I felt a great disturbance in the Douchebag Force, as if millions of lowlife bigot assholes suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced. I think something wonderful has happened.
(Gay marriage ban in Texas struck down — fuck you, Rick Perry)
This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 26th, 2014 at 3:23 pm and is filed under bigots, church and state. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
BOOOM and the opinion quotes Scalia’s dissent in Lawrence:
“The procreation argument raised by Defendants also fails. The notion that same-sex marriage will encourage responsible procreation assumes that heterosexual marriage is “naturally
procreative.” However, procreation is not and has never been a qualification for marriage. Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 605 (Scalia, J., dissenting) (“[W]hat justification could there possibly be
for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples exercising ‘the liberty protected by the Constitution’? Surely not the encouragement of procreation since the sterile and elderly are
allowed to marry.”); Golinski, 824 F. Supp. 2d at 993 (“The ability to procreate cannot and has never been a precondition to marriage.”). This procreation rationale threatens the legitimacy of
marriages involving post-menopausal women, infertile individuals, and individuals who choose to refrain from procreating. See Bishop, 2014 WL 116013, at *30. These individualswho
cannot or will not procreateare allowed to marry under Texas’ current laws.”
Loved the “rational basis is enough, no need to go further” analysis.
BOOOM and the opinion quotes Scalia’s dissent in Lawrence:
“The procreation argument raised by Defendants also fails. The notion that same-sex marriage will encourage responsible procreation assumes that heterosexual marriage is “naturally
procreative.” However, procreation is not and has never been a qualification for marriage. Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 605 (Scalia, J., dissenting) (“[W]hat justification could there possibly be
for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples exercising ‘the liberty protected by the Constitution’? Surely not the encouragement of procreation since the sterile and elderly are
allowed to marry.”); Golinski, 824 F. Supp. 2d at 993 (“The ability to procreate cannot and has never been a precondition to marriage.”). This procreation rationale threatens the legitimacy of
marriages involving post-menopausal women, infertile individuals, and individuals who choose to refrain from procreating. See Bishop, 2014 WL 116013, at *30. These individualswho
cannot or will not procreateare allowed to marry under Texas’ current laws.”
Of course they have to legalize gay marriage, since they’ve outlawed women.