how bout it was wrong to let queers adopt children for their own amusement in the first place???
Posted on 12/02/2018 1:21:34 PM PST by servo1969
This week on The David Rubenstein Show, retired Justice Kennedy finally admitted the real reason behind his Obergefell ruling, the 2015 Supreme Court decision that created a novel definition of marriage to give legal status to same-sex couples. Kennedy said, “It seemed to me just wrong that under the Constitution, over 100,000 adopted children of gay parents could not have their parents married. I just thought this was wrong.”
Well, now we know. The justice’s reasoning had nothing to do with Constitutional principles. He had an emotional reaction and in his hubris he imposed his private feelings on the nation.
Ironically, the former justice had things exactly backward. The Court’s unprecedented redefinition of legal marriage harms the very children it was designed to protect -- and indeed, all children.
A free society is possible only if it recognizes certain rights as pre-political. The state does not create them -- it merely recognizes them. Chief among those pre-political rights are marriage and family. In all civilizations, people have known it takes a male and a female to produce a child; thus the core definition of the family was based on biology.
All that changed with Obergefell.
The first target was marriage: The only way the state could treat same-sex couples the same as opposite-sex couples was to deny the relevance of biology and redefine legal marriage as a purely emotional bond. But we have lots of emotional bonds. So the state claimed the authority to decide which of them qualify as marriage -- based not on biology but on its own legal fiat.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
100,000 children living in homosexual “marriages”?
Lesbian-lesbian co-habitation?
Or pure exaggeration by the usual liberal suspects in Alensky’s national press corpse?
Very well written and true. Kennedy is a very evil man. His comment about Kavanaugh proves his immorality. God will take care of him eventually.
Didn't want to be remanded to grammar hell.
Precisely what Justice Scalia lay awake nights worrying that he himself might, unconsciously, do. If he found himself liking his opinion too much, he would go over his logic the more thoroughly lest where he stood on any decision should depend on where he sat on the matter.
how bout it was wrong to let queers adopt children for their own amusement in the first place???
Philosopher king.
IIRC, Kennedy even said as much at the hearings, that the court would have to be extremely arrogant to redefine marriage. Then he did it anyway.
We knew at the time he was following his own immoral compass.
O’Connor did this before Kennedy. In the Planned Parenthood vs. Pennsylvania decision she thought it was an undue burden for a married woman to inform her husband before she had an abortion because . . . well, because Sandra Day thought she might have been raped or molested and, after all, it was HER body.
Tells us much about Reagan judicial picks
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.