SCOTUS Rules In Favor Of Marriage Equality

[Dale00]

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said the Supreme Court's ruling in favor of gay marriage shows just how much trouble American democracy is in.

In a strongly worded dissent, the conservative justice wrote that he did not care that gay marriage was now legal, but he said that the court's ability to make this decision represented a threat to democracy.

"I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy," Scalia wrote in the opening paragraph of his dissent.

"Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court," Scalia said.

"This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves."

The conservative justice railed against his fellow justices, calling the majority opinion "egotistical" and pointing out that the justices were a homogeneous group that didn't represent the people. As proof, Scalia pointed out that many went to the same law schools, and none were evangelical or protestant Christians.

"To allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation," Scalia said.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/scalia-gay-marriage-dissent-2015-6#ixzz3eW54oNg7

"...more fundamentaL than no taxation without representation"

I believe elsewhere Scalia points out the very large danger that the American people will stop obeying the rulings of the Supreme Court because they will have lost respect for it.
This is much like we have seen in NY state where 95% ignored the law to register assault rifles.

 

[TwoForFlinching]

It's always good when a small group of black clad "politicians" dictates, overrides, or voids law....especially to the states.

Like Heller V DC?

 

[TenBears]

Like Heller V DC?

Does that require all states to respect my right to keep and bear arms? Oklahoma has to honor NY's marriage licenses, will they honor an Oklahoma CCL? Too much power in too few hands, irregardless of type of law. The United States of America was intended to have one branch of .gov that makes law, but that's too narrow minded in our society, when we could have congress, executive, and the judicial branch all making laws.

“We warned in Heller that a constitutional guarantee subject to future judges’ assessments of its usefulness is no constitutional guarantee at all.”

Thomas was joined in his dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia, who authored Heller.

BOTTOM LINE: It appears that, until the nation’s highest court decides to protect the expressly enumerated Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as strongly as it does non-enumerated rights like gay marriage and abortion, law-abiding American gun owners are simply left to watch lower courts unravel the Constitution and our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms in decisions like Bonidy. The full Bonidy v. USPS decision can be read here.



Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2015/06/bre...ls-second-amendment-gun-rights/#ixzz3eWHjBM70
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

 

[TwoForFlinching]

Does that require all states to respect my right to keep and bear arms?

Yes. As a basic, fundamental right, you may keep and bare arms in any US state/DC... in turn, as a basic, fundamental right, you can enter marriage with any consenting partner.

 

[Hawgman]

Maybe an actual reading of the ruling is in order?

This reminds me of all the homophobes out there that believe every gay man wants to nail them. Pretty sure the gays won't be hitting up the southern baptists for marriage. Spare me the war on christianity BS.

I encourage you to read the lead story on the CBS news website. It is an article giving voice to 4 "foot soldiers" (CBS words, not mine) of the LGBT movement. Two of the four say one of the next main battle fronts is religion. Deny it all you want, but there is a battle and it's between the religious and non-religious. The non-religious are in no way content to live and let live. They are intent on oppressing any who do not agree with them. They are not content to simply find a denomination that will accomodate them. They are not content with a general purpose wedding chapel that serves all. They are not content with a judge or justice of the peace. They will not rest till all who practice their beliefs in a way that runs contrary to theirs is bent to their will or stamped out of existence.

 

[henschman]

Yes... deny equal rights to a whole group of folks because some among them would deny rights to others if they were in power. Makes sense. It's like a preemptive denial of rights strike. Just the ticket for a free society.