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 ...
But you will be forced to accommodate gay weddings. Your child will be indoctrinated on the virtues of homosexuality in public schools. You will lose tax exempt status for your churches and other organizations if they do not bow to demands. You will be sued for everything you own if you criticize or refuse to accommodate us. On and on.
What started as freedom for them in the privacy of their own bedrooms is ending as freedom for us only if we lock ourselves in our bedrooms.
Who was nominated by a mental midget in the Oval Office.
And we won’t take away anyone’s liberty by forcing a gay to marry a heterosexual.
Can you beam me up to a planet with no wise Latinas? BTW I have met a few (the wise ones) and they are not so wise. Just have a lot of folkloric bs to run by silly whites.
No kidding.
When Brain Cavities Implode
SotoMayor.. Deep in thought.
Should they Federalize Gay Marriage, then all State Laws regarding Incest, Polygamy and Age of Consent must meet a Federal Standard as well.
That is, Incestuous Marriage and Polygamous Marriage between consenting Adults must be Legalized once a Federally mandated Age of Consent is established.
When the Dam bursts, everyone drowns.
We’re just forcing you to bake cakes for them.
I’m picking out my sheep now.
am going back to the land to get my soul free ... I’ve come to lose my ‘smile’
"No one's forcing .." NOT YET! Wait.
you too sense those fawn of death?
yep, liberals are complete and total hypocrits.
They demand the freedom to choose who they can marry without government butting in, but refuse to give that same freedom to others.
This would be like blacks saying... We just want Jim Crow removed for the blacks, but Mexicans and Orientals... that’s different, we aren’t asking for them to be treated equally too!
lock up your children ... Whitey caused it!
That's next on the agenda. Gay's will have a "right" to be married and despite the arguments from stupid latina's like Sotomayor, the liberals in America and on the USSC are just DYING to force churches to marry gays.
Who gave whom freedom? on Earth? Forget It, They Forget!
“if two consenting adults can be married regardless of their gender, then why can’t three consenting adults also be married?”
They could be married. Under any ceremony they see fit
But, IMO, marriage should be completely irrelevant and unrecognized by the government for any purpose.
If someone wants to marry 50 horses in a Klingon ceremony, I don’t give a damn. As long as the government doesn’t acknowledge any marriage at all- hetero, homo, poly or horse.
always love the larger voices .... LOL ... it will not murder/kill ya, I promise.
I wouldn't be so sure she doesn't consider it her prerogative to mandate sodomy too. Maybe she just means that the court is not mandating it YET.
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.