Antigay Lawyers Really Phoning it in at This Point

Okay, now it’s like our opponents actually want to lose. Seriously, is this the best they can do?

In both Virginia and Utah this week, anti-equality lawyers dusted off their antique “responsible procreation” arguments for court. This is the same line of argument that has failed in one court after another in the last few years, and it is totally baffling why they think it is suddenly, magically going to work like it used to.

But hey, don’t let us stop you. Go right ahead. If this is how you want to lose, go right ahead.

Our opponents will soon get another chance to parade these losing arguments in court: there’s a new lawsuit in Wisconsin, and wait’ll you hear what one of the plaintiff couples had to go through. It involves power of attorney, a coma, and a rogue family member who was a little too eager with the plug. Yikes.

Meanwhile: keep an eye on Indiana this week. We might finally have an end to the suspense over the marriage ban … for a little while, at least.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #marriage #marriageequality #utah stories and more


  • Dakotahgeo

    A sane, intelligent person would think these rogue anti-Equality States would have learned their lessons but until the score is 50-0 in favor, they will continue to be calm above the water, paddling like hell beneath the surface, like demented ducks. Let ’em paddle… it’s their lost energy!

  • Joetx

    Anti-gay attorneys aren’t phoning it in. It’s simply that their arguments are completely baseless, so this is all that they have. They’re basically just hoping they get a judge as ignorant as they are.

  • hyhybt

    @Joetx: Exactly. They use the same arguments because there aren’t any good ones.

  • robirob

    I guess or hope that the anti-gay movement is no longer the money maker it used to be and that’s why the lawyers ‘phone it in’. They are looking for the next cash cow they can milk.

  • Ken

    No state requires a fertility test for a marriage license. No state requires the ability or desire for procreation as a condition of a marriage license. No state allows failure to procreate as a reason for divorce. No state regulates procreation not even irresponsible or accidental procreation. The Supreme Court ruled that couples have the right NOT to procreate, and the a people who cannot possibly procreate, say, because of incarceration, cannot be denied the right to marry.

    In theory, the Catholic Church defines marriage as a completely biological institution for the sole purpose of reproduction. In practice, it does not refuse to marry the elderly, the infertile, women who have had hysterectomies, or women past menopause. If the Catholic Church can’t practice its own principles, how can they expect a secular government to do it?

    The anti-gay lawyers want the court to permit them to apply an imaginary requirement to some but not others. They invoke imaginary principles, requirements, and traditions to pose as guardians of morality when they are really just bigots.

Comments are closed.