Today the Supreme Court failed to act to either uphold or overturn lower court decisions that set aside state constitutional amendments and other legislation passed by voters in support of authentic marriage. I will not go into why the concept of homosexual “marriage” makes as much sense as people deciding what sex they want to be for a particular occasion. That is not the issue here.
The Court apparently did not want to man up to making a decision on the issue. Instead it hid behind the ruse that it would simply not hear the case. This unfortunately does not exonerate it from blame. There are sins of omission as well as sins of comission. If you don’t feed your child and he dies, you did not strangle him, but you might as well have. Failure to act is the same as acting in some cases, like this one. So, the Supremes are just as guilty as the lower courts.
30 states now are cleared for homosexual “marriages”. The 9th Circuit Court is reviewing the same sort of decisions in five Western states, and in case you aren’t familiar with the 9th Circuit Court, it is the most liberal of all of them, and their decision will without a doubt be to overturn these voter-passed amendments and laws. The issue of concern is that of what will soon be 35 states cleared by these courts to “marry” homosexuals, 29 voted not to allow it.
In other words, “We the People” means nothing to these unelected judges and justices. It is extremely difficult to pass an amendment to a state constitution. Different states have different mechanisms, but it involves the kind of work that running for office entails. Lots of volunteer hours, lots of work preparing the amendment itself, often it has to be voted by a super majority of the legislative houses, and so forth, and then be upheld in a referendum. Then, like Obama with his pen, in a stroke a couple activist judges decide that their opinion is more important than that of literally millions of citizens. Talk about arrogance!
Judicial activism has gotten completely out of hand in this country. The only way to interpret the Constitution is to understand what the Founders meant when they wrote it. The concept of a “living Constitution”, as taught by most law schools today, is beyond stupid. If the Constitution does not mean what is says, and does not mean what the Founders thought it meant, then who is to decide what it means? Anyone wearing a black robe?
Sadly, the answer to that question is, “Yes”. Our nation is so enthralled with the concept of “experts” that we are willing to accept the word of someone who says he has a degree in something or other as gospel, particularly if that degree comes from a school with a big name. However, if you look at this Administration, it is full of experts who have done a great job of messing up everything they have touched. The past six years is living testimony that experts, especially left-leaning experts, cannot be trusted to be right all the time. I’m not sure they can be trusted to ever be right, for that matter.
The point is that with homosexual “marriage”, the only “right” involved is to marry, and everyone in this country of legal age has the right to get married. The restriction is that it has to be to a person of the opposite sex. Any person of legal age that passes a qualifying test has the right to drive. They don’t have the right to drive 100 miles per hour, and they don’t have the right to fly a plane. All these “rights” have qualifications. The state sets the qualifications, but they are based on the will of the people.
But the will of the people no longer means anything. These activist judges have set themselves over the people. Their will trumps ours. That is what we call “tyranny”. It needs to stop.
In case you think this doesn’t involve you, because you are a heterosexual individual and figure that this will not affect you personally, think again. The issue of the social consequences of homosexual “marriage” are not at issue here, but the process by which it is coming about against the will of the people is. If you think that your Constitutional right to bear arms, which has only been around for a couple hundred years, is stronger than the concept of marriage between one man and one woman, which has been around for thousands of years, you are deluding yourself.
The Second Amendment has already been misinterpreted and slowly eaten away at for many years now, and the attacks are growing more frequent and more vicious. When I think back, only a few years ago the idea of homosexual “marriage”, and especially the idea that it would become law, would have had people rolling in the aisle with laughter. Well, it’s here, due to years of leftist propaganda that passes for “education” in our schools, as well as a constant barrage of liberal claptrap from the TV, the radio, the Internet, and particularly from the government designed to brainwash our children and to destroy their capacity for rational thought. They may not be able to write a coherent sentence, or to balance their checkbook, but they surely know that guns are bad and should be banned.
With voters like that, whose influence can be seen in the fact that there were six states where homosexual “marriage” actually won referendums and in no case did 100% of the people reject it, what do you think would be the result of a vote on banning guns? And even if the people voted to uphold their Second Amendment rights, what difference would it make with judges and justices like we have?