The Supreme Court vs. The Constitution


Opinion among many news commentators as well as actual news reporters is that the Supreme Court will once again try to avoid making the difficult decision, as it did with the “Obamacare” ruling, by finding a technicality that allows them to do nothing about Proposition 8 or DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). As Sally Kohn, one of the ‘opinionators’ admits: “The Supreme Court will either ride the wave or try to block it or dodge it, but ultimately it doesn’t really matter. The tide has irrevocably turned.” (NOTE: The headline (see “Reference”) for this Fox News Opinion piece, because Fox News vocally opposes same-sex marriage, made no attempt to be fair or balanced by unfairly implying that because Chief Justice Roberts has a cousin who is gay it will sway his opinion.)

Ms. Kohn is right that the tide has turned. The majority of the public now supports the right of same-sex couples to marry and obtain all the benefits and rights that go along with a legal marriage but, at the same time, Ms. Kohn is very wrong! It does matter a great deal what the Supreme Court says when they make their ruling. Even the most Conservative Justice will have a hard time dismissing the FACT that to deny legal marriage based on gender, race or sexual preference is clearly unconstitutional. Not only is it unconstitutional now, because public opinion has turned to favor same-sex marriage, the opposing view has always been unconstitutional.

The argument used to be that because the majority of the California voters voted for Proposition 8, those who opposed it will have to live with it and because other states have adopted DOMA or DOMA-like provisions into their state constitutions, it is legal in those states to refuse marriage to same sex couples. Those were false arguments! Public opinion on this issue does not matter nor do biblical admonitions!

The U.S. Constitution overrules state laws that are unconstitutional at the Federal level and if our Supreme Court Justices have the intestinal fortitude to interpret the Constitution correctly they can do nothing but overturn Proposition 8 and DOMA.

This is not, as most media outlets have described it, a “gay rights” issue; this is an issue of equal justice under the law for all American citizens, without regard to their sexual identity or their choice of a marriage partner.

REFERENCE: Opinion: Marriage equality, the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice’s cousin

Gay Marriage in the spotlight


The chairman of the Republican National Committee, Reince (pronounced: Rence) Priebus stated on NBC’s Meet the Press Sunday:

“I think that most Americans agree that in this country, the legal and historic and the religious union marriage has to have the definition of one man and one woman.”

It seems to me that Mr. Priebus is being misled by his own prejudices and is misleading the Republican Party with those prejudices.

Obviously the legal definition of marriage does not HAVE to be one man and one woman. Several states have now proved that to be the case: States that allow Gay Marriage or some form of legal domestic partnerships.

This, of course, knocks the “historic” argument out of the box unless you don’t consider recent history to be part of history.

Even the “religious union marriage” argument is specious. Many religions and most individual churches have come to the unspoken understanding that marriage is not about procreation; if it was, post-menopausal woman and men with low or nonexistent sperm counts would not be able to get a church wedding. I’ve never yet heard of a church requiring a physicians certificate that states that the couple being married are ABLE to have children. Aside from that, basing marriage on the ability to bring a new life into the world discounts the fact that love and caring are actually the cornerstones of all successful marriages. That alone should be the deciding factor behind every church sanctioned marriage ceremony.

What Mr. Priebus is really saying is that HE doesn’t support gay marriage. That is, of course, his right and feeling like that, HE should never enter into a gay marriage; and if he has any children who turn out to be gay, it would be far better for he, she or them to be sent to live with a more understanding substitute parent; if not, they will be subject to a life of loneliness.

Gay is not a disease, not a disability, not a curse, not “curable” and not abnormal. Gay is the way that some people ARE and they can never be any other way! They were created by the same “force” (call it “God” if you like) that created everyone else. To deny a gay couple the right to marry and deny them the legal rights that go with marriage can be considered nothing but cruel.

At least Obama got SOMETHING right!


President Obama has “evolved” to the view that everyone really IS equal — including gay people who fall in love. I can understand why Americans would have to “evolve” to that position — the majority of Americans have been brainwashed by various religious institutions to believe in their irrational teachings. It takes something special (like a run for reelection) to clear their head.

The Christian bible has approximately 7 passages spread out between a few different “books” that seem to condemn homosexual relations. I could go into the arguments used to refute these apparent condemnations but there is no need to waste my or your time beating a dead horse. People who believe that homosexuals are inherently bad people who made a bad “choice” (the “choice” to be gay) are incapable of thinking anything else and are too brainwashed to understand that gay is not a choice or a disease or a mental disorder.

If there is anyone out there reading this who is capable of facing facts, here’s a documentary to watch: Fish Out Of Water; Fish Out Of Water is available at Netflix(R) (; just type the movie title in the search box and press the ENTER key). Fish out of Water is a partially animated documentary that interviews theologians, and ordinary people, refutes the biblical condemnations and, most interestingly, points out that the ‘Apostle Paul’ was the author of every passage that condemns homosexuality.

Since most (not all) homophobes are suppressing their own homosexual tendencies, one might conclude that Paul fits into that category … one just MIGHT conclude that!


CNN Politics: Obama announces he supports same-sex marriage

Fish Out Of Water: A documentary film by director Ky Dickens.

Same-Sex Marriage Changes Nothing


A popular argument in favor of same sex marriage is: ‘everyone else is doing it so we should too.’

Does that make sense to you?

This is a social issue confronting a society that is basically democratic in nature and in tradition and what Argentina and Mexico , among others, are doing is hardly relevant.

The bottom line is: this is another place where the Federal Government has taken away Constitutionally mandated states rights; however it happened so long ago and is so entrenched in Federal law that the fact that marriage should be decided by the community or by the state is now moot. So let’s ignore that!

Personally, I think that any two adults should be allowed to wed, without regard to their race, gender, religious or political beliefs and I believe this will soon be the accepted norm in the U.S.

The Federal Government certainly wants to maintain it’s investment in the business of controlling marriage through tax law, Social Security and etc. and there is no legal basis for rejecting same-sex marriage.

Some marriages will be “blessed” by both the state and by various religious entities and others will be purely civil marriages — other’s will be considered common law marriages authorized by neither church or state (but, in the end, regulated by the state). That’s the way it is now — the only difference is that once this legal challange has been resolved, some of those marriages will be male-male and some female-female.

The only opponents to same sex marriage are those who oppose it based on their religious convictions — they will continue to oppose it until the end of time, and it is their right to do so, and they will continue to issue legal challanges but they will be (and should be) quickly struck down.

This country is known for religious freedom but it will never be a theocracy.