Olsen lost the argument when he answered Scalia’s questtion with a question. The rest was just prologue.
Sounds like Scalia is on the right side of this case. Wish I had confidence in Roberts. But I don’t.
We need 8 Scalia’s on the Court.
(and one token liberal for comic relief.)
Marriage is not a right. It’s an artificial construct that doesn’t happen in nature. It also involves a contract between at least 2 parties, needing agreement between them all. Therefore it is not a right. Many people who are heterosexual end up not married, unable to find someone to love them. Do they have a right to force someone into marriage with them? No. Yet by these fools you’d think everyone should be able to line up at the marriage department and receive a partner.
Lawyers have bragged they can make white appear black and black to appear white for centuries..
What is unusual is people not slapping them down harshly when they do..
Sophomore’s have bragged forever that everyone has their own truth..
Thereby making “the Truth” an opinion..
It was never unconstitutional to prohibit interracial marriages. Those were state statutes and the constitutionality was never in the picture.
OUR Ted Olson ?
BKO/WTF?
From what I have read of the Justice’s comments, I am struck that except for Scalia, this is a thoroughly lightweight Supreme Court from left to right.
Kennedy was going on about 40,000 adopted children of gay couples who are waiting for their decision? Why is this a federal concern or a concern of the Supreme Court? Are they the ones who started all these gay adoptions?
Just strikes me as about as analytic as the average debate in Congress.
Did Scalia tell him that the 14th amendment covered that situation? What a bogus argument.
It is as simple as this - Marriage throughout history has always referred to a man and a woman for the purpose to produce children and to raise and protect those children until such time as they are ready to start their own family.
It is Lazy (BIASED) (PERVERTED) Liberal thought processes that has allowed the term “Marriage” to include people of the same sex. This does in NO WAY produce children - at least in all the biology books I have read, but maybe liberals have a secret book they have learned from that states differently.
Love is Love. Marriage is different.
Two dogs humping in the back yard does not mean they should be married. A female dog humping another female dog does not denote love, it denotes dominance. The same goes for male dogs.
Maybe someone needs to explain that concept to Democrats.
Why do we not allow blind people to fly airplanes?
when did it become constitutional for the Suprwme Court to decide who has a “right” to a RELIGIOUS SACRAMENT?
Nobody has ever been excluded from marriage. Homosexuals, like heterosexuals, have always been free to marriage. It’s just that marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman. If you allow people of the same sex to marry each other, how can you not allow all sorts of strange types of marriages? The answer: you can’t.
Hearing common sense almost sounds alien to the ears since the left have so distorted the debate. For example, the left are always using the phrase “separation of church and state” yet at the same time advocate federally forced atheism.
Gay couples aren’t barred from marriage, so long as they don’t marry each other. They are as free as anyone to marry someone from the opposite sex. What they want to do is redefine what marriage means. Allowing interracial marriage doesn’t do that. Olson’s response is BS.
Olson’s response was idiotic.
Scalia is still the master of the court. The others use childish arguments in comparison to him. But he is a lone voice of such brilliant rational arguments.
The libs on the court demand a ‘public interest be stated’ that they find convincing, good luck with that.
Also Kagan defined the ban’s purpose as discriminating based on ‘orientation’. The big mistake by supporters of marriage was accepting this premise.
The scarey part is swing vote Kennedy asked a so called question if the well being of the CA kids whose parents are ‘gay’ should be considered in the decision, because those kids need ‘married’ parents.
Think about that one. gay parents.
Pray, boys and girls. Dad will be home soon.