California gay marriage case looks headed to Supreme Court


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2012.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

"Protect the sanctity of marriage!"


0 ( +1 / -1 )

"Protect the sanctity of marriage!"

One way of doing that is to ban straight people from getting married! Many are marrying, divorcing and remarrying like there's no tomorrow. I'm sure people like Newt Gingrich can tell you lots more about the sanctity of marriage!!!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

As marriage is a very personal, private issue, the government should have nothing to do with it. Throughout human history, marriage has generally been defined by the social norm of that society which typically means some kind of religion. In one tribal area in Africa, the women have multiple husbands. The will of the people determines what is socially acceptable.

"The vast majority of U.S. states limit marriage to opposite-sex couples, and popular votes have consistently approved bans on widening those rights."

That sounds like the will of the general populace. And it's part of how a democratic republic functions. The US is not a democracy.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Oh great, another court deciding a hot button social issue. America will be forced to deal with their decision for the next 50 years like the hash that was made of the abortion issue. Government needs to get out of the marriage business.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"the hash that was made out of the abortion issue"

It was an even bigger issue back when it was illegal, women were dying or leaving the country for abortions, and prominent conservatives like Barry Goldwater had to rely on illegal abortions for family members (e.g. Goldwater's daughter Joanne). By the way, Goldwater's wife helped start Planned Parenthood. It was called Mother's Clinic in 1937. Funny how much the political battle lines have shifted since those days, eh?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In 2003 in Lawrence v. Texas, he wrote that the decision to strike down a ban on sexual acts between same-sex couples

Not only the writing about the decision, but the decision itself was from 2003. Yet people act like this rank oppression of gays never happened, or was ages ago, and act like we are all modern now. Yet, homosexual acts are still illegal in many states and so is gay marriage. There is still lots of oppression, discrimination and unfairness out there yet, and not just against gays either. Human nature definitely has a dark side. Not just in in what people do, but in the way they go from doing it, to tolerating it, to pretending it isn't happening, to pretending it never happened. Some of us who are not so weak in the head will look back in shame that it took so much bickering to stop the unfairness against gays.

And what is the hold-up on gay marriage? Because some people say opposite sex couples are better for raising kids, or can make their own? How narrow minded! I agree that the main purpose of marriage should be child rearing, but there is no reason why it has to be the only purpose. How low does your IQ have to be to not see that?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Funny how much the political battle lines have shifted since those days, eh?

Funnier is how little things have actually changed. I think things might move along a little faster if we learn to identify those who are just out to make other's lives harder, and weed those stinkers out. Seems to me to be the main reason of all to oppose gay marriage, just to enjoy putting them down.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites