Posted on 05/06/2016 8:42:49 PM PDT by Bodleian_Girl
In Fact, Judge Moore upheld Alabama State law, to whit...
Alabama high court’s decision criticized the U.S. Supreme Court’s creation of same-sex marriage as “lawless” and left undisturbed its determination dating back to 2015 that the state’s Sanctity of Marriage Amendment and Marriage Protection Act, limiting marriage to one man and one woman, are constitutional and binding.
Liberty Counsel explained that on March 3, 2015, months before the U.S. Supreme Court narrowly established same-sex marriage, the Alabama Supreme Court issued a 135-page order upholding the state’s marriage laws and ordering certain named probate judges to stop issuing licenses to same-sex couples.
Then, Probate Judge Don Davis asked to be relieved of the order because it contradicted a federal court order that demanded the state establish same-sex marriage. On March 10, 2015, the state Supreme Court rejected the petition.
On March 12, the state court issued yet another order that “all probate judges” were included in the March 3 order.
Then just weeks ago other petitions related to the case were dismissed, but the underlying orders were affirmed in a certificate of judgment that got far less publicity than the order for dismissals.
In fact, Chief Justice Roy Moore wrote at the time: “Today this court by order dismisses all pending motions and petitions and issues the certificate of judgment in this case. That action does not disturb the existing March orders in this case or the court’s holding therein that the Sanctity of Marriage Amendment, art. I, § 36.03, Ala. Const. 1901, and the Alabama Marriage Protection Act, § 30-1-9, Ala. Code 1975, are constitutional. Therefore, and for the reasons stated below, I concur with the order.”
obama does it day in and day out.
Judge Moore is absolutely correct in stating that the boneheaded decision handed down by the Kennedy liberal court only applies to the states that itpertained to and there were five, which did not include Alabama. This hogwash that a “law” on same-sex “marriage” now applies to every state in the country is BS. The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction even mentioning marriage. It falls under the purview of the states. Each and every state that has any morals left should oppose it. Like abortion, marriage can not be ruled on one way or the other by the US Supreme Court. Of course they did, and they found some way around it, but it’s still wrong and should be ignored. Like Roberts finding a way to agree with the ObamaCare by calling it nothing but another tax. The Supreme Court interprets laws, they don’t make new law. We live in a lawless society no better than a tin horn banana republic.
It appears your correct. Well said.
That bridge was long burned, Trump already spit at Roy Moore when he suggested the man that grilled him for his religion to be placed on the SCOTUS...
Plus Moore was a solid Cruz supporter/constitutionalists.
The gays are tools to advance an agenda, when they are no longer needed they will become the new target, very strange that these hate mongers either do not know history or refuse to believe they may be targeted.
The rule of law isn't a license to do anything you want. When it conflicts with natural law and reality, it SHOULD be resisted, unto blood if necessary.
Sounds like 1984. The Justice violating ethics in upholding decency and ethics? What?!
re: “If you don’t like that outcome the options to you are made clear by the Rule of Law. Simply ignoring the court ruling isn’t one of them.”
This is rub. People of goodwill who support law and order are now having to make a choice. Abide by the rule of law and disobey the moral standards of God, or disobey the duly elected government and obey God.
I believe an Orthodox Jew or Christian must be willing to disobey government when it clearly, egregiously, violates the Law of God. However, it must be understood that doing so opens one up to legal consequences. Believers must be prepared to endure those consequences, and, also not whine about it when it happens.
So, I disagree with your premise that the “rule of law” is always the right thing to do. These are extraordinary times - that’s no news to anybody nor is it the first time the world is living in insanity - so, sometimes ignoring an unjust order is the just thing to do - but, again, understanding that one will face consequences for doing so. We must not shrink away from doing what is right because we might have to pay a price.
re: “Lastly, you seem to argue that violent resistance against militant secularization (or just ungodliness in general) “displeases God”. There are just as many Biblical examples where it pleases Him. How are you not encouraging (whether you realize it or not) more capitulation to left-wing activism? They are willing to use the violent force of government against us. What recourse do we have?”
There is little support in the New Testament for violence against those we disagree with. I’m not a pacifist - I believe in the right to defend oneself and one’s family, and one’s country - but, to resist a government policy with violence, I’m not so sure that’s called for - yet. Simply refusing to obey, and not cooperating with an immoral law or policy is Biblical. However, we must be willing to face the consequences for doing so without whining about it when we do.
This world is not our home. Believers are citizens of God’s Kingdom. Remember Jesus said His Kingdom is not of this world, if it were, my followers would fight (He said this to Pontius Pilate during His trial).
I’m not saying Biblical resistance can never utilize violence - but, I think using such tactics is a line one does not want to cross until absolutely no other option is available.
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.