29 June 2015
Thank you SCOTUS, for starting a civil war in America which may take 25 years to resolve, if ever!
Hopefully unlike our civil war of the 1860’s which saw separation of families, social turmoil and many physical deaths on a daily basis with much property damage.
Aside from random acts of hate, I believe the social toll of this decision will be greater and divide us forever just like the Sunnis and Shiites have been!
All SCOTUS had to say was, “All unions in any state which were called a marriage between like partners is now called a civil union, a contractual agreement for the protection of intimacy and with the same statutory provisions as traditional marriage between different sexes at birth; and, is to be recognized anywhere in America. A civil union is a protected Constitutional right. A marriage defined as between opposite sexes at birth is a defined and protected right under the 1st Amendment.”
A definition which has two interpretations is ambiguous and does not make legal sense!
This is a terrible prospect for America, pitting two Constitutional Amendments against each other so people of like gender can have legally protected sex!
The recent SCOTUS decision is rewriting the biblical Genesis story of mankind. The importance of the historical precedence of man and woman as husband and wife together and their social coexistence within the community around them, the Ten Commandments by many is debased by politically correct SCOTUS. The Ten Commandments is an elegant, succinct statement of social order and economic values providing for peaceful coexistence.
The social order in America as written through all of the Supreme Court decisions is an abomination of the Ten Commandments. Each decision has chipped away at the cohesiveness of that early statement of relationships, personal integrity and responsibility.
It is depressing to think that for almost 225 years all of the SCOTUS decisions are nothing more than finer and finer gradations of deceit between humans or corporations in violation of one or more of the Ten Commandments. Not morality, but behavior modification enforced by due process and then recorded.
I believe the due process review of heterosexual marriage and same sex marriage was incorrectly decided for the following reasons:
1. The term marriage has been used since time immemorial, a legal precedent, to mean between a man and a woman. One result of which is for the procreation between these two people. SCOTUS had a duty to protect the original meaning of this terminology because two likes cannot biologically reproduce.
2. The terms husband and wife are also reserved for the role of man and woman in marriage. So how can a woman be a husband and a man be a wife in this new scenario?
3. How many people now constitute a marriage? Why can’t two people related by one or both parents become married? Or marrying a same sex parent?
4. It is in the respective states’ best interest to protect the application of this terminology for social stability and economic productivity to be between a man and a woman, not like genders.
5. A plethora of legal matters between a man and a woman in marriage have been adopted by society over time. These could be extended by reason of law for same sex civil unions
6. The SCOTUS decision does not allow the democratic process to evaluate all of the existing elements in law or commerce for same sex civil unions. The democratic process has been hijacked by the convenience of SCOTUS marriage terminology.
7. The current SCOTUS decision has violated an aspect of the 1st amendment by passing a law that dis-respects religion. Marriage had been a term contained in religious beliefs since time immemorial, under God or with God’s blessing.
WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED
Does a civil union between same sex partners have the same existing social standing and access to same legal benefits of federal regulations? With this question, then as much as I and many others might object, this would provide the 14th amendment provisions of due process and same equality in existing law and business practice for marriage type benefits.
Terminology or definition of partners being able to produce a biological off spring is different from partners who cannot; therefore, this union between one man and one woman is called marriage.
The term civil union is for all other social arrangements regardless of gender reassignment or quantity of people participating.
The only beneficial outcome of this ruling is the SCOTUS acknowledgement that there is a God! The SCOTUS decision says the two paths to marriages are protected and the first has always been in the eyes of God.
Thanks for that inadvertent decision! You got sandbagged by churches that did not stand up for traditional marriage and were social activists rather than protecting the back bone of civilized society, traditional marriage between a man and a woman.
What we do know for certainty and protected by law is any civil contract between two or more people for any enumerated purposes with or with out a termination process.
HOW is SCOTUS going to manage multiple partners within their definition of marriage?