Replies

Here’s what I’m seeing.
Most serious lawyers who are honest actually agree that there is no Constitutional right to “gay marriage”, and that it is a field of law that is properly left to the state’s.
The problem (in part) is that most serious people are increasingly not interested in public office or even joining the discussion because of the futility of it all. I certainly sympathize with that view.
So what we are left with is purely politicall driven judges and socialites that rule with little opposition.
Also note, I don’t think improved arguments or positions before the stacked judges would make any difference.
These judges get away with this because they know most office holders are content and won’t take any meaningful risk to oppose them.
I firmly believe this is a fight worth waging, and let the chips fall where they may. We don’t have a chance if we don’t try.
Courts hate to make rulings that won’t or can’t be enforced.
If I were a judge there’s no way I’d perform a “gay marriage” of any kind. I wouldn’t resign either.
There are just some prices too high to pay for peace.

Is this kinda what you mean! Let us also remember William Barrett Travis was a young 26 year old lawyer with a young son. He spoke to power pretty clearly I think.

Per Thomas Paine circa Revolutionary War:

I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.

Thomas Paine