Outstanding! It's now officially legal for Bruce to marry Bruce!

[G.W. Cooper]

Next up, Animal Marraige

[Drama Queen]

Animals can't consent.

It seems that acts between "mental competent" adults or anything from a "mentally competent" individual is ok in America as long as they don't harm or impact others.

[RSE]

In voting his politics and then crafting his rhetoric, Scalia is no different than any other Justice. It would be naive or dishonest to believe otherwise.

[JuTMSY4]

If they paid for the Justice

Of course batshit asshole, bought and paid for by the Koch Brothers, Scalia proclaims his ignorance to all the world.........

They sure are getting a bad return because the Koch brothers are pro-gay marriage.

[Eagle Road]

They sure are getting a bad return because the Kock brothers are pro-gay marriage.

Great, now you are going to have Liberal heads exploding.

[FuriousXGeorge]

Great, now you are going to have Liberal heads exploding.

They generally lean big business libertarian IIRC. Not at all shocking they don't hold to social conservatism. The big question now is since corporations are people, can they marry each other?

If anything the social conservatives who cheered on Citizens United should be worried about who they sold their party to.

[JuTMSY4]

ha, I wrote "kock"

[Maniac]

So you're agreeing that his comments were in favor of democracy ... good.

I'm saying I find his comments uninteresting because he consistently votes his politics and personal biases.

But I'd say he's citing states rights here. That's different than democracy, isn't it? At least different than American democracy. Our system is supposed to grant equal standing to minorities.

[Eagle Road]

They generally lean big business libertarian IIRC. Not at all shocking they don't hold to social conservatism. The big question now is since corporations are people, can they marry each other?

True, esp. since David Koch was actually nominated for VP in the 80's of the Libertarian party.


Saying that they are all full blown tea baggers is quite an exaggeration, (edit, at least what some people consider Tea baggers) but some people just love to sling that wide brush around.


They actually donate quite a bit to the Dems too, my take on them is they more support a candidate that aligns with their beliefs more than a party line.

[Maniac]

In voting his politics and then crafting his rhetoric, Scalia is no different than any other Justice. It would be naive or dishonest to believe otherwise.

Largely true although Scalia seems to get the most joy out of flaunting it.

[slag]

Majority rules in democracy.

However, constitutional principles, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, do not allow a majority to take away a constitutionally-protected right from a minority.

4 judges, including one who voted in favor of the ACA yesterday, think the States have a right to define who can and cannot get married based on the exercise of democracy.

5 judges think same-sex marriage is a fundamental right that cannot be infringed against gays because it's discriminatory, so the people of a State don't get to decide that issue.

You, I believe, think same-sex marriage is a fundamental right.

But, I further imagine, you don't think shooting unlimited numbers of deer is, so you'd probably be pissed if the Supremes took away the right of the people to elect representatives who decide how many deer you can shoot.

Now, there are a shitload of people who think homosexuality is sufficiently deviant from their morals that gay marriage is something the States should be allowed to regulate.

And it's all about democracy ... ie. do the people get to decide it, or does the Supreme Court?

EDITED TO ADD: Don't think for a minute that I'm equating deer hunting with marriage ... I'm just pointing out that there are things you think States should be able to regulate ... or not.

[Big Little]

Like MUSIC to my ears

[BigSlizz]

You sure were. And that's appropriate today.

[slag]

PS - or to maybe better state it:

There are probably people who think it's a fundamental right to shoot as many deer as they want.

And you'd disagree with that, I imagine.

Well, four Justices disagree with the notion that it's a fundamental right to marry someone of your own sex, so the state should be able to regulate that through the democratic expression of the voters.

Now that's a question of State's rights, but it clearly is encompassed in the notion of democracy.

EDITED TO ADD AGAIN: I am not equating deer hunting with same sex marriage as issues ... I'm just using deer hunting as an example of what most people would agree is not a fundamental right.

[Dim Bulb]

My cat

Animals can't consent.

It seems that acts between "mental competent" adults or anything from a "mentally competent" individual is ok in America as long as they don't harm or impact others.

is really smart. I know what she means when she looks at me that way.