Did Anthony Kennedy just change the course of Western civilization?



Perhaps the most important person in the history of human culture


For a brief response to today’s marriage-related Supreme Court decisions from a noted defender of the “traditional” view, see this.


For good commentary from a conservative legal point of view, mostly from Ed Whelanthis is a place to follow.



Recovering (at least part of) a lost sermon by the Prophet Joseph Smith
Roots and Wings
"Twelve reasons why I never argue with internet atheists"
What would Wesley do? Methodists coping with decline in numbers
  • Steve M

    I am trying to determine whether you are being serious or sarcastic. Please advise.

    • DanielPeterson

      I’m trying to decide, too. Can’t advise.

  • RaymondSwenson

    The California Supreme Court, whose ruling prompted Proposition 8, was honorable enough to recognize that, when a law or constitutional amendment is enacted via an initiative by the voters,because the legislators and governor refuse to act, the small group who prepared the.initiative and got it paced on the ballot have a particular interest in preserving the effectiveness of a winning initiative, and like a legislature or governor who helped enact a bill into law in the conventional process, they should be recognized as having unique standing to defend the initiative in legal challenges. Justice Scalia was very critical of the court’s contempt for the state supreme court ruling that anointed the appellants as proper representatives of the interests of the state and its people. The absurd result undercuts democracy and says that an individual has standing to attack a provision in the state constitution, but no one has standing to defend it! That renders the state constitution null and void.

  • RaymondSwenson

    The ruling invalidating the Defense of Marriage Act will unleash a flood of litigation attacking the normal marriage laws of the 37 states that have rejected same sex marriage. In all too many cases, accommodating US District Court judges, some of them closeted homosexuals like the one that heard the Prop 8 case, will declare the state laws invalid under the Federal constitution, asserting that the contemporaries of Abraham Lincoln wanted to go beyond integrating former slaves into society as citizens, and enable homosexuals, both white and black, to marry each other.

    At that point, since Federal judges have life tenure, and cannot be impeached for merely stupid and willful decisions, the governors and legislatures will have to decide whether to knuckle.under or fight back by refusing to accept the authority of the courts to create such a fundamental social change by fiat.

  • RaymondSwenson

    Theoretically, Congress and the president can enact a limit on judicial challenges of state marriage laws. But you need a Republican president.