Scalia rips #SCOTUS majority in scathing dissent on #DOMA ruling

Posted by: ST on June 26, 2013 at 7:35 pm

Scalia is one guy whose bad side I would not ever, ever want to be on.  Via National Journal (bolded emphasis added by me)

In a ripping dissent, Scalia says that Justice Anthony Kennedy and his colleagues in the majority have resorted to calling opponents of gay marriage “enemies of the human race.”

But to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to con- demn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions. To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution. In the majority’s judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement. To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to “dis- parage,” “injure,” “degrade,” “demean,” and “humiliate” our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homo- sexual. All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence— indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history. It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change by adjudging those who oppose it hostes humani generis, enemies of the human race.

Scalia says that the court’s holding – while limited to the Defense of Marriage Act – is a sure sign that the majority is willing to declare gay marriage a constitutional right.

It takes real cheek for today’s majority to assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here—when what has preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral judgment against it. I promise you this: The only thing that will “confine” the Court’s holding is its sense of what it can get away with.

And, he says, the holding will short circuit the debate over gay marriage that should have been carried out in the states.

In the majority’s telling, this story is black-and-white: Hate your neighbor or come along with us. The truth is more complicated. It is hard to admit that one’s political opponents are not monsters, especially in a struggle like this one, and the challenge in the end proves more than today’s Court can handle. Too bad. A reminder that disagreement over something so fundamental as marriage can still be politically legitimate would have been a fit task for what in earlier times was called the judicial temperament. We might have covered ourselves with honor today, by promising all sides of this debate that it was theirs to settle and that we would respect their resolution. We might have let the People decide.

You can read the full opinions of the court on United States v. Windsor here.

So nice to know that proponents of traditional marriage like myself are viewed by the majority in this case to be hateful, demeaning bigots, hmm?  Next up for militant liberal gay leftists? The church. Don’t be surprised if this court doesn’t go along with it.  Meanwhile, on to polygamy.

By my count these are the terms successfully redefined by the left over the last few decades: abortion, gender, marriage, family, adult, racism, sep. of church & state. And people still wonder why we’re so screwed up?

Justice Scalia

#TeamScalia

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

12 Responses to “Scalia rips #SCOTUS majority in scathing dissent on #DOMA ruling”

Comments

  1. Dana says:

    In some ways, the Court painted itself into a corner: by saying that the regulation of marriage is and has always been, in our republic, a state matter, they are concomitantly saying that the federal government has no business interfering . . . and most of the states have had the good sense to restrict legal marriage to heterosexual couples.

    Of course, if the next Court wishes, it can completely ignore the restraints it placed on itself with this decision.

  2. The Bible was written about Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.

    “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.”–Leviticus 18:22

  3. Kathy B. says:

    SCOTUS DOMA Ruling basically states: “Hate your neighbor or come along with us” as Justic Scalia points out in his dissent. The Truth IS, indeed, much more complicated. This objective truth is of such vital importance when attempting to redefine the definition of marriage. The Supreme Court really thinks it is “SUPREME” by this decision – placing itself over this One Nation that was and always should be “under God”, who is the only SUPREME BEING that can define what is naturally good for humanity and what is intrinsically evil for any individual human being. Redefining a long-standing tradition of marriage between a man and a woman is like saying it’s okay to build a structure without a solid foundation. The result of the DOMA ruling today will be a further collapse of society and should be considered an unjust law. The time has come when evil is called good and good is called evil. Thank you Justice Scalia for shedding some light on this darkness and realizing the limits of your power.

  4. EBL says:

    Scalia is right that democracy should resolve issues like this.

  5. Zippy says:

    God Bless him for speaking his (right) mind!

  6. Sefton says:

    Next up: polygamy… then beastiality… then pedophilia…

  7. Neo says:

    Yes, the Court majority fornicated on the 9th Amendment, yet again.

  8. Carlos says:

    Decisions like this makes one wonder whether any of the majority, even Kennedy, passed third grade language arts. They don’t seem to be able to read and understand fairly simple English sentences put forth in the Constitution.

    Heck, there’s only maybe three on the court that can consistently, and one of them isn’t that upstanding jerk who heads the court, who contorted the language into pretzels so badly with the ObamaCare decision, which was as basically easy as it can get any more. Taxes indeed!