Supreme Court Jtice Anton Slia torched the majory opn regnizg gay marriage natnwi lorful language.
Contents:
- READ SLIA GAY MARRIAGE DISSENT: SUPREME COURT JTICE SLAMS 'CONSTUTNAL REVISN'
- WHY FOUR JTIC WERE AGAST THE SUPREME COURT'S HUGE GAY-MARRIAGE DECISN
- ANTON SLIA ROUTELY LED AGAST GAY RIGHTS. THOSE OPNS EXPLA HIS PHILOSOPHY.
- GAY MARRIAGE: IT'S A 'JUDICIAL PUTSCH' WARNS DISSENTG SLIA
- MANY BRONS HAVE CHANGED THEIR MDS ON GAY MARRIAGE
- JTICE SLIA'S GAY MARRIAGE ADVICE: 'ASK THE NEART HIPPIE'
- CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR
- THE BCHIT QUOT OM SLIA’S GAY MARRIAGE DISSENT
- SAME-SEX MARRIAGE SYMPOSIUM: JTICE SLIA’S NSTUTNAL SE FOR GAY MARRIAGE
- CALIFORNIA VOTERS WILL BE ASKED TO REAFFIRM GAY MARRIAGE PROTECTNS ON 2024 BALLOT
- GAY STUNT ASKS JTICE SLIA TO FEND HIS 'BTIALY' MENTS
- JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS ASSISTANT COACH KEV MAXEN MAK HISTORY AFTER COMG OUT AS GAY
READ SLIA GAY MARRIAGE DISSENT: SUPREME COURT JTICE SLAMS 'CONSTUTNAL REVISN'
* scalia and gay marriage *
” Fally, Slia warned that the lg to extend marriage rights to gay upl across the untry would rob the urt of s power: “Hubris is sometim fed as o’erweeng pri; and pri, we know, goeth before a fall.
Protters opposed to gay marriage rallied ont of the Supreme Court Washgton on Thursday. Urt ultimately cid to end the ban on gay marriage, lg that the 14th Amendment requir stat to marry same-sex upl as well as regnize their marriag legally performed other stat.
WHY FOUR JTIC WERE AGAST THE SUPREME COURT'S HUGE GAY-MARRIAGE DECISN
This week the Supreme Court will hear arguments about equal rights for gay Amerins. But we already know what Slia thks. * scalia and gay marriage *
Right after Mary Bonto, the lawyer challengg marriage bans several stat, pleted her argument, a spectator rose om a back row and started screamg, “If you support gay marriage, you will burn Hell! ” Ined, there’s every reason to believe that Slia more or ls shared the protter’s view of the immoraly of homosexualy, and that he regards the Court’s toleratn of gay people as one of the great disasters of his nearly three s as a ’s unter-outburst was a notable ntrast to the rpectful tone of the rt of the argument, cludg om his fellow-nservativ.
ANTON SLIA ROUTELY LED AGAST GAY RIGHTS. THOSE OPNS EXPLA HIS PHILOSOPHY.
How Slia's opns on gay rights expla the late Supreme Court jtice. * scalia and gay marriage *
It is one measure of the succs of the gay-rights movement that all the other Jtic felt pelled to phrase their qutns ways that honored the humany of gay people.
After Bonto said that gay people should be allowed to jo the stutn of marriage, Chief Jtice Roberts replied, “Well, you say ‘jo’ the stutn. “Excludg gay and lbian upl om marriage means the digny of the upl.
GAY MARRIAGE: IT'S A 'JUDICIAL PUTSCH' WARNS DISSENTG SLIA
The nservative's latt turn of phrase his gay-marriage dissent ma a splash on social media. * scalia and gay marriage *
)Jtice Elena Kagan battered John Bursch, the lawyer for Michigan, wh var versns of the same qutn: What ernmental tert was the state servg by excludg gays om the stutn of marriage? ” Bursch uld never really say what those nsequenc were, nor uld he expla why heterosexual-only marriage had to be prerved for the sake of the children when lots of straight people don’t have kids and lots of gay and lbian people most likely oute still looks like a victory for the plantiffs and marriage equaly all fifty stat.
At a mimum, even before the cisn is announced, the argument self was an example of how much the untry, and the Court, has changed on the subject of gay rights. In lg favor of gay marriage, he said, "Five lawyers have closed the bate and enacted their own visn of marriage as a matter of nstutnal law. "(RELATED: What 2016 Candidat Are Sayg About the Gay Marriage Rulg)Roberts's other dispute is that many of the arguments ma support of gay marriage uld also be ed to support plural marriage.
"If not havg the opportuny to marry 'serv to disrpect and subordate' gay and lbian upl, why wouldn't the same 'imposn of this disabily, '...
MANY BRONS HAVE CHANGED THEIR MDS ON GAY MARRIAGE
California voters will be asked to affirm gay marriage rights on the 2024 ballot followg Prop. 8 ncerns about the state nstutn. * scalia and gay marriage *
"(RELATED: Watch The Two GOP Printial Candidat After the Supreme Court's Gay Marriage Decisn)Slia wrote that if he ever were to jo an opn that began wh that sentence he "would hi my head a bag, " sayg such language was more like the "mystil aphorisms of the fortune okie" than, say, legendary Chief Jtice John Marshall. "Jtice Samuel AloIn his dissent, Alo argued that gay marriage is not protected the Constutn unr the Due Procs Clse bee "liberty" only appli to those prcipl that are rooted U. His argument is that the ncept of gay marriage is new and therefore not clud.
The Jtic the majory claim the thory to nfer nstutnal protectn upon that right simply bee they believe that is fundamental, " Alo also reaffirmed his posn that there is no way to nfirm what the oute of gay marriage may be on the stutn of tradnal marriage, and therefore the Court is and should not be a posn to take on the "For lennia, marriage was extribly lked to the one thg that only an oppose-sex uple n do: procreate.
Their basic argument is that Stat formalize and promote marriage, unlike other fulfillg human relatnships, orr to enurage potentially procreative nduct to take place wh a lastg un that has long been thought to provi the bt atmosphere for raisg that the majory has led favor of gay marriage, Alo offered a stark warng about future nflict between relig liberty and progrsive ias. Rellg the harsh treatment of gays and lbians the past, some may thk that turnabout is fair play.
JTICE SLIA'S GAY MARRIAGE ADVICE: 'ASK THE NEART HIPPIE'
His many reflectns on homosexualy formed a notable part of his judicial legacy.
This story was published March 2013, as the urt prepared to hear historic gay rights s. ” Judgg by the thgs he has said urt or wrten his legal opns about gays and lbians, he don’t really mean . Dpe Slia’s long public history of exprsg revulsn and ntempt for gays and lbians, on the subject of whether people of the same sex should be allowed to marry, he is among the ne people whose opns will really matter.
Here are the lowlights of Slia’s anti-gay ments:. Texas, the se challengg a Texas law that crimalized homosexual sex, Slia me up wh a tastels analogy to illtrate the issue. Let’s throw gay people jail bee some people don’t like them.
CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR
In his dissent Lawrence, Slia argued that moral objectns to homosexualy were sufficient jtifitn for crimalizg gay sex. “Many Amerins do not want persons who openly engage homosexual nduct as partners their bs, as sutmasters for their children, as teachers their children’s schools, or as boarrs their home, ” he wrote.
Laws banng homosexual sex are like laws banng murr.
Surely that is the only sort of ‘anim’ at issue here: moral disapproval of homosexual nduct[.
THE BCHIT QUOT OM SLIA’S GAY MARRIAGE DISSENT
Slia cid to take the “moral disapproval” argument up a notch his dissent Lawrence, wrg that the Texas ban on homosexual sex “unniably seeks to further the belief of s cizens that certa forms of sexual behavr are ‘immoral and unacceptable, '” like laws agast “fornitn, bigamy, adultery, adult ct, btialy, and obsceny. Homosexual upl are like roommat.
“[Colorado’s ban] prohibs special treatment of homosexuals, and nothg more, ” Slia wrote. “[I]t would prevent the State or any municipaly om makg ath benef payments to the ‘life partner’ of a homosexual when do not make such payments to the long time roommate of a nonhomosexual employee. In one sectn, he plas that banng discrimatn based on sexual orientatn hirg amounts to grantg gays and lbians special treatment that Republins, adulterers, and Cubs haters don’t get.
Have gays and lbians tried NOT havg homosexual sex?
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE SYMPOSIUM: JTICE SLIA’S NSTUTNAL SE FOR GAY MARRIAGE
” But Slia poted out that gays and lbians uld jt have sex wh people of the oppose sex stead.
“Men and women, heterosexuals and homosexuals, are all subject to [Texas’] prohibn of viate sexual terurse wh someone of the same sex. Perhaps no cha of s monstrated this better than Slia's very nsistent opposn to gay rights.
CALIFORNIA VOTERS WILL BE ASKED TO REAFFIRM GAY MARRIAGE PROTECTNS ON 2024 BALLOT
In his view, wasn't so much that he was opposed to gay rights — although he was — but that such rights simply weren't protected by a very origalist terpretatn of the Constutn and s amendments. Slia's opposn to gay rights showed his brand of nservatism. Slia was a nsistent opponent of nstutnal claims ma on behalf of gay rights.
At the heart of Slia's opposn to gay rights was his view that the US Constutn simply did not protect the rights of gay people. So the three major s that me to the urt sce 2003, Slia oped agast gay rights sometim btal dissents. His lleagu, of urse, argued that the 14th Amendment protected gay people — by forbiddg any level of ernment om passg discrimatory laws that nied people their fundamental rights.
GAY STUNT ASKS JTICE SLIA TO FEND HIS 'BTIALY' MENTS
Slia rejected the view, claimg the Constutn, the 14th Amendment, and their amers ma no mentn of gay rights and therefore did not tend to protect gay people. Texas 2003, where the Court led that stat' anti-sodomy laws — which effectively banned gay sex — were unnstutnal, Slia warned his dissent that the logic ed to strike down the lg uld upend stat' laws agast same-sex marriage:. The Supreme Court reasoned that all the anti-gay laws were unnstutnal for largely the same reason: They discrimated agast a group of people by whholdg fundamental rights and vlated the 14th Amendment.
JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS ASSISTANT COACH KEV MAXEN MAK HISTORY AFTER COMG OUT AS GAY
Slia's stance on gay rights monstrated his origalist view: He believed the Constutn uldn't protect gay rights, bee no one uld envisn, for example, same-sex marriage as an issue back when the Constutn and s amendments were wrten.
So Slia's view, the urt's pro–gay rights cisns read rights and lims to the Constutn that simply didn't exist, and therefore allowed the Court to strike down laws that were, his opn, nstutnally valid.