Same sex marriage legalised in the United States

[Samson]

The reason you don't get it is because it is totally dissociated from the issue at hand.

In the US churches get all sorts of privileges...most notably being untaxed no matter how much revenue they generate. They are also pretty much exempt from laws, including this one. There is equal protection under law, so the state (now every state) will issue a license to any couple who wants to get married. But a church, being a church, is allowed to say "we will only allow people of our faith to marry in our building." That's why, as someone else already noted, you won't see anyone marrying a protestant. No one has tried it, but the "church of god's people are all white" could open a lot of legal worm cans.

This is no more an attack on the tax exempt status of churches than it is an attack on their exemption from obeying the law. That is just the usual dog whistling. Any time anything happens that some of the religious fundies take offense to they immediately chant "What's next? Taxing the churches?" because absolutely nothing can create a unified front of outrage among religious leaders faster than a perceived threat to their money.

Thanks, I think this explains it. So it will (probably) not happen, it is just a good way of generating interest in the topic.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I am not certain what you are saying. Is it that the government can't force a church to officiate a marriage, but they can take away their tax free status?

If they rule a church is not a church, they can then force them to officiate a marriage AND tax them at the same time, because they would no longer be exempt. I have absolutely no idea what would be involved in declaring a church to not be a church. I know there have been at least a couple of explorations in that direction regarding Scientology, but nothing has come of it. If the government can't manage to get a church which was originally founded on the principle "hey if we were a church we'd be tax exempt" declared not a church I don't think any churches founded on the principles of a dead messiah are at immanent risk.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Now that California is no longer a western state, who gets to adopt it?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Really? I thought only not-for-profit organizations were tax exempt.

To be deemed "not for profit" you have to go through a lot of paperwork showing "we take in this, it goes towards that" and all that jazz...or be recognized as a church. A church gets the exact same tax exempt status as any non profit, plus an assortment of exemptions to various laws as well...specifically in the "non discrimination" category. There is plenty of eyebrow raising at the assumption that a church is inherently "non profit" but it is never really challenged despite being obviously not true.

 

[warpus]

To be deemed "not for profit" you have to go through a lot of paperwork showing "we take in this, it goes towards that" and all that jazz...or be recognized as a church. A church gets the exact same tax exempt status as any non profit, plus an assortment of exemptions to various laws as well...specifically in the "non discrimination" category. There is plenty of eyebrow raising at the assumption that a church is inherently "non profit" but it is never really challenged despite being obviously not true.

Odd that nobody would take a church that makes money and files as a not-for-profit organization to court. Seems like it'd be easy enough to prove, if it is indeed happening.

 

[Kennigit]

Who gives a crap about love

Theres that sweet check box on tax forms and junk of "filing jointly with spouse" or claiming "spouse"

I look forward to the day of true equality when a homosexual avoids financial regulation laws by putting their business or investments or property something under their spouse's name to weasel their way through

 

[warpus]

The Onion provides their usual witty commentary on today's historic ruling:

Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito Suddenly Realize They Will Be Villains In Oscar-Winning Movie One Day

“I’m going to be portrayed as a closed-minded Neanderthal and the very symbol of backward thinking. And at the end of the movie, when my character realizes he’s on the wrong side of history, the audience will feel emotionally fulfilled because the hero attorney, probably played by George {bleeep}'n Clooney, will have won. Great.”

Another Onion article on the matter

“Yeah, of course gay men and women can get married. Who gives a {bleep}?” said Chief Justice John Roberts, who interrupted attorney Charles Cooper’s opening statement defending Proposition 8, which rescinded same-sex couples’ right to marry in California. “Why are we even seriously discussing this?”

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Odd that nobody would take a church that makes money and files as a not-for-profit organization to court. Seems like it'd be easy enough to prove, if it is indeed happening.

The point is that they don't have to file as a non-profit. They are a church, and thus they are exempt from the entire process.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I thought it was already legal in some states anyway? No? Oh well.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I thought it was already legal in some states anyway? No? Oh well.

It was. In 37 of them I think. This ruling only makes a difference in the BSA.

 

[Arakhor]

37, plus some change from Missouri.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Remember in 1996 when Congress and Bill Clinton passed DOMA?

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.

Later ruled unconstitutional in 2013. (Also with a nail biting 5-4 vote)

Interesting reading.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act


So, did the court overturn a law passed by Congress and the President, and then pass a law stating the opposite 2 years later (today)?
Judicial tyranny yet?

Here's the 2013 DOMA ruling:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf

 

[warpus]

The point is that they don't have to file as a non-profit. They are a church, and thus they are exempt from the entire process.

Oh, I see. Any church? Church of Satan, Scientology temple, the Church of Warpus, etc?

How do you prove you're a bona fide church? Do you need to, or do you just show up and say: "Hey, yo, I'm opening a church, don't tax me and stuff, aight, peace" ?

 

[Manfred Belheim]

It was. In 37 of them I think. This ruling only makes a difference in the BSA.

Oh... so not quite as big a deal as the opening page of the thread makes it seem then. And what's the BSA?

 

[LucyDuke]

Neener neener.

Sorry, the whole thing is so mean-spirited that that's all I've got. This was inevitable and I'm happy about it and have nothing but contempt for everyone pitching a fit about it.

 

[Arakhor]

And what's the BSA?

I'm guessing they're the Backward States of America.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Oh... so not quite as big a deal as the opening page of the thread makes it seem then. And what's the BSA?

Backwards States of America. They will be talking secession shortly.

Oh, I see. Any church? Church of Satan, Scientology temple, the Church of Warpus, etc?

How do you prove you're a bona fide church? Do you need to, or do you just show up and say: "Hey, yo, I'm opening a church, don't tax me and stuff, aight, peace" ?

I honestly don't know, because I've always been afraid to find out for fear I would not be able to resist. If it were really easy though I imagine a lot more people would do it, but L Ron Hubbard did it so it clearly isn't impossible.

 

[Atticus]

That's the US you can be proud of!

 

[Valka D'Ur]

There is equal protection under law, so the state (now every state) will issue a license to any couple who wants to get married. But a church, being a church, is allowed to say "we will only allow people of our faith to marry in our building." That's why, as someone else already noted, you won't see anyone marrying a protestant. No one has tried it, but the "church of god's people are all white" could open a lot of legal worm cans.

Just this morning, someone on CBC.ca asked why gays would want to marry in a church.

Well, there's a really simple answer: Maybe they're religious, and just because some humans who believe in that religion are selective about which neighbors Jesus told them to love, that doesn't mean the gay couple has rejected that religion.

I'm not sure what you mean by "won't see anyone marrying a protestant." Do you mean Catholics specifically? Because protestants do have their own churches and lots of people marry them.

I wouldn't be so sure.

Look what has happened to Massachusetts, which has had legal gay marriage for over 10 years!

That place has ... um... it, well, you see, it has... ah... the thing is they... err...

Yeah, so...

TAKE THAT GAYS

So I take it that Massachusetts is still okay?

 

[Kaitzilla]

Marriage responds to the universal fear that a lonely person might call out only to find no one there.

Awww, that brightens my black heart.