Judicial tyranny (You may now kiss the, um, “bride”)

brideWhy bother having elections?  We have these unelected law school graduates in black robes regularly stomping all over the will of the people and their elected officials.  Want to make a rule or a law?  Run it past a judge first. 

The judicial branch was established by our Founding Fathers as a referee on the executive and legislative branch.  SOMEONE had to ensure those two acted in accordance with the elements of The Constitution. The problem has become that judges are simply making stuff up that aligns with the platform or wishes of their political patrons.

In 1973, a portion of The Constitution meant to prevent soldiers and police from just kicking down your door and searching your place willy-nilly was magically transformed into a “Right” to taxpayer-subsidized abortion.  No elected officials debated that or voted on it.  Unelected judges legislated it.

In May 2012, 61 percent of North Carolina voters agreed to codify the very reasonable, highly-logical statement that Marriage shall be defined as being between a man and a woman.  Right in line with the laws of nature.  

The liberal hordes — determined to erase all gender lines — did what they normally do when they can’t win at the ballot box: SUE.  While being cheered on by the drive-by media, lefties shopped around for just the right federal judge.  nice

While that was going on, the US Supreme Court declined to hear challenges to the same-sex laws in North Carolina and other states — saying that it was an issue to be decided within the states.  But that didn’t stop federal judge Max Cogburn of Asheville — a Massachusetts native appointed first by Clinton and elevated by Obama to his current post — from sticking his nose into the affair:

[…] “The issue before this court is neither a political issue nor a moral issue,” Cogburn stated in his ruling. “It is a legal issue and it is clear as a matter of what is now settled law in the Fourth Circuit that North Carolina laws prohibiting same-sex marriage, refusing to recognize same-sex marriages originating elsewhere, and/or threatening to penalize those who would solemnize such marriages, are unconstitutional.”[…]

Really?  What part of The Constitution does that? 

Didn’t we just have national news where New Jersey didn’t recognize a concealed-carry permit from Pennsylvania?

(For those of you telling us how important it is to elect Republican senators, think about this:  Cogburn got approved by the US Senate for his current position by a vote of 96-0.  That means NO Republican opposition.  Not even from our “Republican” senator Richard Burr.) 

judgeWe are really slipping into dangerous territory when unaccountable ideologues can wipe out, on the basis of personal beliefs,  a law approved by the people and their elected representatives.

Don’t think this stops here.  Wait until someone refuses to lease their property for a gay wedding or reception.  Wait until a preacher refuses to officiate a gay wedding, or allow his or her church to be used for a gay wedding and reception.  Businesses around the country are being threatened and fined by government agents all over the country for daring to refuse to conform.  

The Book of Genesis, with the retelling of the events at Sodom and Gomorrah, makes God’s feelings about homosexual practices pretty doggone clear.  Many Christians see The Bible as something to be taken literally.  Is it the place of the government — especially unelected, unaccountable government agents — to tell people they have to set aside their religious beliefs documented in thousands-of-years old scripture or the sake of modern-day political correctness?  What about the First Amendment protections for church-going folks? 

A good way to get around this might be to consider weeding government out of the institution of marriage.  (I know, I know — good luck with getting government’s tentacles off of something.)  Statists have taken a sacred ceremony before God and turned it into a bureaucratic exercise akin to registering a real estate deed or getting a driver license. 

When is enough going to be ENOUGH?  How long will we sit quietly by while the statist, progressive hordes rip this country to shreds? 

28 thoughts on “Judicial tyranny (You may now kiss the, um, “bride”)

  1. Another softball for Thommy to hit out of the park – if Karl will let him. This ruling should put Thommy up by 10 points on the Sock Puppet but somehow the GOP will blow this one too.

    1. You’ll remember that Tricky Dick Burr voted to allow gays to serve openly in the military, weakening our military so no Republican opposition there. Tillis argued that when the consititutional amendment defining marriage was decided overwhelmingly by the voters, the smartass looked down on conservatives as backwards and said that the amendment would be reversed. This was a statement that was made in direct opposition to conservatives and follows the line of his political lover Karl Rove to “destroy conservatives”

      1. “This was a statement that was made in direct opposition to conservatives and follows the line of his political lover Karl Rove to “destroy conservatives””
        I see this as a statement that continued the flow of Karl (Citizens United) Rove money to the Tillis campaign and to try to broaden the GOP voter base.

  2. The Washington GOP establishment has been pushing for gay marriage for years. They will not allow Tillis to make an issue of this radical judge’s arrogant decision. They would rather lose the election than take a stand for the Constitution and morality. Burr is also secretly for gay marriage. There is no hope for conservatives in the NC GOP. The sooner the GOP dissolves, the better.

    1. We also have to remember that back before the primary, the leading money man of the gay ”rights” movement held a major fundraiser for Thom Tillis in New York City, and that Tillis skipped his own county GOP convention to go out to Las Vegas to hobnob with another political groups pushing gay marriage.

      Yes, this would be a great issue for a principle-driven GOP nominee, but that is NOT what we have in Thom Tillis. Yes, it is an issue that could fire up our troops if we can a candidate who would use it, but unfortunately we do not have such a nominee.

  3. This is the game changer. Tillis can stand strong for the voters of North Carolina and challenge the judge’s decision. Voters will be lined up to vote for Tillis just as we all lined up outside Chik-Fil-A to support the right to make up our own minds! The judge has negated the voters of North Carolina and Thom Tillis can show the voters that he stands for them. Tillis can seize the opportunity and join our Senator Burr as conservative stalwarts in the United States Senate. Thom Tillis has the Senate seat within his grasp but he must stand tall for the voters who supported the Marriage Amendment. The voters expect no less. Seize the moment, Senator Tillis. Seize the moment!

    1. Republicans (Tillis & Co.) have a size problem. LGBT & Co. represent 3% of the population. Republicans have been PSYOPed / hoodwinked into imagineering that minority into something much bigger, all at the expense of the 61% ‘normals’ who voted in favor of the pro-natural marriage amendment to the NC Constitution. They seem hell-bent on throwing the 61% base under the bus … Raleigh Republicans are trying to ‘seem, rather than to be’ loyal to the base that will either save or sink them.

  4. Preacher: Bubba, do you take Elwood to be your lawfully wedded husband?
    Bubba: But Preacher, Elwood is my wife.
    Preacher: What?
    Bubba: Elwood will be my wife.
    Preacher: But Elwood has a beard!
    Bubba: I like a manly girl.
    Preacher: Shouldn’t she shave her beard for the wedding photos?
    Bubby: Just get us hitched.
    Preacher: (My daddy wanted me to take over the family farm. I should have listened.)

  5. Observation: Karl Rove seems of late to be more hated here in NC than Barack … and that is saying something. It may be his supported RINO candidates need to disassociate from him, if they are interested in winning. He’s poison.

  6. The very end of the article says it all. Get government out of marriage completely. Government has no business deciding who can or cannot marry. There is no reason the government should collect fees from marriage. If two people want to marry, the two of them should sign a contract with each other for said purpose. Those with religious convictions could have their priest/pastor perform a ceremony. Get government out of marriage period!

  7. It doesn’t matter what you say about this issue.The courts are far left and are only going to get worse.Texas is going to be a Blue state and that is a fact.California was once a Red state.When Texas turns Blue( NC is even trending Blue.Obama’s approval rating is higher in NC than most of the other red states).there will never be another Republican president bar a miracle.A democrat president will pack the Supreme Court with far left radicals and the federal appeals courts will be a joke.And even if there is a republican President you see how far that has gotten conservatives with the court.The far left federal courts will overturn all legislation they choose.The only way to stop them is to change the system.Make any ruling the courts come up with able to be overturned by 3/5ths vote of Congress, and stop giving federal judges lifetime appointments.I don’t see any other peaceful solution.

    1. Start impeaching and removing judges for abuse of power when they legislate from the bench. You only have to do one to make the rest of them get the message.

      As to ”red” and ”blue” states, I refuse to let the leftwing media assign political colors to parties by using their terminology, especially when they try to assign to Democrats blue, which is and has been the color of the right beginning with the British Conservative Party centuries ago, and adopted officially all around the world by parties of the right who have officially adopted colors, and to assign to Republicans red, which has been the color of the left, officially adopted by leftwing parties all over the world since at least the time of Karl Marx in the mid 1800s. Trying to ”reverse the colors” politically is an outrage from the media. I never use that distorted political color scam of the media myself.

  8. Want to know about the two Fourth Circuit judges who supported gay marriage? One was appointed by George W. Bush. The other was appointed as a District Judge by George W. Bush at the recommendation of Lindsay Graham. Then Graham got Obama to appoint him to the Fourth Circuit! Folks, there is Republican blood all over this crime. Not to mention Kennedy and Roberts on the Supreme Court. Yes, this could be the winning issue for Tillis, but the DC GOP Establishment won’t allow him to touch it. Very sad.

    1. I think you touch on a very important issue. If we got a GOP president in 2016, could we trust the recommendations of Tricky Dick Burr or Toll Road Thom for judgeships?

      1. Raphael, you cannot trust a Republican President for sure. Remember when George H.W. Bush swore on a stack of Bibles that the totally unknown David Souter was a conservative? Right. He turned out to be one of the most liberal justices in the Supreme Court’s history. Bush outright lied to us, just like he did about raising taxes and, as a result, we’ve been saddled with the Clintons ever since. The Bush name should be excised from the Republican lexicon.

        1. I would trust the appointments of a President Ted Cruz and probably those of a President Scott Walker.

  9. Come on.. Most who support same sex marriage didn’t even bother running opposition to the amendment because they knew it was unconstitutional and would be struck down. On the other hand you had Rev. Harris and and other social conservatives rallying the troops to go vote for it. The result was an election outcome that has no basis in reality. Poll after poll shows that the majority of North Carolinians (including the majority of Republicans) either support same sex marriage or want the government out of marriage entirely.

    Conservative lawmakers, conservative judges, and others were warning that passing the amendment would undermine existing and effective law (NCGS 51.1-2) and would be overturned, but Harris and others were to busy feeding their egos to listen. http://equalitymatters.org/factcheck/201205020001

    Aside from the hot button issue of same sex marriage, Cogburn’s ruling on the case before him was the correct legal ruling.

    The founders of the United States didn’t create a Democracy for this very reason. If the majority decides to pass a bad law then there are checks and balances to reverse it.

    1. Unconstitutional? Horsehockey! It is radical judges legislating from the bench who grossly distort the Constitution who say it is unconstitutional. Those abusers of power need to be removed from office. The framers of our Constitution and Bill of Rights are probably turning over in their graves our what these pompous power-mad demagogues on the bench are doing to their documents.

      1. Washington probably is turning over in his grave at the thought of Americans having ask permission of the state and get a license to be married. He didn’t have to do that.

        What’s even worse is that it isn’t liberals pushing for the encroachment of the state on a religious act, it’s “conservatives.”

        And to make sure you understand the issue, the ruling by Cogburn had NOTHING to do with same sex marriage or the constitutionality of Amendment One. His ruling was simply following the law on a suit that was filed purely for political reasons and had no legal grounds. Just as with Amendment One, the people behind this knew it would be thrown out when they filed it, but they did it anyway.

  10. If the judge overturns the voters on the marriage amendment I guess the judge can remove a candidate elected by the voters.

    1. I think it is interesting how Georgia tried to handle this back in the 1790s with a decision of the US Supreme Court that did not sit well with them. One house of the Georgia legislature passed a bill to make it a capital felony, punishable by death without benefit of clergy, for any federal official to come into the state to attempt to enforce that decision. Unfortunately, the bill did not make it through the other house of the legislature, so we could not see how that would have worked out.

      I admire their sentiments, however. To preserve our liberties, we need to crush the tyranny of the judiciary.

  11. Will Greg Brannon run against Burr in 2016 or do we just continue to accept non-constitutional government?

    1. Somebody needs to run against Tricky Dick after he has completely gone native in DC and especially after he helped finance those really nasty dirty tricks in the Mississippi primary. Tricky Dick is just not acceptable. I keep hoping he will retire and go take his payday on K Street.

    2. I doubt Brannon has much political future. He alienated the “establishment Republicans” and last time I checked there are more of them than the other kind. It is tough to start campaigning when there is ill will from the get go.

      1. Actually, if it is out of state Rove dollars doing the voting, instead of people, then there seem to be more of those dollars, as bought the nomination for Tilli$. However, as to actual active Republican, the establishment is in short supply. Take a look at the straw polls of the delegates and alternates at the county and Congressional District GOP conventions around the state this spring. I do not know of any Tillis won. All of them I am aware of he lost by wide margins. One in the east, Tillis even ran fourth, behind Brannon, Harris, and Alexander. In his own home county, Tillis’ allies had to cancel the straw poll so he would not be embarrassed by losing it.

        No, what we need is to demand that Rove, the NRSC, and the other outsiders stay out of our primary, and let North Carolinians chose our nominee.

  12. Finally NC has arrived in the 21st century. There is NO reason (and never has been) that consenting adults who love and care for each other should not be married.

Comments are closed.