Finnis on Posner's acclaimed marriage opinion: "It disgraces the federal judiciary"

Richard Posner, the "economic analysis of law" pioneer and Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals judge, has argued, as the late Ronad Dworkin reminded readers, "that mothers should be permitted to auction off their newborn babies, and that criminal laws prohibiting rape are justified because 'even if the rapist cannot find a consensual substitute… it does not follow that he values the rape more than the victim disvalues it'." 

Recently, however, in what surely counts as one of the most bizarre moments in the more than two-decades-long debate about redefining marriage, Judge Posner has emerged as a hero on the Left for his allegedly "unanswerable" case against the argument that states have a valid interest in preserving the historical definition of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.

This morning at Public Discourse, John Finnis examines Posner's case and, to say the least, finds the claim that it is "unanswerable" sorely lacking: 

"In truth,"Finnis says, "the argument that Posner is said to have refuted remains compelling. His judgment is one long attempt to hide from that argument and to conceal it from his readers. In its refusal to engage the opposing argument, Posner’s opinion disgraces the federal judiciary."

Professor Finnis concludes that the opinion "constitutes a profound injustice, recklessly imposed."

Here is a link to th article:

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2014/10/13896/