http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324105204578383130230471720.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

From the article,

In the first part of the arguments, Justice Kennedy, a potential swing vote, raised a point made by gay-marriage supporters, saying nearly 40,000 children in California are living with same-sex parents who are barred from marriage.

"They want their parents to have full recognition and full status," Justice Kennedy said to lawyer Charles Cooper, who was defending Proposition 8. "The voice of those children is important in this case, don't you think?"

My sense is that the court, while interested, isn't prepared to go there just yet. I think that they'll let the lower court ruling stand.

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My sense is that the court, while interested,
> isn't prepared to go there just yet. I think that
> they'll let the lower court ruling stand.

My suspicion is that they're going to punt the case on standing grounds (which has the outcome you cite). In order to have Article III standing in Federal court, the PropH8 side would have to prove that they have suffered personal, particularized harm if Prop 8 is struck down -- and they haven't/won't.

I think Kennedy wants to side with gay rights, but he doesn't want to get a reputation as a liberal. He's already getting a lot of heat for his ruling on the Health Care issue.

The comment he made about the children though shows his ethically on the side of gay rights. I think he is just trying to find the best solution for both sides.

Personally, I think that this issue is a divisive festering wound, and the best thing he can do, for the country, is to move to give universal marriage rights to all gays everywhere. His grounds for doing so may be debatable, though I think Equal Protection is broad enough, but it needs to happen. The religious right can then focus on getting a constitutional amendment that will never come.

I bear my testimony that your words are true. Inthenameofjesuschristamen.
Brother Hives agrees with you with every fibre of his being.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-combs/i-just-left-the-supreme-c_b_2956535.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

I just read Pauls article.

I think you're right. If Prop 8 gets kicked back down the pike on Standing then it's over. The rest of the states will fall like dominoes in time as the SCOTUS has proven that no harm came from denying a law that denies Gays the right to marry.

I believe the LDS church sees this and sees the enormous impact that changing attitudes have had on members with this issue. I doubt the church will ever issue a new edict. There will be a little chnage here and little denial there but the Prophets will remain quiet. The whole issue will die out with the old gaurd.

"We have always been at war with Eastasia"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2013 07:12PM by AmIDarkNow?.

Proclamation on the Family? That's just an anti-Mormon lie. I am not sure we ever taught that.

More of a couplet really. I don't know much about it, I don't know that we teach that.

but I am not sure that marriage between male/female, male/male, female/female is a "fundamental" right that deserves federal protection - despite some case law to the cont.

I think it may just be a state issue.

Education is always the changer of minds anyway - not federal legislation or court ruling.

You see the tide slowly turning toward marriage between consenting adults in many states - even those that currently have laws to the contrary.

I think that if you are on the side of the tide turning - it may be better to wait for it to fully turn via education and changing of minds...than to have the federal government decide the issue.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2013 07:20PM by michaelff.

I am Christian and do not believe in gay marriage. But I also strongly believe that I should not force my Christian beliefs on others. I have never voted either way on the issue, but plan to vote in favor next time. I guess I do not believe in gay marriage for me. I am friends with a lady who is married to another lady. I don't know how if it's not legal. They have a daughter. I kept thinking if something happens to one parent the other is not recognized. That is wrong for the child; that is why i will vote in favor next opportunity.