People hold signs, including some reading "America is ready for marriage," at a same-sex marriage victory celebration on Oct. 6 in Salt Lake City, Utah. America may be ready, but Republicans aren't: Rising popular support for same-sex marriage is posing a problem for the GOP. i i People hold signs, including some reading "America is ready for marriage," at a same-sex marriage victory celebration on Oct. 6 in Salt Lake City, Utah. America may be ready, but Republicans aren't: Rising popular support for same-sex marriage is posing a problem for the GOP. George Frey/Getty Images hide caption itoggle caption George Frey/Getty Images People hold signs, including some reading "America is ready for marriage," at a same-sex marriage victory celebration on Oct. 6 in Salt Lake City, Utah. America may be ready, but Republicans aren't: Rising popular support for same-sex marriage is posing a problem for the GOP. People hold signs, including some reading "America is ready for marriage," at a same-sex marriage victory celebration on Oct. 6 in Salt Lake City, Utah. America may be ready, but Republicans aren't: Rising popular support for same-sex marriage is posing a problem for the GOP. George Frey/Getty Images When social norms change, sometimes they change so fast it's hard to keep up. Only 10 years ago, ballot initiatives opposing gay marriage were helping Republicans win elections. But two weeks ago, when the Supreme Court effectively cleared the way for legal same-sex marriage, the response from Republican leaders was deafening silence. In Red States, Many See Courts Eroding Their Values Dec. 23, 2004 -- Evangelicals' New Chief Says Days Of Moral Majority Over Aug. 30, 2013 "No Republican candidate can be nominated that openly supports same-sex marriage. That doesn't mean that you need to talk about it in a way that implies disapproval or condemnation of gay and lesbian people. It certainly does not mean that you have to deny certain sorts of federal benefits that presumably could be extended to people without the formal extension of marriage," he says. "That sort of thing is the rhetoric of compassion and inclusion that a Republican candidate to win the presidency ought to pursue." Gay marriage is where opinion is changing the fastest, but the public is also evolving on other issues, like immigration and climate change. The RNC's Kirsten Kukowski says the party will debate all of this in the 2016 primary campaign. By Gail Sullivan October 20, 2014 Follow @g_forcewinds After a California federal appeals court declared same-sex marriage legal in Nevada earlier this month, the wedding capital of the world welcomed gay couples with open arms. The Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority bought a full-page USA Today ad featuring a wedding cake with two grooms on top looking out over the Vegas cityscape. The tagline: “Now you can say ‘I do’ to one more thing here.” The city also has a Web site devoted to gay travel. But a handful of Sin City’s dozens of wedding chapels have been turning gay couples away. -- Meanwhile, laws banning discrimination in public accommodation have required bakers, photographers and other businesses that provide wedding-related services to serve gay customers. In Idaho, where gay marriage also recently became legal, a religious liberty group, Alliance Defending, filed a lawsuit Friday on behalf of two ordained ministers who don’t want to perform same-sex marriages at their for-profit wedding chapel. Since it’s not a church, the chapel likely falls under the state’s public accommodation law, Coeur d’Alene city attorney Warren Wilson told the Idaho Spokesman-Review. Donald and Evelyn Knapp, who operate the Hitching Post, face 180 days in jail and up to $1,000 for turning gay couples away. "Same-sex couples that seek to destroy our way of life and the institution of marriage are NOT cute and cuddly but rather (for those of you that are old enough to remember the movie), Gremlins that will only destroy our way of life," the GOP hopeful wrote last Tuesday in a Facebook post. Culler posted this status the day after the Supreme Court rejected five appeals from states to prohibit same-sex marriage, effectively sanctioning more gay and lesbian unions across the country. "These people, like my opponent SC-6 Congressman Jim Clyburn who OPENLY supports same-sex 'marriage,' seek to destroy the traditional family and the values we cherish," Culler's post continued. "For years this insidious plan has been in the works." [1413826780372.cached.jpg] Brendan Gmialowski/AFP/Getty President Obama believes that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. “Ultimately, I think the Equal Protection Clause does guarantee same-sex marriage in all 50 states,” he said in an interview published Monday in The New Yorker. While Obama said he believes states are legally required under the Constitution to allow same-sex marriages, his administration has not yet made that case before the Supreme Court. Also in the interview, Obama spoke favorably about the Supreme Court’s recent decision not to interfere with lower court rulings on gay marriage. “In some ways, the decision that was just handed down to not do anything about what states are doing on same-sex marriage may end up being as consequential—from my perspective, a positive sense—as anything that’s been done,” he said. “Given the direction of society, for the court to have allowed the process to play out the way it has may make the shift less controversial and more lasting.” Read it at The New Yorker Print Poll: Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Falling Across the Board Written by Bob Bernick on 21 October 2014. Posted in Today At Utah Policy In light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that made same-sex marriages legal in Utah, some key groups’ opposition to gay marriage has softened – although the groups are still opposed to the practice. And, perhaps more important for gay rights leaders, the chance that a statewide law banning discrimination in housing and employment for gays and lesbians is gaining critical support, a new UtahPolicy poll finds. -- The first year Urquhart’s bill got out of a Senate committee, but was never debated on the floor, and died. Last year GOP senators decided in a closed caucus not to hear any gay rights bills at all, with members saying they wanted to wait until an appeal on Utah’s same-sex marriage ban was heard by the Supreme Court. Well, a month ago the high court refused to hear any same-sex marriage appeals this term, letting stand a number of federal appellate court decisions striking down state anti-same-sex marriage laws, Utah’s Amendment 3 being one of them. -- Jones finds that even though Utah Republican rank-and-file still oppose same-sex marriage – that opposition is falling. In August 87 percent of Republicans opposed same-sex marriage. Now that number is 81 percent. Only 14 percent of Republicans – who are by far Utah’s majority party – support same-sex marriage. So don’t expect a pro-same-sex marriage law to pass any time soon in the Utah Legislature. -- Jones found an amazing shift in attitude – even when considering the poll’s margin of error – among those who say they are political independents, belonging to no party. Back in August, Jones found that independents opposed same-sex marriage, 54-31 percent. But in last week’s poll, independents have flipped – no doubt because of the high court’s ruling -- 51 percent now support same-sex marriage, 44 percent oppose. Democrats have always overwhelmingly supported same-sex marriage, various statewide polls over the years have shown. -- Urquhart said he’s pleased with other demographic findings in the new UtahPolicy poll. * Religion Clergy members gather in support of same-sex marriage More Religion stories -- “I asked myself, ‘If the U.S. Marine Corps can get this, what is wrong with Ohio?’  ” said Ahrens, who serves as senior minister at the Downtown church. His voice boomed yesterday to the applause of about four-dozen clergy members gathered at King Avenue United Methodist Church to support Why Marriage Matters Ohio, a grassroots campaign that seeks legalization of same-sex marriage. The Rev. John Keeny, senior pastor at King Avenue, has blessed about two same-gender unions per month since June for couples who have legally married in other states after being together for as many as 20 years. -- “I believe in same-gender marriage because I’ve seen it,” he said. “I have seen the faithfulness. I have seen their frustration with each other, I have seen their arguments with each other. I have seen forgiveness and patience and thoughtfulness and tenderness.” Same-sex marriage is banned in Ohio under a constitutional amendment voters approved in 2004. Since that year, legislatures, judges and voters have made gay marriage legal in more than 30 other states and the District of Columbia. Some Christian denominations and most Islamic and Orthodox Jewish leaders oppose same-sex marriage. Religious leaders who support the unions typically belong to churches or sects that support gay marriage or are going against the official stance of their denominations. Ahrens calls himself a “recovering homophobe” who opposed gay marriage when he was ordained in 1985. Seven years later, he celebrated a gay couple’s union in his church, and he has consecrated and celebrated many same-sex marriages since. The Rev. Carmeka Benning, senior pastor at Driven by Purpose Ministries in the University District, said she spoke at the event because she recently saw firsthand how difficult it is for couples to use vacation days and spend extra money to marry in another state. WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said the U.S. Supreme Court's recent move to uphold lower-court rulings allowing gay marriage in several states may be its most significant decision during his time in office, he told the New Yorker magazine in comments published on Monday. In declining to decide whether states can prohibit gay marriage, the court last week rejected seven different appeals of court rulings striking down gay marriage bans, effectively giving the go-ahead to same-sex marriage in 11 states that previously outlawed it. “In some ways, the decision that was just handed down to not do anything about what states are doing on same-sex marriage may end up being as consequential — from my perspective, a positive sense — as anything that’s been done,” Obama was quoted as saying in an article about his legal legacy. Among major Supreme Court decisions during his six years in office was a 2012 ruling upholding the constitutionality of Obama's healthcare reform law, known as Obamacare. Obama, who in 2012 became the first U.S. president to publicly express support for gay marriage, told the magazine he now believed the Constitution required all states to allow same-sex marriage. “But, as you know, courts have always been strategic. There have been times where the stars were aligned and the court, like a thunderbolt, issues a ruling like Brown v. Board of Education, but that’s pretty rare," Obama said, citing the landmark 1954 decision banning racial segregation in schools. @NCCapitol Legal experts: Same-sex marriage likely here to stay Tags: * Same-Sex Marriage Posted October 15, 2014 -- * Judge: GOP can intervene in gay marriage cases * Same-sex couples line up for marriage licenses, adoption papers * Federal judge strikes down NC's same-sex marriage ban By Laura Leslie Raleigh, N.C. — Legislative leaders said late Wednesday they’re evaluating their legal options to appeal the overturning of North Carolina’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. But legal experts say such an appeal is unlikely to succeed. Over the past week, two federal judges – one in Asheville, one in Greensboro – have ruled that the amendment violates the U.S. Constitution and have ordered state officials to stop enforcing it. -- U.S. District Judge Max Cogburn denied legislative leaders’ request to be allowed to intervene in the case. However, U.S. District Judge William Osteen granted them standing in the case. That leaves the door open for a potential appeal of the ruling. However, constitutional and family law experts agree an appeal is unlikely to succeed. The court to which any North Carolina appeal would go would be the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the same court that ruled Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional. That was the ruling that led to North Carolina’s ban being overturned as well. University of North Carolina School of Law professor Maxine Eichner, who specializes in family law, predicts the 4th Circuit will refuse to hear the appeal, instead issuing a summary order upholding Osteen’s ruling. Legislators could also petition the court for an emergency stay that would put same-sex marriage on hold temporarily in North Carolina, but Eichner doubts that’s likely, either. In order for lawmakers to win on appeal, she said, “The 4th Circuit would have to reverse its previous decision. There is nothing to suggest that it would plan to do that.” (BUTTON) Previous Story (BUTTON) Next Story Conservatives Are Clinging On To Religious Exemptions To Fight Same-Sex Marriage AP | By RACHEL ZOLL -- + reddit Alarmed by the broad expansion of same-sex marriage set in motion by the U.S. Supreme Court, religious conservatives are moving their fight to state legislatures — seeking exemptions that would allow some groups, companies and people with religious objections to refuse benefits or service for gay spouses. But winning sweeping carve-outs for faith-affiliated adoption agencies or individual wedding vendors will be an uphill battle. Public attitudes against exceptions have hardened, and efforts by faith groups in states where courts, not lawmakers, recognized same-sex unions have had little success. -- "When the judiciary does it they don't do the kind of balancing that legislatures tend to do," said Tim Schultz, president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, which has organized legislative caucuses focused on religious liberty in 20 states. Every state legislative debate over gay marriage has addressed the question of whether religious objectors could be exempt in any way from recognizing same-sex unions. But in states where same-sex marriage became law through the courts, only one, Connecticut, followed up by enacting significant new exemptions. Massachusetts, Iowa and New Jersey have provided no opt-outs for gay marriage opponents. Until recently, gay rights groups accepted some exceptions to pick up badly needed votes from conservative lawmakers. But that political pressure has dropped as acceptance of same-sex unions has grown. Gay advocates say broad carve-outs perpetuate the very discrimination they had been working to end. -- The exemptions approved so far have generally been much narrower than faith leaders sought, although opponents did win some meaningful concessions. About a half-dozen states allowed religious associations, such as the Knights of Columbus, or some faith-based nonprofits to deny specific benefits for gay couples — such as insurance for spouses — or refuse to serve them. A few states allowed privately funded adoption agencies to refuse to place children with gay couples. Religiously affiliated marriage support programs, such as Christian couples' retreats, were exempted in several states. But many of the states only reiterated First Amendment protections for worship. Still, the high court decision last week to turn away appeals by states trying to protect their same-sex marriage bans moves the debate over exemptions into territory that is more conservative, politically and religiously. Utah, Nevada and Idaho are heavily Mormon. South Carolina, where the attorney general is fighting to uphold the state's gay marriage ban despite the court ruling, is largely evangelical Protestant. "Some of the states are so red — think South Carolina — that the legislature can likely lock down all kinds of religious liberty protections, even those we have not yet seen adopted anywhere, like protection for the small mom-and-pop wedding professionals, simply because they have the votes of like-minded colleagues," said Robin Fretwell Wilson, a family law specialist at the University of Illinois, Champaign, who tracks exemptions in state laws. State Rep. Jacob Anderegg, a Utah Republican, said he plans to reintroduce a religious exemptions bill he had temporarily shelved amid the federal court cases on gay marriage in the last two years. His bill would allow anyone authorized by the state to solemnize marriages — including clergy and justices of the peace — to refuse on religious grounds to preside at same-sex marriages. "The bill reasserts and re-establishes fundamental principles: I have a religious objection. You can't force me or compel me to do it," Anderegg said. He expects a few other exemptions to be proposed in the next legislative session. -- Advocates for the bill said critics massively overreacted. Proponents argued the bill would have given objectors only the chance to bring a religious liberty claim before a court. But critics argued the legislation would have effectively allowed businesses to refuse service to gays and lesbians without penalty, especially given that Arizona has no statewide nondiscrimination policy that covers sexual orientation. "There will be a temptation to enact broad exemptions in states that otherwise would oppose same-sex marriage," said John Green, a religion and politics expert at the University of Akron's Bliss Institute for Applied Politics. "However, overly broad exemptions can backfire as well: They can be perceived as intolerant and discriminatory." Also on HuffPost: -- More: Gay Marriage Gay Marriage Fight Religious Exemptions Gay Marriage Same Sex Marriage Suggest a correction -- [favicon.ico] Next Gay Marriage Fight: Religious Exemptions [favicon.ico] Increasing number of Mormons support same-sex marriage Suggested For You [marriage12-art0-gvsukc72-1fiscal-summit-jpeg-08a75.jpg?__scale=w:660,h:440,t:1,c:ffffff,q:80,r:1] View Slideshow Request to buy this photoAP file photo Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, favors gay marriage, but that position could hurt him in the early primaries if he runs for president in 2016. WASHINGTON — The reaction would have been very different 10 years ago: Had the U.S. Supreme Court struck down bans on same-sex marriage in any state in 2004, conservative Republicans would have howled in protest. But this week, when the justices upheld lower-court rulings that essentially legalized same-sex marriage in five states, a sizable number of Republicans seemed to shrug off the news as no big deal. The relatively quiet GOP response — House Speaker John Boehner of West Chester never even commented on it — is a sign that a divisive issue across the country a decade ago has become acceptable to many Americans. A Pew Research Center survey last month showed that 49 percent of Americans favor same-sex marriage, while 41 percent oppose it. A Pew poll from 2004 showed that, at the time, 60 percent of Americans opposed gay marriage, while 31 percent supported it. Ten years after voters in Ohio approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, 62 percent to 38 percent, half of the states and the District of Columbia permit same-sex marriage. A Washington Post poll last year showed that 81 percent of people younger than 30 support same-sex marriage. “Nothing has changed quicker in the political environment than the politics surrounding gay marriage,” said David Leland, former chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party and a candidate this year for the Ohio House. “There has been a sea change of enormous proportions in the past 10 years. I think the silence from the Republicans is reflective of that.” Analysts say that as the issue fades, it will be less of an obstacle for potential Republican presidential candidates such as Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio who favor same-sex marriage. Portman announced last year that his son Will is gay and reversed his longtime opposition to same-sex marriage. Portman was the first sitting GOP senator to publicly support gay marriage. Barry Bennett, a Republican consultant in Washington and a Portman adviser, said Portman’s position would “ absolutely” help him if he could win the GOP nomination. -- “Our problems in the general are primarily driven by voters seeing us as not caring and not compassionate,” Bennett said. “They won’t see Rob that way.” Yet Portman’s stance is fraught with political danger. Politico.com reported this week that only four House Republicans and four Senate Republicans support same-sex marriage. Republicans might not want to talk about same-sex marriage, but they are not embracing it, either. The Pew poll shows that only 34 percent of Republicans back same-sex marriage and that 75 percent of white evangelicals — who make up a strong segment of GOP voters in the early presidential contests of Iowa and South Carolina — oppose gay marriage. “He’ll never get through the primary,” Mary Anne Marsh, a Democratic consultant in Boston, said of Portman. “While Portman, on paper, could be a good general-election candidate , the people who dominate the Republican primary process oppose gay marriage. Period.” -- Phil Burress, president of Citizens for Community Values in Ohio, said, “There’s no way that it has helped him, and it continues to hurt him. He’s damaged goods.” He predicted that Portman is “ not even going to keep his seat in 2016.” In a statement, Portman said he backs “same-sex marriage and the Supreme Court’s ruling opens up the possibility of marriage to more Americans.” But Portman said that “the best way to achieve enduring change is at the kitchen table, not in the courtroom. It is citizens persuading their fellow citizens, and it is happening all across the country.” While Portman was one of the few Republicans to praise the court’s ruling, most GOP officials said nothing, suggesting they hoped to avoid a blistering controversy before the November congressional elections. -- But some were not so reticent. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, assailed the court’s decisions as “both tragic and indefensible,” and he vowed to introduce a constitutional amendment “to prevent the federal government or the courts from attacking or striking down state marriage laws.” Cruz is likely to run for president, and his opposition to same-sex marriage would resonate with social conservatives who make up a large percentage of Republicans voting in the 2016 Iowa caucuses. In 2012, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, an ardent opponent of abortion rights and same-sex marriage, won Iowa with 25 percent of the vote, while in 2008, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee — another social conservative — won with 34 percent. But those close to Portman point out that neither Santorum nor Huckabee were able to win the nomination. They suggest that a number of GOP voters in Iowa might overlook a candidate’s position on same-sex marriage. “There are still a huge chunk of people who are caucus voters who will agree with Portman on this,” said one Republican who spoke on condition of anonymity. “I don’t think the gay marriage thing was a deal-breaker anyway. With the passing of time, it’s becoming less and less of an issue." As recently as 2004, opposition to same-sex marriage might have helped President George W. Bush win Ohio, whose electoral votes gave him a second term. Bush carried the state on the same day that voters approved an amendment to the Ohio constitution banning same-sex marriage. “It was the factor,” Burress said in explaining why Bush won. * To former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, faith absolutely trumps politics, so much so that he has no reservations about casting off the R beside his name if the GOP abandons its opposition to same-sex marriage. “If the Republicans want to lose guys like me — and a whole bunch of still God-fearing Bible-believing people — go ahead and just abdicate on this issue, and why you’re at it, go ahead and say abortion doesn’t matter, either,” Huckabee said on the American Family Association’s radio show this week during a discussion on gay marriage. -- “Because at that point, you lose me,” he continued. “I’m gone. I’ll become an independent. I’ll start finding people that have guts to stand. I’m tired of this.” Huckabee’s comments came after the Supreme Court announced earlier this week that they will not take up gay marriage, thereby clearing the way for same-sex marriages in Wisconsin, Virginia, Utah, Oklahoma, and Indiana. This, of course, provides an opportunity for some GOP candidates who wish to avoid the issue to do just that: The Supreme Court’s decision Monday clearing the way for same-sex marriages in five states may benefit an unlikely group: Republican lawmakers who can’t wait to stop talking about gay marriage, an issue that is increasingly becoming a drag for the party. Advisors to multiple likely 2016 candidates told TIME after the news broke that they are hopeful that swift action by the Supreme Court will provide them cover. “We don’t have to agree with the decision, but as long as we’re not against it we should be okay,” said one aide to a 2016 contender who declined to be named to speak candidly on the sensitive topic. “The base, meanwhile, will focus its anger on the Court, and not on us.” -- “I am utterly exasperated with Republicans and the so-called leadership of the Republicans who have abdicated on this issue when, if they continue this direction they guarantee they’re gonna lose every election in the future,” Huckabee said. “Guarantee it.” “And I don’t understand why they want to lose,” he continued. “Because a lot of Republicans, particularly in the establishment and those who live on either the left coast or those who live up in the bubbles of New York and Washington, are convinced that if we don’t capitulate on the same sex marriage issue and if we don’t raise the white flag of surrender, and just accept it as inevitable, we’ll be losers.” “I tell you,” he said. “It’s the absolute opposite of that.” [lead.jpg?ncto48] A box of cupcakes topped with icons of same-sex couples at City Hall in San Francisco (Stephen Lam/Reuters) Last week, a Pew Research Center poll showed a 5-point drop in support for same-sex marriage between February (54 percent) and September (49 percent) of this year. The result set off much media speculation about the larger public-opinion trends. Maggie Gallagher, former president of the National Organization for Marriage, leapt on the findings in an article titled, “Gay-Marriage Support Falling: A new poll reverses a years-old trend” in National Review. Others, such as Rachel Zoll at the Associated Press and Gabriel Arana at Salon, were more circumspect. Most of the articles followed Pew’s suggestion that it was too early to say what the finding means for the longer-term trends. But is a wait-and-see approach really all that can be said about the meaning of this finding? There are two keys to interpreting the meaning of any survey that runs counter to long-term trends: putting it into context with other surveys, and examining the underlying fundamentals driving the trend. The chart below plots the findings of 33 polls conducted by Public Religion Research Institute between November 2011 and the present, including 22 polls conducted in 2014 alone. Notably, like Pew’s recent poll, PRRI also found that support dipped below 50 percent in two of these polls (with ending field dates of May 18 and August 15) in the past year. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Views on Same-Sex Marriage, 2011-2014 Public Religion Research Institute surveys _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ That said, there are four reasons why dips in support for same-sex marriage in individual polls do not indicate a reversal of the current trend. 1. The trend line from 2011 to 2014 for same-sex marriage support remains positive, while the trend line for opposition remains negative. In October 2011, the public was divided, with 48 percent in favor of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry and 46 percent opposing. In 2012, polls generally showed a plurality of Americans favoring same-sex marriage. By 2013 and into 2014, polls consistently showed majority support for same-sex marriage. The downward trend on the opposition side shows similar consistency. 2. The polling results this year are generally stable, and the average across 22 polls conducted in 2014 shows a double-digit difference between support (52.5 percent) and opposition (39.0 percent) for same-sex marriage. Only two of the 22 surveys conducted by PRRI in 2014 showed support below 50 percent; one found support at 50 percent. The other 19 polls found support for same-sex marriage in majority territory between 51 and 56 percent. 3. Even in the few polls that do show a dip in support for same-sex marriage, there is no corresponding bump in opposition. In the 2014 surveys that show a dip in support for same-sex marriage, including the Pew survey and the two PRRI surveys, the dip is not mirrored by an equivalent increase in opposition, but there is a rise in non-response. The Pew survey, for example, showed a five-point drop in support between February 2014 and September 2014, but only a two-point increase in opposition of same-sex marriage. The portion of respondents who offered no opinion, however, increased by three percentage points to 10 percent. 4. The fundamentals driving increased support for same-sex marriage have not changed. The trend of increased support for same-sex marriage is primarily the result of strong support among younger Americans, and they continue to be the primary drivers of this issue. In PRRI’s most recently released survey, nearly 7 in 10 (69 percent) young adults (age 18 to 29) favor same-sex marriage, compared to only one-third (33 percent) of seniors (age 65 and older). By all current indicators, generational replacement is the slow-moving steamroller that will continue to pave a path toward greater support for same-sex marriage. Younger Americans are also transforming religious institutions, which have historically been the epicenters of opposition to same-sex marriage. In 2003, there was no major religious group among which a majority supported same-sex marriage. Today, majorities of Jews (72 percent) and both white Catholics (53 percent) and Latino Catholics (55 percent) support same-sex marriage, as do half (50 percent) of white mainline Protestants. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Views on Same-Sex Marriage by Age PRRI, American Values Survey, September 2014 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ This does not mean support for same-sex marriage will reach majority support in all 50 states next year—or even the year after. Opponents are often more politically active than supporters, and they tend to be geographically or culturally clustered in ways that give them outsized influence at the local level. Even so, there are already some surprising changes, such as support reaching the 50 percent mark among Americans living in the Midwest and in American suburbs. We don’t have to wait for new polling to say that the few polls showing a dip in support for same-sex marriage are outliers in a larger trend. The incoming tide of support for same-sex marriage may ebb and flow, but it is unlikely to recede as the youngest generation replaces the eldest and as American attitudes across the board continue to shift. Presented by Jump to Comments #TIME » This Is How Much More Popular Same-Sex Marriage Is Today Than in 1989 Comments Feed This New Method of Farming Could Change Where Our Food Comes From Morning Must Reads: October 1 alternate alternate TIME WordPress.com TIME -- TIME History politics This Is How Much More Popular Same-Sex Marriage Is Today Than in 1989 * Sam Frizell @Sam_Frizell -- A prescient TIME story from November of that year, of which the poll was part, argued the merits of domestic partnerships — and went as far as to endorse gay marriage, despite the overwhelming unpopularity of that position at the time. Same-sex partnerships faced deeply entrenched opposition, from forces as diverse as major insurance companies concern about extending coverage to unmarried partners and social conservatives concerned about morals, Walter Isaacson wrote. When San Franciscans proposed that year allowing gay couples to register their relationships, John R. Quinn, the city’s Archbishop, called the idea a “serious blow to our society’s historic commitment to supporting marriage and family life.” And David Blankenhorn at the Institute for American values said the domestic-partnership movement “misses the whole point of why we confer privileges on family relationships.” A quarter century later, it’s easy to forget how much societal mores have changed. In the intervening years, views on same-sex marriage have flipped, with 59% of Americans supporting it and just 34% opposed, according to a March 2014 poll by the Washington Post-ABC News. In his 1989 column in TIME’s pages, Isaacson countered the prevailing views. He made a firm argument in favor of gay marriage that may have sounded eccentric in 1989 but has became mainstream in 2014. He writes: (BUTTON) Previous Story (BUTTON) Next Story Same-Sex Marriages From Other States Must Be Recognized In Missouri, Judge Rules AP | By BILL DRAPER -- + reddit KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — A judge struck down part of Missouri's gay marriage ban for the first time on Friday by ordering the state to recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in other states, saying state laws banning the unions single out gay couples "for no logical reason." The order means such couples will be eligible to sign up for a wide range of tax, health insurance, veterans and other benefits now afforded to opposite-sex married couples. Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster, who has defended the state's ban on gay marriage, said his office was reviewing the ruling. -- In Missouri, Youngs said he expects the state Supreme Court to "provide the last word on all of the important legal issues presented by this case." Same-sex marriage is now legal in 19 states and the District of Columbia. The ACLU has cases pending against 13 other states with such bans, including five cases currently before federal appeals courts. ___ -- More: Missouri Same Sex Marriage Missouri Gay Marriage Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster Gay Marriage Recognizing Gay Marriage Suggest a correction In an interview with the New Yorker's Jeffrey Toobin, President Obama now believes that same-sex couples in every state should be allowed to marry under the equal protection clause of the Constitution — a significant switch from his earlier stance in May 2012, when he believed the issue was best left to the states. Here's the relevant passage from Toobin's lengthy interview on how the president is planning to shape his "judicial legacy": "Ultimately, I think the Equal Protection Clause does guarantee same-sex marriage in all fifty states," he said. "But, as you know, courts have always been strategic. There have been times where the stars were aligned and the Court, like a thunderbolt, issues a ruling like Brown v. Board of Education, but that's pretty rare. And, given the direction of society, for the Court to have allowed the process to play out the way it has may make the shift less controversial and more lasting." "The bulk of my nominees, twenty years ago or even ten years ago, would have been considered very much centrists, well within the mainstream of American jurisprudence, not particularly fire-breathing or ideologically driven," Obama went on. "So the fact that now Democratic appointees and Republican appointees tend to vote differently on issues really has more to do with the shift in the Republican Party and in the nature of Republican-appointed jurists ... Democrats haven't moved from where they were." -- Why you should care: To some extent, Obama's support for gay marriage doesn't matter: The country has already evolved right past him and other prominent Democrats like Hillary Clinton. A GOP-controlled House (and possibly soon the Senate) means that any federal legislation on the topic is off the table for the next two years, while it's very unlikely the Roberts court will see any justices replaced before the end of Obama's second term. But Obama openly backing the right of gay couples to marry — and laying out a constitutional justification for it — is still a major milestone for the gay rights movement. It will now be significantly harder for any potential successor to backtrack on gay marriage, and the support of the nation's leader will make Republican opposition to same-sex marriage look increasingly bigoted. Coupled with his historic executive order protecting all federal contractors against LGBT discrimination, the president may still squeak out of this one with a progressive legacy. Had the nation not gotten over its homophobia so fast, we might still be waiting for the first openly pro-gay president. CNN Arabic CNN Español CNN Mexico CNN Facebook CNN Twitter CNN Google+ CNN Heroes Impact Your World CNN Freedom Project Justices poised to tackle constitutional right of same-sex marriage By Bill Mears, CNN Supreme Court Producer Updated 1148 GMT (1848 HKT) September 26, 2014 Newlyweds Jeff Delmay and Todd Delmay hug during a marriage ceremony in a Miami courtroom on Monday, January 5. Florida began allowing same-sex marriages after a judge -- following similar rulings across the nation -- struck down the state's old law banning such unions. Newlyweds Jeff Delmay and Todd Delmay hug during a marriage ceremony in a Miami courtroom on Monday, January 5. Florida began allowing same-sex marriages after a judge -- following similar rulings across the nation -- struck down the state's old law banning such unions. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Newlyweds Jeff Delmay and Todd Delmay hug during a marriage ceremony in a Miami courtroom on Monday, January 5. Florida began allowing same-sex marriages after a judge -- following similar rulings across the nation -- struck down the state's old law banning such unions. Hide Caption 1 of 31 Chad Biggs, left, and his fiance, Chris Creech, say their wedding vows at the Wake County Courthouse in Raleigh, North Carolina, on Friday, October 10, after a federal judge ruled that same-sex marriage can begin there. Chad Biggs, left, and his fiance, Chris Creech, say their wedding vows at the Wake County Courthouse in Raleigh, North Carolina, on Friday, October 10, after a federal judge ruled that same-sex marriage can begin there. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Chad Biggs, left, and his fiance, Chris Creech, say their wedding vows at the Wake County Courthouse in Raleigh, North Carolina, on Friday, October 10, after a federal judge ruled that same-sex marriage can begin there. Hide Caption 2 of 31 Joshua Gunter, right, and Bryan Shields attend a rally in Las Vegas to celebrate an appeals court ruling that overturned Nevada's same-sex marriage ban on Tuesday, October 7. Joshua Gunter, right, and Bryan Shields attend a rally in Las Vegas to celebrate an appeals court ruling that overturned Nevada's same-sex marriage ban on Tuesday, October 7. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Joshua Gunter, right, and Bryan Shields attend a rally in Las Vegas to celebrate an appeals court ruling that overturned Nevada's same-sex marriage ban on Tuesday, October 7. Hide Caption 3 of 31 From left, plaintiffs Moudi Sbeity; his partner, Derek Kitchen; Kody Partridge; and Partridge's wife, Laurie Wood, celebrate after a news conference in Salt Lake City on Monday, October 6. The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for legal same-sex marriages in five more states -- Virginia, Utah, Nevada, Indiana and Wisconsin. From left, plaintiffs Moudi Sbeity; his partner, Derek Kitchen; Kody Partridge; and Partridge's wife, Laurie Wood, celebrate after a news conference in Salt Lake City on Monday, October 6. The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for legal same-sex marriages in five more states -- Virginia, Utah, Nevada, Indiana and Wisconsin. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos From left, plaintiffs Moudi Sbeity; his partner, Derek Kitchen; Kody Partridge; and Partridge's wife, Laurie Wood, celebrate after a news conference in Salt Lake City on Monday, October 6. The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for legal same-sex marriages in five more states -- Virginia, Utah, Nevada, Indiana and Wisconsin. Hide Caption 4 of 31 Abbi Huber, left, and Talia Frolkis exit the City County Building in Madison, Wisconsin, after applying for a marriage license on October 6. Abbi Huber, left, and Talia Frolkis exit the City County Building in Madison, Wisconsin, after applying for a marriage license on October 6. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Abbi Huber, left, and Talia Frolkis exit the City County Building in Madison, Wisconsin, after applying for a marriage license on October 6. Hide Caption -- Rob MacPherson, right, and his husband, Steven Stolen, hug during a news conference at the American Civil Liberties Union in Indianapolis on October 6. Rob MacPherson, right, and his husband, Steven Stolen, hug during a news conference at the American Civil Liberties Union in Indianapolis on October 6. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Rob MacPherson, right, and his husband, Steven Stolen, hug during a news conference at the American Civil Liberties Union in Indianapolis on October 6. Hide Caption -- Mary Bishop, second from left, and Sharon Baldwin, right, celebrate with family and friends following their wedding ceremony on the courthouse steps in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on October 6. Mary Bishop, second from left, and Sharon Baldwin, right, celebrate with family and friends following their wedding ceremony on the courthouse steps in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on October 6. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Mary Bishop, second from left, and Sharon Baldwin, right, celebrate with family and friends following their wedding ceremony on the courthouse steps in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on October 6. Hide Caption -- Jennifer Melsop, left, and Erika Turner kiss after they were married in front of the Arlington County Courthouse in Arlington, Virginia, on October 6. Jennifer Melsop, left, and Erika Turner kiss after they were married in front of the Arlington County Courthouse in Arlington, Virginia, on October 6. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Jennifer Melsop, left, and Erika Turner kiss after they were married in front of the Arlington County Courthouse in Arlington, Virginia, on October 6. Hide Caption -- Pastor Carol Hill from Epworth United Methodist Church speaks during a marriage-equality ceremony at the Kathy Osterman Beach in Chicago on Sunday, June 1. June 1 marked the first day that all of Illinois' 102 counties could begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Pastor Carol Hill from Epworth United Methodist Church speaks during a marriage-equality ceremony at the Kathy Osterman Beach in Chicago on Sunday, June 1. June 1 marked the first day that all of Illinois' 102 counties could begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Pastor Carol Hill from Epworth United Methodist Church speaks during a marriage-equality ceremony at the Kathy Osterman Beach in Chicago on Sunday, June 1. June 1 marked the first day that all of Illinois' 102 counties could begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Hide Caption -- William Roletter, left, and Paul Rowe, right, press close to each other after having their photo taken with their newly acquired marriage certificate Wednesday, May 21, at City Hall in Philadelphia. William Roletter, left, and Paul Rowe, right, press close to each other after having their photo taken with their newly acquired marriage certificate Wednesday, May 21, at City Hall in Philadelphia. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos William Roletter, left, and Paul Rowe, right, press close to each other after having their photo taken with their newly acquired marriage certificate Wednesday, May 21, at City Hall in Philadelphia. Hide Caption 10 of 31 Julie Engbloom, left, and Laurie Brown embrace after they were wed in Portland, Oregon, on Monday, May 19. A federal judge struck down the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage. Julie Engbloom, left, and Laurie Brown embrace after they were wed in Portland, Oregon, on Monday, May 19. A federal judge struck down the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Julie Engbloom, left, and Laurie Brown embrace after they were wed in Portland, Oregon, on Monday, May 19. A federal judge struck down the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage. Hide Caption 11 of 31 Jennifer Rambo, right, kisses her partner, Kristin Seaton, after their marriage ceremony in front of the Carroll County Courthouse in Eureka Springs, Arkansas, on Saturday, May 10. Rambo and Seaton were the first same-sex couple to be granted a marriage license in Eureka Springs after a judge overturned Amendment 83, which banned same-sex marriage in Arkansas. Jennifer Rambo, right, kisses her partner, Kristin Seaton, after their marriage ceremony in front of the Carroll County Courthouse in Eureka Springs, Arkansas, on Saturday, May 10. Rambo and Seaton were the first same-sex couple to be granted a marriage license in Eureka Springs after a judge overturned Amendment 83, which banned same-sex marriage in Arkansas. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Jennifer Rambo, right, kisses her partner, Kristin Seaton, after their marriage ceremony in front of the Carroll County Courthouse in Eureka Springs, Arkansas, on Saturday, May 10. Rambo and Seaton were the first same-sex couple to be granted a marriage license in Eureka Springs after a judge overturned Amendment 83, which banned same-sex marriage in Arkansas. Hide Caption 12 of 31 Same-sex couples get their marriage licenses at the Oakland County Courthouse in Pontiac, Michigan, on Saturday, March 22, a day after a federal judge overturned Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage. Same-sex couples get their marriage licenses at the Oakland County Courthouse in Pontiac, Michigan, on Saturday, March 22, a day after a federal judge overturned Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Same-sex couples get their marriage licenses at the Oakland County Courthouse in Pontiac, Michigan, on Saturday, March 22, a day after a federal judge overturned Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage. Hide Caption 13 of 31 Utah state Sen. Jim Dabakis, left, and Stephen Justesen acknowledge the crowd after being married in Salt Lake City in December 2013. Utah state Sen. Jim Dabakis, left, and Stephen Justesen acknowledge the crowd after being married in Salt Lake City in December 2013. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Utah state Sen. Jim Dabakis, left, and Stephen Justesen acknowledge the crowd after being married in Salt Lake City in December 2013. Hide Caption 14 of 31 Plaintiffs Laurie Wood, left, and Kody Partridge, center, walk with attorney Peggy Tomsic in December 2013 after a judge heard arguments challenging Utah's same-sex marriage ban. Plaintiffs Laurie Wood, left, and Kody Partridge, center, walk with attorney Peggy Tomsic in December 2013 after a judge heard arguments challenging Utah's same-sex marriage ban. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Plaintiffs Laurie Wood, left, and Kody Partridge, center, walk with attorney Peggy Tomsic in December 2013 after a judge heard arguments challenging Utah's same-sex marriage ban. Hide Caption 15 of 31 Hawaiian Gov. Neil Abercrombie, left, and former Sen. Avery Chumbley celebrate with a copy of the Star-Advertiser after Abercrombie signed a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Hawaii in November 2013. Hawaiian Gov. Neil Abercrombie, left, and former Sen. Avery Chumbley celebrate with a copy of the Star-Advertiser after Abercrombie signed a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Hawaii in November 2013. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Hawaiian Gov. Neil Abercrombie, left, and former Sen. Avery Chumbley celebrate with a copy of the Star-Advertiser after Abercrombie signed a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Hawaii in November 2013. Hide Caption 16 of 31 Newark, New Jersey, Mayor Cory Booker officiates a wedding ceremony for Joseph Panessidi and Orville Bell at City Hall in October 2013. The state Supreme Court denied the state's request to prevent same-sex marriages temporarily, clearing the way for same-sex couples to marry. Newark, New Jersey, Mayor Cory Booker officiates a wedding ceremony for Joseph Panessidi and Orville Bell at City Hall in October 2013. The state Supreme Court denied the state's request to prevent same-sex marriages temporarily, clearing the way for same-sex couples to marry. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Newark, New Jersey, Mayor Cory Booker officiates a wedding ceremony for Joseph Panessidi and Orville Bell at City Hall in October 2013. The state Supreme Court denied the state's request to prevent same-sex marriages temporarily, clearing the way for same-sex couples to marry. Hide Caption 17 of 31 A couple celebrates at San Francisco City Hall upon hearing about the U.S. Supreme Court rulings on same-sex marriage in June 2013. The high court cleared the way for same-sex couples in California to resume marrying after dismissing an appeal on Proposition 8 on jurisdictional grounds. The court also struck down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 federal law defining marriage as between a man and a woman. A couple celebrates at San Francisco City Hall upon hearing about the U.S. Supreme Court rulings on same-sex marriage in June 2013. The high court cleared the way for same-sex couples in California to resume marrying after dismissing an appeal on Proposition 8 on jurisdictional grounds. The court also struck down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 federal law defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos A couple celebrates at San Francisco City Hall upon hearing about the U.S. Supreme Court rulings on same-sex marriage in June 2013. The high court cleared the way for same-sex couples in California to resume marrying after dismissing an appeal on Proposition 8 on jurisdictional grounds. The court also struck down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 federal law defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Hide Caption 18 of 31 At the state Capitol in St. Paul, Minnesota, Gov. Mark Dayton signs a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in May 2013. At the state Capitol in St. Paul, Minnesota, Gov. Mark Dayton signs a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in May 2013. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos At the state Capitol in St. Paul, Minnesota, Gov. Mark Dayton signs a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in May 2013. Hide Caption 19 of 31 Delaware Gov. Jack Markell holds up legislation in May 2013 allowing same-sex couples to wed in the state. Delaware Gov. Jack Markell holds up legislation in May 2013 allowing same-sex couples to wed in the state. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Delaware Gov. Jack Markell holds up legislation in May 2013 allowing same-sex couples to wed in the state. Hide Caption -- Rhode Island state Sen. Donna Nesselbush, right, embraces a supporter after the Marriage Equality Act was signed into law at the statehouse in Providence in May 2013. Rhode Island state Sen. Donna Nesselbush, right, embraces a supporter after the Marriage Equality Act was signed into law at the statehouse in Providence in May 2013. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Rhode Island state Sen. Donna Nesselbush, right, embraces a supporter after the Marriage Equality Act was signed into law at the statehouse in Providence in May 2013. Hide Caption -- Jamous Lizotte, right, and Steven Jones pose for photos while waiting for a marriage license in Portland, Maine, in December 2012. Jamous Lizotte, right, and Steven Jones pose for photos while waiting for a marriage license in Portland, Maine, in December 2012. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Jamous Lizotte, right, and Steven Jones pose for photos while waiting for a marriage license in Portland, Maine, in December 2012. Hide Caption 22 of 31 Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, center, shakes hands with Senate President Thomas V. "Mike" Miller after signing a same-sex marriage bill in March 2012. The law was challenged, but voters approved marriage equality in a November 2012 referendum. Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, center, shakes hands with Senate President Thomas V. "Mike" Miller after signing a same-sex marriage bill in March 2012. The law was challenged, but voters approved marriage equality in a November 2012 referendum. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, center, shakes hands with Senate President Thomas V. "Mike" Miller after signing a same-sex marriage bill in March 2012. The law was challenged, but voters approved marriage equality in a November 2012 referendum. Hide Caption 23 of 31 Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire celebrates after signing marriage-equality legislation into law on February 13, 2012. Voters there approved same-sex marriage in November 2012. Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire celebrates after signing marriage-equality legislation into law on February 13, 2012. Voters there approved same-sex marriage in November 2012. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire celebrates after signing marriage-equality legislation into law on February 13, 2012. Voters there approved same-sex marriage in November 2012. Hide Caption 24 of 31 Phyllis Siegel, right, kisses her wife, Connie Kopelov, after exchanging vows at the Manhattan City Clerk's office on July 24, 2011, the first day New York's Marriage Equality Act went into effect. Phyllis Siegel, right, kisses her wife, Connie Kopelov, after exchanging vows at the Manhattan City Clerk's office on July 24, 2011, the first day New York's Marriage Equality Act went into effect. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Phyllis Siegel, right, kisses her wife, Connie Kopelov, after exchanging vows at the Manhattan City Clerk's office on July 24, 2011, the first day New York's Marriage Equality Act went into effect. Hide Caption 25 of 31 In 2010, television reporter Roby Chavez, right, shares a moment with gay rights activist Frank Kameny during Chavez and Chris Roe's wedding ceremony in the nation's capital. Same-sex marriage became legal in Washington in March 2010. In 2010, television reporter Roby Chavez, right, shares a moment with gay rights activist Frank Kameny during Chavez and Chris Roe's wedding ceremony in the nation's capital. Same-sex marriage became legal in Washington in March 2010. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos In 2010, television reporter Roby Chavez, right, shares a moment with gay rights activist Frank Kameny during Chavez and Chris Roe's wedding ceremony in the nation's capital. Same-sex marriage became legal in Washington in March 2010. Hide Caption 26 of 31 Olin Burkhart, left, and Carl Burkhart kiss on the steps of the New Hampshire Capitol in January 2010 after the state's law allowing same-sex marriage went into effect. Olin Burkhart, left, and Carl Burkhart kiss on the steps of the New Hampshire Capitol in January 2010 after the state's law allowing same-sex marriage went into effect. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Olin Burkhart, left, and Carl Burkhart kiss on the steps of the New Hampshire Capitol in January 2010 after the state's law allowing same-sex marriage went into effect. Hide Caption 27 of 31 Maine state Sen. Dennis Damon, left, hands Gov. John Baldacci the bill that the state Senate passed in May 2009 to affirm the right of same-sex couples to marry. Maine state Sen. Dennis Damon, left, hands Gov. John Baldacci the bill that the state Senate passed in May 2009 to affirm the right of same-sex couples to marry. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Maine state Sen. Dennis Damon, left, hands Gov. John Baldacci the bill that the state Senate passed in May 2009 to affirm the right of same-sex couples to marry. Hide Caption -- Amy Klein-Matheny, left, and her wife, Jennifer, exchange vows in Iowa after same-sex couples were allowed to marry there with a court ruling in April 2009. Amy Klein-Matheny, left, and her wife, Jennifer, exchange vows in Iowa after same-sex couples were allowed to marry there with a court ruling in April 2009. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Amy Klein-Matheny, left, and her wife, Jennifer, exchange vows in Iowa after same-sex couples were allowed to marry there with a court ruling in April 2009. Hide Caption 29 of 31 Michael Miller, left, and Ross Zachs marry on the West Hartford Town Hall steps after same-sex marriages became legal in Connecticut on November 12, 2008. Michael Miller, left, and Ross Zachs marry on the West Hartford Town Hall steps after same-sex marriages became legal in Connecticut on November 12, 2008. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Michael Miller, left, and Ross Zachs marry on the West Hartford Town Hall steps after same-sex marriages became legal in Connecticut on November 12, 2008. Hide Caption 30 of 31 Lara Ramsey, left, and her partner of eight years, Jane Lohmann, play with their 7-month-old son, Wyatt Ramsey-Lohmann. The two wed in 2004 after Massachusetts approved same-sex marriage. Massachusetts was the first state to do so. Lara Ramsey, left, and her partner of eight years, Jane Lohmann, play with their 7-month-old son, Wyatt Ramsey-Lohmann. The two wed in 2004 after Massachusetts approved same-sex marriage. Massachusetts was the first state to do so. Photos: Same-sex marriage in the U.S. 31 photos Lara Ramsey, left, and her partner of eight years, Jane Lohmann, play with their 7-month-old son, Wyatt Ramsey-Lohmann. The two wed in 2004 after Massachusetts approved same-sex marriage. Massachusetts was the first state to do so. Hide Caption 31 of 31 01 florida gay marriage 0106 north carolina same sex RESTRICTED nevada gay marriage 1007 01 gay marriage 1007 02 gay marriage 1007 05 gay marriage 1007 04 gay marriage 1007 03 gay marriage 1007 02 same sex marriage 0614 01 same sex marriage 0614 01 oregon same sex 0519 same sex marriage arkansas michigan marriage licenses dabakis same sex marriage 01 utah same sex marriage 1220 hawaii same sex marriage same sex marriage new jersey 01 supreme court doma 0626 03 gay marriage 0613 04 gay marriage 0613 02 gay marriage 0613 01 gay marriage 0613 06 same sex marriage maryland 02 same sex marriage washington 04 same sex marriage new york 03 same sex marriage washington dc 01 NH same sex 0626 maine gay marriage 0509 RESTRICTED 09 same sex marriage iowa 05 same sex marriage Connecticut 07 same sex marriage Massachusetts Story highlights * Public debate over same-sex marriage returns to the Supreme Court * Justices to meet to consider appeals from gays, lesbians in five states * Same-sex marriage laws are decided by states, resulting in legal patchwork across U.S. The one-sentence order from the U.S. Supreme Court was brief but emphatic. The year was 1972 and the justices were asked to decide something extraordinary in that era: whether an openly gay couple from Minnesota had a "fundamental right" under the Constitution to legally wed. -- In just 13 words, the court under Chief Justice Warren Burger dismissed the Baker v. Nelson petition, "for want of a substantial federal question." For about four decades that was the final word on the issue, at least legally. Now a generational shift in public acceptance has given same-sex marriage a powerful new voice. Judges around the country -- in state and federal courts -- have spoken with a near unanimity over the past year that millions of gays and lesbians have been denied an equal protection right to tie the knot, or to have their legal unions recognized by their home states. Opinion: Marriage equality is not like abortion -- [140625204821-sotvo-utah-same-sex-marriage-00004918-story-top.jpg] Just Watched Court strikes down same-sex marriage ban replay More Videos ... Court strikes down same-sex marriage ban 01:10 PLAY VIDEO [140520195739-dnt-same-sex-marriage-pennsylvania-00003920-story-top.jpg] Just Watched Same-sex marriages begin in Pennsylvania replay More Videos ... Same-sex marriages begin in Pennsylvania 01:06 PLAY VIDEO If one or more of those petitions are accepted now for review, oral arguments would likely be held early next year, with a monumental opinion expected by late June 2015. "The question of whether same-sex marriage bans are constitutional is a historic issue, under the Constitution and for the Roberts Court," said Thomas Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUSblog.com and a respected Washington attorney. "It's hard to imagine a situation where judges are going to have more power to define the social and family relationships of the country." A patchwork of state laws on the issue Same-sex marriage is legal in 19 U.S states plus the District of Columbia: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington state. Massachusetts became the first to grant the right in 2004. A Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage would essentially end a patchwork of state laws -- some that allow it, some that do not, and a few that allow protections short of marriage, such as civil unions and domestic partnerships. The highest court by its nature is a deliberative body, preferring almost by instinct to take things slowly, allowing issues to percolate in the lower courts and in the political discourse. -- [140227021206-dnt-tx-same-sex-ban-struck-down-00002518-story-top.jpg] Just Watched Texas: Same-sex marriage ban struck down replay More Videos ... Texas: Same-sex marriage ban struck down 01:15 PLAY VIDEO [140630153800-obama-immigration-0630-story-top.jpg] -- Many supporters of "traditional" marriage privately say preserving an inflexible one-man/one-woman definition of wedlock nationwide would not be realistic moving forward, and that a divided bloc of states upholding the status quo may be the best possible scenario. But all that hinges on what the Supreme Court does and does not do. A federal appeals court in August took just nine days after intensive oral arguments to issue its sweeping conclusion that voter-approved same-sex marriage bans in Indiana and Wisconsin were unacceptably discriminatory. And state leaders then took just five days to formally ask the Supreme Court to intervene. Even Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg recently hinted a "why wait" attitude may predominate. -- State and federal judges in the past year have ruled 39 times in favor of the expanded marriage right, while two have upheld existing laws. All this follows what the Supreme Court in 2013 said peripherally on the issue. Fifteen months ago, the justices cleared the way for same-sex marriages in California to resume after they ruled private parties did not have "standing" to defend a voter-approved ballot measure barring gay and lesbian couples from state-sanctioned wedlock. More importantly, the high court also rejected parts of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in its 5-4 "Windsor" decision, citing equal protection guarantees to conclude same-sex spouses legally married in a state may receive federal benefits, such as tax breaks. -- However, the nine justices have complete discretion to stand on the sidelines for now -- and wait for a majority of these state battles to play out, or for a federal appeals court to uphold a ban. "In theory, the justices can avoid deciding any question, particularly when there is no real division and there isn't about same-sex marriage -- yet," said Goldstein. "But this is just too important. They can't stay out, it would be ridiculous for the nation's highest court not to decide this issue now." Strike down same-sex marriage bans or allow them to stand [140625120518-cell-phone-file-0625-story-top.jpg] -- PLAY VIDEO The Supreme Court could historically alter how marriage is treated under a legal framework, potentially striking down every current same-sex marriage ban. Or the justices could leave the current patchwork of state laws in place, allowing legislatures, voters, or lower courts to sort it all out, for now. A CNN/ORC International Poll released more than a year ago found an apparent cultural shift: 53% of Americans supported same-sex marriage, up from 40% in 2007. Some gay rights activists have expressed concern a national legal strategy aimed at the Supreme Court could prove too risky, and end up slowing momentum toward widespread public acceptance of their relationships. A state-by-state approach pursued by some groups had proven gradually successful, and some supporters of marriage equality fear trying to move too far too fast could create legal setbacks, especially when polls continue to show a sizable number of Americans opposed to the idea. -- Because of the terseness of that decision, state and federal courts today offer differing opinions on whether Baker is "irrelevant," and has any force today when deciding the constitutional equal protection questions. Minnesota in August 2013 legalized same-sex marriage, the 13th state to do so. Same-sex marriage debate * Rachael Beierle, left, and Boise City Council President Maryanne Jordan, center, laugh at a joke in Amber Beierle's wedding vows at City Hall in Boise, Idaho, on Wednesday, October 15. With Mayor Dave Bieter out of town, Jordan officiated the wedding as acting mayor. Ada County clerks began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples Wednesday morning. Rachael Beierle, left, and Boise City Council President Maryanne Jordan, center, laugh at a joke in Amber Beierle's wedding vows at City Hall in Boise, Idaho, on Wednesday, October 15. With Mayor Dave Bieter out of town, Jordan officiated the wedding as acting mayor. Ada County clerks began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples Wednesday morning. Spreading in the 'red' states Same-sex marriage is spreading quickly in the U.S., even reaching several "red" states. Activists have also launched a new push in the Deep South. * As the U.S. Supreme Court begins its new term this week, pro-life advocates hold a prayer vigil on the plaza of the high court in Washington, Saturday, Oct. 4, 2014. The group, Bound 4 Life, has come to the court for ten years to make a silent appeal against abortion. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) As the U.S. Supreme Court begins its new term this week, pro-life advocates hold a prayer vigil on the plaza of the high court in Washington, Saturday, Oct. 4, 2014. The group, Bound 4 Life, has come to the court for ten years to make a silent appeal against abortion. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) -- Jodie Vandermark-Martinez slides a ring on her partner Jessice during their wedding ceremony in Iowa. Same Sex Marriage Fast Facts Here's a look at what you need to know about same-sex marriage in the U.S. and worldwide. * A same-sex couple celebrated a federal court's ruling in San Francisco, California in February 2012. A same-sex couple celebrated a federal court's ruling in San Francisco, California in February 2012. Same-sex marriage in the U.S. Here's a look at same-sex marriage in the United States, by the numbers. * Map: Legal, or illegal? Which states allow same-sex marriage, and which states don't? * April Dawn Breeden, left, and her long-time partner Crystal Peairs, right, are married by Rev. Katie Hotze-Wilton at City Hall in St. Louis on Wednesday, November 5. April Dawn Breeden, left, and her long-time partner Crystal Peairs, right, are married by Rev. Katie Hotze-Wilton at City Hall in St. Louis on Wednesday, November 5. -- Sir Elton John Elton John: Jesus would back same-sex marriage In the same-sex marriage debate, Elton John believes he knows where Jesus would've stood. * Melanie Servetas (left) was able to return to America with her wife, Claudia Amaral, after DOMA was struck down. Melanie Servetas (left) was able to return to America with her wife, Claudia Amaral, after DOMA was struck down. -- Love wins in gay couple's 40-year immigration fight Anthony Sullivan was a young Australian with Robert Redford looks. Richard Adams emigrated from the Philippines as a child and became an American citizen. * nr intv burke presbyterians same sex marriage_00001524.jpg nr intv burke presbyterians same sex marriage_00001524.jpg Presbyterians vote to allow same-sex marriage The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted to allow pastors to marry same-sex couples in states where it is legal. I do not know if Idaho law has a discreet entity called a “religious corporation” in its statutes, or, if it does, what that means. I do know that the City of Coeur d’Alene called these two ministers. Again, according to Fox News Radio, the city attorney claims that even ordained ministers whose church teachings do not allow gay marriage will be required to perform gay marriages. I think it’s telling that two days after the Ninth Circuit issued an order allowing same-sex marriages, in Idaho, Pastors David and Evelyn Knapp received a phone call from the city advising them they had to perform gay marriages. David and Evelyn Knapp are ministers who were ordained by a legitimate denomination. -- From The Daily Signal: For years, those in favor of same-sex marriage have argued that all Americans should be free to live as they choose. And yet in countless cases, the government has coerced those who simply wish to be free to live in accordance with their belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. Ministers face a 180-day jail term and $1,000 fine for each day they decline to celebrate the same-sex wedding. -- But as a result of the courts redefining marriage and a city ordinance that creates special privileges based on sexual orientation and gender identity, the Knapps are facing government coercion. Filed Under: America, Christian Bashers, Christian Persecution, clergy, Culture, Destruction of the Family, First Amendment, Following Christ, Freedom of Conscience, Holy Matrimony, Marriage, Marriage Protection Amendment, Religious Freedom, Same Sex Marriage, Uncategorized Tagged With: christian bashers, Christian persecution, gay marriage 69 Comments « The Synod, One More Time -- @ FW Ken Gays have attained an ontological status equal to blacks, which is profoundly wrong. Moreover, they have milked the victim status fast beings reality. Hence, their adverts to food, shelter, etc. Is not at stake. Wrong as it is, same-sex marriage, unimaginable 20 years ago, had become a basic human right. To refuse to bake them a wedding cake is tantamount to killing them. Yes, I have read that claim. # cary_w Are you actually saying that equal rights laws shouldn’t apply to everyone? If they don’t apply to everyone, then they aren’t really equal rights laws, are they? -- This is crap in itself. The point is not whether people in a lovely wooded mountain area are invited to have a pleasant vacation – and pay for the privilege – around the time of their wedding, the point is whether the wedding is conducted as a religious ceremony by appointed ministers of an acknowledged denomination. IT IS. Everything else is pure lawyerly rubbish and bullying. # FW Ken I don’t know the area, but harming your tourism business over same-sex marriage seems odd. That assumes the wedding chapel is a major contributor to the local economy, which the numbers suggest it is. * Dave Why don’t they just do the thing where they post a sign saying “all proceeds from gay marriages performed here will be matched and donated to NARTH” (or some other organization that is anathema to gay activists)? That would probably take care of the problem and the troublemakers would leave on their own. -- Here’s a federalist link that does work. The state of California is now requiring that all insurance plans, including those of churches, include coverage for surgical abortion. http://thefederalist.com/2014/10/22/california-orders-churches-to-fund-abortions-or-else/ Here’s the link on same-sex marriage: http://thefederalist.com/2014/10/20/gay-marriage-no-one-expects-the-secular-inquisition/ + Lark62 A- Former UP Law dean Pacifico Agabin recently emphasized that prohibiting same-sex marriage violates equal protection and the right to privacy. Agabin reacted to a lecture by retired justice Jose Vitug to senior judges, where Vitug opined that the Philippines is unlikely to follow the global trend recognizing same-sex marriages, but that there might be a need to recognize property relations among same-sex couples. But Agabin is right, and even a seemingly reasonable start with economic relationships is outmoded and no longer a valid framework for discussion. The synod of Catholic bishops’ draft statement (since rephrased) recently made global headlines by proposing that homosexuals have “gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community,” and that the Church must be “accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine,” offer “a place of fellowship” and respect how same-sex unions are “a valuable support in the life of these persons.” This was nothing short of an “earthquake” and a “stunning change.” Further, we confront the brutal murder of transgender Filipino Jennifer Laude, allegedly by a US Marine. We face another aspect of the same question of human dignity as we reflect whether Jennifer should be called “she” or “he” and whether certain news editors were exploitative in using her voluptuous bikini picture on the front page. -- Agabin is no less than a synod of bishops. In his last major Supreme Court appearance, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio mistakenly addressed him as “Justice,” Justice Marvic Leonen expressed hope that he would do justice to his classes under Agabin, and Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno tried to cite Agabin’s own lectures against him. His unequivocal statement to our judicial leaders is thus no less an earthquake. A mere 10 years ago, I was studying the Massachusetts Goodridge decision in Prof. Elizabeth Pangalangan’s class, the first US state (and sixth global) decision in favor of same-sex marriage. It obliquely pronounced marriage as a set of economic benefits such as tax exemptions. Goodridge stopped short of stating that same-sex marriages must be allowed, accepting “civil unions” or some other recognized partnership that is not marriage so long as homosexuals received the same economic benefits. Human rights philosophers quickly concluded that this is a hollow trick, one that begins from the premise that love has no legal meaning. In 2003, a year before Goodridge, the Lawrence v. Texas decision affirmed that the right to privacy protects homosexual sex. This was not merely privacy behind closed doors but “decisional privacy,” or the right to make fundamental life decisions without government interference. This crucial distinction emphasized the inherent human dignity in the chosen relationship that contextualized the private acts beyond the acts themselves. My professor Laurence Tribe filed a key Lawrence amicus brief and later summarized in the Harvard Law Review: “It’s not the sodomy. It’s the relationship!” (Tribe is the revered constitutional litigator who taught US President Barack Obama and Chief Justice John Roberts and Inquirer publisher Raul Pangalangan, sort of like the Agabin of the United States.) A primacy on publicly recognizing this dignity, not Goodridge’s legal acrobatics, is now the mainstream argument for same-sex marriage. The US Supreme Court nullified the Defense of Marriage Act in 2013, concluding: “The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity. By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others, the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment.” Funny enough, after years of intense legal debate, the most compelling conclusion from Agabin, Tribe and the US Supreme Court is that simple word “dignity.” Law at the highest level is as simple as it is profound. Even funnier, no intellectual, legal argument has gained traction against the simple word. Religious objections are out of bounds. Abstract claims of morality fail against an invocation of a human right. Inability to procreate is irrelevant as infertile heterosexuals are allowed to marry and several US states allow first cousins to marry if the union would be infertile. The latest argument was that same-sex marriages must be prohibited to protect children. Last September, Judge Richard Posner threw this out, as allowing same-sex couples to marry can only avoid stigmatizing and harming the children they adopt. Note how each such argument fails to address dignity. Agabin stopped short of spelling out that the legal acrobatics have fallen away in the modern debate and suggestions to begin with property relationships or “civil unions” intentionally miss the point. The state of the law is simply that if each of us is able to look a LGBT Filipino in the eye and say that he or she is a second-class citizen capable only of second-class human relationships that deserve only second-class legal recognition, then we have an unassailable legal basis to exclude LGBT Filipinos from marriage. If not, then our society is due for an honest conversation on human dignity. -- Between Agabin and Pope Francis, the conversation may well come sooner than later. Oscar Franklin Tan (@oscarfbtan, facebook.com/OscarFranklinTan) published “Marriage Through Another Lens: Weighing the Validity of Same-Sex Marriages By Applying Arguments to Bisexuals and Transsexuals (81 PHIL. L.J. 789 (2006))” and “Articulating the Complete Philippine Right to Privacy, 82(4) PHIL. L.J. 78 (2008)).” Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these chat apps: -- * popeinph * right to privacy * same-sex marriage Related Stories: 5. Top Pro & Con Quotes 6. Comments 7. 36 States with Legal Gay Marriage and 14 States with Same-Sex Marriage Bans 8. Gay Marriage Timeline 9. Gay Marriage in the US Supreme Court, 2013 -- Last updated on: 1/13/2015 8:14:51 AM PST 36 States with Legal Gay Marriage and 14 States with Same-Sex Marriage Bans (dates reflect when laws took effect) -- 36 States Have Legal Same-Sex Marriage gay marriage icons legal 25 by Court Decision -- 14 States Ban Same-Sex Marriage gay marriage icons illegal 13 by Constitutional Amendment and State Law -- In 2013 and 2014, following the US Supreme Court's United States v. Windsor decision, gay marriage bans were overturned by court rulings in several states, but those rulings were put on hold pending appeals to the US Supreme Court. On Oct. 6, 2014, the Supreme Court declined to hear appeals from five of those states, and the decision immediately cleared the way for legal gay marriage in Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Six other states, Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Wyoming, were also potentially affected by the Supreme Court ruling because they were in the jurisdictions of the lower courts that had overturned the gay marriage bans. ARKANSAS – On May 9, 2014, Arkansas' gay marriage ban was ruled unconstitutional by Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza. Arkansas had previously banned gay marriage by both state law and voter-approved constitutional amendment. Some Arkansas counties began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples on May 10, 2014, while other counties refused to issue licenses. Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel requested that the State Supreme Court put a stay on Judge Piazza's ruling, but the request was denied on May 14, 2014. The Supreme Court effectively halted gay marriages from taking place, however, by noting that while Judge Piazza's ruling had struck down both the constitutional amendment and the state law, it had not affected an additional state law prohibiting county clerks from issuing same-sex marriage licenses. 456 licenses had been issued in total. On May 15, 2014, Judge Piazza expanded his ruling to strike down the additional law and any other measures that made gay marriage illegal, but on May 16, 2014 the State Supreme Court suspended that ruling, halting all gay marriages within the state. On Nov. 25, 2014, US District Judge Kristine Baker ruled the state's gay marriage ban unconstitutional, but stayed her own ruling, pending expected appeals. KENTUCKY – On July 1, 2014, US District Judge John G. Heyburn II ruled that Kentucky's constitutional amendment banning gay marriage violates the equal protection clause in the US Constitution. Judge Heyburn stated that the ban serves "no conceivable legitimate purpose," but stayed his own decision, pending the state's appeal. On Nov. 6, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Sixth US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Heyburn's ruling 2-1, thus upholding the state's gay marriage ban. An appeal to either the full bench of the court or directly to the US Supreme Court is expected. MICHIGAN – On Mar. 21, 2014, a federal judge ruled Michigan's gay marriage ban unconstitutional. US District Judge Bernard Friedman wrote that "Today's decision... affirms the enduring principle that regardless of whoever finds favor in the eyes of the most recent majority, the guarantee of equal protection must prevail." Around 300 same-sex couples received marriage licenses before the US 6th Court of Appeals issued a stay on the decision on Mar. 22, 2014, making same-sex marriage illegal again in Michigan, pending the appeal process. On Mar. 28, 2014, US Attorney General Eric Holder stated that the marriages performed prior to the stay being issued would be recognized by the federal government: "These families will be eligible for all relevant federal benefits on the same terms as other same-sex marriages." On Nov. 6, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Sixth US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Friedman's ruling 2-1, thus upholding the state's gay marriage ban. An appeal to either the full bench of the court or directly to the US Supreme Court is expected. -- SOUTH DAKOTA – On Jan. 12, 2015, US District Judge Karen Schreier ruled South Dakota's gay marriage ban unconstitutional, stating that "Plaintiffs have a fundamental right to marry... South Dakota law deprives them of that right solely because they are same-sex couples and without sufficient justification." The ruling was put on hold pending the state's appeal to the 8th US Circuit Court of Appeals. TEXAS – On Feb. 26, 2014, a federal judge ruled Texas' gay marriage ban unconstitutional. Judge Orlando Garcia wrote "Without a rational relation to a legitimate governmental purpose, state-imposed inequality can find no refuges in our U.S. Constitution." He then stayed his own decision pending appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, leaving same-sex marriage illegal in Texas. Timeline of Same-Sex Marriage Bans and Legalizations by Effective Date of Laws Gay marriage 36 states legal 14 states banned -- 1. Associated Press, "Appeals Court Halts Gay Marriages in Alaska," usatoday.com, Oct. 15, 2014 2. Associated Press, "Federal Judge Strikes Down SC Gay Marriage Ban," washingtonpost.com, Nov. 12, 2014 3. Associated Press, "Judge Rules SD Same-Sex Marriage Ban Unconstitutional," nytimes.com, Jan. 12, 2015 4. Associated Press, "Justice Kennedy Blocks Gay Marriage Ruling for Idaho, Nevada," usatoday.com, Oct. 8, 2014 5. Associated Press, "'We're Walking on Clouds': Gay Marriages Begin in Nevada," nbcnews.com, Oct. 9, 2014 6. Saeed Ahmed, "Judge Overturns Alaska's Same-Sex Marriage Ban That Dates to 1998," cnn.com, Oct. 13, 2014 7. Cable News Network (CNN) staff, "Federal Judge Overturns Montana's Ban on Same-Sex marriage," cnn.com, Nov. 19, 2014 8. Curt Anderson, "Federal Judge Rules Florida Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional, but Delays Issuing of Licenses," ap.org, Aug. 21, 2014 9. Curt Anderson, "Judge Won't Lift Fla. Keys Gay Marriage Stay," ap.org, July 21, 2014 10. Curt Anderson, "Ruling Allows Same-Sex Marriages for Florida Keys," ap.org, July 17, 2014 11. Joseph Ax and Edith Honan, "New Jersey Judge Allows Same-Sex Marriage," reuters.com, Sep. 27, 2013 12. David Bailey, "Minnesota Governor Signs Bill Legalizing Gay Marriage," reuters.com, May 14, 2013 13. David Bailey and Kevin Murphy, "Kansas Ban on Same-Sex Marriage Unconstitutional: Judge," reuters.com, Nov. 4, 2014 14. Robert Barnes, "Federal Judge Strikes Down Va. Ban on Gay Marriage," washingtonpost.com, Feb. 14, 2014 15. Steve Barnes and Emily Le Coz, "U.S. Judges Overturn Gay Marriage Bans in Arkansas, Mississippi," reuters.com, Nov. 26, 2014 16. Eve Batey, "Farewell Prop 8: SF City Attorney Vows to Litigate Aggressively to Ensure Marriage Equality for California," www.sfappeal.com, June 26, 2013 17. Barb Berggoetz, "Indiana Won't Recognize Same-Sex Marriages Performed Last Month," indystar.com, July 9, 2014 18. Greg Botelho, "Same-Sex Marriages on Hold in Idaho, Given Go-Ahead in Arkansas," cnn.com, May 15, 2014 19. Greg Botelho and Bill Mears, "Texas Ban on Same-Sex Marriage Struck Down by Federal Judge," cnn.com, Feb. 27, 2014 20. Cable News Network (CNN), "Same-Sex Marriage in the United States," cnn.com, Oct. 14, 2014 21. Cindy Carcomo, "New Mexico Becomes Latest State to Legalize Gay Marriage," latimes.com, Dec. 19, 2013 22. Andrew DeMillo, "Arkansas High Court Suspends Gay Marriage Ruling," ap.org, May 16, 2014 23. Andrew DeMillo and Christiana Huynh, "Judge Strikes All Arkansas Bans on Gay Marriage," ap.org, May 15, 2014 24. Doug Denison, "Gay Marriage in Delaware to Become Legal July 1," www.delawareonline.com, May 7, 2013 25. Lyle Denniston, "Same-Sex Marriage May Go Ahead in Kansas," scotusblog.com, Nov. 12, 2014 26. Lyle Denniston, "Sixth Circuit: Now, a Split on Same-Sex Marriage," scotusblog.com, Nov. 6, 2014 27. Erik Eckholm, "Same-Sex Marriage Gains Cheer Gay Rights Advocates," www.nytimes.com, Nov. 7, 2012 28. Erik Eckholm, "Oklahoma’s Ban on Gay Marriage Is Unconstitutional, Judge Rules," www.nytimes.com, Jan. 14, 2014 29. Zachary Fagenson, "State Judge Strikes Down Florida's Gay Marriage Ban, Stays Ruling," reuters.com, July 25, 2014 30. Zack Ford, "Federal Judge Orders Indiana to Recognize Terminally Ill Woman’s Same-Sex Marriage," thinkprogress.org, Apr. 10, 2014 31. Andrew M. Francis, Hugo M. Mialon, and Handoe Peng, "In Sickness and in Health: Same Sex Marriage Laws and Sexually Transmitted Infections, Appendix: Legal References and Notes," Emory Law and Economics Research Paper No 11-97, www.emory.edu (accessed Aug. 10, 2012) 32. Human Rights Campaign, "Marriage Center," www.hrc.org (accessed Aug. 10, 2012) 33. Lawrence Hurley, "Supreme Court Allows Gay Marriage to Proceed in South Carolina," reuters.com, Nov. 20, 2014 -- 50. Katharine Q. Seelye, "Rhode Island Joins States That Allow Gay Marriage," www.nytimes.com, May 2, 2013 51. Cynthia Sewell, "Otter May Continue Fight to Stop Gay Marriage," idahostatesman.com, Oct. 13, 2014 52. Maya Srikrishnan, "Denver Clerk Joins Boulder in Issuing Same-Sex Marriage Licenses," latimes.com, July 10, 2014 53. Jordan Steffen, "Adams Judge Tosses Colorado Gay Marriage Ban but Stays Ruling," denverpost.com, July 9, 2014 54. Jordan Steffen, "Colorado Supreme Court, Suthers Clear Way for Same-Sex Licenses," denverpost.com, Oct. 7, 2014 55. Jordan Steffen and John Ingold, "Colorado Supreme Court Puts Halt to Boulder Gay Marriage Licenses," denverpost.com, July 30, 2014 56. Jason Stein and Patrick Marley, "Court Rules against Wisconsin's, Indiana's Gay Marriage Bans," Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal-Sentinel, Sep. 4, 2014 57. Letitia Stein, "Florida Same-Sex Marriage Ban Declared Unconstitutional in Fourth Ruling," reuters.com, Aug. 5, 2014 58. Tribune Wire Reports, "Florida Becomes 36th State to Legalize Gay Marriage," chicagotribune.com, Jan. 6, 2015 59. USA Today, "Gay Marriage in Va. May Begin Next Week," usatoday.com, Aug. 13, 2014 60. Elizabeth Weise, "Federal Judge Allows Gay Marriages to Continue in Utah," usatoday.com, Dec. 23, 2013 61. Pete Williams, "Judge Strikes down Wyoming Gay Marriage Ban," nbcnews.com, Oct. 17, 2014 62. Pete Williams and Tracy Connor, "Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down Utah's Same-Sex Marriage Ban," nbcnews.com, June 25, 2014 63. Reid Wilson, et al., "States Issue First Marriage Licenses after Supreme Court Declines Appeals," washingtonpost.com, Oct. 9, 2014 64. Michael Winter, "Utah to Appeal Gay Marriage Case to Supreme Court," usatoday.com, July 9, 2014 65. Richard Wolf, "Alaska, Arizona Become Newest Same-Sex Marriage States," usatoday.com, Oct. 17, 2014 66. Richard Wolf, "Appeals Panel Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban," usatoday.com, July 28, 2014 67. Richard Wolf, "Supreme Court Blocks Same-Sex Marriages in Virginia," usatoday.com, Aug. 20, 2014 68. Richard Wolf, "Supreme Court Puts Utah Same-Sex Marriage on Hold," usatoday.com, Jan. 6, 2014 Rights Same-Sex Marriage Is Now Legal For A Majority Of The U.S. 12:27 PMOct 6 By Nate Silver and Allison McCann silver-datalab-gaymarriage-map Although the trend toward greater acceptance of same-sex marriage has been evident for some time both in jurisprudence and public opinion, the speed with which it has become the law of the land is striking. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Monday to decline hearing a series of appeals cases on same-sex marriage will have the effect of immediately legalizing gay marriage in Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. When combined with the 19 states (and the District of Columbia) that had previously legalized same-sex marriage, these states have a collective population of roughly 165 million, according to 2013 census figures. That means for the first time, same-sex marriage is legal for the majority of the U.S. population. The 26 states where the practice is not legal have a total population of about 151 million. The Supreme Court’s decision may also lead to the legalization of same-sex marriage in Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia and Wyoming. Those states have an additional 25 million people combined. If they follow suit, 30 states and the District, totaling about 60 percent of the U.S. population, would allow same-sex marriage. Two years ago at this time, same-sex marriage was legal only in Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont and the District, which together have about 11 percent of the U.S. population. Comments Add Comment -- silvermccann-datalab-gay-marriage The Expansion Of Same-Sex Marriage Over Time 12:06 PMOct 7 Filed under Gay Marriage, Majorities, Marriage, Rights, Same-Sex Marriage, Supreme Court Back to datalab stream Previous Post * Same-sex marriage rights are sweeping the US. Here's where each state stands. Updated by German Lopez on January 23, 2015, 6:40 p.m. ET @germanrlopez -- By signing up, you agree to our terms. same-sex marriage US map same-sex marriage US map Update: On January 23, a federal judge struck down Alabama's same-sex marriage ban. It's unclear at this point whether gay and lesbian couples can marry immediately. Since 2013, when the Supreme Court struck down the federal ban on same-sex marriage, lower courts have followed with their own decisions effectively ending same-sex marriage bans in several states. As the nation waits for a looming Supreme Court decision on marriage equality, lower courts' rulings have continued coming in. As the decisions pile up, it can get a little difficult to track which same-sex marriage bans are legally valid and which have been overturned. This simple list tracks where each state stands. States where same-sex couples can or will soon be able to marry • Florida: A federal judge on August 21 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. The Supreme Court refused to stay the decision, allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry in the state starting on January 6. A state judge allowed marriages to begin one day earlier — on January 5 — in Miami-Dade County. • South Carolina: The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on July 28 struck down Virginia's same-sex marriage ban. Since the Fourth Circuit Court presides over South Carolina, the decision should take effect there now that the Supreme Court on October 6 rejected an appeal on the circuit court's ruling. A federal judge on November 12 affirmed the Fourth Circuit Court's ruling, allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry on November 20 after the Supreme Court and Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied stays on the decision. • Montana: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on October 7 struck down Idaho and Nevada's same-sex marriage bans. Since the Ninth Circuit Court presides over Montana, the decision should take effect there. A federal judge on November 19 lifted the state's same-sex marriage ban, allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry immediately. • Kansas: The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on June 25 struck down Utah's same-sex marriage ban. Since the 10th Circuit Court presides over Kansas, the decision takes effect there now that the Supreme Court on October 6 rejected an appeal on the circuit court's ruling. A federal court on November 4 reinforced the circuit court's ruling, and the Supreme Court on November 12 allowed same-sex marriages to move forward. • Missouri: A federal judge on November 7 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. But the state's ban remains in place until the case works through the legal appeals process, although a state judge on November 6 allowed same-sex marriages to begin in St. Louis County. • Wyoming: The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on June 25 struck down Utah's same-sex marriage ban. Since the 10th Circuit Court presides over Wyoming, the decision took effect there after the Supreme Court on October 6 rejected an appeal on the circuit court's ruling. A federal judge on October 17 reinforced the circuit court's ruling. State officials, after announcing they won't appeal the decision, allowed same-sex couples to wed starting on October 21. • Alaska: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on October 7 struck down Idaho and Nevada's same-sex marriage bans. Since the Ninth Circuit Court presides over Alaska, the decision took effect there. With a federal court's decision on October 12, same-sex marriages were briefly allowed to begin. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on October 15 placed the weddings on hold until October 17 to give an appeal time to go in front of the US Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court on October 17 denied the appeal, allowing same-sex couples to marry. • Arizona: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on October 7 struck down Idaho and Nevada's same-sex marriage bans. Since the Ninth Circuit Court presides over Arizona, the decision took effect there. A federal judge on October 17 reinforced the Ninth Circuit Court's decision, allowing same-sex couples to wed immediately in the state. • Idaho: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on October 7 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban, but the US Supreme Court initially put the ruling on hold. The Supreme Court on October 10 lifted its stay, and the Ninth Circuit Court on October 13 said same-sex couples can marry in Idaho starting on October 15. • North Carolina: The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on July 28 struck down Virginia's same-sex marriage ban. Since the Fourth Circuit Court presides over North Carolina, the decision took effect there after the Supreme Court on October 6 rejected an appeal on the circuit court's ruling. With a federal court's decision on October 10, same-sex marriages were allowed to begin. • Nevada: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on October 7 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. After state officials announced they won't appeal the case further, courts cleared same-sex marriages to begin in Nevada. • West Virginia: The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on July 28 struck down Virginia's same-sex marriage ban. Since the Fourth Circuit Court presides over West Virginia, the decision took effect there after the Supreme Court on October 6 rejected an appeal on the circuit court's ruling. On October 9, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and Governor Earl Ray Tomblin announced they will not fight a challenge to the state's same-sex marriage ban, allowing same-sex couples to marry no later than October 14. • Colorado: The Colorado Supreme Court on October 7 cleared the way for same-sex marriages in the state, after the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on June 25 struck down Utah's same-sex marriage ban — in a ruling that spans the entire 10th circuit, including Colorado — and the Supreme Court on October 6 rejected an appeal on the 10th circuit ruling. • Indiana: The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on September 4 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. When the Supreme Court rejected an appeal, same-sex marriage became effectively legal. • Oklahoma: The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on July 18 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. When the Supreme Court rejected an appeal, same-sex marriage became effectively legal. • Utah: The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on June 25 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. When the Supreme Court rejected an appeal, same-sex marriage became effectively legal. • Virginia: The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on July 28 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. When the Supreme Court rejected an appeal, same-sex marriage became effectively legal. • Wisconsin: The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, following a lower court's decision, on September 4 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. When the Supreme Court rejected an appeal, same-sex marriage became effectively legal. Also: -- States where courts overturned bans, but rulings are under appeal • Alabama: A federal judge on January 23 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. It's unclear at this point whether gay and lesbian couples can marry immediately. • South Dakota: A federal judge on January 12 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. But the decision was put on hold as the case works through legal appeals processes. • Mississippi: A federal judge on November 25 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. But the decision was put on hold as the case works through legal appeals processes. • Arkansas: An Arkansas judge on May 10 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. A federal judge on November 25 also struck down the state's marriage ban. But the state's ban remains in place until the cases work through legal appeals processes. • Louisiana: A federal judge on September 3 upheld the state's same-sex marriage ban — the first time a federal court ruled against same-sex marriage rights since the Supreme Court's decision. But a state judge on September 22 struck down Louisiana's ban. • Texas: A federal judge on February 26 struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. But the state's ban remains in place until the case works through the legal appeals process. States where same-sex marriage bans are in effect but are being challenged in court • Kentucky: The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on November 6 upheld the state's same-sex marriage ban. The decision is being appealed to the Supreme Court. • Ohio: The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on November 6 upheld the state's same-sex marriage ban. The decision is being appealed to the Supreme Court. • Michigan: The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on November 6 upheld the state's same-sex marriage ban. The decision is being appealed to the Supreme Court. • Tennessee: The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on November 6 upheld the state's same-sex marriage ban. The decision is being appealed to the Supreme Court. Also: #insidejbs » Feed insidejbs » Comments Feed insidejbs » Stop Legalizing Same Sex Marriage! Comments Feed Some Climate Alarmists Refuse to Concede Isn’t It Puzzling? alternate alternate insidejbs WordPress.com insidejbs -- Some Climate Alarmists Refuse to Concede → Stop Legalizing Same Sex Marriage! Posted: October 22, 2014 | Author: insidejbs | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Congress, constitution, Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, John McManus, judicial activists, marriage, Supreme Court, The John Birch Society, Thomas Jefferson, traditional marriage |4 Comments Stop Legalizing Same Sex Marriage! by JBS President John F. McManus There are, of course, many who insist that conferring legitimacy on same-sex marriage is perfectly proper, even overdue. Permit this writer to label the idea absurd, even an attack on civilization itself. “Supporters of traditional marriage rallied Tuesday in downtown San Diego outside the Federal Courthouse one day after those in favor of same sex marriage rallied in the same spot.” (Fox5 San Diego) If marriage between two men or two women is legal, even fostered by some in government, then the question ought to arise about how such a departure from previous norms became accepted. The answer is that there has been a turning away from traditional moors by the people, and the emergence of activist judges, even within the highest court in the land, who claim power to set their own rules for the conduct of fellow Americans, or who wink at the discarding of previous norms by their judicial partners. -- _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4 Comments on “Stop Legalizing Same Sex Marriage!” 1. Douglas A. Logan says: October 22, 2014 at 4:21 pm Amen to John McManus’s article on the legalizing of Same Sex Marriage. Same Sex Marriage makes about much sense as “Dry Water”. Thank you John McManus for such a good and informative article. Come on AMERICA, inform everyone you know and more importantly write and call your U S Representatives and Senators and express your disregard. LikeLike Reply -- 2. rockinraleigh2013 says: October 23, 2014 at 1:58 pm We need to get out and vote to take back the Senate. If we can do that then perhaps Congress will at last be able to intervene in the marriage case and prevent these treasonous socialist lackey judges of Otraitor to usurp the meaning any further and allow the states their right to allow the voters to decide. If that would be the case, state after state would ban same sex marriage and the gags would be literally dead in the water. LikeLike Reply Boies also questioned Blankenhorn's appearance as an "expert witness." (Blankenhorn earned a masters degree in England, where he studied the history of labor unions.) Under persistent questioning by Boies, Blankenhorn was forced to acknowledge that legalizing same sex marriage would most likely "improve the well being of gay and lesbian households and their children." Blankenhorn also confirmed an earlier statement in a 2007 book that the U.S. would be "more American on the day we permit same-sex marriage than we we were on the day before." A perfect witness for Prop. 8 Mr. Blankenhorn was not. And his ambivalence on the stand makes his conversion to same sex supporter less than surprising. -- + Plaintiffs' Complaint [pdf] * More From the California Report + Complete Coverage: Same-Sex Marriage & Prop 8 * On the Radio + Prop 8. Trial: Day One NEWS • BLOGS • SUBSCRIBE • DONATE Same-Sex Marriage Case(s) Heading to U.S. Supreme Court? Posted by Joan Desmond on Thursday Nov 6th, 2014 at 8:45 PM Article main image On Nov.6, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, as expected, upheld state laws that effectively barred same-sex marriage in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee, reported The New York Times. Reacting to the news, constitutional experts predicted that the new ruling, which breaks with previous circuit court decisions on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage, will likely prompt the U.S. Supreme Court to hear one or more cases dealing with the issue by the next term, with a ruling likely by June. Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, the USCCB's point man on this issue, praised the decision -- As Fox News noted, the justices have yet to issue a definitive ruling on this issue The high court on Oct. 6 unexpectedly turned away appeals from five states seeking to prohibit gay and lesbian unions. The court's order effectively made gay marriage legal in 30 states. The San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals the next day overturned same-sex marriage bans in Idaho and Nevada, the fourth federal appeals court to rule against state bans. A total of 32 states, along with the District of Columbia, now permit same-sex couples to legally marry Over the past 10 years as a member of the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits) in good standing I’ve met many celibate gay or straight Roman Catholic seminarians, priests, brothers and nuns. I’ve worked alongside many different laypeople in cities like Rio De Janeiro, New York City, Cochabamba, New Orleans, Barcelona, San Jose, Saint Louis, Syracuse, Rome and Boston. Today I am no longer a Jesuit. I left the order over the firing of Colleen Simon, a lesbian who was fired from her position as director of outreach at the Jesuit-run parish in Kansas City, MO. I left an upper middle class lifestyle, where many gay and straight men do good work with the poor. I could not be an openly gay Jesuit priest, and never (ever) would I be allowed to bless the same-sex relationship of a gay or lesbian couple. To me, the Church remains sadly out of touch with reality, complacent not prophetic, welcoming but not radically honest or radically hospitable. I question how gay priests can serve authentically, with integrity, and not marry gay men or lesbian women; is this not hypocritical: that, while the Church sanctifies, blesses and sacramentalizes a gay or straight man’s ordination to the priesthood, the Church will not sanctify, bless or sacramentalize same-sex marriages. The media does not seem interested in this. This proves to me that the media is not interested in reporting that the institutional Church does not see humanity or human sexuality as intimately connected to God, as much as the Psalmist or the author of the Song of Songs or Saint Paul or Jesus himself might. And as the recent Synod reminds me the Church still distorts human sexuality, all the while good and holy gay and straight celibate priests serve Her whether they are closeted, confused, internally homophobic or marginalized because of their status as openly gay. To me it was a major let down to see Pope Francis let prelates like the bombastic Cardinal Timothy Dolan walk back on a language of inclusion of lesbian women and gay men, whereas even stating that LGBTQ men and women are nice and have talents proved too of-this-world for the Church’s all-male hierarchy. Today, Fr. Martin’s comment about revolution sounds more and more loquacious. Did Judge Feldman write the last anti-gay marriage ruling in US history? October 10, 2014 Robert Mann Louisiana Politicsgay marriage, Louisiana, Martin Feldman, Plessy v Ferguson, same-sex marriage, U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, U.S. Supreme Court U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman By Robert Mann No one knows for sure if the 5^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will affirm U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman’s September decision that upheld Louisiana’s same-sex marriage ban. What we do know is that if any federal appeals court in the nation rules against same-sex marriage, it is likely to be a panel of ultra-conservative judges who make up the majority of the 5^th. Of course, it all depends on which individuals sit on that three-judge panel, or if all the court’s judges convene to consider the matter. However the decision unfolds, the eyes of the nation’s constitutional scholars are now on the New Orleans-based court. If it reaffirms Louisiana’s constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage, it would likely be the case that finally prompts a full Supreme Court hearing of the question. If most legal scholars are to be trusted, it is apparent that a majority of the court would rule in favor of nationwide marriage equality, even in Louisiana. On Monday, justices tacitly affirmed several appeals court rulings that declared unconstitutional five state laws — in Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin — that prohibit same-sex marriage. The following day, another federal appeals court found Idaho’s and Nevada’s same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional, adding at least two more states to the marriage equality list. In all, as many as 32 states — perhaps more — will soon allow same-sex couples to marry. That’s the good news. The bad news, of course, is that a Louisianian might be the last federal district judge in American history to rule against same-sex marriage. And a Louisiana-based federal appeals court could issue the final court ruling in our history that denies basic human rights to gays and lesbians. In other words, Louisiana might again offer up a landmark case in a human rights issue before the Supreme Court. If so, we will be, as we often are, on the wrong side of history. #A WordPress Site » Feed A WordPress Site » Comments Feed A WordPress Site » Why American Muslims Should Support Same Sex Marriage Comments Feed [twitter1.png] -- * Information for Prospective JSD Applicants Why American Muslims Should Support Same Sex Marriage Posted on January 10, 2012 by muslimlawprof Before you shoot me, fellow American Muslims, let’s make one thing clear. No matter how the same sex debate turns out, nobody is going to be requiring you to deem same sex marriages as Islamically legitimate. Within the broad spectrum of religious discourse, some may urge you to do that (Irshad Manji), some may view such a notion as ridiculous, abhorrent or both (the vast majority of traditionalist clerics, as any liberal Muslim would concede), but I will not address any of that here. I am not a cleric, I make no religious argument. Instead, I maintain that you can be a traditionalist Muslim and support same sex marriage as being legal in America, even if Islamically unacceptable. In fact, I think you should do it. How is it possible, if one is a traditionalist unwilling to recognize a homosexual relationship as licit or legitimate? Well, traditionalists do something like this already. They do a great deal of it, specifically in the area of marriage. The state explicitly recognizes particular forms of marital union that the shari’a, as understood traditionally, unequivocally condemns. Traditionalist approaches to Islam have always deemed the marriage of a Muslim woman to a non-Muslim man to be invalid. The matter is laid out no less clearly in the manuals of the classical jurists than the condemnation of homosexuality is. The marriage of the Muslim woman to the non-Muslim man is not a marriage and as such, the sex between them is illicit, a form of zina, and criminal, at least as criminal as homosexual acts would be in the classical manuals. -- them. For others, they might be ethical obligation by way of accommodation, followed just like a believer follows the rules of a contract, an obligation to pay their iphone bill every month. You do it as an ethical matter, not because you like it, not because you’ll be sued if you don’t (then it would not be an ethical obligation, purely a legal one), but because you like the service, you agreed to this and you are a Muslim, and the Qur’an requires the believers to uphold their contracts. But either way, you live up to the deal as ethical obligation, as a deal. So as Muslims what should we be afraid of? Not that the state is going to allow marriages that are unIslamic, we’ve signed on to that and it is an acceptable piece of the aman we’ve made. No, it’s the breaking of the aman we should fear, effectively a ripping up of the social contract. How does that happen? If the rules change and we are no longer free to practice our religion. Now one group of people would argue that happens with the rise of same sex marriage. Because once one allows same sex marriage, then it spreads, and then every religious institution has to recognize it, and if they don’t, then I don’t know, maybe the police come? They stand in the back with their radio speakers and their guns and drag the Imam off in handcuffs for refusing to marry a gay couple under the Qur’an and the tradition of the Apostle? Or something? As you can tell, I cannot imagine such a thing happening. But if it did, it would be a ripping up of the social contract, the one ensured by the constitution, and make a mockery of free exercise of religion. Few things are more violative of religious freedom to my mind than to compel a religious institution to perform a wedding it did not believe was valid under its religious tradition. Again, I don’t worry about this. If the US doesn’t do it for divorced Catholics now, it isn’t going to do it for same sex marriages. So what am I afraid of, how do I see the contract ripping up? By the folks currently threatening to rip it up, the ones who talk of shari’a as if it was a contagion, by the ones who want to deny our right to build our own houses of worship, by the ones threatening to pass laws that say that two people who meet to practice shari’a (that’s prayer; prayer rules are part of shari’a) are engaged in an act of terrorism, by presidential contenders who won’t hire us (Herman Cain), or who equate us with Nazis (Newt Gingrich), and by supposedly small government conservatives who are focused in getting the government into our lives on the theory that we are not a religion but a cult (which so far as I can tell means to them a religion that they do not particularly like). They’re still a fringe, but they’re real people, they exist while the folks who supposedly will force mosques to hold same sex marriage ceremonies do not. I think we’ll overcome this as I said above, I think we’ll win this war, not because I believe in Islam (I do, let me be clear, I do, but believing in Islam doesn’t mean it has to be tolerated here, and now, it’s been extinguished in limited places at limited times before) but because I beli eve in America and its ideals and think history is on our side. But those who threaten us are real, and present, and a danger, and they are promising to rip up our social contract if they ever get a chance. -- And not a one of them is gay. Because it isn’t only our social contract they’re looking to rip up, not only our freedoms they seek to infringe, not only us to whom they’d seek to deny equality. So I say support same sex marriage and uphold the contract. Uphold it because you believe in it, or uphold it because you’ve signed on to it and it is your Islamic, ethical obligation to do so even if it recognizes behavior you find sinful and illicit. But either way, uphold it. Because there, and only there, will we ever find our place in this country. HAH -- Posted in Shari'a Blogs | « Random Thoughts on Slavery and the Shari’a Revisiting Same Sex Marriage as a Muslim Legal Realist » Leave a comment Cancel reply -- * muslimlawprof on Violence Works. Charlie Ebdo and Insults to Islam * George Formby on Violence Works. Charlie Ebdo and Insults to Islam * tm on Islamic Rationalism and Same Sex Marriage Permissibility * Feisal al-Istrabadi on SOL’s threatened “No confidence” vote in the President of the Republic is Facially Absurd * muslimlawprof on SOL’s threatened “No confidence” vote in the President of the Republic is Facially Absurd * [5-5-14_stats_blue.png] * [5-5-14_specialfeatures_blue.png] + Same-sex marriage and the 14th Amendment + Fair Housing Act + Contraceptive mandate symposium -- Bio & Post Archive » Analysis: Paths to same-sex marriage review (UPDATED) Posted Fri, November 7th, 2014 8:29 am by Lyle Denniston -- ————– Depending upon how fast lawyers choose to move, the issue of same-sex marriage could be back before the Supreme Court in a matter of days. So far, only one option has been closed off. The remaining options have some, perhaps considerable, chances of success. The decision Thursday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, upholding bans on same-sex marriage in four states, has clearly increased the prospect that the Justices will now take on one or more appeals — perhaps even in time for decision in the current Term. Already, lawyers representing some of the same-sex couples involved have promised a swift appeal to the Supreme Court. A direct challenge to the Sixth Circuit’s ruling is one of a handful of potential ways to try to persuade the Court to step in now. When the Court on October 6 turned down seven petitions from five states, there was then no split in final decisions among federal courts of appeals in the most recent round of same-sex marriage lawsuits; all had struck down state bans. But the actual date of those denials is now decisive in taking away one option to appeal to the Court. Under the Court’s rules, a lawyer in any one of those cases could have asked the Justices to reconsider the denial. That is a tactic that almost never works, but there is an important modern precedent for doing so: after the Supreme Court had turned down a major case on the rights of war-on-terrorism detainees at Guantanamo Bay in 2007, it changed its mind, accepted review, and went on to issue a major constitutional ruling in 2008. Before the Sixth Circuit’s ruling on same-sex marriage, such a rehearing plea probably would have been futile. The option is no longer available: the Court’s Rule 44 says that a petition for rehearing of the denial of a petition must be filed within twenty-five days after the denial order was issued. And the rule specifies that the time “will not be extended.” So, for the seven petitions, that cutoff date has come and gone. What other options remain? -- Option 1: File one or more petitions for review, focusing on the Sixth Circuit’s ruling. While the Court’s rules allow ninety days before such a petition must be filed, no one expects any lawyer interested in prompt review to take that much time. Petitions could be filed very quickly because the lawyers involved are fully familiar with the issues, and need not write an exhaustive petition at this stage. It basically would be a matter of rearranging arguments already advanced in lower courts and then getting the documents printed — tasks that can be done very rapidly. Lawyers handling the several cases will be planning jointly, but that, too, need not take much time. Option 2: File a petition for review of a ruling by a different federal appeals court that has not yet been appealed to the Supreme Court and for which the ninety-day filing deadline has not yet been reached. There was not much promise of gaining Supreme Court review of such a case when there was no split in the appeals courts; now there is. Cases decided in the Ninth Circuit, for example, would be open to this option, particularly a case from Idaho. That is an option that might well be attracted to officials in a state who want to continue to strongly defend their same-sex marriage bans. Option 3: Ask the Supreme Court to grant review now of a case that is now pending in a federal appeals court, but has not yet been decided there. Such a petition for “certiorari before judgment” is allowed, as long as the case has formally been filed in a federal appeals court. That is already the situation for cases from Louisiana and Texas, in the Fifth Circuit; from Kansas, in the Tenth Circuit, and from Florida, in the Eleventh Circuit. It will soon be true in other courts of appeals, such as a Puerto Rico case in the First Circuit. Among those three options, Option 1 might have the most promise of gaining Supreme Court review because the Sixth Circuit’s decision is the one that broke the pattern, because it involves an array of cases from four states, raising the constitutionality of bans on both new same-sex marriages and the official state recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriages, because it was written by a highly respected court of appeals judge (Jeffrey S. Sutton), because it brought a stirring dissent by another well-regarded jurist (Senior Circuit Judge Martha Craig Daughtrey), and because the opinions swept across all of the issues that have been raised in case after case — even the rather obscure question whether a refusal to recognize an out-of-state same-sex marriage violates the constitutional right to travel, and the emotional question of whether a death certificate for a same-sex spouse who has now died should show that there was a surviving spouse. The time to prepare the papers in pursuing any one of the three options would not vary much between them. -- If any petition gets to the Court within the next few weeks (at the outside), it could be put before the Justices in time for a hearing and decision in the current Term. The seven petitions denied on October 6 were moved along at a much faster pace than normal. Posted in Cases in the Pipeline, Featured, Same-Sex Marriage, Same-Sex Marriage Post-Windsor Recommended Citation: Lyle Denniston, Analysis: Paths to same-sex marriage review (UPDATED), SCOTUSblog (Nov. 7, 2014, 8:29 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/11/analysis-paths-to-same-sex-marriage-review/ Share: -- * Major Pending Petitions + Bourke v. Beshear State ban on same-sex marriage + Obergefell v. Hodges State ban on same-sex marriage + DeBoer v. Snyder State ban on same-sex marriage + Tanco v. Haslam State ban on same-sex marriage * Recent Decisions + Holt v. Hobbs Arkansas ban on half-inch beards for Muslim prisoners violates RLUIPA. 5. Top Pro & Con Quotes 6. Comments 7. 36 States with Legal Gay Marriage and 14 States with Same-Sex Marriage Bans 8. Gay Marriage Timeline 9. Gay Marriage in the US Supreme Court, 2013 -- Last updated on: 1/13/2015 8:14:51 AM PST 36 States with Legal Gay Marriage and 14 States with Same-Sex Marriage Bans (dates reflect when laws took effect) -- 36 States Have Legal Same-Sex Marriage gay marriage icons legal 25 by Court Decision -- 14 States Ban Same-Sex Marriage gay marriage icons illegal 13 by Constitutional Amendment and State Law -- In 2013 and 2014, following the US Supreme Court's United States v. Windsor decision, gay marriage bans were overturned by court rulings in several states, but those rulings were put on hold pending appeals to the US Supreme Court. On Oct. 6, 2014, the Supreme Court declined to hear appeals from five of those states, and the decision immediately cleared the way for legal gay marriage in Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Six other states, Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Wyoming, were also potentially affected by the Supreme Court ruling because they were in the jurisdictions of the lower courts that had overturned the gay marriage bans. ARKANSAS – On May 9, 2014, Arkansas' gay marriage ban was ruled unconstitutional by Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza. Arkansas had previously banned gay marriage by both state law and voter-approved constitutional amendment. Some Arkansas counties began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples on May 10, 2014, while other counties refused to issue licenses. Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel requested that the State Supreme Court put a stay on Judge Piazza's ruling, but the request was denied on May 14, 2014. The Supreme Court effectively halted gay marriages from taking place, however, by noting that while Judge Piazza's ruling had struck down both the constitutional amendment and the state law, it had not affected an additional state law prohibiting county clerks from issuing same-sex marriage licenses. 456 licenses had been issued in total. On May 15, 2014, Judge Piazza expanded his ruling to strike down the additional law and any other measures that made gay marriage illegal, but on May 16, 2014 the State Supreme Court suspended that ruling, halting all gay marriages within the state. On Nov. 25, 2014, US District Judge Kristine Baker ruled the state's gay marriage ban unconstitutional, but stayed her own ruling, pending expected appeals. KENTUCKY – On July 1, 2014, US District Judge John G. Heyburn II ruled that Kentucky's constitutional amendment banning gay marriage violates the equal protection clause in the US Constitution. Judge Heyburn stated that the ban serves "no conceivable legitimate purpose," but stayed his own decision, pending the state's appeal. On Nov. 6, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Sixth US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Heyburn's ruling 2-1, thus upholding the state's gay marriage ban. An appeal to either the full bench of the court or directly to the US Supreme Court is expected. MICHIGAN – On Mar. 21, 2014, a federal judge ruled Michigan's gay marriage ban unconstitutional. US District Judge Bernard Friedman wrote that "Today's decision... affirms the enduring principle that regardless of whoever finds favor in the eyes of the most recent majority, the guarantee of equal protection must prevail." Around 300 same-sex couples received marriage licenses before the US 6th Court of Appeals issued a stay on the decision on Mar. 22, 2014, making same-sex marriage illegal again in Michigan, pending the appeal process. On Mar. 28, 2014, US Attorney General Eric Holder stated that the marriages performed prior to the stay being issued would be recognized by the federal government: "These families will be eligible for all relevant federal benefits on the same terms as other same-sex marriages." On Nov. 6, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Sixth US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Friedman's ruling 2-1, thus upholding the state's gay marriage ban. An appeal to either the full bench of the court or directly to the US Supreme Court is expected. -- SOUTH DAKOTA – On Jan. 12, 2015, US District Judge Karen Schreier ruled South Dakota's gay marriage ban unconstitutional, stating that "Plaintiffs have a fundamental right to marry... South Dakota law deprives them of that right solely because they are same-sex couples and without sufficient justification." The ruling was put on hold pending the state's appeal to the 8th US Circuit Court of Appeals. TEXAS – On Feb. 26, 2014, a federal judge ruled Texas' gay marriage ban unconstitutional. Judge Orlando Garcia wrote "Without a rational relation to a legitimate governmental purpose, state-imposed inequality can find no refuges in our U.S. Constitution." He then stayed his own decision pending appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, leaving same-sex marriage illegal in Texas. Timeline of Same-Sex Marriage Bans and Legalizations by Effective Date of Laws Gay marriage 36 states legal 14 states banned -- 1. Associated Press, "Appeals Court Halts Gay Marriages in Alaska," usatoday.com, Oct. 15, 2014 2. Associated Press, "Federal Judge Strikes Down SC Gay Marriage Ban," washingtonpost.com, Nov. 12, 2014 3. Associated Press, "Judge Rules SD Same-Sex Marriage Ban Unconstitutional," nytimes.com, Jan. 12, 2015 4. Associated Press, "Justice Kennedy Blocks Gay Marriage Ruling for Idaho, Nevada," usatoday.com, Oct. 8, 2014 5. Associated Press, "'We're Walking on Clouds': Gay Marriages Begin in Nevada," nbcnews.com, Oct. 9, 2014 6. Saeed Ahmed, "Judge Overturns Alaska's Same-Sex Marriage Ban That Dates to 1998," cnn.com, Oct. 13, 2014 7. Cable News Network (CNN) staff, "Federal Judge Overturns Montana's Ban on Same-Sex marriage," cnn.com, Nov. 19, 2014 8. Curt Anderson, "Federal Judge Rules Florida Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional, but Delays Issuing of Licenses," ap.org, Aug. 21, 2014 9. Curt Anderson, "Judge Won't Lift Fla. Keys Gay Marriage Stay," ap.org, July 21, 2014 10. Curt Anderson, "Ruling Allows Same-Sex Marriages for Florida Keys," ap.org, July 17, 2014 11. Joseph Ax and Edith Honan, "New Jersey Judge Allows Same-Sex Marriage," reuters.com, Sep. 27, 2013 12. David Bailey, "Minnesota Governor Signs Bill Legalizing Gay Marriage," reuters.com, May 14, 2013 13. David Bailey and Kevin Murphy, "Kansas Ban on Same-Sex Marriage Unconstitutional: Judge," reuters.com, Nov. 4, 2014 14. Robert Barnes, "Federal Judge Strikes Down Va. Ban on Gay Marriage," washingtonpost.com, Feb. 14, 2014 15. Steve Barnes and Emily Le Coz, "U.S. Judges Overturn Gay Marriage Bans in Arkansas, Mississippi," reuters.com, Nov. 26, 2014 16. Eve Batey, "Farewell Prop 8: SF City Attorney Vows to Litigate Aggressively to Ensure Marriage Equality for California," www.sfappeal.com, June 26, 2013 17. Barb Berggoetz, "Indiana Won't Recognize Same-Sex Marriages Performed Last Month," indystar.com, July 9, 2014 18. Greg Botelho, "Same-Sex Marriages on Hold in Idaho, Given Go-Ahead in Arkansas," cnn.com, May 15, 2014 19. Greg Botelho and Bill Mears, "Texas Ban on Same-Sex Marriage Struck Down by Federal Judge," cnn.com, Feb. 27, 2014 20. Cable News Network (CNN), "Same-Sex Marriage in the United States," cnn.com, Oct. 14, 2014 21. Cindy Carcomo, "New Mexico Becomes Latest State to Legalize Gay Marriage," latimes.com, Dec. 19, 2013 22. Andrew DeMillo, "Arkansas High Court Suspends Gay Marriage Ruling," ap.org, May 16, 2014 23. Andrew DeMillo and Christiana Huynh, "Judge Strikes All Arkansas Bans on Gay Marriage," ap.org, May 15, 2014 24. Doug Denison, "Gay Marriage in Delaware to Become Legal July 1," www.delawareonline.com, May 7, 2013 25. Lyle Denniston, "Same-Sex Marriage May Go Ahead in Kansas," scotusblog.com, Nov. 12, 2014 26. Lyle Denniston, "Sixth Circuit: Now, a Split on Same-Sex Marriage," scotusblog.com, Nov. 6, 2014 27. Erik Eckholm, "Same-Sex Marriage Gains Cheer Gay Rights Advocates," www.nytimes.com, Nov. 7, 2012 28. Erik Eckholm, "Oklahoma’s Ban on Gay Marriage Is Unconstitutional, Judge Rules," www.nytimes.com, Jan. 14, 2014 29. Zachary Fagenson, "State Judge Strikes Down Florida's Gay Marriage Ban, Stays Ruling," reuters.com, July 25, 2014 30. Zack Ford, "Federal Judge Orders Indiana to Recognize Terminally Ill Woman’s Same-Sex Marriage," thinkprogress.org, Apr. 10, 2014 31. Andrew M. Francis, Hugo M. Mialon, and Handoe Peng, "In Sickness and in Health: Same Sex Marriage Laws and Sexually Transmitted Infections, Appendix: Legal References and Notes," Emory Law and Economics Research Paper No 11-97, www.emory.edu (accessed Aug. 10, 2012) 32. Human Rights Campaign, "Marriage Center," www.hrc.org (accessed Aug. 10, 2012) 33. Lawrence Hurley, "Supreme Court Allows Gay Marriage to Proceed in South Carolina," reuters.com, Nov. 20, 2014 -- 50. Katharine Q. Seelye, "Rhode Island Joins States That Allow Gay Marriage," www.nytimes.com, May 2, 2013 51. Cynthia Sewell, "Otter May Continue Fight to Stop Gay Marriage," idahostatesman.com, Oct. 13, 2014 52. Maya Srikrishnan, "Denver Clerk Joins Boulder in Issuing Same-Sex Marriage Licenses," latimes.com, July 10, 2014 53. Jordan Steffen, "Adams Judge Tosses Colorado Gay Marriage Ban but Stays Ruling," denverpost.com, July 9, 2014 54. Jordan Steffen, "Colorado Supreme Court, Suthers Clear Way for Same-Sex Licenses," denverpost.com, Oct. 7, 2014 55. Jordan Steffen and John Ingold, "Colorado Supreme Court Puts Halt to Boulder Gay Marriage Licenses," denverpost.com, July 30, 2014 56. Jason Stein and Patrick Marley, "Court Rules against Wisconsin's, Indiana's Gay Marriage Bans," Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal-Sentinel, Sep. 4, 2014 57. Letitia Stein, "Florida Same-Sex Marriage Ban Declared Unconstitutional in Fourth Ruling," reuters.com, Aug. 5, 2014 58. Tribune Wire Reports, "Florida Becomes 36th State to Legalize Gay Marriage," chicagotribune.com, Jan. 6, 2015 59. USA Today, "Gay Marriage in Va. May Begin Next Week," usatoday.com, Aug. 13, 2014 60. Elizabeth Weise, "Federal Judge Allows Gay Marriages to Continue in Utah," usatoday.com, Dec. 23, 2013 61. Pete Williams, "Judge Strikes down Wyoming Gay Marriage Ban," nbcnews.com, Oct. 17, 2014 62. Pete Williams and Tracy Connor, "Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down Utah's Same-Sex Marriage Ban," nbcnews.com, June 25, 2014 63. Reid Wilson, et al., "States Issue First Marriage Licenses after Supreme Court Declines Appeals," washingtonpost.com, Oct. 9, 2014 64. Michael Winter, "Utah to Appeal Gay Marriage Case to Supreme Court," usatoday.com, July 9, 2014 65. Richard Wolf, "Alaska, Arizona Become Newest Same-Sex Marriage States," usatoday.com, Oct. 17, 2014 66. Richard Wolf, "Appeals Panel Strikes Down Virginia Gay Marriage Ban," usatoday.com, July 28, 2014 67. Richard Wolf, "Supreme Court Blocks Same-Sex Marriages in Virginia," usatoday.com, Aug. 20, 2014 68. Richard Wolf, "Supreme Court Puts Utah Same-Sex Marriage on Hold," usatoday.com, Jan. 6, 2014 #LGBTQ Nation RSS Feed LGBTQ Nation Atom Feed REFRESH(900 sec): http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2015/01/federal-judge-strikes-down-alabama-same-sex-marriage-ban/ LGBTQ Nation » Federal judge strikes down Alabama same‑sex marriage ban Comments Feed Nebraska wants lawsuit challenging same-sex marriage ban put on hold Mich. governor hopes to revive legislation prohibiting anti-LGBT discrimination LGBTQ-Friendly Businesses Contact Us • Join our Mailing List -- * [Luther-Strange-192x130.jpg.pagespeed.ce.iuIwyHSHzkyZGH2zBB9Z.jpg] Ala. AG seeks to stay order to block same-sex marriages until Supreme Court rules * [scouts-192x130.jpg.pagespeed.ce.gP9P1C0AO4msWKkqGXhp.jpg] -- * [nebraska-192x130.jpg.pagespeed.ce.Q1uLwkToCCU8bANFD5xI.jpg] Nebraska wants lawsuit challenging same-sex marriage ban put on hold * [Leslie-Rutledge-192x130.jpg.pagespeed.ce.vhiSZzBP_f1A-WDa2XWh.jpg] Arkansas AG asks for new arguments in same-sex marriage case * [Virginia-Flag-192x130.jpg.pagespeed.ce.ems0OHZclQsHafhUD5QF.jpg] -- alabama MONTGOMERY, Ala. — Alabama became the latest state to see its ban on gay marriage fall to a federal court ruling Friday, as the issue of same-sex marriage heads to the U.S. Supreme Court. U.S. District Callie V.S. Granade ruled in favor of two Mobile women who sued to challenge Alabama’s refusal to recognize their 2008 marriage performed in California. The ruling is the latest in a string of wins for advocates of marriage rights. Judges have also struck down bans in several other Southern states, including the Carolinas, Florida, Mississippi and Virginia. The U.S. Supreme Court announced this month that it will take up the issue of whether gay couples have a fundamental right to marry and if states can ban such unions. -- * Attorney General Luther Strange (R-Ala.) Ala. AG seeks to stay order to block same-sex marriages until Supreme Court rules Recommended reading * Attorney General Luther Strange (R-Ala.) Ala. AG seeks to stay order to block same-sex marriages until Supreme Court rules * nebraska Nebraska wants lawsuit challenging same-sex marriage ban put on hold * Attorney General Leslie Rutledge (R-Ark.) Arkansas AG asks for new arguments in same-sex marriage case * two-moms Lifting Florida's gay marriage ban allows lesbian couple to be parents [MexicanFlag.jpg] On March 4, 2010 Mexico City's Legislative Assembly voted 39-20 to uphold the freedom to marry for same-sex couples on December 21, 2009. The law defines marriage as "the free uniting of two people." The bill also legalizes adoption by gay couples. In August 2010, the Mexican Supreme Court ruled that the law honoring the freedom to marry in Mexico City is constitutional and all states must honor same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions. In May 2012, after dealing with a civil code that did not specifically state gender requirements for marriage, the state of Quintana Roo declared that all marriages between same-sex couples would be legal. In December 2012, the Mexican Supreme Court declared that the Oaxaca civil code restricting marriage to different-sex couples is unconstitutional. Because of Mexican law, the ruling currently only applies to the three couples who filed the suit. If the court rules the same way in two additional cases, binding national precedent is set in Mexico, and all other jurisdictions in the country will have the freedom to marry. 799 Is there any point in continuing to debate same-sex marriage? Despite their field’s reputation for interminable controversy, academic philosophers do consider some topics resolved — and a number now think the same-sex marriage debate is one of them. The case in favor of same-sex marriage has been so firmly established, they believe, that further dialogue is at best a waste of time, and at worst an affirmation of bigotry. “The topics seem, to me, settled, and the controversies over them frankly silly,” writes philosopher Justin Weinberg at his widely viewed philosophy blog, Daily Nous. “As far as I can tell, there are zero plausible arguments for opposing homosexual sex and zero plausible arguments for a state offering different kinds of marriage rights to homosexual and heterosexual couples.” -- Weinberg plans to continue teaching same sex-marriage as a controversy in his contemporary-ethics course, but primarily in order to shed light on other issues and to expose the “highly problematic” arguments of those who oppose it. He mulls relegating the topic to a course on “historical moral problems,” where it can be discussed alongside slavery and other topics he considers settled. As a graduate student in philosophy, I’ve heard other tenured philosophers say far less temperate things off the record. Some seem to think that treating same-sex marriage as a controversial subject at all is itself tantamount to legitimating bigotry. They look forward to the blessed day when skepticism of their enlightened views is no longer tolerated in any university classroom. Granted, some Catholic philosophers — Robby George, for instance — are still vocal in their opposition to same-sex marriage. Some other thinkers, like self-described “Gay Moralist” John Corvino, continue to respectfully debate conservative opponents. Nevertheless, the recent political victories of the gay-rights movement seem to have tempted a growing minority to adopt a smug, and sloppy, intellectual intolerance. -- Some philosophical conclusions really are uncontroversial, and for good reason. One could not question the immorality of the Rwandan genocide without showing callousness to the victims of its horrors. To start, though, discussion of same-sex marriage doesn’t so obviously show callousness to homosexuals: Conservatives’ dispute with liberals is over the details of what a “right to marry” means, not whether some people have this right while others do not. Philosophers have been thinking — and, it goes without saying, disagreeing — about marriage since the time of Plato. In Family Politics, Scott Yoner demonstrates that modern philosophers like Locke, Rousseau, Hegel, Mill, and others have developed sophisticated and wildly different accounts of marriage. That is enough to show, at least, that there are many unsettled philosophical questions about the nature of marriage. Conservatives prefer to frame the same-sex marriage debate around questions such as, “What is marriage?,” “What role(s) does marriage play in society?,” and “What relationships should be eligible to count as marriages?” Proponents of same-sex marriage generally decline to give answers to these questions, preferring instead to make their case on the alleged arbitrariness of the “one man, one woman” norm. That argument may be effective, but it cannot settle the debate in the way the triumphalists claim it has been. Public Opinion In Pew Research polling in 2001, Americans opposed same-sex marriage by a 57% to 35% margin. Since then, support for same-sex marriage has steadily grown. Today, a majority of Americans (52%) support same-sex marriage, compared with 40% who oppose it. Attitudes by Generation This is due in part to generational change. Younger generations express higher levels of support for same-sex marriage. However, older generations also have become more supportive of same-sex marriage in recent years. Attitudes by Religious Affiliation Among people who are religiously unaffiliated, a solid majority have supported same-sex marriage since 2001. And among Catholics and white mainline Protestants, roughly six-in-ten now express support for same-sex marriage. Support for same-sex marriage also has grown among black Protestants. Support among white evangelical Protestants remains lower than among other religious groups. -- Attitudes by Political Party Among Democrats, 64% now favor same-sex marriage, as do 58% of independents. Most Republicans continue to oppose same-sex marriage. Attitudes by Political Ideology Support for same-sex marriage now stands at 75% among self-described liberals and 62% among moderates. Far fewer conservatives (29%) support same-sex marriage. Attitudes by Race In 2001, roughly one-third of both whites and blacks expressed support for same-sex marriage. Today, 53% of whites support same-sex marriage, as do 42% of blacks. Attitudes by Gender Support for same-sex marriage has risen among both men and women in recent years. Today, 55% of women and 49% of men support same-sex marriage. Source: Aggregated data from Pew Research Center polls conducted in each year. Question wording can be found here, and information on the Pew Research Center's polling methodology can be found here. -- Jan 6, 2015 Same-Sex Marriage State-by-State Sep 22, 2014