Two big Supreme Court rulings on gay marriage and Obamacare

[KevinNYC]

Court ruled today that gay marriage is legal in all 50 states.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0P61SW20150626?irpc=932

Yesterday they upheld the subsidies in Obamacare.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/06/25/a-decisive-win-for-obamacare/

Obamacare went 6 to 3 and Gay Marriage went 5-4.

[DeuceWallaces]

Today was 5-4.

[Droid101]

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/v3n2T2O88rF7UoWnfdaNcwNRrs6zRcpFFYGnEy3KjUlX=w478-h382-no

[KingBeasley08]

Anybody that really wants to laugh should go on Facebook and go to the Fox News page and just read the comments. These dudes are butthurt as hell :lol

[rezznor]

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/v3n2T2O88rF7UoWnfdaNcwNRrs6zRcpFFYGnEy3KjUlX=w478-h382-no
i believe he also passed the transpacific trade deal and don't forget confederate flags are getting taken down all over the south (not that obama has anything to do with that but he certainly supports it).

[Droid101]

Here is a smattering of the comments from freeperville:

LIBTARD HOMOMARXISTS. The dawn of the Homo Reich begins.

This is the same sort of Neville Chamberlain thinking that enabled and empowered Hitler.

Homo-terrorism.

We are being judged now. This is what judgement looks like.
Things will get worse.

**** sex marriage.

Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin to the United States. I fear the Lord is going to finish us off.

Over/under bets:
1: Polygamy is a constitutional right
2: Incest is a constitutional right
3: Tax exempt status of religious institutions is revoked

Next comes Polyamorous "Marriages" Incestual "Marriages" and Trans-species Marriages.
Count on it.

Homofascist Gay Gestapo will take away OUR marriages next

And Jesus wept.

May America burn in Hell.

[rezznor]

Here is a smattering of the comments from freeperville:

LIBTARD HOMOMARXISTS. The dawn of the Homo Reich begins.

This is the same sort of Neville Chamberlain thinking that enabled and empowered Hitler.

Homo-terrorism.

We are being judged now. This is what judgement looks like.
Things will get worse.

**** sex marriage.

Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin to the United States. I fear the Lord is going to finish us off.

Over/under bets:
1: Polygamy is a constitutional right
2: Incest is a constitutional right
3: Tax exempt status of religious institutions is revoked

Next comes Polyamorous "Marriages" Incestual "Marriages" and Trans-species Marriages.
Count on it.

Homofascist Gay Gestapo will take away OUR marriages next

And Jesus wept.

May America burn in Hell.

im tempted to turn on foxnews just to witness the butthurt

[Droid101]

Holy shit just saw this gem:

From a moral standpoint, 6/26 is now our 9/11.


:roll:

[IcanzIIravor]

Court ruled today that gay marriage is legal in all 50 states.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0P61SW20150626?irpc=932

Yesterday they upheld the subsidies in Obamacare.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/06/25/a-decisive-win-for-obamacare/

Both cases were 6 to 3

Sanity prevails in America. :cheers:

[rezznor]

Holy shit just saw this gem:

From a moral standpoint, 6/26 is now our 9/11.


:roll:


http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--GJts5TZR--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_320/1313128825151184232.gif

this is coming next. thanks obama!!

[Jailblazers7]

it was painfully obvious that the supreme court would rule in favor of gay marriage. anything to the contrary is just a dead culture.

[UK2K]

I agree with the gay marriage ruling.

However, the ruling on the ACA was simply the SC ignoring what the law (the ACA law) said to fit their agenda. That's why Obama urged them to find something to make it stick. If it was the other way, and the law was repealed, there would have been a meltdown and complete chaos.

This was a ruling made to avoid a catastrophe.

[longtime lurker]

See this is what happens when you get rid of the confederate flag. Now gays can get married the apocalypse and return of Jesus is not far behind! :lol

[UK2K]

See this is what happens when you get rid of the confederate flag. Now gays can get married the apocalypse and return of Jesus is not far behind! :lol

Do you think people should be able to marry with members of their own family?

[KevinNYC]

Today was 5-4.
Yeah, I misread that and when I went back to edit, my phone died.

[Patrick Chewing]

Do you think people should be able to marry with members of their own family?


You have to let them. Otherwise it would be discriminatory. The last thing we need is for a government to tell me who or who I cannot marry!

[IcanzIIravor]

Do you think people should be able to marry with members of their own family?

I say yep. Consenting adults. I'm okay with polygamy under the same scenario.

[iamgine]

Do you think people should be able to marry with members of their own family?
Consensual sex, yes. Marry, no.

[KevinNYC]

However, the ruling on the ACA was simply the SC ignoring what the law (the ACA law) said to fit their agenda. Not by a long, long shot.

The entire lawsuit was based on taking one sentence out of the entire context of the law. Literally, the lawsuit and and the political dissent at the SCOTUS level, was entirely about ignoring what rest of the law said it many, many places. Roberts in his opinion quite rationally said you can't ignore the scope and intent of the law overall by focusing on a small ambiguity. In fact, the supreme court went further than the appeals court. The appeals court say in the case of the ambiguity, the executive has the right to interpret the law.
Roberts, writing for the majority, said while the contentious phrase was ambiguous, its meaning in context of the law as a whole was clear......It is our task to determine the correct reading.

This was basically a stunt lawsuit.

[Patrick Chewing]

Marry, no.


Why? Why are you discriminating against people who want to marry within their own family?

[Droid101]

Why? Why are you discriminating against people who want to marry within their own family?
Well, mainly because it sort of circumvents a bunch of inheritance laws. A lot of things would need to be restructured. Other than that, who cares? Do you? Or are you just concern trolling for fun?

[Rose]

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/v3n2T2O88rF7UoWnfdaNcwNRrs6zRcpFFYGnEy3KjUlX=w478-h382-no
:roll: :applause:

[Droid101]

I say yep. Consenting adults. I'm okay with polygamy under the same scenario.
Ehh... I don't know about polygamy. That gets really tricky with who owns what in a divorce, who gets custody of children, who inherits what, etc.

It could be worked out I guess, but this would be wayy more work than just allowing two lesbians to finally get married (using all the same available laws/paperwork/etc).

[Goon Time]

Why? Why are you discriminating against people who want to marry within their own family?

Yes, because incest, beastiality, and homosexuality are the same thing. Strong argument Pat, you're like the Akrazotile that dropped out of high school instead of college.

[SugarHill]

Holy shit just saw this gem:

From a moral standpoint, 6/26 is now our 9/11.


:roll:
6/24*

[Lakers Legend#32]

When liberals win, America Wins!

[Patrick Chewing]

Well, mainly because it sort of circumvents a bunch of inheritance laws. A lot of things would need to be restructured. Other than that, who cares? Do you? Or are you just concern trolling for fun?


Hogwash! If two people are in love and want to marry, just like heterosexual and homosexual couples want do, then why exclude a couple simply because they are related? Let's restructure if we have to. Do you know how many couples are actually cousins?? Why can't they get married??

[Patrick Chewing]

Yes, because incest, beastiality, and homosexuality are the same thing. Strong argument Pat, you're like the Akrazotile that dropped out of high school instead of college.


Homosexuality and Heterosexuality are not the same thing, yet they can both marry. So that shits all over your argument.

[NumberSix]

When liberals win, America Wins!
Lol. This is literally the opposite of liberal.

[Droid101]

Hogwash! If two people are in love and want to marry, just like heterosexual and homosexual couples want do, then why exclude a couple simply because they are related? Let's restructure if we have to. Do you know how many couples are actually cousins?? Why can't they get married??
Okay, so you go ahead and get the paperwork started on how you'd solve the inheritance law skirting issues and get legislation drawn up.

Or what? You're just trolling and don't actually care? Figured.

[Droid101]

Lol. This is literally the opposite of liberal.
And yet all the "conservatives" are bitching about it. #wow #woah #makesuthink

[Patrick Chewing]

Okay, so you go ahead and get the paperwork started on how you'd solve the inheritance law skirting issues and get legislation drawn up.

Or what? You're just trolling and don't actually care? Figured.


You're right, I don't care. But I'll bet you money this is brought to the courts in no time.

**** it, Lefties want anarchy. They'll have it.

[BlazerRed]

You're right, I don't care. But I'll bet you money this is brought to the courts in no time.

**** it, Lefties want anarchy. They'll have it.
This guy, like he's doing shit about anything :lol

[Droid101]

You're right, I don't care. But I'll bet you money this is brought to the courts in no time.

**** it, Lefties want anarchy. They'll have it.
So now allowing people to have equal rights is anarchy?

Wow. You guys are reaching super hard today. And it's glorious!


http://i.imgur.com/3OTF1cr.jpg


http://99gifs.com/-img/509a8584afa96f1daf0010f3.gif

[Rose]

http://media.giphy.com/media/1M15RPLa4VBcc/giphy.gif

[KingBeasley08]

http://media.giphy.com/media/1M15RPLa4VBcc/giphy.gif
:roll: :roll:

Obama this week been like

http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/obama_kicks_door.gif

[NumberSix]

So now allowing people to have equal rights is anarchy?

Wow. You guys are reaching super hard today. And it's glorious!
[/IMG]
Nobody should be upset about gays been given the right to have marriage contracts recognized by the government. Unless you just really dislike gay people, there is no reason to really care....

However, the supreme courts' ruling is very sketchy. The court is not supposed to concern itself with matters of morality or right and wrong. They are supposed to interpret the constitutionality. You can't help but think that they willfully misinterpreted the constitution. This is another "corporations are people" moment.

[KyrieTheFuture]

Beastiality doesn't involve two human beings, polygamy go for it but don't expect it to be easy, and incest is proven to cause birth defects.

[NumberSix]

Beastiality doesn't involve two human beings, polygamy go for it but don't expect it to be easy, and incest is proven to cause birth defects.
What about two brothers getting married? Don't have to worry about incest babies. Should 2 brothers be able to get married?

[KyrieTheFuture]

What about two brothers getting married? Don't have to worry about incest babies. Should 2 brothers be able to get married?
Fair question, one we haven't had to worry about until a few hours ago. I don't really care, I'll say go for it. I imagine there's like 3 instances of that in America though. Maybe.

[iamgine]

Why? Why are you discriminating against people who want to marry within their own family?
Why not? I also discriminate against gay men having sex and getting married. Lesbians though, I support them 100%.

[KevinNYC]

Holy shit just saw this gem:

From a moral standpoint, 6/26 is now our 9/11.


:roll:
There a blog dedidcated to covering the Supreme Court of the United States or SCOTUS. And the blog is called SCOTUSblog. It's on twitter on @SCOTUSblog.

It's timeline is filled with people who think it's actually the twitter handle of the real justices.

@SCOTUSblog Nothing in constitution gives you the right to regulate marriage #fireeveryoneofyou

@SCOTUSblog thanks for the contribution toward the end of America. Great job.

@SCOTUSblog has gone bananas. Next marriage with animals.

@SCOTUSblog powers will have to be circumscribed by amendment.

Nobody grants a more perfunctory license to destroy Christian churches quite like @SCOTUSblog

@SCOTUSblog overstepping it's bounds once again to molest the Constitution

@SCOTUSblog You're rewriting law not interpreting. You've failed us again

@SCOTUSblog bows down to Obama. #Disgusting

@SCOTUSblog Thanks for giving us yet another very sorry day for our country.

[DeuceWallaces]

What about two brothers getting married? Don't have to worry about incest babies. Should 2 brothers be able to get married?

What about a pig marrying a goat and a dog in a polygamous union? Hmmmm... what about that?

Ohhhh, I'm so provocative.

[MavsSuperFan]

it was painfully obvious that the supreme court would rule in favor of gay marriage. anything to the contrary is just a dead culture.
This, only ignorant hicks still want gay marriage stopped.

The GOP overall follows corporate america. Corporate america is fine with the idea of gay marriage

[UK2K]

Lol. This is literally the opposite of liberal.
They don't know that.

[NumberSix]

This, only ignorant hicks still want gay marriage stopped.

The GOP overall follows corporate america. Corporate america is fine with the idea of gay marriage
:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

What is wrong with you people?

The Supreme Court case was not about whether gay marriage should or shouldn't be legal. How is it that none of you understand that? They were deciding whether it's federally mandated by the constitution or up to the states.

[MavsSuperFan]

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

What is wrong with you people?

The Supreme Court case was not about whether gay marriage should or shouldn't be legal. How is it that none of you understand that? They were deciding whether it's federally mandated by the constitution or up to the states.
What is wrong with you that you dont realize it amounts to the same thing?

Gay marriage has been legalized nationwide. :wtf: are you getting caught up on irrelevant shit. Actual Effect >>>>>>>>>>>>> technicalities

the states with bans on same-sex marriage will no longer be able to enforce them.

Also you are stupid if you dont think this was about gay marriage for both the liberal justices and the conservative ones. Read what scalia and thomas wrote

[MavsSuperFan]

Lol. This is literally the opposite of liberal.
your definition of liberal is outdated in the context of 2015 america. maybe if you somehow time traveled back to 1776 your statement would be accurate

[DeuceWallaces]

Conservatives are almost always on the wrong side of history. Their archaic values die with them and progress is made.

[falc39]

Conservatives are almost always on the wrong side of history. Their archaic values die with them and progress is made.

Doesn't matter at this point, on the big issues Democrats and Republicans are the same :hammerhead:

[MavsSuperFan]

Doesn't matter at this point, on the big issues Democrats and Republicans are the same :hammerhead:
there are many significant differences.

on social issues, level of military aggression in the world, level of welfare provided to american citizens, immigration policy, taxation, etc.

[NumberSix]

your definition of liberal is outdated in the context of 2015 america. maybe if you somehow time traveled back to 1776 your statement would be accurate
My definition of liberal is, someone who advocates liberty.

[falc39]

there are many significant differences.

on social issues, level of military aggression in the world, level of welfare provided to american citizens, immigration policy, taxation, etc.

But the results are the same. Doesn't matter if Republican or Democratic president or who controls congress, it's been going the same direction for
decades. You're not looking at the big picture.

[NumberSix]

What is wrong with you that you dont realize it amounts to the same thing?

Gay marriage has been legalized nationwide. :wtf: are you getting caught up on irrelevant shit. Actual Effect >>>>>>>>>>>>> technicalities

the states with bans on same-sex marriage will no longer be able to enforce them.

Also you are stupid if you dont think this was about gay marriage for both the liberal justices and the conservative ones. Read what scalia and thomas wrote
Stop focusing on the result. There is something wrong happening in the process. First this Supreme Court tells us that "corporations are people", now they make a ruling that is admittedly based on something OUTSIDE of constitutional reasoning. What's the next thing gonna be?

Forget the fact that you agree with the result. Does it honestly not worry you at all that Supreme Court justices are just making shit up? You think there won't be another case where they go rogue and just make something up? Perhaps a case that you don't like the result?

This is the problem with people on the left. Their "the ends justify the means" mentality. Maybe you don't care that the process was corrupted in THIS case, but aren't you a little worried about future cases being corrupted?

[MavsSuperFan]

My definition of liberal is, someone who advocates liberty.
classical liberalism.

Social liberalism is the definition of liberalism most common in america in 2015. You lost :pimp:

[MavsSuperFan]

Stop focusing on the result. There is something wrong happening in the process. First this Supreme Court tells us that "corporations are people", now they make a ruling that is admittedly based on something OUTSIDE of constitutional reasoning. What's the next thing gonna be?

Forget the fact that you agree with the result. Does it honestly not worry you at all that Supreme Court justices are just making shit up? You think there won't be another case where they go rogue and just make something up? Perhaps a case that you don't like the result?

This is the problem with people on the left. Their "the ends justify the means" mentality. Maybe you don't care that the process was corrupted in THIS case, but aren't you a little worried about future cases being corrupted?
:lol at you pretending to be mad about the citizen united ruling.

No one on the right had any problem with judicial review when the results benefit them.

:lol so many people mad gays can marry people they love and are sexually attracted to.

[Dresta]

classical liberalism.

Social liberalism is the definition of liberalism most common in america in 2015. You lost :pimp:
Those two words are a contradiction in terms. Anyone who calls themselves a 'social liberal' is a certified ignoramus (not to mention that there was already a perfectly fine term for these people, and that was 'social democrat' - simply stealing names from different traditions because your old one got a bad rap is intellectual dishonesty of the worst kind, and is also one of the major reasons why political discourse has become so nonsensical and cliche-driven).

Just because a group of people have called themselves something for 70+ years, doesn't make them that thing, or prove that they are it. Doesn't matter how many times the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea calls itself democratic - and doing it more often, doesn't make them any more democratic either. Stop distorting language: it's tedious. Learn your intellectual history before simply adopting a bunch of views ignorantly because they sit well with your sentiments.