Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Marriage "Precedent"
www.TrevorGrantThomas.com ^ | 7/2/2018 | Trevor Grant Thomas

Posted on 07/03/2018 8:11:36 AM PDT by DWW1990

There’s “precedent” and then there’s precedent. It seems for Maine’s Senator Susan Collins—who’s never been considered a conservative and is the very definition of a RINO—precedent is everything, except when it isn’t. According to Townhall recently,

“Maine's moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins told CNN's Jake Tapper today that she would not be supporting a Supreme Court nominee who has “demonstrated hostility to Roe v. Wade” because, in her mind, that would be a justice who does not respect established precedent.”…

As most today well know, much of what modern liberals hold dear was achieved because of the efforts of rogue judges who happened to find in the U.S. Constitution what had so long escaped so many others (because, of course, it was never really there). Liberals look at the Constitution like an NBA referee: based on who’s playing the game, the rules are changed. Of course, liberals wouldn’t describe it as such; they simply justify this foolish mental and moral gymnastics by claiming a “living Constitution.”

As the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia—who repeatedly stood against such nonsense—said, “the Constitution is not an organism, it is a legal document…(it) is an enduring document but not a ‘living’ one, and its meaning must be protected and not repeatedly altered to suit the whims of society.”

And once liberals magically find a “right” in the Constitution—and thus, “make law”—we’re supposed to revere said law because of “precedent.” How absurd. If “precedent” really mattered to anyone with a sound legal and moral mind, Obergefell v. Hodges would’ve been laughed out of the courtroom in 30 seconds…

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


TOPICS: Politics; Religion; Society
KEYWORDS: marriage; precedent; supremecourt; susancollins
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 07/03/2018 8:11:36 AM PDT by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DWW1990
“Maine's moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins told CNN's Jake Tapper today that she would not be supporting a Supreme Court nominee who has “demonstrated hostility to Roe v. Wade” because, in her mind, that would be a justice who does not respect established precedent.”…

She really does not understand how STUPID this is...

2 posted on 07/03/2018 8:14:56 AM PDT by goodnesswins (White Privilege EQUALS Self Control & working 50-80 hrs/wk for 40 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins

That’s what happens when one becomes corrupted by liberalism.


3 posted on 07/03/2018 8:17:40 AM PDT by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

Precedent -— just another liberal excuse to ignore the written law of the land.


4 posted on 07/03/2018 8:18:49 AM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

In the next term of the Supreme Court, with Trump’s new Justice, both Roe and Obergefell will be overturned!!


5 posted on 07/03/2018 8:18:56 AM PDT by Blue House Sue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

This was a ‘repeal to a new position’ tactic by the dems using the courts.

How does it work?

You want to get a change in the laws, that you KNOW the voters would never vote for...

So you propose a law that is the OPPOSITE of what you want, then you go to court and have the judge declare it ‘unconstitutional’ and so the OPPOSITE (what you really wanted) must become in effect.

Never mind that repealing something used to mean going back to whatever it was before...

They did this with Gays in the Military too. Gays were told ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ (which was the existing policy if you think about it) and then they went to court and declared “don’t ask, don’t tell” unconstitutional so “Ask and Tell” must be the new law.


6 posted on 07/03/2018 8:19:11 AM PDT by Mr. K (No consequence of repealing Obamacare is worse than Obamacare itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

And to ignore the eternal truths of our Creator!


7 posted on 07/03/2018 8:25:52 AM PDT by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

These folks didn’t complain when the established precedent of Bowers v. Hardwick and the laws of 23 states were overturned.


8 posted on 07/03/2018 8:26:10 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana (There is no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blue House Sue

I would LOVE to see such!


9 posted on 07/03/2018 8:26:33 AM PDT by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
I saw her on one of the Sunday talking head shows (since my TV market now no longer carries Fox News Sunday apparently....) and thought to myself: My God, how did this stupid woman make it down the birth canal so many years ago?!"

That she claims to be a Republican should be an offense to any Republican, IMO.

10 posted on 07/03/2018 8:29:23 AM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana

Good point! (Mr. Thomas has noted Bowers before as well: https://www.trevorgrantthomas.com/2008/05/why-not-polygamy.html )


11 posted on 07/03/2018 8:32:20 AM PDT by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana

Nor Plessy v Ferguson.


12 posted on 07/03/2018 8:35:53 AM PDT by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

And what does Susan Collins think happens to the precious soul when its physical body is torn to pieces?


13 posted on 07/03/2018 8:37:40 AM PDT by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

I believe abortion is this nation’s great national sin on the same scale that caused Solomon and Israel to fall into disfavor with God. I can imagine God looking upon us as when Jesus turned and looked straight at Peter after his third denial. I have a genuine sense of sorrow and shame over our nation’s acceptance of abortion, which is both humbling and frightening to me. We have abused our faith and enormous God-given blessings. May God have mercy on us.


14 posted on 07/03/2018 8:39:55 AM PDT by RatRipper (Unindicted co-conspirators: the Mainstream Media and the Democratic Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

At one time, slavery was “precedent”.

Just saying ....


15 posted on 07/03/2018 8:43:05 AM PDT by taxcontrol (Stupid should hurt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

dred scott was all about precedent.


16 posted on 07/03/2018 8:54:42 AM PDT by teeman8r (Armageddon won't be pretty, but it's not like it's the end of the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abclily

If ever that thought creeps in, I imagine she quickly pushes it away.


17 posted on 07/03/2018 8:58:37 AM PDT by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RatRipper
Agreed. Speaking of the Old Testament and sexual sin: For millennia human beings have sought to shed the tenets of our Creator and go our own way. This is especially true when it comes to our sexuality. Much of the history of ancient Israel, as described by the Old Testament, included the struggle of the Jewish people with idolatry, false gods, and sexual immorality. Chief among these false gods which often drew Israel away from the God of Abraham was Baal. Baal was the proper name for the most significant god in the Canaanite pantheon. When the judges ruled Israel, there were altars to Baal in Palestine. During the notorious reign of Ahab and Jezebel the worship of Baal was prolific. In spite of the warnings from the prophets (including the dramatic demonstration on Mt. Carmel by Elijah), the struggle between Baalism and the worship of God continued for centuries. The worship of Baal included offering of incense and sacrifice—including human sacrifice. However, Baal worship was chiefly marked by fertility rites. It was believed that Baal made the land, animals, and humans fertile. In other words, Baal was seen as the god of “sacred sexuality.” To encourage the god to carry out these functions, worshippers would perform lewd sexual acts. Baal temples were filled with male and female prostitutes for such purposes. The female consort to Baal was Ashtoreth. This goddess was also associated with sexuality and fertility. The worship of Ashtoreth also included obscene sex acts. Israel forsook the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and served “Baal and the Ashtoreths.” (Judges 2:11-23). A third rival to the one true God was Molech (or Molek), the god of the Ammonites. The worship of Molech included the fire sacrifice of infant children. Ashtoreth is also seen as the female consort to Molech. Dr. Jeffrey Satinover describes the relationship between the “virgin-whore who copulates and conceives, but does not give birth (Ashtoreth) [and] the god to whom the unwanted offspring of these practices were sacrificed (Molech).” With the rise of abortion (in lieu of sacrificing unwanted children at the altar of a heathen god, we do it in the hygienic atmosphere of a clinic), adultery, divorce, fornication, homosexuality, pornography, prostitution (especially the child sex trade), and so on, modern American culture makes the misled ancient Israelites look rather righteous. The same philosophy that led Israel astray is well at work in the U.S.: paganism. Read the rest: http://www.trevorgrantthomas.com/2014/02/same-sex-marriage-paganism-founders-and.html
18 posted on 07/03/2018 9:04:00 AM PDT by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: teeman8r

Yes! And note that Dred was undone, not by a mere court reversal, but by a Constitutional Amendment.


19 posted on 07/03/2018 9:06:54 AM PDT by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

And as the piece notes, slavery was undone, not by the courts, but by the Constitution!


20 posted on 07/03/2018 9:08:14 AM PDT by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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