One-handed typing: the doom of mankind!

[elfs]

Justice Antonin Scalia, in his dissent from the ruling Lawrence v. Texas, said that the court's overturning its own opinion in Bowers v. Hardwick, "calls into question state laws against masturbation."

Remember, this isn't just Scalia spouting off here. His version of the constitution may be weird, but it's consistent in the notion that some things, such as sexuality and privacy, which aren't explicit in the constitution, are not to be dealt with by the courts but must be deferred to the states. On the other hand, religion, which is explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, is the province of the Court, which has the final say and sometimes defers to "the verdict of history." Anyone who remembers the Judge Bork case can remember his dissenting opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut.

As if that weren't bad enough, the religious right is now interested in "strengthening marriage," which include "addressing deliberate childlessness is marriage."

Isn't that special?

Comments

*boggle*

[jenkitty.livejournal.com]

Are they now saying that people who choose not to have children for whatever reason should not be married? They just declared my marriage invalid. *grrrr*

Re: *boggle*

[kakoukorakos.livejournal.com]

Let's just hope they actually suggest that as openly as they try to raise a heu and cry about gay marriage. Because most of the sheeples they've been able to fool so far about the "sanctity of marriage" will see their bigotry and ridiculous agenda for what it is and turn on them. The backlash could result in them losing all their influence.