well, tragically funny
a supreme court judge arguing that we should maintain the status quo because...
tradition.
'the definition has been with us for millenia.'
wait what?
this definition which relies on a state sanctioning (licence + rights) is very very new.

reason 3: the argument is wrong because its stupid


are these the republican appointees? the bush family legacy?

wtf does this even mean? "I thought that was the whole purpose of marriage," he said. "It bestows dignity on both man and woman in a traditional marriage ... and these parties say they want to have that same ennoblement."

because i dont know about it, it must not exist, argument
"How do you account for the fact that, as far as I'm aware, until the end of the 20th century, there never was a nation or a culture that recognized marriage between two people of the same sex?" asked Justice Samuel Alito. "Is it your argument that they were all operating independently based solely on irrational stereotypes and prejudice?"