Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Social Issues
 Victories for equality
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 4

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25977 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  08:43:58  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ed Brayton has links to the SCOTUS rulings released today, they boil down to this:

1) Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, so the Federal government must grant full recognition to all legal marriages. In other words, if Joe and Jack get married in a state in which it is legal for them to (a growing number), the Feds must now allow them to file taxes (for example) as a married couple. I'd bet the largest effect this will have will be on the civilian spouses of gay military, since DOMA section 3 was used to deny normal spousal benefits to them (even death benefits) even after the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

2) California's Proposition 8 was declared unconstitutional by a lower appeals court, and SCOTUS punted today by ruling that the people who appealed it to SCOTUS didn't have standing to do so. So if you're a homosexual in California, you can legally get married now (again). The ruling that was hoped for was for everything similar to Prop 8 to be declared unconstitutional nation-wide, but apparently SCOTUS didn't want to go that far.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25977 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  08:55:37   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Greta Christina has a much shorter summary of the rulings:
Fuck you, religious right.

Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Boron10
Religion Moderator

USA
1264 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  09:22:16   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Boron10 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dave W.

I'd bet the largest effect this will have will be on the civilian spouses of gay military, since DOMA section 3 was used to deny normal spousal benefits to them (even death benefits) even after the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
We will see how long it takes the DoD to make good on their implied promise.

REPEAL OF “DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL” (DADT): QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE
From the notice:
BENEFITS
Service members continue to have some benefits for which they may designate beneficiaries, regardless of sexual orientation. Eligibility for a number of other benefits is restricted by applicable statutes, including DOMA. In connection with DADT repeal, DoD is engaged in a careful and deliberate review of the possibility of extending eligibility benefits, if legally permitted, to other individuals, including same-sex partners.

and Report Shows Success of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Repeal
Snip:
The act “obviously does have some impact with regards to the benefits that are provided to same-sex couples,” Panetta said. “And so we continue to review the benefits. But those have to be provided consistent with DOMA. And until DOMA is either rejected by the courts or changed by the Congress, that's the law we abide by.”
Notice that both of these are official DoD press releases.

edited to add second article -- B10
Edited by - Boron10 on 06/26/2013 09:24:59
Go to Top of Page

Convinced
Skeptic Friend

USA
384 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  09:41:38   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Convinced a Private Message  Reply with Quote
It is my understanding that it is still up to each state to determine whether same sex marriage is allowed. Is this correct?

Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17)
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13458 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  09:44:09   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
So much for Prop 8. Funny thing is if it were on the ballet today, 5 years later, it wouldn't pass anyway.

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13458 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  09:45:54   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Convinced

It is my understanding that it is still up to each state to determine whether same sex marriage is allowed. Is this correct?
Yes. But states are turning quickly. I don't think it will be long before all but the redest states will block same sex marriage.

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Boron10
Religion Moderator

USA
1264 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  09:55:57   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Boron10 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Convinced

It is my understanding that it is still up to each state to determine whether same sex marriage is allowed. Is this correct?
Yes, but now the federal government respects all marriages, paving the way to ensure same-sex marriages conducted out-of-state are respected everywhere.

So if a gay Texas couple were to get married in New York, that marriage will eventually have to be respected in Texas.
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  10:09:44   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Boron10

Originally posted by Convinced

It is my understanding that it is still up to each state to determine whether same sex marriage is allowed. Is this correct?
Yes, but now the federal government respects all marriages, paving the way to ensure same-sex marriages conducted out-of-state are respected everywhere.

So if a gay Texas couple were to get married in New York, that marriage will eventually have to be respected in Texas.


I think it has to now under Article IV, Section 1 of the document you swore to uphold and defend. DOMA was the last vestige of excuse.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

Convinced
Skeptic Friend

USA
384 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  11:16:55   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Convinced a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Boron10

Originally posted by Convinced

It is my understanding that it is still up to each state to determine whether same sex marriage is allowed. Is this correct?
Yes, but now the federal government respects all marriages, paving the way to ensure same-sex marriages conducted out-of-state are respected everywhere.

So if a gay Texas couple were to get married in New York, that marriage will eventually have to be respected in Texas.
I think that is fine. Do you think this may lead to laws forcing religious groups to marry same sex couples?

Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Eph 5:15-17)
Go to Top of Page

moakley
SFN Regular

USA
1883 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  11:24:34   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send moakley a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Convinced

Originally posted by Boron10

Originally posted by Convinced

It is my understanding that it is still up to each state to determine whether same sex marriage is allowed. Is this correct?
Yes, but now the federal government respects all marriages, paving the way to ensure same-sex marriages conducted out-of-state are respected everywhere.

So if a gay Texas couple were to get married in New York, that marriage will eventually have to be respected in Texas.
I think that is fine. Do you think this may lead to laws forcing religious groups to marry same sex couples?
No. I would expect the separation clause to prevent this.

Life is good

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13458 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  11:37:44   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Convinced

Originally posted by Boron10

Originally posted by Convinced

It is my understanding that it is still up to each state to determine whether same sex marriage is allowed. Is this correct?
Yes, but now the federal government respects all marriages, paving the way to ensure same-sex marriages conducted out-of-state are respected everywhere.

So if a gay Texas couple were to get married in New York, that marriage will eventually have to be respected in Texas.
I think that is fine. Do you think this may lead to laws forcing religious groups to marry same sex couples?
I don't see how. Even now there are religious groups that will not allow a gay person in, let alone force them to conduct marriages. The constitutionality of that seems pretty clear.

The problem we are seeing with the Catholic hospitals and contraceptives is that they hire people who are either not that religious or aren't even Catholic. So the compromise was to not force the church to pay for that part of the health plan. Plus Catholic hospitals are not required to preform abortions. I don't see how a church can be forced to conduct a marriage that they are against.

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Siberia
SFN Addict

Brazil
2322 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  11:48:46   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Siberia's Homepage  Send Siberia an AOL message  Send Siberia a Yahoo! Message Send Siberia a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Kil
I don't see how a church can be forced to conduct a marriage that they are against.

That'd violate freedom of religion, wouldn't it? I mean it IS part of their creed.

"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa

"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25977 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  13:43:39   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Convinced

Do you think this may lead to laws forcing religious groups to marry same sex couples?
Can you point to any law forcing a church or religious group to perform marriages for interracial couples?

No.

What happened with Loving v. Virginia 46 years ago is being repeated today with same-sex marriage. Every single little worry about the consequences of same-sex marriage we hear today (like yours) were heard in 1967, and not one of them came true. Straight people aren't going to quit getting married, and churches aren't going to be forced to marry anyone they don't want to.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25977 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  14:25:06   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Boron10

We will see how long it takes the DoD to make good on their implied promise.
DoD moves forward with same sex benefits:
Working with the Justice Department and other executive branch agencies, the Pentagon “intends to make the same benefits available to all military spouses — regardless of sexual orientation — as soon as possible,” Hagel said in a written statement. “That is now the law and it is the right thing to do. … Every person who serves our nation in uniform stepped forward with courage and commitment. All that matters is their patriotism, their willingness to serve their country, and their qualifications to do so.”

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25977 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  17:09:54   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
More from Greta Christina:
Since I’m a big proponent of admitting when you’re wrong, I feel that I should say this today:

I was one of the people objecting to bringing same-sex marriage to SCOTUS. I was one of the people saying, “It’s too soon, this court sucks, we have to wait until we have a better court, this will set a bad precedent that we’ll have to live with for years.”

I was wrong.

And I have rarely been more happy to be wrong.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

sailingsoul
SFN Addict

2830 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2013 :  18:04:14   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send sailingsoul a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Who would want to get married by any religious or not "nut" who considers them immoral. If gays want to get married in a church wouldn't you think they'd do so in a church that accepts them as human beings and would be happy to marry them. There were churches that rang their bells for approval when the announcement came. It's not like 100% of all churches are in agreement that gays should not get married you know. I'm most confident there will be no shortage of churches that will be happy to marry gays. I expect there will be a boom of business for wedding business'.
Bells also rang at other Episcopal, Methodist, Presbyterian, Unitarian and other Christian churches.
Why shouldn't gays have the right to be miserably like other married people?

There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 4 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.27 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000