Skip to main content

View Diary: Rhode Island Senate passes marriage equality, 26-12 (38 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  For about a dozen states I'm going to say they'll (7+ / 0-)

    only "accept" marriage equality at proverbial gun point. They will fight a SCOTUS decision for years, find a hundred ways to flaunt the rule of law, and only if they're forced to change by an Amendment to the Constitution will they comply. School segregation didn't end with Brown v. Kansas and there are still miscegenation laws on the books. The bigots won't quit, they'll just find different ways to engage in their bigotry.

    The take away from this mini-rant -- the fight for equality won't be over until they surrender. And without conditions or asterisks.

    Sorry conservatives, but Occam's Razor isn't a beard trimmer for jihadists. What it means is I don't have to accept your crazy-assed theories as an alternative to reality.

    by ontheleftcoast on Wed Apr 24, 2013 at 03:29:48 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I think the last anti-miscegenation law was (6+ / 0-)

      finally repealed by Alabama in 2000.

      But you're right - the dead-enders will be the very same states which were the dead-enders in 1967.

    •  They won't fight it... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TheShovelJockey, skrekk

      ...any more than 16 states fought the decision in Loving. Bear in mind that national support for interracial marriage in 1967 was far lower than it now is for marriage equality. All sorts of laws remain on the books that are unconstitutional; it doesn't mean they are enforced.

      By the time the USSC issues a nationwide ruling ending the discussion once and for all, support in no state will be any lower than it was in Iowa in 2009 when the state SC struck down their laws. And support in IA only runs 14% ahead of the most regressive states - AR and MS, per this:
      http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/...
      And IA did what it was told to do.

      Brown took a long time to implement because the court didn't mandate immediate implementation, rather using the vague phrase "with all deliberate speed", not to mention the fact that integration was simply more logistically complex than replacing a couple of words on marriage forms, thus providing a convenient excuse. Regarding marriage equality, they'll be given a couple of weeks to amend forms, brief officials, and that will be that.

      There's a lot of fight ahead legislatively and judicially, but there is absolutely no indication that states will fail to comply. Brown is a poor analogy for the reason above, and Loving indicates the exact opposite.

      •  OK, how about Roe v. Wade? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TheShovelJockey

        Or do you think they gave up the fight on abortion? Sorry, but they'll make excuses. Lots of them. Just like "sunset towns" aren't supposed to be legal and yet exist we're not going to see the end of this fight just because some laws are passed or a decision is handed down from the bench.

        Sorry conservatives, but Occam's Razor isn't a beard trimmer for jihadists. What it means is I don't have to accept your crazy-assed theories as an alternative to reality.

        by ontheleftcoast on Wed Apr 24, 2013 at 03:52:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The South surrendered "unconditionally" in 1865 (3+ / 0-)

      and has been un-surrendering ever since.

      "I was a big supporter of waterboarding" - Dick Cheney 2/14/10

      by Bob Love on Wed Apr 24, 2013 at 03:48:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site