Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Supreme Court rules on gay marriage

Invalidates Defense of Marriage provision

June 26, 2013

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court says legally married same-sex couples should get the same federal benefits as heterosexual couples....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Aug-07-13 9:20 AM

Have them take the ferry

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-29-13 1:52 AM

Cheer up, conservatives! This is a victory for states' rights.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-28-13 12:43 PM

blackcat, you confused "accept" & "except". (This is something a spellchecker won't catch, b/c "except" is a word.)

Not being good at spelling doesn't mean you're ignorant, but it encourages people to think you are.

I know a fellow who can't spell though he is quite intelligent. (He happens to be gay.)

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-28-13 9:09 AM

Well said, Kendall78!!!! While many American citizens may very well be Christians....there are also many of us who are not!

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-13 9:09 PM

@blackcat- No one is stopping you from talking about your faith. No one is stopping you from practicing it. However, the secular govt is stopping you and anyone else from imposing your belief system onto other people who are doing you no personal harm.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-13 1:48 PM

It is also sad there are churches in this area alone excepting this I don't know what Bible they are preaching but it is not the word of God! If it was wrong than it is wrong now! If gays have a rights to their belief Then the Christians should also have rights to what they believe without persecution. Like Say the name of Jesus openly the real church should get to come out of the closet too!

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-13 1:47 PM

God ordained a marriage between man and women. His law will not change his judgment on the issue will not change just because our government wants in indorse the laws and ways of Baal. As a Bible Believing Christian I should also have the right and freedom to not expect Homosexuality as being ok. I shouldn't have to except this belief of a lifestyle pushed on me or be at risk of going to jail or lose my license because I would refuse to marry a gay couple. Just as people don't want to hear the Name of Jesus spoken or preached or the name of God in our pledge because they get offended, well I am offended as a Christian that I have to except something that I believe is completely wrong! I am offended when my beliefs can get me jailed in the future, I am offended my freedom of speech and religion is be taken away. Because of others

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-27-13 12:31 AM

mtthwhrrs, you say that when a SSI recipient dies, a surviving spouse gets the SSI benefits. Not true. I think you're confusing Title 16 w/ Title 2. (Social Security eligibility is a bit complicated, but you should know at least that basic difference.)

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 10:47 PM

What else used to be illegal Tin?

And you're mistaken on one comment. You refer my support to this movement and I need to correct you. It's not the movement I support because I know some of the bad that will come from the movement.

What I support is the Constitution. As such, the decision today is the only logical decision that is legally plausible as the dissent proves.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 10:45 PM

If I want to have sex with and marry my goat, and if I get enough friends who whine that they want to do it too, will I be able to claim "Billy" on my tax return?

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 9:45 PM

Absolutley AWFUL.

5 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 7:57 PM

Also when is the radical religious right going to realize that for this to be a free nation we have to have equal protections under the law. As long as you aint hurting or bothering anyone else then live and let live.

It just so happens the religious right want special treatment and exclusive rights to something.

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 7:54 PM

It is of my opinion that any man who chooseth more than one wife must undoubtedly be a sadist.

Just imagine the heck the man would go through if by way of severely bad luck all of them had their "monthly" thing on the same week!


4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 7:50 PM

Now it will will thrown in our face even more than it already is.No wonder this country is in the shape that it is.

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 6:11 PM

"Well, while we are at it, let's go ahead and get a ruling on the legal rights of polygamists."

There's already been a ruling on pologomy. The Reynolds case found the practice illegal.

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 5:40 PM

Just as segregationist governors Lester Maddox(Georgia) and George Wallace(Alabama) were told to desegregate their states under federal law requirements thus banning states rights segregation, the Supreme Court ruling today will likewise,as this country moves forward, ban the states rights practice of harmfully denying gay marriage. Gays won today!!! Bigots and those afraid of what they do not understand lost today!!!

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 4:36 PM

“The federal has no constitutional right to tell the states how to deal with marriage.”

I don’t disagree with that statement but that’s not the point of this decision. This decision from the Supreme Court is not telling a state that they have to recognize gay marriage. It simply states that the federal government cannot deny benefits to someone who has entered into a legal marriage based on gender. The Equal Protection Clause prevents such discrimination. As to the rest of your rant, if a contract is permissible between persons of different sexes regardless of the makeup of the genders, then the government must recognize that people of the same gender have a right to enter into the same contract. Once again, it’s that Equal Protection Clause.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 3:01 PM

Then it sounds like you have a problem with the Constitution of our nation. Those Judges have to be free of politics to do their job. If the people voted them in, it would be terrible.

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 2:50 PM

I will never have respect for the Supreme Court again. Five unelected radical leftists, changing our country is enough for me.

7 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 1:27 PM

The ruling wasn't about religion. The ruling didn't say that Christian beliefs on marriage is incorrect. Basically the ruling says that as far as the law is concerned, the citizen has the right to the same perks of marriage regardless of gender orientation.

12 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 1:22 PM

It's about time they figured out how the 14th Amendment works. DOMA and Prop 8 were those kind of issues, as the government has no business meddling in what two mutually consenting adults do with their lives.

13 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 1:04 PM

makes me ill

9 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 12:21 PM

Aaron, I must agree with you!!! My significant other of 44 years passed away in 1996. I wish he were able to have witnessed this act that would have perhaps soothed the sordid memories of discrimination he and I experienced from the many narrow minded and certainly inhumane bigots we both were exposed to during the 1950's when we were part of that group of deviants that "you dare not name". Acceptance of this lifestyle , which how well I know is not a chosen sexual proclivity is most welcoming.

6 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 12:20 PM

Take that fundamentalist christians!

10 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-26-13 12:12 PM

"...marriage in the eyes of the federal government is nothing more than a legal contract between TWO people." ~AaronS The federal has no constitutional right to tell the states how to deal with marriage. The feds can rewrite all the tax laws they want but states still decide what marriage is. Emphasis was added to the "two" because why should it stop there? Why can't 3 men enter into a legal relationship. Or 100 men? That way if one dies the other 99 can get the SSI benefits. The federal government is worthless. They should defer to the 10th amendment and late the states decide it for themselves.

8 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 30 comments Show More Comments


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web