On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:31:55 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:03:44 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:


Why? You think marriages should be conducted by lawyers?

Divorces are conducted by lawyers, why shouldn't marriages be?
It is the 2 sides of the same coin and represents about half of all
marriages.


You don't need a lawyer for marriage or divorce. Unless we have it your
way. We won't.

There's +1100 gov laws that take marital status into consideration.
You want that all changed, as Greg appears to want?
That's just radical libertarianism.

The question is why there are that many discrimitory laws benefiting
married people? It sounds like those evil churches influencing the
government.
Since there is very little uniformity among the states about who, how
and what marriage even means, it is silly that we have that many laws
about it.


Those are federal laws, relating to taxation and fed benefits.
Ever see the tax code? States generally follow federal law as to
taxes/benefits related to marital status.
Churches have nothing to do with it, except as they influence society.
It's society's desires, forwarded via elected representatives, and the
weight of the public sense on the SC that determines what's
"discriminatory." Not you.
Let me know when the SC deems the marriage exemption unconstitutional.
So you can just forget about a simple flat tax and other wacko ideas.
The country has never worked that way and never will.
Just concentrate on waste and corruption.



The only question at hand now in DOMA is whether it violates equal
protection. Of course it does. It was discriminatory and
unconstitutional from the getgo. Nothing new either. Laws and actions
denying equal protection to blacks, women, Japanese-Americans come to
mind. Those were also corrected.

I agree DOMA is a violation of states rights and disrespecting the
will of the people in those states who have decided that gay marriage
is legal. Marriage is a state issue and has always been. The word is
not even mentioned in the constitution. The federal government never
had any business passing DOMA.


Nobody cares about DOMA in relation to state rights except airheads.
That's all bull****, no matter how the SC rules this time around.

The real question is what happens when DOMA is struck down as I think
it will be and the SCOTUS simply punts on Prop 8, letting the appeals
court decision to strike it down, stand.
That would leave such similar laws in other states in limbo.

We may not be done with this.

Of course not. The SC will eventually be forced to step up and declare
discriminating against gay marriage unconstitutional under equal
protection. Because that's what society will demand.
The states will just fall into line, every single one of them.

Gretwell needs to read the 14th again. Perhaps he'd like to tell us
how the specific sections do or don't affect both fed and states?