Gay Marriage is Legal and John Roberts and Scalia are Friends Again

     I would think so as though they disagreed after Scalia had been so unhappy with him yesterday after he saved Obamacare. Today Roberts says gays shouldn't be celebrating as they've really lost.

    "Chief Justice John Roberts does not "begrudge" people for celebrating Friday's Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. But, he warned, the decision was also actually a loss for gay rights advocates."

    "Indeed, however heartened the proponents of same-sex marriage might be on this day, it is worth acknowledging what they have lost, and lost forever: the opportunity to win the true acceptance that comes from persuading their fellow citizens of the justice of their cause," Roberts wrote in his dissent. "And they lose this just when the winds of change were freshening at their backs."

     "Roberts argued in his dissent that it was not the Supreme Court's place to grant gay couples the right to marry, and that same-sex marriage should have been left to the political process in the states to decide."

     http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/john-roberts-gay-marriage-dissent

     Sorry but no. I mean Roberts can try to convince himself of this but no gay rights advocates are going to wish Roberts had been successful in knocking down legalization in all 50 states. Why would they prefer to have marriage legal in some states and illegal in others?

     These kinds of libertarian arguments never work. Like in 1862 some conservatives who didn't' want abolition anyway argued that Lincoln 'deprived' the freed slaves by not letting 'the people decide' in each state. However, do you think any slave would have been willing to go back into bondage to wait until they were freed in the right way?

    Again, on these types of social issues conservatives usually prefer to hide their views behind process-but these arguments don't convince those who stand to gain from social changes.