JUSTICE ALITO: Gay Marriage Is 'Newer Than Cell Phones Or The Internet'

[Saviolo]

I posted this over in LGBT as well, but I thought it was pretty relevant to current events given the current discussion.

This makes me want to say a lot of things, but really, I'm speechless. From a Supreme Court Justice. You want to talk about people being out of touch with the common person. Judges who believe that the battle for gay marriage is newer than cell phones? Politicians that believe that they're so hard done by because after expenses and taxes, they only have $400k to feed their family, while the average Joe family gets by on 1/10 of that?

http://www.businessinsider.com/alito-gay-marriage-cell-phones-internet-supreme-court-prop-8-oral-arguments-2013-3

There's lots I want to say, but I'm struck dumb by a wave of futility. If the people holding the reins have no basic understanding of the situation beneath them, if it is -so far below their notice or concern-, what in the world are we to do? All the protest in the world isn't going to open their eyes and show them what's actually happening among the peasants.

Link to the original post:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1169863

[Gormy Cuss]

1. Yeah, because of people like you, Justice Alito.

Scalito would overturn Living v. Va if they had the chance.

[Rex]

2. You cannot fix stupid.

So many people in Washington D.C. are out of touch with reality for the other 99% of us, that I wonder how they keep the lights on sometimes they seem so stupid and/or delusional.

Having said that, even that comment does surprise me some - what an increadibly insensitive and inflamatory thing to say. Guess that is what we get when we let Congress decide who should be on the SCOTUS. You would think/hope they would pick adults and not out of touch children like Alito.

[LiberalLoner]

3. I think Alito is a sociopath, a man lacking empathy or conscience.

He is a monster. Monsters are dangerous.

[BlueStreak]

4. Something I haven't heard anybody anywhere mention: gay marriage is 1000s of years old

Gay people have always gotten married. Just to people of the opposite sex because society imposed such pressure on them.

And how, exactly, does promoting false relationships help with that family values thing?

Not that a gay person marrying an opposite sex for societal convenience necessarily means the relationship is devoid of values, but it just seems a strange position for the "sanctity of marriage" people to have to defend.

Right along with arguing that marriage must be between one man and one woman because that is the only way to produce offspring -- while at the same time arguing that an infertile straight couple should have the right to marry even though they are less likely to produce offspring than gay people.

Oh, you say a straight couple can adopt? Yeah, so can a gay couple -- very successfully.

The arguments seem really twisted, yet you really don't hear much discussion of these fundamental errors in reasoning.

The reality is that if you try to base it on parenting or producing offspring, your argument gets in trouble really quick. It is much better to say that marriage is a legal relationship of specific commitments and responsibilities, and leave it at that If churches want to have a special marriage ceremony that upholds some extra rules they want to impose on their followers, that's OK too, as long as the rest of us don't have to play that little game.

[justiceischeap]

16. I actually mentioned something similar to this in another thread

However, I talked about LGBTQ couples being married but it has never been allowed to be called "marriage" in our modern times.

Same-sex unions continued until Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire. A law in the Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) was issued in 342 AD by the Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans, which prohibited same-sex marriage in ancient Rome and ordered that those who were so married were to be executed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_same-sex_unions

Hell, it is claimed that Roman emperor Nero was gay married. Yep, that gay married thing is newer than cell phones and the Internet.

[BlueStreak]

17. And the other very basic thing that is rarely asked is

"If a committed gay or lesbian couple makes a binding legal commitment to one another, how does that harm straight couples in any way? How is any specific straight marriage damaged by that?

If you can't give a solid answer to that question (Mike Huckabee and anyone else), then sit down and shut your damn mouth.

Instead of addressing these issues in the most straightforward way, the media just keeps bouncing around aimlessly.

[jessie04]

5. What a class -A idiot.

Dumbshit.

[Gravitycollapse]

6. God this man is stupid.

[uselessobot]

7. They know exactly what they are saying and doing it and is why they are in the positions they have

They are doing what their masters are telling them to do.

Corporations want LBGT $’s who have more than the mouthbreathers who are anti-everything. The useful idiots so to speak.

Corporations will get what they want and they want LBGT $’s.

[dballance]

10. You Are Correct. I Firmly Believe The BSA's Decision Will Be Driven by $$$ Too

I have no doubt that the corporations will pull the strings on their puppets so they can get more $$$ by making same-sex marriages as gaudy, expensive and showy as possible just like opposite-sex marriages. That's where the $$ is. This didn't help the African Americans at all because they had no economic power during the 50s and 60s.

As I said in my title I firmly believe the BSA will make their decision to allow the local troops to decide on gay members/volunteers/scout masters. They'll stop the national ban so they can still seek funds from the corporations like Nike and others who've stopped funding due to the policy. I don't believe for a minute those bastards at the HQ in Dallas give a shit about individual scouts. They're comfortable in their easy, non-profit, high-salary positions and they don't want that gravy train to stop. They might actually have to get a real job if that happened.

ON EDIT - Clarification: I just re-read this and my statement about "easy, non-profit...positions" is aimed solely at the BSA and not non-profits in general. I've volunteered with several non-profits and their staffs and directors work very hard and tirelessly. They scrape for every penny they get. I don't however, feel this is the case with the BSA. I believe that for many years their brand has been enough to get them just about whatever they want. What company used to want to so "no" the the BSA? That's changing now as they are finding out. They also have a big backing by the Mormons who have a vast empire of commercial and non-profit entities.

[Saviolo]

11. The financial argument

People have been making the financial argument for years: that gay weddings would dump money into the economy, because Double-Income No Kids (DINK) gay couples would be able to spend much more on weddings, etc... but it doesn't seem to have taken effect until now. Is it just because the right wing is now eating itself quite voraciously that the mega-corps feel like they won't alienate their consumer base by shifting to support of gay marriage?

[winter is coming]

8. Actually, it makes me somewhat hopeful.

Not the crapass argument itself, but that conservative justices are making arguments that hint that they'd like to kick the can down the road. They're afraid they're not gonna win this one, so they're basically in a holding action against the inevitable.

[Arcanetrance]

9. Hmmmm so the ancient Greeks and Romans are younger than the Internet

I guess one has to rely on these arguments when your philosophy tells you the earth is only a few thousand years

[OldEurope]

13. For your information, Mr. Alito,

Denmark startet in 1989 with a registerred civil partnership for gay couples.




Edited to correct the name.

[Elvin Ives]

14. At one point racial equality was newer than many things

Does it means racial equality is bad? Alito is one strange man.

[sfpcjock]

15. "Justice" Elite-o is a corporate clown, IMO.

Can't stand him. I tried.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Everything is newer than cell-phones and the internet you half-wit.

"Ever-newer waters flow on those who step into the same rivers." ... changes and nothing remains still ... and ... you cannot step twice into the same stream" Heraclitus

[NYC Liberal]

19. Now wait a minute. Since when is the issue here the "effects" of same-sex marriage?

The issue should be decided based on what the law (the constitution) says.

If it says equal protection must be guaranteed to all then it must be guaranteed, regardless of its effects -- positive or negative (not that there any negative effects here).