Tuesday marked the first of two days of arguments about marriage equality heard by the Supreme Court of the United States.
Quite frankly, it’s hysterical this is a debate still being discussed in our court system. Like, are you kidding? Based on this country’s history, you’d think men would be able to marry each other and the women would be perpetual maids and wenches to the obviously more superior man-folk.
But no.
If all men are created equal, then that is the last time we need to interpret the Constitution about the matter.
“The court’s four liberal justices asked questions suggesting sympathy for the gay-marriage cause, but across the ideological spectrum, justices showed reluctance to issue a ruling establishing an immediate constitutional right to gay marriage across the 50 states,” according to The Wall Street Journal after the SCOTUS’ day of initial discussions.
Like, um, sorry if you are a backward thinker, but it’s time to let bygones be bygones and let people get married if they want to. If you’re going to cling to a religious text and argue that “marriage” was created to be between a man and a woman, then we will point to all the other passages in that religious text you have most likely broken just by walking into a Red Lobster.
What else was frustrating about the debates this week?
Facebook reverted to the #Kony2012 fad all over again.
People changed their profile pictures to a red and pink equality symbol, which is a new version of the Human Rights Campaign’s logo. Other equality campaigns created their own versions of a red equality symbol as well.
Did all of you who changed your Facebook profile pictures actually, perhaps, sign any sort of petition or send a piece of mail to the SCOTUS? Because otherwise, thank you for briefly spreading awareness, but you did it on the day discussions began instead of, oh, we don’t know, anytime before it.
Do you think the Supreme Court justices are going to check their Facebook news feeds and suddenly change their minds?
No.
They will have a nice meal with their families — we’re assuming — and then argue some more tomorrow.
Share the good word, spread awareness and thank you for doing so — but doing so on the day of a discussion is too late to change the decision makers’ minds. It is simply a fruitless sign of solidarity.
Ideally, this editorial would just be an exact re-publication of The Onion’s article, “Supreme Court On Gay Marriage: ‘Sure, Who Cares.’”
“‘I’m a strict Originalist, Mr. Cooper, and I’m looking at a 14th Amendment that forbids any state from denying any person equal protection of the law,’ Associate Justice Antonin Scalia said. ‘So, unless we are the most uncivilized society on the face of God’s green earth, I think we can all agree that a gay person is in fact a person. So what I’m saying is, who the f--k are we to tell a person who he or she can get married to? This is dumb. Can we talk about a real case now, please?’”
