Posted on 09/05/2015 1:24:44 AM PDT by DoughtyOne
On June the 16th the SCOTUS handed down a decision on same sex marriage. The majority opinion agreed that same sex marriages must be recognized by the states. The states would have to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples, and they would have to recognize same sex marriages performed in other states. LINK
None of us agreed with that ruling, but it was a much anticipated ruling. Conservatives knew this was coming for months. The ruling, one that could be a catastrophe for traditional marriage, was a potential nuclear bomb to the Biblical and even historic definition of marriage for most of recorded civilization.
This being the case, traditional marriage supporters had plenty of time to prepare. Special task forces could have been established. Methods of countering a potential SCOTUS bombshell could have been developed. None were.
Today we're very upset that a young woman was arrested for defying a court order and refusing to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple. It was against her religious beliefs, and for someone, we knew it would be. Tonight she remains in jail.
All day long today, Republican candidates have been making statements about this situation. Some of them have pledged support to this woman. Some are upset that others didn't express what they deem to be enough support. Lets be clear about something here.
That ruling came down on June the 16th. Before the August 4 & 6th recess, there were 28 days of business.
If our members of the House or Senate had been concerned over the sanctity of marriage, they could have introduced legislation within hours of the SCOTUS ruling. They didn't.
Yesterday the first court clerk was arrested for refusing to issue same sex marriage certificates. Since that moment some of our Republican candidates have been expressing a massive amount of support for the clerk, and they should have.
Some of these candidates who expressed the most support for the clerk, were quick to take other candidates to task for not showing enough support. This is where it gets rather interesting.
Some of the candidates who have shown the most support, are now taking other candidates to task for not showing enough. Strangely enough, three of those candidates served in the Senate and House. Did they express their strong support of traditional marriage there?
Was any single piece of legislation written and processed to address SCOTUS skulduggery? Were people like this clerk protected? Did Obama have to use his veto pen?
NO! NO he did not.
One whole month came and went and no legislative action was taken at all to rectify this situation.
We have supposed Constitutional scholars. WE have people who have argued before the SCOTUS, and know better than anyone else how this system works. They did nothing!
Now they are on the campaign trail, and it's expedient to rally to the defense of someone who could have been protected. She wasn't.
Today one non-politician has come under the gun for recognizing what the law on the books today is. He said he wished the clerk hadn't been arrested, but the law says she has to issue the licenses to same sex couples.
Folks, he's right!
Note this isn't what some folks have determined it to be.
This politician didn't endorse the SCOTUS actions.
He didn't approve of them.
He didn't say they did the right thing with their ruling.
What this politician said was that he was sorry this woman was arrested, but she has to follow the law. Yes folks, she does. We are a nation of laws.
What can this candidate do for the clerk now? He can voice support. He could come down an protest with others. Neither of those things can put an end to what is going on.
This evening there is a lot of gnashing of teeth. Guys are just so upset that this clerk has been arrested.
Where was that concern on June 17th to August 4th? LINK
Why is it that private citizen is being blamed here? Why didn't our Congress-critters do their job?
Is it any wonder we have a non politician kicking the politician's butts this year?
Cruz, Paul, Santorum... what action did you take to prevent this? Here you are acting as if you really care, but when you had plenty of time to know this was coming, and plenty of time to introduce legislation, you didn't.
Don't you dare try to blame this on Trump. Now nothing can be done. Where were you when something could have been done?
I agree with you.
You're jaded, which makes clouds your objectivity.
Trump is against amnesty, common core, enviro-wackism, planned parenthood, Wall Street and the GOPe. He's also pro-gun, pro-military, pro-business.
Jeb is just a POS.
I disagree. The pro-death crowd are the same people who have been targeting Christians and Christian values directly for decades. See the removal of Christianity from public life since 1960 or so. I would not bet on Christians doing anything more about this than they have done about anything else. I hope I am proven wrong but I do not expect it.
Thanks for the comments folks.
I tried to respond to each of you, but I was getting tired at the end. Didn’t mean to short-change anyone.
“So I don’t get why anyone in the Trump/Bush axis is something to be happy about.”
I suspect there is a lot you don’t get.
"He said he did not think she should be in jail."
That is not true. Here is a direct quote "I hate to see her being put in jail. I understand what they’re doing. It would be certainly nice if she didn’t do it, but other people in her office do it. But from what I understand, she won’t allow other people in her office to do it"
Hating that she has to go to jail is not the same as thinking that she should not go to jail.
One more time
Hating that she has to go to jail is not the same as thinking that she should not go to jail.
Plus in the next sentence Trump tells us "he understands why" she has to be put in jail. So your accretion that he does not think she should be in jail is absolutely false.
Then is explains why she has to go to jail. "she won’t allow other people in her office to do it" it being issue marriage licenses. So first he says he hates that she has to go to jail, but he understands why she has to go to jail and the why is because she will not allow marriages licenses to be issued.
I can't believe I have to explain to you in this detail simple obvious facts.
I think Congress impeaching a few federal judges that pushed for redefining marriage might cause the court to reverse itself.
Good idea but I actually think that Trump, by the mere force of his massive personality, will find a way to harness the forces of plate tectonics and find “Top People” to make it happen, and will eventually move Mexico to just off the coast of China! When that happens, Mexico and China will have to engage in a massive trade war with each other and will destroy each other, at which point he will put a big ring around them both and will take all their oil; and all their burritos and piñatas and all their chow mien and fire crackers because American’s love burritos and piñatas and chow mien and fire crackers, most especially fire crackers! And it will bring all those jobs back to AMERICA!
I believe! /s
Thank-you, Doughty One....
With all of the things Cruz has been doing, by himself and getting slammed along the way for trying them, none the less, you take this opportunity to blame him alone when there are 99 other Senators who make it their business to impugn him personally for trying anything that goes against their Utopian plans?
Yea, right. The only thing you missed was that you checked your credibility at the door.
Good article, as it sent thing racing off in my mind; notably, all my political activism in the past.
Short answer: The problem isn’t the politicians, its the people (see tagline).
Watching the Kim Davis saga play out, I called an old friend from back in the day while I was at work. I told her for some reason, this case made me think of her.
Ironically, she couldn’t talk long either as she was on the way to work too. I knew she thought of me too, as we both knew that back in the day, we would have already been there in KY with an army of people - ready to get thrown in jail right next to Ms Davis if necessary.
You see, she was THAT kind of Christian woman, and that’s what we loved about her.
But these days, we have to make a living to pay the bills and the debts from our political activism of the past. Yes, we’re still paying for them.
I saw all the bickering back and forth on this thread and it reminded me of the failures of that ‘movement’ I was part of back then. Everyone went back and forth pointing fingers, or putting faith in one person only blame that same person when they couldn’t accomplish a goal that would have taken thousands to accomplish.
Here’s what I’m going to tell everyone from my own experience: No politician is going to save us, America. And looking to Washington is a recipe for disaster. The Tea Party did a yeoman’s job changing the personnel in Congress, only to be betrayed later. Believe me from an old-timer, we’ve seen this before. Your political change must start as local as possible - not from the top. Start with your family. Your church (been there lately?). Or the most basic: Look in the mirror.
What’s missing from the Kim Davis fight and all the other Kim Davis battles around the country is you, and not simply through crowdfunding. You need bodies on the ground; people on the phones (and not simply updating their facebook). Today, I see millions angry, frustrated and close to giving up hope. What I don’t see is the local networking that got folks elected in 2010 and 2014. Back then, you worked within the law. But as you can see, the powers-that-be are seeing to it that you won’t be able to work ‘within-the-law’, and you (we) will eventually become lawbreakers - just for being who we are.
At which point, don’t count on the politician you are rooting for right now to be there to stand with you, for they may only do so for a season, Like the enemy is doing today, your must put aside your difference and hang together, or as it has been said and I have witnessed, you will most assuredly hang separately.
just my $0.02
jimjohn - OUT
Marriage licensing. $tate sponsored? $ubmit and/or become incarcerated, indebted by the state or spouse.
/sarc
Socialism Is Legal Plunder - Bastiat
What’s in your wallet?
/sarc
“He said he wished the clerk hadn’t been arrested, but the law says she has to issue the licenses to same sex couples.
Folks, he’s right!”
Your analysis is incorrect. The USSC has ruled numerous times that state elected officials cannot be drafted to carry out federal dictates. It’s against the law because elected state officials are sovereign. This clerk cannot be forced to marry homosexuals. If the federal government wants gay marriage, it must provide the federal personnel to carry out the dictate.
This is explained in the USSC ruling in Printz v US.
This is not the first time that lower courts have defied USSC rulings and it won’t be the last.
My main interest and guarded support of Trump has actually not been one about issues (with the exception of the imperative need for a wall and such), as much as his ability to break up this decades-long stranglehold of PC that has so cowed the culture and greased the skids for unending leftist depravity. I want what Trump is doing to grow and flourish among others, and it could be a true turning-point away from an America that has become such a pathetic, spineless nation of pajama-boys.
Accustomed to Trump’s brilliant effectiveness in his brash, un-PC style, it really stood out (and not in a good way) at how flat, safe and unimpressive his comments towards the Kim Davis situation was. Rather deflating, and tended to undercut the primary reason I like Trump. He didn’t have to endorse “lawlessness” (in his eyes), but I thought he could at least offer some edgy digs at the situation which would again give the cultural elites the vapors, like he so often does. Because this is a really, really shocking and egregious development. A key moment in our dying nation. If Trump is so passionless on this issue, I’ll be inclined to be more passionless towards him.
“What this politician said was that he was sorry this woman was arrested, but she has to follow the law. Yes folks, she does. We are a nation of laws.”
Indeed we are a nation of laws, 5 SETS OF LAWS to be exact and in this order of authority:
1. God’s Law
2. Law of Nature
3. Law of Nations
4. Declaration of Independence
5. U.S. Constitution
Even if doesn’t agree with #1, one can’t deny #2 or #3. Where does the Supreme Court ruling fit in this list? The morality and ethics of matrimony are found in the first 4. SCOTUS’ “law” certainly CAN’T be found in the 5th either. And it certainly CAN’T be found in the halls of any court because it has no authority over it!!! The states can’t grant the authority of matrimony because they have no authority over it either!!! But, as with any racket, our governments wanted a piece of the pie and so here we are.
What we are witnessing here is what’s called FORCED participation. There’s a huge distinction between allowing a behavior and forcing others to participate in it. If the government can force a clerk to participate, a baker to participate, even a pastor to participate, it certainly can force anyone else to participate. This is the second time we’ve seen this in the past 5 years. The first is obviously CommieCare™. Just like our framing fathers did, it is our civic duty to rebel against laws in direct conflict with God’s Law, Natural Law, and the Law of Nations.
Trump is wrong. DEAD WRONG. Anyone who spouts off this nonsense of “we are a nation of laws” when those laws violate so many other common sense laws is a fool, a jester. Anyone who doesn’t do everything in their power to stop it in its tracks are also wrong (like Congress and the states as you put it).
Plenty of “lawful nations” have violated this list, including Germany, Russia, China, Cambodia, and a whole slew of others. It starts off with propaganda. Then a little arm-twisting. Before you know it you see mass burial grounds full of millions of innocent people accused of violating some kind of “law” these governments created to empower themselves.
Which side are you on?
I do not like or support Saintorum in any way, but it’s been a long time since he has held any office. He lost his Senate seat to Bob Casey in 2006.
He did sponsor the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, but it never got through Harry Reid’s senate.
Excellent point. Many states, and the US Congress (DOMA) passed laws against gay marriage. The courts overturn them. Wasted effort.
Men cannot fix this country. It is too far gone.
Trump's answer exposed quite a lot about who he really is. He is toast.
Or replacing some of the supes.
> The states would have to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples
This is legislating. Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan all need to be impeached.
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.