Traditional Marriage weakened by SCOTUS ruling

English: Rally for Prop 8 in Fresno, Californi...

English: Rally for Prop 8 in Fresno, California Español: Manifestación por Prop 8 en Fresno, California (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I’m disappointed that the Supreme Court partially ruled against traditional marriage in their decision today. Thankfully they didn’t make a wholesale ruling in favor of so-called same-sex marriage. They still allowed for states to define marriage for themselves.

As far as California’s Prop 8 is concerned, the Court dismissed the appeal. This seems somewhat ambiguous. Prop 8 was a majority vote for an amendment to the California state constitution in favor of traditional marriage between only one man and one woman. A federal judge declared the amendment unconstitutional. The governor refused to appeal this ruling essentially thumbing their noses at the majority popular vote. Conservative groups appealed the federal lower court ruling to the Supreme Court. This appeal was dismissed.

The basis for appealing the dismissal was lack of precedent. Apparently SCOTUS hasn’t before entertained appeals of state laws that were not being defended by the state itself.

So on one hand, SCOTUS has affirmed states to determine a definition of marriage as the state sees fit. On the other hand, the Court didn’t slap down a lower federal court for dictating to California what sort of definition of marriage would be considered constitutional… Ambivalence? I would say somewhat biased toward the redefinition of marriage side.

Hopefully this decision will galvanize further action to strengthen traditional marriage. One way to do this is to sign the Manhattan Declaration.

 

Tipping Points

Advertisements

2700 Pages?

Washington DC: United States Supreme Court

Washington DC: United States Supreme Court (Photo credit: wallyg)

Justice Scalia retorted “…You really want us to go through these 2,700 pages? And do you really expect the Court to do that? Or do you expect us to give this function to our law clerks? Is this not totally unrealistic? That we’re going to go through this enormous bill item by item and decide each one?” I am thankful Justice Scalia was not ready to take the Obama camp’s arguments hook, line, and sinker. In fact, he showed indignation at being asked to review the 2700 pages of law presumably to consider each point for approval. Even Nancy Pelosi and other Democrat leadership was unwilling to read the prodigious bill before it was passed. Here is a video clip of her stating “But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it…”

It’s ironic on many levels but the best walk away from this is that Congress has no place passing any kind of legislation with 2000+ pages. Unscrupulous lawmakers can hide any number of provisions in there that now have to be weeded out. The Supreme Court has no responsible choice but to strike down the whole omnibus bill. If liberals want to push their socialist agenda on America they need to attempt to do it in reasonable steps. So people can actually look at things and make intelligent decisions. Perhaps this is the reason why the burgeoning ObamaCare bill was passed in this way to begin with. Read the transcripts of the Supreme Court oral arguments yourself here.

We have to repeal ObamaCare and preserve the limited government laid out in our founding documents.