Whatever you feel about gay marriage, justice Scalia predicted the complete shape of the litigation on this issue - cutting through all the bullshit and pretend modesty in the previous decisions.

Scalia, J dissenting Lawrence v. Texas (2003):
“State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity ... every single one of these laws is called into question by today's decision,” he wrote. Based on the court majority’s reasoning, “what justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples?”

Scalia J dissenting, Windsor:
“By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition,” Scalia wrote in his Windsor dissent (PDF). He points to wording in the majority opinion finding that supporters of DOMA acted to “disparage and to injure” same-sex couples, to “demean,” to “impose inequality” and to impose “stigma.”

“As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by ‘ “bare . . . desire to harm” ’couples in same-sex marriages. … How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.”

The bigamy litigation is already going on in texas. The state laws litigation are mentioned above.

Last edited by LittleNicky; 02/27/14 03:14 PM.

Should probably ask Mr. Kierney. I guess if you're Italian, you should be in prison.
I've read the RICO Act, and I can tell you it's more appropriate...
for some of those guys over in Washington than it is for me or any of my fellas here