Bitter pinched bigot Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council reacted to today's marriage equality ruling in Pennsylvania via press release and it was schadenfreudelicious.
"Judge Jones ruling has no basis in Supreme Court precedent, and lacks any foundation in the text of the Constitution, or in the history or traditions of our country. Instead, he substituted his own personal dogmatic ideology as he proclaimed that any recognition of natural marriage should be thrown 'into the ash heap of history.'With impotent ammunition like this, it is little wonder that opponents of equality have lost case after case. Let's dissect the conclusions of a putrid and warped tiny mind.
"What is inevitable is that male-female unions will continue to be uniquely important to society. The only question is whether Government will acknowledge that fact or attempt to deny the truth about marriage.
"Oddly, Judge Jones made reference to reading the 'tea leaves' of the Supreme Court's Windsor decision. Shouldn't we expect judges to read the Constitution and the law - not 'tea leaves?'
First, Judge Jones' ruling has everything to do with "Supreme Court precedent" as does every ruling that has come down in the lower courts since last June's ruling in the United States v. Windsor case. It was Justice Scalia himself in his scathing, pissy dissent who predicted that the decision would open the floodgates of equality in the states, which is exactly what has come to pass.
By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition.How far up his tuchus does Perkin's have his head to assert that today's decision "lacks any foundation in the text of the Constitution?" The Supreme Court didn't come to its decision to strike down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act by analyzing the King James Bible. That Perkins maintains Jones ignored constitutional law in favor of "reading tea leaves" is a laughable stretch that even a child could see through.
As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by ‘ “bare . . . desire to harm” ’couples in same-sex marriages. … How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.
From Jone's ruling:
Based on the foregoing, we hold that Pennsylvania’s Marriage Laws violate both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Because these laws are unconstitutional, we shall enter an order permanently enjoining their enforcement. By virtue of this ruling, same-sex couples who seek to marry in Pennsylvania may do so, and already married same-sex couples will be recognized as such in the Commonwealth.As wrong as Perkins gets all of this though, nothing holds a candle to his statement that this Bush appointed judge based his ruling entirely on "his own personal dogmatic ideology." The absurdity of this man who has made it his life's work to fight to deny people their equality based solely on his own dogmatic ideology is enough to give a person whiplash.
The only things being thrown "into the ash heap of history" are people like Perkins and their weak arguments based on personal animus against gay people. The days of making a paycheck by viciously opposing our right to marry the person we love are swiftly coming to a close.
Congratulations Pennsylvania. And to all those who must wait a bit longer, take heart. Your day is most certainly coming.