Supreme Court Issues Ruling On Same Sex Marriage Legalizing Marriage Nat. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 17, 2024, 02:05:26 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Supreme Court Issues Ruling On Same Sex Marriage Legalizing Marriage Nat. (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Supreme Court Issues Ruling On Same Sex Marriage Legalizing Marriage Nat.  (Read 9087 times)
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,872
« on: June 27, 2015, 06:38:32 PM »

Politically, it would be very hard now for any Republican or the courts to overturn this.  The backlash would be career-killing and legacy killing.  When you're fighting an unwinnable battle, the best thing you can do is restructure so that you have a chance to win the war.

I would actually be quite concerned about it being overturned if Ginsburg died under a Republican president and senate.  The fallout would be Dred Scott level, but they only need one more vote.  2016 just got a lot more important this week, with gay marriage, housing discrimination protections and a fully intact Obamacare now on the line.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,872
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2015, 08:07:27 PM »

Actually lots of Polynesian societies include a "third gender" of effeminate males who marry other men. I wonder why you never hear the "bbbbut EVERY SOCIETY has always said marriage is man-woman!!!" crowd address that fact?

That really is a stretch.

What? Are you seriously arguing that the fa'afafine somehow aren't a direct, indisputable counterexample to typical right-wing argument of "marriage was defined by every society and every religious group as the union of a man and a woman" Huh

Colleges and universities do not accept Wikipedia as a source for scholarly writing because of its inaccuracies.

Let's say I give you this one example, out of all the societies and civilizations that existed.  If the shoe were on the other foot; if such a group of people were the ONLY group you knew of in the annals of civilization that practiced only man-woman monogamous marriage, would you consider that enough to ban SSM?  This example is so idiosyncratic . . . I mean, I'm at a loss for words if one actually believes that this one counterexample offsets the assertion that marriage being between a man and a woman is how every society has defined marriage.  OK, every society but one, until 15 years ago.  I suspect that this counterexample was known to the plaintiffs who did not point it out because it would appear to support the opposite point of view.

Many native American tribes had a "3rd gender" that would live and work according to the opposite gender's social expectations.  It's only unheard of among agricultural, urban cultures.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.018 seconds with 13 queries.