Supreme Court extends same-sex marriage nationwide

[Ganyu]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court declared Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry anywhere in the United States.

Gay and lesbian couples already could marry in 36 states and the District of Columbia. The court's 5-4 ruling means the remaining 14 states, in the South and Midwest, will have to stop enforcing their bans on same-sex marriage.
Source (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/9e1933cd1e1a4e969ab45f5952bbb45f/supreme-court-extends-same-sex-marriage-nationwide)

:)

[Noblejanobii]

It was a close ruling, but I didn't doubt the ruling would go in favor of gay marriage. Honestly, if it had not, I would have been shocked.

[Suicune's Fire]

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay, people can get married everywhere there now!

As well as Ireland!

And New Zealand!



...Hello? Hello, I'm from Australia. Anyone out there? ...No? Okay. Okay, I'll wait. 74% of the country believes in marriage equality but okay.

gg Tony Abbott.

http://cdn.mamamia.com.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/winkgate.gif

[Corey]

This is amazing, what a time to be gay!! I don't personally want to get married, but it's very nice to know that others like me can finally connect with a marital union. It's also nice to know that if I change my mind, I have the option!

[Noblejanobii]

I've been spammed with texts from many of my gay couple friends. They're all praising the fact that they don't have to go to Ireland to get married anymore. *rolls eyes* Corey, why are gay guys such goofs? Explain this to me.

[Sir Sivelos]

Ah, joyous day! Any same-sex couples should celebrate.

[Dragon Master Mike]

I'm not even gay and I'm celebrating! I have a bunch of friends who are gay and I've always supported gay marriage, so I'm happy to see that this finally happened.

Suicune's Fire, what are the laws on gay marriage in the future Australia?

[SassySnivy]

Oh wow, so this is a thing now?

I am a little wary of the religious activists out there, though. Plus does this mean that EVERY wedding chapel has to be forced to allow same sex couples to be wed in their chapel?

I understand that people mean well, but forcing them to take in same sex weddings is pretty much just as bad as the super religious forcing their views down our throat. Force isn't the answer.

I'm happy this is a thing, but whoohoo Monday during our bible study activity at the nursing home I'm working at, we are all in for a bigoted earful. >_> If anyone remembers my journal about this stuff, that's the person I was referring to

[Noblejanobii]

Speed-X I think this is where separation of church and state plays in. My mom actually works for a church so I can text her and ask her but I think that this means that legally they can be wed, but churches don't have to marry them. They can get married on the steps of a court.

EDIT: So, according to my mom and the Priest in training, it should be fine because of separation of church and state.

[SassySnivy]

Ohh okay, so it's separated both ways, then. Cool! :>

Still is anyone else here worried about the backlash ;-;

[Noblejanobii]

Yeah. That's how it works.

I'll definitely be hearing about it at church this Sunday.

[Suicune's Fire]

Suicune's Fire, what are the laws on gay marriage in the future Australia?

Basically, our Prime Minister is like "Oh hi guys i have a gay sister but who cares also three quarters of the country supports marriage equality but i don't lol because i'm a jackass who failed priest school haha so i went into politics"

And that is why no gay couple can get married anywhere in our entire. Freaking. Country.


I am a little wary of the religious activists out there, though. Plus does this mean that EVERY wedding chapel has to be forced to allow same sex couples to be wed in their chapel?

I understand that people mean well, but forcing them to take in same sex weddings is pretty much just as bad as the super religious forcing their views down our throat. Force isn't the answer.
Seeing "forced" everywhere makes me a little confused. Why in the world would a gay couple want to enter a place where they're shunned? Obviously they'd stay away from the idiots who'd condemn them. Also why "forced"? It's the law now. They'd have just as much right as a satan-worshipping couple who wanted to get married there. Pretty sure that would be worse for the religious people... I don't think anybody's forcing anyone. It's being legallisaed. It's being allowed. You know, like when women could vote? Speeeeed. D:

[Noblejanobii]

Actually, I figured it out. Suicune's right though, I don't know why they'd want to get married where they're shunned. But that's beside the point. There's two things that can protect the churches from being forced to marry gay couples: separation of church and state and private property laws. So, pretty much, the church is protected from laws that infringe on the church's right to exist so that the law can't dictate what the church does and the church can't dictate what the law does. This means that as much as they might want the church to marry gay couples, the churches have every right to deny the marriage because the law doesn't apply to them. I know that sounds weird but that's about the summary of what that means. Secondly, churches are private property and must be rented for a marriage to happen. As a result, they can set rules as to who can rent, be married, etc. in the church. For example, at the church where my mom works, the priest who runs the place has this set of rules: you must have been a parishioner (active attendee) of the church for at least 6 years, make donations every week you attend (they keep track of this), must know the head priest (he does the services 90% of the time so that's not that hard unless one of the parties isn't a parishioner which usually means that marriage gets denied), and a few other really complicated things. This means that because the church is private property and must be rented to the people who want to get married, the church has every right to deny renting the space to them because it is private property.

Also, that prime minister sounds like a complete jackass.

[SassySnivy]

I wasn't trying to insinuate anything...yeesh. I was just going off of hypothetical statements. Its like, I would understand if a chapel refused to wed an interracial couple. Do I believe it's right? No, I don't believe doing that is right. Its stupid just like looking down on homosexual couples. But if that's part of their belief system, I don't see why they would need to be forced to do it. The couple would just find another chapel, simple as that. Suicune's Fire

And that right apparently exists because of state and church separation

And basically what I was saying is that bigotry can go both ways. We need to be careful to NOT fight fire with fire. Christians shouldn't shove their beliefs down our throats as we shouldn't try to shove our beliefs down theirs. And by presumably forcing them to always take in certain parties to their community really IS shoving our beliefs down their throats. Either way it goes, it's not right.

[Noblejanobii]

Well as far as I am aware, many Protestant churches support same sex marriage, but I know for sure the Roman Catholic Church is very much against it. And you can tell this is true because Ireland is mostly Protestant and same sex marriage is legal there but Northern Ireland is majority catholic and it will probably never be legal there unless Catholics change their minds.

[Pokemon Trainer Sarah]

I'm glad this has happened and also ashamed that Australia is even behind the US now xD As soon as we get a new PM, it will happen though.

I still find it sad that religion governs stuff like this in so many places. I would say that the majority of straight couples in Australia do not get married in a church/religious place these days. Their ceremony has no ties to religion at all, yet they are still "married". So marriage has obviously moved beyond being a religious thing.

I don't think any gay couple (or interracial couple or whatever) would WANT to get married in a chapel where there was a chance they wouldn't be accepted. If they are religious they most likely belong to a religion or church that accepts them and doesn't shun them and therefore would get married there. xD Also seriously, chapels can turn away interracial couples?! That sounds so crazy to me. Its difficult for me to believe that sort of thing still goes on, even though I know it does.

[Noblejanobii]

I don't recall mentioning interracial couples but they can reject anyone they want. Chapels don't have to marry anyone because the church is their property. They choose who to rent it out to.

[SassySnivy]

I don't recall mentioning interracial couples but they can reject anyone they want. Chapels don't have to marry anyone because the church is their property. They choose who to rent it out to.

I was responding to Xanthe. I was using that as an alternate example.


I don't think any gay couple (or interracial couple or whatever) would WANT to get married in a chapel where there was a chance they wouldn't be accepted. If they are religious they most likely belong to a religion or church that accepts them and doesn't shun them and therefore would get married there. xD Also seriously, chapels can turn away interracial couples?! That sounds so crazy to me. Its difficult for me to believe that sort of thing still goes on, even though I know it does.
...that wasn't really my point. Those were both hypothetical examples...

[Noblejanobii]

Ah okay. Gotcha. Still, they have every right to reject whomever they want.

[Suicune's Fire]

I wasn't trying to insinuate anything...yeesh. I was just going off of hypothetical statements. Its like, I would understand if a chapel refused to wed an interracial couple. Do I believe it's right? No, I don't believe doing that is right. Its stupid just like looking down on homosexual couples. But if that's part of their belief system, I don't see why they would need to be forced to do it. The couple would just find another chapel, simple as that. Suicune's Fire

And that right apparently exists because of state and church separation

And basically what I was saying is that bigotry can go both ways. We need to be careful to NOT fight fire with fire. Christians shouldn't shove their beliefs down our throats as we shouldn't try to shove our beliefs down theirs. And by presumably forcing them to always take in certain parties to their community really IS shoving our beliefs down their throats. Either way it goes, it's not right.

Don't you "yeesh" me! xD Wait, seriously?! Like Sarah said, I can't believe they can refuse an interracial couple! Woah. People are so freaking dumb. HOW is equality ever going to happen if there's still segregation happening? Again, it's not about "shoving" a belief down someone's throat. Like I said, no gay couple would want to go near people who still have ridiculous prejudice against them. Heck, I don't.


I'm glad this has happened and also ashamed that Australia is even behind the US now xD As soon as we get a new PM, it will happen though.

I still find it sad that religion governs stuff like this in so many places. I would say that the majority of straight couples in Australia do not get married in a church/religious place these days. Their ceremony has no ties to religion at all, yet they are still "married". So marriage has obviously moved beyond being a religious thing.

I don't think any gay couple (or interracial couple or whatever) would WANT to get married in a chapel where there was a chance they wouldn't be accepted. If they are religious they most likely belong to a religion or church that accepts them and doesn't shun them and therefore would get married there. xD Also seriously, chapels can turn away interracial couples?! That sounds so crazy to me. Its difficult for me to believe that sort of thing still goes on, even though I know it does.

This, exactly. There are so many arguments I could bring up with someone taking a religion standpoint with gay marriage. And there IS no other standpoint, to my knowledge. Most people I know aren't religious. Are they still gonna get married? Of course. It has nothing to do with religion and the fact that people are still clinging to that as their reason for being against it, in my mind, makes no sense.

[EmeraldSky]

As a straight ally with a bunch of LGBT friends, I am elated that they can love who they want to love.

[Noblejanobii]

Is anyone even listening to me?

CHURCHES ARE PRIVATE PROPERTY!! They're not being prejudice or anything, it is literally their right to reject people because they are private property. It's the same reason that they can say no solicitation, no loitering, and no panhandling, because it's private property!

[SassySnivy]

Ah okay. Gotcha. Still, they have every right to reject whomever they want.
That's kinda what I was saying, too. lol.


Don't you "yeesh" me! xD Wait, seriously?! Like Sarah said, I can't believe they can refuse an interracial couple! Woah. People are so freaking dumb. HOW is equality ever going to happen if there's still segregation happening? Again, it's not about "shoving" a belief down someone's throat. Like I said, no gay couple would want to go near people who still have ridiculous prejudice against them. Heck, I don't.
The thing was, I felt like you were calling me out. The point I was trying to get across wasn't taken and instead the smaller parts of my statement were focused on...things that contributed to my point, yes, but they were irrelevant and just picking those little things out make me feel like you guys are picking at split ends and not understanding the point I was trying to get across.

Plus it felt unfair because you KNOW for a fact that I support equal marriage / equal love. It felt like you were calling me out for saying something against gay marriage. What I was saying was that it always goes both ways

And no one here is shoving anyone's beliefs down anyone's throats; sorry if it sounded like that was what I was getting at. My point was, again, that yes; I do feel like churches should (and they do) have the right to refuse someone and shouldn't be obliged to accept everyone. That's the point of the separation of church and state: let the churches do what they want (so long as it doesn't infringe on our human rights, such as, you know, the right to basically be alive), and let the law do what they have to do.


Is anyone even listening to me?

CHURCHES ARE PRIVATE PROPERTY!! They're not being prejudice or anything, it is literally their right to reject people because they are private property. It's the same reason that they can say no solicitation, no loitering, and no panhandling, because it's private property!
That's also the point I've been trying to further after Janobii said something about it. Don't worry: to be honest I feel like no one is actually listening to the POINT I'm trying to get across, either....

[Pokemon Trainer Sarah]

Haha I got you, Noble. But just because it's private property doesn't mean it's not prejudice to turn someone away based on race, sexuality or which Pokemon generation they think is the best. :)

I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do that. I'm just saying it's not very nice. xD

[Noblejanobii]

Yeah I'm not saying it's right either but if it's something like the Catholic Church where we literally are against everything, I think it's okay.

[Suicune's Fire]

The thing was, I felt like you were calling me out. The point I was trying to get across wasn't taken and instead the smaller parts of my statement were focused on...things that contributed to my point, yes, but they were irrelevant and just picking those little things out make me feel like you guys are picking at split ends and not understanding the point I was trying to get across.

Plus it felt unfair because you KNOW for a fact that I support equal marriage / equal love. It felt like you were calling me out for saying something against gay marriage. What I was saying was that it always goes both ways

And no one here is shoving anyone's beliefs down anyone's throats; sorry if it sounded like that was what I was getting at. My point was, again, that yes; I do feel like churches should (and they do) have the right to refuse someone and shouldn't be obliged to accept everyone. That's the point of the separation of church and state: let the churches do what they want (so long as it doesn't infringe on our human rights, such as, you know, the right to basically be alive), and let the law do what they have to do.
To be honest the way you worded it was quite confusing. xD It did sound like you were saying something else, which is why I got confused.

I understand what you're saying, but I still think that no-one who knows they won't be accepted there will even try to go, so I don't know how that's going to affect anyone. They can continue to do what they want. It'll be no different to before. Lol. I meant the same as Sarah.

[SassySnivy]

Yeah, my wording can be a little wishy-washy sometimes. Sorry for any confusion I may have caused. x] I think I was just getting...a bit frustrated is all. :]

[Homura]

A church is allowed to deny gay marriage on their property. However, they also have to take the political baggage and negative impacts that is associated with denying gay marriage on their property. That's basically it.

[PerseusRad]

I'm happy for this change. I feel same-sex couples were shut out for far too long, and now they can express their love and get benefits through marriage. I wish everyone was happy about this, but sadly religion plays perhaps too large role in people's lives. I won't shun them for that, but it does disappoint me that people could be upset about this.