The Supreme Court’s dissenting arguments against same sex marriage are so logically flawed it’s ridiculous, and largely consist of vitriolic embroideries of a) we can’t redefine a legal institution by asserting people have the right to equal treatment, b) lots of people don’t like this idea and you’d be taking away their right to debate it.
Those are literally the two dissenting opinions that aren’t a critique of the writing style of the pro opinion, or that make such idiotic statements as “Who do we think we are?” Please allow me to give you a dumbed down explanation of why those two arguments are fucking preposterous:
In response to A:
The federal government is forbidden to uphold any institution that does not allow equal treatment under the law as stated by the Equal Protection clause of the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution. Period. Meaning if it does not treat peoples of different types identically, it is not equal. This was further upheld when the courts (the branch of our government that determines how we interpret the law) mandated that Separate But Equal was also not equal, during the Civil Rights movement. That’s why schools were desegregated. Separate IS NOT EQUAL. Because you establish DIFFERENCE when you DETERMINE “separate-ness”. So no, you cannot argue it is unconstitutional to “redefine an institution”. The previous definition, subject to our capricious whims, was not in accordance with our Constitution. End of argument. If you’re a fucking patriot, you can recognize this and rejoice that we have rectified this grievous error in our judgment and understanding of the logical “freedoms” we implied when we began this infernal experiment we call democracy. Unless you’re a racist…and then you’re still moronically pissed off, but I can’t fix stupid.
In response to B:
That is, quite possibly, the DUMBEST thing I have ever heard. Essentially, what it means is, that a subset of the population is forced to wait around while the larger set CONSIDERS not being a giant DICK. Or…said better:
“In a world in which gay and lesbian couples live openly as our neighbors, they raise their children side by nside with the rest of us, they contribute fully as members of the community . . . it is simply untenable — untenable — to suggest that they can be denied the right of equal participation in an institution of marriage, or that they can be required to wait until the majority decides that it is ready to treat gay and lesbian people as equals.”
There was a time we considered a black man to be 3/5 of a person. There was a time we forbade women to protect themselves from spousal abuse. There was a time children were considered tinier people fit for labor requiring tinier bodies. There was even a time when people of separate skin colors could not legally marry. The law is a tool, not an end unto itself; its sole purpose to establish fair treatment for as many as possible and recourse for complaints. It gives us structure, NOT a formal definition of reality and all it should be. Who are we? We are the ones who decide how to use this tool. We, in our flawed, mercurial, emotional hearts determine the fates of our fellow me. That is who we are, Justice Roberts. One step behind the purity that could be ours, that IS inherent in our principles.
Who are you? The individual who inexplicably WANTS to be on the wrong side of history.
Who are WE?
Today, one iota better than we were.
….you cocksucking mother fuckers