Posted on 07/31/2003 8:54:10 AM PDT by Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS
Any honest person knows it was never the intent of the writers of the U.S. Constitution to condone, protect or in any way make normal or acceptable the sin of homosexuality.
No other institution has single-handedly done more to hurt and destroy this country than the Judiciary - unless it would be God's people (His Church) who should know better than to apathetically tolerate the evil so prevalent in our courts and nation today.
There is only one way to correct the problem in the court system of our country. Every time one of these renegade black-robed judges violates the Constitution, he or she should immediately be thrown out of office.
That is the only remedy. Everything else is self-delusion. Rebel state judges should be recalled and rebel federal judges should be impeached. I don't care whether they are conservative or liberal, registered as Republican or Democrat. With much fanfare and trumpets sounding, they should be thrown out of office.
The Judiciary of this nation was created by the Constitution. Each judge is supposed to raise his right hand and swear an oath to support that Constitution. Yet, these supposed "guardians" of our Constitution are blatantly acting against and openly defying it by overstepping their authority and legislating from the bench, rather than just interpreting the Constitution. They are arrogantly disobeying their oaths and defiantly ignoring the intent of our Constitution right in our faces.
Case in point - the U.S. Supreme Court's latest decision regarding homosexuality (Lawrence vs. Texas). As Justice Antonin Scalia said in his dissenting opinion, the Supreme Court of our land has, in effect, signed on to the homosexual agenda. Those 6 judges deserve only to be grabbed by the scruff of the neck and the seat of the pants and literally tossed out of their office.
Everyone must stop holding to the illusion that corrupt judges will do anything other than be corrupt. Corrupt decisions do not come from a simple difference of opinion. Corrupt decisions come from a corrupt heart. As long as you tolerate their corrupt actions (disobeying the Supreme Law and breaking their oath) they will continue to give you corrupt decisions.
The actions and rulings of these judges in their black robes are unconstitutional as well as corrupt. It should not be tolerated, but it is. As it stands, the judges feel perfectly safe because they know that the average citizen is too lazy and too self-absorbed to do anything about it. Decision after decision, year after year, they have come to know that all those who refuse to lift a finger in any real effort against them are at heart Oscar Meyer Weenies (hereafter known as OMW's). Regardless of your personal excuses and justification for non-involvement, these corrupt judges know that at the end of the day you will not hold them accountable. They know that you will not do anything about it. They just flat know it! They know it as much as they know the sun will come up tomorrow.
Let us get really serious for a moment. Do you think that they believe all that malarkey about the Constitution being "a living document?" Touch a copy of the Constitution and see if it has a pulse. Put a thermometer up to it and check its temperature or get a stethoscope and listen to its heartbeat. Put a mirror up to its nose and see if there is breath in its lungs. It is not alive. It was meant to be a document of set principles and unalienable rights. Set principles and unalienable rights do not change! The phrase "a living document" which these black-robed judges use, is meant to deceive the simple-minded and the fool so that they can continue to dishonor and disobey those set principles and unalienable rights. They can just bold-faced lie to you and justifying your apathy, you will let them get away with it. They may decide that something that was not intended to be in the Constitution is there - or they might decide that something that was indeed intended by the Founders of that document wasn't really their intent.
They know that the majority of Americans, being OMW's in good standing, simply will not do anything about it.
Consequently, these black robed-judges, right in your face, knowing that you will not call them on their lies, arrogance and corrupt hearts, blatantly subvert the Constitution which our Founding Fathers suffered to create and for which so many have died, believing that they were actually protecting and preserving it.
It is really very sad.
Let me ask a very critical question, from where did they receive this power or right to re-interpret the intent of the Framers of the Constitution? If they have the authority to re-interpret intent, then what they are really doing is creating new intent. For if their decisions add meaning or intent beyond the original meaning intended, then they have created new meaning and new intent.
For example, you send me to the store with five Federal Reserve Notes to buy a gallon of milk. When I get there I discover that I have a desire to buy a package of cookies because I'm hungry. I surely do not want to go through all the trouble of going home to have you clarify your intent, let alone be faced with the possibility that your true intent may not allow me to buy the cookies. Therefore, I say to myself that since you did not specifically forbid me to buy more than the gallon of milk, I will re-interpret your stated intent. I will say that I found additional intent in your stated instructions to me. This now gives me the freedom to buy the package of cookies based on the rationale that everyone knows that cookies and milk go together. Thus, I am in possession of new meaning that never was intended. As far as law goes I have performed the act of legislating. Now when I inform you of my decision regarding the cookies, you remind me that the standing rule of the family is that no person who puts on the "black robe" of those sent on errands can add to the intent and create new intent or meaning (legislation). You remind me that when I agreed to do errands, I raised my right hand and swore a solemn oath that I would obey those rules. But if I continue, right in your face, to arrogantly munch those cookies, what then must be done? If you allow me to distort your intent once, will I not do it again and again if the same corruption lies in my heart? And if you allow me to do it again and again and again and again and again, does that not reveal your own disregard for your standing rule?
Likewise, the fact that we let these black-robed judges by with disobeying and destroying the Constitution reveals that we do not value the set principles and unalienable rights of the Constitution any more than they do. If it is in our power to prevent it and we do not, then we are guilty of allowing it to take place. If we enable and allow the Judiciary to destroy this country right before our eyes, it is undeniable proof that we care more about ourselves than what God and our Founding Fathers established.
Let us now directly test the honesty and integrity of these judges in those black robes. Since the Constitution does not give them the authority, right or power to create new meaning and new intent (in fact, the Constitution grants that right only to a Congress made up of a Senate and a House of Representatives), from where did they get it? They stole that right from the Congress, only adding to their growing list of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors."
I wonder, would they allow us to use the same right that they stole from the Congress? How do you think they would react if we treat one of their opinions or their black-robed decisions the same way that they treat the Constitution? What if we say we believe that all their black-robed opinions are "living" decisions and we find new intent and new meaning in the way they have ruled? For instance, what if a judge tells us to pay 3,000 Federal Reserve Notes for some infraction and we find new intent in their ruling that says that Monopoly money is of the same value as those Federal Reserve Notes and therefore, acceptable legal tender in this case? Will they allow us to treat the intent of their rulings the same way that they treat the intent of the Framers of the Constitution? I guarantee you that if we did that to their rulings, all of a sudden original intent would become very important and vital to them.
Intent is everything! Intent is what is meant. But their arrogance and disrespect for the framers' intent reveals to us just how dishonest and corrupt these black-robed judges are.
There is only one solution that will turn this situation around. Starting with the six-judge majority who created new law (not intended by those that wrote the Constitution) in their decision regarding the Texas sodomy law. We should demand that the Congress immediately impeach every black-robed judge who violates the Constitution.
Therefore, impeachment proceedings should be immediately brought against Justices Kennedy, Breyer, Ginsburg, O'Connor, Souter and Stevens.
Since Congress is the only Constitutional body that can impeach and try them, you must start by calling your U.S. Congressman and your two U.S. Senators and demand that this occur. They will not do it unless you are absolutely serious about this. They will do it - if enough American citizens are serious.
This is what serious means: Tell them that you will leave the political Party in which you are registered and will support a candidate against them who will impeach those dishonorable judges. Remember it is both the Republicans and the Democrats that have given us this situation. Six of the members of the U.S. Supreme Court are Republicans. The real powers that be know that they can advance their agenda in the courts because they know that even the Christians and conservatives will not hold anyone accountable.
Article III, Section 1, second sentence of the Constitution of the United States of America says, "The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their offices during good Behavior."
First of all, do you think that the Founders of this Country meant this? Therefore, does our Constitution mean it?
Secondly, do you think the breaking of a solemn oath to obey the Constitution by doing what the Constitution forbids them to do would constitute bad behavior by these judges? If they are not in "good Behavior," the Constitution of the United States of America says they cannot hold their office.
Thirdly, who is going to do anything about it? Only you - the American citizen! Congress will not act until they are convinced that you will act - and that your action will hurt them.
There is a story in the Bible about a widow and an unjust judge (seems appropriate). What the unjust judge says about her persistence is important, for he said in Luke 18:5, NKJ, "'yet because this widow troubles me I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.'"
The Congress will not act unless enough of you are serious. Get serious enough to re-register and work with like-minded people to defeat the elected officials who are destroying this country. Call them and politely demand that they remove these six Supreme Court judges. Keep on calling until they tell you that they refuse to take any action against these unjust judges. Then re-register and start working to replace those legislators.
If you don't get serious and act, they will continue to make the immoral, unconstitutional rulings that are giving wings to the destruction of the moral base of our country.
As I have said, they are counting on you to not do anything - and your inaction gives them the power to destroy this country.
Don't be an Oscar Meyer weenie. Get serious. Start by calling your legislators. And keep on calling them.
Reining In the Court has the information and justification. The conservative portion of the electorate hasn't the will.
Second Amendment Showdown with Judge Stephen Reinhardt 69 pages of anti-gun propaganda masquerading as a constitutional decision in which the oft-overturned judge opined that "[t]he historical record makes it … plain that the [Second] Amendment was not adopted in order to afford rights to individuals with respect to private gun ownership or possession."
Dear Congressman/Congresswoman:
I request that you begin an Impeachment Investigation to Remove Federal Judges Alfred T. Goodwin and Stephen Reinhardt for ABUSE of Our Laws and Our Society, Our Constitution, Our 1st Amendment granting Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech, our 10th Amendment granting States Rights, Our Rights of Intellectual Freedom to Recite our Pledge of Allegiance and for Overextending the Role of the Judiciary into the Role of our Legislature, for Judicial Usurpation of our Laws and the Censoring of Our History.
Impeach SCOTUS - WorldNetDaily.com, Farah, 3 July 03 It's time to challenge the authority of the majority with an impeachment movement.
Will it happen overnight? Absolutely not. No great movements ever do. But it will only happen if Americans stand up and demand it. Even if the movement fails to achieve its objectives, it will set a different tone for the appointment of future justices who will know there is a political price to pay for undermining the Constitution. WorldNetDaily: Impeach the 'Sodomy 6' SIGN UP http://mail.worldnetdaily.com/cgi-bin/subunsub.pl?list=impeach
How many times and how many pundits do we really need rehashing the same old arguments?
Commentary on this decision reached a point of diminishing returns about four weeks ago. The laughable call for impeachment of USSC justices reached that point even sooner.
today's political climate
Change the climate.
Truthfully, I believe that the climate is changing. Slowly, but it is changing.
Your comments remind me of:
From Article Published 05. 23. 03 at 8:24 Sierra Times
An Interview With Ron Paul Part 2
Sir, on May 6th, on the floor of the house you asked the question: "Are the American people determined they still wish to have a Constitutional Republic." How would you answer that question, Sir?
A. A growing number of Americans want it, but a minority, and that is why we are losing this fight in Washington at the moment. That isn't as discouraging as it sounds, because if you had asked me that in 1976 when I first came to Washington, I would have said there were a lot fewer who wanted it then. We have drifted along and, although we have still enjoyed a lot of prosperity in the last twenty-five years, we have further undermined the principles of the Constitution and private property market economy. Therefore, I think we have to continue to do what we are doing to get a larger number. But if we took a vote in this country and told them what it meant to live in a Constitutional Republic and what it would mean if you had a Congress dedicated to the Constitution they would probably reject it. It reminds me of a statement by Walter Williams when he said that if you had two candidates for office, one running on the programs of Stalin and the other running on the programs of Jefferson the American people would probably vote for the candidate who represented the programs of Stalin. If you didn't put the name on it and just looked at the programs, they would say, Oh yeah, we believe in national health care and we believe in free education for everybody and we believe we should have gun control. Therefore, the majority of the people would probably reject Thomas Jefferson. So that describes the difficulty, but then again, we have to look at some of the positive things which means that we just need more people dedicated to the rule of law. Otherwise, there will be nothing left here within a short time.
I don't believe that the Republicans are our saviors.
RINOs may set us up for democide (seeRJ Rummel) that a demoncrat regime would initiate.
…I want a party with Bob Smith's principles to freedom and the Constitution and will gladly kick the Republicans out the door.
May we live to see it.
Sure, but what you seem to be proposing, and please correct me if I'm mis-stating your position, is that we should change the impeachment laws to allow judges to be impeached for making bad decisions or decisions that the majority disagrees with. If that's the case, there's no point in having an independent judiciary becuase every legal decison will be based on public opinion, rather than the law.
For so long as they remain all but untouchable, they will remain badly out of touch and uncaring in their decisions.
Real accountability-with-teeth is the only deterrent to Judicial Tyranny. We currently have none.
No, what he seems to be proposing is making it easier, and even common, for Judges to be removed who flaunt their Oath of Office by ignoring or trying to re-write The Constitution.
An "independent Judiciary" is very different from a "Rogue Judiciary Run Amok."
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.