४ फेब्रुवारी, २०१६
A conversation with James Obergefell, the man whose name is on the Supreme Court case that established the right of persons of the same sex to marry.
At Indiana University Maurer School of Law (with Professor Steve Sanders).
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५ टिप्पण्या:
Rights established and withheld under the pro-choice religion of the congruence movement.
Massive ego. It was all about him and his desire to control how his fellow Americans -- not the government -- behaved towards him.
Note well, how law school faculties treat this subject.
As Justice Scalia wrote in his dissent in Lawrence v Texas:
Today’s opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct. I noted in an earlier opinion the fact that the American Association of Law Schools (to which any reputable law school must seek to belong) excludes from membership any school that refuses to ban from its job-interview facilities a law firm (no matter how small) that does not wish to hire as a prospective partner a person who openly engages in homosexual conduct. See Romer, supra, at 653.
A couple of other things about viewing this video...
Jim Obergefell says that he didn't listen to Chief Justice Roberts when Roberts read his dissent from the bench (a mark of Roberts' serious disagreement with Kennedy and the majority). Obergefell says he was thinking, "Blah blah blah, we won!" Obergefell "ignored him," and the law school audience cheered.
The campus "LGBTQ Student Support Services" faculty leader asked Obergefell about his appearance as a White House guest at the State of the Union address, and whether he crossed paths with Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis. Obergefell said that he thought about it but then decided there was no reason for him to look for "that woman" and the law school crowd again cheered him. Obergefell also wen out of his way to congratulate President Obama (who ran in opposition to same sex marriage in 2008) on his "staunch support" for gay rights.
Obergefell also did something that is really offensive to legal thinking; he described same sex marriage opponents' argument as being somehow... recognizing our marriage prevents straight couples from getting married or having children..."
That is a cartoonish version, that is unrecognizable from anything seriously argued in court. And is well beneath the dignity of any serious law school presentation.
Obergefell also took an absolutist opinion, promoting "protected class" status for gays, lesbians and transgenders, and state equal rights laws to enforce that status. And he said that public businesses who claim that some services interfere with personal religious beliefs should close their doors.
But note well the overall atmosphere of this event. Obergefell is a hero to this audience, and many of the leaders of the hero-worship are the faculty and staff.
Interesting side note; Obergefell says that he got "thousands" of letters about his role in the famous case, and of the "thousands," only four were unsupportive, and Obergefell says that those four "weren't that bad." So there was no campaign of hate directed at him personally, by opponents of same-sex marriage.
Not the most likeable litigant from a famous Suoreme Ciurt case. Otis McDonald was a more interesting and likeable litigant. But his case didnt excite the progressives who control most law schools.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा