[governsleastgovernsbest]

LA Times/NewsBusters ping to Today show list.

[FormerACLUmember]

The LA Times in a liberal death spiral into a well deserved demise. Who on earth buys this rag?

[backtothestreets]

I'm posting to this thread mostly out of frustration.

It seems ironic to me that "conservatives" want government to stop hounding religion, but make a 180 and want government to pass an amendment affecting marriage. It would seem more consistent to me to demand government get completely out of the marriage business. The original civil unions conducted by a Justice of the Peace (or other government official) were a result of liberal legislation in its time. Prior to the government entry into the marriage, it was a religious matter.

The government participation has been around so long that most people believe it is as it should be. Personally, I believe it is never too late to undo liberal legislation, which in this instance would take government completely out of marriage and a religious matters, and not require an amendment.

If some churches what to conduct same-sex marriages, they will also be signing their eventual death warrant as their membership will dwindle.

Asking government to pass an amendment on what was once a strictly religious matter is an invitation for later generations to pass other amendments affecting other religious matters, and that could go any direction, good or bad, but I instinctively think bad.

[TChris]

I believe most of the MSM couldn't care less about the Constitution or the separation of powers. They would be most happy with an all-powerful dictatorship, so long as that dictator was a "progressive".

Democracy my tookus. Liberals just want to have their way, regardless of what it takes or who it harms to get it.

[Paloma_55]

What really concerns me about our courts is that they have moved almost completely away from ruling on the constitutionality or legality of an issue, and into the political realm.

There are three possible outcomes of an appeal.

1) The law/constitution upholds a decision.
2) The law/constitution reverses a decision.
3) The law/constitution does not address the merits of a decision and therefore the legislature needs to add/change the law.

Unfortunately, #3 is rarely if ever found any more. The courts, when lacking legal/constitutional basis, revert to their personal opinion on what the decision should be.

[Lancey Howard]

Excellent! Though nobody expects anything serious or thoughtful from a toilet tissue like the LA Times, it is always good to expose its editors for the sick hypocrites they are. "Kick the scumbags while they're down", I always say. You kicked 'em right in the face!

These LA Times editors are your typical "living Constitution" liberals for whom bedrock Constitutional principles are little more than bumps in the road for activist judges packed into funny little clown cars. You know - - liberal judges for whom the Constitution is a "living document" to be used merely as a "guideline" when they ultimately rule based on their own cowardly perception of the chic political correctness of the day.

[DBeers]

Homosexual Agenda Ping!

If you oppose the homosexualization of society
-add yourself to the ping list!

To be included in or removed from the
HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA PING LIST,
please FReepMail either DBeers or DirtyHarryY2k.

Free Republic homosexual agenda keyword search [ Add keyword = homosexualagenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

In the world of the liberal media, there is no distinction between the judicial and legislative branches. If a particular outcome is deemed desirable, a court should so rule - the law and constitution in question be damned.

How true...

[goldstategop]

I'm of the view the courts should be confined to carrying out the laws. If people feel a law is wrong, they can elect new officials to either rewrite it or throw it out. But the courts have no business substituting their judgment for that of the elected representatives of the people.

(The Palestinian terrorist regime is the crisis and Israel's fist is the answer.)