Comments on: That Nausea You Feel is Just Discrimination at Work

By: John

John — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 22:28:20 +0000

on the plus side, the supreme court *did* say that the state congress has the right to define marriage, which means they *can* make a law legalizing it. So just have to do what DW said and elect some state reps who’ll do it.

Of course, I’d wager most of the people reading this in the seattle area already have state reps who support it.

Maybe. I’d have to doublecheck the voting on doma and compare it to who is in office now.

By: wasiq

wasiq — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 19:09:49 +0000

“Mr chairman we are done here for the term….lets bring on the burgers…..”

By: dw

dw — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:04:17 +0000

It’s unlikely this will go to the federal level, since you’d have to make this a federal case in order to do that. In effect, DOJ would have to sue the state.

You want it changed? Elect state legislators and senators who will overturn the DOMA and pass laws to allow for gay marriage. Same goes for those who want the status quo — elect people to the legislature who agree with you.

Of course, in doing so you run the risk of a one-issue legislative branch that looks like the Do-Nothing Congress we have now, but it’s your vote and your choice.

By: Kelly

Kelly — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 15:53:05 +0000

I’ve heard a dissenting view about whether or not this will be able to go to a federal level, but I’m afraid I have to leave it at that, for the whole protect the anonymous source thing. :)

By: Aaron B. Hockley

Aaron B. Hockley — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 15:38:16 +0000

Josh is correct… the case wasn’t about the legality of gay marriage… the case argued that the legislature did not have the power or right to define what “marriage” is.

By: josh

josh — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 15:24:42 +0000

according to lambda legal (in the p-i article linked in dylan’s post), there’s no federal claim in their case; so no possibility of appeal to the US supreme court.