- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
SCOTUS strikes down Arkansas attempt to treat same sex parents differently
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:18 am
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:18 am
OF COURSE Gorsuch dissents. Looks like Gorsuch is turning out to be the anti gay bigot everyone knew he was. What else would anyone expect from Trump though.
LINK
quote:.
On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution requires states to list married same-sex couples on their children’s birth certificate. The per curiam decision marks a landmark victory for gay rights, confirming that the court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges protects all rights relating to marriage, not simply the recognition of marriage itself.
In Obergefell, the court held that the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th Amendment require states to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples “on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples.” Arkansas began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples—but when these couples had children, the state refused to list both parents on the birth certificate.
Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Gorsuch wrote that “nothing in Obergefell indicates that a birth registration regime based on biology” runs afoul of the 14th Amendment. His dissent should be deeply alarming to LGBTQ advocates; it indicates an eagerness to read Obergefell with implausible narrowness, and a hostility to the extension of civil rights to same sex couples
LINK
49
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:20 am to Toddy
trolololololololololol
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:20 am to Toddy
(no message)
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:20 am to Toddy
His point was requiring biological parents be listed on birth certificate is not disparate impact and has rational basis.
But then, you would think that doesn't make sense.
But then, you would think that doesn't make sense.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:21 am to Toddy
quote:
Looks like Gorsuch is turning out to be the anti gay bigot everyone knew he was.
He is an anti-gay bigot because he used reason and logic? got it.
quote:
Gorsuch wrote that “nothing in Obergefell indicates that a birth registration regime based on biology” runs afoul of the 14th Amendment. His dissent should be deeply alarming to LGBTQ advocates
LOGIC IS DEEPLY ALARMING
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:22 am to Toddy
The gheys win and still bitch
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:22 am to Toddy
quote:Because he thinks it is ok to list biological parents on a birth certificate?
Looks like Gorsuch is turning out to be the anti gay bigot
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:22 am to Toddy
Egads!
Gorsuch based his ruling on biology.
Party of science?
I don't personally give a shite about this ruling, but if birth certificates are meant to list biological parents, then this ruling is dumb. If not, then it is correct.
Who is on the birth certificate of a normal adopted child?
Gorsuch based his ruling on biology.
Party of science?
I don't personally give a shite about this ruling, but if birth certificates are meant to list biological parents, then this ruling is dumb. If not, then it is correct.
Who is on the birth certificate of a normal adopted child?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:23 am to Toddy
What kind of insane moron thinks a non birth parent should be listed on a birth certificate?
This is the kind of nonsens which makes you guys look ridiculous.
I have a 25 year old son, my now wife is more of a mother to him than his birth mother ever was or ever will be, but her name is NOT on the birth certificate, not any other state document that requires his mother's name. Why not? Because we are not insecure little bitches who need to put our names on stuff where it doesn't apply.
This is the kind of nonsens which makes you guys look ridiculous.
I have a 25 year old son, my now wife is more of a mother to him than his birth mother ever was or ever will be, but her name is NOT on the birth certificate, not any other state document that requires his mother's name. Why not? Because we are not insecure little bitches who need to put our names on stuff where it doesn't apply.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:23 am to Toddy
Same sex people have a mental disorder.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:23 am to Toddy
Good lord what a bottom boi.Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:23 am to Toddy
Kennedy gotta go.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:23 am to Toddy
What happens in Arkansas when a married woman has a child with someone other than her husband? Does the husband automatically go on the birth certificate?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:24 am to Fun Bunch
Wait? A guy + a guy had sex and one of the guy's got pregnant and had a child? Or was it a girl + a girl bumped uglies and one of them got pregnant as a result?
Have the laws of biology changed?
ETA: What does this do for child support as it relates to identifying the biological father when/if the mother applies for benefits for the child?
Have the laws of biology changed?
ETA: What does this do for child support as it relates to identifying the biological father when/if the mother applies for benefits for the child?
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 10:26 am
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:24 am to Toddy
The state court said the birth certificate law did not violate the guarantee of equal protection under the U.S. Constitution because it was intended to record biological relationships, not marital ones.
Makes complete sense to me.
Makes complete sense to me.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:25 am to Toddy
You do realize two gays can't make a baby, right?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:25 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Who is on the birth certificate of a normal adopted child?
The adoptive parents; why? So there isn't a paper trail to the adoptive papers and it ultimately protects the children. How do I know? I'm an adoptive parent.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:25 am to Toddy
quote:
a birth registration regime
Do what now?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:26 am to Toddy
This seems to be a federalism issue, not a religious one. Is it the federal government's job to decide what info goes on a birth certificate? To my knowledge, it is not. Thus, Gorsuch isn't a bigot, he's following the Constitution. He may in his heart believe that the parents of same sex couples deserve to be on the birth certificate, but that it is not the federal government, but the state government's job to decide how to handle that issue.
As for me, I do not agree with SCOTUS from a logical standpoint. How can a same sex couple have a child with both parents being the biological parent? The birth certificate should list the biological parent, the one with whom the child shares DNA. If the child is adopted, it should have neither of their names on the birth certificate. If they had the child via in vitro fertilization with a surrogate (where the child has the DNA of both same-sex parents), only then should the child's birth certificate have both names on it.
As for me, I do not agree with SCOTUS from a logical standpoint. How can a same sex couple have a child with both parents being the biological parent? The birth certificate should list the biological parent, the one with whom the child shares DNA. If the child is adopted, it should have neither of their names on the birth certificate. If they had the child via in vitro fertilization with a surrogate (where the child has the DNA of both same-sex parents), only then should the child's birth certificate have both names on it.
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 10:27 am
Posted on 6/26/17 at 10:27 am to Toddy
quote:
Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Gorsuch wrote that “nothing in Obergefell indicates that a birth registration regime based on biology” runs afoul of the 14th Amendment. His dissent should be deeply alarming to LGBTQ advocates; it indicates an eagerness to read Obergefell with implausible narrowness, and a hostility to the extension of civil rights to same sex couples
Such drama, much stupidity.
Page 1 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News