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 ...
Thursdays and Saturdays ... Ruby Throated Sparrow ...
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.
nope and nope is a lie, as is, nobody is wanting to change a life or America .... as you knew ....
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 ...
Eagle/Dove Xzins!
Let us not forget they gave us Obamacare also. I’m not stating that as a good either.
“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...
He might as well consider the project failed. It was a noble effort.
Wide Latina.
The “Wise” Latina hath spoken!
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.
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.
Uhh... the issue is completely about force.
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.
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.
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.
Didn’t Lindsy Graham vote for Sotomayor and Kagan?
Would not surprise me a bit. To some of our Pubbie Senators, advice and consent = rubber stamp...
Kagan officiated at the "marriage" of her former law clerk and his "husband".
Do you think she would ever recuse herself?
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.