Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sotomayor: We’re not taking away your liberty, because we won’t force you to marry a gay person
LifeSiteNews ^ | 4/29/15 | Ben Johnson

Posted on 04/30/2015 8:55:52 AM PDT by BlatherNaut

One moment in the Supreme Court's oral arguments over same-sex “marriage” reveals what an embarrassment Sonia Sotomayor is as a justice.

John J. Bursch, who argued on behalf of marriage, said that the people, not five unelected justices, should be able to decide whether to redefine a pillar of society that predates the government and written history.

“This case isn't about how to define marriage,” he said. “It's about who gets to decide that question. Is it the people acting through the democratic process, or is it the federal courts? And we're asking you to affirm every individual's fundamental liberty interest in deciding the meaning of marriage.”

The “wise Latina” immediately interrupted him with the following non-sequitur:

“I'm sorry. Nobody is taking that [liberty] away from anybody. Every single individual in this society chooses, if they can, their sexual orientation, or who to marry or not marry. I suspect even with us giving gays rights to marry that there's some gay people who will choose not to.”

I'll pass over Sotomayor saying that “every single individual..chooses” his or her sexual preference. But don't miss the full illuminating brilliance of her argument: The Supreme Court is not trampling on the right of 50 million people in 35 states to settle their own law as long as straight people are not forced to “marry” homosexuals.

For Sotomayor, apparently anything short of judicially mandated sodomy is within the justices' constitutional prerogatives – a view that would surprise any of our nation's founding jurists, whether Jeffersonian or Hamiltonian.

(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Indiana
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; indiana; libertarians; marriage; medicalmarijuana; mikepence; rfra; samesex; scotus; soniasotomayor; sotomayor
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 next last

Thursdays and Saturdays ... Ruby Throated Sparrow ...


81 posted on 04/30/2015 10:34:22 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

Ah, Sonya, are you naive or evil?

This is about the right NOT to participate without having the State come down on your head.

I’m pretty sure you know that. I think back to a question you were asked pre-Obamacare, whether a law requiring purchasing broccoli would be Constitutional, and you, instead of answering the question and invalidating Obamacare, you avoided it by being intentionally obtuse.


82 posted on 04/30/2015 10:35:34 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

nope and nope is a lie, as is, nobody is wanting to change a life or America .... as you knew ....


83 posted on 04/30/2015 10:36:18 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

confusion has it’s fun and cost ... confusion is one person, two, three and four (sp) each other ... house, senate, sc, the media. Don’t become down and confused ... please ...


84 posted on 04/30/2015 10:40:52 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: xzins
????

Eagle/Dove Xzins!

85 posted on 04/30/2015 10:42:37 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion

Let us not forget they gave us Obamacare also. I’m not stating that as a good either.


86 posted on 04/30/2015 10:46:41 AM PDT by Guardian Sebastian (Mother of God, pray for us and our country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

“For Sotomayor, apparently anything short of judicially mandated sodomy is within the justices’ constitutional prerogatives – a view that would surprise any of our nation’s founding jurists, whether Jeffersonian or Hamiltonian.”

The progressive forces feel they can safely leave that sordid task to Justices appointed by future Presidents Clinton, Bush, Kennedy, etc...


87 posted on 04/30/2015 10:48:47 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Mass murder and cannibalism are the twin sacraments of socialism - "Who-whom?"-Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut
I guess all that huntin' time with Scalia isn't resulting in more brain power.

He might as well consider the project failed. It was a noble effort.

88 posted on 04/30/2015 10:52:08 AM PDT by riri (Obama's Amerika--Not a fun place.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Wide Latina.


89 posted on 04/30/2015 10:52:13 AM PDT by jaydubya2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

The “Wise” Latina hath spoken!


90 posted on 04/30/2015 10:54:37 AM PDT by Politicalkiddo ("We must see that the world is rough and surly, and will not mind drowning a man or woman" - Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion
The Supreme Court lite off the Civil War (But was by no means the only reason) with Dred Scott v. Sandford. What has made people rely on them so much?

They are unelected, unaccountable, and have taken upon themselves the power to create law by fiat which is, as a practical matter, irreversible since the amendment process is virtually impossible.

As a result, they are for all intents and purposes our overlords. This is why they get such deference and attention.

91 posted on 04/30/2015 11:05:00 AM PDT by pepsi_junkie (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

It tells you just how ignorant she really is. If gay marriage is made legal she is in fact FORCING all state residents to pay for health benefits to gay couples given to Hetro. married couples where one works for the State.

Same with State and federal Pension benefits, SSI etc.


92 posted on 04/30/2015 11:21:13 AM PDT by VRWCarea51 (The original 1998 version)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Uhh... the issue is completely about force.


93 posted on 04/30/2015 11:23:04 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Guardian Sebastian

This woman didn’t just give us Obamacare, she FORCED it on us or pay a fine. This stupid woman doesn’t even recall that she FORCED it on us. Her lame argument doesn’t even make sense as it applies to this case.

She should be forced to marry Ruth Bader Ginsburg except that they probably already are.

Don’t worry, if you want to keep your heterosexual partner you can keep your heterosexual partner.


94 posted on 04/30/2015 11:52:28 AM PDT by Auslander154
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: MarkRegal05

The “upside” to your postulation is the eventual start of the Second American Civil War/Revolution will be upon us sooner rather than later. Turning SCOTUS into such a blatant anti-Constitution “Branch” will guarantee bloodshed on a horrific scale.


95 posted on 04/30/2015 11:56:16 AM PDT by Pox (Good Night. I expect more respect tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Auslander154

But they will force orphan children to be raised by two men or two women, or deny children the right to be raised by at least one of their true, natural parents.

THAT is what this is about.

Jesus had strong words for those who lead children astray.


96 posted on 04/30/2015 12:03:28 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: gov_bean_ counter

Didn’t Lindsy Graham vote for Sotomayor and Kagan?


97 posted on 04/30/2015 12:07:39 PM PDT by duffee (Dump the Chairman of the Mississippi Republican Party, joe nosef.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: duffee

Would not surprise me a bit. To some of our Pubbie Senators, advice and consent = rubber stamp...


98 posted on 04/30/2015 12:35:11 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Slyfox
Any member of SCOTUS who has performed a gay wedding should recuse themselves from this case.

Kagan officiated at the "marriage" of her former law clerk and his "husband".

99 posted on 04/30/2015 12:38:01 PM PDT by BlatherNaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: BlatherNaut

Do you think she would ever recuse herself?


100 posted on 04/30/2015 12:42:56 PM PDT by Slyfox (If I'm ever accused of being a Christian, I'd like there to be enough evidence to convict me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson