Posted on 03/29/2013 9:53:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
Or they can rule that runaway slaves must be captured and returned to their masters, as they did before, and that wouldn't be right either.
And they can rule that homosexuals can "marry," but they the can't make that unnatural union a natural marriage any more than they can make a horse the same as a cow by legal fiat.
God has already decided it.
Romans 1:24-32
The question is whether the Supreme Court or the states should usurp the Authority of God?
My guess is that they will all play God and thumb their noses at God’s authority.
That is usually very unwise course for a nation.
Very well said
It’s not a matter of numbers. It’s a matter of jurisdiction. Since marriage is not a constitutional issue, SCOTUS has no jurisdiction to rule on the matter. It should be remanded back to the states.
I’ve been tuning up that idea since I heard the throwaway phrase “natural marriage” on a local talk show program driving across SC 2 days ago.
The assumption that the Supreme Court Justices are smarter than you or any average person for that matter in not valid. They are nothing more than political hacks. All three branches of government are not on our side. As of this writing, I have withdrawn my consent.
Please see #2.
I’ve thinking that “natural marriage” is a winning meme on several overt and subtle levels.
Yes, Kennedy asked the question, but justices often pose “devil’s advocate” questions like that to push details of the argument into the open. There are plenty of reasons to be concerned about the outcome, but that alone isn’t one of them.
There is no such thing as homosexual marriage, regardless of what fifty states or a court says.
I’m also kicking this around.
The entire Constitution of the United States is 4,436 words long, not counting the Bill of Rights. Of those 4,436 words, 2,268 in Article 1 (Note, it comes first) deal with the powers and duties of the Legislature. In Article 2, 1,025 words deal with the powers and duties of the Executive. In Article 3, only 377 words pertain to the duties and powers of the Judiciary. Note, the Judiciary comes last in order.
This is all of Article 3:
# # #
Article III.
Section. 1.
The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;— between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
Section. 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
# # #
Now, this is the part that modern “judicial supremacists” ignore.
“In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”
Let’s repeat that again.
“...with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”
So why are we constantly told that the SCOTUS has the last word???
"As we are 'one nation under God', so too is one man and one woman joined in marriage under God."
I agree with you. Let me add, though, drawing from Travis McGee's post, that the state can't turn something unnatural into something natural any more than the Fed can. As McGee says, you can declare a horse to be a cow, but you can't make it true, even if you are a state judge and not a federal one.
While that might work, the term "natural" remains secular. I think we need to engage a term that is entirely religious with a religious tradition. HOLY Matrimony is something that the church can recognize but that the secular courts would be prohibited from re-defining. Natural is subject to court interpretation and while for 10,000 years "natural" has never included homosexual acts, the courts are now recognizing those acts as perfectly normal and legitimate (despite the fact that those acts cause early death in almost all who engage in them).
Our government can prohibit 32 ounce drinks to save us from our own choices and then encourage us to engage in unnatural dangerous perverted sexual practices that kill.
James Madison would call the 10th a “parchment barrier,” a waste of words without a State appointed Senate.
“Holy Matrimony” has the important advantage of speaking specifically to mothering, and providing a unit within which “Holy” mothering can take place.
Moreover, “Holy Matrimony” can only be joined in a religious setting.
Finally, while the Metropolitan Community Gay Church could mimic and proclaim their own “Holy Matrimony”, first it would be nonsensical with the word mother as part of the term. Second, churches could recognize one another’s marriages or not, and a registry of acceptable matrimonials could be established.
Awesome cartoon! Thanks, Salvation.
Somebody said the other day that Kagan recused herself. Now I don’t know if it was for this case, or another one. If it was for this one and it goes 4-4 then it will likely go back to the states which it should.
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.