Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
LGBT
In reply to the discussion: Elena Kagan says: [View all]Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)52. I agree the Constitution is silent on the issue of marriage "rights"
but Court history and decisions as others have suggested "Loving v. Virginia" and even "Lawrence v. Texas" suggest that intimate relationships between TWO LOVING and CONSENSUAL individuals are protected by the Constitution under theories of right to privacy and as fundamental rights.
I cannot, based on the context of the link, draw a conclusion on her actual view on the issue. It would be, at worst, imprudent for her to comment publicly on an issue that might come before the Court.
I am not as much doom-as-gloom as the post suggests. I will wait until I see the substance of her position in an eventual ruling on this issue.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
56 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Your right to privacy cannot be infringed upon. Negative right, not positive.
WingDinger
Jun 2012
#25
That's true, but the elephant in the room here is that reason and logic are not primary
Zorra
Jun 2012
#54
We covered Loving in my Business Law class for my MBA, and that's fairly recent.
Creideiki
Jun 2012
#56
I'm so glad we have you here to remind us that we don't deserve equal rights.
Creideiki
Jun 2012
#44