Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 12:39:00 PM (view original):
That's not unreasonable. Looking at the trends from several different places (and political ideologies) I'd guess that same sex marriage will eventually be legal everywhere, not just the 7 states where it is legal now. But anything could happen.

But anything could happen?

You keep trying to paint this as "We all know gay marriage will be legal, but there is a 0.0001% chance that superman might make the world change roatations".

I think on divided social issues history has proven that the status quo is a tough opponent.

Dude, I just said that your point wasn't unreasonable.  The trends point toward legalization.  There is always a chance that the trends won't continue.

There's also a chance that somebody will successfully argue a compelling legal reason to uphold the will of the voters in 30 states to define marriage as "one man and one woman".

Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 1:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/21/2012 1:06:00 PM (view original):
If you're really asking "Will society lean to more liberal ideas in the future?", I think we know the answer is "yes".   How that will translate to the legalization of SSM or marijuana is tough to say.   If I had to guess, I'd say stoned preachers will be marrying Frank and Bob while the congregation legally shoots up in the very near future.   Not going to say "That's progress" but that's where society is heading.   In my parent's day, teenage girls didn't get pregnant.   In my day, teenage girls dropped out of school if they got pregnant.  Today, they probably have day care at high schools.    If that's "progress", we're in trouble.

In your parents' day it was illegal for interracial couples to marry in many states.   We can all come up with examples of things that change over time that are good and bad.

Just trying to figure out what your point is. 

You love to say "If you had to bet" or "If you had to guess".   I don't know what your point is because what I'm betting or guessing on has about ZERO to do with what will happen. 

Nonetheless, change does not necessarily equal progress. 

I'm sure that the leaders of the temperance movement felt quite progressive when the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution was passed in 1919.

Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 2:28:00 PM (view original):
There's also a chance that somebody will successfully argue a compelling legal reason to uphold the will of the voters in 30 states to define marriage as "one man and one woman".

A compelling legal reason would have to exist first.

Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 2:52:00 PM (view original):
I'm sure that the leaders of the temperance movement felt quite progressive when the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution was passed in 1919.

Which two are most alike:

Gov deciding which adults can and can't drink alcohol
Gov deciding which adults can and can can't marry
Repealing 18th amendment
Repealing Prop 8

Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 2:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 2:28:00 PM (view original):
There's also a chance that somebody will successfully argue a compelling legal reason to uphold the will of the voters in 30 states to define marriage as "one man and one woman".

A compelling legal reason would have to exist first.

Who's to say it doesn't?

Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 2:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 2:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 2:28:00 PM (view original):
There's also a chance that somebody will successfully argue a compelling legal reason to uphold the will of the voters in 30 states to define marriage as "one man and one woman".

A compelling legal reason would have to exist first.

Who's to say it doesn't?

Do you have one?

Does he need one?

Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 2:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 2:52:00 PM (view original):
I'm sure that the leaders of the temperance movement felt quite progressive when the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution was passed in 1919.

Which two are most alike:

Gov deciding which adults can and can't drink alcohol
Gov deciding which adults can and can can't marry
Repealing 18th amendment
Repealing Prop 8

You're missing the point.

A small special interest group somehow garners enough legislative support to make an arguably radical and controversial change to the law of the land, despite the overwhelming will of the people.

Some time passes.

The overwhelming will of the people eventually wins out, the law is repealed.

Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 2:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 2:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/21/2012 2:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/21/2012 2:28:00 PM (view original):
There's also a chance that somebody will successfully argue a compelling legal reason to uphold the will of the voters in 30 states to define marriage as "one man and one woman".

A compelling legal reason would have to exist first.

Who's to say it doesn't?

Do you have one?

I'm not a lawyer.

I would say that the will of the voters in several states constitutes a compelling legal reason.

Well, only if voting is legal.

Voting is a right.  That's the same as legal, correct?