For what it's worth, I'm actually one of those folks who like
Justice Kennedy's opinion in _Obergefell. _And one reason I like it is
that he doesn't play the usual game of means-end analysis, which in
previous iterations has too often either hollowed out the meaning of
marriage or belittled its
It seems to me that natural law establishes a certain percent of any mammalian
species be non-reproductive—in some cases through homosexual pair bonding.
It’s up to us as human beings, and legislative creatures, to decide if same-sex
pair bondings between consenting adult human beings be grante
I
argue, in any event.)
I'll address Earl's first point in a separate post, because it deserves its
own attention.
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Earl Maltz
wrote:
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Earl Maltz
> *Subject:* RE: The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in
&
Actually, what we label "natural law" is a figment in the West of Greek
imagination, since the arguments can be found in Plato and Aristotle, even if
they were most fully developed by Thomas Aquinas. And, alas, Jewish and, I
presume Islamic, law is thoroughly homophobic. None of this affects my
, Judith
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2015 4:18 PM
To: 'Doug Laycock'; 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Cc: conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu <mailto:conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu>
Subject: RE: The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in
Obergefell, federal laws of
k S. Scarberry
>> Pepperdine University School of Law
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:56 AM, "Marty Lederman"
>> wrote:
>>
>> Some of you might find this of interest. Reactions and critiques
>> encouraged, as always.
>
Being Muslim (or Christian) has nothing to do with it, but the answer is
yes, depending on which Muslims you are talking about. There is, of
course, a long history of Muslim thought that recognizes what is natural
(no need for the scare quotes with them).
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Malla Pol
t; religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] on behalf of Marty Lederman [
> lederman.ma...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, July 03, 2015 11:32 AM
> *To:* Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> *Cc:* conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
> *Subject:* Re: The Remarkable Disappearance of State J
Largely agree with this point, except for one major caveat -- natural law
arguments are not religious arguments. That's what is natural about them.
The collapse of the distinction between natural and religious is precisely
what allows for the dismissal of natural law arguments as not applicable to
ders to refer back to his original post for
>>> the content of it.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> Mark S. Scarberry
>>> Pepperdine University School of Law
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>
t;> wrote:
Some of you might find this of interest. Reactions and critiques encouraged,
as always.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-remarkable-disappearance-of-state.html
The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in Obergefell
Marty Lederman
Over at the Slate &
gion issues for Law Academics;
conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in Obergefell
I don't have to; I was saying that was the state's argument; therefore, Marty
is incorrect in saying that the dissenters didn't mention the sta
tent of it.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> Mark S. Scarberry
>> Pepperdine University School of Law
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:56 AM, "Marty Lederman"
>> wrote:
>>
>> Some of you might find thi
aw
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:56 AM, "Marty Lederman"
mailto:lederman.ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Some of you might find this of interest. Reactions and critiques encouraged,
as always.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-remarkable-disappearance-of-state
than "relations between a man
> and a woman."
>
>
>
> Whatever Ed Whelan and Roberts may think, the procreation rationale is
> just not rational.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Eric
>
>
> ------
>
> *From:* conlawprof-bou
issues for Law Academics; conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in Obergefell
Except, of course, in our country the premises of that reasoning have
absolutely nothing to do with the benefits of marriage otherwise two sterile
people would not b
o:lederman.ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Some of you might find this of interest. Reactions and critiques encouraged,
as always.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-remarkable-disappearance-of-state.html
The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in Obergefell
Marty Lederman
---
> *From:* conlawprof-boun...@lists.ucla.edu <
> conlawprof-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> on behalf of Michael Worley <
> mwor...@byulaw.net>
> *Sent:* Friday, July 3, 2015 1:21 PM
> *To:* Scarberry, Mark
> *Cc:* Law & Religion issues for Law Academics; conlawp...@lists.ucl
; wrote:
>
> Some of you might find this of interest. Reactions and critiques
> encouraged, as always.
>
>
> http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-remarkable-disappearance-of-state.html
>
> *The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in Obergefell*
>
>
eligion issues for Law Academics
Cc: conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in Obergefell
I agree with Doug that "the majority gave short shrift to the state’s reasons
because they viewed them as ridiculous" and that "the dissent
; 434-243-8546
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:
>> religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Marty Lederman
>> *Sent:* Friday, July 03, 2015 11:55 AM
>> *To:* Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
>> *Cc
gionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:
> religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Marty Lederman
> *Sent:* Friday, July 03, 2015 11:55 AM
> *To:* Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> *Cc:* conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
> *Subject:* The Remarkable Disappearance of S
Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:56 AM, "Marty Lederman"
> wrote:
>
> Some of you might find this of interest. Reactions and critiques
> encouraged, as always.
>
>
> http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-remarkable-disappearance-of-state.ht
Marty Lederman"
mailto:lederman.ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Some of you might find this of interest. Reactions and critiques encouraged,
as always.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-remarkable-disappearance-of-state.html
The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in
...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2015 11:55 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in Obergefell
Some of you might
Some of you might find this of interest. Reactions and critiques
encouraged, as always.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-remarkable-disappearance-of-state.html
*The Remarkable Disappearance of State Justifications in Obergefell*
Marty Lederman
Over at the *Slate* "Breakfast Tabl
26 matches
Mail list logo
