Home / General / “They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”

“They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”

Comments
/
/
/
1147 Views

Hey, when you’re wrong 66% of the time, you’re completely right 33% of the time!

More on the historic decision soon.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • yet_another_lawyer

    The weirdest thing is that Scalia wrote an opinion, joined only by Thomas, then Thomas wrote an opinion joined only by Scalia. I don’t read enough SCOTUS opinions to be sure, but isn’t that pretty unusual? Wouldn’t they (or any combination of judges who all signed each other’s opinions) normally just write one consolidated really pissed off opinion?

    • Steve LaBonne

      All that spittle wouldn’t fit in just one opinion?

      • They need to swallow.

        • Steve LaBonne

          Especially after gay marriage was rammed down their throats.

          • tsam

            OH you’re about to get the navy seal cp.

            • MAJeff

              Is he single?

              • tsam

                Copypasta is always single. It’s pretty shallow and kind of dumb though, so if you’re after a quick laugh and aren’t interested in being intellectually challenged, fire away, sir!

        • tsam

          Hard to swallow when they’re ramming all those gay agendas down their throats.

      • Downpuppy

        Scalia makes a very strong argument against Shelby County.
        Other than that, yes, spittle, venom, hyperole & generally mockable ranting.

        • Downpuppy

          OMG – Ask the
          nearest hippie.

          Scalia IS Eric Cartman.

    • Hogan

      There are four dissenting opinions, with at least one other dissenter joining each opinion.

      (Someone at SCOTUS Blog asked if having all four dissenters write opinions was rare. The answer was “Like, Bush v. Gore rare.”)

    • NonyNony

      Actually if I’m understanding the liveblog on SCOTUSBlog correctly, all four of the dissenters wrote their own dissents. And all concurred with each other’s dissents.

      That’s really weird, right? That doesn’t happen all that often, does it?

      The four haters on the bench really, really, really hate gay people don’t they?

      As an ex-Catholic I’m disgusted, but not surprised, that all four of them are Roman Catholic. At least there’s Sotomayor on the correct side of morality in the majority.

      • matt w

        Kennedy too.

        • NonyNony

          You are, of course, correct.

          I don’t know why I forgot that Kennedy was Catholic – given his name it would be surprising if he were anything else, and I know that everyone on the Court right now is either Catholic or Jewish.

          • matt w

            Almost certainly apocryphal story: A friend of my family was teaching in Great Neck in 1960, and she said, “If Senator Kennedy wins he will be the first Catholic president.” A voice from the back said, “All the rest were Jewish?”

            • John F

              Growing up in Long Island during the 70s I was flabbergasted to learn that Kennedy was the 1st and only Catholic President… my town being 80% Catholic, 15% Jewish and 5% Protestant… group up thinking Protestants were the oddball minority…

          • Manny Kant

            Kennedy can also be a Scottish name, so I’d guess there’s plenty of Protestant Kennedys.

            • Amanda in the South Bay

              Or Ulster Prots.

              • Schadenboner

                He already said “Scottish”.

      • Tybalt

        They did not all concur in each other’s dissents. Alito and Roberts didn’t join anyone’s. Only Scalia and Thomas joined everyone else’s.

      • Marek

        Hilarious, too, that Scalia called out the lack of religious diversity on the Court. You can always resign, dude.

        • Lee Rudolph

          What, and give Obama the chance to nominate Pope Francis???

          …Actually, I can’t find any constitutional impediment to a Federal judge not being a citizen of the United States. Am I missing something? Has this ever been adjudicated? Has it ever happened?

    • Todd Pettis

      Thomas Jefferson wanted to castrate homosexuals, he wrote the constitution the idea the it mandates same-sex “marriage” is absurd on it’s face.

      • Hogan

        Thomas Jefferson was the minister to France during the Constitutional Convention. And I’m not too sure about your first thing either.

        • NonyNony

          I mean it may actually be true, but Thomas Jefferson also kept slaves and apparently was okay with raping his slaves. So it isn’t like the man was an infallible saint who needs to be deferred to.

          • Todd Pettis

            Why passed the 13th amendment in order to outlaw slavery we have passed no amendment to mandates queers “marriage”.

            • sharculese

              Five people who know more about the law than you disagree. You can act like a child about that all you want, but it won’t change the fact that smarter people than you have concluded you’re wrong.

              • Todd Pettis

                Five people who know more about the law than you disagree. You can act like a child about that all you want, but it won’t change the fact that smarter people than you have concluded you’re wrong.

                The same way you did with Shelby County?

                • joe from Lowell

                  The failure in Shelby County was about the facts, not the law.

                  Citing Supreme Court Justices as experts on jurisprudence. On voting procedures and their implications on marginalized populations, not so much.

                • sharculese

                  I would chide you for not understanding the difference between the Constitution and a statute, but you’re didn’t even know the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, so it wouldn’t even be useful.

                  You’re just shrieking buzzwords to blot out the white hot rage of inadequacy that quakes you core. Shriek on, babbyman.

                • Todd Pettis

                  Shelby County was a constitutional decision.

                • joe from Lowell

                  Yes, and it was printed on paper, too. Hurr, durr, dere ain’t no findings of fact in Shelby, hurr durr!

                • sharculese

                  Shelby County was a constitutional decision

                  .

                  That involved muddling up the implications of statutory law. That didn’t happen here.

                  I know you’re a confused manchild, but that doesn’t mean you have to bother us with your confusion.

                • sharculese

                  Hurr, durr, dere ain’t no findings of fact in Shelby, hurr durr!

                  Well, there were certainly facts, but it’s a tad generous to say the Court managed to find them.

                • matt w

                  Eh, I’m not really comfortable with citing the justices as higher authorities here, or relying on the fact/law distinction. I reserve the right to say that Scalia and Alito are full of shit on the law when they’re full of shit on the law. (Though Alito’s most embarrassing moments do seem to edge into findings of fact, like all the talk radio nonsense he put into the Ricci concurrence in order to argue that government action is discriminatory whenever a black person expresses an opinion about it.)

                  What I will say is this: Many people who are more intelligent than you have expressed reasons to disagree with Shelby County, because you’re a hateful dumbass.

            • Hogan

              We did. The 14th. Read the opinion.

              • Todd Pettis

                When the 14th amendment was passed Sodomy was criminal act in every state, it was never intended to give queers rights.

                • timb

                  It doesn’t say that anywhere.

                  The First doesn’t say it protects a right wing troll from serially trolling blogs.

                  The Second never refers to assault weapons either.

                • tsam

                  Hey FULE–U MAD?

                  OH HE MAD. HE SO MAD.

                • sharculese

                  The nature of injustice is that we may not always see it
                  in our own times. The generations that wrote and ratified
                  the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not
                  presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions,
                  and so they entrusted to future generations a charter
                  protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we
                  learn its meaning. When new insight reveals discord
                  between the Constitution’s central protections and a received
                  legal stricture, a claim to liberty must be addressed.

                  – a better person than you

                • Hogan

                  Oh, you’re an intentionalist? Then you agree with the ACA decision yesterday.

                • matt w

                  HE MAD

              • Gwen

                The 14th amendment cane out of the closet today, but it was born that way.

                • tsam

                  THIS COMMENT WINS THE INTERNET FOREVER.

                  That’s so perfect.

                • Rob in CT

                  OMG.

                • MAJeff

                  *Standing slow clap*

                • matt w

                  All my huzzahs.

                • Tyto

                  *low, low, bow*

                • Malaclypse

                  You win ALL THE INTERNETS.

          • Origami Isopod

            but Thomas Jefferson also kept slaves and apparently was okay with raping his slaves.

            You’re talking to Jennie, who considers that a feature and not a bug.

      • sharculese

        You’re thinking of the Declaration of Independence, dude. I would say that you’re too rage addled to remember things straight, but we both know the truth is you don’t know anything about history (unless it involves dudes fucking, apparently.)

      • James Madison wrote the constitution.

        • Todd Pettis

          He didn’t support queers either.

          • tsam

            ░░░░░░▄▄▄░░▄██▄
            ░░░░ ▐ ͡° ͜ > ͡°▌░░░▀█▄
            ░░░░░▐███▌░░░░░░▀█▄
            ░░░░░░▀▄▀░░░▄▄▄▄▄▀▀
            ░░░░▄▄▄██▀▀▀▀
            ░░░█▀▄▄▄█░▀▀
            ░░░▌░▄▄▄▐▌▀▀▀
            ▄░▐░░░▄▄░█░▀▀ U HAVE BEEN DONGED BY THE
            ▀█▌░░░▄░▀█▀░▀
            ░░░░░░░▄▄▐▌▄▄
            ░░░░░░░▀███▀█░▄
            ░░░░░░▐▌▀▄▀▄▀▐▄SPOOKY DONGER
            ░░░░░░▐▀░░░░░░▐▌
            ░░░░░░█░░░░░░░░█
            ░░░░░▐▌░░░░░░░░░█
            ░░░░░█░░░░░░░░░░▐▌

      • Origami Isopod

        This Todd Pettis? Honored, suh!

      • Tybalt

        Thomas Jefferson wanted to castrate homosexuals [citation needed], he wrote the constitution [holy crap citation REALLY needed] the idea the it mandates same-sex “marriage” is absurd on it’s face [citation Obergefell v. Hodges 576 U.S. 888 (2015)]

        • Origami Isopod

          I will hand the first one to Jennie:

          Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro’ the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least.

          This does not make Jefferson right, of course, or make Jennie right.

          • joe from Lowell

            I want the people who claim that changing social norms and understandings do not change the meaning of Constitutional doctrine to tell me if they consider castration and the cutting of holes in people’s noses to be legitimate, in 2015, under the Eighth Amendment.

            • sharculese

              That’s the thing. Jenny pretty much concedes social norms change downthread. If you pressed him on whether he thinks gay people should still be summarily executed, as SC was apparently doing a mere 150 years ago, of course he’d say no. But he can’t reason past that to realizing that other people haven’t stayed as backwards as he has.

            • timb

              Other people? He’d be okay with that. Jennie is not an empath

          • Rob in CT

            All while Jefferson was raping one of his slaves. But that didn’t count to him because shut up, that’s why.

    • sleepyirv

      It’s not that unusual in a very contentious case. Even if both Justices are using the same reasoning, they might want to get their “name on the record” by a writing a separate dissent. For example Potter Stewart and Hugo Black’s dissents in Griswold.

  • MPAVictoria

    Fantastic! What a great week for liberals. :-)

    • BigHank53

      What a great week for liberals human beings.

      FTFY. Conservatives deserve health care, they deserve to be able to marry the person they love, and they deserve to live in a less racist world. Even if they scream that they don’t want any of those things.

      • MPAVictoria

        Sure but they won’t see it that way and forgive me for enjoying a moment of victory. It is not like we get many of them brother.

        • BigHank53

          Oh, the tantrum-pitching toddlers? They’re just upset that they lost a target they could legally kick and gloat about it afterwards. Fuck them. Screencaps of their dismay will be revisited frequently during the (oh god) 2016 election.

      • NonyNony

        A great week for human beings is usually also a great week for liberals.

        It’s why, while not all liberals are humanists, most humanists are pretty liberal.

      • tsam

        THANKS FOR THE BUCKET OF COLD WATER, M8!

        Allow us a bit of gloating…Then we’ll go back to accepting reality despite wanting to send all the conservatives to their own island in the Arctic Sea.

        • CD

          How was BigH’s comment cold water? This *is* a victory for humanity and we should be happy about that.

          • tsam

            Conservatives deserve health care, they deserve to be able to marry the person they love, and they deserve to live in a less racist world. Even if they scream that they don’t want any of those things.

            My comment was just a joke.

            Right now I’m in “HAHA FUCK YOU GUYS!” mode. He’s completely right and I agree.

            • CD

              Got it! Thanks for the orangutan which puts it all in perspective.

      • so-in-so

        My vote for winner of the intertubes for the day.

        Well, after justice Kennedy.

      • random

        That would imply that there’s no human beings out there opposed to those things. Only one side showed up to argue either of the SCOTUS cases, and the Confederate Flag is some kind of geological formation that just kinda happens.

        That’s not what happened. It was a great week for liberals. Not such a great week for conservatives.

    • kg

      and a tough week for mouth-breathers.

    • Todd Pettis

      YOu like it now but in addition to “marrying” his boy lover Nero also executed people on a whim this is morality that the court has brought back we will all live to regret this.

      • matt w

        Jennietears! Yum.

      • tsam

        O.K. this is how it goes. You get an orangutan. I’m not talking a little
        monkey or some dancing chimp bullshit, I mean a fucking orangutan.
        Don’t ask me how you’re gonna get a fucking orangutan, that’s not my
        problem. So the orangutan’s name is Clyde. This is non-negotianable, all
        orangutans are named Clyde. I don’t know why that is, it’s just how the
        world works. So you and Clyde become man (and ape) about town. You’re
        seen everywhere together, you make the scene. You and friends go out in
        big groups. You talk loud, you laugh louder. Every time you say
        something witty you high-five the orangutan. The town begins to buzz. It
        gets back to her. “Did you know the guy with the orangutan?”, “You used
        to date the guy with the orangutan?”, “Why would you break up with a guy
        with an orangutan?” Next thing you know she’s calling.
        “I’m hoping we can still be friends. Wanna hang out sometime.” “Geez I
        dunno, me and Clyde were going to go to a monster truck race tonight.
        (orangutans love monster trucks) In fact the whole social calender seems
        kinda full. I tell you what, I’ll make a little note (what was your name
        again?) and maybe I can squeeze you in.” “Oh, well you know my number so
        don’t be a stra-” “Hey look at the time! I gotta skate, Clyde’s making
        Mojitos’.”
        At this point the upper hand is yours. You can let her twist in the
        wind, you can draw her back into your life at the pace you decide.
        Whatever, it’s your life. But if you’re a smart man? You slowly phase
        her back in. You’re IM’ng. You’re talking on Live. You get invited to
        family functions. You bring Clyde, he becomes like one of the family.
        You’re one big Brady Bunch.
        Then the orangutan fucks her mother.

        • Tybalt

          Nine months later, little ‘Todd’ was born. Sweet dreams, Jennie.

        • joe from Lowell

          They “Clyde” detail really makes this work.

          Because that’s totally true. They’re all named Clyde.

          • tsam

            It’s like, the law and junk.

        • Schadenboner

          …That’s a hell of an act. Whaddy’a call yourselves?

          • tsam

            Just copypasta. I cannot take responsibility for it’s creation–I’m nowhere near that funny or creative.

            • Manny Kant

              I think that is the best copypasta, though.

      • sharculese

        But Jenny, executing people on specious evidence (as long as they’re black) is a thing you’re into! You should like this Nero dude!

      • kayden

        Why can’t you write proper grammatical sentences? There must be free writing classes where you live. Take at least one.

        • so-in-so

          A FREE class? Then he/she’d be a moocher.

    • LeeEsq

      On a more abstract level, it was also a great week for the Constitution, rule of law, and the norms of American democratic government.

      • liberal

        Exactly this.

      • Todd Pettis

        It’s a terrible week for both the Supreme Court’s rulings make the Constitution meaningless.

        • Don’t worry, Jennie — your grandfather thought the same thing about Brown v Board, and your great-great-grandfather thought the same thing about women being allowed to vote.

          The nation will survive, your kids and grandkids will hail this decision as a positive thing, and you and your impotent rage will, as always, be forgotten.

          • sharculese

            To be fair, Jenny thinks those things about Brown v. Board and the 19th Amendment, too.

          • Todd Pettis

            Women voting has destroyed this country, it’s why we keep losing wars and the welfare state has exploded.

            • But again, sugarlumps, women voting isn’t going away. Black people voting isn’t going away. Gay people getting married isn’t going away.

              And you and your impotent rage will still be forgotten.

              Have fun with your future as nothing.

            • sharculese

              Caaaaaalllled it.

            • celticdragonchick

              What a strange, sad little man.

            • Keaaukane

              Woman got the right to vote in the USA in 1919. I think we kicked ass in WW II, which was after that date. Led by a Democrat. You know, that guy on the dime.

              • runsinbackground

                Led by a Democrat. You know, that guy on the dime.

                This was also a time in which Huey Long was considered a notable political figure at least in part because he only resorted to “beating up on the n*****s” as a rhetorical strategy if well and truly backed into a corner. Modern Democrats should be wary of identifying too closely with any pre-Southern Strategy member of the party.

            • timb

              At least we know where the reactionaries think things went bad. Mark Levin went on and on about his hatred of Wilson, the other day. It truly is Wilson whom they hate. The conservative movement loss 50 years before it was even founded!

              • matt w

                Randy Barnett was also posting “Hey if we’re taking down the Confederate Flag next we should stop naming things after Woodrow Wilson.” And it’s not like Wilson wasn’t a nasty racist! But somehow I doubt his commitment to the side of good here.

                • njorl

                  I don’t think it’s an equitable trade, but what the hell, I’ll take it. We’ll rename all the “Woodrow Wilson” junior highs etc in exchange for eliminating every public vestige of every Confederate and Jim Crow leader.

                • Hogan

                  Would we have to rename Woody Guthrie? I don’t think I’m down with that.

                • timb

                  Yeah, the idea that modern Progressives will fight to keep Wilson is pretty funny. He was right about a few things and desperately wrong about others. He has as much to do with leftist thought today than Chester Arthur does

                • NonyNony

                  Taking both Hogan and njorl together I propose the following solution:

                  We will remove Woodrow Wilson’s name from everything it is currently on and in exchange they will remove the name of every Confederate traitor from everything it is on.

                  In exchange all of these now nameless buildings/bridges/roads/etc. will be named after Woody Guthrie.

                  I think this is a fair bi-partisan compromise that everyone can rally around.

                • Hogan

                  NonyNony: Perfection.

            • Four Krustys

              Israel recognizes gay marriage and has socialized medicine. Why are you such an anti-Semite? Seriously. Why do you hate the state of Israel and wish to see her destroyed?

              Anti-semitic bigots like you make me sick.

          • NonyNony

            The idea of Jennie having kids horrifies me more than any of the rants that Jennie has produced on this blog. Thanks for the nightmare fuel Scott.

        • Alan Tomlinson

          Must not engage with troll.

          Cheers,

          Alan Tomlinson

          • SgtGymBunny

            Yeah, but on a stupendously momentous occasion like this we can make exceptions. If he wants to bring his open wounds to this salt-fest, he is more than welcome. I’ve got my coarse sea salt at the ready!

            • Lee Rudolph

              Sorry, if it’s not Pink Himalayan salt, it’s not worthy of his wounds.

              • Malaclypse

                Nothing but the cheap crap for Jennie.

    • Except that fast track passed.

      • Origami Isopod

        Yeah, I was gonna say.

        On balance, it’s been a good week, but that is a giant, glaring exception.

        • That this issue really received so little traction among liberals and is already forgotten about by those celebrating the politics of this week is quite telling about where economic issues stand in our minds.

          Not that I’m not happy about all these great victories this week too.

          • MDrew

            It was a good week for liberals on economic issues too, given the possibilities at the start of it. Because anti-free-trade != “economic issues writ large” in the minds of all liberals.

            Perhaps I’m an unorthodox liberal in this regard, but issues like ACA subsidies, Medicaid expansion, buttressing the safety net, infrastructure, etc. all precede railing against the reality of international trade for me. I don’t think I’m alone.

            Trade is an issue that splits liberals, not one that they in a united way suffered defeat on this week. Whereas the survival of Obamacare subsidies and arguably Obamacare itself is an economic issue that liberals almost unanimously won a victory on. The same is true of the significant economic dimensions of the right that the justices guaranteed to all Americans today.

            • Origami Isopod

              Trade might be an issue that splits liberals, but progressives understand the importance of protecting workers.

              • MDrew

                What a surpassingly important distinction. So important, in fact, we note that Loomis himself doesn’t even bother with it.

          • timb

            But, it was always gonna pass. The money party, which controls the Republican Party and half (at least) of the Dem party, wanted it. Those fuckers get what they want. And, no matter how many emails I sent to my republican senator and former banking lobbyist and to my Democratic Senator, chamber of commerce owned don’t cha know, they were always gonna disappoint me

            • Origami Isopod

              +1

              I don’t disagree that there are plenty of liberals out there who don’t care about economic issues, but there was only so much that could be done, given the Democratic Party we currently have.

      • Todd Pettis

        Obamatrade allows the Vietnamese communists and Malaysian Muslims to impose communist sharia on America you liberals should love it.

        • celticdragonchick

          Commenting here and trying to insult us doesn’t actually make your penis grow any larger…no matter how often you try.

        • I’m looking forward to running a reeducation camp myself.

          • sharculese

            I hear FEMA is very interested in the principles of a headstick based discipline system.

          • celticdragonchick

            Can I apply? I have my resume finished!

          • CD

            Trying to get into administration are we?

        • SgtGymBunny

          Just what the fuck is “communist sharia”???? What does that look like in practice, exactly. I thought the commies were godless…

          • Rob in CT

            This is why Poe’s Law exists. You’d think that no one but a liberal parodying conservativism would use a term like “communist sharia.”

            Apparently, you’d be wrong.

            • sharculese

              Oh, it’s obvious that Jenny only believes about 30% of what he says, but at the same time there’s a reason he obsesses over the same issues time and again and can’t seem quit this place.

              • Ahuitzotl

                it’s obvious that Jenny only believes about 3 0% of what he says

            • Bufflars

              I dunno. This Todd Pettis incarnation seems a bit too over the top. I think I might call Poe on this one.

              • Philip

                Every time I think that, I remind myself of unlimited corporate cash, surges in various locations, and so on.

          • Linnaeus

            I thought the commies were godless…

            That’s because you actually know what communism is and what it isn’t.

            • SgtGymBunny

              Or I just know how to not mix my alarmist talking points. But I guess it does sound kinda clever in a nonsensical kind a way…

          • CD

            Working out how gay marriage fits into Communist Sharia is gonna take some work, but I’m confident we can do it in time for the opening of the reeducation camps.

        • joe from Lowell

          Obamatrade allows the Vietnamese communists and Malaysian Muslims to impose communist sharia on America you liberals should love it.

          You betcha!

          Whoever came up with that Islamic State Dispute System was a genius.

          • Tyto

            To be fair, the Islamic State Dispute System doesn’t emphasize procedure quite so much as remedy. But your larger point stands.

        • NonyNony

          Holy crap – you’ve not only lost the plot but also the subtext AND the characterization!

      • Rob in CT

        Fair point. But these were big, big wins.

  • I’m off to inform Mrs__B that we must now divorce.

  • MPAVictoria
    • yet_another_lawyer

      First comment in that thread:

      Welcome to the new world of the gay US of KKA where the 1% calls the tune for the 99. Our turtles have come home to roost! We have broken through to the other side.

      Got to hand those rascally dems the cake today. They GET IT DONE. On the other hand us conservatives are just like so many bloated turtles. Just laying on our backs in the baking sun.

      I gotta say. This has been a dilly of a week. We’re in a pickle now. Ok, some of you brainiacs. What to do? I’m flummoxed. And I know you, dear reader, are also. And we still ain’t seen the best of O yet. Crazy. They ain’t banned fresh water fishing. Yet.

      I hardly know where to start with that, but I guess the thing that stands out most is turtles coming home to roost. Is coming home to roost a thing turtles do now? I thought it was mostly chickens.

      • tsam

        That guy’s an idiot. Everyone knows turtles come home to bask, not roost.

        • SgtGymBunny

          Why do I get this image in my head of all those little turtles back home in NC slowly trying to cross the highway…???

      • sharculese

        I’m fascinated by the conservative commenter urge to force that stilted faux-folksy affect onto their writing. It makes them sound like Lewis Grizzard channeling the spirit of Buffalo Bill, but they never stop doing it.

        edit: and we also get a soupcon of monkey cheese with the whole turtles thing.

        • matt w

          Is that a reference to the box turtle thing? Cornyn, was it?

          …ah, remarks prepared for Cornyn by Ben Domenech but not delivered.

        • Gabriel Ratchet

          Not always. Sometimes they do that “Hollywood Shakespeare as imagined by a 15-year-old D&D player” faux-grandiloquence thing.

          Or as I call it, “going Full Buckley.”

          • Origami Isopod

            I’ll say this for Buckley: He actually used words in their correct meanings.

            • Hogan

              Yeah, it’s more like a Full John C. Wright.

              • Rob in CT

                Look at the big words I use! I can make allusions to things! I AM SMART!

                The guy who apparently (I haven’t read it) wrote a story that consists of nothing but characters sitting around and talking, which was nominated for an award by a group of people who loudly complain that awards have been improperly going to overly “literary” works instead of good ‘ole fashioned space opera.

                Plus, he’s a massive, massive asshole.

                Beyond parody.

          • sharculese

            Ah, I see you’ve read Scalia’s dissent from today.

        • Karen24

          They do fauxbilly until they want to sound Important and then they write in a pretentious 19th century version of Cicero. Russell Kirk was fond of LARPing as Thomas Carlyle.

      • mds

        Okay, which of the regular commenters here wrote that? “Our turtles have come home to roost”? A Bladerunner reference? “Dilly” and “pickle,” in consecutive sentences yet? It’s too “Foghorn Leghorn rewrites Ulysses” to be genuine.

      • Origami Isopod

        where the 1% calls the tune for the 99

        Since when do they have a problem with this per se?

      • so-in-so

        I guess the theory is, if Gays can marry, then turtles can roost, or some such nonsense about all natural order being destroyed.

      • njorl

        Bit T little t what begins with t?
        Ten tired turtles in a tuttle tuttle tree.

        He’s obviously just a Seuss enthusiast.

    • postmodulator

      I’m holding out for whatever Kathryn Jean Lopez writes about it. She wrote something after one of the state rulings — California, I think — and I swear you just knew her lip was quivering the entire time she was typing.

      • MPAVictoria

        Reading the next Rod Dreher post will be like opening a brightly wrapped present on Christmas morning.

        :-D!!!!!!

        • sharculese

          Reading the next fifteen Rod Dreher posts, all of which will come today, will be like opening a brightly wrapped present on Christmas morning.

          ftfy

          • Snarki, child of Loki

            “brightly wrapped presents on the shattered remains of Christmas morning, now that the war on Christmas has been won.”

        • IM

          Oh, yes.

          Edroso will have a lot of work on his hands. And we a lot of fun.

        • Origami Isopod

          Don’t forget Vox Day and John C. Wright!

          • Ahuitzotl

            I try to, whenever possible

      • UncleEbeneezer

        I think Mollie Hemmingway’s tears will be the tastiest. Well maybe Douthat’s…so hard to choose.

        • UncleEbeneezer

          I couldn’t wait for Xmas morning. A couple from Mollie:

          Speaking as someone who changed my mind on marriage law, thinking deeply on this topic hasn’t even come close to happening in this country.

          People made fun of me for putting Polygamy in the <5 years window. Read Kennedy and you won't. Also, far less radical than SSM, fwiw.

          Much like Roe more or less began the fight over killing the unborn, today’s decision launches – rather than ends – the fight over marriage.

          • NonyNony

            The polygamy comparisons make me roll my eyes.

            First of all, the number of folks in committed polygamous relationships cannot be that high yet. So the political pressure for the right for multiple people to marry is not going to be there. 5 years for a fight that hasn’t started yet is ridiculous when you look at how hard gay folks have been fighting for rights.

            Second, the extension of the kind of benefits that married couples have to polygamous groups is non-trivial. Extending a two person marriage contract to a multi-person marriage contract is not nearly the same as removing the arbitrary gender barriers to a two person marriage contract.

            It’s like the people who make these claims not only have no knowledge of how actual modern polygamous relationships work, but they also have no knowledge of all of the legal rights that you get from marriage and why gay people might be fighting for that right in the first place.

      • ColBatGuano

        Don’t forget Maggie Gallagher!

        • Malaclypse

          I just looked. She’s really, really sad.

          Good.

    • brad

      Fuck basking, it’s bath time.
      Then I’m marinating some pork in this sweet, sweet whine.

      Hell, I’m going to bottle some and keep it in the cellar, too.

      • My mother’s verb, in reference to watching the Watergate hearings, was “wallowing.”

        • Pat

          Looks like everyone here feels entitled to a good wallow today!

    • Todd Pettis

      Now that you’ve rammed homosexual “marriage” down throats it’s only a matter of time before Christians are fed lions you people have no respect for freedom.

      • Origami Isopod

        you’ve rammed homosexual “marriage” down throats

        As has been pointed out to you countless times, the subtext is always text with you, Jenbob.

      • Rob in CT
      • brad

        Those poor lions.

        • Snarki, child of Loki

          “Those poor lions.”

          Yeah, feeding lions on basement-caged cheetos fed teabaggers can’t be good for them.

          Especially if they manage to gnaw their way through the 6 inches of bone to get to the ‘brain’; there’s a nasty prion disease in there, and it would be really bad if lions caught it.

          I mean, can you imaging magnificent, noble lions, lounging around in their underware, drooling while they watch FOX News and trolling on the internet? Extinction would be preferable, I think.

      • Todd Pettis

        That should read Christians are fed to lions sorry about that.

        • Pat

          Honestly, we’re not expecting any aptitude for editing from you, Todd.

          It’s quite clear that you don’t get paid for your words.

        • tsam

          Hey Todd–U MAD?

          OH HE MAD

          • matt w

            HE MAD

      • celticdragonchick

        There are likely several useful things that could be profitably rammed down your throat, but my marriage is not one of them.

      • John not McCain

        Naw. We’re just gonna shoot the whiny christian filth.

      • Hogan

        Oh, I stuck my head
        In the little skunk’s hole
        And the little skunk said,
        “Well, bless my soul!
        Take it out! Take it out!
        Take it out! Remove it!”

      • timb

        I hope they are gay lions

    • timb

      That’s was lovely

  • tsam

    This has been one hell of a week.

    I’m going to feel pretty good about my Independence Day celebration this year!!

    Now on to income inequality and banning ketchup and vodka, no?

    • kayden

      Was with you until you mentioned banning ketchup. What has ketchup ever done to you?

      SCOTUS issued great decisions this term and this decision is definitely a high note.

      • tsam

        Nothing. I like ketchup and vodka. It’s just my trollish nature coming out.

    • FlipYrWhig

      Ketchup and vodka… I think finer establishments call that order an “Anastasia Romanov.”

      • tsam

        HA! NICE

  • ChrisS

    I also saw another ad from Tylenol this morning championing same sex and interracial marriages/families.

    Fucking amazing how this went from being something that was opposed by 60% of the country to accepted by the majority and corporations quickly following suit in just under a decade.

    Congrats to the Supremes for getting it right.

  • Todd Pettis

    The Supreme Court has set morality back 2,000 year, we’ve returned to the time when Nero “married” his boy lover. The Romans had no respect for personal liberty we will all suffer because of this.

    • Hogan

      Just you, doll. Just you.

      • NonyNony

        While I normally am firmly in the “no feeding the troll” camp, there are always exceptions.

        The past two days are the exception. I hope our pet troll sticks around today weeping tears of pure anger and screaming about impeaching John Roberts (though I guess the ire will turn towards Anthony Kennedy today given the short attention of your average troll).

        • Ken

          I’m sure there’s at least one RWJNJ already claiming that Roberts only dissented to give himself cover for yesterday’s ACA ruling, and continuing to call for his impeachment.

    • tsam

      What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

    • Davis X. Machina

      I expect the Suebi won’t get over the Rhine till winter, when it freezes.

      But then, with warmer winters, they may not be able to cross at all.

    • John not McCain

      Dance for me, bigot! Put some effort into it! I want those legs over your head!

    • sharculese

      Can I just say that Jenny’s new fixation on dudes in togas going to town on each other is the most revealing thing about his character ever?

      • NonyNony

        Is this actually new? I thought there was always a strong undercurrent of it in a lot of Jennies anti-gay diatribes.

        • sharculese

          Oh, that’s always been there. It’s this specific fixation on Rome and How Things Were Different Back Then that’s new.

          • NonyNony

            Ah – the Roman thing. Yes, that’s a bit odd.

            I’m wondering if they finally got to Rome in Jennie’s World History class before the end of the school year and he feels the need to show off his new knowledge to the rest of us.

            • Rob in CT

              Oh dear. Eventually he’ll get to Diocletian and we’ll have the whole currency debasement thing…

              • Origami Isopod

                Just wait ’til he hears about Julius Caesar.

                • Rob in CT

                  Hadrian was an even clearer case.

                  With Caesar, I’m never sure if it was real or just a thing his enemies made up (because, at least at the time, being gay actually *wasn’t* perfectly ok in Roman society).

                • Origami Isopod

                  Jennie probably knows about Hadrian, hence the whole “boy-lover” thing.

                  “Being gay” isn’t a concept that applies well to ancient Rome. It was perfectly fine to be a “pitcher” but not a “catcher,” or to get a blowjob but not give one, so long as you were of higher status than the other guy. Men who penetrated boys, free men who penetrated slaves, and any other man who penetrated a man of lower societal station than he was – Rome was A-OK with all of this, because to penetrate someone equaled domination over them.

                • Rob in CT

                  Right, agreed, I actually knew that bit.

                  The insinuation with Caesar was specifically that he was catching, wasn’t it? Otherwise it wouldn’t really have stung.

                  Incidently, man can you see how misogyny forms the foundation of homophobia when you look at stuff like this.

                • Origami Isopod

                  Regarding Caesar and misogyny: Yes, and yes.

                • timb

                  The insinuation with Caesar was specifically that he was catching, wasn’t it? Otherwise it wouldn’t really have stung.

                  He was the Queen of Bithynia, according to the writing on the wall. Damn Lucullus

      • tsam

        Yes, (not that there’s anything wrong with that, of course).

    • brad

      Mmmmm. Please continue Jennie. Tell us every little feel you have.

    • IM

      Dance for us, little monkey! Dance!

    • tsam

      Ok, Turd Pettis–serious question. All joking aside…

      U MAD, BRO?

      • matt w

        I believe he mad.

  • Hogan

    66 + 33 = 99

    So that just leaves the Schroedinger one percent.

  • Rob in CT

    “Justice Antonin Scalia accuses the majority of writing ‘the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie,’ and howling that its ‘opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic.’ The opinion’s ‘showy profundities,’ he writes, ‘are often profoundly incoherent.’

    It’s always projection. ALWAYS.

    • tsam

      Equal protection is pretentious and egotistic. I for one, prefer the more humble oppression and relegating groups of citizens to a marginalized class.

    • Cheerful

      It’s an amazing stream of consciousness rant. By the way, Californians are not true “Westerners”.

      • Hogan

        It’s just one big San Francisco.

  • Shakezula

    Congratulations to everyone who has waited too fucking long to receive a basic right. Someone pointed out that this is the anniversary of Lawrence. Hopefully there won’t be so much of a gap between this ruling and an end to all forms of legal anti-queer discrimination.

    Now everyone break out the waders and prepare for flash floods of Conservotears.

    Am I right in thinking that the Johnson decision (ACCA) is also good news?

  • Gator90

    Message to anti-gay bigots, Obamacare-haters, and Confederacy-lovers: You lost. Deal with it.

    • Rob in CT

      It’s almost enough for me to want to check Rod Dreher’s blog to see the inevitable meltdown. But nah, screw that. Imma just gonna smile. Others can pick the mangos.

      • MPAVictoria

        You sir are a better person than me.

        • Rob in CT

          No, I’m really not. I’m lazier than you, at least today.

          I’ll happily read snippets curated by others and giggle.

          Artisal, curated Tears of Wingnuts. Blowout sale! 50% off!

    • celticdragonchick

      Rod Dreher will alternate between anger, depresson, calls for the “Benedict Option” and “BUY MY BOOK ON DANTE IT WILL SAVE YOU”

      • the “Benedict Option”

        Poaching the decision and serving it on a muffin?

        • so-in-so

          Hollandaise sauce, yuck!

          • Tyto

            Ignore the crappy restaurant stuff.

        • no, retiring when Poping gets tough.

    • kayden

      They’re dealing with it alright — by whining and screaming and beating their chests. Poor things. It must be hard to lose on so many different issues. It’s going to get even worse for them when they lose the next Presidential election.

  • Joe_JP

    Alito didn’t join CJ Roberts opinion (and Roberts didn’t join his). My take is that though Roberts threw in the usual “the majority isn’t principled – it’s not just I deeply disagree with them, they just aren’t applying law, just policy” (so tired of this) b.s., he was still too open for same sex couples to get rights in the political process. Alito’s dissent was more a paean to “traditional marriage” and warning about the “new” type.

    • Davis X. Machina

      I’m surprised at Roberts. This decision doesn’t take a dollar out of the pocket of anyone who matters

      • LeeEsq

        Its actually a great victory for the wedding-industrial complex. All those same-sex couples are now available. De Beers is probably at work right now for a new diamond selling campaign.

        • Karen24

          I can’t wait to see the themes for my friends’ weddings. This is a bonanza for jewelers, tux renters, big bands, and organza makers. Not to mention organic caterers.

          • tsam

            Wine, beer, equipment rentals…

            Yeah, this is a good thing from that respect–as a secondary benefit to finally getting that equal protection that’s been deprived for so long.

            • Ahuitzotl

              Big Glitter is going to go crazy on it

      • Joe_JP

        I’m not quite as cynical but am surprised it was so strong and/or he couldn’t figure a way to support them half-way like civil unions or on recognition. I’ve been noticing a few cases where he took the strident side though. Maybe him joining Scalia in the passport case was a sign.

        • Just_Dropping_By

          I think the logical “half-way” point would have been for Roberts to conclude that there’s no constitutional right to SSM, but that states which do not permit SSM are still obligated to recognize out-of-state SSMs on full faith and credit grounds because their refusal to recognize otherwise lawful marriages is animus-based and thus barred by Romer v. Evans. I’m curious as to what the vote would have looked like if any party involved had seriously pursued that line of reasoning.

      • Ahuitzotl

        he’s appeasing his colleagues after the ACA stab in the front

    • sleepyirv

      Roberts didn’t want to come off as a bigot, but obviously couldn’t join the majority opinion without coming off as a hypocrite. A subtle dissent raising the same issues as Sutton’s 6th Circuit decision was the logical conclusion.

      • Joe_JP

        Fine, I guess.

        Simply note strong disagreement with the result then. Don’t go into the b.s. about how “deeply disheartening” under “government of laws [equal protection etc.], not of men” that SSM is protected. Judicial review means striking down popularly passed laws. Sometimes, judges do that wrong. (Not that I think so here.) Grow up.

        I also think some half-way measure, especially regarding recognition of out of state marriages, was possible especially given result for him to support w/o looking hypocritical.

  • Does this means that Moops are finally free to marry one another?

    • Just_Dropping_By

      Only if they have health insurance!

    • Captain Haddock

      Human sacrifice! Dogs and cats living together! Mass hysteria!

  • elk

    Hey Scalia, paper or plastic? (We’re out of paper.)

  • LeeEsq

    The decision is just as moving as the decision to strike down bans on interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia. When Kennedy wants to write, he can deliver.

    • DeAndre Washington

      comparing blacks to sodomites is insulting to blacks and very racist.

      • tsam

        Your nym is insulting and racist. No go play with your toys. Every summer we get a run of these kids. I can’t wait until they go back to school.

        • ScottK

          By my calculations it’s now the 7969th of September 1993. I don’t think it’s going to end any time soon.

          • matt w

            You referring to the Eternal September or The Eternal Wingnut Freakout That Democrats Are Allowed To Win Sometimes?

            • ScottK

              Here, I mean Internet September. I’d have to date the Great Wingnut Freakout from either mid-1993 (in that year you have the Travel Office “scandal”, Foster suicide, and Whitewater allegations) or the House impeachment in 12/1998.

      • Shakezula

        What about black sodomites, JenKnob?

  • Todd Pettis

    At the time the Constitution was ratified every state put homosexuals to death, South Carolina put homosexuals to death until 1869. Homosexuals should be grateful that we don’t put them to death instead they keep demanding more and more rights.

    • Davis X. Machina

      Technical query. If they were black, were they lynched, and then executed? Or was it the other way ’round.

    • tsam

      You’re lucky I don’t you to death, you maggot. You are a puke. You are the lowest form of life on Earth. You are nothing but an unorganized, grabasstic piece of amphibian SHIT.

      • I’m trying to find a way to combine “throat-cramming” with “rip off your head and piss down your neck” but I’m finding it linguistically difficult.

        • tsam

          That’s not a bad thing, actually.

        • Pat

          But you’re a bear! Bears do the ripping thing so well.

        • Tyto

          Well, you can certainly combine the first and third. Maybe the second happens last.

    • liberal

      Does that likewise mean that semiautomatic and automatic weapon ownership isn’t protected by the 2nd Amendment, since they didn’t exist at the time (at least not in modern form)?

      • so-in-so

        Right, I’m sure they’ll be happy with their swords and flint-locks. So long as they are part of a well-regulated militia…

    • Rob in CT

      You’re such a loser. I mean, a total zero. Under different circumstances, being a bleeding heart liberal and all, I might find it in myself to feel pity for you.

      • sharculese

        I’ve said before that I actually do feel sorry for Jenny. He’s clearly forced himself to make a lot of life choices he didn’t want to because he thought it was the Right Thing To Do, and now he really does seem to hate his life and everything about it.

        Deep down, I do hope that one day he can figure out that the things he believes are nonsense and that it’s okay to be happy. Even he deserves to be happy.

        • NonyNony

          I feel sorry for him to a degree because you are correct – he clearly has to have a whole lot of self-loathing to keep coming around here looking for people to kick.

          At the same time though – he keeps making bad decisions. When you have a grown adult who refuses to own his own bad decisions and work to make his own life better after a while it gets hard to maintain that sympathy.

          (That may be why my image of Jennie is that of the perpetual 8th grader learning to be a dick on the Internet.)

    • Anticorium

      People also used to shit in rivers in 1869. What’s your point?

      • IF TOILETS ARE NOT IN THE CONTSTINTUTION, WE MUST CONTINUE TO SHIT IN RIVERS, TO THE POOP PONDS, YE SONS OF FREEDOM

    • NonyNony

      At the time the Constitution was ratified, human beings were allowed to be kept as chattel slaves. And they counted as 3/5s of a person for the purposes of determining representation in Congress.

      So your point is that things are much better now than they were when the Constitution was ratified all around? I definitely agree with that – and frankly it just keeps getting better. I can only hope that the arc of justice continues along this path.

    • John not McCain

      Yeah,it’s a rough old world out there now. Better kill yourself so you don’t have to put up with it anymore.

    • celticdragonchick

      Deleting this…not worth the effort

    • IM

      Dance for us! Dance!

    • nosmo king

      Don’t you say fuck you to me! Don’t you know who I am? You’re fuckin’ right, I’m Plettschner! Otto Plettschner! Three times decorated in two world wars! I was killing people while you were still swimming around in your father’s balls! You little scumbag! I worked five years in a slaughterhouse, and ten years as a prison guard in Attica! So what? So never say fuck you to me! Because you haven’t earned the right yet!

  • Rob in CT

    So, what’s the last ditch defense option available for the bigots?

    • Davis X. Machina

      Massive resistance. Not a public swimming pool public school chain-hotel ballroom left open in the South.

    • NonyNony

      There’s an idiot in Michigan who is trying to remove the ability of public officials to perform wedding ceremonies, requiring clergy to perform the actual ceremony. This is the kind of retrenchment I expect the bigots to fall back to next – shooting off their own feet.

      (I guess this is mostly so that public officials don’t have to sign off on same-sex unions? Except I don’t see how this survives a court challenge – it seems like a clear separation of church and state issue to me.)

      • Steve LaBonne

        I hope they pass it. In the brief interval before the courts strike it down, it will be fun to watch their astonishment at the number of clergy from sane denominations who will be kept busy officiating at same-sex weddings. These cretins don’t get out much, so I think that will genuinely take them by surprise.

        • NonyNony

          The thing is – this would hardly affect same-sex marriages at all. The group it would hit the hardest are nominal Christians who don’t belong to a church – they’re going to have the hardest time of it under that kind of regime. Gay folks, atheists, and others who fall outside the mainstream midwestern Christian stereotype are used to people throwing hurdles up in their faces – they expect it and will do the research to figure out how to get around it. After all, they’ve always had to.

          OTOH – the nominal Christians who have never encountered that kind of bullshit in their day-to-day lives are the ones who will be stunned to find out that they can’t just go to the courthouse to get married but will instead have to find a church to sign off on it.

          • Steve LaBonne

            During the very short time the law would be in effect, plenty of liberal clergy would make known their willingness to marry people of any religion or none.

            • matt w

              You might also see an upsurge in membership in the Universal Life Church.

    • celticdragonchick

      ROD DREHER AND TEH BENEDICT OPTION WE TAKE OUR BALL AND GO HOME AND GO GALT YOU SORE WINNERS WILL PUT US IN CONCENTRATION CAMPS AND LAW OF MERITED IMPOSSIBILITY O BOY O BOY DO I WANT TO BE A PERSECUTED CHRISTIAN JUST LIKE IN THE BIBLE PLEASE PERSECUTE ME AND JUSTIFY MY HATRED OF YOU ONTOGICALLY INCORECT FAGGOTS AND TRANNY TYPES!!!

      • Ahuitzotl

        That was nearly incoherent enough to get you a gig at NR

    • cleek

      in NC, they passed a law making it legal for state magistrates to refuse to perform weddings, for religious reasons.

  • celticdragonchick

    Mike Huckabee just now made an excrement joke about Obama and the SCOTUS.

    Keeping it classy as always.

    • kayden

      That’s classy for Huckabee.

      With a son who stoned and hung a stray dog to death, with his habit of socializing with child molesters and with his decision to support the parole of someone who later went on to commit rape and murder, making a joke about poop, Obama and SCOTUS is as classy as Huckabee gets.

  • DeAndre Washington

    Clementa Pinckney was an outspoken opponent of faggot “marriage” and the Supreme Court had the nerve to issue this ruling on the day of his funeral! Have they no decency!

    • sharculese

      We can tell it’s still you, Jenny.

    • tsam

      Whenever I get a package of plain M&M’s, I make it my duty to continue the strength and robustness of the candy as a species. To this end, I make them have M&M duels.
      Taking two candies between my forefinger and thumb, I apply pressure, squeezing them together until one of them cracks and splinters. That is the ‘loser’ and I eat the inferior one immediately. The winner get to go to the next round.
      I have found that, in general, brown and red M&Ms are tougher, while the blue ones are genetically inferior. I have hypothesized that blue M&Ms as a race cannot survive long in the intense ring of competition and cracks under the pressure of being in the modern candy and snack food world.
      Occasionally I will come across a mutation, a candy that is mishapen, pointier or flatter than the rest. Almost invariably this seems to be a weakness but on very rare occassions it gives the candy extra strength. In this way, the candy continues to adapt in it’s enviroment.
      When I finish the package, I am left with one M&M. The strongest of the herd. Since it wouldn’t make any sense to eat this one as well, I package it up with a letter that says “Please use this M&M for breeding purposes” and send it back to
      M&M Mars, A division of Mars INC in Hackettstown, NJ
      They wrote back this week thanking me and gve me a coupon for a free 1/2 pound bag of M&MS.
      This weekend there will be a tournament of epic protortions.
      There can only be one champion.

    • Anticorium

      As South Carolina gay rights advocate Jeff Ayres lobbied lawmakers earlier this year to stop a wave of anti-gay bills in the statehouse, he went to speak with state Sen. Clementa Pinckney, the charismatic legislator and church pastor slain alongside eight other congregants in last week’s racially motivated mass shooting.

      “He gave me his assurance then that he was on our side,” says Ayres, the chairman of South Carolina Equality. The South Carolina Legislative Black Caucus, of which Pinckney was a member, “always has our backs, and has always been there unconditionally to support the LGBT community,” Ayres told me in an interview, echoing sentiments from other gay rights advocates and two lawmakers who worked with Pinckney.

      • NonyNony

        Let me include the link to that article, because it’s a good one.

        Anyone surprised that Jennie is making shit up? No, no one is surprised.

        • Pat

          It helps to explain Jennie’s grade point average!

      • kayden

        So “DeAndre Washington” is a liar, huh? You don’t say.

    • celticdragonchick

      I bathe in your sweet, sweet wingnut tears of impotence and rage. I want them all. Give them to me now!

  • cleek

    if only the right-of center Republican Obama hadn’t appointed all those conservative judges…

    oh wait

  • MPAVictoria

    This one is pretty great! :-)

    “It’s time for Civil Disobedience
    They’re coming for the Christians now, folks.”

    http://www.redstate.com/2015/06/26/time-civil-disobedience/

    • sharculese

      Civil disobedience: (n) the practice of muttering ‘queer’ under my breath in public places to show that Obama isn’t the boss of me

    • Rob in CT

      You know, if they actually stepped up and engaged in civil disobedience – accepting that they would be arrested/fined/whatever for their disobedience, that would be something. They’d still be wrong, of course.

      I predict, however, that all that is just too much effort. Or maybe it’s not the effort, really. It’s just so… humiliating. I mean, to be arrested like one of Those People.

      I think they will whine like stuck pigs and then do nothing that requires they put in any real effort or suffer any real hardship.

      • Robert M.

        But… what would civil disobedience actually look like, here? The injured parties can refuse to get married to same-sex partners, but that would have happened anyway. They can refuse to attend or facilitate the weddings of same-sex partners, but the vast majority of them wouldn’t be doing either one anyway.

        I suppose they could get together and physically block same-sex couples from entering the courthouse to file paperwork, but the optics of that are terrible: it makes it pretty clear who’s on the side of the angels, and it would also impede a lot of people with “legitimate” business.

        So I’m seriously wondering: even if they were ready and willing to put forth a serious effort (and I suspect you and sharculese are both right on that point), what does that effort look like?

        • sharculese

          Well, we’ll get the usual smattering of local officials refusing to issues licenses and maybe some more Bob the Baking Bigot nonsense, but that’s probably about it.

          • tsam

            I get a twinge of “kill a faggot or two” from that. I hope I’m wrong.

            • John not McCain

              Absolutely. They’re probably raising money right now to send the next Dylann Roof to a gay wedding. Conservatives are truly depraved.

      • Origami Isopod

        I predict, however, that all that is just too much effort.

        A dozen of them will show up in Washington with signs, and the “liberal” media will cover it like it was a 100K-person anti-war march. Oh, wait, what am I saying, they didn’t cover those at all.

        • sharculese

          The media is learning, I think. They mostly ignored Operation American Spring except as a quaint curiosity.

          • Ahuitzotl

            Operation What?

      • NonyNony

        The only people in a position to practice any civil disobedience on this are the civil servants who sign off on marriage licenses. I’m expecting some bigots to go that route – some will lose their jobs and some will get “attaboys” from their superiors and court cases will ensue.

        Everyone else who is screaming about this has no ability to do anything. Even the hypothetical flower shop owner or cake baker can’t really perform any “civil disobedience” as far as this goes – refusing service for a wedding reception is just being a bigoted asshole, it isn’t really civil disobedience in any real way.

        I think that’s part of what has them so frustrated – this has zero impact on their lives, so there’s no way for them to act out against it. And yet they’ve been obsessed about it for over a decade at this point. It must make them feel really damn impotent.

        • Murc

          The only people in a position to practice any civil disobedience on this are the civil servants who sign off on marriage licenses.

          That just isn’t true. There are lots of benefits and situations in which your relational status to someone matters in a legal sense, and people can refuse to acknowledge the legal fact of those relations when they’re required to can engaged in civil disobedience.

          It is true that the opportunities for it aren’t as widespread as they are in other circumstances, but they do exist. Off the top of my head, I’m waiting to hear about the first hospital staffer out in redneck country that refuses to do things like let someones legal spouse into their hospital room or recognize their right to make medical decisions on the grounds that “y’all ain’t married before god, I don’t care what your fascist piece o’ paper says.”

          • NonyNony

            You’re right – I was thinking about the actual “getting the marriage license” part but the hospital thing is the other place where some dangerous civil disobedience will happen.

            Some Catholic hospital somewhere is almost guaranteed to insist that they don’t have to honor that marriage contract because of religious reasons.

            Sigh – now I’m depressed again.

          • Shakezula

            Off the top of my head, I’m waiting to hear about the first hospital staffer out in redneck country that refuses to do things like let someones legal spouse into their hospital room or recognize their right to make medical decisions on the grounds that “y’all ain’t married before god, I don’t care what your fascist piece o’ paper says.”

            I’m not saying it doesn’t still happen because people are dickheads, but unless your hypothetical bigot works for a facility that receives Zero federal money (including billing Medicare/Medicaid) they’ll expose the hospital to penalties from the fed and probably get fired.

    • ColBatGuano

      I hear in Massachusetts there are no Christians left! Someone should pass that on to Redstate.

      • Todd Pettis

        Massachusetts has the lowest Church attendance rate in the country. In Denmark the first country to legalize same-sex “marriage” 75% of babies are bastards.

        • Origami Isopod

          Yeah, who’d want to live in a shithole like Massachusetts or Denmark? The quality of life’s so much better in Saudi Arabia and Mississippi.

        • Origami Isopod

          Yeah, who’d want to live in a shithole like Massachusetts or Denmark? The quality of life’s so much better in Saudi Arabia and Mississippi.

        • Rob in CT

          And, to your neverending dismay, both Denmark and Massachusetts are doing fine.

        • tsam

          Hey fule–U MAD?

          OH HE MAD

        • celticdragonchick

          And you managed to be a bastard without even be Danish! You should tell us all how you do it!

        • Marek

          In Denmark the first country to legalize same-sex “marriage” 75% of babies are bastards.

          Yeah, but they’re OUR bastards.

      • CD

        Just a lot of contented lions.

    • mds

      Yeah, guys, we’re going to get you. Just to be safe, stay away from all public areas, especially polling stations.

    • Origami Isopod

      We’re going to stick them all into FEMA trailers and force them to attend re-education camps. All their pronouns will be changed to “ze,” “zir,” and “zem.” Sustenance will be provided via an H.R. Giger-like machine that crams it down their throats.

    • kayden

      Who exactly is coming for the Christians? Christians make up close to 80% of the American populace. Such silly folks.

      • so-in-so

        I suppose the majority aren’t TRUE Christians (or Scotsmen) because they elected a Democratic president, or something.

    • Shakezula

      Oh dear, I hope they don’t seal themselves up in churches so people can’t force the pastor to marry them.

    • guthrie

      Surely it shows how far some of them have come, that they actually write:
      Nonviolent civil disobedience is the only option we have been left under this terrible ruling. We will be heard.

      Come over to the light side, we have cookies and nice people. By the way, thanks for wanting to adopt non-violent direct process a century after we lefties and progressives and suchlike showed that it could work.

  • Joe_JP

    This probably helps Ted … teddy bear/human marriages clearly protected now.

  • Robert M.

    So obviously I’m glad the SC decided in favor of equality in marriage.

    But is it just me (IANAL), or did Kennedy write a really bad opinion? Roberts comes across as calm and thoughtful, and neatly skewers the question about polygamy that was flubbed in oral argument. Scalia’s opinion is as bilious and spittle-flecked as anyone could have expected, but he’s still a more entertaining writer than most of the court.

    And worst of all, Thomas pretty much feeds Kennedy’s opinion through a shredder. Again, I think Thomas is objectively and substantively wrong, but Kennedy’s opinion is just… weaksauce. It makes it appear as if wishy-washy, high-school-debate reasoning is the best we can do in favor of equality.

    Maybe that doesn’t matter? But I really can’t wait for Hillary to appoint someone in his place who’s (a) a more reliable liberal vote, and (b) able to make a much better written case for the liberal side of an issue.

    • Cheerful

      I was in despair at Kennedy’s stubborn unwillingness to make use of the Equal Protection clause. An argument based on there being a fundamental right to “marriage” is always going to look a little arbitrary as to what is or is not defined to be marriage. It would have been nice to make a better shout out to the idea that discrimination against gays is a constitutional problem in itself.

      But as Lemieux has pointed out, it may not actually make any difference as to its effects.

      • Robert M.

        I was in despair at Kennedy’s stubborn unwillingness to make use of the Equal Protection clause.

        Right! Again, IANAL, but it seems to me as if the due-process argument is a harder road to travel–I do think you could make the case that a state government’s refusal to recognize same-sex marriage represents a restraint on liberty, but Kennedy didn’t.

        But equal protection seems like it would have been a slam dunk. The government takes action every time it issues a marriage license (or takes another action that requires recognizing a marriage). And by refusing to recognize same-sex marriages, respondents are discriminating against same-sex couples: there’s already a fundamental right to marriage, so the question is whether that fundamental right applies to all Americans or just straight ones.

        And that would have put the conservative wing of the Court in the position of explicitly justifying discrimination, rather than allowing them a more-or-less dignified retreat to (e.g.) the originalist definition of “liberty”.

        • ScottK

          According to this ThinkProgress piece, it’s too bad Kennedy didn’t go all the way to heightened scrutiny for sexual orientation, but he did say it was “immutable” which is a big step towards that.
          http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/06/26/3674356/single-important-word-todays-historic-marriage-equality-opinion/

          • sharculese

            I’ve expected for a long time that we’re never going to get there, or at least not while Kennedy is the swing. And while, on the one hand, it would be nice, it is fun having the courts find distinctions of the basis of sexual orientation to be purely irrational.

    • Rob in CT

      Isn’t the concensus on Kennedy that he’s probably got the least intellectual firepower of anyone on SCOTUS? That he’s basically a decent human being, but isn’t a great judge?

      You know, sometimes I wonder… maybe it’s better to have fundamental decency than to have a truly gifted legal mind (obviously it’s best to have both). I mean, he’s a Conservative. He was appointed, basically, to not do things like this. He got there in his own, probably muddled, way.

      Shrug.

      • sleepyirv

        I don’t think it’s a question of intelligence, but a question of temperament. All of the Justices are smart, but they might otherwise lack ability necessary for the bench. Kennedy is so willing to give into emotional appeals that he writes “fuzzy” opinions that gives little guidance to lower courts and is less likely to use Court precedent.

    • Joe_JP

      No, I don’t think Kennedy wrote a bad opinion though I think it could have been longer to show how same sex marriage developed over time & is equal to different sex marriage. But, books have been written about this. A single opinion only go so far.

      I don’t agree with respect of Roberts dissent. He disagrees with the majority but doesn’t actually show why it is an opinion of men, not law. Also, what about all the briefs? Latching on to a question in a 30 minute oral argument is b.s. The briefs DID differentiate polygamy. Kennedy should have said something about that, I’ll grant. And, Roberts on how marriage was about procreation, full stop, is and always was bullshit.

      As to Thomas, substantive due process is now standard. HE might disagree with it, but it’s well recognized. And, no, same sex couples can not simply raise their children “in peace.” Without a right to marry, they are not merely deprived of “entitlements” but seriously burdened. And, no, a concern for “dignity” has long been a concern of the equal protection clause. Finally, yes, government can demean, even if some core of dignity remains.

      Finally, in this opinion, both the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause was used — its “synergy” was cited as it was in Lawrence v. Texas.

      Addendum: Reading Roberts’ dissent, it’s hard to see why Alito failed to join it.

      • Cheerful

        Well sure Kennedy mentioned there was a synergy of the Due Process clause and the Equal Protection clause, and then walked away from actually explaining what it was, or how the synergy here has anything to do with EQP cases from the past.

        I tend to think that because of Kennedy’s role as the swing vote on gay rights issues, the applicability of the EQP to discrimination against gays will reside for a long time in a fuzzy warm and mysterious place.

        • Joe_JP

          then walked away from actually explaining what it was

          There are multiple paragraphs doing just that; he also explained the connection in Lawrence.

          in a fuzzy warm and mysterious place.

          This to me snide sentiment that Kennedy doesn’t show his work is quite exaggerated. And, to the degree he doesn’t, it is not unique to him.

    • Yeah, it’s kinda bad. To quote myself from the VC, it’s like a Hegelian essay in deducing SSM from first principles.

      He’s reversing Sutton’s CA6 op: perhaps addressing Sutton’s (bad) arguments would have been a judicial-opinion kinda thing to do?

      There were much better circuit & district opinions than this one.

      The idea also seems to be “marriage is different,” which as y’all have noted here, doesn’t do anything for employment/housing protections.

      I would’ve preferred a straightforward holding that bans on gay marriage lack a rational basis.

  • Todd Pettis

    Most of the Roman emperors were queer that’s why Rome fell homosexuals were to busy sodomizing underage boys to run the empire and as a result it collapsed and it took 1,000 years of Christian rule to recover. the liberals have just paved the way for a return to the dark ages.

    • Origami Isopod

      Your grasp of ancient history is about as firm as your grasp of anything else, other than your pud in one hand as you try to type with the other.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Pudicitia

      • NonyNony

        Yeah – I mean, there’s no real point in arguing with Jennie but the idea that gay relationships were normal in ancient Rome is a bit weird.

        It’s like Jennie has confused Roman with Sparta. But even in Sparta, where gay relationships might have been encouraged among soldiers, gay marriage wouldn’t have been accepted.

        • Origami Isopod

          There is no point in explaining to most wingnuts that other societies, especially in other eras of history, didn’t work the same way ours does. They don’t understand anything outside their frames of reference for the modern day. Expecting them to understand the basics of Roman, Spartan, or any other ancient society would be like expecting a five-year-old to understand nuclear physics.

          ETA: That is to say, I posted the Wikipedia link for the benefit of others. Jennie won’t click on it. Too many big words in there.

          • MeDrewNotYou

            Let me thank you, then, for the link. I always thought that the Romans, while not resembling Jennie’s ramblings, were certainly not prudes. I feel a bit better educated now.

        • wjts

          Right. See also Cassius Dio’s account of Augustus dressing down members of the equestrian order in Book 56 of his Roman History, which concludes with this (56:10): “Later he increased the rewards given to those who had children, and for the rest he introduced a distinction between the married men and the unmarried by imposing different penalties on them.” Pointing to Nero’s marriages to Sporus and Pythagoras/Doryphoras as being somehow typical of Imperial Roman attitudes towards marriage is just bizarre.

    • tsam

      Hey Todd–U MAD?

      OH HE MAD.

      • Gregor Sansa

        YEAH, HE MAD.

    • celticdragonchick

      Wipe your reproductive fluids off your computer screen and try again, dear. You don’t seem to be making sense.

    • Hogan

      That’s not how it happened.

      It was luxuries like A/C that brought down the Roman Empire. With A/C, their windows were shut, they couldn’t hear the barbarians coming. Decadence: we’re on the verge of it, one wrong move and k-shoom! the fat man sits on your teeter-totter. You get A/C and the next day Mom leaves the house in a skin-tight dress, holding a cigarette and a glass of gin, walking an ocelot on a leash.

    • ColBatGuano

      I love me some comic book history.

  • David W.

    Ever since Stonewall it’s gotten better.

  • Normally I’d delete the troll, but watching him freak out and then us collectively make fun of him is well worth the cost of admission for the day.

    • Rob in CT

      Obviously. Ditto yesterday, I assume.

      I think we’re all fine with it.

      • I was actually traveling yesterday and that’s why I didn’t get it rid of it early on, but I’m glad I didn’t anyway.

      • random

        This troll’s exercises Poe’s Law so hard that I really do wonder if its not one of the regular posters here having a go at us.

        • I have wondered this at times.

          • Rob in CT

            I figured your front pager wizard powers enabled you to “see” that it really was Jennie, and that you’d clue us in if it wasn’t.

            Huh.

            This one’s spoutings are so ridiculous I do wonder if it’s parody.

            • Ken

              That’s the point of Poe’s Law, isn’t it? No matter how ridiculous or outrageous a parody is, someone out there will be worse yet entirely sincere.

    • Shakezula

      Yes, I was going to say I appreciate Jennie sparing me the trouble of searching out the freakiest of the freakouts. It’s like a one-stop-shop for RW meltdowns.

      I just hope the blog has some sort of sluice gates to let out all of the tears and spittle.

    • gmack

      Typically, I’d agree with the idea of just deleting his comments. I usually find trolls and troll-feeding (this one in particular) to be pretty tedious. Today’s and yesterday’s threads are exceptions, however. Jennie’s freak outs make my heart sing.

  • ap77

    You guys, it’s really important to Scalia who “rules” him. And his ruler shouldn’t be determined by a bare majority of the Supreme Court. No other case comes to mind on this topic.

    • Robert M.

      Per curiam means never having to say you’re sorry.

    • celticdragonchick

      it’s really important to Scalia who “rules” him.

      And here I am without my thigh high boots, ball gag and a whip. Scalia would be so much happier in Gimp leather and with a competent Domm to keep him in line.

    • UncleEbeneezer

      Picking the President without setting precedent.

  • Linnaeus

    I was amused a bit by the quote from Faulkner in Roberts’s opinion about the past not being dead, given that it meant something quite different than what Roberts seems to think it does.

    • sharculese

      Roberts strikes me as a dude who has a well-thumbed copy of Bartlett’s but has never read any of the sources.

    • Baby Needs-A-Nym

      At least he didn’t include that quote in Shelby County, I guess?

  • MPAVictoria
    • Rob in CT

      Isn’t it cute when Conservatives pretend they care about democracy?

    • sharculese

      gaseous eructations from the judicial pyloric

      aaaaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Smell the freedom!

    • brad

      Second sentence:

      You will not be surprised that the majority opinion in Obergefell, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, is full of gaseous eructations from the judicial pyloric…

      So many throats to ram my views down, so little time.

      • wjts

        “Pyloric” is an adjective, the noun is “pylorus”. And because the pylorus is the juncture between the stomach and the small intestine, its role in eructation is minimal to nonexistent.

    • I am so not clicking that shit.

      Not … clicking … must … resist …

      • sharculese

        It’s mostly just him quoting the parts of the dissents he thinks are sick burns.

  • libarbarian

    Really? What’s next?

    A “right” to marry your iPhone because you love Siri? A right to marry the color blue? Who gets the kids in the divorce? Checkmate LIEBRALS!!!!!!!!

    * I don’t have an iPhone. What does Siri say if you ask “her” “Do you take so-and-so to be your lawfully wedded husband”? Please let me know :).

    • Todd Pettis

      You hit the nail on the head. This ruling will lead to total madness.

  • random

    So, I think we can now agree that Roberts has no problem telling Corporate America to pound sand if it doesn’t help the Republican Party.

  • IM

    And Dreher delivers:

    Democracy Is Dying; Persecution Is Coming

    • Rob in CT

      He, like so many other American Christians, fantasize entirely too much about being persecuted.

      I guess it’s really baked into the religion.

      • jim, some guy in iowa

        I think it’s baked into the person. Since what he’d like to be is the persecutor, if he isn’t then he’s the martyr

        • matt w

          Yeah, I don’t think it’s unique to Christian doctrine, I think that when you’re used to dominating a society any move to bring other people to your level feels like persecution. See also: too many male gamers’ reaction to someone saying “Hey maybe games should be a little less sexist?”

      • SgtGymBunny

        The greatest tragedy to befall the RWNJs is that they were NEVER really oppressed. They basically just hate ethnic minorities, women, gays, etc. because THEY actually were persecuted and oppressed. Lucky bastards, right? Really weird envy complex.

        • Davis X. Machina

          Not-being-oppressed is the most pernicious form of oppression of all — and they’ve been singled out for it!

        • so-in-so

          Yet, none of them ever suffer any ACTUAL persecution. It’s like martyr lite. No torture or anything, just mild mental discomfiture.

      • Linnaeus

        If you take on the mantle of a victim, then you can claim a moral authority you don’t otherwise have.

        • SgtGymBunny

          It’s really weird. I guess in their militant Christianist mythologizing of persecution, they feel like there’s nothing but glory in being persecuted, without acknowledging the actual misery, suffering, inconvenience and costliness that goes along with it. They seriously think claiming persecuted status is like claiming a little extra perk, like being able to board a flight first.

          • Lee Rudolph

            They seriously think claiming persecuted status is like claiming a little extra perk, like being able to board a flight first.

            …after waiting comfortably in the Victims’ Lounge.

  • Joe_JP

    Scalia, who wanted to declare unconstitutional in full PPACA, is concerned about our freedom to self-govern and judicial restraint. Also, always fun to toss some snark:

    “The nature of marriage is that, through its enduring bond, two persons together can find other freedoms, such as expression, intimacy, and spirituality.”[23] (Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality [whatever that means] were freedoms? And if intimacy is, one would think Freedom of Intimacy is abridged rather than expanded by marriage. Ask the nearest hippie.

    Didn’t realize “spiritality” (loads of people self-label as not religious but “spiritual”) was so novel of a term. “Freedom” to be intimate without being arrested? What a concept! Are hippies still around?

  • celticdragonchick

    Rod Dreher:

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/democracy-is-dying-persecution-is-coming/

    The Supreme Court’s opinions in the Obergefell vs. Hodges case — the majority opinion constitutionalizing same-sex marriage and the dissents — can be read here. You will not be surprised that the majority opinion in Obergefell, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, is full of gaseous eructations from the judicial pyloric, e.g., “the right to marry is fundamental because it supports a two-person union unlike any other in its importance to the committed individuals.” And who says a two-person union is unlike any other in its importance? This is groundless assertion.

    You really must read the four dissenting opinions in the case. Even I am shocked by the bracing quality of the rhetoric and the analysis. If these justices are correct, this is a dark day for American democracy, and for the practice of traditional religion in America.

    My marriage is the death of democracy and Rod will go to a FEMA death camp because my spouse and I sleep in the same bed!!

    WHOOHOOOOO!!!!!!!!

    My work here is done! It’s Miller Time!

    • Why is he “shocked by the bracing character” of the dissents? “Shocked”? That makes no sense. I mean yeah, it’s Dreher, but still.

  • Todd Pettis

    There is nothing stopping a conservative state from passing a law saying the only Marriages preformed in Poland are legal in the state, since Poland is still a moral country they won’t preform queer marriages but the state won’t discriminate and Poland can’t be sued in US courts.

    • celticdragonchick

      Are you stoned or just brain damaged? Step away from the BC Bud, put down the bottle of Night Train and close that other window you opened on Big Boobed Russian Escorts.

      It’s confusing you, sweetie.

      • Why should people travel to a foreign nation to get married? That’s dumb even for the wingnuts.

        Also, I think Jennie’s ongoing ragegasm is cracking his brain apart. His spelling is actually getting worse. Before long, he’ll be typing his rants with his forehead.

        • SgtGymBunny

          Before long, he’ll be typing his rants with his forehead.

          Well he should just knock himself out and have at it!!!

        • Obligatory video.

      • jim, some guy in iowa

        stoned *and* brain damaged

    • tsam

      Your real name is Joe.

      JOE MAMA!!

      W00t

      TOTAL BURN, BRO

    • matt w

      There is nothing stopping a conservative state from passing a law saying the only Marriages preformed in Poland are legal in the state

      Full faith and credit clause, hoss.

      • Ken

        Also affirmed by today’s decision, so all those same-sex couples who got married in Massachusetts and moved to Alabama must be recognized as married by that state.

        (That may have been logically true before today’s decision, because of the way “all” works when applied to an empty domain – but now it’s also legally true.)

    • sharculese

      Do it. Announce that you’re going to force everyone to hop on a plane to eastern Europe if they want to keep enjoying the benefits of marriage.

      See how well it goes. I dare you.

    • wjts

      And here I thought you guys were all about not applying foreign law on American soil.

  • MPAVictoria

    The comment thread at Vox Day’s place may be the best one yet:

    http://voxday.blogspot.ca/2015/06/more-emanations-and-penumbras.html

  • Todd Pettis

    How long before the Mormons sue for a right Polygamy? I don’t have anything against homosexuals but if they want their “marriages” recognized I think they should do it through the legislative process not through the courts.

    • tsam

      HEY BRO U MAD? COME AT ME BRO

    • celticdragonchick

      Huckabee? You still here?

    • Hogan

      I don’t have anything against homosexuals

      it was never intended to give queers rights.

      in addition to “marrying” his boy lover Nero also executed people on a whim this is morality that the court has brought back we will all live to regret this.

      Most of the Roman emperors were queer that’s why Rome fell homosexuals were to busy sodomizing underage boys to run the empire and as a result it collapsed and it took 1,000 years of Christian rule to recover.

      So you’re a “hate the sin, love the filthy civilization-destroying perverted degenerate who commits it” kind of guy.

      • libarbarian

        Yeah. Nero screwed boys and that caused the Empire to collapse 400 years later and 150 years after it embraced Christianity.

        CHECKMATE LIEBRALS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        • so-in-so

          So, it was Christianity’s fault!

    • tsam

      I’m not going to get an epic meltdown out of you, am I?

      • jim, some guy in iowa

        no, more like watching an ice cream sandwich turn to mush

        • tsam

          Oh well, I tried. That would have been hilarious. Trolling someone until they explode gives me a tickle in my no-no spot.

    • Linnaeus

      I don’t have anything against homosexuals but if they want their “marriages” recognized I think they should do it through the legislative process not through the courts.

      After railing against the immorality of gay and lesbian people and saying they should be glad not to be summarily executed.

      Rrrriiiiight….

    • sharculese

      There are multiple means by which things acquire the force of law in this nation.

      I’m sorry you hate our Constitutional order, but you’re free to move to Poland if they’ll have you.

  • KmCO

    Thread’s probably dead, but godDAMN was this beautiful news to wake up to this morning. I’d never thought I’d be so happy about decisions from the Roberts Court, but you know what? I’ll take it.

  • Bryan Fischer quoting Don McLean.

    • Hogan

      Ah well. I was hoping it would be Vincent.

  • John F

    “‘The nature of marriage is that, through its enduring bond, two persons together can find other freedoms, such as expression, intimacy, and spirituality,'” he quoted from the majority opinion before adding, “Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality [whatever that means] were freedoms?

    ummm…. just about everyone?

  • bassopotamus

    .333 would be great if this were baseball

  • The spire of 1 World Trade Center is lit up as a rainbow right now. So the Port Authority has at least one person with some sense of propriety.

    • tsam

      Wow. This is all so wow. I got no werds man

      • On retrospect, it may have been lit up for Pride Weekend, but who cares?

  • j_kay

    Wilson did do massive good. He got rid of alot of evil empire
    by starting democracy to decide on a territory’s status in the Versailles Treaty. And he invented the UN, helpful for peace. And did the Fed, which’s helping us out of depression.

    Alot of why he’s blamed’s unfair, because Versailles made him actually insane, not his fault. Both our joining WW1 and his attack on Mexico was the German fault, for they sent the Zimmermann telegram and bribed massively with German marks for Mexican instability.

    Though he was a step back in racism, and wrongly imprisoned.

It is main inner container footer text