Prima DOMA
"Then, amending RCW 26.04.020, DOMA explicitly prohibited marriage between parties 'other than a male and a female'--i.e., same-sex couples. Thus, DOMA 'defends' and 'protects' marriage from an entire class of people, homosexuals." -- Justice Fairhurst, dissenting.The H-Man has a summary of the Washington Supreme Court's decision to uphold that State's Defense of Marriage Act. This quote particularly stands out, but I haven't read the entire dissent yet.
posted by Armen at 9:00 AM
7 Comments:
Armen--do you find it odd that any post that mentions grades gets dozens of comments, while a post about an important legal issue gets exactly none?
Max, I spend all day reading and writing about important legal issues. I save my mental masturbation time imagining myself in two years drinking Amstel Light after work with CJ John Roberts.
Just because the old dudes on the Washington Supreme Court can't get down with animus based rational review is not surprising -- hopefully the next generation of women and men that take the bench will have a broader sense of the world.
well put anonymous 3:16
Fair enough 3:16. Though you have to admit, an awful lot of masturbating, mental or otherwise, goes on over grades around here.
Perhaps it is because there is diversity of opinion regarding issues involving grades. When the vast majority of the school supports gay marriage and the remaining minority won't risk the stigma of their views being known, discussions are kind of boring.
Interesting that anonymous 8:59 attaches the word "stigma" to describe the discomfort (a terrible thing, that kind of potential unpopularity) felt by those who take a position that actually stigmatizes other men and women and prevents them from enjoying the same rights and privileges as their compatriots.
Though the vast majority of Boalt Hall probably does support "gay marriage", I think you'd find a wide array of policy prescriptions (civil unions, etc.), tactics for making it a reality and such.
And as an aside, this persecuted conservative thing at Boalt doesn't really fly with me. My politics fall well to the right of the majority of Boalt, as far as I can tell (which makes me a center-leftist, ba-dum-bum!), but I've never felt that any opinion, thoughtfully expounded and expressed, was ever shouted down. I just don't see the "stigma."
Who said anything about persecuted conservatives? I support gay marriage and merely intended to use the word "stigma" in much the same way I would use it to refer to a pro-choice advocate at Bob Jones University. I was (and remain) unaware that stigmatizers cannot, by definition, be stigmatized. Perhaps "deserved repudiation" would have been more Boalt-like, but I try to avoid needless spiteful rhetoric. In any case, my post was simply intended to suggest an objective reason for the lack of discourse concerning this topic. Nonetheless, the lesson is learned and I will remember to put a liberal slant on otherwise objective comments lest I be taken for a persecuted conservative.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home