The Supreme Court has ruled that the traditionalists side in the culture wars were motivated by a “bare … desire to do harm” and struck down the Federal Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA]. Justice Scalia’s dissent puts it in context:
… to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to condemn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions…. In the majority’s judgment, any resistance … is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement. To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to “disparage,” ”injure,” “degrade,” ”demean,” and “humiliate” our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homosexual.
All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence—indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history. It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change by adjudging those who oppose it … enemies of the human race.
Then there was one
Today, only the Catholic Church stands in the way of the Federal government’s Executive and Judicial branches–and its non-Fox media affiliates–efforts to redefine morality. As with all important contests, I attempt to examine the latest trends, strengths and weaknesses and the players involved in this latest chapter of the culture wars from the perspective of my Catholic team:
- Catholic membership frighteningly ignorant. Routinely beaten like rented [consenting] mules in public square exchanges. Many admit to nightmares involving having to face Glenn Greenwald after his daily haircuts and any recording devices.
- Cultural Catholics, i.e. people who identify as Catholics because they were once dragged to a baptism, but have never actually practiced their faith, are frequently trotted out to provide the Catholic perspective.
- Justice Kagan barred from WNBA games for rest of this chapter in the culture wars.
- Project to sanitize the image of the average homosexual male’s lifestyle remains impressively on message.
- Al Pacino is now claiming that his character in the movie ‘Cruising’ was portrayed by a body double given that he came down with mononucleosis just before filming, but did not want to endanger the movie financially. NAMBLA and LGBT organizations are weighing his appeal. Al remains hopeful and recently offered to ‘smoke’ Paula Deen if necessary.
- Bathhouses scenes in ‘And the Band Played On’ missing from the director’s cut version.
- Bathhouses in general, now portrayed as a huge misunderstanding. The NAMBLA and LGBT governing bodies are testing the ‘Roger Ailes was falsely advertising the locations as adoption centers’ storyline with focus groups.
- Any remaining politically incorrect studies which suggest steroid-like levels of promiscuity involving homosexual males will soon feel the full weight of the Oprah — I refer to her network, this blog does not endorse physical torture — brought to bear on them.
- Justice Ginsburg’s expiring [life] contract.
- Opponent’s fertility rate 0.00 [rounded to nearest miracle].
- Lord and savior signed through eternity, or until Michael Jordan’s first winning season as an executive.
Prediction: Catholic Church in 5
See the conclusion of Scalia’s dissent at end of post:
In the majority’s telling, this story is black-and-white: Hate your neighbor or come along with us. The truth is more complicated. It is hard to admit that one’s political opponents are not monsters, especially in a struggle like this one, and the challenge in the end proves more than today’s Court can handle. Too bad. A reminder that disagreement over something so fundamental as marriage can still be politically legitimate would have been a fit task for what in earlier times was called the judicial temperament. We might have covered ourselves with honor today, by promising all sides of this debate that it was theirs to settle and that we would respect their resolution.We might have let the People decide.
But that the majority will not do. Some will rejoice in today’s decision, and some will despair at it; that is the nature of a controversy that matters so much to so many. But the Court has cheated both sides, robbing the winners of an honest victory, and the losers of the peace that comes from a fair defeat. We owed both of them better. I dissent.