Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michael McConnell: The Constitution and Same-Sex Marriage
Wall Street Journal ^ | 03/22/2013 | Michael McConnell

Posted on 03/22/2013 7:50:50 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

For most Americans, the Supreme Court cases being heard on Tuesday and Wednesday next week are about same-sex marriage. But the cases—Hollingsworth v. Perry (the Proposition 8 case from California) and U.S. v. Windsor (the Defense of Marriage Act case)—also are a test of the nation's democratic and decentralized constitutional structure. These cases thus are not just about marriage. They are about how we reach decisions regarding matters of deep moral significance in our federal republic.

We learned from Roe v. Wade that the Supreme Court endangers its own legitimacy and exacerbates social conflict when it seeks to resolve moral-legal questions on which the country is deeply divided without a strong basis in the text of the Constitution. The court sometimes intervenes when the legislatures of the 50 states are approaching a consensus. When it jumps into a live political controversy, the justices look like they are acting like legislators.

The system today, without the Supreme Court's intervention, is working as it should. Representatives of the people are deliberating. "We the People" are thinking. So far, nine states have extended marriage to same-sex couples; many others chosen to explicitly endorse traditional marriage. Those choices distress advocates on either side of the matter when their wishes have been disappointed.

But when all of us have an equal right to be heard on an issue, and to participate through our representatives in making the decision, it is easier to accept the outcome than when unelected judges make moral pronouncements from the bench. Change that comes through the political process has greater democratic legitimacy.

Moreover, in states where same-sex marriage has been made legal, legislatures have taken care to provide generous protections for people and institutions—especially churches—that conscientiously disagree. This is good for civic harmony and for achieving long-term position of mutual respect.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: DaveyB

While it is nice for you to share your personal feelings with us, it sure isn’t relevant to the laws being changed and passed in America as marriage is being redefined.


21 posted on 03/22/2013 12:10:14 PM PDT by ansel12 (" I would not be in the United States Senate if it wasnt for Sarah Palin " Cruz said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
... it sure isn’t relevant to the laws being changed and passed in America as marriage is being redefined.

I suspect the framers would find your approach queer.

22 posted on 03/22/2013 12:21:27 PM PDT by DaveyB (Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. -John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Mentally ill sex perverts should not have a legal right to be heard in court.


23 posted on 03/22/2013 2:33:24 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; 185JHP; 230FMJ; AFA-Michigan; AKA Elena; APatientMan; Abathar; Absolutely Nobama; ...
Homosexual Agenda and Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

DaveyB said: The author is still operating under the presumption that the institution of marriage is a human convention and can be redefined legally by human agents. My presupposition is that marriage is instituted by an immutable creator.

Actually one can easily understand that marriage means a man and a woman even without religion. Biology and natural law also tell us the same thing. Biology and natural law also teach us that a mother is a woman and gives birth to children and a father is a man who inseminates a woman. And that children do not need a woman/mother and a man/father, but two or more sexual perverts can be the "parents". Fag "marriage" is an effort to overturn the very laws of nature and thus destroy human society by forcing everyone to accept the insane lie that a man can be a wife/mother and a woman can be a husband/father and thus nothing has any meaning at all. It's utter rebellion against reality, truth, natural law, God's law and human civilization. And just who is destroyed the most?

Children.

Anyone wanting on/off either list, FREEPMAIL me.

24 posted on 03/22/2013 2:40:03 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
...but how does telling each other that, help us stop homosexual marriage and polygamy in America?

Well the first thing one ought do before advancing to activism, is to make sure what you believe is correct and ought be applied, and the second thing you should do is to make sure you know how to articulate it to others.

Now, if you have constructive suggestions for activism, I think they will be welcome, but that was not the subject of this particular discussion so far.

25 posted on 03/22/2013 3:02:09 PM PDT by AndyTheBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: paterfamilias

>> A very thoughtful discussion on a complex problem.

It’s not complicated.

Don’t pass law that forces the citizen to participate in, service, or otherwise support homosexual behavior.


26 posted on 03/22/2013 3:03:57 PM PDT by Gene Eric (The Palin Doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Enough with the Catholic bashing.


27 posted on 03/22/2013 3:06:22 PM PDT by Gene Eric (The Palin Doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

LOL, Where did you find any Catholic bashing in that post, I would like to see what you see there.


28 posted on 03/22/2013 3:30:14 PM PDT by ansel12 (" I would not be in the United States Senate if it wasnt for Sarah Palin " Cruz said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: AndyTheBear

Yeah my advice is to push for legal protection of marriage.


29 posted on 03/22/2013 3:40:12 PM PDT by ansel12 (" I would not be in the United States Senate if it wasnt for Sarah Palin " Cruz said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson