Supreme Court defends sanctity of marriage for all. And a streak ends shockingly for Federer on crazy day at Wimbledon.



On the very last day of its year, the Supreme Court did a hell of a thing on Wednesday:
It acknowledged what those of us in the 21st century have known forever: That the act of marriage requires only two people who are in love and are committed to each other.

That’s it. That’s all marriage is. But for so long, and through so many long fights, same-sex couples have been forced to swallow the idea that they were unworthy of being married, that it was only reserved for “those people,” of opposite genders.

What the Court did Wednesday, in striking down the odious Defense of Marriage Act (and let that please remain a stain on Bill Clinton’s reputation as President; it makes me sick when Dems in revisionist history terms recall the “liberal” side of Bubba) and turning back a challenge to the legal overturning of California’s Prop 8, is simply and clearly say that the federal government deciding who gets to marry whom is not kosher.

I know the fight isn’t over; there are still 37 states that don’t allow gay marriage. But Wednesday was another huge, more than symbolic brick crashing down from a wall of intolerance that has stood for far too long.

Bravo to the Supreme Court.


*While the Supreme Court was making history, my man-crush Roger Federer was making history of his own, in a bad way.

For the first time in nine years our man Rog was knocked out of a Grand Slam tournament before the quarterfinals, an astonishing streak of consistency (36 straight tournaments he made the final 8; that’s mind-bogglingly good). In keeping with the bizarreness of the first week of Wimbledon, Fed lost to someone named Sergiy Stakhovsky, a player ranked out of the Top 100 (and the first time Roger has lost to someone that low since 2005).

Wednesday was maybe the wackiest day ever at Wimbledon; besides Federer, Maria Sharapova, Victoria Azarenka, and Jo-Willie Tsonga all either lost or had to pull out with injury.

What does this mean? It means Andy Murray will never have a better chance to win Wimbledon.

It also means that without Federer and Nadal, Wimbledon got a little less compelling.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s