Replies

If the Republicans ran under a platform of "restoring this nation to its Christian heritage" they would not win many elections --not the ones that count, anyways.

Please explain to me how acknowleding one's traditional heritage -- the one in which the DoI and Constitution are firmly rooted -- necessarily involves establishing a theocracy, Drew68.

And while you're at it, would you kindly explain to me from what text in the Constitution have the federal courts received any grant whatever to rule on issues involving sexuality? Are you comfortable with the federal government unilaterally writing the moral code for our nation?

" -- would you kindly explain to me from what text in the Constitution have the federal courts received any grant whatever to rule on issues involving sexuality?
-BB-

Our general rights to life & liberty pretty well encompress sexual rights Betty, - there's no need to enumerate them. Thus the courts powers granted under Art III apply to 'sexuality' issues, when such issues are violated.
The constitutional principle that life, liberty and property cannot be denied by fed/state/local 'laws' that violate due process, -- must be upheld.

Obviously, the court felt that the case in question defined that principle in private sexual matters.

Let us hope that the same principle can now be used to strike down the 'wars' on guns, drugs, and 'sin' that our prohibitionist brethren insist on fighting.

Where do you stand on such prohibitory type laws, Betty?

Please explain to me how acknowleding one's traditional heritage -- the one in which the DoI and Constitution are firmly rooted -- necessarily involves establishing a theocracy, Drew68.

Right on. We established an organizationally secular nation, upon what is learned by being disciples of Christ, whether "apodeicticly," or nominally, or even unwillingly so. Even the U. S. Constitution, while attempting to fulfill the flinty Christian, John Adams' wishes for a secular government, also acknowledged Christ by its drafters' and consignatories' title for him, "our Lord."

Apt question!

The government, from the highest court in the land, has imposed itself in our beadrooms and not stopping there, even into wombs, and now, excuse me, has established itself in rectums throught the nation.

Are you comfortable with the federal government unilaterally writing the moral code for our nation?

They wrote nothing. They merely struck down laws aimed at punishing a specific group of people. No different than striking down Jim Crow laws.

You folks lost the culture war. Don't take it so personally.

Me? I'm happy with this. Freedom is always worth celebrating.

And while you're at it, would you kindly explain to me from what text in the Constitution have the federal courts received any grant whatever to rule on issues involving sexuality?

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

"Are you comfortable with the federal government unilaterally writing the moral code for our nation?"

The Supreme Court increasingly dictates that Christianity cannot be displayed or expressed in public places, and they continue to strip away rules that used to govern our morality, such as school prayer, anti-sodomy laws, anti-abortion laws, etc. So in this regard they have already written their own moral code by persistently eroding the existing ones and replacing them with thier own ideas of what American morality should be, (which is really just immorality). Notice that as we move further and further away from Christian moral codes, we are governed more and more by men instead of God.

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters,"; Benjamin Franklin. ~~~