Dumbest Same Sex Marriage Argument Yet

Dumbest Same Sex Marriage Argument Yet March 31, 2015

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner. I’ve heard all manner of terrible arguments against marriage equality, but Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette, who has never been the sharpest knife in the drawer, has come up with the dumbest one yet. From the brief he filed in the Supreme Court appeal on Michigan’s ban:

Because the Constitution is silent regarding marriage, such court orders indicate a lack of faith in democracy. By teaching that courts are the fastest mechanism to achieve social change, such decisions encourage reliance on the courts for change and thus weaken democracy. This approach lessens the very dignity that the petitioners seek; rather than achieving the dignity that comes from persuading fellow citizens through the democratic process, a litigation victory merely means that a court order requires compliance.

Concern troll is concerned, so very concerned about the dignity of gay couples. It’s almost touching how concerned he is, isn’t it? Let’s imagine that Schuette was filing briefs in some earlier cases like, say, Brown v Board of Education:

Because the Constitution is silent regarding school policy, such court orders indicate a lack of faith in democracy. By teaching that courts are the fastest mechanism to achieve social change, such decisions encourage reliance on the courts for change and thus weaken democracy. This approach lessens the very dignity that victims of segregation seek; rather than achieving the dignity that comes from persuading fellow citizens through the democratic process, a litigation victory merely means that a court order requires compliance.

Like when those black kids wanted to go to decent schools in the South and the courts ordered that they be allowed to do so. It was so tragic how the courts undermined the dignity of those poor kids before they could convince their racist fellow citizens to magnanimously give them the right to get an education by going to schools where they might pollute those poor white children with their flagrant blackness.

And Loving v Virginia:

Because the Constitution is silent regarding marriage, such court orders indicate a lack of faith in democracy. By teaching that courts are the fastest mechanism to achieve social change, such decisions encourage reliance on the courts for change and thus weaken democracy. This approach lessens the very dignity that the petitioners seek; rather than achieving the dignity that comes from persuading fellow citizens through the democratic process, a litigation victory merely means that a court order requires compliance.

Oh wait, that’s the same thing. Of course it is, because his argument could have been made word for word in that case too. It’s just so tragic that allowing Richard and Mildred Loving to get married before they could convince their racist fellow citizens to give them the right to do so, the Supreme Court hurt their dignity so much.

And remember back in 2004 when gay people were, in fact, trying to convince their fellow citizens in the state of Michigan to respect and uphold their dignity by allowing them to get married. Was Schuette standing up for their dignity then? Nope, he was a staunch advocate of the ban on same-sex marriage. Concern troll is just so very concerned, you guys. Seriously, Bill Schuette, you’re a moral and legal trainwreck.


Browse Our Archives