To: ClintonBeGone
One has nothing to do with the other and I do not live in Mass. The court was being asked to restore the constitutional order in Massachusetts. Article IV section 4 of the US Constition guarantees to every state a republican form of government. That means that the people's representatives make the laws, not the courts.
And if you think this means the Supremes will not rule on the marriage issue themselves, imposing it nationwide, then you didn't read the Lawrence decision. They declined because they are pro-gay marriage and are just waiting to impose it on all. The cases are already in the works.
19 posted on
11/29/2004 8:28:15 AM PST by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
The court was being asked to restore the constitutional order in Massachusetts. Article IV section 4 of the US Constition guarantees to every state a republican form of government. That means that the people's representatives make the laws, not the courts.
Its rather amusing that you cite the constitution, yet completely ignore the 11th amendment, which is suppose to prohibit states from being sued in federal court.
31 posted on
11/29/2004 8:46:06 AM PST by
ClintonBeGone
(Sometimes it's OK for even a Wolverine to root for a Buckeye win.)
To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
Which is why the POTUS must get the original amendment passed, forbidding courts to rule where the legislature and the people clearly have the power.
Shouldn't have to be that way, however, Judges are overstepping the separation of powers, put in place as a system of checks and balances, carefully crafted to prevent this kind of tyranny
32 posted on
11/29/2004 8:46:18 AM PST by
gidget7
(God Bless America, and our President George W. Bush)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson