- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Supreme Court being formally asked to overturn Obergefell; gay marriage will fall
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:51 am to td01241
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:51 am to td01241
I don't really see an issue with gay marriage. I think everyone should have a partner/spouse that they share and build a life with. And it makes sense in the current world that even same sex couples need healthcare benefits, life insurance payouts, and ability to serve their partner in times of need.
4
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:52 am to Sput
quote:
frick em let then get married, just ban them from ever adopting kids
I agree in a vacuum. You can however draw a direct line from allowing gay marriage to all of the gender ideology insanity. It needs to be struck down. Creating law by fiat by way of the court is wrong here just like it was wrong in Roe
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:53 am to td01241
quote:
Creating law by fiat by way of the court is wrong here just like it was wrong in Roe
And Loving
And Griswold
These cases are all progeny of Griswold
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:53 am to SuperSaint
quote:I don't know how anyone takes that guy seriously. But he has a huge audience, so maybe I'm missing something. I don't think so though.
I can’t watch someone wearing a damn beanie cap indoors, and in the middle of the damn summer at that. What the frick is wrong with people?
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:53 am to theliontamer
quote:
theliontamer
See my comment above. Plus it allows them adopt kids which curiously they choose boys at above a 90% clip and we all know why
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:55 am to td01241
I don't think SCOTUS will take it up. its a big reach and every other court has passed on it.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:55 am to AubieinNC2009
quote:
I don't think SCOTUS will take it up. its a big reach and every other court has passed on it.
Correct
The 6th Circuit was unanimous in rejecting her appeal.
LINK
quote:
The damages were awarded after a federal judge ruled that Davis violated the plaintiffs’ rights when she denied them a marriage license. Davis was also ordered to pay an additional $260,000 in legal fees.
The denial came just days after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 landmark ruling that guaranteed same-sex couples the right to get married.
Davis appealed to the Sixth Circuit, arguing her then position of clerk for Rowan County granted her immunity and that the record did not support the calculation of emotional damages.
However, the panel unanimously disagreed with Davis, finding that the matter of immunity was settled and that she was not entitled to a reversal on that issue.
quote:
The panel also rejected arguments from Davis that her conduct was shielded by the First Amendment because she was acting as a government official.
“That binary is outcome-determinative here because the act for which Davis is being held liable — denying plaintiffs a marriage license — is quintessential state action,” wrote White, who was appointed to the court by George W. Bush.
quote:
Chad Readler, who was appointed to the court by Donald Trump, wrote a concurring opinion expressing that, while he believed the First Amendment might partially shield Davis, her conduct went above and beyond those protections.
"Rather than attempting to invoke a religious exemption for herself, Davis instead exercised the full authority of the Rowan County Clerk’s Office to enact an official policy of denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples, one every office employee had to follow. Under this unique set of facts, I agree that the First Amendment does not shield Davis from liability," wrote Readler.
This post was edited on 8/11/25 at 10:00 am
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:55 am to TwoFace
quote:
Just in time to frick up midterms.
Worth it, republicans are useless anyway so what’s the point of getting them elected so they can just do more crap that we didn’t vote for. Gay marriage is an abomination.
This post was edited on 8/11/25 at 9:56 am
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:56 am to td01241
Good. I feel like I got snookered on that deal.
I had the naive "they just want to get married" belief
Little did I realize LGBTQ+ was going to be
So now you have to go back in the closet.
I had the naive "they just want to get married" belief
Little did I realize LGBTQ+ was going to be
So now you have to go back in the closet.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:56 am to theliontamer
quote:
life insurance payouts
I have never heard of this being a problem. Does the insurance company say that if they are not married, there is no insurable interest?
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:59 am to AubieinNC2009
I think they’ll take it up. But even if they don’t take it up for this lady for a particular reason, they will eventually just like with Roe. It’s only a matter of time
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:59 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:He should have stuck strictly to food additive design.
These cases are all progeny of Griswold
Posted on 8/11/25 at 10:03 am to SlowFlowPro
How did the circuit rule on Roe vs Wade counselor?
Posted on 8/11/25 at 10:08 am to td01241
This would be fricking phenomenal.
Next, remove sexuality as a “protected class”
Next, remove sexuality as a “protected class”
Posted on 8/11/25 at 10:08 am to td01241
Doubtful.
Gorsuch was Kennedy's law clerk and was hand-picked by him to replace him. I seriously doubt he will overturn the decision. Neither Barrett nor Kavanaugh are guarantees.
Would be at least 5-4 and would likely be 7-2 to affirm.
Gorsuch was Kennedy's law clerk and was hand-picked by him to replace him. I seriously doubt he will overturn the decision. Neither Barrett nor Kavanaugh are guarantees.
Would be at least 5-4 and would likely be 7-2 to affirm.
This post was edited on 8/11/25 at 2:00 pm
Posted on 8/11/25 at 10:09 am to td01241
Leave that shite alone. All overturning that will accomplish is a bunch of pissed off people voting against republicans next year.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 10:09 am to SuperSaint
I saw someone ask him to take off the beanie. He's got his reasons.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 10:10 am to SidetrackSilvera
Posted on 8/11/25 at 10:10 am to td01241
quote:
How did the circuit rule on Roe vs Wade counselor?
Her appeal isn't even directly on gay marriage.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 10:10 am to TDsngumbo
I disagree. Doing the right thing is doing the right thing and should be done. Not shy awayed from
Page 3 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News