Posted on 10/25/2014 10:20:00 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
While supporters of same-sex marriage rejoice over the recent rulings of activist courts, it is seldom mentioned in articles hailing these decisions that the Judicial Branch is overturning voter-approved measures that serve as an affirmation of the democratic process.
NC Judge Stands Up for His Beliefs in Same-Sex Marriage Fight
October 25, 2014 By Greg Campbell ZMarriedWhile supporters of same-sex marriage rejoice over the recent rulings of activist courts, it is seldom mentioned in articles hailing these decisions that the Judicial Branch is overturning voter-approved measures that serve as an affirmation of the democratic process.
As the Supreme Court ducks and dodges a full ruling on the issue of homosexual unions, states like Oregon and North Carolina are forced to accommodate the rulings of lower federal courts that are rapidly overturning voter-approved bans on same-sex marriages. While not only the sanctity of marriage remains under attack, the concept of states’ rights remains under attack simultaneously.
However, it is not only a theoretical state-federal squabble, but a very-real battle over the issue of marriage that has spilled-over into the private sector. Throughout the country, there are countless examples of small businesses being forced to provide flowers, cakes, photography and other goods and services to homosexuals looking to take full advantage of the legal maneuverings occurring within the courts.
The resulting choice offered by the Department of Justice has been a simple, terrifying one: comply or go out of business.
Many have opted to close-down shop rather than bend to the will of bullies. In North Carolina, a judge has stepped down from his prestigious position out of protest.
On October 10th, 2014, North Carolina’s voter-approved ban on homosexual marriage was overturned by the Fourth Circuit Court. Last week, Swain County Magistrate Judge Gilbert Breedlove resigned from the bench upon which he sat for 24 years rather than be forced into violating his principles.
“It was my only option,” Breedlove said. “We were directed we had to perform the marriages, and that was just something I couldn’t do because of my religious beliefs.”
“I was Christian when I started,” said Breedlove. “Then, the law didn’t require me to perform something that was against my religious belief. Now that law has changed its requirements.”
Whether one is a supporter or opponent of the legalization of same-sex marriage, the issue has been irreparably marred by an “ends justify the means” mentality that has skirted gaining public approval in favor of ramming activist court rulings down the throats of Americans who have largely rejected the legalization of homosexual marriage by approving bans in 32 states.
The result has been a secular crusade against Christians and other persons opposed to the adulteration of the concept of marriage via the legalization of homosexual unions.
While it certainly is a shame that Judge Breedlove was offered the choice between dogmatically following the orders of activist courts and violating his principles, the fact that he did not bend to the will of judicial bullies shows a strength of character and should inspire others who wonder if there are still people of principle within the Judicial Branch.
I keep thinking the reason SCOTUS didn’t hear any of those SSM hearings is some of them are hoping it’ll be legalized before they have to admit state SSM bans are constitutional. If it wasn’t, wouldn’t they have mentioned it when they overturned DOMA? So, why are they biding their time? Blackmail. I said “some”.
You would think we could, wouldn’t you.
Anyway, it is nice to hear about Judges with principles.
I want to see what Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore will say when some liberal federal judge tells him to not enforce the marriage ban in Alabama!
Roy Moore is an honorable man.
A civilization “Gone With The Wind”.
I wish somebody would compile a chart of the 50 states, showing exactly how many people forced homosexual marriage on each of them.
In some New England states it was a part of their legislature and governor. But in many states it was either just one federal judge, or a panel of three federal judges.
The purpose of the exercise is to show how anti-democratic the whole thing has been.
The final part of the chart should be to show how many people in those states were *opposed* to gay marriage, *if* they had the opportunity to say so on the ballot.
For example, in California, 7,000,000 voters said “no” to homosexual marriage (prop 8), and only 1 federal judge said “yes”, and overruled them as his opinion meant more than did theirs, because they were “the people”, who matter less than 1 judge.
“and only 1 federal judge said “yes”.
And that Federal judge was a sodomite. But the US Supreme Court saw nothing wrong with a sodomite judge ruling in a case concerning sodomy. That sir is the problem. These robed tyrants take care of each other. They could have heard the case, then ruled the judge should have recused himself him, then reinstated the will of the people. But they sided with tyranny, because that’s what they’re good at.
He should have stayed on the bench and refused to perform as "directed."
““I was Christian when I started,” said Breedlove. “Then, the law didn’t require me to perform something that was against my religious belief. Now that law has changed its requirements.””
If Federal couts are ‘not empowered to rewrite law’ then the law did not change it simply was given an entirely new and unprecedented meaning never even imagined by its authors or anyone who then spoke or read English, nor anyone but a corrupt loonitic today.
I agree with this judge in stepping down rather than violating religious concus nothing is more important in life than fidelity to God. I just would have made the Federal injustice system remove me for refusing to obey their lawless edicts. Let the blood of their violations be on their hands.
“I just would have made the Federal injustice system remove me for refusing to obey their lawless edicts”
Exactly what Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore did in the 10 Commandments debacle. Will be interesting to see what Chief Justice Moore will do when the Feds order the state of Alabama to allow sodomite “marriage”, after 81% of the people voted against it in 2006. The entire Alabama Supreme Court are republicans, the governor is a republican, and the state attorney general is a republican.
Yet the important thing is that chart of the states, to show beyond any doubt how few people it took to inflict an unpopular and unwanted law on everyone.
All told, maybe a few thousand people, out of 330,000,000, got what they wanted, and everybody else didn’t matter one bit. Even the public who want homosexual marriage didn’t get a say in the matter, because of these few thousand peoples’ arrogance.
And that is how the issue should be presented to the people.
Alabama is going to have to do something about its own injustice system Spesficly the “Alabama Court of the Judiciary”.
The problem we have is not federal courts its an entire lawer cuture raised and trained in the law schools and university run by the hard left.
There is a Dam good reason we don’t have law reflexing what is written done, or practiced by the people who voted for such laws. The legal culture has gotten very imaginative and successful in their efforts to turn the Federal court system into unelected and lawless legislative dictatorship.
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.