Comments

  1. simon says

    The Oregon Catholic Conference issued a statement saying “authentic marriage remains what it has always and only been according to God’s design….”
    Coming from some celibate priests. Kind of funny.

  2. simon says

    The Oregon Catholic Conference issued a statement saying “authentic marriage remains what it has always and only been according to God’s design….”
    Coming from some celibate priests. Kind of funny.

  3. Robotron says

    The outcome of the decision was generally correct, of course, but I did not think the judge’s overly personal musings were appropriate for a legal decision. Set out the facts, interpret the law, state your conclusion(s).

    Also, I can’t stand the sappy melodrama of a wedding, all that gazing into someone’s eyes and droning some saccharine script in a monotone. Mine will be a very business-like sign-on-the-dotted-line-then-let’s-have-cake.

  4. says

    eh I’m always apprehensive when I see minority children being raised by white parents. I’m always worried they are going to have problems down the road when it comes to properly educating their children about racism, especially considering so many people are ignorant of what it actually is.

  5. says

    eh I’m always apprehensive when I see minority children being raised by white parents. I’m always worried they are going to have problems down the road when it comes to properly educating their children about racism, especially considering so many people are ignorant of what it actually is.

  6. says

    eh I’m always apprehensive when I see minority children being raised by white parents. I’m always worried they are going to have problems down the road when it comes to properly educating their children about racism, especially considering so many people are ignorant of what it actually is.

  7. says

    eh I’m always apprehensive when I see minority children being raised by white parents. I’m always worried they are going to have problems down the road when it comes to properly educating their children about racism, especially considering so many people are ignorant of what it actually is.

  8. says

    eh I’m always apprehensive when I see minority children being raised by white parents. I’m always worried they are going to have problems down the road when it comes to properly educating their children about racism, especially considering so many people are ignorant of what it actually is.

  9. simon says

    NOM’s appeal to stay the ruling was immediately rejected by the appeal court. Now they are appealing the decision which rejected their intervention. These people seem to be living in an alternative universe. Kind of pathetic.

  10. simon says

    NOM’s appeal to stay the ruling was immediately rejected by the appeal court. Now they are appealing the decision which rejected their intervention. These people seem to be living in an alternative universe. Kind of pathetic.

  11. simon says

    NOM’s appeal to stay the ruling was immediately rejected by the appeal court. Now they are appealing the decision which rejected their intervention. These people seem to be living in an alternative universe. Kind of pathetic.

  12. Zlick says

    Yeah, the judge did wax poetic in several parts of the Opinion. A bit unorthodox and perhaps not appropriate on the level of this single ruling.

    But as part of a trend, I like it. Feels to me as if these judges are just trying to distinguish themselves in an obvious flood of similar opinions that have come before and are yet to come … and knowing the significant place these rulings will have in the history of American Civil Rights, want to say something stirring to the nation and to posterity.

  13. Zlick says

    Yeah, the judge did wax poetic in several parts of the Opinion. A bit unorthodox and perhaps not appropriate on the level of this single ruling.

    But as part of a trend, I like it. Feels to me as if these judges are just trying to distinguish themselves in an obvious flood of similar opinions that have come before and are yet to come … and knowing the significant place these rulings will have in the history of American Civil Rights, want to say something stirring to the nation and to posterity.

  14. Zlick says

    Yeah, the judge did wax poetic in several parts of the Opinion. A bit unorthodox and perhaps not appropriate on the level of this single ruling.

    But as part of a trend, I like it. Feels to me as if these judges are just trying to distinguish themselves in an obvious flood of similar opinions that have come before and are yet to come … and knowing the significant place these rulings will have in the history of American Civil Rights, want to say something stirring to the nation and to posterity.

  15. Zlick says

    eah, the judge did wax poetic in several parts of the Opinion. A bit unorthodox and perhaps not appropriate on the level of this single ruling.

    But as part of a trend, I like it. Feels to me as if these judges are just trying to distinguish themselves in an obvious flood of similar opinions that have come before and are yet to come … and knowing the significant place these rulings will have in the history of American Civil Rights, want to say something stirring to the nation and to posterity.

  16. simon says

    I checked out the NumbBlog just for fun. They have this to say:
    “To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, or John Eastman, chairman of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray.”
    It seems that they are not exactly in demand.
    Trollroad should have an interview with them as a form of mercy fxxx.

  17. Hey Darlin' says

    The organizations like NOM have to show that they are attempting to regain the support, for traditional marriage, they never actually had. Any organization who’s funding supposedly comes from outside donors just has to have a cause to fight, to inspire donors.

    Do these types of organizations think the tide will turn? – Nah.

    Will they keep snatching them dollars? – Yup.

  18. simon says

    Daring:
    “To regain support for traditional marriage”.
    May not be in the near future. Probably will not come true before the Second Coming.

  19. Dback says

    Very proud of my state today…I grew up in Washington, went to college in Oregon, and spent 14 years in California before deciding I wanted the Portland metro area to be my home. So glad that Oregon has joined its brothers to the south and north. (Now, can I get my partner to City Hall/in front of a minister for a 4th time?)

  20. Hey Darlin' says

    @Simon

    I was saying the support for traditional marriage they never actually had. To donors, they want it to appear the support is there however.

  21. Randy says

    The Court: “Men and women are prohibited from doing the exact same thing: marrying an individual of the same gender … Instead, the state’s marriage laws classify same-gender couples differently than opposite-gender couples … There is no … invidious gender-based discrimination here”

    I’m dismayed that so many courts are getting this wrong. First, no state has ever asked a person’s sexual orientation before approving or denying a marriage license. Indeed, there’s no way to tell for certain. And as the court notes, “Oregon recognizes a marriage of love with the same equal eye that it recognizes a marriage of convenience.” So regardless of orientation, we can expect straight same-sex marriages, in addition to the more well-known gay opposite-sex marriages. Same-sex marriage bans discriminate directly on gender, and only indirectly on orientation.

    Marriage is an individual right, and so marriage discrimination is against the individual, who is marrying someone of the disapproved gender, and it’s based clearly on the idea that women are the inferior sex. In 1972 when marriage bans were not “a substantial federal question”, discrimination based on gender was also still considered via rational basis (prior to Frontiero in 1973) which illustrates the environment in which anti-gay infrastructure originated. A man who marries a man is assumed (including by the Court) to be gay, and less than a man because men aren’t supposed to be penetrated. Women marrying each other are missing the supposed leadership and protection of a male partner, defying the patriarchy which then existed.

    Sexual orientation (as currently defined) isn’t even a thing. Rather, the biology is increasingly telling us that we’re looking at it backwards. We have no gay or straight people, but rather “male-attracted” and “female-attracted” individuals, which society then labels in various ways depending on this in combination with their gender. Discrimination on this basis is clear gender discrimination.

    “The targeted group here is neither males nor females, but homosexual males and homosexual females.” (Notably, despite their weak attempts elsewhere, even the court notices these are NOT couples but individuals) But the real groups are “male-partnered males” and “female-partnered females” who tend to be “male-attracted males” and “female-attracted females”. Putting them in a single group called “Gay” covers up the actual discrimination.

    I hope some think tank is putting the effort toward getting this right, but it’s important to get done.

  22. Male Attracted Individual says

    @Randy: Yeah, I didn’t agree with that part of his ruling. Thank you for taking the time to break it down, or more precisely, obliterating his mis-analysis.

Leave A Reply