Posted on 04/28/2015 5:43:35 PM PDT by PROCON
WASHINGTON (April 28, 2015) — Excerpts from arguments before the Supreme Court on Tuesday about whether states must allow same-sex couples to marry and whether states must recognize gay marriages performed in other states:
Chief Justice John Roberts, on the institution of marriage:
"You're not seeking to join the institution, you're seeking to change what the institution is. The fundamental core of the institution is the opposite-sex relationship and you want to introduce into it a same-sex relationship."
(Excerpt) Read more at onenewsnow.com ...
At the link, you can vote on which comment is most relevant to the case.
That’s good what Roberts said, right?
Yes, very good.
YES!! but I hope it is not putting off the inevitable. Let the all stay healthy if they shoot it down until Cruz gets in office.
A bit, yes BUT ... I’ve argued any number of appellate cases and I can tell you Judges questions are little to no measure of how they will rule. Many times I had a Justice ask me tough questions about my position only to rule for me. Yo really can glean almost nothing from questions.
They best place to look is the history of how justices voted which would suggest 5-4 against us ... maybe 6-3 as Roberts is squirrely. I don’t expect us to win this one, but I could be surprised. Wouldn’t be the first time a judicial ruling surprised me.
Smoke and mirrors.
Yeah. I have no hope. I hate the SCOTUS.
"It's hard to see how permitting same-sex marriage discourages people from being bonded with their biological children."
Which of the adults in a lesbian relationship in which a child is ensnared is the biological parent and which one isn't?
And which biological parent isn't included in the lesbian union?
It will be a nail biter, and you're right that SCOTUS hasn't ruled in favor of the People lately.
Thanks for your input.
Why is a marriage issue in the High Court ?
God help us.
You are most welcome and I completely agree. A nail biter indeed.
Kabuki theater. Supremes will rule 7-2 in favor of the homos
I am hoping at best for a split decision. There”s no doubt to me they are going to at least decree it legal in some form across the land. They cant reverse what they ave already done with state after state overturning amendments and state laws.
Roberts, on the question of forcing states that ban same-sex marriage to recognize those unions formed in other states:"It'd simply be a matter of time until they would in effect be recognizing that within the state, because we live in a very mobile society and people move all the time. In other words, one state would basically set the policy for the entire nation."
If I understand Justice Roberts correctly, he is wrongly ignoring the following. If enough states soften up to gay marriage, then the states can amend the Constitution to expressly protect gay marriage. So Roberts seems to be edging towards an excuse to establish the so-called “right” to gay marriage outside the framework of the Constitution imo.
The 17th Amendment needs to disappear.
Because our overlords have spoken.
As a side note to this thread, please consider the following. The promotion of abortion and gay marriage are arguably politically correct ways for enemies of the USA to ultimately reduce the size of the USA’s armed forces.
The full faith and credit clause has always been a problem. That is why what is really needed if there is to be any homo marriage is a federal marriage amendment allowing the other states to not recognize them. My preference would be to ban it in the same way polygamy was banned in Utah as a requirement before they could join the Union.
How many people should be allowed to marry each other and why?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
