US Supreme Court rules gay marriage is legal nationwide

[AgnesIO]

Almost every other country that has legalized gay marriage has done so on a federal level.

In the US, we often have voted to legalize it at a state level, but then judges ban it again.

- - - Updated - - -


This isn't in debates, though, so it was kind of unnecessary imo. And if that is the only reason you're in favor of gay marriage then I'd hate to say it but you really aren't.

Forum: a meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.

You are using a forum. The whole point in a forum is for ideas and views to be aired and discussed.

[-:Undertaker:-]

It's always amazing how those who preach tolerance are most intolerant of views that differ to their own, as page 7 of this thread has shown.

And if that is the only reason you're in favor of gay marriage then I'd hate to say it but you really aren't.

Uhm, that is what I view the purpose of marriage as. That's what every major religion views marriage as.

Let me guess why you back it... because of lurveeeeeee awh. But that isn't a valid reason to back a social reform in society.

[God]

It evidently does in some states hence why it has lost nearly every public vote it's been put to. I do understand what you mean though, but then again that's just another reason for a unitary state and sovereign parliamentary system like our own rather than a federal system with a constitution like the United States.

The judges ruled that this was indeed part of the constitution.... They didn't make a new law, they clarified it.

[Zak]

It's always amazing how those who preach tolerance are most intolerant of views that differ to their own.

Amen to that

[FlyingJesus]

Run out of arguments? Try throwing out a tired ad hom and make assumptions about people that you have no basis for *+*+*+*+

And yeah I am intolerant of people who are provably incorrect about things and still try to teach their bigotry as though it were fact

[OldLoveSong]

wonder how this is going to go over with the religious freedom act inregards to pastors and so forth that will refuse to marry same sex couples

[GommeInc]

Great news. As per usual, the courts are the only ones that defend the innocent and are the protectors of issues of the heart. Well done US Supreme Court, even though it was only just a majority.

It's amazing how the politicians find it so difficult to read an out of date and dodgy constitution, yet judges (whose job it is to protect it) have no difficulty in saying marriage between two consenting human beings is perfectly within it. There's a reason Benjamin Franklin (I think?) said the constitution should be re-written every decade or so, to stop past Governments dictating what future Governments can and cannot do.

Love is love, marriage is but a contract and common sense should always rule. Not bible worshipping, frigid, hateful human beings.

[Sian]

It's a human rights issue now, so I think federal courts, governments etc are quite right to clarify and rule if need be.

So yay.

[GommeInc]

It's a human rights issue now, so I think federal courts, governments etc are quite right to clarify and rule if need be.

So yay.

It's one of those human rights meets constitutional law issues, and seeing as the constitution says nothing about hating the gays, the blacks, the women etc, then the courts can interpret it as they see fit. Sod the politicians. If they lack a moral and compassionate compass, then that's their problem, not the people's

[AgnesIO]

Sorry chaps, but interracial people of opposite genders being together is evidently different to two people of the same sex...

Stupid to suggest otherwise.

Whoever -repped me for this post claiming it was 'homophobic', please look up the definition for 'homophobia'.

Pointing out that two people of the same gender are different from two people of opposite genders is not homophobic, it's a matter of scientific fact.