Supreme Court Rules All States Must License And Recognize Same-Sex Marriages

[Stoffel]

Well, that's all well and good if the people who denied catering were leading the couple on before finally just going, "Oh wait... you're gay. NOPE." I don't think they were at all impolite about it. Especially since it's not a lack of tolerance for gays they are displaying, but a lack of interest in their ceremonial practices. No different than a Mosque declining to host a Christian wedding. It's not personal, in fact it's entirely understandable. Would you like to be forced to an abortion clinic when you're pro-life? I don't think so, and this is the whole point. We can't impose our ideals on others like people are trying to do with that case.

 

 

It is completely different from a Mosque refusing to host a Christian wedding! How can you not see that. Unless you assume that every Wedding Cake maker is automatically a Christian?

Like I said before, if you want to pick and choose, then be up front about it and display this info at your entrance. So people can make up their mind before they enter.

[Memphis]

Is it really a choice though?

Whatever your sexual orientation is, imagine that liking the opposite sex to the one you're attracted to was the norm. Why should you be forced to like that sex just because that is what society views as normal, rather than the sex you actually do like. Yes, you could force yourself to do it, but you would be desperately unhappy in doing so.

Comparing homosexuals to paedophiles and rapists is absolutely ridiculous by the way. Clearly the glaring difference between the first and the latter two is the issue of CONSENT.

From what I can tell he doesn't argue that your not born that way, but rather to that they should "not act on it" which is ridiculous because they are doing nothing illegal and the law is not about anyones definition of morality but rather if an action is forced or damaging to another.

[+JHBrown Subscriber¹]

I'm hoping that there's a sarcasm tag that was forgotten otherwise that's the most ridiculous thing I've read in a long time.  Humans don't choose to be homosexual, they are born that way.  And I don't think you understand what the meaning of 'coming out' is...

One of my favorite members on Neowin,

 

I have to sort of disagree with you on this one. Choosing, not choosing, to be homosexual, really depends on an individuals beliefs, upbringing, religion, what have you. Personally, I believe it is a choice, however, I've debated on why I believe what I believe for ages, even denouncing so called scientific theories. We all should just respect each others personal belief's and find a common ground, as the debates lead to nowhere. Let it be known, I am ok with anyone having the right to marriage, although I do not believe in the lifestyle.

[xendrome]

I think the biggest thing here that probably no one has touched on it, nowhere in the constitution does it define marriage. That is left to the states to define and govern. Yet the federal government is now violating the rights of the states and their voters.

[+JHBrown Subscriber¹]

If I remember your black right? You mean like the lifestyle choice you made to be black right? Or am I missing something /s

No, I am not black as has been mentioned numerous times. So yes, you are missing something. However, I do support many causes in the African American community. One of my closest friends is black, and if it weren't for him, I would not be here today.

[Emn1ty]

I'm hoping that there's a sarcasm tag that was forgotten otherwise that's the most ridiculous thing I've read in a long time.  Humans don't choose to be homosexual, they are born that way.  And I don't think you understand what the meaning of 'coming out' is...

 

If you read what I stated, you'd realize I mention nothing about choosing to be gay. I said we choose to live a gay lifestyle, ie be openly gay and immerse ourselves in the gay community. That is a choice.

 

Is it really a choice though? 

 

Whatever your sexual orientation is, imagine that liking the opposite sex to the one you're attracted to was the norm. Why should you be forced to like that sex just because that is what society views as normal, rather than the sex you actually do like. Yes, you could force yourself to do it, but you would be desperately unhappy in doing so. 

 

Comparing homosexuals to paedophiles and rapists is absolutely ridiculous by the way. Clearly the glaring difference between the first and the latter two is the issue of CONSENT. 

 

It's not about forcing people to do anything in particular. It's about choosing to explore your feelings and figure out your identity, or to ignore them. These are choices we all make all the time about a varying degree of urges. Because we as people can see things from a perspective beyond just, "I want to have sex with that." If you think that's such an impossible notion then I'd press you to find what differentiates us from animals then.

 

Happiness is relative, someone who's attracted to men who chooses and accepts the decision to not explore men romantically or sexually can be content and happy with his own life choices. Don't presume to tell others what will and won't make them happy. That's up to them to figure out. Unless you're keen on doing exactly what you're fighting against, pressuring people who find men attractive to become openly gay because if they don't they'll be unhappy.

 

I make the comparison because it's not about consent, it's about restraint. It's about being higher than just our wants and desires. And to say just because I might be craving ice-cream today (and perhaps have some biological disposition towards sweets) I then have no other choice than to eat ice-cream. Because my body tells me to.

 

That's in no way, shape or form justification or an excuse. Urges and dispositions are not decisions being made for you.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

It's not about forcing people to do anything in particular. It's about choosing to explore your feelings and figure out your identity, or to ignore them. These are choices we all make all the time about a varying degree of urges. Because we as people can see things from a perspective beyond just, "I want to have sex with that." If you think that's such an impossible notion then I'd press you to find what differentiates us from animals then.

 

Happiness is relative, someone who's attracted to men who chooses and accepts the decision to not explore men romantically or sexually can be content and happy with his own life choices. Don't presume to tell others what will and won't make them happy. That's up to them to figure out. Unless you're keen on doing exactly what you're fighting against, pressuring people who find men attractive to become openly gay because if they don't they'll be unhappy.

 

I make the comparison because it's not about consent, it's about restraint. It's about being higher than just our wants and desires. And to say just because I might be craving ice-cream today (and perhaps have some biological disposition towards sweets) I then have no other choice than to eat ice-cream. Because my body tells me to.

 

That's in no way, shape or form justification or an excuse. Urges and dispositions are not decisions being made for you.

 

Your ice cream / sweet craving will go away. People are usually stuck with their sexuality. I say usually because I'm sure there is the odd individual whose sexuality changes over time. 

 

Again you're making absurd comparisons. 

[Stoffel]

If you read what I stated, you'd realize I mention nothing about choosing to be gay. I said we choose to live a gay lifestyle, ie be openly gay and immerse ourselves in the gay community. That is a choice.

 

 

It's not about forcing people to do anything in particular. It's about choosing to explore your feelings and figure out your identity, or to ignore them. These are choices we all make all the time about a varying degree of urges. Because we as people can see things from a perspective beyond just, "I want to have sex with that." If you think that's such an impossible notion then I'd press you to find what differentiates us from animals then.

 

Happiness is relative, someone who's attracted to men who chooses and accepts the decision to not explore men romantically or sexually can be content and happy with his own life choices. Don't presume to tell others what will and won't make them happy. That's up to them to figure out. Unless you're keen on doing exactly what you're fighting against, pressuring people who find men attractive to become openly gay because if they don't they'll be unhappy.

 

I make the comparison because it's not about consent, it's about restraint. It's about being higher than just our wants and desires. And to say just because I might be craving ice-cream today (and perhaps have some biological disposition towards sweets) I then have no other choice than to eat ice-cream. Because my body tells me to.

 

That's in no way, shape or form justification or an excuse. Urges and dispositions are not decisions being made for you.

 

But who says you shouldn't give in to those urges to explore your sexuality? Why is it so wrong to find out what you like?

Who are you or anybody else to say what people can enjoy. Unless you are hung up on that old silly book again.

[Emn1ty]

Your ice cream / sweet craving will go away. People are usually stuck with their sexuality. I say usually because I'm sure there is the odd individual whose sexuality changes over time. 

 

Again you're making absurd comparisons. 

 

Yes, one is temporary and one is not. It's also not so simple to apply this logic to everyone, since some people can overcome their own urges and some cannot. But it's pretty definitive to say certain mental disorders are ones you can't just walk away from. As well as being attracted to children. If gays could live relatively normal, everyday lives when it was downright taboo to be so then I'm sure they've already demonstrated they have the ability to live contrary to their nature. As have all people who learn to starve themselves, or ignore pain. We have an ability to overcome what our bodies tell us. If you aren't going to dispute that then this conversation is done.

 

But who says you shouldn't give in to those urges to explore your sexuality? Why is it so wrong to find out what you like?

Who are you or anybody else to say what people can enjoy. Unless you are hung up on that old silly book again.

 

We choose for ourselves, no one has power over us to make those decisions for us. We are as explorative or conservative with our actions as we desire to be. It's not about right, or wrong. It's about respecting personal choices because we as humans have that ability to choose. You are acting as if I am telling homosexuals can't enjoy being homosexual. I've not said that, what I have said that whether or not someone wants to be a part of the LGBT community is up to them. Whether they want to explore their desires or not is up to them. Not society, not some expectation that peers put on them.

 

Unless of course, you really think people can't overcome such basic instincts?

[Hardcore Til I Die]

Yes, one is temporary and one is not. It's also not so simple to apply this logic to everyone, since some people can overcome their own urges and some cannot. But it's pretty definitive to say certain mental disorders are ones you can't just walk away from. As well as being attracted to children. If gays could live relatively normal, everyday lives when it was downright taboo to be so then I'm sure they've already demonstrated they have the ability to live contrary to their nature. As have all people who learn to starve themselves, or ignore pain. We have an ability to overcome what our bodies tell us. If you aren't going to dispute that then this conversation is done.

I'm saying that they don't really have a choice in the true sense of the word. A person has a natural affinity towards a certain sex (or both). To deny their natural sexuality will more than likely lead to depression.

[Emn1ty]

I'm saying that they don't really have a choice in the true sense of the word. A person has a natural affinity towards a certain sex (or both). To deny their natural sexuality will more than likely lead to depression.

 

I dunno, I'm naturally ADHD but I've done pretty well dealing with those habits myself. And I'm not depressed because of it. I feel you're too easily boiling things down into cause and effect when there's no real reason to assume that one thing leads to another.

[Stoffel]

I dunno, I'm naturally ADHD but I've done pretty well dealing with those habits myself. And I'm not depressed because of it. I feel you're too easily boiling things down into cause and effect when there's no real reason to assume that one thing leads to another.

 

You can't seem to wrap your head around the fact that we are all differently wired. Some like same sex partners, other from the opposite sex. Nothing we can do about it. Why would you not give in to your natural urges? We all crave love, sex, confirmation,.... why should some hide what they are because some others feel uncomfortable with that choice.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

I dunno, I'm naturally ADHD but I've done pretty well dealing with those habits myself. And I'm not depressed because of it. I feel you're too easily boiling things down into cause and effect when there's no real reason to assume that one thing leads to another.

Presumably overcoming your ADHD symptoms has benefitted you in some way.

What benefit is there to deny your own sexuality?

[123456789A]

The churches are not being forced to wed gays, gays just have the right to be wed. be that in churches that do SSM or civilian at the court house. 

 

Ok well if that's all this is about, I'm surprised people were (and still are) arguing about that for so long? Seems kind of petty.

 

Having same sex marriages legalized isn't even going to affect straight couples or unmarried people. People should be more concerned about having choice in mobile operating systems, because too many people going iOS or Android limits my experience as a Windows Phone user.

[freak180]

Now this is approved . Can we stop the ridiculous rainbow color crap. If I wear rainbow color it means this or that or I support this. I'm seeing this crap on social media.  Its very childish. Just say you accept it and that be it.

[Noir Angel]

How about you respect and tolerate my religious views as protected by the Constitution!

 

Again, I'll just repeat it again because you seemed to ignore me the first time: The constitution allows you to believe whatever stone age nonsense you want. It does not oblige people to respect your beliefs. The constitution deals with your relationship with the government. It forbids them making a religious establishment, and it prevents them from infringing upon people's religious beliefs. The constitution does not underpin any rights with regards to the general populace, and it doesn't oblige them to respect your beliefs. Deal with it.

 

Valid point, but it seems to me the reverse is true. If someone living a Christian lifestyle isn't automatically owed tolerance and respect, then neither are gays, or anyone else really. The problem with the situation we're discussing is that gays, at least the activist ones, demand tolerance and respect, but aren't willing to show any in return. Given the history of being treated unfairly, that's understandable, but it leads to a vicious circle of neither side being tolerant.

 

Basically, it's always been my experience that you need to give respect to get it. Not always guaranteed of course, but if you don't show someone respect, you have no call to expect it back. If the activists are willing to destroy someone's livelihood over turning down a job then I don't see how they deserve the respect they demand. Even if the refusal was rude, it still comes across as a disproportionate, hateful reaction.

 

Even if the refusal was truly a hateful reaction rather than simply discomfort, how is adding more hate to the situation a good thing? Better to just take the business elsewhere and leave the bad review like you said. Starting a crusade against the business - that's epic overkill, and just undermines the message that they want tolerance. How can you reasonably ask for something you're not willing to give to others?

 

Nobody's owed tolerance, and people are free to disagree with them all they want. Actually using those beliefs to infringe upon their civil rights is not a reasoned difference of opinion, that's oppression. I'm not saying the religious should accept the homosexual movement with open arms, just that they should voice their disagreement without trying to actively torpedo their push for civil rights.

[TPreston]

I think the biggest thing here that probably no one has touched on it, nowhere in the constitution does it define marriage. That is left to the states to define and govern. Yet the federal government is now violating the rights of the states and their voters.

Like they did before in their previous rulings on marriage ?

[Joe User]

I think the biggest thing here that probably no one has touched on it, nowhere in the constitution does it define marriage. That is left to the states to define and govern. Yet the federal government is now violating the rights of the states and their voters.

 

That's true only if you ignore Loving v Virginia, which said explicitly that states do not have the right to create laws limiting interracial marriage. Which used the same argument as this case, the 14th amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

 

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

States do not have the right to create discriminatory laws. 

[xendrome]

States do not have the right to create discriminatory laws. 

 

I never said they do, and a ton of states have adopted their own same sex marriage laws. But they need to do it, not the Supreme Court.

[perochan]

I could careless about same-sex marriage but what I am worrying about is their adapted children if they decide they want some. Young kids with dad and mom would probably bully kids with two dads or two moms because kids are taught to have both dad and mom. They would make fun of them saying they are weird and stuff and will affect their growth mentality. Kids get confuse wondering why they dont have a mom or a dad.

 

Maybe in the future in the text book same-sex marriage topic will be covered. Who knows...

[0sit0]

Now this is approved . Can we stop the ridiculous rainbow color crap. If I wear rainbow color it means this or that or I support this. I'm seeing this crap on social media.  Its very childish. Just say you accept it and that be it.

 

Awww.. here...  smile

[Joe User]

I never said they do, and a ton of states have adopted their own same sex marriage laws. But they need to do it, not the Supreme Court.

 

The Supreme Court did not write any laws, they invalidated all laws prohibiting same sex marriage because they were found to be in violation of the 14th amendment.

[COKid]

Now this is approved . Can we stop the ridiculous rainbow color crap. If I wear rainbow color it means this or that or I support this. I'm seeing this crap on social media.  Its very childish. Just say you accept it and that be it.

 

I was going to stop, but because of your attitude, I have decided not to. 

 

[hagjohn]

I agree, but that's not what I'm talking about.

 

We already seen one lawsuit about it.  If a cake decorator is against gay marriage because of religion, they shouldn't be forced to decorate a cake for a gay wedding.  If a church doesn't want to marry a gay couple, then they shouldn't have to, nor should they be labeled a hate group because of it.

 

Did these cake decorators deny to make a cake for anyone else? ... say if one or both had been divorced, had a child out of wedlock, had an affair? If the answer is no, then they cannot use religion as an excuse.

[+Anarkii Subscriber²]

Congrats to the gays in the community, but please, my Facebook is full of gay posts today, please don't go ramming it down our throats. (See what I did there?)