Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Upholding the Constitution
The Rhinoceros Times of Greensboro, North Carolina , and The Meridian Magazine ^ | Orson Scott Card

Posted on 11/16/2008 9:13:13 PM PST by yellowroses

On one extreme, we have the idea that the Constitution is a written document that can only be altered by a deliberately time-consuming process of amendment.

On the other extreme, we have the idea that the Constitution means whatever a group of judges says it means.

The Constitution itself belongs to the first group -- it declares that it can only be changed through the amendment process.

But ever since Roe v. Wade in 1973, we have watched as, first the U.S. Supreme Court, and now state supreme courts in Massachusetts, California, and Connecticut, make new law by judicial decree, based on "ideas" purportedly found in the federal and state constitutions, but not based on the plain language of those documents.

No one in their right mind can possibly claim that when these constitutions were approved, there was the slightest intention to force abortion, and now gay marriage, on societies that had never been given a chance to vote on such morally portentous matters.

Roe v. Wade originally allowed abortions only in the first trimester of pregnancy. But through diktat after diktat, without any new law passed by constitutional process, the abortion "right" has come to allow killing a viable baby in mid-birth, or discarding a living baby when it was rude enough to be born breathing in the midst of an abortion.

Now various state courts are declaring that "marriage" must be redefined to include something that "marriage" has never meant in the history of the human race -- a reproductively and socially irrelevant "bond" between persons of the same sex.

(Excerpt) Read more at meridianmagazine.com ...


TOPICS: General Discussion; Issues; RLC News
KEYWORDS: amendment; constitution; judges; liberty
I'd like to know what ya'll think...
1 posted on 11/16/2008 9:13:14 PM PST by yellowroses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: yellowroses

1. I will no longer use the word “gay.” From now on I will use the proper term, Homosexual.

2. It is not gay marriage; it is same-sex marriage.

Other than those phraseology problems, it’s good, but a little long on point.


2 posted on 11/16/2008 9:23:14 PM PST by Loud Mime (CHANGE: Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yellowroses

On the other extreme, we have the idea that the Constitution means whatever a group of judges says it means.
::::::::::
The socialist wet-dream....


3 posted on 11/16/2008 9:23:49 PM PST by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yellowroses

I’ve met him, several times. I’m surprised he remains a Democrat. There will no doubt be many leftist callers taunting him in the “Sound Of The Beep” column in the local, free conservative weekly, The Rhinoceros Times, about Prop. 8 and his being Mormon. Greensboro proper is a very liberal town, politically dominated by racial militancy and college kooks, an island surrounded by a sea of red. I look forward to seeing his terse replies.


4 posted on 11/16/2008 9:45:51 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loud Mime

does all this mean that we will have new Jerry Sringer guests who will in the future want to marry their goats or pigs?


5 posted on 11/16/2008 10:25:01 PM PST by She hits a grand slam tonight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: She hits a grand slam tonight
does all this mean that we will have new Jerry Sringer guests who will in the future want to marry their goats or pigs?

After seeing some of the people at these protests, I must say that it is already being done.

6 posted on 11/16/2008 10:31:31 PM PST by Loud Mime (CHANGE: Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: yellowroses
If people want to live under a judicial tyranny, then God help us (never mind the fact that we are doing so now, even though you could call it a soft tyranny). It's fine for the libs now since the judiciary seems to give them all they want. But based on their childish reaction to the Prop 8 results in imagine their reactions if the judiciary turned on them too.
7 posted on 11/17/2008 12:11:23 AM PST by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson