[E.G.C.]

The bottom line to all of this is this nonsense of men and women in black robes overturning the will of the voters and substituting personal public preferences for the U.S. Constitution has got to stop and it has got to stop now. Otherwise America will cease to exist.

Regards......

[Sacajaweau]

Marriage in Black's Law dictionary is defined as between one man and one women. The people who wrote the Constitution did not see it as being defined differently. The definition is recognized universally.

Where does this judge thinks he's going with this? Oh, yeh....History books. These judges are egomaniacs.

[yankeedame]

And in this corner, the Devil's Advocate:

"If it may please the Court (of Freeper opinion) the here is either unaware or choose to dismiss the little known, but well documented fact that "judicial activism", as it is termed, has a long, deep rooted history. Stretching back to the very beginning of our Federalist period, and was, in fact, both tactically and overtly espoused by several Founding Father, chief among which was none other than Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson believed that since the judicial branch of the Federal government, specifically the Supreme Court, was in no way represented the "the People", meaning non- elected either by the state or by the people, the judiciary was therefore, and should remain therefore, the handmaiden of the other two branches; specifically, though not exclusively, the legislative.

Not to put too fine an edge on it, the man from Monticello was the well meaning father of American judicial activism. Jefferson, and in turn his judicial progeny, did not believe in the Law. A fix law in the historic English concepts of laws. His, and his philosophical heirs of today, believe was one of rule by the wise and the good. Men and women acting in the interest of the whole, restrained only by their sense of duty and obligation to the greater good. A kind of legal noblesse oblige as it were.

"A strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a food citizen, but not the highest,"wrote Jefferson[1], "....Every good officer [of the judiciary] must be ready to risk himself in going beyond the strict line of the law ...his motives will be his justification..."

Ergo, we can see that judicial activism is neither new to this country nor a sign that this nation has somehow passed from virtue unto corruption.

========

[1] McDonald, Forrest, "The Presidency of Thomas Jefferson", Ch.3, p.49 [University of Kansas Press, 1976]