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?
More can be found on wickipedia
BTW as far as I know the Judicial Branch of government is the one whom now determines ones rights as related to free speech as to what can and can not be said especially in their so called halls of Justice. {Gag} Don’t follow their mandated script in court answering with “their truth” not yours you swore to tell and watch what happens. The Judiciary integrity in this nation has sank to all time lows because of the profession from which judges come from.
Agreed. Cruz is my choice but with his banishment from the media and GOPe lexicon, it sure is fun watching Trump driving a D9 through their house of cards.
You win. Now for extra points who’s wife also a member congress was a keynote speaker in the 1996 GOP Convention?
I’m not a Dred Scott legal scholar. My cursory review causes me to understand the dynamics you address, but only enough to give you what may amount to a superficial answer.
I don’t believe the idea that racial relations today could be a lot different if Dred Scott had been judged differently, is a flawed one. There’s a reasoned basis for that conclusion.
Can I say that conclusion is rock solid? I’m not quite there.
I’m not a big fan of the outcome of Dred Scott. In the day with the social dynamic and the reality of the plight of slaves, it seems an understandable and yet disgusting decision.
The limbo the Black slave existed in, was a cesspool of man’s inhumanity to man.
It was a big enough problem, that simply waving a magic wand wasn’t going to resolve it.
Today Blacks are considered to be citizens equal with any other citizen. Somehow that seems to be lost on some of them.
Others pick up on that concept and run with it.
I believe ultimately that the racial hatred some Blacks have for Whites today, exists in large part due to Democrats, Jessie Jackson, and Al Sharpton.
Dred Scott and the Civil War are long forgotten. I think their real effects probably are too in the overall scheme of things.
If the Democrat divide and conqueror clowns, the race baiters, and the entertainment media elites who exploit racism for cash didn’t exist, there would be far more harmony between the races. First of all, we wouldn’t even discuss race. It would be an issue behind us.
Very well said, DO.
When a case comes down like Roe Vs Wade, the issue is considered settled. I realize it isn’t to those who disagree and wish to defend the innocent, and I sympathize with that view. It’s very frustrating.
On the other hand, as other cases come up, the courts look at other SCOTUS decisions and ultimately consider the issue already settled.
A claimant raises an issue. The court responds that this is a settled matter. Unless it is presented in a way that a wedge issue is deemed arguably different, it won’t move on.
Someone in Arizona making the same argument that appeared in Roe Vs Wade, is going to be given the same answer at a lower court level.
I do think the 14th is a problem. Interpretation becomes problematic.
Perhaps the 14th Amendment reveals the fallibility of man compared to God better than any other example.
Boehner’s stunt was basically the end of a conservative agenda within the GOP and ushered in GOP-E control. IOW Boehner is no Conservatives friend. He should have been honest and at least changed parties joining the DEMs rather than being their Proxy inside the GOP.
Thank you. I appreciate it.
Always, friend.
Dole, Molinari, Huchinson....lol
Yeah....well.....when faced with all these legal stunts, My laymen’s response is generally to hang all the lawyers..:-)
It’s been said in many ways and many times before.
Thanks for the mention. I thought it expressed something deep inside of me too.
We’re of a kindred spirit there.
There does need to be attornys, but so many of them? :^)
It would certainly be a good idea for the Davis’ attorneys to contact the lawyers who argued the Printz case before the USSC back in the 1990s. From my reading of Printz, Davis cannot be forced to carry out the dictates of the federal government. Like you, though, I am not a lawyer.
Well though, that does sound logical from my understanding.
I agree with you.
I wasn’t insinuating you were on the side of millions of deaths. I was asking if you were on the side of “the law of the land” or the laws governing actual life on this planet. In particular God’s Law.
No problem, I have always enjoyed reading your posts. You are I where raising the alarm over illegal immigration years ago when it wasn’t cool. LOL.
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.