Gay marriage

Could Gay Marriage Lead to . . . Tax Reform?

Featured image Morningafterwise, we didn’t have to wait long for conjectures like this from Time: Now’s the Time to End Tax Exemptions for Religious Institutions . . .  Rather than try to rescue tax-exempt status for organizations that dissent from settled public policy on matters of race or sexuality, we need to take a more radical step. It’s time to abolish, or greatly diminish, their tax-exempt statuses. Or the New York Times »

Post-Obergefell Civil Rights: A Tangle or a Knot?

Featured image Remember the Hobby Lobby decision last year, where the Supreme Court sided with employers whose religious faith led them to object to the Obamacare mandate that all health insurance policies must offer contraceptive coverage? The authoritarian and conformist left howled with indignation. Get ready for a lot of sequels in the aftermath of Obergefell. On Friday the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations in America issued a very gracious statement about »

The need to get our minds right

Featured image National Review has posted a symposium contemplating what the Supreme Court has wrought in its gay marriage decision of this past Friday. The decision represents itself as the culmination of a long line of cases and related social developments. In the first contribution to the symposium, however, Notre Dame’s Professor Gerard Bradley asserts that it is only the end of the beginning. Concluding with an allusion to the prison warden’s »

A Question For Those Who Celebrate the Gay Marriage Decision

Featured image What would you think if the Court had decided the opposite? That is, if the Court had held that same sex marriage is unconstitutional, so that all state laws approving such unions are void, and all court decisions establishing same sex marriage are overruled. Would you then think it appropriate for “five lawyers,” as Chief Justice Roberts put it, to remove this issue from the democratic process and purport to »

Justice Kennedy’s eyes are wide shut on the gay rights assault on religion

Featured image In Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Justice Kennedy acknowledged the dangers of ruling that disparate impact analysis applies to Fair Housing Act cases, and he tried to erect limitations that would avoid these dangers. However, as Justice Alito showed in his dissent, the supposed limitations will not constrain liberal bureaucrats and judges. A parallel exchange can be found in today’s ruling finding a »

From Justice Scalia’s dissent

Featured image Justice Scalia’s dissent in today’s gay marriage diktat is all must reading. Short of posting the whole thing, let me offer these pointed excerpts (to which I have added some paragraphing in the interest of readability): The substance of today’s decree is not of immense personal importance to me. The law can recognize as marriage whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements it wishes, and can accord them favorable civil consequences, »

Oy Vey!

Featured image Where to start?  (After the epic face palms, that is.) In no particular order: • Let’s not have any more talk from the Left about how we have a “conservative” or “reactionary” Supreme Court.  Also, let’s note that the author of the majority opinion in the same sex-marriage case, Anthony Kennedy, also wrote the Citizens United opinion that some on the Left have compared to Dred Scott.  (Seriously.) It is »

Anthony Kennedy Discovers a Right to Gay Marriage [Updated]

Featured image Two hundred twenty-four years after the Constitution was ratified, Anthony Kennedy and four loyal Democrats have discovered, hidden somewhere in its provisions, a right to gay marriage. This so-called right, deemed “fundamental” by the five-justice majority, was undreamed of until a few years ago. If you want to read the decision, it is here. Yesterday’s Obamacare decision told us that we do not live under the rule of law. Today’s »

Justice Kennedy sends mixed signals during argument on gay marriage

Featured image Today, as I mentioned here, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Obergefell v. Hodges in which the issue is whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to be deemed by the state “married” if that’s what they want. Lyle Denniston of Scotusblog filed this report on the argument. The Washington Post’s account is here. The argument confirmed the impression that the decision will be 5-4, with Justice Kennedy casting »

Justice Kennedy and gay rights

Featured image As I begin typing this, the Supreme Court is in the middle of oral argument in Obergefell v. Hodges, the gay marriage case. You can follow the progress of the argument at Scotusblog. Personally, I am not opposed to changing the definition of marriage to encompass same-sex unions. I consider this a low-risk accommodation to the reasonable desires of a large segment of our fellow Americans. But a change of »

The Ugly Side of the Gay Marriage Campaign

Featured image It is extraordinary how having the exact same view about marriage that President Obama and Hillary Clinton professed until very recently now gets you cast into outer darkness as a vile bigot and reprehensible human being. What explains this? I have my own theory, but take note of Damon Linker, a long-time gay marriage supporter, writing in The Week about the “ugliness” (Linker’s term) of the demonization of gay marriage »

Why “big law” won’t defend the constitutionality of bans on gay marriage

Featured image Not long ago, in the context of the controversy over Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, I complained that corporate America won’t stand up to the increasingly totalitarian tactics of the gay rights movement and its leftist supporters. This is not surprising, I added, because “history teaches that corporations are hardly a bulwark against totalitarianism.” What’s true of corporations is true in spades of their handmaidens, big law firms. I worked »

Some Indiana Interrogatories

Featured image The whole Indiana RFRA controversy prompts a few interrogatories.  Such as: • If a member of the Westboro Baptist Church asks for a bakery to create a cake with their motto “God hates fags,” will the baker be charged with discrimination if she refuses? • If a baker agrees to bake a cake for a gay wedding, but as matter of practice includes the slogan “God hates fags” in, say, »

The Lebron James of BS

Featured image Barack Obama is not just a BS artist of the first rank; he is the gold standard in BS. He’s not so good that anyone who knows what Obama is talking about would fall for his act, but we must give credit where credit is due. When it comes to BS, he never lets his guard down. I think it’s because he even dishes it out to himself. Thus he »

Cook’s pride

Featured image In the light of traditional morality, homosexual practices are a vice. The promotion of “gay pride” has long been part of the “transvaluation of values” promoted by the countercultural left and it proved useful in the campaign against laws prohibiting homosexual acts. Hitching its wagon to the rhetoric of equality and civil rights, the campaign has succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of its advocates. To defend the virtue of traditional »

Gay marriage vs. religious freedom, the latest installment

Featured image Two ordained ministers, a husband and wife, who perform marriage ceremonies but oppose gay marriage reportedly face a 180-day jail term and a $1,000 fine for each day they decline to celebrate a same-sex wedding. The ministers operate a chapel in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. The city has an ordinance that prohibits discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation, in public accommodations. Recently, the ministers turned down a gay couple’s »

New frontiers in freedom

Featured image I may be mistaken, but it has seemed to me for quite a while that the campaign for gay marriage is about something other than “freedom” or “acceptance” or “equal rights.” The point of the campaign seems to me that we are compelled to get our minds right, to borrow the resonant phrase of the jailers in Cool Hand Luke. The proponents of “marriage equality” demand our inner assent. We »