1st Circuit Correctly Rules DOMA UNconstitutional

[dgs49]

"To conclude, many Americans believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and most Americans live in states where that is the law today. One virtue of federalism is that it permits this diversity of governance based on local choice, but this applies as well to the states that have chosen to legalize same-sex marriage. Under current Supreme Court authority, Congress’ denial of federal benefits to same-sex couples lawfully married in Massachusetts has not been adequately supported by any permissible federal interest."

In other words, How can the Feds refuse to accept a legal status created by a State?

More to come from USSC, but how can they disagree?

[oldr_n_wsr]

No other persons marriage to another person, be it man-man or woman-woman effects (Affects?) my marriage one little bit.

been married 28 years and hope to die married to my wife

[Gob]

“These people who are making a big deal out of gay marriage? I don’t give a fuck about who wants to get married to anybody else! Why not?!”

“We’re making a big deal out of things we shouldn’t be making a deal out of, they go on and on with all this bullshit about ‘sanctity’ — don’t give me that sanctity crap! Just give everybody the chance to have the life they want.”

Clint Eastwood.

[Gob]

Downing Street has defended plans to change the status of civil ceremonies to allow gay and lesbian couples in England and Wales to get married.

It said it was confident safeguards to stop religious organisations being forced to take part in services would not be overturned by European courts.

The Church of England has said the move would "alter the intrinsic nature of marriage as the union of a man and a woman".

Ministers plan to pass the law by 2015.

In its 11 June response to a consultation on the issue, the Church of England said plans to exempt religious organisations from performing gay marriages would be unlikely to survive legal challenges in domestic and European courts.

However, Home Secretary Theresa May has said she believes ministers can create safeguards to protect the concerns expressed by religious groups.

"The government is not going to ask anybody to do anything that is against their conscience," she said.

[Scooter]

In its 11 June response to a consultation on the issue, the Church of England said plans to exempt religious organisations from performing gay marriages would be unlikely to survive legal challenges in domestic and European courts.

It's not only the fact that it is horseshit, but that they know it to be horseshit that makes their attempts at opposition so pathetic. Has any church in Europe ever been required to perform a marriage against its own doctrine on any other basis? Has there been even one such case that they can point to?

You don't like the fact that SSM will be legal, fine, go ahead and say so. But don't insult anyone's intelligence by claiming your religious freedom is at stake, because it marks you as the lying hypocrites that you are.