SCALIA: ‘When Did It Become Unconstitutional To Exclude Homosexual Couples From Marriage?’

scalia“We don’t prescribe law for the future,” Scalia said. “We decide what the law is. I’m curious, when did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage? 1791? 1868? When the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted?”



  1. Moe Green

    March 26, 2013 at 8:25 pm

    Droppin’ some law shit

  2. Docintoxicated

    March 26, 2013 at 8:27 pm

    I’ve been busy all day so I just logged on to facebook and saw a bunch of those red equal things. Luckily Ron and Fez inspired me to make my own version.

    • SarahMcPants

      March 26, 2013 at 9:28 pm

      @Docintoxicated Until now I questioned if you were a real doctor.

  3. turfgrass64

    March 26, 2013 at 8:31 pm


  4. filler

    March 26, 2013 at 8:32 pm

    Just let one dick rest against your lips Fez, then we will care when you post these typical gay stories we are so so used to.

  5. Rphils

    March 26, 2013 at 8:32 pm

    It has ALWAYS been unconstitutional… we are just finally realizing it

  6. Ziggy Stardust

    March 26, 2013 at 8:42 pm

    They were on the DL when this was drafted, so tick tock.

  7. DanARou

    March 26, 2013 at 8:50 pm

    Since Marriage is legally for the intent of procreation; 8====) (====8 does not make babies, neither does O/O (scissoring)

    • HummusMagnate

      March 26, 2013 at 10:10 pm

      @DanARou …fuck! I totally forgot babies can’t be made without a marriage license

      • DanARou

        March 27, 2013 at 2:04 pm

        @HummusMagnate   @DanARou
        You are 100% correct, by a Man and a Man, oh wait… ;P

  8. Vami

    March 26, 2013 at 9:07 pm

    Thanks for a very angry, smug and confused 20 minutes of radio tomorrow, Scalia!

  9. DerekJamesSmith

    March 26, 2013 at 9:24 pm

    I wonder if Scalia would apply the same thinking to the 2nd Amendment

  10. JonNockels

    March 26, 2013 at 9:28 pm

    Right around that “We hold these truths to be self evident…that all men are created equal” part.

    • HummusMagnate

      March 26, 2013 at 10:08 pm

      @JonNockels …right idea wrong document.

      • JonNockels

        March 26, 2013 at 10:18 pm

        @HummusMagnate Not according to my American public school education. #AndLincolnWasThe5ThPresident.

      • HummusMagnate

        March 26, 2013 at 10:22 pm

        @JonNockels must’ve been approved by Texas.

  11. edrooney

    March 26, 2013 at 9:30 pm

    If Jesus came back and became a citizen of the USA.  Not a dual Israeli/US citizenship but a Straight up US citizen, what political party do you think he would be registered with ( for drivers license purposes, of course)   If you think Jesus would be a republican, I challenge you to tell me why.

    • HummusMagnate

      March 26, 2013 at 10:07 pm

      @edrooney eww!

      • edrooney

        March 27, 2013 at 8:05 am

        @HummusMagnate   @edrooney  I think I was in some kind of Nyquil trance last night.  I despise liberals and religion which makes me a man with no party.  That being said,  They can all go to hell and I don’t give a shit who marry’s who.

    • indpendnt

      March 27, 2013 at 1:32 am

      @edrooney Because he’d want people to do things for themselves, he’d also want charity and not forced philanthropy

      • fuchubh

        March 27, 2013 at 9:57 am

        @indpendnt  @edrooney Actually, he would want people to follow unquestioningly, leave their families, take no thought of the morrow.   Sounds pretty Gingrichy to me.

    • galactictraveler

      March 27, 2013 at 2:21 am

      @edrooney he would be a dictator. ! Another cult of personality !

  12. TwizzlesMcNasty

    March 26, 2013 at 9:33 pm

    I have had a similar point of veiw on the constitution but then you consider the thoughts of some of the founding fathers who felt like they were laying the ground work for the ending of slavery.  I do not think that we are completely beholden to these men from 200 years ago but they did seem to be men who considered freedom precious  Homosexuality never should have been illegal based on our contitution but there is a question for the of how is marriage defined?  Is it an agreement between two people?  No Is it an agreement between two people and a church?  No.  Is it an argeement between two people and the state?  Yes.  Is it improper discrimination for the state to resrict people of the same sex to enter into the argeement?  Scalia thinks an amendment like the one that abolished slavery is necessary and that would be the cleanest solution but they could argue the intent of the constitution restrict this type of discrimination. 
    Marriage and the state shouldn’t mix at all.  Marriage should be the realm of the people.  Churches, individuals, whoever makes something up, what business is it of the state?

    • edrooney

      March 26, 2013 at 9:39 pm

      @TwizzlesMcNasty  The founding fathers did 0.00 for ending slavery.  Slavery was an issue that they skirted for another 80 or so years.

      • fuchubh

        March 27, 2013 at 9:49 am

        @edrooney  Jefferson wrote in his original draft of the Declaration of Independence, with regard to King George III :
        “he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it’s most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemispere, or to incure miserable death in their transportation hither.”
        The fact that it was removed at the insistence of the southern states is unfortunate, but necessary to assure the ratification of the Declaration.  As Benjamin Franklin stated, and I’ll have to paraphrase:  First Independence, without that, what does it matter?
        So, as for 0.00… not truly much more, but some.

  13. SarahMcPants

    March 26, 2013 at 9:37 pm

    Around the same time women could vote and black men stopped being 3/5ths of a person.

    • edrooney

      March 26, 2013 at 9:44 pm

      @SarahMcPants At least women were a no/yes decision and not valued as a “compromise” at 60% competent.

      • SarahMcPants

        March 26, 2013 at 9:52 pm

        @edrooney  The 3/5ths thing started in 1783 until black men counted as 100% in 1865. Women didnt get the right to vote until 1920. Its pretty clear its bros before hoes here.

      • edrooney

        March 26, 2013 at 10:15 pm

        @SarahMcPants Right.  “Bros” could “vote” just as easily in 1865 as they could in 1965.  Hoes win.  They always do.

      • SarahMcPants

        March 26, 2013 at 10:25 pm

        @edrooney I thought we were talking about what was in the constitution and not how well those laws were actually implemented. I wasnt there, I will have to take your word for it.

      • indpendnt

        March 27, 2013 at 1:28 am

        @SarahMcPants  big fan of Women’s suffrage?

      • SarahMcPants

        March 27, 2013 at 7:51 am

        @indpendnt Um yes? I do actually vote unlike a lot of people my age.

      • Hoboken Guy

        March 27, 2013 at 1:57 pm

        @SarahMcPants  @indpendnt As opposed to not being a fan of women’s suffrage?

  14. ecupirate

    March 26, 2013 at 9:42 pm

    for the most part marriage is dumb anyhow

  15. HummusMagnate

    March 26, 2013 at 10:04 pm

    Hmm… I’m gonna say that the government can’t “exclude” people from government sponsored activities like marriage because that in my opinion violates civil rights. Now the way for religion to get around this is to not be in bed with the government when marrying people. I.e. no judge or JOP no tax benifits etc. Problem solved. If you’re that serious about your religious beliefs then you would keep the government out of them. If your contract is between your lover and God you should not be worried about a rubber stamped government document “legalizing” it in the eyes of the court system. Is this making any sense?

    • indpendnt

      March 27, 2013 at 1:25 am

      @HummusMagnate  But your government demands to be part of a Marriage. Mainly their claim for it is, divorces. I think they should stay the fuck out of it.
      Fuck, they discriminate against single people. They tax them/us at a higher rate. WTF!?

  16. TurdJerguson

    March 26, 2013 at 10:05 pm

    Even Scalia is gonna vote to overturn prop 8.

  17. Tbone1120

    March 26, 2013 at 10:21 pm

    Just let them get maried so the queens can stop crying about it.

  18. TurdJerguson

    March 26, 2013 at 10:28 pm

    It should be constitutional if you go by the Full Faith and Credit clause.

  19. rexdart936

    March 26, 2013 at 10:38 pm

    the argument for gay marriage should be made on equal protection grounds.

    • indpendnt

      March 27, 2013 at 1:21 am

      @rexdart936  Everyone has the right to Marry now. Just the member of the opposite sex. So no one is denied any right. Now if a couple of the same sex want a “legal” union. It should be called a civil union, with THE EXACT SAME PROTECTIONS. Marriage is a religious term. Next, the gays will want the right to preach and marry inside the churches. Why should their rights trample other rights?

      • SarahMcPants

        March 27, 2013 at 7:59 am

        @indpendnt  @rexdart936 Was separate but equal ok with you when it was black vs whites too? And why do you think gays would be forcing their way into churches they are not welcomed in? They dont do that now, and I as an agnostic straight person dont have the right to get married or preach in a church that doesnt accept me, so why would a gay person? Marriage is a religious term but it is used by the government for some but not others, why should the government be involved in what couples “god” thinks are ok to get married vs the ones that arent?

      • Hoboken Guy

        March 27, 2013 at 1:56 pm

        @indpendnt  @rexdart936 How is this “trampling other rights”?  So if you only had the right to marry a woman from, say, Georgia but not one from any other state, would you consider that the same as others rights to marry?  Because it’s the same argument.
        Sounds an AWFUL lot like separate but equal just like Sarah notes.  “Hey if you’re black you have the right to eat at a restaurant, just not at the same restaurant where I eat.  You can ride on the bus, in the last four rows”.

  20. CamfromToronto

    March 26, 2013 at 10:57 pm

    Let me be the millionth person to make the observation that the founding fathers were just a bunch if dudes who drank heavily and weren’t worthy of anywhere near the deference and adulation they get to this day.
    My country’s “fathers of confederation” were no better but I’m glad we don’t look back on them like they were godddamn prophets…

    • elephant_droid

      March 27, 2013 at 1:22 am

      @CamfromToronto Do you have confidence any of today’s equivalents to create the country’s government and bill of rights?

    • indpendnt

      March 27, 2013 at 1:39 am

      @CamfromToronto Canada!? A fucking preacher can’t preach fucking scripture in your SHIT country without getting prosecuted. SO SHUT THE FUCK UP!

      • CamfromToronto

        March 27, 2013 at 6:48 am

        @indpendnt @CamfromToronto the idea that the value of someone’s opinion can be determined by the country they were born in is an excellent follow up example of this sort of childishness, so thank you. I don’t stand behind Canada’s record on free speech and I’m not so blindly patriotic to recognize that free speech is an area where the U.S. has a better track record. I just find the uncritical belief that this great and noble group of politicians all happened to converge at the time the country was born to be kinda ridiculous. The U.S. Constitution is great but blind deference to these noble heroes while interpreting/applying it seems crazy to me.

      • SarahMcPants

        March 27, 2013 at 8:07 am

        @CamfromToronto  @indpendnt  @CamfromToronto I dont think people rely so heavily on the founding fathers because they are so dear to us, I personally think its more of a leverage point for bridging the gap between parties. Conservatives and liberals disagree and cant work things out on their own so they go back to the ‘rule book’ to try to get a leg up. They both interpret that their own way too of course, so its pointless but boy do they try.

      • CamfromToronto

        March 27, 2013 at 8:50 am

        @SarahMcPants  makes a lot of sense, I think the greatness is in the document itself and that intelligent people probably use the “founding fathers” as more of a metaphor or representation of the document (which on occasion has needed enhancement and correcting, in spite of the infinite wisdom of its authors).  Having said that, I get the sense that a lot of people actually believe that the focus needs to be realizing their initial intent which just seems crazy to me and gives them way too much credit.  It is similar to the contrast between people who think the bible is a fictional document that has inherent value as a moral guide versus those who literally believe it to be the word of God and that it contains stories that actually happened…

      • fuchubh

        March 27, 2013 at 9:40 am

        @CamfromToronto  I respect the point you are making regarding undue adulation. But I might just add that, the flag-wavers notwithstanding, there are good reasons to hold people like Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, and Adams (John and Abigail) in high esteem.  Not that any were without flaws, but for the time, and with wildly different lifestyles among them, they helped create a new nation, built on ideas, rather than bloodlines or geographic proximity.  Has it lived up to its promise all the time? Absolutely not.  But the ideas are worth holding onto, and the people worth admiring.

  21. cigarsNscotch

    March 26, 2013 at 11:07 pm

    Around the same time the government involved itself it religious sacraments. I feel all legally binding relationships should be considered civil unions as far as the government is concerned.

  22. Someone

    March 27, 2013 at 6:32 am

    Marriage isn’t a constitutional right because its never been defined in the constitution. It was just grandfathered in (and it was done so when women were equal to property). End the benefits which are there own kind of prejudice against singles, legally adopt domestic partnership and just call it what you want in your personal life.

  23. Morgan McNasty

    March 27, 2013 at 8:28 am

    Marriage is for fags

  24. Aria Taint

    March 27, 2013 at 9:19 am

    Homosexuals are for fags!

  25. JfromHuntington

    March 27, 2013 at 12:56 pm



    March 27, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    not the first to say this,but I’m married and if the gays want to marry…go for it!

  27. DanARou

    March 27, 2013 at 1:07 pm

    Why isn’t Fezzie screaming that a man should be able to marry his gay brother?

  28. Aria Taint

    March 27, 2013 at 1:09 pm

    Here Fez, this will calm you down..

  29. WimberlyWilliam

    May 19, 2015 at 2:19 am

    My passion for love and life has made me to take to the internet to
    warn internet users particularly those in search of solution to their
    problems to beware of and avoid comments about spell caster that can
    use their magical power in helping you out with your problems. I don’t
    want anyone to be fooled because i was a victim of this fraudsters
    who claimed to be spell casters. I am Wimberly William and i was having
    a difficult time in my relationship as my wife couldn’t give birth to a
    child. Although my wife and i loved each other very much as it were.We kept on
    hoping and for 6years there weren’t any sign of breakthrough .As days
    goes by,i will always weep because at that time i was really down.
    Even though my wife tried to always be by my side,only time would
    tell as we couldn’t cope with pressure  coming from friends and she had to leave
    me for another man. I was now left to face my problem alone even
    though my mom would always talk to me and console me on phone. Things
    went from bad to worse when i was sacked from the private organization
    i was working because been happily married was a criteria that was
    needed and that i was now lacking owing to my failure to have a child that has made my
    wife leave me for another man leaving me single. I kept on
    searching and hoping i would find a solution to my problem but there
    wasn’t any coming. I contacted lots of spell caster as i saw them on
    the internet but all were scams as they demanded money from me
    frequently and nothing happened. i had to relocate from Texas city
    United state to Jamaica where my mom was residing and also because i
    became racially abused because of my color .I spent 4 months with my
    mom and together we kept on looking for solution still to no avail.
    There came a faithful day when i met my high school mate who knew i
    was happily married and living in Texas city United state with my
    wife and had to ask why i flew back to Jamaica. I explained  my
    problem to her and with sincere desire in wanting my problems solved
    she led me to DR JAMIN ABAYOMI. Although i was doubtful but soon as i
    explained my problem to him,he laughed and gave me a maximum of
    72hours for my wife to come back and for she go give birth. I
    did all i was asked to do which included me traveling back to Texas
    city United state. I traveled  back to Texas city united state,on my
    arrival during the early hours of the morning,my phone rang and guess
    who?it was my wife who called asking for my forgiveness and saying
    she was coming back home. She came few hours later and on her knees she
    pleaded for forgiveness. Although it was a tough decision for me to
    make because of all the pains i have been through. I love her and
    needed her back so i had no option but to forgive her. We sat together
    and while she was resting her head on my chest we had romantic
    conversation and talked about things that we have never spoken about
    and like husband and wife the urge came to have sex and we had sex for
    a very long time that day. The next day which was still within the
    72hours given by DOCTOR JAMIN ABAYOMI she felt something different in her
    body and immediately she went for a check up and to our greatest
    surprise,she was pregnant. How possible could this be but it happened
    and am very thankful also my skin color that made me racially abused
    was changed to the preferred and now we are now happily married again
    and no racially discrimination. All thanks to DR JAMIN ABAYOMI for his
    THAT DR JAMIN ABAYOMI isn’t on the internet so kindly contact him via