Skip to comments.'This is the thing revolutions are made of'
Posted on 06/27/2013 9:35:19 AM PDT by Perseverando
The Supreme Court had no reason to rule on the merits of the Defense of Marriage Act, but the majority opinion lays the groundwork for a sweeping, national legalization of same-sex marriage in the near future, warns Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court handed same-sex marriage advocates a pair of victories. In addition to dismissing a defense of Californias traditional marriage amendment based on legal standing, it struck down a provision of the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, as unconstitutional that allowed federal benefits only for spouses in heterosexual marriages. Thats because the 1996 federal law recognized marriage as only the union of one man and one woman. The Court preserved the DOMA provision that allows states to refuse recognizing homosexual marriages performed in other states.
Under DOMA, same-sex married couples have their lives burdened, by reason of government decree, in visible and public ways, wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy in the majority opinion. DOMAs principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal.
Kennedy was joined on the opinion by the Courts four liberal justices.
Staver blasts the majority for ruling on the merits at all, saying the case never should have come this far since the Obama administration refused to defend DOMA. The government, the plaintiff and the lower courts all agreed on the earlier verdict, so Staver said this matter never should have reached the Supreme Court.
The parties all agree that the ruling below is correct. Therefore, it should never have gone to the court of appeals, and certainly the U.S. Supreme Court has no jurisdiction. This is just an advisory opinion, Staver said. This is unprecedented that the Court took this step to actually even decide the merits of the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
The seeds for a future revolution are being planted.
First abortion and now gay marriage. Very difficult to respect the Supreme Court for its decadent activism or for that matter the nebulous “constitution”. Really if its “constitutional” to allow the wanton killing of innocent human life, how can a person of conscience take an oath to uphold and defend? Wonder if Kennedy understands the full harm he has done.
No, Kennedy does not understand it. The liberals don’t give a blank about due process, federalism, separation of powers, limits on court jurisdiction, or any of that. They want homosexual marriage and they want it now. They don’t care who they steamroll or how they shred the Constitution or legal process to get there. They just want homosexual marriage and they want it now, as if they are spoiled children.
One of the first things that Obama says after this is “I will not force Churches to hold gay marriages.”
Why is this one of the first things he says?
...because the Church WILL be the FIRST thing that his gay buddies will go after, and Obama will be laughing in the background.
And the future is not so far away.
No worse than Roe v. Wade, which has led to the killing of more than 50 million innocent babies. And the constitutional theory behind it was—privacy?
Once you get a “living constitution” and activist judges, and people like Nancy Pelosi who think that morality is whatever you say it is, then there is no end to the abuses.
Probably we crossed the line back with Teddy Roosevelt or Woodrow Wilson, and have been going downhill ever since.
But Roe v. Wade was the biggest turning point.
So what happens when eventually the SC rules that no state can discriminate and must allow homosexual marriages? If a state refuses do the feds step in with troops to force it to do so (as with Brown v Board of Education)?
And the revolution comes to a screeching halt 2 hours after the Feds turn off the electrical grid and the formerly rebellious citizens march into camps for the promise of a shower and a hot meal.
......The revolution that should have started at Roe V Wade.
The constitution is ours. Not theirs. It’s to protect us. Not to force us to do what they want. I have God given liberty no matter what they say.
The states will cave. Every last one of them. The fudgies have the money to make enough pols squirm.
I’m not sure it’ll even start, but if it does, it’ll be very short and the good guys will “win”. Whatever that means.
Hey, don't knock privacy — the NSA says we have all the privacy we can handle!
Oh, yeah, and I just got booted out of my doctor's practice because they are switching over to CommieCare-only patients.
"You can keep your doctor."
"We're not going to throw Grandma under the bus."
This guy has a very high sucess rate for making predictions:
We have to leave the Union. There is no other way.
I've read here and elsewhere the notion that the Libtards are hoping that forcing a collapse will force everybody into the arms of the federal government. Sorry, folks, that's not the way collapse works. Read Tainter's "The Collapse of Complex Societies." What happens in collapse isn't a further centralization of federal power, but rather a devolution of power to the next lowest economically-viable quantum.
We've seen it many times in the past 30 years. The Soviet Union shed it's Eastern European empire and also split along its federal internal borders. Same thing happened in Yugoslavia. Ditto Czechoslovaki. The US is devolving power right now.
I think that a full-on split of Red States from Blue States is very possible in the next few years.
I was listening to a preacher the other day state that, America doesn’t have the moral fortitude for a successful revolution like the first one. I believe he is correct. Too many of us have left the Almighty God, and He has now left us.