Scalia's Dissent Unraveled

January 4, 2006 12:45 PM

k, so, i finished writing the second part of my Law Review article, the part that deals with Scalia's dissent. I'm sorta afraid that it's crap. However, i at least now have a roadmap for my article. From my whiteboard:

P might be prohibited. To prohibit it, courts must give reasons. If they do, then -P. If this is true, then homophobes can't argue that G -> P -> D. So, there is no slippery slope. Scalia's "parade of horribles" doesn't work.

"P" means polygamy, "G" means gay marriage, and "D" means man marrying a donkey. You can credit James Dobson for D.

In other news . . .

12 of the 13 miners trapped after an explosion in West Virgina were found alive. That makes me happy.

1 Comments

kcs said:

You finished the second half of your article?? I haven't even finished the second page...

June 25, 2006 1:59 PM

Leave a comment

Name

Email Address

URL

Remember personal info?

Comments (You may use HTML tags for style)