One thought on “Ruth Bader Ginsburg eviscerates same-sex marriage opponents in court | US news | The Guardian

  1. Reblogged this on Biblebelt Witch and commented:
    I am an ally.

    Here are the main points from the article, that I highly recommend reading the whole thing.

    In response to the “traditional marriage” argument:

    “Marriage today is not what it was under the common law tradition, under the civil law tradition,” said Ginsburg when Justices Roberts and Kennedy began to fret about whether the court had a right to challenge centuries of tradition.

    “Marriage was a relationship of a dominant male to a subordinate female,” she explained. “That ended as a result of this court’s decision in 1982 when Louisiana’s Head and Master Rule was struck down … Would that be a choice that state should [still] be allowed to have? To cling to marriage the way it once was?”

    The fact that my husband didn’t purchase me for three goats and a cow means we already changed, redefined, marriage. The fact that divorce happens more often than not means we already changed and redefined marriage. Period. The end.


    In response to the procreation argument:

    “Suppose a couple, 70-year-old couple, comes in and they want to get married?” remarked the 82-year-old Ginsburg, to laughter, after a protracted debate over whether it was fair to ask couples if they wanted children before allowing them to wed.

    This one cuts me deep. Yes, I have Witchlette. Yes, I’m carrying Witchling. But I was once told by doctors that it was “impossible”. At that point, with this argument, my marriage to my husband would have become null and void. All the infertile couples I know who struggle and never saw success would have their marriages null and void.

    Bottom line:

    “All of the incentives, all of the benefits that marriage affords would still be available,” said Ginsburg. “So you’re not taking away anything from heterosexual couples. They would have the very same incentive to marry, all the benefits that come with marriage that they do now.”

    Just because someone who read a book you like said that in the book it’s mentioned that this “lifestyle”…I’m sorry, I still hold a genetic link, therefore a genetic condition that influences a lifestyle, much as someone who is Deaf lives a Deaf lifestyle and someone who is red-headed leads a ginger lifestyle…is wrong, doesn’t take a tracking thing away from you.

    Live and let live. Love and let love.

    That’s what I says in your book, anyway.


Comments are closed.