Switch Theme:

You Make the Call! DOMA and Prop 8  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN (Currently in WY)

So, let's here your predictions for the Supreme Court cases involving DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) and California's Prop 8.

Here's my quick predictions:

DOMA: Going down
Prop 8: Stands

Both decided thanks to a Pro-State's Rights stance by Justice Kennedy.

Your thoughts?

Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

I'm gonna bet SCOTUS will pass the buck on Prop 8. Some speech where they just say "leave us out of it" or some such.

   
Made in us
Paramount Plague Censer Bearer





Neenah

Not the fed's problem - 10th ammendment.

ZF-

 
   
Made in us
Focused Dark Angels Land Raider Pilot





Dallas, TX, USA

I think the court will let the prior court's ruling on Prop 8 stand (the one that struck it down) and pass on a ruling itself, limiting its need to comment or provide anything broader. The California Supremes already struck it down, so they can just cry "Standing!" and point at that ruling to indicate they don't have to do/say anything about it.

I think it will strike DOMA down with Kennedy being the swing vote, but only if he gets to author an opinion regarding it being a States rights/10th Amendment issue. One of the newer justices (Kagan/Sotomayor) will write a concurrent opinion that points to the 14th Amendment.

These are my guesses. I could be totally wrong.


Dark Angels (Black Armor Themed)
WarmaHordes - Protectorate / Skorne - ~100pts of each
Dark Angels P&M Blog
WarmaHordes P&M Blog

Playing only painted since 2012

 
   
Made in us
Most Glorious Grey Seer





Everett, WA

DOMA (specifically Section 3) should be struck down because it prevents Federal benefits (tax exemptions and military benefits for example) in states that allow same-sex marriage. I could see Section 2 being let stand.

Prop 8 should be upheld but will likely be tossed due to the "standing" issue.

 
   
Made in us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Toledo, OH

I think, especially with the Administration not trying to defend it, that it'll be rough sledding to find a majority to uphold all of DOMA. As has been pointed out ad nauseum, this is a genuine 10th Amendment issue. I'm hard pressed to think of nearly any other area where the Feds won't accept a State license based on it's character.

Section 2 has a fighting chance, in that it might survive this round. It will almost certainly be struck down in 10 years or so, but I can see them keeping it for now. I really don't know enough about "full faith and credit" jurisprudence to comment on it's validity.

   
Made in us
Most Glorious Grey Seer





Everett, WA

There are many exceptions to the Full Faith and Credit clause. A current example can be found in the various regulations regarding concealed carry permits for gun owners. I have one issued in Washington state. I cannot use it to carry a concealed weapon in New York state. Further, in Texas, a person can buy and keep a short barrel rifle (SBR) but in Washington, I can't. Nor can I buy one in Texas and then bring it into Washington. On the other hand, my Washington state drivers license is valid in all US states, territories, and possessions.

Another, more fun, example is beer. The movie Smokey and the Bandit is about some rich guys wanting a truck load of Coors beer for their party but they are in Georgia which didn't allow Coors to be imported or sold there (it was not pasteurized). They hire a trucker and his friend to get them some Coors from Texas (yes, illegally) and hilarity ensues.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/03/28 20:34:15


 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 Breotan wrote:
There are many exceptions to the Full Faith and Credit clause. A current example can be found in the various regulations regarding concealed carry permits for gun owners. I have one issued in Washington state. I cannot use it to carry a concealed weapon in New York state. Further, in Texas, a person can buy and keep a short barrel rifle (SBR) but in Washington, I can't. Nor can I buy one in Texas and then bring it into Washington. On the other hand, my Washington state drivers license is valid in all US states, territories, and possessions.

Another, more fun, example is beer. The movie Smokey and the Bandit is about some rich guys wanting a truck load of Coors beer for their party but they are in Georgia which didn't allow Coors to be imported or sold there (it was not pasteurized). They hire a trucker and his friend to get them some Coors from Texas (yes, illegally) and hilarity ensues.



I think we all learned a lesson here:
1. The tenth Amendment was eviscerated with the case of Grant vs. Lee. Upon rehearing in Roosevelt vs. SCOTUS, appeal was denied.
2. Texas is once again, superior. Texas rules, Somalia drools!

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in gb
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





South Wales

I feel it is ok to be Takei.

Prestor Jon wrote:
Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
 
   
Made in us
Old Sourpuss






Lakewood, Ohio

 MrDwhitey wrote:
I feel it is ok to be Takei.


Whoah buddy, you best not let Shatner hear you say that... No one should be Takei but Takei... Though it's okay to be gay...

DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+

Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics 
   
Made in gb
Renegade Inquisitor de Marche






Elephant Graveyard

 Alfndrate wrote:
 MrDwhitey wrote:
I feel it is ok to be Takei.


Whoah buddy, you best not let Shatner hear you say that... No one should be Takei but Takei... Though it's okay to be gay...

I believe he is referring to George Takei's suggested alternative to gay when people were banned from using/referring to the word gay in some high school... probably in Texas.

Dakka Bingo! By Ouze
"You are the best at flying things"-Kanluwen
"Further proof that Purple is a fething brilliant super villain " -KingCracker
"Purp.. Im pretty sure I have a gun than can reach you...."-Nicorex
"That's not really an apocalypse. That's just Europe."-Grakmar
"almost as good as winning free cake at the tea drinking contest for an Englishman." -Reds8n
Seal up your lips and give no words but mum.
Equip, Reload. Do violence.
Watch for Gerry. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

 purplefood wrote:
 Alfndrate wrote:
 MrDwhitey wrote:
I feel it is ok to be Takei.


Whoah buddy, you best not let Shatner hear you say that... No one should be Takei but Takei... Though it's okay to be gay...

I believe he is referring to George Takei's suggested alternative to gay when people were banned from using/referring to the word gay in some high school... probably in Texas.


Surely everybody has seen this:


   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

If you don't want gay marriage... then don't marry gay! Otherwise, it's none of ya'll bidness.

I'd bet that DOMA is struck down and Prop 8 is 50/50 split.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

 whembly wrote:
If you don't want gay marriage... then don't marry gay! Otherwise, it's none of ya'll bidness.
.


One thing I have never understood is how people can be both "social conservatives" in politics and claim to be "small government" at the same time. That's what gets me about the Tea Party

I'm pretty dang conservatives with my religious and personal views with regards to all the "is being gay a sin" "should you do drugs" "insert random social issue" things. But I am pretty dang liberal politically.

It's a difference between "Do I think something is right" and "Do I think something is a right" for me.

I might think that being gay is a sin under my religious belief but that doesn't mean I'm going to legislate that on you, and I also I think you should have every right to loose half your stuff when you break up just like everybody else .
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 d-usa wrote:
 whembly wrote:
If you don't want gay marriage... then don't marry gay! Otherwise, it's none of ya'll bidness.
.


One thing I have never understood is how people can be both "social conservatives" in politics and claim to be "small government" at the same time. That's what gets me about the Tea Party

I'm pretty dang conservatives with my religious and personal views with regards to all the "is being gay a sin" "should you do drugs" "insert random social issue" things. But I am pretty dang liberal politically.

It's a difference between "Do I think something is right" and "Do I think something is a right" for me.

I might think that being gay is a sin under my religious belief but that doesn't mean I'm going to legislate that on you, and I also I think you should have every right to loose half your stuff when you break up just like everybody else .

Yep!

Why isn't "Civil Unions" (man/woman, man/man & woman/woman) NOT a viable option from a federal/state standpoint? I really don't understand this issue...

I mean, I undstand the arguments... here's one of the better ones against SSM.

But, in the end, I disagree with that... what you do in your bedroom/life/relationship is none of anyone's damned business and thus each relationship ought to be treated equally in the eyes of government.

I mean, look what we have now... if you get married to your same-sex partner in Massachusetts, then you move to a state that doesn't recognize it and they want to get a divorce... how does that work? KnowWhatIMean?

I mean, it's practically the exact same thing as the Civil Rights Movement (ironically, traditional blacks don't approve of gays... riddle me that one batman )

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

I don't think that argument makes really any decent points about SSM. Using "children" is useless since people who cannot or don't want to have children are already allowed to get married, tradition got thrown out when we ruled laws against interracial marriages unconstitutional (I wouldn't have been able to marry my wife 40-50 years ago). And the divorce statistics are pretty meaningless since they are brand new (making SSM legal will result in people getting married for no other reason than just because they finally can).

The only decent point against SSM I have seen so far is the argument that government shouldn't regulate marriage to begin with. Basically "why make SSM legal, why do we need permission from the government to begin with for any marriage?".

But as long as there are legal benefits to being married there will be a required system of regulating marriage. If there is no way for a business to verify that somebody is really married to get cheaper health insurance, then they could easily stop offering cheaper insurance for married people.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/03/30 15:00:57


 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 whembly wrote:

I mean, I undstand the arguments... here's one of the better ones against SSM.


One of the better arguments against same-sex marriage is "I totally support it, but I'm scared!"?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 d-usa wrote:

The only decent point against SSM I have seen so far is the argument that government shouldn't regulate marriage to begin with. Basically "why make SSM legal, why do we need permission from the government to begin with for any marriage?".


Strictly speaking, you do not need government recognition unless you want your marriage to be recognized by the government; which is the point of this debate.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/03/30 16:44:36


Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

Did you miss my last paragraph?
   
Made in gb
Nihilistic Necron Lord




The best State-Texas

DOMA is going down, for sure.

Prop 8, is going to go down, one way or another.

4000+
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
:Necron: Necron Discord: https://discord.com/invite/AGtpeD4  
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 d-usa wrote:
Did you miss my last paragraph?


No. I was reiterating.

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

 dogma wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
Did you miss my last paragraph?


No. I was reiterating.


That makes sense then .
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Kamloops, BC

 d-usa wrote:
 purplefood wrote:
 Alfndrate wrote:
 MrDwhitey wrote:
I feel it is ok to be Takei.


Whoah buddy, you best not let Shatner hear you say that... No one should be Takei but Takei... Though it's okay to be gay...

I believe he is referring to George Takei's suggested alternative to gay when people were banned from using/referring to the word gay in some high school... probably in Texas.


Surely everybody has seen this:




...Oh, my!
   
Made in us
Hallowed Canoness





The Void

 d-usa wrote:
 purplefood wrote:
 Alfndrate wrote:
 MrDwhitey wrote:
I feel it is ok to be Takei.


Whoah buddy, you best not let Shatner hear you say that... No one should be Takei but Takei... Though it's okay to be gay...

I believe he is referring to George Takei's suggested alternative to gay when people were banned from using/referring to the word gay in some high school... probably in Texas.


Surely everybody has seen this:




George Takei is so freaking awesome.

I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long


SoB, IG, SM, SW, Nec, Cus, Tau, FoW Germans, Team Yankee Marines, Battletech Clan Wolf, Mercs
DR:90-SG+M+B+I+Pw40k12+ID+++A+++/are/WD-R+++T(S)DM+ 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Kamloops, BC

 d-usa wrote:
 whembly wrote:
If you don't want gay marriage... then don't marry gay! Otherwise, it's none of ya'll bidness.
.


One thing I have never understood is how people can be both "social conservatives" in politics and claim to be "small government" at the same time. That's what gets me about the Tea Party

I'm pretty dang conservatives with my religious and personal views with regards to all the "is being gay a sin" "should you do drugs" "insert random social issue" things. But I am pretty dang liberal politically.

It's a difference between "Do I think something is right" and "Do I think something is a right" for me.

I might think that being gay is a sin under my religious belief but that doesn't mean I'm going to legislate that on you, and I also I think you should have every right to loose half your stuff when you break up just like everybody else .


One thing I don't get about devout Christians is a lot of them don't seem that concerned about environmental issues, which is odd because if they believe God created the world wouldn't they be really concerned with how modern society is mistreating the environment?
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Cheesecat wrote:
One thing I don't get about devout Christians is a lot of them don't seem that concerned about environmental issues, which is odd because if they believe God created the world wouldn't they be really concerned with how modern society is mistreating the environment?


Because either:

1) God will always provide everything you need, so you don't have to worry about running out of oil/global warming/etc. God won't allow any of that to happen, the oil reserves will magically fill up again, global warming will stop before it hurts any true believers, etc.

or

2) The End Times are almost here, so there's no point in worrying about things like conservation. Consider the Bush I-era environmental policy: "I do not know how many future generations we can count on before the Lord returns, whatever it is we have to manage with a skill to leave the resources needed for future generations." And of course since the world is going to end soon anyway, we might as well make ourselves comfortable and use all the resources we have.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 dogma wrote:
 whembly wrote:

I mean, I undstand the arguments... here's one of the better ones against SSM.


One of the better arguments against same-sex marriage is "I totally support it, but I'm scared!"?

Strictly speaking, you do not need government recognition unless you want your marriage to be recognized by the government; which is the point of this debate.


Ya mean like this guy?
Here's the money quote:
But in the case of these 212 members of Congress, or Barack Obama, the message is a bit different. The vast majority of these politicians are people who have done almost nothing in practical terms to support gay marriage. So what they are really saying to the court is this:

We lack the courage of our convictions. We want to say we support gay marriage, but we are afraid of actually doing anything to advance gay marriage because of the politics involved. So please let us off the hook by saying that the Constitution demands the outcome we don’t have the courage to work for.


Of course the accusation of cowardice is not going to be true in every case, but what has Barack Obama actually done for gay marriage besides declare once he was for it, then against it, then for it again?

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in ca
Depraved Slaanesh Chaos Lord





d-usa wrote:The only decent point against SSM I have seen so far is the argument that government shouldn't regulate marriage to begin with. Basically "why make SSM legal, why do we need permission from the government to begin with for any marriage?".

Because of the tax codes. Eliminate all tax breaks/incentives/loopholes/etc and allow for only individual filings, and then that becomes a decent point.


Currently, the only decent point against gay marriage is "they shouldn't marry because I hate them". And let me be clear: this argument makes the speaker a piece of gak, but it makes them an honest piece of gak, and that honesty is what makes this the best current argument against gay marriage, because there is a complete lack of good qualities to be found in over other anti-gay-marriage argument, so this one wins by default on account of that honesty.
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 whembly wrote:

Ya mean like this guy?


How is an accusation of cowardice regarding a refusal to openly support gay marriage an argument against it?

I mean, yeah, the Democrats (When they held both houses.) could have made the repeal of DOMA a component of their legislative agenda, but there was another piece of legislation they were trying to pass; one which affected a lot more people.

And, despite what the cited author says, the people were consulted; welcome to representative democracy.

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: