Washingtonpost.com:

The Supreme Court on Friday delivered an historic victory for gay rights, ruling 5-4 that the Constitution requires that same-sex couples be allowed to marry no matter where they live and that states may no longer reserve the right only for heterosexual couples.

The court’s action marks the culmination of an unprecedented upheaval in public opinion and the nation’s jurisprudence. Advocates called it the most pressing civil rights issue of modern times, while critics said the courts had sent the country into uncharted territory by changing the traditional definition of marriage.

“The court now holds that same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. No longer may this liberty be denied to them,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.

The country’s first legally recognized same-sex marriages took place just 11 years ago, the result of a Massachusetts state supreme court decision. Now, more than 70 percent of Americans live in states where same-sex couples are allowed to marry, according to estimates.

Holy cow, what a week.  Lots of change.  All of it was just a matter of time.  Now everyone can marry who they love, all over the nation.

Looking back, the end result of all these changes is that people have more rights.  This should be seen as a good thing.

Same-sex marriage was only a matter of time and is definitely a civil rights issue.  The LGBT community still has a long way to go to have full rights.  There still is no job protection, for example.  It’s been less than 50 years since Loving v. Virginia codified interracial marriage in Virginia.  At the turn of the century, there were places were homosexual sex was illegal.  Imagine the number of lives that have been ruined because former respected members of communities across the country were somehow discovered.  That is no longer an issue.

Just as a perspective, when I was a young psych major in college, homosexuality was by the  AMA  and the American Psychiatric Association as a mental illness.  We have come a long way, in so many respects.  The wheels of social justice march on.    Limbaugh has something to bitch about for decades.

83 thoughts on “Same-sex marriage, Obamacare, the flag–It’s been quite a week

  1. Steve Thomas

    @Moon-howler
    “I guess I don’t think the 2nd group is any safer than the first group. At least good ole boys know that bullets are real.”

    The 2nd group is more inclined to seek formal, professional training, rather than rely solely on that handed down from uncle ted, or obtained in basic training in the military, neither of which covers the legal aspects of lawful carry.

    “My basic problem is that I don’t think everyone should be permitted to own a gun. The world is simply gifted with too many AH’s/”

    Kinda like I feel about everyone being permitted to vote…I kid. I kid.

    1. well, you might be right on the voting count also. My problem is, who decides.

      Truthfully, I have seen stupidity out of the good ole boys and the professional types. You can’t govern stupidity. It is what it is.

  2. Steve Thomas

    I am starting to see news reports where people are walking in to clerks courts looking for licenses for polygamous marriage. In light of the court’s decision to redefine marriage, I don’t see how someone can be prevented from legally wedding a second, third, or fourth spouse.

    1. That might be next. I don’t see the provisions for polygamy right now. On the other hand, why do I care? The polygamists already live a married life with the blessing thru their church. They are ecclesiastical marriages. I guess the only difference it would make would be for taxes.

      Not to be disparaging but a lot of them that I know about are living on the dole anyway.

  3. Steve Thomas

    @Moon-howler
    Moon,

    Upthread, someone asserted that we’ve become a more “civilized” society. I disagree. We’ve become more technology advanced, no question, but “civilized”? I could list a thousand reasons why I believe we’ve regressed. If society chooses moral relativism as its guiding principle, it will go the way of others that have fallen. Greece and Rome come to mind. But hey, that’s just my opinion.

    1. I just had the computer eat my response. ARRGGG

      I believe I was asked that question and I side-stepped it because it required too much thinking. It all depends on how :”civilized” is defined. 500 year ago enemies disemboweled each other with red hot pokers, drawing and quartering was standard punishment. People tortured each other and women were systematically raped by invading armies. We have shuddered in horror reading about this behavior. Yet, are we so different? 500 years ago violence was up close and personal. Now we rip the faces off people from afar, via aircraft, drones and long range weapons. We just don’t get up close and as personal as a general rule. Our civilization is perhaps veneer?

    2. Round 2. We also are horrified when some terrorist group like ISIS invades and chop off heads. Can we compare that to the Vikings? I just finished watching the movie Fury. Good grief, someone was having their head or face blown off every 3 seconds. That was “the good war” of course. That pretty much describes combat in what we have deemed, “the Good War.” Civilized? Again, compared to what?

      I don’t think slavery was a good thing, not in the least. However, no where during that time I have heard one word about nearly 700,000 American troops (including confederates in this one) being killed, often in heinous ways. It just isn’t mentioned. Not once have I heard any cause/effect attached to Reconstruction. Reconstruction harmed women, children and former slaves the worst. None of those people could even vote and had no say-so in what happened in the various state capitals throughout the south. Yet those [people were punished horribly. They had zero control over the secession that the south was being punished for.

      Congress stupidly tried to punish the South rather than help them rebuild a destroyed economy and countryside. Look what those freaking fools created. Yet no one is willing to talk about it. When they create a dog eat dog world, its not going to be pretty.

  4. Ed Myers

    Marriage licenses via the local court house are archaic. The only place that one needs to register a household is via the IRS. Once you determine what group of people are related via a household and can document it (e.g. via a website) then benefits flow from there. If the household splits up that would gets recorded by filing a form with the IRS.

    This has very little to do with marriage. We have placed too many government benefits predicated on marriage when in reality we mean household. A mother, daughter and grandchild living together is a household and we should treat it like a husband wife and child when discussing tax and public policy. Likewise polygamy should be documented and government assistance provided by the needs of the household instead of trying to break it up into a marriage unit with single women as head of household at the same location.

  5. Ed Myers

    @Steve. If one is in an emergency room with a gunshot wound, then a gun did it and gun insurance would pay. Right now that cost of medical care for a gunshot is transferred to everyone and non-gun owners subsidize the recklessness and criminality of gun owners. More of the intangible cost of massive gun ownership should be born by those who choose to purchase a gun, not society in general. The right to own a gun does not require a public subsidy so everyone can exercise that right.

  6. Cargosquid

    @Steve Thomas
    “But, I am optimistic that very soon I shall be able to ‘bear arms for lawful purposes” anywhere in the US and its territories,”

    I’m not. Not on this basis. Nothing says that SCOTUS has to take the case or rule consistently. Recent rulings show that they are NOT following the Constitution.

  7. Cargosquid

    @Ed Myers
    Actually, you make a good point here….. household vs marriage.

    Then again, repeal the income tax and a lot of the problems are solved.

    As for the gun…. why should an owner pay for the insurance if the gun is stolen and used in a crime. Also, the gun does NOTHING. The human does it. Insurance will NOT pay for intentional criminal acts.

  8. Steve Thomas

    @Ed Myers
    Recklessness and criminality of gun owners?

    Ed, while most of your posts have a tinge of foolishness, you’ve just gone “full idiot”. Never go “full idiot”.

  9. Steve Thomas

    @Cargosquid
    Cargo,

    SCOTUS isn’t the only route. How many states got legalized gay marriage at the state court and federal circuit level? Answer: most of the 36 that had it prior to last Friday.

  10. Furby McPhee

    “Now everyone can marry who they love, all over the nation.”

    Sadly, that’s still not the case. The poly community is still discriminated against, even when it is part of their religious beliefs or traditional culture.

    None of us is free to love until love truly knows no bounds. Any number of people should be able to marry any other consenting entity.

    Of course, we really should just eliminate marriage completely. It’s an inherently regressive concept, forever rooted in the idea of chattel property. People should be free to live with whoever they want for as long as they want.

    1. Polygamists do marry. They are civilly to wife one. Sequential wives are only married ecclesiastically.

      They should lobby for marriage to multiple marriage. My guess is, there just aren’t enough of them to pull it off.

  11. excellent PBS American Experience episode about the Klan in NC.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/klansville/player/

    They used American flags and crosses to terrorize. Strange how those haven’t been deemed symbols of hatred. It’s something to think about. Also, the Hymn, The Old Rugged Cross was their theme song.

  12. Furby McPhee

    Moon-howler :
    Polygamists do marry. They are civilly to wife one. Sequential wives are only married ecclesiastically.
    They should lobby for marriage to multiple marriage. My guess is, there just aren’t enough of them to pull it off.

    Saying polys have the right to marry as long as they only marry one person is just like the homophobic argument that gays were free to marry someone of the opposite sex just like hets were.

    So what happens when a poly family wants to visit one of the ‘illegal’ wives in the hospital? Who becomes guardians of the children if the birth mother dies?

    The state must recognize and accept whoever and however people want to love.

    1. The father is named. Who gets the kid when single mom’s die?

      BTW, I don’t really care if they marry or not.

Comments are closed.