Replies

The alternative, which I support, is the consitutional remedy -- just take it away from the liberal judges. If they can't interpret the law without trying to legislate their own policy nostrums out of prejudice, then take the law away from them and leave them with an empty docket.

There are two aspects of what you suggest. A simple act of Congress, could end Judicial Activism in a wide swathe of areas, simply by limiting the jurisdiction of the Federal District Courts. I have been advocating such a move all of my adult life.

But the problem with the Homosexual assault on tradition and decency, is that if they win in any State, of course, there come into play considerations under the "full faith and credit" clause of Article IV. I think that we do indeed have to consider a Constitutional Amendment on this. This was not necessary before, because every State was at least somewhat rational. But it appears that Massachusetts has now fallen down the Rabbit Hole, so far, that the threat of totally delusional State Government is about to be realized.

Given this sudden crisis, we need to act; but not in panic. I would suggest that the Amendment should be broad enough to protect the States not only from this form of delusional newspeak, but from any form of delusional newspeak, as well as from the possibility of a Court misusing the provisions of some treaty, already ratified. I have a clear concept in mind, but haven't yet put it into words; and I want to reflect on various aspects a bit more, before I start to focus the concept into specific terminology.

In the meanwhile, if someone has a copy of Jefferson's 1782 Notes On The State Of Virginia, handy; I would suggest they post the provisions of the Virginia criminal code that relate to Homosexual and Lesbian activity. (Those lifestyles were not protected civil liberties in the minds of the men who gave us our liberty. No they surely were not!!)

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

I generally concur, but notice that the Massachusetts Supreme Court has put us on a whirligig -- deliberately, I believe, in order to deprive the People of Massachusetts the opportunity to moot their little decree by amending their constitution as Hawaii did.

Once we reach their deadline date, then we are relying on the stalling tactics and, frankly, the defiance of honest Massachusetts clerks, to avoid homosexual marriage licenses, and therefore homosexual marriages, from becoming fait accompli.

Then, they think, the endgame that takes them to SCOTUS for their final triumph will be on.

Notice that a key element in the homosexuals' strategy -- which had to be coordinated behind closed doors with the Massachusetts judges (IOW, I smell judicial misconduct) -- is to take away time, the time to prepare, the time to defend, the time to deliberate what the law should be. This IMHO is a marker that their intentions -- the court's and their unacknowledged clients' -- are tyrannical.

They are jamming the People. Hell, clubbing them.