#GayMarriage — from serious to teary to angry on #SSM

I offered several serious hot takes on the Supreme Court's ruling yesterday declaring gay marriage the law of the land.

First was my take on the actual ruling, and the clear fact that whatever faint hopes of "growth" Chief Justice John Roberts showed on Obamacare, they were clouds without water, shadows only.

Second was my wondering if Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, with a major assist from state AG Ken Paxton, is prepared to play George Wallace, shouting "Straight today, straight tomorrow, straight forever." (Initial signs say that's a yes.

Third was my observation that four dissenting justices had four incredibly vacuous arguments, so vacuous they had to write four dissents because they couldn't agree what was the primary damage legalized gay marriage caused.

And now we're here. The emotions.

Who wouldn't, if you're not a homophobe, get teary-eyed at seeing two 80-somethings, Jack Evans and George Harris, get married after waiting 55 years?



Having seen gay friends and acquaintances struggle with coming out and more, who couldn't be teary-eyed as a loving, accepting straight person?

And, who couldn't be angry at the homophobia, or the political pandering of the likes of Paxton and Abbott, or a mix of both?

Who wouldn't be angry at religious institutions and self-appointed public faces and guardians of conservative Christian family values, already exposed as hypocrites, yet doubling down on their hypocrisy?

So, I call out two sets of hypocrites with these poster comments.

The first is obvious. Of course, that's not actually what Catholic bishops across the country said.

But it's what they might as well have said, given the Church's history on child sexual abuse at the altar.

The second?

Possibly short of Ann Coulter, what female wingnut is more grating as a defender of the far right? And short of nobody at all, what female wingnut is more hypocritical, along with her chip off the old block daughter, in pretending to be a moral guardian.