New Mexico makes 17

[JagFarlane]

New Mexico is the 17th state to allow same-sex marriage: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/sex-marriage-ruled-legal-nms-high-court-21278430

 

[3113]

That's a third of the states!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Yuh gotta wonder what chance in Hell a Constitutional Amendment would have.

Judges sentiments ebb and flood like the tide.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The New Mexico Navajos told the court to go fuck themselves.

 

[JKendallDane]

I'm ok with SSM...just wish it was something that voters approve rather than courts deciding.

Ummm....just last year Maine, Maryland, and Washington did that very thing via ballot initiatives. Look for Ohio and several more states to do the same in 2014. Then you have the states where it was legalized via legislation in 2013.

If it was left up to "majority rules vote" every Walmart in most of the south would have a "slave department." The courts had to get involved because this is a basic rights question.

The next uproar that is still to come will be when SCOTUS takes on the issue nationwide based on the 'Full Faith & Credit' clause of the Constitution based on marriage being a contract and that contracts are enforcable across state lines...meaning if you get legally married in New York, California, New Mexico, et al, then you are legally married in any state you live in or move to.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Ummm....just last year Maine, Maryland, and Washington did that very thing via ballot initiatives. Look for Ohio and several more states to do the same in 2014. Then you have the states where it was legalized via legislation in 2013.

If it was left up to "majority rules vote" every Walmart in most of the south would have a "slave department." The courts had to get involved because this is a basic rights question.

The next uproar that is still to come will be when SCOTUS takes on the issue nationwide based on the 'Full Faith & Credit' clause of the Constitution based on marriage being a contract and that contracts are enforcable across state lines...meaning if you get legally married in New York, California, New Mexico, et al, then you are legally married in any state you live in or move to.

You cant be more wrong. If Texas executes felons other states aren't obligated to do it. If Michigan emancipates kids before 18 no one else is obligated to do it. Ditto for drinking, driving, whatever.

 

[JKendallDane]

The New Mexico Navajos told the court to go fuck themselves.

Nice try at attempting to use a broad brush on what the Native American stance is on the issue by only mentioning the Navajos.

NA's have a history of acceptance when it comes to gays...or as they refer to them: two spirits.

Even moreso than the rest of the country, the NA tribes are already more in the pro-gay marriage column than the the anti one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_under_United_States_tribal_jurisdictions

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Nice try at attempting to use a broad brush on what the Native American stance is on the issue by only mentioning the Navajos.

NA's have a history of acceptance when it comes to gays...or as they refer to them: two spirits.

Even moreso than the rest of the country, the NA tribes are already more in the pro-gay marriage column than the the anti one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_under_United_States_tribal_jurisdictions

Check your notes again.

 

[JKendallDane]

Check your notes again.

My notes are fine.

Your comprehension may need a check up though.

 

[3113]

You've got it backwards....

Anyone else wish it would be the people of a particular state who actually vote to approve Same Sex Marriage, rather than a court forcing it on them??

You have the "forcing" backwards here. The majority doesn't have a right to force a minority to give up their rights. Back before civil rights, the majority in the south FORCED a minority to eat only at certain places, drink at certain fountains and go to certain schools. And they also told them who they could marry because whites and blacks couldn't legally marry.

None of those states "voted" away segregation—the majority favored it. It was the the courts said that the majority could not force the minority to give up their rights just to satisfy the biases of that majority. And so segregation was ended. And you should be very glad of that. Otherwise the majority could take away your rights because of a bias. I mean what if a majority passed a law that, due to your religion, your skin or eye color, your sexual practices, which kept you from eating at certain restaurants, staying at certain hotels, or marrying whomever you wanted to marry. Which said that even if you could afford to buy a home in a certain neighborhood, you—in particular--weren't allowed to live there like anyone else. Would you be going to court over that or would you be saying, "Well, I shouldn't force the majority to accept me...."?

The majority can't force minorities to give up their rights because of majority biases. That's the "forcing" going on here.

 

[JKendallDane]

Apple's and Oranges..When it comes to comparing SSM to this country's racial struggles.

Controversial court decisions are often not seen as legitimate by large segments of the population. Popularly supported legislation tends to be a better way to make sweeping changes.

Ridicule...is rarely an effective method of discussion and ad hominem is a notoriously weak logical argument. Maybe we could leave wal-mart and slave references out of the discussion.

I'm not comparing SSM and the racial struggle. However, the entire gay rights movement can certainly be compared as similar struggles, but that isn't the topic.

Considering the political climate of the past 15-20 years and how divisive things have become, I am curious as to how you would quantify "popularly supported" legislation?

And there was no ridicule intended in my response to your post.

 

[1sickbastard]

You cant be more wrong. If Texas executes felons other states aren't obligated to do it. If Michigan emancipates kids before 18 no one else is obligated to do it. Ditto for drinking, driving, whatever.

And how are the examples you've given contracts, freely entered into by two (or more) consenting adults?

However, if a convicted murderer escapes Death Row from Huntsville and is apprehended in another state, that state is legally obliged to return said convict.

Similarly, if Michigan emancipates a teen, then any state the teen moves to is also obliged to treat the teen as a legal adult.

False equivalency much?

 

[JKendallDane]

Anyone else wish it would be the people of a particular state who actually vote to approve Same Sex Marriage, rather than a court forcing it on them??

Would that belief also extend to the 1967 SCOTUS ruling on anti-miscegenation laws?

 

[1sickbastard]

New Mexico is the 17th state to allow same-sex marriage: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/sex-marriage-ruled-legal-nms-high-court-21278430

And yet, 26 states allow first cousin marriage, either by direct legislation or by allowing local justices of the peace to grant variances...

 

[JKendallDane]

Great post 13!

Originally Posted by JAMESBJOHNSON
You cant be more wrong. If Texas executes felons other states aren't obligated to do it. If Michigan emancipates kids before 18 no one else is obligated to do it. Ditto for drinking, driving, whatever.

To expand on what 1SB said, driving is also a perfect example of the Full Faith & Credit clause in action. A driver's license is a contract between a specific state and a resident and every other state in the union is required to recognize it for travel.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Of course I wish that a huge plurality of American citizens would agree that we all deserve the same civil rights, including the right to marry the person we love.

But gay people are growing old and dying without any legal protection for their loved ones, so we will let the courts force the constitution on the unwilling.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Great post 13!



To expand on what 1SB said, driving is also a perfect example of the Full Faith & Credit clause in action. A driver's license is a contract between a specific state and a resident and every other state in the union is required to recognize it for travel.

Un uh. What it means is, if youre visiting New York, say, and you meet their criteria to do whatever, youre good to go even if you cant qualify back in Podunk. But if Michigan emancipates you at 17, it wont fly in Florida. We'll put your ass on a bus going back to Detroit. The clause means you play your ball where it lies.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

My notes are fine.

Your comprehension may need a check up though.

Since youre in Florida look up the law for importing wine, liquor, etc in to the state. You cant. You cant import a variety of animals and plants. States can control commerce within their jurisdictions. A law license from California is no good here, ditto medical license. I bought an old truck in Alabama, the truck had no title, that's cool in Alabama but not in Florida (it was in 1992). Some things go back and forth so much the cops cant keep up with what is, and what aint contraband. Fireworks come to mind. I don't know if buying insurance has changed but its always been illegal to buy insurance out of state, cuz youre here and the laws there are different. Its why we have insurance agents here, to warrant the policies in this state.