Posted on 08/14/2010 4:50:35 AM PDT by GonzoII
U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker should have recused himself, but he had a legal and political statement he wanted to make.
The people of California spoke clearly at the polls in 2008 when they passed an amendment to the state Constitution that defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The public debate was held, the media wars were fought, both sides spent millions of dollars and the people voted for Proposition 8 by a margin of 52% to 48%.
The people's will carried the day, as it is supposed to — until U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker came along.
Last week, Walker nullified the votes of 7,001,084 people. In his decision to invalidate the constitutional amendment, he wrote: "That the majority of California voters supported Proposition 8 is irrelevant."
This judge believes that defining a person by sexual behavior is the same as defining a person by skin color. And given the fact that he is widely reported to be homosexual, it is obvious he believed this before the case was even brought to his courtroom. Walker should have recused himself, but he had a legal and political statement he wanted to make.
Colin L. Powell once said of this comparison: "Skin color is a benign, nonbehavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument."
This case will end up in the U.S. Supreme Court sometime soon, and there will be a 4-4 split in opinion, leaving the decision once again to one man in a black robe — Justice Anthony M. Kennedy.
The Constitution envisioned a system in which the judiciary would serve to check the excesses of the legislative or executive branches.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Last week, Walker nullified the votes of 7,001,084 people. In his decision to invalidate the constitutional amendment, he wrote: “That the majority of California voters supported Proposition 8 is irrelevant.”
Welcome to Obama’s world...you bunch of irrelevant bast*rds...
So which way will Kennedy swing?
This pernicious ruling makes, for the first time, an open attack on traditional Judeo-Christian values. Its time has truly come, the beginning of open persecution of Christians. We are not far at all from seeing the state close Churches and force acceptance of homo-perversion in every conceivable corner of society. It’s been codified in case law.
If The People tolerate this sort of thing, then The People get what they deserve and vice versa.
The People of California continue to elect Democrat politicians and RINOs to public office. Democrat politicians and RINOs continue to shove America into the quicksand of Decadence. The People who vote for these Democrat politicians and RINOs have no one to blame but themselves for the Fall of America.
I'm anticipating that because there are so many constitutional and legal flaws in the homosexual activist judge's rulings that Kennedy has many reasons to support overturning the decision by the "judge" and, likely, that of the 9th Circuit.
I agree the fix was in before the trial began, but more substantive grounds on appeal beyond the mere fact the judge was gay will be required.
If a straight judge had upheld the referendum, how far would you think a gay appellant should get complaining because the male judge sleeps with a female wife.
This judge should step down period. It’s almost as if he is enjoying himself.
But I still think the stronger argument is the one accepted by the California Supreme Court -- there is no violation of rights as homosexuals have the right to marry, or not. They choose NOT. There is no denial of the right to contract, etc.
One man decides. I am going to scream.
If this happens, and it may, I think we can console ourselves with the knowledge that it won't be for long.
The horrors released by this ruling will be so stark, so disgusting, so heart-wrenching, that the population wll become very strongly polarized against it. Just the effect on children, as homosexuals come after them in ways that normal people cannot forsee at present, will be more than enough. Add in the health consequences and the cultural consequences, gays in the military, and the pot will boil over very quickly.
Just as the abortion radicals in the 60s used a series of decisions to get to Roe v. Wade, the Rump Rangers have a series of decisions to support them. Kennedy figured large in at least a couple of them. IIRC, one conservative judge noted that the precedent stage was set for homo marriage.
I guess 60/40 that Kennedy provides the vote to sow further chaos in our fragile society.
Oh, and while various civilizations in decline also accepted open homosexuality, no other enshrined the perversion in marriage.
Eh, by that view, then any heterosexual judge is just as biased in the other way.
This is a stupid point to argue.
Arguing why we allow the government to dictate religious law (marriage) is what we oughtta be talking about.
I know you may be referring to a "backlash" against the perversion, but your statement is really a double entendre, perhaps unwittingly. The second meaning could be this: that we are at the end of our viability as a country. That we have been so completely emasculated and feminized that we will be fair game to be picked off by sleeper cells of embedded barbarians, or invaded by a stronger country awaiting the opportunity. With the military becoming a social statement made by the sodomites, there may be no more real fighting men left. Just look at what complete jellyfish that much of the upper command as already become under Obama.
I personally don't see a backlash to right society as viable. We have, in a large sense, almost completely lost any trace of innocence as a society, and this is impossible to regain short of a miracle - true spiritual awaking/revival. Don't belittle the concept of innocence; it doesn't have the sole connotation of immaturity and ignorance as much as it suggests purity and an unsullied outlook and worldview. What has been seen cannot be unseen.
A third possible meaning is, if you are a believer, that the cup of iniquity in now full to overflowing. Judgment cannot be far away.
Well and concisely put, J.
Bears repeating.
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.