I know, I know, justiciarchy is not a word, but it will be. As we move down the path of an increasingly activist court, we will continue to see the court move into an increasingly legislative role. According to the Associated Press, Iowa's Supreme Court just declared the ban on gay marriage unconstitutional:
"The court reaffirmed that a statute inconsistent with the Iowa constitution must be declared void even though it may be supported by strong and deep-seated traditional beliefs and popular opinion," said a summary of the ruling issued by the court.
What citizens are not asking is how defining marriage as it has been defined for thousands of years is infringing upon the rights of those who now want it redefined. On what basis are courts suddenly redefining marriage? The larger story here is that judges are moving quite comfortably into the role of unelected legislators and the legislatures, executives, and people across America hardly seem to care. God help us as we happily and lazily slide into tyranny.
A La Carte (December 26)
5 hours ago
Posts
1 comment:
Chad, I am really surprised to see such an opion coming from someone who used to teach Government. As I am sure you know, our country is based on a system and heirarchy of laws, the highest law being the constitution. If we are to legalize or outlaw certain activities, it must be through that system of laws. As soon as we begin to work outside of that system of laws, no matter the purpose, we enable those who follow us to work outside of those laws as well. And it is that very body of laws that protects our freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom to assemble. If we are to enforce a ban on homosexual marriage, which is a moral and good thing to do, it must be done through the laws, not against them, or we risk every freedom that has been guaranteed to us through that body of laws.
Post a Comment