842 Comments
User's avatar
simpledinosaur's avatar

It would be incredibly wrong and massively disruptive to overturn Obergefell. Which doesn't mean that this jaw-droppingly right-wing SCOTUS majority won't do it. I mean, most people thought Roe v. Wade would never be overturned, and look how that turned out. Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me by this point if the majority decided to interpret the First Amendment as meaning, "You have the right to free speech, but only if you're a registered Republican."

Cheers Y'all's avatar

Roe was never safe unless codified into law just like Ruth said. Roe was overturned because of apathy and lots of that young demographic who didn't care enough to vote or even register for that matter.

Yep, I said that. Saw it, heard it, tried to convince otherwise for over 30 years. But nope, if it wasn't apathy, it was purity pony shit. This is one of the reasons that the youth vote is going to have to prove it to me they are not all complaints and no shows. And I don't give a flying damn about what pronouns they want us to use until they give a damn enough to vote.

Gern Blansten's avatar

You ain’t a bigot if yore personal babby jebus sez you ain’t.

Tessie's avatar

Sorry to go full New Jersey, but how did she find four guys willing to fuck her, let alone marry her?

Daniel O'Riordan's avatar

Three. Two and four, I believe, were the same person.

Which does bring up even more questions about him.

Fender Deluxe's avatar

Look at all of the terrible conservative incel men, desperate to get laid. You can work out the rest for yourself.

Biff52 Lost Canadian's avatar

I think one of them married her twice!

Tessie's avatar

Just pay the god damn fine, Kymbyrlyeigh.

Elizabeth  Trezona's avatar

REALLY blows! ✌🏻❤️🇺🇸

Chuck Dickens's avatar

I have had to deal with the small town county court clerks in my mom’s hometown since she passed, and at least a couple of them there are exactly the kind of dimwit little hitlers that this train wreck Kim Davis is.

Doloras LaPicho's avatar

"The overturn of Obergefell is far from a done deal. But, on the other hand, it also seems inevitable, "

Wow, two Wonkette posts in a row counselling surrender in advance

I Stedman's avatar

I think Justice Thomas would be delighted to overturn Loving v. Virginia.

The legal theory being very Thomas indeed; "I got mine, so f*ck you."

Fender Deluxe's avatar

Why the fucking Bowdlerization?

Tessie's avatar

Overturn?

Uncle Ruckus wants to *cast the deciding vote* to overturn Loving v. Virginia.

DJ Teetop's avatar

That's his favorite precedent

DJ Teetop's avatar

Apropos of nothing, George Orwell once said “at 50, everyone has the face he deserves.”

simpledinosaur's avatar

She has the PERFECT right-wing position: People I don't approve of can't have rights! It violates my rights that they have rights! Stop it!

Kirsty Gnome #squatting's avatar

"I say bust up the Treasury Secretary's marriage!"

~ K. Davis

Davis's avatar

One of my many problems with a certain form of Christianity is the idea that no matter how many shitty sins you have committed, once you find Jesus, it all A-OK; your ticket to heaven. Emperor Constantine did not get baptized until he was on his death bed (had his wife murdered some time earlier). So he's up there, too.

meh's avatar

That behavior is endemic to xianity in general.

Fender Deluxe's avatar

"So he's up there, too."

He's not. Nor are any of them.

IdRatherBeDancing's avatar

Which of her marriages is Obergefell threatening?

Mary Hall's avatar

If you don't like gay marriage blame straight people. They're the ones having the gay babies.

GMT's avatar

Not sure how Kim Davis has anything to do with gay marriage- I believe it’s is lack of standing. A plaintiff cannot sue based on generalized grievances that affect a large group of people. The injury must be specific to the individual bringing the suit. Except for the fact that she is a bigoted pig- she is not a gay person, it’s stretch to say that gay married people do her any harm except in her fucking pathetic pea brain. Not sure that counts. Can’t wait to hear how she describes how she has been injured by gay marriage. I am a bigoted pig wont work. At least it should not work.

Cheers Y'all's avatar

She wants revenge. You know, that Christian thing when they are wronged for being wrong.

thephantomcheese's avatar

They ignore that verse about "Vengance is mine, saith the Lord"; i.e., God is the only one allowed revenge.

But that's the beauty of 1200+ pages of fine print where no sentence relates to any other sentence- you can PIDOOMA till God agrees with you!

GMT's avatar

Not sure how Kim Davis has anything to do with gay marriage- I believe it is called “lack of standing.” A plaintiff cannot sue based on generalized grievances that affect a large group of people. The injury must be specific to the individual bringing the suit. Except for the fact that she is a bigoted pig- she is not a gay person, it’s stretch to say that gay married people do her any harm except in her fucking pathetic bigoted pea brain. Not sure that counts. Can’t wait to hear how she describes how she has been injured by gay marriage. If she claims she is a bigoted pig that should not work. At least it will not work with the Supreme Court judges who are not racist, bigoted pigs.

oscarphile's avatar

Lack of standing won't stop them. Why would it? Precedent doesn't stop them.

Hank Napkin's avatar

Judging only by the hair I'd say -- confidently -- Kim's in regular contact with God.