Dick Whitman
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2009
- Messages
- 45,703
I think it deserves its own thread, even though 99.9 percent of the board, I assume, applauds the decision.
Roberts' dissent today is pretty hilarious when taking into account his written opinion in yesterday's Obamacare decision.
One day we're a nation of men, not laws. The next day we're a nation of laws, not men. How convenient to be able to switch whenever you want to.
Polygamists also thank you."They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his 28-page ruling. "The Constitution grants them that right."
Thank you, 14th amendment. Future Americans will someday wonder how a cretin like Scalia ever made the Supreme Court.
Although the majority randomly inserts the adjective “two” in various places, it offers no reason at all why the two-person element of the core definition of marriage may be preserved while the man-woman element may not. Indeed, from the standpoint of history and tradition, a leap from opposite-sex marriage to same-sex marriage is much greater than one from a two-person union to plural unions, which have deep roots in some cultures around the world. If the majority is willing to take the big leap, it is hard to see how it can say no to the shorter one. It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage.
-- John Roberts
Polygamists also thank you.
Bestiality is right after that, amirite?
Polygamists also thank you.