“Bible Schmible!” That's essentially what an article  on the Washington Post's “On Faith” blog by Susan Jacoby (aka. The Spirited Atheist) said about the moral and legal issues surrounding same-sex marriage. Jacoby approvingly quoted Judge Vaughn Walker's recent opinion overturning
“Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians,”
“The profound religious conservatism of Robscalitomas (my acronym for Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas) probably means four automatic votes against gay marriage as a right guaranteed by the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” she wrote.
Jacoby explained that “conservative religion – based on a literal interpretation of Genesis and Leviticus – is and always has been the main source of opposition to gay rights.” That and simple biological reality, but Jacoby didn't stray from her skewering of Christianity. She said Judge Walker had ruled that “disdain based on religious faith – even if ratified by majority vote – cannot jettison the constitutional rights of any group.” Thus,
While she was happy to mock “people who think Leviticus is an appropriate manual for modern life,” Jacoby was equally dismissive of “more rational, nonreligious” objections to same-sex marriage. “[G]ay marriage is so new and offers such a small sample that we really don't know whether such unions will be more or less stable than heterosexual unions or whether children will turn out more or less happy.”
But with characteristic liberal disregard for the potential consequences of the demand du jour, she wrote, “And guess what? It doesn't matter.”
Jacoby compared the case to “Loving v.
In a final effort to de-legitimize the
A column by an atheist seems out of place in the Post's “On Faith” blog, but the space regularly serves as a platform to push liberal agenda issues like global warming , and for attacks on religious and political conservatism, including the Catholic Church .