DOMA plaintiff: Case 'went beautifully'
March 27th, 2013
01:20 PM ET

DOMA plaintiff: Case 'went beautifully'

  • Today's arguments focused on federal Defense of Marriage Act.
  • It denies Social Security, other spousal benefits to same-sex couples.
  • The court heard 80 minutes of arguments yesterday focused on California same-sex marriage ban.
  • Live updates below. Also, read the full story; and share your thoughts.

[Updated at 1:36 p.m.] We're wrapping up Day 2 of the same-sex marriage court debate here - check out our main story for more detail and analysis as it comes today. As always, we want to hear from you.

[Updated at 1:20 p.m.] "I'm very optimistic that DOMA will be struck down, it has no rational basis for being," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said just now. Pelosi was at the Supreme Court to hear arguments over DOMA and California's Proposition 8 over the past two days.

Pelosi's district has been at the epicenter of gay rights for decades. She called the oral arguments at the Supreme Court "thrilling."

[Updated at 1:01 p.m.] According to CNN Supreme Court Producer Bill Mears, the court appeared divided along ideological lines about whether DOMA is discriminatory and steps on state marriage laws for gays and lesbians.

If legally married homosexuals were being denied more than 1,100 federal benefits, "What kind of marriage is that?" asked Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She said the discriminatory effect was "pervasive."

But when Windsor's lawyer argued in court there was a "sea change" afoot today in support of same-sex marriage that leaves DOMA outdated, Chief Justice John Roberts said that was because of "the political effectiveness of those on your side" swaying public opinion.

Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia suggested DOMA could still remain in place as a valid extension of congressional authority. Forty-one states do not allow same-sex marriage.

The potential swing vote, Justice Anthony Kennedy, said DOMA presents a "real risk of running into traditional state police power to regulate marriage."

[Updated at 12:54 p.m.] The case of DOMA plaintiff Edie Windsor originated in New York, where Donna Lieberman heads the New York Civil Liberties Union.

“My state, the state of New York, respects the rights of all couples, straight or gay, to marry," Lieberman told reporters just moments ago. "But as long as DOMA remains on the books, the marriages are not truly equal. The federal government treats New York gay and lesbian couples as if they don’t exist. … It’s time the federal government treats the marriages of all New Yorkers with the respect and dignity … they deserve."

The federal government “should never relegate the marriage of a couple like Edie and Thea to the legal status of strangers,” she said.

[Updated at 12:43 p.m.] Marriage is a magic word, Windsor says, for anyone who doesn't understand why she still wanted to get married at age 73 to her partner, Thea Clara Spyer.

"I felt very serious" in court today, she says.

How does she think the oral argument went? "I think it went beautifully. I think the justices were gentle, if I can use that word. They were direct, they asked all the right questions - but I didn't feel any hostility. ... I think it's going to be good."

She showed off a diamond brooch in the shape of a circle that she was given decades ago by Spyer when they wanted to be engaged. Windsor said the couple picked the brooch over a traditional engagement ring because Windsor wasn't ready to come out yet.

[Updated at 12:41 p.m.] Windsor takes the mic and says, "Today, I’m an out lesbian who just sued the United States government. It’s a little overwhelming."

[Updated at 12:37 p.m.] Windsor's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, told reporters just now: "Today’s arguments tells the lesson of why it is we have a Constitution: to bind us together as citizens of one nation, all of whom are guaranteed equal protection under the law. There is no one individual who personifies the concept of equal protection like Edie Windsor."

[Updated at 12:32 p.m.] Edie Windsor is walking out, and being greeted by cheering crowds. Alicia Keys' "Girl On Fire" is blasting from speakers.

[Updated at 12:29 p.m.] “The court appears to be moving toward an out if it wants it on procedural grounds,” CNN Correspondent Joe Johns said just minutes ago. At issue is whether House Republicans have standing to defend DOMA instead of the Obama administration, which has decided not to defend it.

As for the merits of the case, there was a lot of discussion as to why the U.S. Congress passed DOMA in 1996 – whether it was just trying to ensure legal uniformity on marriage, or whether something else was afoot, like moral disapproval of homosexuality, Johns said.

[Updated at 12:22 p.m.] "They are obviously very deeply split. But I think DOMA is in trouble," says CNN Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin of the Supreme Court justices after watching the arguments.

[Updated at 12:20 p.m.] Both parties are leaving the courthouse right now. Stay tuned for latest developments.

[Updated at 12:16 p.m.] Oral arguments on the Defense of Marriage Act at the Supreme Court have ended after nearly two hours.

[Updated at 11:49 a.m.] If the high court is on schedule, the oral arguments should be more than three-quarters of the way through. Just outside, protesters are speaking out about why the fight over DOMA is so important to them. Here's a snapshot of some folks tweeting outside the Supreme Court:

[Updated at 11:27 a.m.] A number of legal observers have pointed out that the court, when it makes its decision on DOMA later this year, could skirt the issue of same-sex marriage by simply saying that the party defending it – the House GOP – doesn’t have the right to do so.

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, told CNN moments ago that this is very possible.

Congressional Republicans took up the cause after the Obama administration declined to defend the law. Turley says that judging by justices’ questions in yesterday’s Proposition 8 hearing, some justices are "worried about handing down a major ruling” on same-sex marriage.

“Today’s case is going to be another example of that. They have an out. They can reject this case on standing, which is basically saying that one of the parties doesn’t have the right to be here in court. And there are significant standing problems here, and it is right there for any justice to take as an exit,” Turley said.

“… For justices that are already a little bit squeamish about this issue, they can easily take this exit and say ‘you, members of Congress, cannot speak for the nation.’”

[Updated at 11:11 a.m.] Well, here's one way to look at it. CNN's Shannon Travis found this controversial sign outside the courthouse.

[Updated at 11:02 a.m.] Same sex-marriage has also divided the religious community. We've seen Catholics rallying for and against it. Barrett Duke, of the The Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, just tweeted this a little while ago:

But who's on God's side of the marriage debate?

[Updated at 10:52 a.m.] Anti-gay protesters have also gathered in support of keeping DOMA in place. While some say they are concerned that same-sex marriage threatens the traditional family institution, others offered more fiery rhetoric.

[Updated at 10:39 a.m.] The weather has warmed up a bit in Washington, and so has the crowd. Same-sex marriage supporters who want to see an end to DOMA are rallying outside the Supreme Court.

[Updated at 10:14 a.m.] The arguments should be under way by now, but the high court isn't expected to rule on DOMA until sometime this summer.

So let's talk about what's at stake here: money. If the Supreme Court overturns the federal law that defines marriage as solely between a man and a woman, some married same-sex couples will save $8,000 or more in income tax, according to a new study.

A same-sex couple with combined income of $100,000, in which one person earns $70,000 and the other makes $30,000, currently pays an extra $1,625 per year by filing separately rather than jointly, according to an analysis H&R Block conducted for CNNMoney. The calculations assume a standard deduction, no children and no tax credits.

The extra tax liability jumps to nearly $8,000 when one spouse earns all $100,000 and the other reports no income. In this case, couples filing jointly owe tax of $11,858, while a same-sex couple filing separately owes $19,585 - a 65% difference.

[Updated at 10 a.m.] If things are rolling according to plan, court is in session now and the oral arguments on DOMA will start after a few housekeeping items. We can't show you the inside of the courthouse (no cameras allowed), but here's what's going on outside. It appears to be a bit mellower than yesterday's rallies.

[Updated at 9:41 a.m.] As the justices prepare to hear a second day of oral arguments, the crowds have returned outside the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court. The sun is out, the temperatures are down - but the flags are up.

Some protesters had parked themselves, braving near freezing temperatures at dawn, to secure a good seat.

Edith Windsor, the 83-year-old plaintiff in the DOMA case, greeted protesters earlier in the morning on her way into the courthouse.

[Updated at 9:15 a.m.] Less than an hour to go before oral arguments start, but same-sex marriage is gaining steam on social media. As of 9 a.m. #DOMA and #SCOTUS were among the top five U.S. topics trending on Twitter - not bad for #humpday.

Supporters of "traditional" marriage – between one man and onw woman – are also making their voices heard. The Catholic News Service just tweeted a video of a "march for marriage" from yesterday.

[Updated at 8:34 a.m.] Today's drill is similar to yesterday's - arguments to start a little after 10 a.m. ET, and no cameras. But lawyers arguing before the court will get one hour and 50 minutes. Hey, that's almost an hour more than what Proposition 8 got.

In addition to Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin, Correspondent Joe Johns and Bill Mears will be inside the courthouse to bring us the latest.

To make the best sense of yesterday's hearing, dive into this "5 things we learned" from our Supreme Court producer Bill Mears. It's got the audio of key parts of the hearings so you can hear Justice Scalia for example while reading Mears' analysis.

[Posted at 8:25a.m.] To understand the arguments around DOMA, get to know Edith Windsor - the woman at the heart of the case. "Edie," as she's well known, spent 42 years of her life with Thea Clara Spyer.

But even after they married in 2007 in Toronto, four decades into their courtship, the two women were not "like most couples" in the eyes of the state of New York, where they lived, nor in the eyes of the U.S. government, which under the Defense of Marriage Act mandates that a spouse, as legally defined, must be a person of the opposite sex.

In 2009, a month after Spyer died, Windsor was slapped with a massive bill for inheritance taxes - $363,053 more than was warranted, she later claimed in court - because Spyer was, in legal terms, just a friend. She would ultimately argue in court that her relationship with Spyer should not be considered any different than a heterosexual couple when it came to rights, taxes and other issues.

In October, Windsor, now 83, got an answer in the form of a ruling opinion from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That court found, in her favor, that the Defense of Marriage Act violates the Constitution's equal protection clause and thus she shouldn't have had to pay an inheritance tax after her partner's death. This follows a similar ruling, in May, from another federal appeals court in Boston.

The Obama administration isn't challenging the ruling - the president has said he supports same-sex marriage. Lawyers representing House Republicans are taking up the case, since both Windsor and the administration are taking the same legal position.

[Updated at 7:58 a.m.]Just a few minutes until the doors open to the Supreme Court. While we wait, weigh your state on CNN's LGBT rights calculator.

And, remember the red equal sign all over Twitter and Facebook yesterday? You'll probably see more of it today.

[Updated at 7:22 a.m.] While yesterday dealt with big questions (Who should be allowed to marry? What is the impact of same-sex marriage on children?), today's arguments will look at a relatively clearer issue - discrimination, according to CNN's senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

The arguments over DOMA will focus on the nine states plus the District of Columbia, which allow same-sex marriage. Will they treat same-sex couple the same as straight couples?

"It's a case about money, benefits and who can be denied those benefits," Toobin said.

[Posted at 7:06 a.m.] We’re gearing up this morning for round two of oral arguments at the Supreme Court over same-sex marriage.

Yesterday, the justices heard both sides of California’s Proposition 8. The overriding legal question in that case is whether the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law prevents states from defining marriage as that state has done. Some 80 minutes of arguments left no clear picture of how things might go - but here's what we learned from it.

Today’s arguments deal with the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which like Proposition 8, defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. The federal law means federal tax, Social Security, pension, and bankruptcy benefits, and family medical leave protections do not apply to gay and lesbian couples.

Arguments are scheduled to start at 10 a.m. ET. We’ll have all the latest developments here.

In the meantime, you can catch up on the details.

soundoff (90 Responses)
  1. Mary

    Anytime a court overturns a ruling in favor of equal rights to the gay community it isn't because of their heartfelt belief that *all* should have the same rights; It's about the MONEY folks! TAXES , REVENUE ect...

    March 27, 2013 at 7:19 am | Report abuse | Reply
    • Brian

      Its about civil rights, the money issue is just an effect of the inherent inequality that a significant portion of the population faces.

      March 27, 2013 at 8:21 am | Report abuse |
    • guest

      That may be true Mary ,but also remember, the Supreme Court this is largley a liberal court which inturprets the law to fit its own needs without considering the long range consequences - ln this case the loss of moral integrity. The morals of this country has fallen a great deal since WWII and it will eventually lead to the downfall of this country, as a matter of fact, along with other lost morals, 'greed' has underminded the country to a guarnteed fall; it is just repeted history. As the old saying goes: those who fail to learn from history are bound to repeat it.

      March 27, 2013 at 9:02 am | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      Or it could be that witholding equal rights for ALL citizens is in violation of our Constitution, and deserves to be rectified.

      March 27, 2013 at 9:30 am | Report abuse |
    • reality

      100x duh. Marriage is just a paper. Anyone can print the marriage certificate and you don't need the government to sign it. All these people wants is benefits meaning money. They protest to make it lawful is to get free money.

      March 27, 2013 at 9:55 am | Report abuse |
    • Guest #2

      If it's about Civil Rights, where does it stop?. Will polygamists be clamoring for their "Civil Rights" next ? How about Pedophiles ?

      March 27, 2013 at 10:06 am | Report abuse |
    • chris hogan

      "They only want money"

      When my husband Duane died 4 years ago, I had to pay over $8,000 in estate taxes that I wouldn't have had to pay if he were a woman. But, honestly, I'd sell everything I own just to spend one more day with him. Yes, the money matters, but it isn't the only thing we care about.

      March 27, 2013 at 10:49 am | Report abuse |
    • wisdomVSknowledge

      Most of the decisions people make in their lives have a financial factor to consider? It doesn't change the heart of the matter. If you decide not to take your kids to the movie because your money is running low... does that mean you don't love your kids. Of course not.

      March 27, 2013 at 10:56 am | Report abuse |
    • Jack Rivera

      If this is what it is about, I'm going to start claiming my 2 dogs as dependents and collect their SS benefits as they will probably die before me.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:03 am | Report abuse |
    • Think Right

      @Jack R, Your way of thinking should be a great worry for you. Get help soon!

      March 27, 2013 at 11:13 am | Report abuse |
    • elza

      IN NAME OF GOD!!!! IT‘S A SHAME!!!!!

      March 27, 2013 at 11:16 am | Report abuse |
    • Look Here First

      @Elza, What the real shame is about is the abortions that straights are having as well as their extra-marital affairs and divorces. You all need to look at that first!

      March 27, 2013 at 11:33 am | Report abuse |
    • James Poster

      Guest, you are referring to religious morals, which are irrelevant in this courtroom.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:45 am | Report abuse |
    • James Poster

      Guest, polygamists should have the same right to marry. It was Catholic morals that forced them to quit this ages old biblical practice. Your pedophile argument indicates an inferior ability to reason and argue.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:47 am | Report abuse |
  2. Mary

    When Obama makes the statement that all should have the same rights does he have one hand on the bible that prohibits the gay lifestyle ALL OVER IT? Yes he does... Talk about hypocrisy !

    March 27, 2013 at 7:22 am | Report abuse | Reply
    • Joey Isotta-Fraschini ©™

      One cannot argue that USA citizens should have to pay money to their government because of the Bible.

      March 27, 2013 at 8:12 am | Report abuse |
    • Jay

      What about the parts that say you have to make sacrifices whenever you menstrate? do you do that? If not you're unclean. What about the part that says you can't work on Sunday or women cannot cut their hair. If you cut your hair you are going to Hell to burn for all eternity. The Bible also condems divorce in Leviticus, so if you or anyone you know has been divorced you are breaking God's rules and you will go to Hell because it states in the Bible that "all sin is equal in the eyes of God" so breaking any of these rules is just as bad as murder. You have to agree because all of this is in the Bible. You choose to quote some portions of the Bible while ignoring others? Yes you do... Talk about hypocrisy.

      March 27, 2013 at 8:31 am | Report abuse |
    • Jai

      The Bible can not and should not have any impact on law. Even if the original text was handed down by God him/her/itself, the thousands of intervening years have seen translations, mistranslations, edits, cuts, and misinterpretations that remove any reliability of original intent.

      March 27, 2013 at 9:06 am | Report abuse |
    • guest

      @Jay (and others) One wise person, speakng of Christians, said: "...there is not one person in twenty that is ready for translation." In other words, not oneperson professing to be a Christian in twenty will be saved.

      March 27, 2013 at 9:11 am | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      Guess it's all in the myriad of interpretations people use the Bible for to justify bigotry and denying equal rights to a segment of our SECULAR society.
      I have never yet met any person who uses their gender preference as a descriptor to their "lifestyle".

      March 27, 2013 at 9:37 am | Report abuse |
    • wisdomVSknowledge

      Mary, Mary, why art thy troubled? Seeing that Obama is a liberal Democrat and thou art a conservative.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:07 am | Report abuse |
    • sly

      Mary, you are 100% correct. NO President should ever be shown touching a bible in public as part of his duty.

      The bible should not be used for any swearing in ceremonies.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:08 am | Report abuse |
    • James Poster

      The entire Christian religion is based on a hypocritical god, so he's just being a good Christian.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:48 am | Report abuse |
    • Robert

      So i think we should fix the problem, instead of swearing on the Bible i think the president should swear on the flag.

      March 27, 2013 at 12:46 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Joey Isotta-Fraschini ©™

    @ guest;
    Nobody needs to be "saved."
    You lie.

    March 27, 2013 at 9:18 am | Report abuse | Reply
  4. justsayit

    What a pretty Lady, Good Luck Ruth!!!

    March 27, 2013 at 9:56 am | Report abuse | Reply
  5. palintwit

    I'm for anything that makes a tea party patriot's head explode. It's music to my ears !

    March 27, 2013 at 10:07 am | Report abuse | Reply
  6. Gary

    You either believe in the promise of all men being created equal or you do not. If you do not, please go join your brethren in the Middle East and enjoy the wonders of living in a theocracy where nobody is safe.

    March 27, 2013 at 10:14 am | Report abuse | Reply
  7. palintwit

    Truth be known, every time someone mentions Chick-fil-A I think of toothless inbred teabillies.

    March 27, 2013 at 10:16 am | Report abuse | Reply
    • fiftyfive55

      most people think of food when they think of a restaurant.

      March 27, 2013 at 10:41 am | Report abuse |
  8. julnor

    In the tax analysis, if the combined income of $100k were split evenly between the two, they would likely pay more in taxes being married. Kind of strange that the article didn't mention that.

    March 27, 2013 at 10:59 am | Report abuse | Reply
  9. wisdomVSknowledge

    ATTENTION BIGOTS!

    Gays have been among you since the foundation of civilization. They aren't going anywhere and more are being born each day. One might think that evolution is dealing with over-population in a way you didn't expect. The bottom line is this... they refuse to be mistreated any longer by the bigots of this world. That is certainly understandable. So, I say deal with the issue now and in a fair manner or they'll be back ... only stronoger the next time.

    March 27, 2013 at 11:03 am | Report abuse | Reply
    • fiftyfive55

      Well,if they think their so right,why did they wait 10,000 years to exit the closet ? could it be that deep down inside they know they are wrong ? I think so.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:15 am | Report abuse |
    • Joseph

      Geez, fiftyfive, let me see...why didn't they come out of the closet....oh, maybe burned at the stake or somehing...even recently tied to a fence and beat and allowed to die.

      I am a bit older then that 55 so we are in that age group that is not handling this very well....as we become ashes, there will basically be no opposition to equal rights for gays anymore.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:23 am | Report abuse |
    • fiftyfive55

      @Joseph-if gays were evrywhere like they claim,which they aren't,then they wouldn't have had to hide in closets.Since were both older,as you state,what makes you think it's us handling this all wrong ? If gays are so righteous,why do they have the highest suicide rate of all groups ? It's definitely not because of pride in their lifestyle,and don't hand me that genetic do-do since now the law is questioning whether genetic evidence should be admissable in court because of possible controversiesabout accuracies.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:29 am | Report abuse |
    • Joseph

      Fift Five, oh yes, when us old guys turn to ashes, there will be few that oppose equal rights for the gay community.

      I will trust that you are accurate on the suicide rates but that just helps jusify this need change. If we had the public and relatives telling us that we are second class or worse, we may find life hopeless more often also.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:46 am | Report abuse |
    • Jed Clampett

      I am getting the notion that 55 agrees with that North Carolina preacher who thinks all gays should be put in a 100 mile fenced area and allowed to die out because they can't procreate.

      Too bad all of the heteros keep producing gay children.

      March 27, 2013 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
  10. t3chsupport

    I can only hope to be as hot as Edie Windsor when I reach that age.

    March 27, 2013 at 11:07 am | Report abuse | Reply
  11. fiftyfive55

    Truth be told-if as many people were for gays,as gays claim there are,there would NOT be so much oppsosition to gay marriage.Talk about the tail waggin the dog.

    March 27, 2013 at 11:11 am | Report abuse | Reply
    • One L

      In 1967 there was over 60% to interracial marriage

      March 27, 2013 at 11:15 am | Report abuse |
    • Joseph

      Truth be told that over the past few years many of us that aren't gay have been more vocal about are support for the gay communty...which is why the majority of the nation's population now favor this equality change which will happen, whether this year or not.

      So, get over it and get to know your gay relatives as you will love them just as much or more.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:16 am | Report abuse |
    • fiftyfive55

      @Joseph-hate to burst your bubble but politically correct answers to surveys are NOT the truth and it's politically correct responses that the gay arguement uses.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:21 am | Report abuse |
    • Me

      You keep telling yourself that, but in the meantime try to explain why, for the first time, gay marriage was approved at the ballot box in not one but two states last fall. You can try to discount polling if you want, but statistics work, and they show overwhelming support in the 18-29 demographic, even among young Republicans.

      People who answer surveys to be politically correct don't translate into real votes.

      March 27, 2013 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
  12. One L

    Sorry 60% opposition to interracial marriage

    March 27, 2013 at 11:16 am | Report abuse | Reply
    • fiftyfive55

      truth is that more people are for legalized pot than for gay marriage.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:24 am | Report abuse |
  13. Cross of CHRIST is for everyone

    Why does the Cross of CHRIST offend you?

    Why does the word of GOD, the BIBLE, offend you?

    Why does the shed blood of CHRIST offend you?

    Why does the empty tomb offend you?

    Why does the risen LORD and SAVIOUR offend you?

    Why does KING JESUS offend you?

    Why are you angry with GOD ALMIGHTY?

    Why do you box with GOD?

    March 27, 2013 at 11:26 am | Report abuse | Reply
    • We Love God

      God and Jesus are absolutely and unequivocally of no offense to me. Quite the opposite in being a Born Again Christian.But there is history as told in https://anthropologist.livejournal.com/1314574.html that needs to be read by everyone to understand things.

      March 27, 2013 at 1:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • DC1973

      None of those things offend me.

      What offends me is all the people, like you for instance, who insist on taking those words out of context, adding in words that aren't there, and claiming that your lies and hatred are "God's will."

      March 27, 2013 at 1:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cross of CHRIST is for everyone

      @DC1973...

      Do you have a question? Are you a believer?

      What are your doubts?

      No hidden meanings. Clear questions.

      Only love, JESUS love.

      Love the sinner, not the sin. Do you understand what that means?

      March 27, 2013 at 2:18 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Same Comparison

    Leaving it up to the states where a majority of people can rule over a minority is unfair and is the exact same thing as allowing one majority religion to rule and make law for another minority religion Guess who would win in the end?

    March 27, 2013 at 11:45 am | Report abuse | Reply
  15. thomas butler justice

    all these issues have an agenda to devour something more righteous than they, get your own scouts and marriage . how do you overlook gender specific words like wife and husband but expect the world to agree with your new invention of marriage with any real understanding . the word mafia is not used for a business establishment , except by the mafia. should a man be able to sue for his dog to be called his son? this is pure confusion .
    get a life. the gay community looks like someone who spends his time doing nothing but stepping into others' yelling "i'm gay , i"m gay " every pouter is so offended and the gay agenda would even remove my right to disagree . but they got to put it on the law books and call it a hate crime while they declare for themselves freedom of speech. there's got to be some rich and powerful gays in high places for this much propaganda that they keep shoving down our throats . i'm waiting for society to puke it back your way . cause i'm sure sick of it and its feeble reasons and excuses to hijack society. proverbs says depart from a man when you perceive not in him the words of knowledge . and job sums up who is this that darkens council by words without knowledge . the knowledge of the Holy is understanding. prov.

    March 27, 2013 at 11:46 am | Report abuse | Reply
    • banasy©

      One word: spouse.
      There. That wasn't so hard.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:54 am | Report abuse |
    • Joseph

      I won't take the time to read your comments as I am tired of the bible preachers yelling I Christian, I am Christian.....but don't act the part.

      March 27, 2013 at 11:56 am | Report abuse |
    • Jim

      thomas, quite simply... I call mine "Husband" .....

      March 27, 2013 at 12:07 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.