Posted on 08/01/2015 11:49:30 AM PDT by PROCON
Full Title: Schlafly: Treat Gay Marriage Ruling ‘Like Abe Lincoln Treated Infamous Dred Scott Case’ – ‘We Don’t Have to Obey’
Conservative activist, best selling author, and syndicated columnist Phyllis Schlafly said the 5 (of 9) judges on the Supreme Court who voted for homosexual marriage “made it up” because there is nothing in the Constitution about such arrangements, and added that Americans, like Abraham Lincoln, should treat the ruling like the Dred Scott case: don’t accept it or obey it.
“That’s right, there's nothing in the Constitution about homosexual marriage,” said Schlafly during a July 29 interview on PIJN News, hosted by Gordon Klingenschmit.
“The judges made it up,” she said, “and some people think that because they did, and the Supreme Court has spoken, therefore we have to accept it. We don't.”
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
She’s also dead wrong about the forthcoming Article V Convention.
Maybe she will smarten up but she lives in the Beltway milieu that causes her much derangement.
How is Mrs. Schlafly wrong regarding the Article V Convention?
As recently as 1961 anal sodomy was illegal in all 50 states. There is a reason that anal sex was illegal, it is a dangerous/unhealthy practice.
She’s been spreading the fiction of a “Runaway Convention”.
It won’t matter as state legislators are getting onboard with rules and procedures that they are approving themselves.
Here’s Mark Levin on the speciousness of Schlafy’s assertions:
Time 28:10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6xEHPkYE1g
The problem is she’s a Beltway fossil and can’t think outside the Beltway Box.
I love reading her articles. She’s articulate, concise
and just simply educates the reader. No snark or trying to
be clever. The younger writers and pundits should emulate
her style more.
If the 0bama Regime is now ignoring and disregarding our Constitution, what makes you think he or any other democrat will comply with any Amendments that come out of a Article V Constitutional Convention?
“[T]he Law of Nature stands as an eternal rule to all men, legislators as well as others. The rules that they make for other men’s actions must . . . be conformable to the Law of Nature, i.e., to the will of God. [L]aws human must be made according to the general laws of Nature, and without contradiction to any positive law of Scripture, otherwise they are ill made.”
— John Locke, Two Treatises on Government
“This natural law, being as old as mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, from this original.”
— William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law of England (1765)
“Upon this law, depend the natural rights of mankind, the supreme being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beautifying that existence. He endowed him with rational faculties, by the help of which, to discern and pursue such things, as were consistent with his duty and interest, and invested him with an inviolable right to personal liberty and personal safety.
“Hence, in a state of nature, no man has any moral power to deprive another of his life, limbs, property, or liberty; nor the least authority to command, or exact obedience from him....
“Hence also, the origin of all civil government, justly established, must be a voluntary compact, between the rulers and the ruled; and must be liable to such limitations, as are necessary for the security of the absolute rights of the latter; for what original title can any man or set of men have, to govern others, except their own consent? To usurp dominion over a people, in their own despite, or to grasp at more extensive power than they are willing to entrust, is to violate that law of nature, which gives every man the right to his personal liberty; and can, therefore, confer no obligation to obedience.”
“When human laws contradict or discountenance the means, which are necessary to preserve the essential rights of any society, they defeat the proper end of all laws, and so become null and void.”
— Alexander Hamilton
“The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.”
— George Washington, 1789
That’s just it. Anal sex is a nasty, dangerous/unhealthy practice. My mother used to say that homosexuals just simply got into a nasty habit that was difficult to break.
She’s a great lady and as evidence of just how bad the ERA is it comes up every couple of years in Illinois and even with 100% Democrat control it can’t pass, just like Amnesty.
That question has been answered numerous times before on FR.
Answer your question by answering how the Federal Government will evade the following example Amendments:
************************************************
AMENDMENT XXVIII
To restore effective suffrage of State Legislatures to Congress, the following amendment is proposed:
************************************************
Section 1.
A Senator in Congress shall be subject to recall by their respective state legislature or by voter referendum in their respective state.
Section 2.
The seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
************************************************
and
************************************************
AMENDMENT XXIX
To redress the balance of powers between the federal government and the States, the following amendment is proposed:
************************************************
Section 1.
Term limits for Senators in Congress shall be set by vote in their respective state legislatures but in no case shall be set less than twelve years nor more than eighteen years.
Section 2.
Upon a majority vote in three-fifths of state legislatures, specific federal statutes, federal court decisions and executive directives of any form shall be repealed and made void.
************************************************
The above are structural amendments that leave all power for their enforcement in the hands of state legislatures and voters. The Federal Government can do nothing because there is no constitutional power to do anything against these types of amendments.
The constitutional scholars, law professors and state legislative leaders that are pushing the Article V Convention forward are not stupid. They are far ahead of the curve in every respect.
So, who's going to enforce these Article V Amendments?
What if the Convention takes place, the Amendments returning power to the states is ratified and 0bama says, "Pffft, make me comply."
What happens then?
Who will forcefully enter the white house and arrest him?
Until there is some legitimate enforcement mechanism, which as yet doesn't exist, an Article V Convention will be fruitless.
And believe me, I’m with you that a Con-Con would be ideal if it had an enforcement mechanism, but I see none.
Oh please get a life.
If those two examples are ratified, the states can ignore the federal government.
Look, you’re a Schlafly cheerleader. I am not. Leave it at that.
You on the other hand seem to be naïve enough to think that 0bama hasn't already got a counter movement at the ready.
You think the Won is going to just sit by and let the states ignore him without major repercussions?
You don't seem to see the seriousness of the situation America is in.
No Con-Con is going to go ANYWHERE until a major revolution takes place.
I suggest Sir, that you wake up and very soon!
By using the misnomer “Con-Con” you reveal either your bias or your ignorance. An Article V Convention is not a “Con-Con”, it is simply a ‘meeting’ of state legislature appointed delegates.
“Con-Con” is used by Schlafly sycophants and political ‘con’ artists.
Here’s what Mark Levin has to say about a “Con-Con”:
Time 22:05
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdZuV8JnvvA
The COS is progressing at breakneck speed regardless of Schlafly and her network of Beltway parasites. Several hundreds of state legislators at last week’s ALEC meeting are on fire with the COS Project and how it answers the rage of their constituents.
Since last December there are now 37 States with significant legislation in support of it and it’s not receding, it s growing. Right now they setting the rules and procedures for the convention meeting that are facilitated and coordinated by the COS Project. The project has already set up an organizing committee, a rules committee and an amendment proposal committee. These committees are run by seasoned legislators that are acutely aware of rules and order. There’s not going to be any “runaway” anything with these legislators.
Schlafly only cares that her little nest inside the Beltway culture is left undisturbed by the ‘crazies’ in flyover country. Too bad for her; she’s long in the tooth anyways. She needs to retire or be retired.
Schlafly and her ilk will never be recorded in history as ever having any effect on saving this country.
Her support of Beltway control and her badmouthing of state legislators organizing around Article V will never ever gain anything that reins in the out-of-control Federal Government. The Federal Government will never rein itself in but Schlafly seems to think so. She’s not only wrong, she’s a heckler for the solution that the Founders left in the Constitution for just this situation.
It’s summarized here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSNzcFJ0-kc
Less than 3 minutes and published just two weeks ago.
Schlafly didn’t get the memo and she will never get it because her whole life is immersed in the Beltway cesspool formed by Federal Government sewage. That’s her food chain; it’s her paycheck.
This entire thing was a pander to voters by Democrats and a hoped-for windfall by divorce lawyers. It may just fade of its own accord. After the initial rush of publicity after the Supreme Court ruling, you haven’t heard much about it. That confirms the realists’ take: there really weren’t all that many gays who wanted to get married, anyway.
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.