MARRIAGE EQUALITY NATIONWIDE

[Thumpalumpacus]

Scalia's opening line: "I join (CJ Roberts's dissenting opinion) in full. I write separately to call attention to this Court's threat to American democracy."

1. "Today's decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court.... This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves."

No, it doesn't. It is the exercise of the Court's power to review lower laws to ensure their Constitutionality.

2. "Until the courts put a stop to it, public debate over same-sex marriage displayed American democracy at its best."

You mean the part where you had a majority denying a minority equal rights? That part?

3. As stated by J. Kennedy 2 years ago, "Regulation of domestic relations is anarea that has long been regarded as a virtually exclusive province of the States."

"Virtually."

4. When the 14th Amendment was ratified, every state limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so.  That resolves these cases... it is unquestionable that the People who ratified that provision did not understand it to prohibit a practice that remained both universal and uncontroversial in the years after ratification."

Is/ought fallacy. No one denied the Constitutionality of segregation, either, before Brown v Board in 1954.

5. What this does is assure that "liberty," as used in the Constitution, means "liberty as defined by the majority of the SCOTUS", not "liberty as defined by the people."

The Court has, by historical precedent, always interpreted the Constitution. If you don't think that was apt, why did you accept your nomination?

6. "A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy."

If you're feeling that bad about the system, why are you part of it, you hypocrite?

The idea that rights should be determined by popular sentiment is a startling, and uneducated, view for a Supreme Court Justice to hold.

7. It is ridiculously prideful of the majority to "have discovered in the Fourteenth Amendment a 'fundamental right' overlooked by every person alive at the time of ratification, and almost everyone else in the time since."

The Fourteenth Amendment says what it says: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. That, very simply, means that all Americans are entitled to the same rights. It is not topic-specific.

What a shame that an illiterate bigot can rise to sit on that august Court. You do it a disservice with this ignorant petulance, and should resign.

8. "Of course the opinion's showy profundities are often profoundly incoherent. 'The nature of marriage is that, through its enduring bond, two persons together can find other freedoms, such as expression, intimacy, and spirituality.'

I guess if you're a heartless bigot, such insight would indeed be mysterious.

9. "Hubris is sometimes defined as o'erweening pride; and pride, we know, goeth before a fall."

Hubris is thinking you should be able to deny 30 million Americans a right that you yourself enjoy, simply because they wouldn't exercise it in the same manner you do.

Pathetically simple to answer Scalia's arguments. Reminds me of a t-shirt I saw a few weeks back: "Silence is golden. Duct tape is silver."