Supreme Court of the United States Recent Rulings

[good sam]

Love it! Roberts using Kennedy's quote from 1986 against him:

Allowing unelected federal judges to select which unenumerated
rights rank as “fundamental”—and to strike
down state laws on the basis of that determination—raises
obvious concerns about the judicial role. Our precedents
have accordingly insisted that judges “exercise the utmost
care” in identifying implied fundamental rights, “lest the
liberty protected by the Due Process Clause be subtly
transformed into the policy preferences of the Members of
this Court.” Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U. S. 702, 720
(1997) (internal quotation marks omitted); see Kennedy,
Unenumerated Rights and the Dictates of Judicial Restraint
13 (1986) (Address at Stanford) (“One can conclude
that certain essential, or fundamental, rights should exist
in any just society. It does not follow that each of those
essential rights is one that we as judges can enforce under
the written Constitution. The Due Process Clause is not a
guarantee of every right that should inhere in an ideal
system.”).

[elit]

This ruling doesn't really upset me in it of itself bc the expectation that society and the courts would see it the same way as torah Jews is just unrealistic but what is very concerning is the next step when religious people refuse to officiate or service a gay wedding...

[good sam]

Roberts makes the slippery slope argument:

One immediate question invited by the majority’s position
is whether States may retain the definition of marriage
as a union of two people. Cf. Brown v. Buhman, 947
F. Supp. 2d 1170 (Utah 2013), appeal pending, No. 14-
4117 (CA10). Although the majority randomly inserts the
adjective “two” in various places, it offers no reason at all
why the two-person element of the core definition of marriage
may be preserved while the man-woman element
may not. Indeed, from the standpoint of history and tradition,
a leap from opposite-sex marriage to same-sex marriage
is much greater than one from a two-person union to
plural unions, which have deep roots in some cultures
around the world. If the majority is willing to take the big
leap, it is hard to see how it can say no to the shorter one.

First observation: Roberts is confusing the cultural tradition of a man taking more than one wife, with the sexual revolution called Polyamory: the marriage of more than 2 people. They are very different.

Second observation: Assuming Roberts is referring to the latter, what's so bad about that? Seriously.

[wayfe]

So the question to all those who think that this ruling has no halachic ramifications: if it was up to you, would you vote for it? Just as a kindness for all your gay friends? Because you're open-minded and understand that there are nice gay people who will benefit from it?

ETA: I'm just asking this as a theoretical question. In no way do I think that people who do approve of gay marriage are more "open-minded" than others.

[jj1000]

Yup. A person very involved in the battle for religious freedom told me months ago that they all had no doubt how the court was going to rule. Did you really speak to Kennedy? Where?For now this won't last

I was part of a small group of staff at a law school he spoke to. He basically said it will change just as all civil rights movements have.

[eis517]

I was part of a small group of staff at a law school he spoke to. He basically said it will change just as all civil rights movements have.

What law school do you work at? What do you do there?

[Achas Veachas]

So the question to all those who think that this ruling has no halachic ramifications: if it was up to you, would you vote for it? Just as a kindness for all your gay friends? Because you're open-minded and understand that there are nice gay people who will benefit from it?

That will only be a Halachic issue if a Frum judge is appointed to the Supreme Court.

[Matovu]

I'll add some more kernels in the popper:

+10000
Let's spend this weekend on fear mongering about this ruling. When the dust settles we'll look back and ask ourselves what were we been scared into ?

Religious freedom goes both ways.

[jj1000]

What law school do you work at? What do you do there?

The school was UPenn, I don't work there though. Kinda just slipped in.

[wayfe]

I'll add some more kernels in the popper:

Ridiculously idiotic and simplistic view.

This country and its legal system are created by the people and for the people and should reflect the people's opinion. And I'm assuming that as an orthodox Jew, Shmuel Tennenhaus's personal beliefs jive with the Torah's, so just because popular opinion (is it so?) is for gay marriages doesn't mean that he needs to be thrilled by it.

[Achas Veachas]

This country and its legal system are created by the people and for the people and should reflect the people's opinion.

And it does.

[Aj3042]

I'll add some more kernels in the popper:

Sickening the way he uses Judaism to promote it. It's just like the self-hating Jews who say "Don't call me an anti-Semite, I'm Jewish!" and like the nonreligious Jews who champion causes antithetical to to the Torah (like real gay marriage) and say it's in the spirit of their Judaism. Absolutely sickening.
(On a side note, who is this guy? Is he a religious authority in any way? Why are you quoting him as if the fact e blows his mouth off on FB validates his view?)

[wayfe]

And it does.

So as Torah believing Jews we have the full right to be as outraged at this ruling (while still understanding that it was inevitable) as we'd like without being made to feel like old-fashioned, simple-minded bigots.

[Aj3042]

So as Torah believing Jews we have the full right to be as outraged at this ruling (while still understanding that it was inevitable) as we'd like without being made to feel like old-fashioned, simple-minded bigots.

In today's day and age hating what Hashem said to hate (people who commit aveiros publicly and brazenly) is hateful and you're a labeled a bigot. But still better to be on God's side he usually wins in the end.

[avremie]

Enjoy this.
From today.

[Achas Veachas]

So as Torah believing Jews we have the full right to be as outraged at this ruling (while still understanding that it was inevitable) as we'd like without being made to feel like old-fashioned, simple-minded bigots.

You have the right to be as outraged as you want. You have that right not just as a Torah believing Jew but as an American citizen. As for me, getting outraged about a ruling that has no bearing on how I keep Torah seems like a waste of energy.

[sky121]

In today's day and age hating what Hashem said to hate (people who commit aveiros publicly and brazenly) is hateful and you're a labeled a bigot. But still better to be on God's side he usually wins in the end.

So you hate gay people?
What if it was your kid? Your sibling? Your relative? Would you hate them too?

[Aj3042]

You have the right to be as outraged as you want. You have that right not just as a Torah believing Jew but as an American citizen. As for me, getting outraged about a ruling that has no bearing on how I keep Torah seems like a waste of energy.

You're right about that-it's not worth our time. Western civilization will corrode and eventually collapse just like all of history's greats, the corruption of morals usually being the beginning of the end, as in the oft cited case of the Roman Empire. This decision was inevitable, whether now or in a decade from now.

[Dan]

Sickening the way he uses Judaism to promote it. It's just like the self-hating Jews who say "Don't call me an anti-Semite, I'm Jewish!" and like the nonreligious Jews who champion causes antithetical to to the Torah (like real gay marriage) and say it's in the spirit of their Judaism. Absolutely sickening.
(On a side note, who is this guy? Is he a religious authority in any way? Why are you quoting him as if the fact e blows his mouth off on FB validates his view?)

I know better than to bother arguing with you or even telling you my thoughts.

Feel free to start a petition to get congress to pass an amendment banning gay marriage. I hear those are usually a good use of time.

[Aj3042]

So you hate gay people?
What if it was your kid? Your sibling? Your relative? Would you hate them too?

My friend Judiasm isn't only about love-it's about hate too. David Hamelech praises himself in numerous places in Tehillim for hating the enemies of Hashem. And please stop with the emotional double talk of "what if it's your relative". That has zero bearing on the halacha or hashkafa and is a thinly veiled attempt at sidelining logic and appealing to emotions.