Wingnut Explains Why Same-Sex Marriage is Unconstitutional

I troll the right wing fever swamps every day, but when I’m really looking for rock bottom, I turn to Free Republic for the lulz. This post, written by someone calling himself Eternal Vigilance, sufficiently made me laugh. In it, he explains why same-sex marriage is actually unconstitutional.

“Gay marriage” makes it impossible to fulfill a single clause of the stated purposes of the Constitution.

You can’t possibly “form a more perfect Union” by destroying the most important first bonds that tie together any society, the bonds of holy matrimony, and the bonds of the natural family.

Ha. Absurd in both premise and conclusion. First, you’ll need to explain how letting gay people get married will “destroy” marriage and the “natural family.” Will it destroy your marriage? Anyone’s you know? No? Then you’re talking out your ass.

You can’t “establish Justice” by committing the gross injustice of destroying the first and most important institution of civil society, which is the family.

Still waiting for a connection between letting gay peopleget married and “destroying” the family.

You can’t “insure domestic Tranquility” by committing violence against domestic life.

Violence? Where?

You can’t “provide for the common defense” by destroying the source of the next generation that must defend the republic, or by crippling the only moral basis that can possibly make them an effective fighting force.

Destroying the source of the next generation? Do you think that letting gay people get married will cause straight people to stop having children? Because that’s really, really fucking stupid.

You get the idea. It’s funny stuff by some halfwit wanna be con law scholar.

"It's "The Little Drummer Boy" that does it for me."

Bakker Declares Victory in Mythical War ..."
"A few years ago I was wished a merry Christmas by a man wearing earlocks ..."

Bakker Declares Victory in Mythical War ..."
"Me previously:At some point conservative Christians may stop defending Roy Moore’s predatory behavior. Artor responds:No, ..."

And Two More Women Come Forward ..."
"He'll probably revive the War on Christmas rhetoric next year, knowing his viewers will likely ..."

Bakker Declares Victory in Mythical War ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • John Pieret

    From the article (if it can be called that);

    Marriage is of a unique, sublime, ineffable nature. It is a God-breathed mystery.

    I’d ask what the fuck that was supposed to mean but the mouth-breathed mystery is too unique, sublime and ineffable to be disturbed.

  • John Pieret

    From the article (if it can be called that);

    Marriage is of a unique, sublime, ineffable nature. It is a God-breathed mystery.

    I’d ask what the fuck that was supposed to mean but the mouth-breathed mystery is too unique, sublime and ineffable to be disturbed.

  • Sastra

    Absurd in both premise and conclusion. First, you’ll need to explain how letting gay people get married will “destroy” marriage and the “natural family.”

    A lot of this talk sounds suspiciously like magical correspondences. In magic, the physical world and the spiritual realm are connected through symbols, appearances, categorical relationships, and so forth. It’s all connected by strands of meaning. Manipulate or destroy one and you might automatically affect or change the other. The world above is pure; the one below is not. Arguments about “Marriage” no longer existing if gay people get married looks to me like a contamination concern involving a magical world view.

  • Sastra

    Absurd in both premise and conclusion. First, you’ll need to explain how letting gay people get married will “destroy” marriage and the “natural family.”

    A lot of this talk sounds suspiciously like magical correspondences. In magic, the physical world and the spiritual realm are connected through symbols, appearances, categorical relationships, and so forth. It’s all connected by strands of meaning. Manipulate or destroy one and you might automatically affect or change the other. The world above is pure; the one below is not. Arguments about “Marriage” no longer existing if gay people get married looks to me like a contamination concern involving a magical world view.

  • wreck

    “It’s funny stuff by some halfwit wanna be con law scholar.”

    I think you overestimate his wititude by several orders of magnitude.

  • caseloweraz

    Come on, Ed. Don’t you realize that E.V. is right, that “Marriage is of a unique, sublime, ineffable nature. It is a God-breathed mystery. It is among His greatest gifts to mankind, the nexus of His eternal plan and all true, lasting, earthly riches. It is the foundational building block of all decent civic, governmental institutions. It is the basis of all true economics. It breeds peace and prosperity. It is the great stabilizer of civilizations. It is the well-spring and nursery of posterity. It must be protected, or America will fail and fall.”

    Hey course, for someone who professes to believe that marriage is ineffable, he seems to think that the SCOTUS has eff’d it pretty good. Just sayin’.

  • caseloweraz

    Come on, Ed. Don’t you realize that E.V. is right, that “Marriage is of a unique, sublime, ineffable nature. It is a God-breathed mystery. It is among His greatest gifts to mankind, the nexus of His eternal plan and all true, lasting, earthly riches. It is the foundational building block of all decent civic, governmental institutions. It is the basis of all true economics. It breeds peace and prosperity. It is the great stabilizer of civilizations. It is the well-spring and nursery of posterity. It must be protected, or America will fail and fall.”

    Hey course, for someone who professes to believe that marriage is ineffable, he seems to think that the SCOTUS has eff’d it pretty good. Just sayin’.

  • raven

    It breeds peace and prosperity. It is the great stabilizer of civilizations.

    Since all civilizations have fallen eventually, I’d say god’s magic plan is a failure. Marriage of one form or another is universal but the world isn’t exactly full of peace and prosperity.

    AFAWK, god’s plans always fail starting with Genesis. The Garden of Eden failed, the Big Boat genocide failed, the Tower of Babel failed, jesus failed numerous times.

    People create gods in their own image. The fundie xian god is a half wit.

  • raven

    It breeds peace and prosperity. It is the great stabilizer of civilizations.

    Since all civilizations have fallen eventually, I’d say god’s magic plan is a failure. Marriage of one form or another is universal but the world isn’t exactly full of peace and prosperity.

    AFAWK, god’s plans always fail starting with Genesis. The Garden of Eden failed, the Big Boat genocide failed, the Tower of Babel failed, jesus failed numerous times.

    People create gods in their own image. The fundie xian god is a half wit.

  • raven

    Marriage is of a unique, sublime, ineffable nature. It is a God-breathed mystery.

    I’d ask what the fuck that was supposed to mean

    It’s meaningless gibberish from someone with more time and letters than things worth writing.

  • raven

    Marriage is of a unique, sublime, ineffable nature. It is a God-breathed mystery.

    I’d ask what the fuck that was supposed to mean

    It’s meaningless gibberish from someone with more time and letters than things worth writing.

  • zenlike

    And the comments from the Freepers, indistinguishable from trolls (Poe’s law at work):

    ‘EternalVigilance’ also seems to believe polling is some evil liberal plot. Also, a real congress would have impeached those darned justices.

    ‘Telepathic Intruder’ seems to believe everything liberals do is unconstitutional. I bet xe has some byzantine version of the constitution pinned to his bedroom wall for heavy masturbatory purposes.

    ‘The Ghost of FReepers Past’ melted every irony meter everywhere with “Liberals do not deal in facts and truth and logic.”

    ‘sodpoodle’ is sad about the existence of IVF. xe also ended with the bizarre statement “Ancestry.com will soon be banned!!!!!!!”. Yes, including all those exclamation marks. I have no fucking idea what xe is talking about.

  • caseloweraz

    To be fair, Zenlike, someone called “gusty” calls him out on the poor quality of his legal assessment. Not that it makes much of an impression.

  • caseloweraz

    To be fair, Zenlike, someone called “gusty” calls him out on the poor quality of his legal assessment. Not that it makes much of an impression.

  • eric

    All of those quotes are from the preamble to the Constitution. We create a democratic structure of government in order to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, to ensure domestic tranquility, and to provide for the common defense. He’s taking an argument for why we should have three branches of government with two being elected, and trying to pretend its an argument for why we should have straight marriage.

  • eric

    All of those quotes are from the preamble to the Constitution. We create a democratic structure of government in order to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, to ensure domestic tranquility, and to provide for the common defense. He’s taking an argument for why we should have three branches of government with two being elected, and trying to pretend its an argument for why we should have straight marriage.

  • Sastra

    ““Marriage is of a unique, sublime, ineffable nature. It is a God-breathed mystery. It is among His greatest gifts to mankind, the nexus of His eternal plan and all true, lasting, earthly riches. It is the foundational building block of all decent civic, governmental institutions. It is the basis of all true economics. It breeds peace and prosperity. It is the great stabilizer of civilizations. It is the well-spring and nursery of posterity…

    Oh, dear. This sounds like a really, really depressing opening to an interminably long “so when are you going to get married and give us some grandchildren?” speech. No Thanksgiving turkey is going to be worth having to listen to that.

  • Sastra

    ““Marriage is of a unique, sublime, ineffable nature. It is a God-breathed mystery. It is among His greatest gifts to mankind, the nexus of His eternal plan and all true, lasting, earthly riches. It is the foundational building block of all decent civic, governmental institutions. It is the basis of all true economics. It breeds peace and prosperity. It is the great stabilizer of civilizations. It is the well-spring and nursery of posterity…

    Oh, dear. This sounds like a really, really depressing opening to an interminably long “so when are you going to get married and give us some grandchildren?” speech. No Thanksgiving turkey is going to be worth having to listen to that.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    … crippling the only moral basis that can possibly make them an effective fighting force.

    Uh, bachelors don’t make successful combat troops?

    We’re going to have to rewind and start over with just about every war in history now.

    Thanks, Obama!

  • http://artk.typepad.com ArtK

    @Sastra #2

    Sympathetic magic at its best. Marriage is a ‘union’. The Constitution talks of forming a “more perfect union.” Same word. Therefore they are related. Damage one, you damage the other. Makes perfect (non)sense to me. After all, words have meaning, don’t they?

  • http://artk.typepad.com ArtK

    @Sastra #2

    Sympathetic magic at its best. Marriage is a ‘union’. The Constitution talks of forming a “more perfect union.” Same word. Therefore they are related. Damage one, you damage the other. Makes perfect (non)sense to me. After all, words have meaning, don’t they?

  • Saad

    From the article:

    God-breathed mystery

    The real question is why are wingnuts so good at suggesting band names?

  • Saad

    From the article:

    God-breathed mystery

    The real question is why are wingnuts so good at suggesting band names?

  • Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden

    “Gay marriage” makes it impossible to fulfill a single clause of the stated purposes of the Constitution.

    You can’t possibly “form a more perfect Union” …

    When someone like this doesn’t know what a clause is, and then proceeds to quote from language that exists in no clause of the constitution whatsoever, you know you’re dealing with a quality legal scholar.

  • Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden

    “Gay marriage” makes it impossible to fulfill a single clause of the stated purposes of the Constitution.

    You can’t possibly “form a more perfect Union” …

    When someone like this doesn’t know what a clause is, and then proceeds to quote from language that exists in no clause of the constitution whatsoever, you know you’re dealing with a quality legal scholar.

  • http://festeringscabofrealityblogspot.com fifthdentist

    I can’t wait for one of the explain how gay marriage is terrorism, but executing nine members of a black church in an attempt to start a race war isn’t.

  • http://festeringscabofrealityblogspot.com fifthdentist

    I can’t wait for one of the explain how gay marriage is terrorism, but executing nine members of a black church in an attempt to start a race war isn’t.

  • http://festeringscabofrealityblogspot.com fifthdentist

    Should have read: “I can’t wait for one of them to explain, etc.”

    Me write pretty one day.

  • The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge

    You can’t “provide for the common defense” by destroying the source of the next generation that must defend the republic, or by crippling the only moral basis that can possibly make them an effective fighting force.

    This is actually why abortion first became illegal in the early 20th century–the state needed as much cannon fodder as it could get. State governments started requiring every pregnancy to be signed off on either by a “Certificate of Live Birth” or a medical document certifying a genuine miscarriage.

    During the Baby Boom, hospitals started handing out ceremonial “Birth Certificates” as a goodwill gesture to generate repeat business. Now the wingnuts think that’s the official document and that Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth is some kind of inferior substitute.

    These people are stupid–film at 11.

  • The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge

    You can’t “provide for the common defense” by destroying the source of the next generation that must defend the republic, or by crippling the only moral basis that can possibly make them an effective fighting force.

    This is actually why abortion first became illegal in the early 20th century–the state needed as much cannon fodder as it could get. State governments started requiring every pregnancy to be signed off on either by a “Certificate of Live Birth” or a medical document certifying a genuine miscarriage.

    During the Baby Boom, hospitals started handing out ceremonial “Birth Certificates” as a goodwill gesture to generate repeat business. Now the wingnuts think that’s the official document and that Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth is some kind of inferior substitute.

    These people are stupid–film at 11.

  • John Horstman

    He’s just running through the preamble*, and that bit isn’t even statutory/binding, is it? The text just describes a general outline of the intent as a means of framing the rest of the document.

    *Can I do it from memory? Let’s see: We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and ensure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.

  • John Horstman

    He’s just running through the preamble*, and that bit isn’t even statutory/binding, is it? The text just describes a general outline of the intent as a means of framing the rest of the document.

    *Can I do it from memory? Let’s see: We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and ensure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.

  • raven

    “Gay marriage” makes it impossible to fulfill a single clause of the stated purposes of the Constitution.

    You can’t possibly “form a more perfect Union” …

    It’s fortunate that this is just gibberish.

    Marriage isn’t necessarily a perfect union. Half of them end in divorce.

    Oddly enough, the fundies have a much higher divorce rate than the general population. One of the automartyrs in Kentucky opposing gay marriage has been married….four times.

  • raven

    “Gay marriage” makes it impossible to fulfill a single clause of the stated purposes of the Constitution.

    You can’t possibly “form a more perfect Union” …

    It’s fortunate that this is just gibberish.

    Marriage isn’t necessarily a perfect union. Half of them end in divorce.

    Oddly enough, the fundies have a much higher divorce rate than the general population. One of the automartyrs in Kentucky opposing gay marriage has been married….four times.

  • dingojack

    My dear Eternal Vigilance,

    Sheriff Arpaio called — he’d like your help sorting out some legal hurdles in his ‘proving Obama is a Marxist-Leninist-Fascist-Trotskyite-Monarchist-Epicurean Mexo-Korean-Sino-Kenyan usurper Lizerdman from the core of the Earth‘ case …

    @@

    Dingo

  • sigurd jorsalfar

    That and the phrase “more perfect Union” clearly refers to a union of the various states, not of married couples.

    But even if we play this stupid game and suppose for a moment that it does refer to marital unions, one could argue the words “more perfect Union” are best carried out by allowing gay marriage because that creates more unions that are perfect for people now that everyone gets to marry the person they love regardless of gender.

  • sigurd jorsalfar

    That and the phrase “more perfect Union” clearly refers to a union of the various states, not of married couples.

    But even if we play this stupid game and suppose for a moment that it does refer to marital unions, one could argue the words “more perfect Union” are best carried out by allowing gay marriage because that creates more unions that are perfect for people now that everyone gets to marry the person they love regardless of gender.

  • thebookofdave

    This must be an excerpt. Eternal Vigilance never even got to the part where gay marriage fails our constitutional mandate to “promote the general welfare”.

  • thebookofdave

    This must be an excerpt. Eternal Vigilance never even got to the part where gay marriage fails our constitutional mandate to “promote the general welfare”.

  • Trebuchet

    A bit off-topic, but am I the only one here missing, in a very weird way, DookyDoggySeven? Who am I to mock?

    I have, by the way, visited the Egnorance blog (no stinkin’ link, look it up yourself) and discovered an uptick in posts since DD7 disappeared from here.

  • Trebuchet

    A bit off-topic, but am I the only one here missing, in a very weird way, DookyDoggySeven? Who am I to mock?

    I have, by the way, visited the Egnorance blog (no stinkin’ link, look it up yourself) and discovered an uptick in posts since DD7 disappeared from here.

  • John Pieret

    Trebuchet:

    am I the only one here missing, in a very weird way, DookyDoggySeven?

    One thing we can say with some certainty is that Ed didn’t ban Egnor or he would be trumpeting it on his blog as proof that “atheists” can’t stand up to his logic and evidence. I suspect the regulars here didn’t squeal enough to be enjoyable to him and instead kept pointing out his fact-free assertions and presenting actual evidence in return. As an ex-Catholic myself, I know I annoyed him a couple of times pointing out that he isn’t really part of the religious right, most of whom barely tolerate Catholics more than they do gays.

  • Michael Heath

    John Pieret writes:

    One thing we can say with some certainty is that Ed didn’t ban Egnor or he would be trumpeting it on his blog as proof that “atheists” can’t stand up to his logic and evidence.

    Ed banned that particular troll on 7/3 or 7/4.

  • Michael Heath

    John Pieret writes:

    One thing we can say with some certainty is that Ed didn’t ban Egnor or he would be trumpeting it on his blog as proof that “atheists” can’t stand up to his logic and evidence.

    Ed banned that particular troll on 7/3 or 7/4.

  • John Pieret

    Really? Where? It’s not like Egnor to not pump things like that for all their propaganda value.

  • John Pieret

    Really? Where? It’s not like Egnor to not pump things like that for all their propaganda value.