Gene Schaerr, who specializes in constitutional and appellate litigation, is perhaps best known for defending same-sex marriage ban in Utah and Idaho, and is a former clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Now, as The Washington Post points out, he's filed an amicus brief on behalf of "100 scholars of marriage" asking the Supreme Court not to recognize same-sex marriage as a constitutional right.
This is how Schaerr made his case over on The Daily Signal:
On the surface, abortion and same-sex marriage may seem unrelated. However, as explained in an amicus brief of 100 scholars of marriage, filed in the pending Supreme Court marriage cases and summarized here, the two are closely linked in a short and simple causal chain that the Supreme Court would be wise not to set in motion.
In a nutshell: A reduction in the opposite-sex marriage rate means an increase in the percentage of women who are unmarried and who, according to all available data, have much higher abortion rates than married women. And based on past experience, institutionalizing same-sex marriage poses an enormous risk of reduced opposite-sex marriage rates.
Actually marriage rates are dropping all over the country and it has NOTHING to do with gay marriage. In fact the argument could be made that allowing same sex marriage would bring those marriage numbers back up.
Then using some of the most convoluted math I have seen since the conservatives assured the country that Mitt Romney was kicking Obama's ass during the 2012 election, Schaerr makes this startling accusation:
Nearly 900,000 more children of the next generation would be aborted as a result of their mothers never marrying. This is equal to the entire population of the cities of Sacramento and Atlanta combined.
So there you have it folks. Thanks to all of you wanting to allow two dudes to get married, NOW we have a pile of dead fetuses to contend with.
Are you happy?
Okay you know conservative math always gives me a splitting headache, I think I will go lay down now.
They should have to name their "100 scholars on marriage." I wonder if they include Sarah and Bristol Palin.
ReplyDeleteBeaglemom
LOL!
DeleteWell Sarah has had 2 abortions and Bristol is on her 4th, 5th, or 6th trial husband.
DeleteThis is the stupidest thing I have read since..well, yesterday's GOP news! What a waste of the SC's time. I sure hope the poor clerks who have to wade through this mark it as "Idiotic" and it never reaches a real Justice. Wanna stop abortions? Make contraception free and available, and teach young MEN to keep their pants zipped.
ReplyDeleteNotice that the amicus brief was written by a former Scalia clerk. So the clerk is as awful as the jurist he worked for - earning our tax dollars, including those of gay Americans.
DeleteBeaglemom
And here I thought that dementia, like Scalia's, wasn't contagious. I stand corrected.
DeleteUnder the surface, abortion and same-sex marriage are totally unrelated. I can't believe that anyone would take this Schaerr guy seriously. May I assume the 100 scholars are all dropouts of Liberty University?
ReplyDeleteEven "on" the surface, gay marriage and abortion have nothing to do with one another.
DeleteBeaglemom
If anything, stable same-sex marraiges decrease abortion, because many of those same sex couples ADOPT kids.
DeleteThis certainly makes me wonder how bizarre the arguments might have devolved as a decision in Loving v. Virginia drew closer back in '67.
ReplyDeleteWait, so if a lesbian is not allowed to marry the woman she loves, she is then going to run out and have unprotected sex with a guy? And then abort the baby because she's not married??
ReplyDeleteMy head is spinning with the moronic leaps of "logic"--
Yep. That's my take on it... I think... Let's ho ask the Magic 8 Ball ??
Delete"A reduction in the opposite-sex marriage rate means an increase in the percentage of women who are unmarried"
ReplyDelete----------------------------------
Why? How? Is there a substantial and peer-reviewed study that says so?
Also, lovely opinion of women. Gay marriage is legal. All the men start marrying each other, so women can't get married, but they will go ahead and have the sexy times anyway, thus they will get pregnant just as if they were married, and then have an abortion because they are not married?
So who in the hell is getting them pregnant?
"100 scholars of marriage" = 100 "straight" people who spend every waking hour thinking, talking, writing, researching, studying, dwelling on, obsessing over, and collecting lots and lots and lots of "study materials", all about GAAAYYY SEXXX!!!"
ReplyDeleteTheir argument is based on the assumption that homosexuality is a choice. If same-sex marriage is available, some men, and women, will "choose" to enter into a same-sex marriage. If it is not available, they will have no choice but to enter into the so-called traditional marriage. With all these men hooking up with other men, you have to wonder how these women would become pregnant.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the O/T, Gryph, but thought you might like this:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/23/1379631/--Earth-Day-Video-Prince-Ea-To-Future-Generations-I-m-Sorry-And-To-Fox-News
They are constantly trying to overwhelm sanity with absolute bullshit. These homophobes want to exhaust us . . . . But so do the racists and misogynists.
ReplyDeleteIsn't this an argument in favor of same-sex marriage and a reduction in abortions?
ReplyDeleteLouisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is proposing the new "Religious Freedom Bill." See the comments on the Times Picayune's Facebook page, including this one: "My invisible sky wizard's magic book says I should hate you" and an adorable (photoshopped) photo of the esteemed governor in a diaper, https://www.facebook.com/NOLAnews?fref=nf
ReplyDeleteGov. Snyder refused to sign the bill here in Michigan. He doesn't want Michigan to be seen as another Indiana and doesn't want the state to lose business or tourist money. Snyder's a little smarter than his fellow GOP governors. No better but a tad smarter.
DeleteBeaglemom
Or just avaricious.
DeleteDoes gay marriage happen at a much higher rate between two men than two women? Because otherwise, wouldn't the lesbians cancel out the gay men?
ReplyDeleteAlso, does not allowing gay men to marry mean that they will just go out and have sex with single straight women instead of hanging out with their gay boyfriends?
I'm pretty sure that they just came up with a really good reason to allow gay people to adopt children. Think of all the women who would be able to place their babies( gay-fathered or straight-fathered, of course) into loving stable homes.
So by their ahem "logic", priests and nuns have made gay marriage a viable option. I was wondering, as I read this post, would the bigoted asshats be ok with abortion if there was a test that could tell if a fetus is or isn't gay? To refute this report's veracity, look no further than the happily married Michelle and Marcus Bachmann. And they thought gay marriage didn't exist before it was legalized.
ReplyDeleteI fear if they keep this crap up, those totally tasteless dead baby jokes will start up again.