Awesome. Extra awesome that it coincides with Pride. 

Sorry if this has already been asked, but not being American I'm confused. Does this actually mean that same-sex couples can get married in any state as soon as it comes into effect, or can state law in practice override the federal law, as it kind-of-does-kind-of-doesn't with cannabis legalisation?

Nebraska was issuing marriage licenses within an hour or so.

(June 27, 2015 at 1:53 am)DramaQueen Wrote: I literally woke up to this news.

Come to America and I'll make an honest woman of you !!




*Terms and conditions apply, offer void in Senegal

So I guess it means now we all have to go out there and marry a gay

Dibs on NPH

(June 27, 2015 at 8:28 am)vorlon13 Wrote:

(June 27, 2015 at 1:53 am)DramaQueen Wrote: I literally woke up to this news.

Come to America and I'll make an honest woman of you !!




*Terms and conditions apply, offer void in Senegal

I had Yellowbrick Road going through my head as I read this. ;-)

(June 27, 2015 at 7:52 am)Razzle Wrote: Sorry if this has already been asked, but not being American I'm confused. Does this actually mean that same-sex couples can get married in any state as soon as it comes into effect, or can state law in practice override the federal law, as it kind-of-does-kind-of-doesn't with cannabis legalisation?

States cannot violate federal law. Period. In states which have "legalized" marijuana, the drug is technically still illegal under federal law. If you are caught by a federal agent, you will still get prosecuted under federal law.

The reason states can effectively legalize marijuana but cannot refuse marriage licenses to gay couples is due to the actual laws involved. With marijuana, the federal government ruled it is illegal, but that just gives states the right to arrest people for it. States are not required to arrest people, so some states choose not to, effectively making the drug legal there. With gay marriage, the federal government ruled that states cannot refuse licenses for gay couples, so states which continue to do so would directly violate federal law.

I read this morning that some counties in Alabama have refused *all* marriage licenses rather than issue ones for gay people. This probably isn't against federal law, because the counties are not discriminating; they are refusing licenses for all people. It is rather pathetic though.

TL;DR: When federal laws give a state the right to do something (e.g arrest someone for marihuana possession) the state can choose not to use that right. When federal laws require a state to do something, or to not do something, the state has no choice but to comply with the federal law.

(June 27, 2015 at 7:52 am)Razzle Wrote: Awesome. Extra awesome that it coincides with Pride. 

Sorry if this has already been asked, but not being American I'm confused. Does this actually mean that same-sex couples can get married in any state as soon as it comes into effect, or can state law in practice override the federal law, as it kind-of-does-kind-of-doesn't with cannabis legalisation?

Our system is based on the principle of checks and balances and is basically a ban on absolute power. But the biggest core is that of the "Supremacy Clause", which says while states have rights, the idea is as long as they don't infringe on anyone's rights including minorities. Not even voters have the right to deny minorities rights. It is still up to a minority, if they feel others are stepping on them, to sue in court, the court cannot bring up it's own cases.

The key prevision which rarely gets mentioned about our First Amendment is " the right to petition the government for a redress of grievance". That does not mean the court has an obligation to side with the complaint, but merely that everyone, either majority or minority, have the opportunity to make the complaint to the court. 

Even with voters, there still has to be a ban on even absolute power through "majority rule", voting alone does not insure pluralism, there has to be protection even from voters to insure, not just the rights of minorities, but a long term future to prevent fascism. It is why women now have the right to vote despite what the majority at one time wanted. It is why segregation ended despite what the majority at the time wanted. And even now, with gays. 

Voting, along with our three branch, separate but equal, concept is designed long term, to prevent monopolies of power. I wish this concept would be applied more to business, which has unfortunately, sold the false idea that it cannot be abusive itself. If the First Amendment rightfully applies to speech, religion, and politics, this anti monopoly concept should also apply to the private sector as well.

RationalPoet....... Yes this ruling means gay marriages have to be recognized in every state now, no matter where the couple got married originally.

I had to skip ahead on this one, to reply to Tonus's view of my take on Tiberius's number counts.
Nothing major there, but I immediately thought, 48 was the year Israel was re-established as a nation again.
12 is the # of government and eleven the number of disorder/destruction and is sacred in the occult.

Thinking about the glee expressed (seemingly across the board here) the thought came to me:
"AS IT WAS IN THE DAYS OF LOT...... So shall it be when the Son of Man comes" -- check

One of the sins of Sodom was pride.
How interesting that it is connected intimately with the homo movement now.
This latest checked item rounds out a rather lengthy list of previously checked events, such as:
AntiOchrist revealed -- check
False prophet Francis on stage - check
Israel restored as a nation -- check
Jerusalem restored to Israel -- check
exponential earthquake chart -- check
mass animal,fish and bird die offs-- check
UFO delusion widely believed-- check
The list goes on and on.
I was told to "Look Up" as I see these things transpire.

Your math is off, prof. You should've subtracted the nonsense but you added fucking crazy instead