SCOTUS/Prop 8 predictions?

No, they shouldn't. The tax code should be neutral on such things. If I made a hundred grand and my wife made a hundred and fifty, then I pay tax on a hundred and she pays tax on one-fiddy. Period.

Funny how the tax stuff only comes up when the gheys want it.

Forty years of silence, NOW it all comes up.

This is what's behind the hysteria, maybe even more than the religious stuff.

For every faux Xtian like apostle and TLS, there's at least one Cliff Clavan type propped up at the bar muttering, "Yeah, but think about it. If them gays get more stuff, where's it gonna come from? I'll tell ya where it's gonna come from. It's gonna come from taking away our stuff. Mark my words; that's what it'll come to."

I liked the response to Scalia's stupid question. To paraphrase "It became unconstitutional exactly the same way it became unconstitutional to outlaw marriages between blacks and whites." Which is spot on even if Scalia didn't like it.

Seriously, has Scalia even read any amendments beyond the Bill of Rights? It's like he missed the memo about the other 17.

Why are you picking on me?

It's apples and oranges. Negroes and whites should have the ability to be married as long as they're opposite sexed.

Up until about 50 years, it was "Negroes and whites should have the ability to be married as long as it's not to each other." Same dumb argument, 50 years later.

"Picking on you"? I'm holding you to account.

This^ is why.

The conservative arguments in favor of Prop 8 and DOMA were especially feeble. More so than usual. All Bible thumping and shrieking about "traditional marriage."

One thing that amuses me about cons trying to defend Prop 8 is the "will of the people" argument. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if something is unconstitutional, which Prop 8 has been ruled to be by the 9th Circuit, does it matter if it's the "will of the people?"

If CA voters approved a ballot measure that banned all firearms other than handguns, that would be blatantly unconstitutional, right? Would conservatives demand it stand because it's the "will of the people?"

We know the answer to that one.

This is just like the interracial marriage debate.

No, you can't compare the two, b/c the state had no interest in banning interracial marriage.

What interest does the state have in banning same sex marriage?

Tradition.

Those defending Prop 8 will center their argument around the state's interest in managing procreation and the welfare of children.

Well it's still a pretty dumb idea, but it shouldn't be disallowed.

All joking aside, I don't have any issue with legal weddings between homosexuals. None at all. Have at it.

Ah, so now that it looks as if the Supreme Court might not give you what you want, all those years of sliming people here and elsewhere was just "joking," huh?

Just like his racism. It's all just jokes. The only racists and homophobes are the people who get offended.

That's a pretty piss-poor argument, then. It's not like heterosexual couples are suddenly going to stop having kids if homosexual couples can get married. It's not like children are suddenly going to be molested left and right. And besides, the state's interest in managing procreation is a fairly eugenicist argument. If we take that one step further, do they want to ban sterile heterosexual couples from marrying? I'm glad their stupidity and insanity is being shared with us. I was actually mildly concerned that prop 8 would be upheld until I read their arguments for it.

Not sure a warthog and a meerkat count as "men" . . .

Yep, exactly the same. If you listen to the video of the ruling in the Lovings case (which ditched the anti-miscegenation laws) the ruling even said nothing is more private and personal than the choice of who to marry and to deny a couple the right to marry the person of their choice is inherently unconstitutional. Gee, sort of sounds like that would apply to gay marriage too, huh?

Actually it has nothing to do with being on a winning side of a legal battle one way or the other. It has to do with what they are really looking for and it's not simply marriage equality.

They are looking for validation and acceptance of their lifestyle and privately most people would tell you they don't take gay marriage seriously, no matter what public polling says. So, if the government wants to let them play pretend, so be it.

My stance-

Let them play house as it's a total sham anyway.

Teach my child what is right and what is wrong (and keep her out of public school systems).

Do what is morally right.

We should all get a break on our income taxes.

No, they don't. See, they were fighting for a right that other people actually did have. Gays can marry members of the opposite sex. Nobody's denying them that right. Straight people can't marry members of the same sex. Gays aren't pushing for anything that anybody else has already got.

^That troll is weak when Volpone does it, and it's weak when you do it.

What troll? Are you claiming that gays can't marry members of the opposite sex, or are you claiming that straight folk can and gays are being denied the same right?

That's not the right being argued, VisionLegion.

The beautiful thing is that when DOMA and Prop 8 are tossed out, saintvision will have the same right as a gay person to marry someone of the same sex.

Maybe he and Volpone can get married. They seem to like the same trolls.

Unlike Volpone, I think LegionCastle is actually a straight homophobe (and NAZI).

Sure it is. They want to marry members of the same sex. Which, in places where that's still prohibited, straight people can't do either. So they're not looking for equal rights, they're looking for something nobody else is allowed to do either.

At least, that's the point of view of those opposing it, and in an autistic kind of way, it does make sense.

Now, of course, in the not-anal-retentive world, they want to marry who-the-hell-ever they want to, which is a right other people do have.

Y'all are so fuckin' easy. Jayzus.

So, now that you are acknowledging the truth of what i said, I'm easy? You're dumber than I thought you were.