You might appreciate the bit on page 61 of the decision, where Walker quotes Scalia's angry and sarcastic
dissent
in Lawrence v. Texas to support the premise that there is absolutely no logical nor legal reason to prohibit gay and lesbian folk from marrying.
Here, lemme show you:
c. Lawrence v Texas, 539 US 558, 604-05 (2003) (Scalia, J, dissenting) (“If moral disapprobation of homosexual conduct is ‘no legitimate state interest’ for purposes of proscribing that conduct * * * what 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 the elderly are allowed to marry.”)
I love how Scalia's snarkiness rose up and bit him right in his bigoted, stupidstitious ass.
I think this bit was sort of critical, because this case will be going to the Supreme Court. They've already confirmed there, that private morality is insufficient to base a law that denies rights in that case.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-05 02:14 am (UTC)Here, lemme show you:
dissenting) (“If moral disapprobation of homosexual
conduct is ‘no legitimate state interest’ for purposes of
proscribing that conduct * * * what 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 the elderly are
allowed to marry.”)
I love how Scalia's snarkiness rose up and bit him right in his bigoted, stupidstitious ass.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-05 03:01 pm (UTC)