Scalia On Same Sex Marriage

[debrand]

But to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to con- demn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions. To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution. In the majority's judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement. To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to "dis- parage," "injure," "degrade," "demean," and "humiliate" our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homo- sexual. All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence— indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history. It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change by adjudging those who oppose it hostes humani generis, enemies of the human race.

For a very intelligent man, he made some comments that are pretty easy to tear apart.

There is no such thing as traditional marriage. Throughout history, men gained wives through kidnapping, rape, contracts with parents and, in some lucky cases, through love. Thankfully, many of these 'traditions' have fallen away. However, just because something is traditional does not make it right. Slavery is actually traditional but it is considered evil today.

A person who does not believe that others can marry outside their own race is a racist. If you are only attracted to members of you own race, you aren't forced to marry outside your race but you can't make decisions for other people and not be considered a racist. The same is true of homophobia. If you are attracted to the opposite sex, marry the opposite sex but if you tell other people that they can't marry their own sex, you are a homophobe.

What the hell does he mean by enemies of the human race? That is a bit overly dramatic and sounds like the extreme thing a fundie nutcase would say.

[debrand]

http://www.nationaljournal.com/domestic ... e-20130626

[France Nolan]

He'd still be pissed if society "elected" the change. A bigot is a bigot even if he has a gavel and a law degree.

[gezykah]

It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change

Where was his concern for society electing change and a court of law imposing change during Bush v Gore?

[gustava]

He's a tad too fixated on sodomy. Wonder if "he's in"? (Interthreaduality alert.)

[laura oz]

He's a tad too fixated on sodomy. Wonder if "he's in"? (Interthreaduality alert.)

Nice :wink-kitty:

[debrand]

I guess I expected something more original to his rational for voting to uphold DOMA instead of the same tired arguments that are so easily defeated.