Posted on 02/14/2004 1:33:23 AM PST by Latest Samurai
In the wake of recent developments in Massachusetts, you'll be pleased to know that our partners, Alliance For Marriage Foundation (AFM), continues to see extensive national -- and international -- news coverage.
In addition to the recent piece in Time magazine, AFM has recently done interviews with major national publications including the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Wall Street Journal. Moreover, a number of major international newspapers have recently covered AFM's work including the Le Monde of Paris and the leading German language news service based in Berlin.
In the next few days, AFM has also been tentatively scheduled for interviews on other national networks ranging from CBS to CNN. This means our Save Marriage petition effort -- and the campaign to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment -- is hitting the radar of the major media.
Action Item:
Would you please forward this message to your friends to update them on the important developments? This is such a crucial time to show Congress that Americans want to save marriage. Right now, we have 151,352 signers, and we want to add another 25,000 as quickly as possible.
Your friends can click here to sign:
There is much more just ahead. With the President expressing his support for our Federal Marriage Amendment, we anticipate Congress will be taking action soon. But the key will be grassroots support.
Grassfire.net
Most importantly, a Constitutional amendment is NOT required to overturn a bogus decision of the Supreme Court or any other court for that matter. When the Founders spoke of the Judiciary as being the weakest branch of government they did so because the Judiciary has no direct enforcement powers.
The Supreme Court can opine all it wants on any topic it wants. But the Constitution does NOT mean what the 9 justices on the Supreme Court says it means. I means what the plain language of the document reads. A simple resolution passed by Congress declaring the Court wrong and ordering the State Legislatures and the Governors not to obey a bogus ruling is sufficient to overturn the decisions we all hate (e.g. Lawrence, Roe). Some even argue (correctly I believe) that the Executive Branch alone has the power to order that an invalid Court ruling not be enforced. After all the President swears an oath to obey and defend the Constitution, not the Supreme Court or any other Court.
There is nothing wrong with the Constitution. The problem is Justices on the Supreme Court who rule according to fashion and not according to the Law. These Justices do not obey the plain language of the Constitution now. What makes you think they will obey any new language that we spend years getting approved? Amending the Constitution to reign in the Court is a diversion. By the time an Amendment gets approved (if it ever does) homosexual marriage will be a fait accompli just like abortion.
Both political parties are cynically using these issues to raise money and energize the base. They revel in the scenario of an endless fight over an Amendment that solves nothing. We currently have a Republican House, a Republican Senate and a nominally Conservative President. If a resolution passes the House and Senate and is signed by the President declaring that the Supreme Court ruled contrary to the plain language of the Constitution in Lawrence and ordering the States not to obey, and make no mistake the ruling in Lawrence is the root of the current flap over gay marriage, the problem is solved. Such a shot across the bow will reign in all the Courts (e.g. Massachusetts) and put an end to Judicial tyranny. The Founders envisioned that any rogue Court would be restrained by the Congress and the President exercising their Constitutionally mandated powers as representatives of the people. That is how our system is supposed to work.
The Court and the press can scream all they want. But the Congress and the President are the voice of the people not the Courts. We should focus all our energy on getting the Republicans in Congress and President Bush to exercise the powers we have already granted them. The last thing we should do is acknowledge the power of a rogue Court to rule over us by floundering helplessly before them in a pointless quest to amend a Constitution that is not flawed in the first place.
A Resolution to Overturn an Unconstitutional Ruling of the Supreme Court
Whereas: The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled contrary to the plain language of the Constitution in the matter of Lawrence v. Texas,
Be it resolved that the Republican Party shall submit to the Congress and pass legislation declaring:
1. That the Constitution of the United States contains no language prohibiting the sovereign states from passing laws regulating the practice of sodomy.
2. That it is the will of the Congress that the Governors of the States and the Legislatures of the States not be prohibited from regulating the practice of sodomy in their states by the opinion rendered by the Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas.
3. That it is the will of Congress that the President of the United States use all necessary means to insure that the Governors of the States and the Legislatures of the States be free to exercise their legitimate powers to regulate the practice of sodomy in their states.
No, they don't.
Marriage was legislated out of existence between 1969-1972.
Nobody seemed to care then, and I bet that a strong majority still favors the three critical elements of the end of marriage:
1) Divorce at will
2) No criminal penalties for adultery
3) No fathers for bastards
You are mostly correct, especially in your assertion that there is nothing wrong with the Constitution.
But your statement that "the problem is Justices..." is belied by your own argument.
The problem is that Congress does not exercise its power, or, more correctly, the problem is WHY does Congress not exercise its power?
The reason is that Congress has developed permanent incumbency as a strategy, and therefore no Congressman or Senator will ever do anything to energize a group of people who could act together to end the endless supply of booze, broads, and bribes.
Much better the courts do it, so they can be blamed by the Republicans (for electoral advantage) or blessed by the Democrats (likewise).
Congress could end this travesty in ten minutes. That they refuse to do so tells you where the problem really lies.
1. Since you all say that gay marriage should be left to the states, what will your administrations filing to the Supreme Court say when the first case is heard regarding recognition of gay marriage under the "Full Faith and Credit Clause"?
2. What is your opinion of the case in front of the Supreme Court, right now, on the Challenge to the Pledge of Allegiance?
Congress could end this travesty in ten minutes
That is the point.
In practice, yes, but it can be restored if the Congress and/or the Executive Branch decide to use the Powers given them by the U.S. Constitution to "Keep In Check" the other Branches of Gov't (i.e. The Judicial Branch - or members of the Supreme Court who voted to usurp their powers) and start "Impeaching these 'Rogue' Justices, and even lower court Judges who seem to think they are the LAW MAKERS instead of Law Enforcers.
In practice, yes, but it can be restored if the Congress and/or the Executive Branch decide to use the Powers given them by the U.S. Constitution to "Keep In Check" the other Branches of Gov't (i.e. The Judicial Branch - or members of the Supreme Court who voted to usurp their powers) and start "Impeaching these 'Rogue' Justices, and even lower court Judges who seem to think they are the LAW MAKERS instead of Law Enforcers.
Words well worth pondering.
Your post is appreciated trek!
Great to have a good ally in this fight. So much is at stake here. An amendment like this could set a horrible precedent - for more judicial activism, and more belabored attempts to correct them by mangling the Constitution further. Making a mockery out of marriage is certainly a bad thing, but it's reversible. Making a mockery out of the Constitution may not be reversible. Talk about trying to get the toothpaste back in the tube...
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.