Supreme Court ruling falls short on gay marriage protections

  • Article by: Noah Feldman , Bloomberg View
  • Updated: June 26, 2013 - 6:19 PM

There is reason again to doubt whether we will see a gradual acceptance of same-sex marriage or a redoubled effort by its opponents to keep it from becoming the norm nationally.

  • 6
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 6 of 6
kd5757Jun. 26, 13 1:05 PM

Now that same-sex marriages will be recognized by the Federal government (with its ensuing benefits) there will be more pressure on many states to also legalize gay marriage. What we will most likely see over the next couple of years is many Northern and perhaps Southwestern states following suit. If history guides us, Southern states will eventually be forced to comply as the result of a future SCOTUS ruling. In the meantime, Minnesota will be one of the most welcoming states in the country for same-sex couples. That's the Minnesota that I know and love!

33
10
jd55604Jun. 26, 13 2:09 PM

Marriage is not a right. In most states it is a government subsidy given to diverse couples (opposite sex) whose pairing will most likely result in procreation. I would just prefer that government get out of the marriage business completely and put it back in the hands of religious organizations where it belongs. Your love for somebody shouldn't need an endorsement by government.

8
33
lostinstpaulJun. 26, 13 2:37 PM

it will never be teh norm across america, because gays represent such a small %% of the population. Sad, but true

8
30
guessagainJun. 26, 13 5:09 PM

lostinstpaulJ === "it will never be teh norm across america, because gays represent such a small %% of the population. Sad, but true..." So if you are part of a small minority, you don't deserve equal protection under the law. The fact that you believe that is "sad, but true."

21
4
davehougJun. 26, 13 6:25 PM

The Supreme court validated every claim by gay rights to be entitled to gay marriage. But I am sincerely curious, what part of the logic used and validated could NOT be claimed by the next group??? Multiple spouses, close relatives etc. Or should there be ANY restrictions on marriage recognized by the states (and thus federal benefits).

1
14
hawkeye56379Jun. 26, 1310:06 PM

"what part of the logic used and validated could NOT be claimed by the next group??? Multiple spouses, close relatives etc. "-------- None of it can be used for marrying multiple spouses or close relatives. NO ONE can marry those persons so everyone is being treated equally.

8
1
  • 1 - 6 of 6

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT