Wanker of the Day

Pulled this gem from Right Wing Watch.

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel stopped by VCY America’s “Crosstalk” yesterday to discuss his group’s attempt to stop judges from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in Alabama. Staver praised Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore for flouting the ruling of a federal court on the matter and lashed out at the Supreme Court for rejecting Alabama’s appeal of the marriage case, saying that Alabama “does not have to obey” any future Supreme Court ruling “that there’s some invented right to same-sex marriage and therefore you can’t have marriage as a union of a man and a woman.”

“That is so far off the beaten path, so far removed from the Constitution that it is no rule of law,” Staver said. “There is a limit to what the court can do, there is a limit to what the people can stomach. If that court were to say, the laws of gravity were fine for the founders but we have progressed, we’re a progressive society and we think they have changed, you would say, ‘That’s nuts, have they lost their mind?’ The question is: Have they lost their mind by saying there’s a constitutional right for same-sex marriage?”

Because everybody knows the laws of physics and a civil contract between two people are the exact same thing!

*headdesk*

They All Fall Down

This is the Ninth Circuit Court's decision striking down Idaho and Nevada's gay marriage bans, issued today.

Judge Reinhardt, who wrote the decision, evidently has something of a sense of humor; one of his footnotes, on page 21, reads:

He also states, in conclusory fashion, that allowing same-sex marriage will lead opposite-sex couples to abuse alcohol and drugs, engage in extramarital affairs, take on demanding work schedules, and participate in time-consuming hobbies. We seriously doubt that allowing committed same-sex couples to settle down in legally recognized marriages will drive opposite-sex couples to sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll. 

Which made me both laugh out loud and shake my head at the stupidity of such an argument. As if many opposite-sex couples weren't already doing all those things.

There's also a very interesting concurring opinion, written by Judge Berzon, starting on page 50 of the 95-page document. He argues that not only do "these same-sex marriage prohibitions fail because they discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation," but because of "impermissible gender classifications," based on "the baggage of sexual stereotypes."

The opinion is quite long, but well worth your time. Hopefully, this will apply to all the other states in the Ninth Circuit....which means that my home state of Arizona will have to wave its discriminatory little amendment bye-bye.

About damn time.