[xevenofhearts]

Up until Friday's ruling it was already legal in more states to marry a first cousin than it was for 2 members of the same sex to marry

Interesting, I'd like to know when and how so many states came to the conclusion of legalizing cousin marriages. But, going farther than cousins, what about brothers and sisters, mother and son, daughter and father. Do we find that wrong in our views?

^Answer that, I'd much like to hear.

[roger_smith]

Interesting, I'd like to know when and how so many states came to the conclusion of legalizing cousin marriages. But, going farther than cousins, what about brothers and sisters, mother and son, daughter and father. Do we find that wrong in our views?

^Answer that, I'd much like to hear.

Mother/son Father/daughter brother/sister mother/daughter father/son intimate sexual relationships are taboo in almost all countries

first cousin marriage is legal in the following states according to wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_mar...s_by_state

Alabama[1] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Alaska[2][3] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
California[12][13][14] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Colorado[15][16] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Connecticut[17][18] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
District of Columbia[23] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Florida[24][25] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Georgia[26][27] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Hawaii[28][29] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Maryland[67][68] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Massachusetts[69][70][71] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
New Jersey[96][97] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
New Mexico[98][99] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
New York[100][101] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
North Carolina[102][103] Yes No Unknown Unknown Unknown No Yes Unknown Unknown
Rhode Island[119][120] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
South Carolina[121][122] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Tennessee[127][128] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Vermont[136][137] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Virginia[138][139] Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Wisconsin Yes

the first "yes" field is for whether first cousin marriage is allowed or not.

Before civil war times first cousin marriage was legal in all states. It was legal in Texas until just 2005.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_mar...d_States_2

^^ has a couple paragraphs giving you more look at the history.

[Vertigo]

To be honest, the gay marriage debate has nothing to do with gay rights, and everything to do with legality and how people in a marriage are treated in a court room. The Supreme Court of the United States has literally made a landmark case that will change how many things work in law permanently. I don't think people get how this works quite yet, but it will kick in soon.

To really understand how this is such a landmark case, first you need to understand something about how the court system works. In a court ruling (particularly a high one such as this) there is a fatal flaw in how the laws work that allows for courts to override laws. Because of the fact that a court cannot be convicted for the ruling that they make, they can technically make decisions that are above the law. This and states rights is actually what a lot of the civil war was fought over (it wasn't about the slaves even remotely). Up until this point, the US judiciary system has never actually done this, in fact they have been very careful not to. This is because the judiciary body is not used as a legislature; it is merely there to tell people how law works not to make it.

This ruling sets a dangerous precedent.

Now the judiciary system is able to ignore laws freely and rule in any ways it likes. Do the courts think that you need 37 years in prison for cussing once? So be it, they can change laws. If you think I am spouting nonsense, this is actually the main part of the dissenting argument:

This case is about power in several respects. It is about the power of our people to govern themselves, and the power of this Court to pronounce the law. Today's opinion aggrandizes the latter, with the predictable consequence of diminishing the former. We have no power to decide this case. And even if we did, we have no power under the Constitution to invalidate this democratically adopted legislation.

Dissidence (mirror)

There are even more things fucked up about this ruling and how it treats people in a marriage.

First of all, now that any two people not just a man or a women can be in a relationship, by the law you are as much as a stranger to your own child as you are to your partner. This allows for legalized "synthetic-orphanization", where a government body can take your child for as long as it is concerned, you are not the person you had it. You could be strait, gay, or lesbian; the child could be yours or not, they simply do not care.

This ruling has nothing to do with gay rights, and everything to do with your rights.