Wyo., 9 states file brief opposing gay marriage

[Newsjock]

Source: Associated Press

Wyoming and nine other states have filed a gay marriage opposition brief to a federal appeals court in California.

The amicus brief sent Friday to the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said that the Constitution does not require marriage to include same-sex couples. The 39-page brief also said that states, not federal courts, have final say in whether to allow same-sex marriages.

... The Casper Star-Tribune reported that other states who joined the brief against gay marriage are Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, South Carolina, Utah and Virginia. They argued that same-sex marriage is not a fundamental right.

"If public affirmation of anyone and everyone's personal love and commitment is the single purpose of marriage, a limitless number of rights claims could be set up that evacuate the term marriage of any meaning," the brief said.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/09/25/state/n092301D17.DTL&tsp=1

[RKP5637]

1. This nation makes just about every damn thing unbelievably difficult. For a nation

that brags about equality, equal rights and the rest of the apple pie and BS, why does everyone have to fight endlessly for equal rights. It seems to me many in this nation spend a lot of time working on the next group to suppress and/or discriminate against. It's so nice that some in this country are so F'ing perfect their SH** doesn't even stink.

[awoke_in_2003]

14. "It's called the American dream for a reason...

you have to be asleep to believe it". George Carlin

[RKP5637]

21. My hero, always, George Carlin... could he ever tell it like it is. I miss him. n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

24. me too...

there will never be another like him in our lifetime.

[msongs]

2. no marriages are fundemental rights under the constitution far as a Ive heard lol nt

[Fearless]

4. That's a non sequitur argument.

The point at debate is whether or not the government has the right to tell same-sex couples that they can't marry, not whether they can endorse marriage at all.

[HereSince1628]

8. I think that's correct

but then it didn't say anything about interracial marriage, but didn't SCOTUS decide it had an interest in that?

[Unvanguard]

10. Actually, marriage has been recognized by the Supreme Court as a fundamental right.

See, among others, Loving v. Virginia, Turner v. Safley, and Zablocki v. Redhail.

The defenders of Prop. 8 do not deny this, but argue that marriage's status as a fundamental right is tied to procreative capacity. This seems a silly argument to me, incapable of accounting for its status as a right.

[RKP5637]

12. Interesting, so using the defenders of Prop. 8 logic any heterosexual couple that

can not have children should be denied marriage, because marriage is a procreative capacity...

[Unvanguard]

19. Well, that is one of the difficulties with their position.

They argue that it would be an egregiously intrusive and error-prone process to weed out the infertile, though that hardly suffices as a response to an age cap proposal, and still isn't an argument for why infertile couples have marriage as a right (which presumably they do.)

[RKP5637]

22. Amazing, this all gets more and more bizarre. n/t

[Hosnon]

17. The right to marry is a fundamental right according to the SCOTUS. nt.

[Fearless]

3. Life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness... Pick any one. That's where it says it.

[laconicsax]

5. Uh-oh! The slippery slope! Too bad for them, it slopes both ways.

If "same-sex marriage is not a fundamental right," they'd better be able to prove that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XMvviFbkf0#t=35s">"opposite marriage" is a fundamental right or else they may have to accept a court not just banning all marriage, but all association. After all, is friendship a fundamental right?


Opposite marriage...:rofl:

[yellerpup]

6. All about getting the hardcore homophobes out.

That's why they need a strawman issue (for them) on the ballot. Win or lose they will still not act pro or con. They need this as a dog whistle. Here Bigot, come here! Good dog!

[xchrom]

7. I think fundies do fine job of 'evacuating' any meaning out of marriage.

A serious poor choice of words on their part.

[Unvanguard]

9. Thirteen, actually. Pennsylvania, Nebraska, and Alaska also joined.

The brief is one of those linked here.

Mostly the same as what we've already heard from the defendant-intervenors, with the addition of the strange claim that marriage law is somehow an invalid topic for federal litigation (with the various Supreme Court cases dealing with marriage rather arbitrarily grandfathered in.)

[Bluenorthwest]

11. Florida, of course.

Totally the State of the Week, with Crist and this and the rest of it. Demented.

[RKP5637]

13. Florida's generally always in the middle of anything that's F'ed up. n/t

[KamaAina]

15. How many tax dollars in these states are being thrown away on filing fees, etc?

:grr:

[felix_numinous]

16. I am so sorry to hear this nt

[Hosnon]

18. Waste of taxpayer money. And clearly on the wrong side of history.

Fuck 'em.

[ruggerson]

20. This is the result of rightwing Attorneys General in each state

If your state has a far rightwing AG, they can do this all on their own unfortunately.

[sakabatou]

23. 50 or so years ago

These states would've been opposed to interracial marriage.

[alp227]

25. A couple things I wanna say:

(1) Why do those states feel so compelled to tell California how it can administer its marriages?
(2) Prop 8 supporters and other like-minded folks might as well just move to the states that filed the pro-8 briefs for all I care.

[defendandprotect]

26. Murder of Matthew Shepard in 1998 ... evidently they haven't learned anything since then ... ???

Except to continue on with spreading religious intolerance and hatred for

homosexuals!!