It has been interesting to watch the news coverage of the latest SCOTUS fiasco. As usual, the elctronic media hypnotists do their dead-level best to misdirect you and point your focus somewhere other than where it should be. I have seen almost no television coverage of any substance regarding the horrific gutting of the 5th Amendment by our good friends in the 'conservative leaning' Supreme Court. That is massively more impactful to my day to day life and liberty than DOMA, which was a poorly thought out law to begin with. The media instead have tapped into the deeply emotional nature of the DOMA debacle, which to me was the least surprising thing the Supremes have done lately. But even while covering it, they have failed to look at it in any depth. The narrative is painted as a simple one reinforced with looped footage; happy homosexuals on one side of the argument, and foaming at the mouth religious people on the other. I'd like to think I don't fit into either group, in fact I can assure you that I don't qualify for the first group with my wife as the star witness. but I would like to weigh in with my own analysis of these events, and throw my 2 cents into the national debate.
DOMA was a bad idea, because there exists nowhere in the Constitution the authority for the federal government to regulate or define marriage. I'm not even entirely certain where we got this notion from. Legislation intended to shape or steer a society is often the most dangerous stuff you can dream up. Had I been a Congressman I would have voted against it. An individual has a right to conduct their own personal affairs and enter into any sort of relationship that they desire. I may not approve of it, I may even preach against it, but in the end, according to scripture they are sinning against their own body and is not something Congress needs to pay any attention too. I will go on further to say they have the right to call that relationship whatever they want, but as we say back home 'putting a cat in the oven don't make it a biscuit'. You don't have the right to redefine a word to suit your own agenda at anyone else's expense. At this point , the individuals involved have only harmed and involved themselves. DOMA gave Congress unconstitutional powers to regulate something that only affects the people involved.
So as an example, let's say I joined a 2 person club. Me and my fellow club-member agree that when one of us dies, the other one gets his stuff. We both agree to this, and even put it in writing. We decide to call our club "The Coolest Club in the Universe". Silly? Absolutely. You might even say that the club name is misleading ( really Mike? the whole universe?). You may not like it, you may not approve of it and even speak out against it but really, it's none of your business what we are doing, and what we call it. What you lack is the legitimate authority to outlaw it. Later on, we decide to expand the club parameters to allow a 3rd person to join. Does it suddenly become your business legislatively?
Here's where it gets hairy and here is exactly where I think , as bad an idea as DOMA is, the SCOTUS decision is just as bad. I now take my club and go to your restaurant and say 'you must offer my club the discounts and privileges you offer other clubs, or I will cry foul'. A rational response would be to assess what business impact this would have on your restaurant, along with your personal feelings about our club, and make your decision from there. You may decide to offer me what you have offered others, or you may decide to tell me to hit the bricks. Either way, I should have no authority to FORCE you to cater to our little group of weirdos because you are under no obligation to honor a agreement that you weren't part of. Our club has no 'rights' other than the right to associate with whom we please. We should not be able to force you to associate or acknowledge us. We certainly shouldn't have the right to legislatively force you to modify your business practices to accommodate us against your will.
The long term fallout of the SCOTUS decision will be in its application, and my prediction is that a new 'right' will spring out of whole cloth, and with it the justification for the state to force other people to acknowledge a union that they were never part of. I expect discrimination lawsuits and defamation campaigns to be generated against those that choose not to acknowledge the latest 'club'. Those that speak out against the club will be vilified even worse than they already are, and their speech curtailed under the jackboot of the police state. I expect the heavy hand of government will violate people's right to association and to their own property and business practices in order to force this new reality down every ones throats. The end result will be less freedom for everyone, the homosexuals included ,and more government interference in people's bedrooms.