Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules • Hacker News Board

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#461

Post by glhaynes » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:51 PM UTC

andreyf wrote: post #406

hackuser wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can anybody counter Scalia, and say why the issue of gay marriage couldn't wait to be resolved by the states? Why is this class of license inequity different than other classes, where the states' right to license something is not resolved by SCOTUS? Certainly with all the imagined legal expertise on HN, someone will answer. I have no expertise, but here's a shot at least from a moral point of view and based on some…

Legally, you are right. Morally and practically, I'm not so sure. Few hearts and minds are changed as a result of the supreme court's rulings, just the code powering the justice system. Convincing 5 of the top judges is easy compared to convincing the populace, and the latter is more important for the long term goals of equality. Federally legislated social change pushes back the more important goals of social equali…

No hearts and no minds are changed as a result of the supreme court rulings, just the code powering the justice system.

This assumes that peoples' moral judgments aren't influenced by societal opinion and that societal opinion isn't influenced by laws and the opinions of its leaders/elites. That seems like a tough case to make.

Today's decision pushes back the more important goals of social equality and cultural integration.

How so?

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#462

Post by towelguy » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:51 PM UTC

Void_ wrote: post #235

samatman wrote: post #121

While this is excellent news for my gay and lesbian friends, I see no progress on polygamy. Which, unlike same-sex marriage, is an institution with deep roots both in America (the Mormons were forced to give up this sacrament as a condition of statehood) and in the majority of world cultures, where it ranges from condoned to celebrated. Without getting unduly personal, let's say that I have a stake in that question b…

10 years from now. HN Headline: Polygamy upheld by supreme court Comment: While this is excellent news for my polygamous friends, I see no progress on [insert new deviation here]. --- So what do you all think will be the next big thing?

AI+VR

Edit: Just remembered this is already happening http://travel.cnn.com/tokyo/none/love-plus-scourge-takes-ano...

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#463

Post by ticviking » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:52 PM UTC

aclimatt wrote: post #425

quizotic wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad that my LBG friends can now marry anywhere. But damn, Scalia's counter opinion (and Roberts' opinion) strike me as well-considered and well-argued in the 2nd half of http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf . In brief, their view was that resolving this issue in the courts erodes the democratic process. Can anybody counter Scalia, and say why the issue of gay marriage couldn't wait to be re…

I believe the issue is that by passing a law prohibiting granting a marriage license to a same-sex couple, a State is violating that couple's Fourteenth Amendment right to life, liberty, and equal protection, among other things. I will admit that there were a lot of high-soaring words that might have covered up the legal basis, but to me, the legal component of the ruling was simply: 1) The court finds that marriage…

I think that's the Best TL;DR; of the ruling I've found so far.

#1 was found by the court almost 80 years ago in Loving vs Virginia[1]. What the court found was that this applied to the rights of same sex couples.

The court has been building the legal framework for this for about a decade. They found that Civil Unions must not be legally different from Marriage. From there it was a simple matter of ruling that existing civil rights rulings did in fact apply to LGBT folks.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#464

Post by jasonjei » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:52 PM UTC

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #451

Well, I know I'm probably a minority in saying this, but I'm disappointed - not because I don't think everyone should have access to the government rights attached to marriage, but because it seems our country doesn't actually want to fix problems at the root. What is the root problem? People on both sides of the debate agree (if given the option) that the government probably never should have messed with marriage, a…

What's shocking to me is that we need permission from the state to marry, whether gay or straight. Why do we need the blessing of the government to marry anyway? We can have kids without permission from the state (so long as you aren't in China), why do we need to ask for permission and "apply for marriage"? In theory, applying for marriage implies the government could deny a marriage, gay or straight. Why do we implicitly give this power to the government?

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#465

Post by MichaelGG » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:52 PM UTC

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #451

Well, I know I'm probably a minority in saying this, but I'm disappointed - not because I don't think everyone should have access to the government rights attached to marriage, but because it seems our country doesn't actually want to fix problems at the root. What is the root problem? People on both sides of the debate agree (if given the option) that the government probably never should have messed with marriage, a…

Correct. And the restriction on two people is also a cheap hack. It should be more like an LLC where multiple entities join for tax and other concerns. Full stop.

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#466

Post by dntrkv » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:52 PM UTC

baakss wrote: post #30

In my lifetime, I think this is the social issue that has seen the most positive change. As a kid, gay people were practically lepers. Eleven Years ago, Dave Chappelle just outright said "gay sex is just gross, sorry it just is", and it was considered funny and acceptable. (Not harping on him specifically, just pointing out what it was like in 2004) Seven years ago prop 8 passed, if barely with some caveats about lac…

You can't just pull a quote like that out of context. Chappelle said the "gay sex is gross" thing twice, once was in the black bush character (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoDpghAaXT4) and the other was when he had a white girl sing his thoughts:

"Gay sex is gross; sorry, I just think it is. (gets another card) Unless, of course, they're lesbians. (gets another card) I like lesbians. (gets another card) I like lesbians."

Which is super tame compared to a lot of the other things Chappelle said back then, or even Louis CK says nowadays.

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#467

Post by Roodgorf » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:53 PM UTC

hackuser wrote: post #361

rayiner wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looking at just the legal aspects, in 1789 (and 1776) we did recognize that 'all men are created equal' and equal protection (and due process might apply too). From those rights flows the idea that a right conferred to some, such as marraige, should not be denied to others. That language is in the declaration of independence, which has no legal effect. The Constitution explicitly creates a system where all men are…

Equal protection is in the Constitution, in the 14th amendment.

For what it's worth, the 14th amendment was not adopted until 1868, nearly a century later.

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#468

Post by ElComradio » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:53 PM UTC

baakss wrote: post #30

In my lifetime, I think this is the social issue that has seen the most positive change. As a kid, gay people were practically lepers. Eleven Years ago, Dave Chappelle just outright said "gay sex is just gross, sorry it just is", and it was considered funny and acceptable. (Not harping on him specifically, just pointing out what it was like in 2004) Seven years ago prop 8 passed, if barely with some caveats about lac…

Any straight guy will, if given the choice, avoid scenes of man on man sex as much as possible. They might say it's "just not my thing" out of politeness or tact but watch what they do. When Chapelle said it it was funny because everyone watching can relate and it's a tension reliever to hear what you've been bottling up is actually true. Much comedy works this way.

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#469

Post by cafard » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:54 PM UTC

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #451

Well, I know I'm probably a minority in saying this, but I'm disappointed - not because I don't think everyone should have access to the government rights attached to marriage, but because it seems our country doesn't actually want to fix problems at the root. What is the root problem? People on both sides of the debate agree (if given the option) that the government probably never should have messed with marriage, a…

Stop defining marriage of any form? Isn't it shorthand for a collection of rights and duties that would be inconvenient to spell out by other means?

Re: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules

#470

Post by bighi » Fri, Jun 26, 2015, 4:54 PM UTC

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #451

Well, I know I'm probably a minority in saying this, but I'm disappointed - not because I don't think everyone should have access to the government rights attached to marriage, but because it seems our country doesn't actually want to fix problems at the root. What is the root problem? People on both sides of the debate agree (if given the option) that the government probably never should have messed with marriage, a…

But marriage is not a religious thing.

Before most popular religions were created, marriage was already old.

For cultural reasons, it's popular to do a RELIGIOUS CEREMONY along the marriage. What's religious there is the ceremony, not the marriage.

You can have religious ceremonies without marriage, and marriages without the religious ceremony. Two independent concepts that, by happenstance, often come together.