Gay Marriage to Alfred: Your Thoughts

I've already seen an argument that Christie's nod/wink approach -- "Hey I tried but what are you going to do?" -- is going to become the new default over time on the right. Not exactly sure of that myself -- at some point you inevitably run into people who really honestly do object to it and aren't going to change their minds -- but at the same time, the trend has been and continues to be a series of clear indicators that there's growing national acceptance on all fronts. It's a shitty fact that there's still some years to run on this but compare it with ten years ago, much less twenty, when this whole thing essentially kicked off with the original Hawaii decision, and it is pretty amazing still.

Great answers Ned, thanks. Yeah, I should be more optimistic. This whole thing could be a done deal in the relatively near future, and yet, yeah, SO recently it was just unthinkable.

Sorry, Rev, you're joining Eric and me in mah-riaj.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9vk5vUzuXc

Sorry, Rev, you're joining Eric and me in mah-riaj.

― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, November 14, 2013 3:48 PM Bookmark

I can't condone that. Polygamy makes a mockery of traditional marriage between a man and man.

who are the men here.

yall just move to new caledonia and find a cool turtle to name after yourselves.

what is this thread about. oh yeah, gay marriage. go die in a fucking fire.

property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol states gay marriage thing makes me feel better lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol property transfer lol property transfer lol property trasfer lol ned raggett lol states gay marriage thing makes me feel better lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCtO_WdsdqM

New Mexico makes it 17

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57291925-78/ban-judge-sex-court.html.csp
Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

!

Same-Sex Couples in Utah Getting Marriage Licenses

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/judge-strikes-utahs-sex-marriage-ban-21293820

so has the federal court called state law unconstitutional on this issue prior? how important is this?

uh, prop 8 was ruled unconstitutional by a federal court

okay, dumb question on my part. so does this mean that wherever a law is raised banning gay marriage, the feds will move in and revoke it? how quick is this moving now?

more detail

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=28099570&nid=148&title=federal-judge-rules-utah-same-sex-marriage-ban-unconstitutional&fm=home_page&s_cid=featured-1

forks i think it means the broader issue of state bans based on gender will be at the supreme court pretty soon and likely overturned i.e. a more active ruling? california ruling was limited somehow, i can't remember in what way though, i'm slow on this stuff.

Yeah this is moving pretty quickly. Due process is starting to work out damn fast.

Also, at least one gay couple has already married (no waiting period in Utah). So an attempt to revoke that (which will happen) would only prompt a further lawsuit that will rule similarly at some point.

http://gaysaltlake.com/news/2013/12/20/breaking-utahs-first-gay-married-couple/

*dies*

hahahahahaha fuck washington county

utah is by far the reddest state this has happened in fwiw.

xp to matt: yeah, if the state of utah takes this to the supreme court that should force a more active ruling. the state of california didn't appeal the original district court ruling against prop 8, so the supreme court was able to avoid ruling directly on its constitutionality by simply determining that the defendants (supporters of prop 8) had no standing to appeal, leaving the district court's decision intact.

ty

https://twitter.com/jsethanderson/status/414169183707234304

Seth Anderson ‏@jsethanderson

Line out the door now in Salt Lake. A celebration of love and joy.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bb9srY-IYAcPQPw.jpg

Utah state senator Jim Dabakis just got married to his longtime partner.

damn it xp

this is especially sweet given that Utah-based orgs funded Prop 8 in California

Ryan Bruckman, spokesman for the Utah Attorney General’s Office, said its attorneys plan to appeal the decision and were currently drafting a motion to seek a stay of the ruling "as quickly as we can get it taken care of."

Utah Gov. Gary Herbert issued this statement late Friday afternoon: "I am very disappointed an activist federal judge is attempting to override the will of the people of Utah. I am working with my legal counsel and the acting Attorney General to determine the best course to defend traditional marriage within the borders of Utah."

the u.s. judge ruled in 16 days on this (he was scheduled to issue a decision jan. 7).

is it possible this could be at the supreme court in a year?

The only long-term couples that I know who aren't married couldn't be because they live in Utah and New Mexico. This week is pretty alright.

10th Circuit Court denied Utah's request for an emergency stay tonight so get ready for a slew more marriages tomorrow...

And 10th Circuit reaffirms Shelby's rejection of the stay, gay marriage to remain legal through the resolution of the formal appeal at least, Gov. Herbert already saying in internal emails that there's minimal impact on state services. State's move now, but I suspect this is pretty much done on a practical level. Question is do they take this to the Supreme Court so Kennedy can put the final kibosh.

http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mobile3/57306142-219/state-sex-marriages-utah.html.csp

Officially four Utah counties still going "La la la I can't hear you!" Including Utah County/Provo/BYU.

And to answer Matt P's question -- I don't think a year? It kinda depends on when the 10th Circuit decides, which sounds like it might not be until summer. If Utah loses, they'd have to appeal, then it depends on when the Supreme Court schedules it, if they agree to hear it (which is pretty damn likely).

Hmm, though one final twist via the Washington Blade re the immediate stay:

But same-sex marriage seeking to marry in Utah aren’t out of the woods yet. State officials — Gov. Gary Herbert and Attorney General Sean Reyes — can file a request for a stay before the U.S. Supreme Court. The request would go to U.S. Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who could refer the issue to the entire court.

provo spain?

Gotta love Orem.

utah county is the weirdest place in the u.s.

towns named after book of mormon characters. one of the articles had the weirdest fuckin quote from batshit insane byu law professor lynn wardle. hope they get the shit sued out of them.

Op-ed: Massacre of marriage endangers the republic

"sexual civil rights"

http://www.sltrib.com/csp/cms/sites/sltrib/pages/slidegallery.csp?cid=57302470

so pretty

Stop now in place in Utah per Supremes. SCOTUSBlog thoughts as to why:

The order appeared to have the support of the full Court, since there were no noted dissents. The ruling can be interpreted as an indication that the Court wants to have further exploration in lower courts of the basic constitutional question of state power to limit marriage to a man and a woman. Had it refused the state’s request for delay, that would have left at least the impression that the Court was comfortable allowing same-sex marriages to go forward in the thirty-three states where they are still not permitted by state law. The order, however, cannot be interpreted as a dependable indication of how the Court will rule on the issue when it finally decides to do so directly.

...

As a result of the new order, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, based in Denver, will go forward with an expedited review of Judge Shelby’s decision. The appeals court has ordered briefing to begin on January 27 and to be completed by February 25. It has indicated it is not likely to grant any extensions of time to file those documents. It has not yet set a hearing date.

With the Justices’ order in the case, it now appears almost certain that the question of state power to bar same-sex marriages will not be before the Justices during the current Term. A case on that issue would have to be granted this month to be reviewed before the Court is expected to finish this Term in late June.

Doesn't matter – I ain't marrying anybody in You-tah.

I rule that the state of Utah can fuck itself.

until a few hours ago it could