Alito and Thomas begin Supreme Court term by taking swipe at “Ruinous” Obergeffel marriage Decision

The Supreme Court turned away Kim Davis' case, but Thomas (joined by Alito) wrote a jaw-dropping rant taking direct aim at Obergefell and suggesting that SCOTUS must overturn the right to marriage equality in order to protect free exercise.

But it’s not just marriage. Conservatives and Republicans think that all gay rights are inherently a threat to religious liberty because it outlaws the ability of people and businesses to make moral and religious judgments about homosexuality and sexuality in general.

I did see that Judge Amy gave paid speeches multiple times to, and accepted money from, an anti-gay hate group. She is also in favor of supressing a woman's right to obtain contraception. She is a MONSTER.

If they overturn gay marriage I am leaving the US - even if Biden wins. I have already looked into Thailand or Mexico.

It was inevitable after the 2016 election. I roll my eyes at anyone who thought anything different

But thankfully, Trump is pro-gay...because that fucking matters.

My one wish. Just one: Every gay person who votes for the current Republican party, live exclusively under their rule/laws. I am so sick of those parasites benefiting from what D E M O C R A T S have fought for and having the nerve to think their rights wouldn't be taken away by the very people for whom they vote. Bigoted, racist scummy Rep. gays.

Starting with Richard Grenell, that scum.

Luckily for Longdong and his white wife, interracial marriage is still legal.

"Although most denials of certiorari are handed down without explanation or comment, Justice Thomas wrote a four-page statement on the case. The statement was a scathing criticism of the Court for wrongly reading the right to same-sex marriage into the Constitution, for prioritizing LGBT rights over religious freedom, and for inappropriately inserting the judiciary into a matter of state law."

Thomas: In deciding Obergefell, "the Court has created a problem that only it can fix."

Well, equal status under the law was nice while it lasted.

Alito and Thomas are inviting "religious liberty" cases that can make their way to a 6-3 conservative court.

Oh yeah. Why are y’all surprised?

I hope Thomas gets the virus, I'm adding him to my death wish.

Thats not nice

Someone should remind Justice Thomas that not too long ago he was legally prohibited from marrying a white woman

But he doesn’t think interracial marriage is comparable to samesex marriage because he believes the former is moral, the latter is a grave sin

R9 Then we may have a 15 member Court...with 6 more liberals, just to be sure.

This is why we have to look out for ourselves. I’m going to stop donating to anything other than gay rights organizations. Does anyone have a list of organizations that care about our rights (and don’t pretend to wile spending all of their money, time and energy on trans or racial equality)?

[quote]Alito and Thomas begin Supreme Court term by taking swipe at “Ruinous” Obergeffel marriage Decision

Why are they so angry?

R16

You need to be donating to Biden and the Democrats. They are 100% for gay rights and upholding gay marriage. There is nothing organizations can do if Republicans hold the power.

I suspect you’re a troll, but posting this anyway because it’s necessary.

Predictable

If you voted for anyone other than Hillary, you are to blame

Alito is horrid

Why is Thomas so obsessed with 2 same sex partners that love each other, cherish each other and want to spend their lives together? Why does that threaten him so? What a nasty piece of work and his life must be.

It’s part of the rightwing belief gay It’s inherently under mine religious liberty to object to homosexuality; hence, Republicans today almost uniformly oppose any type of gay rights as a threat to religious liberty.

Under their reasoning, gay rights laws will also be struck down as undermining the fundamental right to religious liberty.So, basic anti-discrimination laws that protect lgbt people are also in jeopardy of being found unconstitutional

"Does anyone have a list of organizations that care about our rights (and don’t pretend to wile spending all of their money, time and energy on trans or racial equality)?"

Calling for equality while denigrating other minorities? Nice. If you really want to help, send money to Dems who will NOT appoint people like Scalia, Coney Barrett, Alito, and Thomas to the court

But I don’t understand how 2 men, 2 women married hinders Sunday services. How does it keep Christians from reading their Bible? Having a Sunday prayer meeting potluck at Aunt Gerti’s House?

Baffling.

[quote]"Does anyone have a list of organizations that care about our rights (and don’t pretend to wile[sic] spending all of their money, time and energy on trans or racial equality)?"

Log Cabin Republicans. Give to them since you sound like one. Selfish idiot.

People like you are the ones who drool when any Republican with no power supports gay rights and whine about in-power Dems who "aren't doing enough."

In their views, Christian bakers and florists shouldn't have to cater gay weddings, Christian accountants and lawyers shouldn't have to serve gay clients, Christian hospitals shouldn't have to accept gay patients, etc.

R25,

I am not denigrating anyone. People can support whomever they choose. From this moment on, I will look to support gay causes. If we don’t, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

I really wish both of these fuckers would get Covid and die.

I haven’t heard any mainstream Christian say Christians should be able to reject gay patients. They say hospitals shouldn’t be forced to perform sex reassignment procedures; perform abortions; or provide contraception and assistive fertility treatments.

[quote]I really wish both of these fuckers would get Covid and die.

Yeah!

Let's give Moscow Mitch another supreme court seat to fill!

[quote]Alito and Thomas are inviting "religious liberty" cases that can make their way to a 6-3 conservative court.

Can't someone start bringing cases about their right to freedom from religion aka the freedom to have their rights not decreed by any one religion?

Gay rights groups should have supported Utah comprises that allowed wide accommodation to gay rights laws for at least some antidiscrimination protections. Now, all gay rights are in danger of being voided

[quote]They say hospitals shouldn’t be forced to perform sex reassignment procedures; perform abortions; or provide contraception and assistive fertility treatments.

... or allow same-sex spouses to make medical decisions, or allow same-sex partners to visit critical patients, or ...

This Judge Amy gal has the same crazy look that Michelle Bachmann has.

Guzzling the baby Jesus' semen will do that to a girl r36.

^ Yep, she has Bachmann crazy eyes

R35, can you cite a recent example?

R39, are you denying that this was their view? Why wouldn't bigots revert to their original prejudices once they're given the green light?

R39

Why do we need to do your homework for you? It’s been pretty big news on every gay news site what Republican administrations are doing. And you clearly gloss over the parts that undermine rights based on sexual orientation.

You’re clearly a Trump supporter lol.

That’s a good point, but I haven’t seen it occur or attempted in the medical field for over a decade

Justice Thomas's most famous quote, from a NYT article:

[quote]In 1992, according to an article in The Times, Justice Clarence Thomas told two of his clerks that he planned to remain on the court until 2034.

[quote] Why 2034? one of them asked.

[quote] “Liberals made my life miserable for 43 years,” Thomas replied, “and I’m going to make their lives miserable for 43 years.”

Lots more misery is possible with a conservative 6 to 3 majority on the court.

His rulings are, in part, just for spite. I didn't say that, he did.

That'll be funny, revoking all those marriage licenses.

I can't imagine anyone having problems with that.

I wonder if Kim Davis is cheatin' on her hubby to celebrate. That's what she usually does of an evening.

“Liberals made my life miserable for 43 years,”

How? By supporting civil rights?

They won't revoke any marriage licenses, they'll just say that "Christians" don't have to recognize them.

And then likely bar any future ones.

Just a reminder that RBG has been on her deathbed since 1996, Obama asked her to step down, and she didn’t. She wanted to squeeze out a few more years of power and now we have to worry about this.

She’s no fucking hero.

Cut to the chase: much as we despise Thomas, we need him alive in that Seat until we have a Democrat in the White House to nominate his young, liberal replacement.

Down, Covid--hands off SCOTUS for the time-being.

R47

Shut the fuck up troll

No, R48. He needs to be gone. Younger Republicans are more willing to accept gay marriage. This guy is creating problems and specifically targeting him. FUCK him.

[quote] Younger Republicans are more willing to accept gay marriage.

Never underestimate the Republican Senate's ability to find that one, special youngish Republican who lines up perfectly with the views of the other dinosaurs. Have you met Amy Covid Barrett?

Well my religion is JEDI, and the Jedi religion forbids all personal attachments and therefore all marriage! THE MARRIAGE OF ANY PERSONS AT ALL IS AN ATTACK ON MY RELIGIOUS FREEDOM!!!!

For r39.

For r39.

For r39.

For r39.

For r39.

[quote] This is why we have to look out for ourselves. I’m going to stop donating to anything other than gay rights organizations.

Good luck with that. There's not such a thing as gay rights organizations anymore, they're taken over by trans women, that is fetishist straight men who wants to fuck lesbians. You won't hear a peep from them.

R58

Troll Alert

"There's not such a thing as gay rights organizations anymore, they're taken over by trans women, that is fetishist straight men who wants to fuck lesbians."

The anti-trans crowd can't decide if trans people are really just gay people in denial or straight men

Thomas believed that “if the States had been allowed to resolve this question through legislation, they could have included accommodations for those who hold these religious beliefs.” So it sounds like he was looking for accommodation and not outlawing marriage equality. I’m not sure how that would work in practice, but maybe he had in mind allowing clerks to pass the work to others, like in some states pharmacists can do who are against abortion.

[quote] In the summer of 2016, Evan Minton was preparing for his scheduled hysterectomy at Mercy San Juan Medical Center in Carmichael, California, just outside Sacramento. The procedure, part of his gender-affirming care, should have been routine.

Even in 2020, it seems odd that such a procedure should be referred to as “routine”.

But isn’t that a legislative and policy issue. sCOTUS should only be concerned with constitutional issues

Bump

Religious people fuck up everything with their socially sanctioned bigotry. They aren't happy unless they're bullying people who aren't like them and making people miserable. With Amy the court becomes even more of a Catholic freakshow taliban.

[quote] sCOTUS should only be concerned with constitutional issues

That’s the problem at hand - they’re trying to figure out how to handle the Constitutional issue of free exercise of religion. The trickiest thing for the SC is to determine what to do when two Constitutional rights infringe on each other. A common expression is that one’s rights end where another man’s nose begins, but if the right in question includes the (religious) right to strike figuratively someone’s nose, then it becomes more difficult.

Complex

R7 Clarence Thomas has always been a hypocrite. He has worked for decades to dismantle affirmative action yet benefited enormously from it, perhaps more than any human being in the history of the United States. While the brilliant Sotomayor remains grateful for the opportunity it meant for her to attend Princeton, Thomas thinks of it as paternalistic. He sure didn't mind the paternalism when he got that sweet admission to Yale or when he was appointed to the D.C. Court of Appeals (one step below the Supreme Court) despite having produced ZERO scholarly works or tried ZERO cases.

R59 R60 GLAAD was literally taken over by a cadre of autogynephilic males led by James/Jennifer Boylan (a heterosexual male with a wife and kids). One of the first things GLAAD did under his auspices was conduct a smear campaign against RuPaul (who was instrumental in raising funds for GLAAD when it was just getting started) over absurd accusations of "transphobia". In the United Kingdom, the National Union of Students (representing 95% of all higher education unions) went from being a staunch supporter of gay people to outright banning gay male representatives because we are considered "privileged" and "transphobic".

Here are several charts made by an Oxford University professor that perfectly illustrate the situation. You can stay in denial, though.

^ Yawn, you Milo clones want to have it both ways. "Transwomen are straight guys who want to rape women! But they're also gay and they represent gay erasure! Waaaaah!"

GLAAD still supports gay rights and gay marriage. But you know who doesn't? The same Republicans who hate trans people and pass laws discriminating against them. The Altos and Thomases of the world.

R70 I see you have no counter-arguments and are simply resorting to a strawman. Where have I said trans-identified males are just gay males? Sounds like something transsexual icon Juno Dawson would say. In the West, >70% of trans-identified males are attracted to the female sex, so no, I would never describe them as gay males as a whole. They are by and large heterosexual/gynephilic males, just like James/Jennifer Boylan.

Try again, but this time actually put some thought behind your words instead of strawman screeching.

Why is Clarence Thomas such an Uncle Tom.

Clarence Thomas is an insatiable bottom.

"Try again, but this time actually put some thought behind your words instead of strawman screeching."

Looks who's talking. It's not a strawman at all, TONS of dataloungers insist that trans people are just gay and can't handle it (even though trans people are less accepted in America than gays) and were FORCED into it. They think it represents "gay erasure" which is bullshit. It's also bullshit to claim they're all straight rapists and are a huge threat to women when of course the biggest threat to women is hetero "cis" men. Don't accuse me of being "shrill" when you're repeating talking points from shrill TERFS and shrill republicans who hate trans people as well as gays. Btw, where did you get that "70%" figure from, the studies I read give different numbers.

R74 Do you even know what a strawman is? You are coming up with random shit I've never even said and arguing against it instead of addressing the points I've made. It's the equivalent of me calling you a pedophile enabler just because there are many ~queer~/TQI2S+#%+/trans activists out there who support pedophilia (look up "MAP - Minor Attracted Person"). Now you are just screeching about "terfs" like a typical unhinged transactivist lunatic.

Once again you fail spectacularly at argumentation and after multiple posts you still refuse to address the reality that gay organizations have been taken over by non-gay people and gay interests have been sidelined, as evidenced by the link I provided.

Oh, Clarence Thomas can [italic]write?[/italic]

Who knew?

Do you understand now why the T was forcibly inserted into gay rights? The conflation of sex with gender undermines every single gay rights win, undermines the very reality of homosexuality. We cannot continue supporting groups that support the trans agenda.

The T also reinforces the stereotype that gay men just want to be women. We’ve had to fight for decades to show straight people that we are happy and secure being men and have no desire to be women.

JESUS CHRIST! A horrible dissent by Clarence Thomas unequivocally denouncing gay marriage rights has suddenly devolved into a troll-inspired diatribe about trans people. GET OUT TROLLS! YOU ARE NOT WANTED HERE!

It's never enough for religionists to simply follow the tenets of their religion. EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO FOLLOW THEIR RELIGION, TOO.

Religion is a blight on humanity.

Well, we have to acknowledge there is a tug of war between religious rights and gay rights. When we seek to outlaw Antigay discrimination, we are seeking to outlaw actions rooted in the view that homosexuality is immoral, sinful, or inferior, which often Derive from strongly held religious reviews. So, it’s inevitable religious people would oppose gay Riggs as curtailing their right to practice their religious beliefs.

r81, It all depends on what is considered a protected class. Christians felt it was their religious right to discriminate against Jews and did so openly in many part of the US until numerous court cases established that religious right didn't trump the rights of others. Many of the most egregious examples of that type of discrimination (in housing, education, employment) didn't end until well after WWII. In spite of what Thomas wrote in his dissent, it was COURT cases that protected and expanded the rights of minority religious expressions, not state democratic processes. Gay marriage rights ought to now be protected, just as minority religious expressions are protected. It's horrifying and scary that Thomas is opening the door to rolling that back. Courts exist partly to protect the rights of the minority from the Tyranny of the majority.

We didn’t federally outlaw Anti-Jewish or religious discrimination under Title VII in 1964.

[quote] In spite of what Thomas wrote in his dissent, it was COURT cases that protected and expanded the rights of minority religious expressions, not state democratic processes.

That’s true, like in Colorado. However, Thomas may have wishful thinking that legislatures will add the necessary religious exemptions without the courts forcing them to.

Right now, almost no additional states will pass gay rights laws. The states without gay rights laws are controlled by Republicans, and gay rights are a nonstarter almost everywhere where Republicans are in power

"But it’s not just marriage. Conservatives and Republicans think that all gay rights are inherently a threat to religious liberty because it outlaws the ability of people and businesses to make moral and religious judgments about homosexuality and sexuality in general."

Can they not see the slippery slope? Obviously this could be extended to things other than sexuality - including the religion of the judgmental religious nuts themselves.

They aren’t that far sighted.

All the guns in the USA and someone cannot shoot Thomas and Alito.

[quote] But I don’t understand how 2 men, 2 women married hinders Sunday services. How does it keep Christians from reading their Bible? Having a Sunday prayer meeting potluck at Aunt Gerti’s House?

It doesn't, but it makes us enjoy those things less, so how dare you have equal rights if it means casting a shadow over our holy lives.