I’m thrilled that California has finally decided to be the second state in the nation to legalize gay marriage. Two down 48, and the district, and a bunch of territories to go. You know, if we go one state every 4 years, we’ll have full marriage equity by 2220 or thereabouts (I’m assuming we add a few states that don’t have gay marriage in the next 200 years, then they get gay marriage).* Anyway, noted expert on the California state constitution, Federal Way Conservative takes time to weigh in on the ruling.
The big news of today has dramatic meaning in Washington State. The California Supreme Court determined that Homosexual Marriage (there’s nothing gay about it) is protected by the California State Constitution.
Is Gardner really trying to take back “gay”?
Obviously, they are wrong.
I’m sure he spends his time pouring over the California state constitution.
I doubt anyone who wrote that document, nor anyone who signed it, nor anyone who voted to sustain it as the law of the land had any intent to grant homosexual couples the same rights and privileges as married couples. I am justified in this because the entire idea of putting homosexual couples on the same level as married ones is a very modern invention of the 1990’s. It was unthinkable before then–absurd, something we would call crazy.
What about the people who decided to amend the state constitution to include an equal protection clause in the state constitution?
How can a document, written in a time when only marriage between one man and one woman be considered marriage at all, how can such a document have hidden in it a right for homosexual couples to pretend to be man and wife? Impossible.
Well, that’s a bit like saying, “Mormonism wasn’t even a religion when the U.S. Constitution was written, how can it possibly protect the rights of Mormons?”
The judges in California invented this so-called right (which is really a wrong), just like the federal supreme court invented the right to murder babies in the womb and the right of governments to take property away from private citizens for private purposes.
They didn’t say that there was a right for gay couples in California to get married. They said that if California is going to grant marriage licenses to straight couples, then they have to extend the practice to gay couples.
Folks, there is no reason why we have to defer our own conscience and interpretation of the constitution to judges. They are no more human than you or I because they wear a black robe and are officials in our government. We granted them the right to speak on matters of law for the government, to arbitrate between two parties within the parameters of that law.
And just because almost all of those judges were “appointed” by “Republicans” don’t think that they are anything but in the tank of teh queeah.
We never granted them the right to interpret our rights, or grant us new rights, or take away our existing rights. Look closely. It is not in the constitution. Not in the federal one, not in the state ones, nowhere. They cannot do this anymore than I could declare war on Timbuktu. The moment a judge steps out of his duty, out of his lawful jurisdiction, then he is unlawful as much as a president who wrote law, or a congress who conducted a war, or a policeman who enforces non-existent laws would be.
Something tells me he hasn’t read every state constitution and the U.S. Constitution.
To place judges in a position of superiority is the same as making the president a King, or the congress a heavenly messenger of law. These are not gods, these are not kings nor emperors, these are citizens who have no more nor fewer rights than you or I or Bill Gates or the bum who lives on the street. They are not blessed with any divine power to discern any more than you or I. Don’t cede your moral right to judge between right and wrong to them.
Um, who is doing that? You can still not like it when gay people get married, and you can still not get gay married in California. You just can’t say that marriage isn’t open to couples of the same sex if it’s open to couples of the opposite sex.
There are obviously some remedies that the Californian people have available to them. First, they can amend their own constitution. That is their right. They wrote the document, they get to fix it. Second, they can have the members of the Supreme Court removed from office for violating their oaths to uphold and sustain the constitution of their state. Third, they can elect a new government that will represent them, and not a tiny minority of sexual deviant bent on perverting the natural laws of God in a vain effort to justify their own sinful natures.
They could do away with marriage all together, thus keeping it out of the hands of teh gay.
I hope the people of California wake up and remedy this mess immediately. It is not the social conservatives who made this an issue. Never forget that.
It’s those damn people who are in the wrong kind of love. Fall in love right, gays!
The decision in California has massive repurcussions in our home state of Washington. Don’t think that our justices see this and don’t imagine themselves writing new laws or amending the constitution or inventing new rights out of thin air. In fact, our Supreme Court is just as deviant as the Californian one. Any difference would be one of degrees. Don’t be surprised to wake up to more foolish decisions.
Unfortunately, our supremes said that marriage equity is up to the legislature. Fortunately, if our legislature had any gumption whatsoever, they’d just pass it in the next session (and as long as I’m dreaming, universal healthcare).
Folks, it is vitally important that you pay attention to whom you elect as judges in our state. This is not a matter to be left to the judges and lawyers and judicial activists. It is not a slot to be passed over because the issues are too hard to think about. It is our law, we wrote it, and we must enforce it upon our government when they break it. The government is a creation of our hands, not the other way around. If we refuse to keep our own government in check, we must live with the lawlessness and tyranny it will bring.
Remember, this paragraph isn’t about illegal war, or torture, or illegal spying, or immunity for that illegal spying; it isn’t about a state AG attacking people for taking medical marijuana even though that initiative passed overwhelmingly; the preceding paragraph is about the horrors of people in love getting married.
To all those homosexual activists out there who imagine a day when marriage means nothing more than a sexual union between two parties, I challenge you to think carefully about what you are doing. You imagine a universe where there is no living God, where he is just an abstract concept invented by weak-minded individuals like myself to console ourselves in our own stupidity. As you remove God from our society, what do you plan on replacing him with? What will we worship and adore and strive to emulate in place of the Christian God? Do you think our society will be so tolerant of its deviants if we remove the Christian God who preaches love and mercy instead of violence and hate? Think carefully, because in other countries, countries that don’t worship Christ as the Savior of mankind, homosexuals are branded and executed without mercy. Diversity is not tolerated in these places, and only homogenity is acceptable.
First off, Israel recognizes gay marriages performed in other countries, so I suppose they must believe in a Christian God. Are they just killing gay people consistently in Japan? More to the point, what the fuck? I do believe in a Christian God, and I can’t parse this out. Seriously!