Skip to content

The Spot-On Quote Of The Day… [Updated Below]

01 June 2012 @ 09:54

…is awarded to fugitive from injustice, Robert Stacy McCain for this insightful commentary on a Federal Court’s decision in Boston that declares the Defense Of Marriage Act unConstitutional [worth quoting almost in full]:

…Back in the 1990s, President Clinton implemented “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” and DOMA, which stood uncontested through the remainder of Clinton’s term and all through the eight years of Bush, but now — in the Obama era — these measures have been declared dreadfully oppressive.Hope! Change! And it’s probably only a matter of time before homosexuality is declared compulsory, so that turning down an offer of sodomy is illegal “discrimination.”


Once again, Justice Scalia is shown to be a prophet. From his dissent in Lawrence v Texas [2003]:

… State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding. See ante, at 11 (noting “an emerging awareness that liberty gives substantial protection to adult persons in deciding how to conduct their private lives in matters pertaining to sex” (emphasis added)). The impossibility of distinguishing homosexuality from other traditional “morals” offenses is precisely why Bowers rejected the rational-basis challenge. “The law,” it said, “is constantly based on notions of morality, and if all laws representing essentially moral choices are to be invalidated under the Due Process Clause, the courts will be very busy indeed.” 478 U.S., at 196.

It is just a short step from making something legal to making it compulsory.

The Boston Heraldreport on yesterday’s decision may be found here [tip of the fedora to Wombat-Socho’s Live At Five]. An interesting highlight from it:

[Massachusetts Attorney General Martha] Coakley said she’s confident of the case’s chances in the country’s highest court, optimism echoed by Dean Hara, the widower of U.S. Rep. Gerry E. Studds and one of the case’s 17 plaintiffs.

“DOMA was not right back in 1996 and it’s not right now,” he said. “Those people that years ago were saying this is wrong and that we should treat all Americans the same are just becoming louder.”

So the ‘widower’ of a pedophile was directly involved in the case.

UPDATE at 1851…

Jeff Goldstein is dead solid perfect in his analysis:

Make no mistake: the goal here, from a strategic legal perspective, is to take the fact the some marriages have taken place to then force all states, eventually, to recognize those marriages as part of some equal protection strategy. Or to put it another way, the strategy is to get the courts to rule that states have no say at all over same sex marriage — because even though same-sex marriage will remain a “state issue,” the fact that such marriages can occur in certain states and then must be recognized in every state is merely an instance of a back-door violation of federalism.

Once again, the Left is seeking to have something shoved down our throats via Judicial Fiat.  Those who predicted that the Federal Court orders issued in the late 1960’s and 1970’s forcing public schools to desegregate would snowball into rule by Judge were right on the money.

We have to urge the legislative and executive branches of the Several States to begin resisting such orders.  This kind of action is totally allowable in our republican forms of government and is, in fact, a feature, not a bug.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: