Posted on 08/23/2015 6:51:10 AM PDT by HomerBohn
Conservatives are always on the retreat. In fact, our constant giving of ground has created a government that no longer even follows its own laws.
The conservative "battle" goes something like this: "Sodomy is illegal because it violates God's law." So the "Supreme" Court decides to legalize it.
"OK", says the conservatives, "but we aren't baking any cakes for homo weddings." The "Supreme" Court then says it is illegal to refuse to do so because it "discriminates" against homos.
"OK", says the conservatives, "but no way are we going to let them get married." The "Supreme" Court then rules that homos can get married.
The conservatives respond, "OK, but no way will we violate our conscience." "Oh yes you will," says the "Supreme" Court, because of the equal protection clause.
"OK", says the conservatives, "but we will make a law restoring our religious freedom and solicit funds from like-minded supporters to "fight" the evil."
Round and round the mulberry bush the courts chase the conservatives…
The reason we end up running up against all the legal mumbo jumbo is because we always end up fighting the wrong battles. The homo "marriage" and the abortion issues are classic examples of this failed strategy. Just show me the law.
So much of what you and I choose to believe is simply not true. Do you really want to be set free? Then stop believing lies! We have all been programmed with cleverly crafted lies and propaganda. It has often been stated that if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.
Hold on folks, I am about to give you a dose of real Truth. You don't have to believe it, but it's still the Truth. Until we are willing to challenge the lies that we've been taught and fight back on the proper premise, we will continue running around the tree trying to head off the wolf at the pass.
The "Supreme" Court does not make laws, it simply offers opinions on whether or not a "law" meets Constitutional muster. If the law violates the Constitution, then the law is remanded back to the Legislative branch so that the law can be re-written to fall in line with the Constitution. This is how our government is supposed to create laws.
Bear in mind that offering an "opinion" does not change the law. They just tell us that it does and we believe their lies. We then repeat their lies and teach them to others. The lies soon become "truth", although it is not The Truth. I'll say it again. Courts do not make laws.
Abortion is not legal anywhere in America. That's right, there is no Federal Law on the books regarding abortion. None! There is a "Supreme" Court opinion called Roe V Wade, but that is merely an opinion…not a law! They just tell us that it is and we believe them, follow the lie, and teach it to others.
In fact, if you were to ask any judge anywhere to show you the abortion law, he or she would have to refer you to state law because that is the only place you will find any law regarding abortion. In 30 U.S. states abortion is illegal. In the other 20 states it is legal only with exceptions for the life or health of the mother.
Access to abortions of "convenience" is illegal in all 50 states. A "Supreme" Court decision cannot and does not change the law. They just tell us that it does, and we, like gullible subjects, believe them.
Planned Parenthood has been violating the law in all 50 states and should be closed, and all of the directors and abortionists should go to prison as accessories to murder. That is the law of the land, and that is the Truth.
The same Truth also applies to homo "marriage." Before the recent "opinion" of the "Supreme" Court, marriage was strictly between a man and a woman in 39 states. Eleven states had legalized sodomite "marriage" through the legislative process, 3 by direct election of the people, and 8 by action of State Legislatures. Today, sodomite "marriage" is still illegal in all 39 of the states where the law is still on the books. The "Supreme" Court cannot change the law, but can only offer opinions about it.
Interestingly enough, there actually was a Federal Law regarding homo "marriage." It was called the Defense of Marriage Act and was passed by the U.S. Congress in 1996. The activist courts illegally overturned it by judicial fiat in 2013; however this did not nullify the law that was on the books. They only told us that it did, and we believed it, and told others to believe it.
This is called Judicial Tyranny and it has radically transformed the direction of this nation. Laws can only be made by one of two ways in America: by an act of the Legislative Branch, or by a citizen's initiative through a direct vote of the people. Courts can never make laws. They just tell us that they can, and we believe it, and teach it to others until the lie eventually becomes accepted as "truth."
Abortion is still against the law. Marriage is still the union of one man and one woman. There is no separation between the church and the state as is currently accepted in America. They just tell us there is, we believe it, and we teach the lie to others.
We have to begin to push back. We must attack the lies head on. They have distracted us and they have us focusing on "religious liberty" or "conscience" or "deeply held religious beliefs." But those are the wrong arguments. We must stand and fight on the Truth. Courts do not make laws. A court decision does not carry the force of law, and it most certainly does not "change" the law. Abortion is illegal, homo "marriage" is a fraud, and religious values cannot be separated from government.
It's time to make one simple request of the judges: Show me the law! Show me the law that legalizes abortion. Show me the law that legalizes homo "marriage." Show me the law that separates church and state.
Show me the law…
Stand with God always and you'll never be disappointed. God gave us laws to live by for a reason and we should never question him. Looks like some of our justices are on a collision course with God. They will soon learn that there is a court of justice much higher than their puny humanist one.
What is needed to drive this home is a standing Article V amendments convention that meets every year, say the week after Independence Day.
The second week of July also happens to be a few weeks after the regular Scotus decision dump in June.
Imagine the outcome had the states met in convention a few weeks after the blackrobes determined the government could forcibly integrate neighborhoods, the plain language of statutes was irrelevant (Obamacare), and homos have a God given right to marry.
We'll continue down the road to a police state unless and until we put the Uniparty elites on notice that there is a higher power . . . WE THE SOVEREIGN PEOPLE!
As I understand it, Supreme Court may rule on a specific case.
Problem is, that is called precedent, and is treated kind of like law, because any similar case brought before the court will have the same ruling. Or we have been told.
I, not a lawyer, do not agree. Rule on each case, even if the same. Now that is a lot of work, but ...
Each new accused murder gets his own trial, right?
I know, not quite the same, but closer to how I, the not lawyer, thinks.
The family unit is the bedrock of society. A family unit is one man and one woman and their children. Destroy the family unit and you destroy the society. Marxists KNOW this. THEIR goal is to destroy society as we know it and rebuild it as some kind of anthropomorphic ant hill or bee hive. And this crap about Sodomtic unions, plural marriages,promotion of baby murder,etc. are viewed by them as instruments in that direction. Besides, it runs counter to the Judaeo-Christian foundation of America and western civilization.
You are 100% correct. Problem is the various states won’t stand up against the federal government.
OK look. I get the sentiment and share it. I really do.
But the longer we rail against “judicial tyranny” in some cases and not in others we are going to get NOWHERE.
Of course, we could just set up a system where we dump courts entirely and rely upon majority rule. Of course that devolves quickly into “Warlord World” but it’s an option.
We, as do the LibTards, scream judicial tyranny when we don’t like what they decide. The very same argument can be made for Tyranny with regard to Second Amendment decisions in our favor, Hobby Lobby, etc.
Of course Courts don’t make laws, but they DO say what the law “is” and, on very rare occasion, they rule on a law’s constitutionality. And if they say a law isn’t constitutional and that the Constitution provides for a certain type of protection, that isn’t making law. Of course something has to rush to fill that void.
In many ways, this is arguing over semantics. But that is important. Because if we don’t properly define the debate, we are just voices crying in the wilderness and I don’t mean John the Baptist. I am talking about voices that will, ultimately, be blown away by the wind.
In the end, we MUST get America’s attention. Not understanding and properly articulating the arguments is not gonna do it.
The Constitution gives the feds NO power to interfere with state anti-abortion or anti-gay laws. Time to blast the phony federal excuses for unconstitutional activity by individual state nullification.
So remember, when it comes to federal action, you only have to ask yourself one question: IS IT CONSTITUTIONAL?
If a state confronts the feds with that question, having already researched, finding no constitutional authority for the action, giving notification of the results, and having their ducks in line to take action, then the state can confront the feds thusly: You (the feds) only have to ask yourself one question: IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL? WELL IS IT PUNK?
I would love to see that before I leave this earth.
Isaiah 10New International Version (NIV)
10 Woe to those who make unjust laws,
to those who issue oppressive decrees,
2
to deprive the poor of their rights
and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people,
making widows their prey
and robbing the fatherless.
3
What will you do on the day of reckoning,
when disaster comes from afar?
To whom will you run for help?
Where will you leave your riches?
4
Nothing will remain but to cringe among the captives
or fall among the slain.
Whoa there, hoss. Time out. Reality check. Something is way out of calibration.
Here we have the dreaded “Inverse Mustard Seed” scenario, where a dark, little confusion leads to major malfunction.
To them I first say, "Your “child” is a dog, not a human child, are we clear?"
And the so called “gay marriage” is not marriage. It is a domestic partnership.
Contract laws says that two people of legal age and sound mind and body can enter into a contract for whatever as long as the "whatever" they’re doing isn’t illegal.
That broad umbrella and low legal bar covers and allows for many types of contracts, including that of traditional marriage, either by holy matrimony in a church or by civil ceremony in front of a Justice of the Peace.
However, while you can call any contractual relationship a “marriage”, that loose definition works only because of the pure, standard definition of marriage we inherited and has long functioned as a self-evident truth.
Societies, religions, cultures, etc. throughout the centuries have defined the traditional, committed, exclusive partnership between one man and one woman as “marriage”.
From that pure original spring, all definitions of marriage flow, some of which having been polluted as they flow through time.
Compared to the maladaptation its creators call “gay marriage”, traditional marriage is a fertile and different creation altogether living several evolutionary levels higher, closer to, and in harmony with, the Source of Life itself.
Traditional marriage, not “gay marriage”, is what has been passed from one civilization to the next across time and religion to us here and now.
Keeping one's definitions accurately calibrated to reality is one of the keys to sanity.
So, instead of the latest something fabulous for the straight guy from gay eye, how about we try reality on for size and wear it around the store for a while, okie dokie?
Besides, I think it looks good on you.
Fwiw, we also learned to call our dogs “dogs” and not “children” from the same people who originally defined marriage. Just saying…
Lipstick on a pig & call her (or him) a WOMAN (or something).
Twinkie is confused. Beam me up, Scotty. - On second thought, scrap that, Scotty if the Oriental guy is still onboard the Enterprise!
Especially considering most cases before the court(s) NEVER settle the question at hand.
They rule upon some sub/non-existent context (IE: If govt is to protect, and ensure, Life, Liberty and Pursuit....exactly what becomes of a pregnancy/birth? Hint: It’s not a puppy, regardless of position of conception. Instead, it was decided on ‘right of privacy’).
Yet, courts and Liberals, but I repeat myself, utilize the ‘standing’ and ‘precedent’...as if the question WERE actually ruled (and, ruled it might be, but not Lawful until Congress, States codify it as so).
A creator of any kind and nature itself has laws of logic. There are some facts that are self evident.
One of them is that man and woman “go together” Two men don’t nor do two women.
Any opinion or law that negates that is not reasonable.
The SCOTUS judges who lack that reasoning power are literally stupid.
“Just show me the law.”
This is a backwards and dangerous approach.
There doesn’t have to be a law specifically listing each of our freedoms. Or a law specifically prohibiting each thing the state is prohibited from doing. What you’re describing is tyranny; free men don’t need laws giving them permission for every little thing.
There is a difference between SCOTUS reigning in the power of the state (which is what they did, however wrongheaded) and a new law needing to be created.
Don’t let your righteous frustration with recent decisions lead you down the wrong path.
bump
When people read this they shrug it off as rantings. I take is seriously
and unlike conspiracy it's absolutely true. This is how they want
to kill America because they don't have the might.
We are Gods soldiers, not man.
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.