Thursday, June 27, 2013

Antonin Scalia Viciously Opposes Your Social Progress

El Rude-o on Fat Tony's reactions to the DOMA beat-down.

The Defense of Marriage Act has long been one of the goddamnedest embarrassments of this nation. Passed in an election year, 1996, and signed into law by a president shit-scared that he would look too soft on the queers since he had tried to show them compassion in 1993 by attempting to get rid of the ban on gays in the military, an effort that was an utter failure. It passed Congress with no problems, with bipartisan support, 342-67 in the House, 85-14 in the Senate. Score a battle in the culture war for the dumbfucks.

[...] Which means that we get another vicious, latently homophobic dissent from Justice Antonin Scalia.

The fun part is that so much of Scalia's reasoning in upholding DOMA could have been used to uphold the entire Voting Rights Act, a section of which was struck down yesterday by a 5-4 conservative decision. There, Scalia had absolutely no difficulty overturning an even more broadly bipartisan law (98-0 in the Senate).

Check out this shit and see if you just don't feel like saying to Scalia, "Wait, you're supposedly the smart conservative. You just sound like a desperate bitch boy attempting to get the conservative groups that fund your speeches and junkets to shove their cash rolls into your anxious asshole."

First, Scalia is aghast, aghast, motherfuckers, at the notion that the Supreme Court would dare to believe that it has the power to overturn the mighty Congress: The majority says that "judicial review must march on regardless, lest we 'undermine the clear dictate of the separation-of-powers principle that when an Act of Congress is alleged to conflict with the Constitution, it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.'" Then, with the kind of hyperventilating hyperbole that'd make Morton Downey, Jr. say, "Whoa, calm down there, big fella," Scalia vents, "That is jaw-dropping. It is an assertion of judicial supremacy over the people’s Representatives in Congress and the Executive. It envisions a Supreme Court standing (or rather enthroned) at the apex of government, empowered to decide all constitutional questions, always and every-where 'primary' in its role."
Rude goes on to point out where in the Constitution it says that's SCOTUS' fucking job. Yada yada. We knew that.

Scalia's dissent is so filled with disdain for everything, angry in a King-Kong-gets-shot-by-a-biplane kind of gorilla rage, that you just wanna hate masturbate to it. "Oh, yeah, yeah, fuck you, Tony, suck on this cultural hegemony and tell us how much it makes you wanna vomit." And then, when he starts to get pissed at Justice Alito's dissent, we're into something that veers towards camp. Well, shit, he is usually wearing a gown.
Stop right there, Rude! Do NOT esplain what is or isn't under that gown! I'm pretty tough but...

Go down fighting, Justice Scalia, you hypocritical activist judge who declares you're no activist. Flail away at the waves of progress, and when the tsunami hits, you just have to hope, piece of shit that you are, that you're a floater and not a sinker.
Sink, float, mox nix. Shit's shit.

Much more.


WhyNot said...

Lol, nicely put.

You know, I'm not gay, in fact I don't even know any gays nor lesbians, but what really beats me is what fucking business is it of anybody whether someone is homosexual?

Is tolerance about other peoples' private sexual life so fucking hard to get through the heads of those religious right wings meddling do-gooders fucks?

You guys in USA are particularly afflicted by that wide-spread medieval retarded religious mentality, and I feel sorry for the sane ppl like you guys to have to endure those fuckholes. I now live in Europe, but also spent 24 years in Australia, and although both places couldn't be further apart on the globe's map, they share an amazingly similar view on this issue - the bottom line and general concensus being that sexual preferences is a personal matter, and no gov nor laws have any fuckin right to tell ppl who to fuck and when.

My second wife (Aussie) also lived for close to a year in Japan, and same thing there, nobody gives a flying fuck about religions or homo/bi sexual/marriages - everyone minds their own fucking business and lets other people do as they please.

The bottom line is so fucking simple it is just astounding that those republican born-again religious cunts who spoil USA's country side can't seem to get it through their thick pointy heads. THEY are the source of all the problems in USA. I lived there for 2 years (Florida), and got on wonderfully with everyone EXCEPT a small bunch of born-again cunts I met there.

Oh well... USA is only 3 or 4 hundred years old; let's give time to grow - maybe in a couple of millenia... lol.

Gordon said...

Yes, we are most definitely afflicted with Dark Ages religious ignorance. The USA was first settled by religionists who were so extreme they were kicked out of England and they are still with us.