Saturday, February 28, 2015

The Supreme Court should punt on Same‐sex Marriage

(My new American Thinker post)

We understand that The Supreme Court will make a decision in a few months regarding same-sex marriage.  

In fact, Justice Ginsberg recently said that the country is ready for "gay marriage". I guess we know how she is going to vote! It's a bit like the home plate umpire saying that the country is ready for the home team to win the World Series.

Let's hope that five justices will not give us the "same-sex marriage version of Roe v. Wade". It will be awful and divide the country even more than we are divided now. A same-sex marriage decision based on five justices finding a justification in the 14th amendment will not settle the issue. Such a decision will poison future nominations to the Supreme Court, in much the same way that Roe v. Wade has!

I agree with Heather Wilhelm:
In June, as USA Today recently put it, the United States Supreme Court “will resolve the national debate over same-sex marriage once and for all.”
That’s a pretty big mandate for nine unelected, intelligent-yet-flawed human beings...
Yes, it is. This is a lot to ask of an institution that was not created to resolve issues like these.

So let me send this idea to the justices and let's hope that five will adopt it. I think that Thomas, Alito, and Scalia are with me. I'm confident about Roberts but Kennedy worries me a bit. I will assume that the four Democrat appointments can't wait to put their names on a decision that creates what they call "marriage equality".

The Court should write an opinion like this, with all of the "legal language" that goes with it:

Dear Citizens,
You are asking us to opine on an issue that is not in the U.S. Constitution.  
You want us to find a definition of marriage but we don't find the word or anything in the historical writings that the Founding Fathers intended us to settle issues of that nature. We do see over and over that the Founding Fathers wanted these issues to be settled by voters, as it is pointed out in the 10th Amendment.
Therefore, 5 of us have a simple admission to make:  We don't have a clue about the definition of marriage. Yes, we don't know. Did you think that we're supposed to know everything just because we wear this robe?
The institution of marriage has been around longer than the U.S. and has always been a "state matter" in our nation's history.   

Don't expect us to make the tough call that your politicians don't want to make. You settle it and keep us out of it.Furthermore, we want you the people to decide it. Argue and scream at each other in your state legislatures. Force your elected officials to vote "yes or no" on changing marriage.  

Maybe I'm expecting too much. Nevertheless, it'd be nice to know that five Justices in the Supreme Court actually understand what their constitutional role is.

P.S. You can hear my show (CantoTalk) or follow me on Twitter.  We discussed this topic on Saturday's show:

Tags: Internet freedom, Same sex marriage & judges  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

"Communism 2.0", a new book by Ileana Johnson, economist and author

Tags: "Communism 2.0" by Ileana Johnson  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!




Check Out Politics Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Silvio Canto Jr on BlogTalkRadio

Search This Blog