Oh well, Scalia, if the American people can't live with the horror of gay marriage they can always pass a Constitutional Amendment to overturn the decision.

Oh wait, they can't, because only 13 states of the needed 38 have enough anti-gay sentiment to actually pass laws banning SSM. Too bad, so sad.

More more scalia:

The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic. It is one thing for separate concurring or dissenting opinions to contain extravagances, even silly extravagances, of thought and expression; it is something else for the official opinion of the Court to do so.

So his calling it a Putsch is fine because it's a dissent? But Kagan's Spidey references (she had the majority right?) were egotistic? Man, I wish some logic fairy would punch Scalia in the crotch.

Jeez, my aunt posted this on FB:

"Some of my ultra-liberal family and friends are out celebrating and I am being treated like this horrible mean intolerant person; I love everyone, but GOD MADE THE RULES!!!"

I wanted to reply "You get wifi up on that cross???"

But I didn't. Because I don't need to be a dick. (But seriously, fuck that noise.)

I think Scalia slipped the bonds of sanity some time ago. I'd like to propose that high court justices be given a sanity test every few years.

Scalia used to make more sense, didn't he? Like, twenty years ago? I feel like I disagreed with him most of the time but he was at least consistent in his logic.

" I am being treated like this horrible mean intolerant person"

What? People think you are a big meanie? Sadly if what people thought of us (even if they didn't express it) was the basis of what should be legal or illegal, then Miss Manners and Emily Post would be on the Supreme Court instead.

Miss Manners and Emily Post would be on the Supreme Court instead.

t basking in the fantasy of Miss Manners and her clear logic and deceptively sharp tongue handing down legal rulings and responding to Scalia

Well, as wonderful as it is to update reactions, I need to run some errands before the hellmouth fully opens for the day.

Man, Scalia is such a grump. It's almost entertaining to read except he's so wrong it hurts.

And yeah, Supreme Court is not exactly forefront of this battle--it's not like they made this decision 20 years ago when no states had legalized and public opinion majority wasn't for it. That would be pushing on the people (not that it would've been wrong but whatever). Now? Please.

What confounds is that Scalia and Roberts both talk about letting democracy and legislating take their course. And yet, they struck down key provisions of the Voting Rights Act which was a legislative victory for inclusive democracy.

pfft.