Posted on 06/27/2013 9:30:51 AM PDT by Coronal
The Supreme Court, a day after deciding two major cases on gay marriage, declined on Thursday to take up two more cases on the issue.
The cases concerned Nevada's ban on same-sex marriage, and an Arizona law that denies state benefits to "domestic partners."
The court declined to take the cases without comment. Its action means an appeals court ruling striking down the Arizona law stays in effect, while litigation over the Nevada law will continue.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
More wisdom from Compromised John and the Gang
The queers just have to keep throwing cr@p at our justice system and wait for something to stick, and then capitalize on that. The USSC can’t hear all of these cases, so their Leftist circuit courts get to do their dirty work.
Wait until Article 4, Section 1 of the US Constitution comes into play, and it will, I say inside of a decade at max.
Two guys or two gals get married up in Washington, move to Florida, Florida doesn’t recognize that marriage, and BOOM.
Off to SCOTUS.
true.
We would probably have nationwide homosexual marriage today if John Kerry had been elected in 2004. Reason being, instead of seeing Roberts and Alito on the Court, Kerry would have picked two strong liberals.
The goal of the homosexual activists was to use the 2003 Massacnusetts court decision on homosexual marriage to force it on the entire country. If Kerry had won that election, a more liberal Supreme Court would have forced it nationwide in 2006 or 2007.
As bad as yesterday’s decision on marriage was, things could have been worse if even more liberals were on the Court.
And Obama has almost four more years to fill any vacancies, so pray for the good health and service of Justices Scalia, Alito, and Thomas.
We don’t have a Supreme Court any longer. It’s like a activist club.
Whatever they do, I will not abide their activist injustices. I will obey God’s law. I still say they should protect our property rights versus giving the police more powers. Why not Stand up for the law? Many of these so called judges need to be recalled or brought up on activism overreaches. Where’s the House/you have that right to do so, I would think. Especially, John Roberts. He has ruin protections regarding our medical rights now stepping into a role the government should not be involved in. This is all insane what we are seeing.
Sounds like they are leaving it to the states.
Full faith and credit hasn’t happened yet AFAIK, but there is reason for a precedent.
In some states, first cousins can get married. But not all.
I am not sure if this issue has ever been adjudicated.
face it the world changed yesterday. Watch now as the Gay Mafia uses this to make this all ‘Normal’. If you do not agree why your worse than Hitler. The next target will be Churches that believe in the Bible—and in the future it will be banned—and a new Gay Bible used to replace it—don’t you know Jesus was Gay? Yes, we live in a new Progressive world. They were a success in using our own system against conservative ideas. Get ready for a Whole New Age! sad thing is—it will rip everything good out of the USA.
A case involving the Full Faith and Credit clause hasn’t come up yet, and I have to admit, I’m rather surprised it hasn’t, but it’s inevitable. It’ll come up, and likely quite soon......within the next couple of years, I think, and then it’ll end up in front of the SCOTUS. It’s a direct constitutional issue at that point; can a state have as part of its laws something that contravenes the US Constitution, specifically, Section 4, Article 1?
The Supreme Court did not rule on that part of the Defense of Marriage Act, which allows states to not recognize homosexual marriages from other states.
I’m sure that part of the Defense of Marriage Act will be challenged. For now, the 37 states which only allow monogamous opposite sex marriage have their laws intact. But there will be challenges, count on it.
Some guy from the homophile organization, “Human Rights Campaign”, predicted nationwide homosexual marriage in 5 years. He is not going to lobby 37 state legislatures and people in those states to change their laws. He is planning more lawsuits in federal court, with the goal of getting the Supreme Court to upend all those states marriage laws.
. Ruled by corrupt stinking judges. I call them SCROTUS now.
“In some states, first cousins can get married. But not all.”
Good thing Reynolds explains why this isn’t the case. One man and one woman has been the federal law and the law in all 50 states dating back prior to the constitution.
States do have some leeway, but they cannot change the definition of marriage as one man and one woman.
It just takes one vote in the Congress. Thanks to the liberaltarian bozos crying over DOMA.
Great job, bozos. Thanks for kneecapping conservatives once again.
Funny how these issues are never “settled” until the lavender mafia wins.
Why bother, the communists controlled part of the Court has done it damage. Eventually they will show America that they do not support the Constitution but politics will be the rule of the land.
To them, it’s a world without God’s acknowledgement and in to having God’s word re- written as those pathetic activist justices are doing on the high court with the one solid document that our founders left for generations to come. The Bible has always been their target.
They just advanced their hatred yesterday and damaging morality over the longrun. They want to be accepted. Yesterday, they were happy to think a activist law validated their behavior with protections; a special right. But no activist law will force millions to condone their behavior. It won’t happen. People who support this have no commitment to their faith or had none anyway. Those people are living in the moment. Years from now, they will have to answer. Pushing same sex people relationships on the masses (young children) is wrong. The nation has to be brought down to her knees since the rulers are destroying morality. I am very prepared.
There is nothing “gay” about being homosexual. I refuse to use the word gay when referring to the sexually depraved. They are homosexual or lesbian, not gay.
Noting that I support only traditional one man, one woman marriage, given that the Founding States made the 10th Amendment to clarify that the Constitution’s silence about things like marriage automatically makes it a state power issue, I think that the Court is right to decline to hear marriage-related cases.
In fact, with all due respect to Terri Schiavo’s family, the Court properly respected 10A-protected state power to address euthenasia issues by declining to hear Terri’s case. But as a consequence of Florida citizens evidently not understanding 10A-protected state powers, based on very limited feedback I understand that citizens have still not worked with their state lawmakers to make Florida’s euthenasia laws more compassionate for people like Terri.
Also, although I don’t think that the dust has settled with respect to people, including me, understanding what the Court had actually decided about DOMA and Prop. 8 because of media spin on the Court’s decisions, regarding Prop. 8, I think that the Court’s constitutionally indefensible excuse that private citizens do not have the right to have their cases heard by the Court under the right circumstances actually had the same effect as declining not to hear it as with the cases referenced by this thread.
Again, I support only traditional marriage, but I try to support traditional marriage within the framework of the Constitution.
Don’t need to take ‘em. They’ve already set the dominoes tumbling. Let some lower court do their dirty work.
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.