| February 2004 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | ||||||
In the comments section at Donald Sensing’s One Hand Clapping, visitor Beau Monday concisely states the position of the Left.
Donald had posted this comment:
...it is not bigotry to: A. maintain that marriage is inherently possible only between a man and a woman, B. insist that democratic processes not be usurped by five unaccountable judges.
To which Beau replied:
Sorry, Mr. Sensing, I disagree with you on Point A. The only goal of making that distinction is to legalize discriminating against gays. That is bigotry, and that is wrong. I don’t care how you package it, the end result is discrimination. I agree with you on Point B, but I’m not sure I agree that the democratic process has been usurped in this instance. Even if 95% the people don’t think gays should marry it does not mean it’s legal to discriminate against them. Who will stand up for these people if the courts do not?
There it is, in a nutshell—a precise statement of the position of the Left.
How easily the Left would discard over 200 years of rule of the people, by the people, and for the people!
And what about Beau’s argument in favor of his position? He uses the words “discrimination” and “bigotry,” to show he feels that gays are comparable to ethnic minorities.
The error in the position of the Left on this subject is as follows.
“Gay” is not an ethnic group. The arguments of the Left assume that gay behavior is genetic. This is not established by science at this time.
It would be a mistake to transform our society based on an assumption which is not yet known to be factually correct.
Rule of the people, by the people, and for the people, should not be sacrificed for the sake of an assumption.
Donald Sensing has an excellent and insightful review of the legal issues:
...this ruling is as clear a case of judicial overreach and activism as can be found. The idea that the constitution’s framers had homosexual “marriage” in mind when they wrote the constitution, so long ago, is simply ludicrous.
And the court’s justices know this; they just don’t care. The Left’s idea about our states’ and nation’s constitutions is that they are “living documents.”
...And that is exactly the real issue facing the legislature and people of Massachusetts today, whether five practically unaccountable judges of the Supreme Judicial Court may treat the constitution – that is the very foundation of law itself – as their own personal playground.
The Left is trying to overthrow the power of the people, and the power of Congress to make laws, by having activist judicial allies arbitrarily decide that the Constitution requires people to do whatever the Left wants.
The majority of people in the U.S. are not in favor of gay marriage. The Congress of the U.S. has passed no law in favor of gay marriage. Yet in a blatant power-grab, the Left is seeking to decide these matters as it sees fit.
Let’s not kid ourselves. This is is an attempt by the Left to seize power and overthrow the will of the people.
