roeVwade:Same-sex couples updating legal status after Supreme Court’s decision on abortion (Jay Reeves) [+CNN clip]

[Creamu]

'[...]

The ruling last week didn’t directly affect the 2015 decision that paved the way for same-sex marriage. But, Duncan said, it was still a warning shot for families headed by same-sex parents who fear their rights could evaporate like those of people seeking to end a pregnancy.

[...]

Overturning a nearly 50-year-old precedent, the Supreme Court ruled in a Mississippi case that abortion wasn’t protected by the Constitution, a decision likely to lead to bans in about half the states. Justice Samuel Alito said the ruling involved only the medical procedure, writing: “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”

But conservative Justice Clarence Thomas called on his colleagues to reconsider cases that allowed same-sex marriage, gay sex and contraception.

The court’s three most liberal members warn in their dissent that the ruling could be used to challenge other personal freedoms: “Either the mass of the majority’s opinion is hypocrisy, or additional constitutional rights are under threat. It is one or the other.”

That prospect alarms some LGBTQ couples, who worry about a return to a time when they lacked equal rights to married heterosexual couples under the law. Many, fearful that their marital status is in danger, are moving now to square away potential medical, parental and estate issues.

Dawn Betts-Green and wife Anna Green didn’t waste time shoring up their legal paperwork after the decision. They’ve already visited a legal clinic for same-sex families to start the process of making a will.

“That way, if they blast us back to the Dark Ages again, we have legal protections for our relationship,” said Betts-Green, who works with an Alabama-based nonprofit that documents the history of LGBTQ people in the South.

As a white woman married to a Black transgender man, Robbin Reed of Minneapolis feels particularly vulnerable. A decision undermining same-sex marriage or interracial unions would completely upend Reed’s life, which includes the couple’s 3-month-old child.

[...]

In a sign of what could come, the state of Alabama already has cited the abortion ruling in asking a federal appeals court to let it enforce a new state law that makes it a felony for doctors to prescribe puberty blockers and hormones to trans people under age 19. The decision giving states the power to restrict abortion means states should also be able to ban medical treatments for transgender youth, the state claimed.

Any attempt to undo gay marriage would begin with a lawsuit, and any possible rollback is years away since no major legal threat is on the horizon, said Cathryn Oakley, senior counsel and state legislative director with the Washington-based Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ advocacy organization.

[...]

Although the threat to same-sex couples feels particularly acute in conservative states, Oakley said she’s heard of people all over the country in recent days seeking second-parent adoptions, which protect a family by having the names of both adoptive parents on the birth certificate. People also are completing medical directives in case one spouse is incapacitated and doing general estate planning, she said.

Ryanne Seyba’s law firm in Hollywood, Florida, is offering free second-parent adoptions, which are similar to step-parent adoptions, for qualified same-sex couples to help ease some of the stress caused by the possible ripple effects of the abortion decision.

[...]'

-Jay Reeves

https://www.chicagotribune.com/nati...0220701-563b4jxkrrco5jxd3sfnhxognu-story.html

 

[Xzi]

After they get rid of gay marriage, top slippery slope enthusiasts of the republican party will want to get rid of interracial marriage next. Wonder what Thomas will think about that.

 

[XDel]

After they get rid of gay marriage, top slippery slope enthusiasts of the republican party will want to get rid of interracial marriage next. Wonder what Thomas will think about that.

Interracial Marriage still conforms to the definition of male and woman, so no, there will be no attack on that.

In fact your post reads like one of CNN's White Supremacy Conspiracy Theories.

 

[SyphenFreht]

Interracial Marriage still conforms to the definition of male and woman, so no, there will be no attack on that.

In fact your post reads like one of CNN's White Supremacy Conspiracy Theories.

What's the issue against gay marriage with you in particular? I've seen you mention before that it's an agenda; I'm curious to know what you think this agenda entails. Is it only an affront to your religion or is there something deeper?

 

[XDel]

What's the issue against gay marriage with you in particular? I've seen you mention before that it's an agenda; I'm curious to know what you think this agenda entails. Is it only an affront to your religion or is there something deeper?

A lot of my position is covered in the link in my avatar. It's a broader subject than many make it out to be.

 

[Xzi]

Interracial Marriage still conforms to the definition of male and woman, so no, there will be no attack on that.

Thank you for admitting that the court is ruling based on some twisted, authoritarian interpretation of Christianity, thus violating a major component of their oaths. I'm not interested in what piss-poor excuses Thomas might use to weasel his way out of tossing that particular red meat to his base, which is why I used a period instead of a question mark. Hell, for all we know Thomas is enough of an uncle Ruckus to vote to abolish interracial marriage himself, provided there's enough money and protection involved for his marriage specifically. Conservatives are all about the "I got mine" mentality, after all.

 

[SonowRaevius]

A lot of my position is covered in the link in my avatar. It's a broader subject than many make it out to be.

-Makes fun of someone posting conspiracy theories.
-Literally wants people to look at a right wing site that has LGBT+ conspiracy theories posted all over it.

Can't make this shit up if you wanted to.

The only "Gay Agenda" or "LGBT agenda" is these people wanting the same rights and treatment as anyone else.

I forget sometime that not wanting to be killed or judged simply for existing is political and an "Agenda" for some idiots out there.

Thank you for admitting that the court is ruling based on some twisted, authoritarian interpretation of Christianity, thus violating a major component of their oaths. I'm not interested in what piss-poor excuses Thomas might use to weasel his way out of tossing that particular red meat to his base, which is why I used a period instead of a question mark. Hell, for all we know Thomas is enough of an uncle Ruckus to vote to abolish interracial marriage himself, provided there's enough money and protection involved for his marriage specifically. Conservatives are all about the "I got mine" mentality, after all.

Funny enough there are plenty of Christ based religious conservatives that often spout about how interracial marriage is a sin stated in the bible as well.

As with many cases, this is just one of many cases of someone joining the face eating leopards thinking their own face won't get eaten as well until it is too late.

 

[XDel]

Funny enough there are plenty of Christ based religious conservatives that often spout about how interracial marriage is a sin stated in the bible as well.

There are indeed, but it doesn't mean that what they are promoting is true. There are lots of nutty people out there that call them selves all sort of things from Christian, to Buddhist, to Atheist, what is your point?

As for the link in my avatar, it's not a conspiracy theory but a study of tactics that have been and are being used. You people carry on like there is no such thing as social engineering, marketing, propaganda, and the like, and that your thoughts and opinions are clear and are birthed from the depths of your own original thought; never having been tainted by the influences of the world around you. Until you have faced the truth of your self in the proverbial wilderness, you can never know truth but rather illusion.

 

[SyphenFreht]

You people carry on like there is no such thing as social engineering, marketing, propaganda, and the like

I can't speak for others but I'm definitely on board with this, except:

A) I'm still curious to know what YOU think about the gay/trans agenda. I can't think of what their endgame would be that's so detrimental to the greater majority of people unless it's faith based, and

B) I refuse to believe that all of these concepts are ONLY used by anyone that isn't a conservative Republican. As in, these concepts are not tied to one particular belief system or way of life. Everyone one from whatever they represent have the capacity to utilize these tools; it's disingenuous to believe that only one subset of people use them.

that your thoughts and opinions are clear and are birthed from the depths of your own original thought; never having been tainted by the influences of the world around you.

A lot of my position is covered in the link in my avatar. It's a broader subject than many make it out to be.

Please be careful how you phrase things and present yourself. You're getting awfully close to hypocrisy and, while I don't believe that's your intent, it'd be a shame for you to put yourself in that predicament. Again, I'm all for malicious social engineering and targeted marketing and such as a reasoning, but you can't imply that people are mindless sheep when you let a link dictate how you reason.

 

[SonowRaevius]

You people carry on like there is no such thing as social engineering, marketing, propaganda, and the like, and that your thoughts and opinions are clear and are birthed from the depths of your own original thought

It is rather hypocritical that you are trying to act as though you are some great, intelligent being with original thinking and everyone else is just sheep while literally linking propaganda/conspiracy sites and acting like they are your own opinion that you formed and posted yourself.

As for "tainted views based on the world around us", the world around has been cold towards these people for decades and generations, where many watched friends and loved ones be cast out in the cold and left or nearly left homeless for simply being something they couldn't help or getting sent to camps to be abused and mistreated in many way including electrocution so there is some "truth of the world" for you.

To think anyone suddenly gained compassion, humanity, or warmth for others through media of any type is absolutely preposterous.

 

[XDel]

I stand firm on my position and if you guys want to attack, then I suggest you do it with facts, prove why the information in my avatar is wrong, then we will be having a conversation, but to make accusations about me or my character accomplishes nothing.

 

[Creamu]

I stand firm on my position and if you guys want to attack, then I suggest you do it with facts, prove why the information in my avatar is wrong, then we will be having a conversation, but to make accusations about me or my character accomplishes nothing.

Since you are so passionate about this subject, may I ask you about your position of the following?

Dawn Betts-Green and wife Anna Green didn’t waste time shoring up their legal paperwork after the decision. They’ve already visited a legal clinic for same-sex families to start the process of making a will.

“That way, if they blast us back to the Dark Ages again, we have legal protections for our relationship,” said Betts-Green, who works with an Alabama-based nonprofit that documents the history of LGBTQ people in the South.

As a white woman married to a Black transgender man, Robbin Reed of Minneapolis feels particularly vulnerable. A decision undermining same-sex marriage or interracial unions would completely upend Reed’s life, which includes the couple’s 3-month-old child.

Ryanne Seyba’s law firm in Hollywood, Florida, is offering free second-parent adoptions, which are similar to step-parent adoptions, for qualified same-sex couples to help ease some of the stress caused by the possible ripple effects of the abortion decision.

 

[XDel]

Since you are so passionate about this subject, may I ask you about your position of the following?

Gay couples can't marry unless they marry to the opposite sex, otherwise it is not marriage. Abortion is murder. If we did not live in an age of extreme affluence, we would not have time nor energy to prioritize such philosophies in our life.

 

[SyphenFreht]

Gay couples can't marry unless they marry to the opposite sex, otherwise it is not marriage.

What's your reasoning behind this? Is it purely religious?

 

[SonowRaevius]

Gay couples can't marry unless they marry to the opposite sex, otherwise it is not marriage.

mar·riage
/ˈmerij/

noun

the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship

Looks like Xdel is wrong again.

If we did not live in an age of extreme affluence, we would not have time nor energy to prioritize such philosophies in our life.

What Philosophies?

Are you really trying to say that treating people with kindness, equality, consideration, and respect is something that should be debated or considered?

 

[XDel]

What's your reasoning behind this? Is it purely religious?

It's a spiritual observation in that you can glimpse aspects of God's nature through the creation. Within creation there are polar opposites. In regards to magnets, like rejects like, but opposites pull together, with electricity you need a positive and negative feed, in regards to pro-creation one of each sex is required, and so on and so forth. This is not just something that Christians have observed over the centuries, but also Egyptians, Africans, Hindus, Native Americans, and so forth. In fact up until the 90's, this observation was also strongly held by WICCANs, or at least it wasn't until the 90's that I noticed that that group began to wander into more Crowley esque tendencies and interpretations of nature.

Psychologically and emotionally the man must face the woman and the woman must face the man in order to develop. Generally when a person is behaving in a homosexual manner, they are avoiding the growth they require and can only find though facing and coming to terms with the opposite. Likewise, most relationships today are only based upon the physical, or how happy a person makes you, rather than upon sacrifice, humbleness, and mutual growth. This is why straight couples are having more and more kids outside of marriage and are unable to hold a marriage because over the past century, our culture has been altered and we are no longer grounded or rooted in our collective history, nor clear knowledge of it there of.

 

[SyphenFreht]

It's a spiritual observation in that you can glimpse aspects of God's nature through the creation. Within creation there are polar opposites. In regards to magnets, like rejects like, but opposites pull together, with electricity you need a positive and negative feed, in regards to pro-creation one of each sex is required, and so on and so forth. This is not just something that Christians have observed over the centuries, but also Egyptians, Africans, Hindus, Native Americans, and so forth. In fact up until the 90's, this observation was also strongly held by WICCANs, or at least it wasn't until the 90's that I noticed that that group began to wander into more Crowley esque tendencies and interpretations of nature.

If we cycle the mentality of this back to a primal state of thinking, then man is no less susceptible to the wanton lust not unlike other animals that also practice homosexuality and related sexual desires. Penguins, dolphins, dogs, monkeys, all have been observed to practice both homo(bi)sexual and, by extension, polygamous relationships and, in some cases, interspecies relationships as well (though personally I find that last part abhorrent in humans). It seems that the biggest thing that separates man from animals in that aspect is the crushing influence of religion, a concept not realized by anything else than man (that we can ascertain). It seems from your comment you feel that gay marriage, and by extension any relationship that isn't inherently man and woman, is an affront only in the sense that it does not cause pro creation, which in itself is an ideal taught by the Christian church in specific (although I'm sure it's prominent to some extent in other religions).

If my affirmation is correct, then my next question is: Do you believe every government should operate as a theocracy?

Psychologically and emotionally the man must face the woman and the woman must face the man in order to develop. Generally when a person is behaving in a homosexual manner, they are avoiding the growth they require and can only find though facing and coming to terms with the opposite. Likewise, most relationships today are only based upon the physical, or how happy a person makes you, rather than upon sacrifice, humbleness, and mutual growth. This is why straight couples are having more and more kids outside of marriage and are unable to hold a marriage because over the past century, our culture has been altered and we are no longer grounded or rooted in our collective history, nor clear knowledge of it there of.

Why is the matter of other people's growth that important to you, in particular? Or better yet, at what point do you believe that growth is necessary, and does marriage, or procreation, the only method you see for people to grow? In what ways can growth only be accomplished through heterosexual relationships aside from procreation?

I recall a lot of stories of the Roman Empire in particular, but others have practiced as well, about the acts of free sex among the higher classes of people (in particular). If you recall the Roman Empire was an incredibly large factor in the modern development of humankind, despite actively engaging in free sex with groups of people of different types: man, woman, hermaphrodite (intersex), white, black, other, so on and so forth. The Egyptians and Greeks practiced these concepts as well, and we owe many of our modern practices to each of these empires, cultures, including but not limited to law, medicine, science, and even religion. I believe that, to say that growth can only be attributed to heterosexual sex and mannerisms, as opposed to homosexual and related sex and mannerisms, is a tad off from any standpoint than that of a religious overtone.

Please don't view this as an attack.

 

[XDel]

Man, you sure did a 180 on that "Guys please don't attack me and actually debate me" attitude didn't you?

Clearly I am talking about homosexual marriage and abortion, you are just trying to be clever.

 

[XDel]

If we cycle the mentality of this back to a primal state of thinking, then man is no less susceptible to the wanton lust not unlike other animals that also practice homosexuality and related sexual desires. Penguins, dolphins, dogs, monkeys, all have been observed to practice both homo(bi)sexual and, by extension, polygamous relationships and, in some cases, interspecies relationships as well (though personally I find that last part abhorrent in humans). It seems that the biggest thing that separates man from animals in that aspect is the crushing influence of religion, a concept not realized by anything else than man (that we can ascertain). It seems from your comment you feel that gay marriage, and by extension any relationship that isn't inherently man and woman, is an affront only in the sense that it does not cause pro creation, which in itself is an ideal taught by the Christian church in specific (although I'm sure it's prominent to some extent in other religions).

If my affirmation is correct, then my next question is: Do you believe every government should operate as a theocracy?



Why is the matter of other people's growth that important to you, in particular? Or better yet, at what point do you believe that growth is necessary, and does marriage, or procreation, the only method you see for people to grow? In what ways can growth only be accomplished through heterosexual relationships aside from procreation?

I recall a lot of stories of the Roman Empire in particular, but others have practiced as well, about the acts of free sex among the higher classes of people (in particular). If you recall the Roman Empire was an incredibly large factor in the modern development of humankind, despite actively engaging in free sex with groups of people of different types: man, woman, hermaphrodite (intersex), white, black, other, so on and so forth. The Egyptians and Greeks practiced these concepts as well, and we owe many of our modern practices to each of these empires, cultures, including but not limited to law, medicine, science, and even religion. I believe that, to say that growth can only be attributed to heterosexual sex and mannerisms, as opposed to homosexual and related sex and mannerisms, is a tad off from any standpoint than that of a religious overtone.

Please don't view this as an attack.

There is an order to the cosmos that we must abide by if we are to truly live and know what is true from what is false. The fact that civilizations, individuals and such have engaged in hedonistic life styles does not in any way suggest that it aligns with truth and how we should be behaving. The proof of their error can always be found in their proverbial fruits. There was no love there, only lusts, only desires.

Rome is recognized for being a world economic power, but the miseries that their cultural norms brought upon the people are not often discussed. Not unlike our modern world which is clearly larger and bolder than anything that Rome ever accomplished, we have toys, we have gadgets, and everything at the touch of the finger and yet our individual and collective lives are at a low point, suicide rates are at an all time high, the blood bath of the last century is just mind blowing, and yet we call this progress. The reason being is because we are being conditioned to look at the world through a purely materialist point of view, whilst neglecting the invisible and the subtle.

 

[XDel]

Wilhelm Reich & The Sexual Revolution​