http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/...e-appeals/

Indiana
Utah (LOL)
Oklahoma (Even bigger LOL)
Virginia
Wisconsin

Couples in six other states -- Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia and Wyoming -- also should be able to get married in short order. Those states would be bound by the same appellate rulings that were put on hold pending the Supreme Court's review. That would make same-sex marriage legal in 30 states and the District of Columbia.

Missouri's law (at the moment) looks like it's going to stand, since the courts ruled that Missouri will be required recognize other states' marriage certificates.

The real question is… if GTS considers this a gay thread?

This decision is probably a loss for the gay rights cause.

Had the SC taken the case and found affirmatively, then gay marriage would be legal nationally.

I suspect that the decision to refuse was 5-4 with the conservative wing in the majority.

On a purely constitutional basis, the court may be saying that gay marriage is and should be a state level issue. Too bad they didn't see that this also applied in Roe v Wade.

(10-06-2014 10:45 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  This decision is probably a loss for the gay rights cause.

Had the SC taken the case and found affirmatively, then gay marriage would be legal nationally.

I suspect that the decision to refuse was 5-4 with the conservative wing in the majority.

On a purely constitutional basis, the court may be saying that gay marriage is and should be a state level issue. Too bad they didn't see that this also applied in Roe v Wade.

I'd say it's a draw.

remember it's the cons who wanted to appeal this thing.

(10-06-2014 10:44 AM)AngryAphid Wrote:  The real question is… if GTS considers this a gay thread?

at least my gay threads are newsworthy issues unlike the crap ER posts

(10-06-2014 10:45 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  This decision is probably a loss for the gay rights cause.
Had the SC taken the case and found affirmatively, then gay marriage would be legal nationally.
I suspect that the decision to refuse was 5-4 with the conservative wing in the majority.
On a purely constitutional basis, the court may be saying that gay marriage is and should be a state level issue. Too bad they didn't see that this also applied in Roe v Wade.

Only four justices have to vote in favor for a case to be heard, so the conservative wing cannot block a case from being heard. Of course, if they aren't fairly confident they have the votes to win the decision, the liberal wing probably wouldn't vote for cert either.

The Supreme Court typically does not like to lead from the front on controversial social issues. One of the biggest determinants to whether a case will be granted is whether or not there is a split between the various federal circuits or between the states and circuits. Right now there is really no split, with virtually every final decision finding in favor of the right to gay marriage. Until there is a split (or the issue becomes even less controversial), the Supreme Court is likely to avoid weighing in.

(10-06-2014 10:46 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:45 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  This decision is probably a loss for the gay rights cause.

Had the SC taken the case and found affirmatively, then gay marriage would be legal nationally.

I suspect that the decision to refuse was 5-4 with the conservative wing in the majority.

On a purely constitutional basis, the court may be saying that gay marriage is and should be a state level issue. Too bad they didn't see that this also applied in Roe v Wade.

I'd say it's a draw.

remember it's the cons who wanted to appeal this thing.

Part of me wishes that the SCOTUS would have made a ruling. If for no other reason the to finally put the issue in the rear view mirror.

Liberals on the Court likely didn't want to overturn the decisions which all support marriage equality so far, while the conservatives on the court don't want gay marriage to be legally throughout the nation. Makes sense that the court is not hearing the case since there is no split within the circuits.

(10-06-2014 12:40 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:46 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:45 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  This decision is probably a loss for the gay rights cause.

Had the SC taken the case and found affirmatively, then gay marriage would be legal nationally.

I suspect that the decision to refuse was 5-4 with the conservative wing in the majority.

On a purely constitutional basis, the court may be saying that gay marriage is and should be a state level issue. Too bad they didn't see that this also applied in Roe v Wade.

I'd say it's a draw.

remember it's the cons who wanted to appeal this thing.

Part of me wishes that the SCOTUS would have made a ruling. If for no other reason the to finally put the issue in the rear view mirror.

the GOP seems content on the 51 bullets to the limbs & chest approach rather than one to the head type approach.

Kicking and screaming, that's what (social) conservatives seem to do the best.

Republicans really should stop trying to be on the wrong end of this.

(10-06-2014 12:44 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Republicans really should stop trying to be on the wrong end of this.

It's an issue which stirs up their voter base, but the problem is that it's ultimately a losing proposition on their part.

(10-06-2014 10:47 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:44 AM)AngryAphid Wrote:  The real question is… if GTS considers this a gay thread?

at least my gay threads are newsworthy issues unlike the crap ER posts

So you're admitting that your threads ARE gay? Is this a "coming out of the closet" revelation about your threads?

And just FTR, are we talking about what you post, or what you wear?

This will ensure that there would be chaos if the courts dared to allow same sex marriage bans. SCOTUS cant rule against marriage equality now. All hell would break loose if they did. They might not have to get involved, because there might be victories in all circuits within the next 18 months. Were in an end game. And its later than the anti-gays think

On to the next legal frontiers .... polygamy, brothers and sisters, etc.

Libs will continue to push the limits.

(10-06-2014 12:46 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  It's an issue which stirs up their voter base, but the problem is that it's ultimately a losing proposition on their part.

No, ultimately, we'll all be judged by the good Lord in the end. That's a losing proposition for homosexuals. And its final with no appeals.

Well well well.

Quote:It's an issue which stirs up their voter base, but the problem is that it's ultimately a losing proposition on their part.

Very true. These types of social-conservative issues worked well in 2004, in Bush vs Kerry. But after 2008 with a shift in thoughts on the economy, and more "younger" republicans becoming into the mix -- it now turns the opposite way.

It's good for MID-TERMS, since Republicans show, Democrats don't.

But for Governor and/or Presidential elections? It totally works against Republicans and Democrats LOVE the social conservatives bringing it up.