Same Sex Marriage Legal Nationwide

[Arkady]

I'm so pleased to hear this news. Together with the Obamacare decision, this has started to restore a little confidence in the Supreme Court, which had become the dung heap of American politics in the Rehnquist era -- especially the vile Bush v. Gore decision. Although the court is still dominated, 5-4, by Republicans, and although those Republicans are capable of some wholly indefensible legal positions, Roberts has set a much-improved tone for the court, moving it away from its Rehnquist-era role of being a collection of robed GOP operatives. Roberts came down on the other side of this one, but I still give him some credit for the improved tone.

Anyway, congratulations to my gay friends, who now have equal protection under our marriage laws, coast to coast. I'm so happy for them. And congratulations, as well, to Massachusetts, which pioneered this road, back when it was still a wildly unpopular stance. At the time, on the old Fray, I predicted that gradually this would be accepted more broadly, starting first in the most educated states and countries, and rolling out from there. I predicted there would come a point where it was so widely accepted that finding someone in the first world who'd take a clear stance against it would be as hard as finding someone who will speak out against interracial couples being able to be married. Just as with the fall of anti-miscegenation laws, I saw this as something that would soon be an orphan issue, with almost nobody being willing to admit to being a parent of the discriminatory view. I think we're well on our way down that road now.

 

[BitterPill]

I'm so pleased to hear this news. Together with the Obamacare decision, this has started to restore a little confidence in the Supreme Court, which had become the dung heap of American politics in the Rehnquist era -- especially the vile Bush v. Gore decision. Although the court is still dominated, 5-4, by Republicans, and although those Republicans are capable of some wholly indefensible legal positions, Roberts has set a much-improved tone for the court, moving it away from its Rehnquist-era role of being a collection of robed GOP operatives. Roberts came down on the other side of this one, but I still give him some credit for the improved tone.

Anyway, congratulations to my gay friends, who now have equal protection under our marriage laws, coast to coast. I'm so happy for them. And congratulations, as well, to Massachusetts, which pioneered this road, back when it was still a wildly unpopular stance. At the time, on the old Fray, I predicted that gradually this would be accepted more broadly, starting first in the most educated states and countries, and rolling out from there. I predicted there would come a point where it was so widely accepted that finding someone in the first world who'd take a clear stance against it would be as hard as finding someone who will speak out against interracial couples being able to be married. Just as with the fall of anti-miscegenation laws, I saw this as something that would soon be an orphan issue, with almost nobody being willing to admit to being a parent of the discriminatory view. I think we're well on our way down that road now.

It certainly has been a stunning week or two, and this ruling caps it off.

 

[Sunset Rose]

This is one the most important, far reaching decisions the Supreme Court has ever made. I applaud them.

 

[Arkady]

I'm so pleased to hear this news. Together with the Obamacare decision, this has started to restore a little confidence in the Supreme Court, which had become the dung heap of American politics in the Rehnquist era -- especially the vile Bush v. Gore decision. Although the court is still dominated, 5-4, by Republicans, and although those Republicans are capable of some wholly indefensible legal positions, Roberts has set a much-improved tone for the court, moving it away from its Rehnquist-era role of being a collection of robed GOP operatives. Roberts came down on the other side of this one, but I still give him some credit for the improved tone.

Anyway, congratulations to my gay friends, who now have equal protection under our marriage laws, coast to coast. I'm so happy for them. And congratulations, as well, to Massachusetts, which pioneered this road, back when it was still a wildly unpopular stance. At the time, on the old Fray, I predicted that gradually this would be accepted more broadly, starting first in the most educated states and countries, and rolling out from there. I predicted there would come a point where it was so widely accepted that finding someone in the first world who'd take a clear stance against it would be as hard as finding someone who will speak out against interracial couples being able to be married. Just as with the fall of anti-miscegenation laws, I saw this as something that would soon be an orphan issue, with almost nobody being willing to admit to being a parent of the discriminatory view. I think we're well on our way down that road now.

Here's a graphic showing the progress of gay marriage. As I first predicted back in 2003, the general trend was it to roll out to the most educated areas first, then to spread from there:

 

[Barbella]

I'm so pleased to hear this news. Together with the Obamacare decision, this has started to restore a little confidence in the Supreme Court, which had become the dung heap of American politics in the Rehnquist era -- especially the vile Bush v. Gore decision. Although the court is still dominated, 5-4, by Republicans, and although those Republicans are capable of some wholly indefensible legal positions, Roberts has set a much-improved tone for the court, moving it away from its Rehnquist-era role of being a collection of robed GOP operatives. Roberts came down on the other side of this one, but I still give him some credit for the improved tone.

Anyway, congratulations to my gay friends, who now have equal protection under our marriage laws, coast to coast. I'm so happy for them. And congratulations, as well, to Massachusetts, which pioneered this road, back when it was still a wildly unpopular stance. At the time, on the old Fray, I predicted that gradually this would be accepted more broadly, starting first in the most educated states and countries, and rolling out from there. I predicted there would come a point where it was so widely accepted that finding someone in the first world who'd take a clear stance against it would be as hard as finding someone who will speak out against interracial couples being able to be married. Just as with the fall of anti-miscegenation laws, I saw this as something that would soon be an orphan issue, with almost nobody being willing to admit to being a parent of the discriminatory view. I think we're well on our way down that road now.

Since I've never been opposed to gay marriage, I agree with the decision. Can't, and won't, argue with you about this one.

 

[marvin martian]

Government needs to get out of the marriage business; gay, straight or otherwise.

 

[Craig]

Government needs to get out of the marriage business; gay, straight or otherwise.

Why?

 

[marvin martian]

Why?

Do you feel you need the government's permission to legitimize your marriage?

 

[Craig]

Do you feel you need the government's permission to legitimize your marriage?

Let's try again...


Government needs to get out of the marriage business; gay, straight or otherwise.

Why?

 

[marvin martian]

Let's try again...


Government needs to get out of the marriage business; gay, straight or otherwise.

Why?

Sorry, I sometimes forget you have the reading comprehension of a five year old.

Here it is (read slowly and carefully)...I don't believe anyone should require the permission of the government to legitimize their marriage.

Do you?

 

[Craig]

Sorry, I sometimes forget you have the reading comprehension of a five year old.

Here it is (read slowly and carefully)...I don't believe anyone should require the permission of the government to legitimize their marriage.

Do you?

I never forget that you are incredibly hesitant to ever actually answer a question.

Marriage has been a civil purview for hundreds of years. It is for record keeping and laws regarding descendants and property rights. I have zero issue with government record keeping.

 

[marvin martian]

Marriage has been a civil purview for hundreds of years. It is for record keeping and laws regarding descendants and property rights.

Really? You don't have a deed for your property or birth certificates for your children?

 

[Craig]

Really? You don't have a deed for your property or birth certificates for your children?

Deed? You mean a government document? Yeah...and I have a will too.

No kids...so the transfer of property isn't so forthright. There are many beneficial considerations marriage bestows on a couple, like the ability to not testify against your partner...

Whether or not you favor marriage as a social institution, there's no denying that it confers many rights, protections, and benefits -- both legal and practical. Some of these vary from state to state, but the list typically includes:

Tax Benefits

• Filing joint income tax returns with the IRS and state taxing authorities.
• Creating a "family partnership" under federal tax laws, which allows you to divide business income among family members.

Estate Planning Benefits

• Inheriting a share of your spouse's estate.
• Receiving an exemption from both estate taxes and gift taxes for all property you give or leave to your spouse.
• Creating life estate trusts that are restricted to married couples, including QTIP trusts, QDOT trusts, and marital deduction trusts.
• Obtaining priority if a conservator needs to be appointed for your spouse -- that is, someone to make financial and/or medical decisions on your spouse's behalf.

Government Benefits

• Receiving Social Security, Medicare, and disability benefits for spouses.
• Receiving veterans' and military benefits for spouses, such as those for education, medical care, or special loans.
• Receiving public assistance benefits.

Employment Benefits

• Obtaining insurance benefits through a spouse's employer.
• Taking family leave to care for your spouse during an illness.
• Receiving wages, workers' compensation, and retirement plan benefits for a deceased spouse.
• Taking bereavement leave if your spouse or one of your spouse's close relatives dies.

Medical Benefits

• Visiting your spouse in a hospital intensive care unit or during restricted visiting hours in other parts of a medical facility.
• Making medical decisions for your spouse if he or she becomes incapacitated and unable to express wishes for treatment.

Death Benefits

• Consenting to after-death examinations and procedures.
• Making burial or other final arrangements.

Family Benefits

• Filing for stepparent or joint adoption.
• Applying for joint foster care rights.
• Receiving equitable division of property if you divorce.
• Receiving spousal or child support, child custody, and visitation if you divorce.

Housing Benefits

• Living in neighborhoods zoned for "families only."
• Automatically renewing leases signed by your spouse.

Consumer Benefits

• Receiving family rates for health, homeowners', auto, and other types of insurance.
• Receiving tuition discounts and permission to use school facilities.
• Other consumer discounts and incentives offered only to married couples or families.

Other Legal Benefits and Protections

• Suing a third person for wrongful death of your spouse and loss of consortium (loss of intimacy).
• Suing a third person for offenses that interfere with the success of your marriage, such as alienation of affection and criminal conversation (these laws are available in only a few states).
• Claiming the marital communications privilege, which means a court can't force you to disclose the contents of confidential communications between you and your spouse during your marriage.
• Receiving crime victims' recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
• Obtaining immigration and residency benefits for noncitizen spouse.
• Visiting rights in jails and other places where visitors are restricted to immediate family.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/marriage-rights-benefits-30190.html

 

[marvin martian]

Deed? You mean a government document? Yeah...and I have a will too.

Yes, and those correctly have nothing to do with whether or to whom you are married.

I get that you feel the need to have the government "bless" your marriage. Whether they admit it or not, even Godless people still need a deity to whom they can cede control.

 

[Craig]

Yes, and those correctly have nothing to do with whether or to whom you are married.

I get that you feel the need to have the government "bless" your marriage. Whether they admit it or not, even Godless people still need a deity to whom they can cede control.

It's remarkable the ability you have to ignore content...



Whether or not you favor marriage as a social institution, there's no denying that it confers many rights, protections, and benefits -- both legal and practical. Some of these vary from state to state, but the list typically includes:

Tax Benefits

• Filing joint income tax returns with the IRS and state taxing authorities.
• Creating a "family partnership" under federal tax laws, which allows you to divide business income among family members.

Estate Planning Benefits

• Inheriting a share of your spouse's estate.
• Receiving an exemption from both estate taxes and gift taxes for all property you give or leave to your spouse.
• Creating life estate trusts that are restricted to married couples, including QTIP trusts, QDOT trusts, and marital deduction trusts.
• Obtaining priority if a conservator needs to be appointed for your spouse -- that is, someone to make financial and/or medical decisions on your spouse's behalf.

Government Benefits

• Receiving Social Security, Medicare, and disability benefits for spouses.
• Receiving veterans' and military benefits for spouses, such as those for education, medical care, or special loans.
• Receiving public assistance benefits.

Employment Benefits

• Obtaining insurance benefits through a spouse's employer.
• Taking family leave to care for your spouse during an illness.
• Receiving wages, workers' compensation, and retirement plan benefits for a deceased spouse.
• Taking bereavement leave if your spouse or one of your spouse's close relatives dies.

Medical Benefits

• Visiting your spouse in a hospital intensive care unit or during restricted visiting hours in other parts of a medical facility.
• Making medical decisions for your spouse if he or she becomes incapacitated and unable to express wishes for treatment.

Death Benefits

• Consenting to after-death examinations and procedures.
• Making burial or other final arrangements.

Family Benefits

• Filing for stepparent or joint adoption.
• Applying for joint foster care rights.
• Receiving equitable division of property if you divorce.
• Receiving spousal or child support, child custody, and visitation if you divorce.

Housing Benefits

• Living in neighborhoods zoned for "families only."
• Automatically renewing leases signed by your spouse.

Consumer Benefits

• Receiving family rates for health, homeowners', auto, and other types of insurance.
• Receiving tuition discounts and permission to use school facilities.
• Other consumer discounts and incentives offered only to married couples or families.

Other Legal Benefits and Protections

• Suing a third person for wrongful death of your spouse and loss of consortium (loss of intimacy).
• Suing a third person for offenses that interfere with the success of your marriage, such as alienation of affection and criminal conversation (these laws are available in only a few states).
• Claiming the marital communications privilege, which means a court can't force you to disclose the contents of confidential communications between you and your spouse during your marriage.
• Receiving crime victims' recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
• Obtaining immigration and residency benefits for noncitizen spouse.
• Visiting rights in jails and other places where visitors are restricted to immediate family.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Like I said in another thread:.

1. It fits right in to the movement of getting rid of gender differences and trying to make the sexes 100% equal even though their biology and physiology say it's impossible.

2. Many states already make it legal, but I think most intellectually honest people know what this is all truly about..

Vengeance by the gay community against Christianity.

The gay community could have recieved equal rights years ago through state Civil Unions. That wasn't enough, they wanted blood.

And that's fine. The next step is to see if the state orders churches to perform same-sex marriage. If that occurs, things could begin to change rapidly.

 

[resident_evil]

I'm so pleased to hear this news. Together with the Obamacare decision, this has started to restore a little confidence in the Supreme Court, which had become the dung heap of American politics in the Rehnquist era -- especially the vile Bush v. Gore decision. Although the court is still dominated, 5-4, by Republicans, and although those Republicans are capable of some wholly indefensible legal positions, Roberts has set a much-improved tone for the court, moving it away from its Rehnquist-era role of being a collection of robed GOP operatives. Roberts came down on the other side of this one, but I still give him some credit for the improved tone.

Anyway, congratulations to my gay friends, who now have equal protection under our marriage laws, coast to coast. I'm so happy for them. And congratulations, as well, to Massachusetts, which pioneered this road, back when it was still a wildly unpopular stance. At the time, on the old Fray, I predicted that gradually this would be accepted more broadly, starting first in the most educated states and countries, and rolling out from there. I predicted there would come a point where it was so widely accepted that finding someone in the first world who'd take a clear stance against it would be as hard as finding someone who will speak out against interracial couples being able to be married. Just as with the fall of anti-miscegenation laws, I saw this as something that would soon be an orphan issue, with almost nobody being willing to admit to being a parent of the discriminatory view. I think we're well on our way down that road now.

Polygamy is next.

How can we discriminate against our Mormon and Moslem friends anymore.

 

[Craig]

Polygamy is next.

How can we discriminate against our Mormon and Moslem friends anymore.

Good.

 

[resident_evil]

Good.

I know. I can't wait.

 

[Craig]

The next step is to see if the state orders churches to perform same-sex marriage. If that occurs, things could begin to change rapidly.

It won't. As I said in another thread, states are excluding churches from obligations. Maryland has that written in the law.

Marriage is a civil consideration.