Justice Scalia's dissent is, as usual, filled with the sort of zingers that have made him a national treasure:The Supreme Court on Friday delivered a historic victory for gay rights, ruling 5 to 4 that the Constitution requires that same-sex couples be allowed to marry no matter where they live and that states may no longer reserve the right only for heterosexual couples.The court’s action marks the culmination of an unprecedented upheaval in public opinion and the nation’s jurisprudence. Advocates called it the most pressing civil rights issue of modern times, while critics said the courts had sent the country into uncharted territory by changing the traditional definition of marriage.
"The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic... If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began: 'The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity,' I would hide my head in a bag. The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."The Supreme Court can declare that squares are round if it wishes, but that doesn't make it so. Gay LARPers can ape the trappings of marriage but that doesn't make them married. Whenever liberal justices manufacture a new right, they argue that they're not manufacturing anything but that the right they've discovered was hidden in the text of the Constitution all along, arising from the emanations and penumbras.
The normative force of any positive law, including the Constitution, rests on the natural law. Right-liberals are reluctant to speak of the natural law so instead they attempted to reign in the judicial power with positivism. Republican candidates always vow to nominate "strict constructionists" to the Supreme Court, that is Justices who would base their rulings solely on the text of the Constitution. I've had Fox News on in the background and already I'm hearing right-liberals decrying this decision, not because sodomy is a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance, but because the court trampled on democracy or this should have been decided by the states or some other procedural complaint.
Both right-liberal positivism and left-liberal post-modernism are attempts by the free and equal liberal superman to push the natural law outside the Overton Window. From now on whenever a Republican president nominates a justice to the Supreme Court, the nominee will dutifully inform the Senate committees that of course sodomite marriage is the settled law of the land, and that he might not personally approve of it, but that won't affect his rulings...
Man is a social animal. Our connections to others make us who we are. Our duties to society aren't impositions by outsiders, but integral to our identities. Traditional sexual morality made possible trust and bonding between the sexes. Rejecting that tradition, as our current world works so hard to do, is to reject what makes us human. Progressive delusions to the contrary, human nature cannot be reconfigured at will. A fully human life must respect natural human functions in areas that affect the entirety of life such as love, marriage, and childrearing. That which is best for man is to use sex for its natural ends. Otherwise, life becomes an animalistic bedlam of impulse and chaos.
The traditional family is not a museum artifact the government can redefine at will. The progressives hate it because it represents settled understandings of what men are, what women are, and what sex is for. If you give the same level of honor and support to arrangements that are radically at odds with the traditional family, then you destroy the family as a reliable institution. I doubt the gays would be triumphant today without the existence of feminism and no-fault divorce.
What can't last forever, won't. If sexual anarchy causes enough problems for individuals and societies, it won't last. Progressives in general are not known for their fecundity. When the State collapses (and it will, long before this century is over) and people can no longer depend on it for education, health care, and pensions, then the importance of family ties and the sexual mores that support it will grow in importance again.