Kate ([info]kate_nepveu) wrote,
@ 2008-05-16 22:15:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Entry tags:law, politics

Links, California same-sex marriage decision edition

Three quick comments I found interesting:

  • Dahlia Lithwick on the difference between judicial activism and judging; also on how "when your citizens and/or their Legislature are racing around banning and legalizing the same thing at the same time, the will of the people is not necessarily the last word on what's constitutional."
  • Kenji Yoshino on the potential wider legal consequences of the decision. I note that the decision explicitly refused to make immutability a requirement of traits deserving the highest legal protection, as Yoshino argued in Covering.

    (Also, it is amusing to contrast his and Lithwick's characterizations of the way the decision is written.)

  • The Slacktivist considers people who are sincerely opposed to same-sex marriage for religious reasons and wonders "why these friends and brothers and sisters of mine think that such theological arguments can or should be persuasive to those who don't share our religious perspective."

(5 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]dsgood
2008-05-17 03:59 am UTC (link)
"Come the counter-revolution, you'll marry women AND LIKE THEM!"

In Minnesota, there are people who object as strongly to non-organic food -- though they don't claim to have God on their side. And they don't see themselves as having enough political clout to get non-organic food banned. Yet.

And then there's David Strom, who just as strongly opposes public transit and supports automobiles. Not out of Libertarian principles; he's proposed having governments buy cars for people who can't afford them.

(Reply to this)


[info]doire
2008-05-17 03:06 pm UTC (link)
Have you seen this language log post. Just an analysis from the linguistic POV of one sentence from Corrigan's dissent.

I found it rather sobering.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]kate_nepveu
2008-05-17 03:11 pm UTC (link)
Permanent link: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=165

I hadn't read any of the concurrences or dissents, for lack of time, so thanks for pointing that out.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]calimac
2008-05-17 03:17 pm UTC (link)
In answer to slacktivist's question, this sort of theology includes the presumption that it is correct and all contrary theologies are wrong, and that this can and should be enforced by majority rule.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]kate_nepveu
2008-05-17 03:21 pm UTC (link)
(For those who don't click through, that's not his answer:

I don't think they quite really believe that everyone else can or should be compelled to act in accordance with our particular religious beliefs. I think, rather, that their unexplored assumption is that everyone else can be expected to live as though we all believed the same thing.

That's a peculiar expectation for a "peculiar people."
)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(5 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…