Unconstitutional. The Supreme Court’s liberal justices keep using that word. I don’t think it means what they think it means.
The latest miscarriage by the justices came Monday when the court refused to intervene to protect Alabama’s right to keep homosexual “marriages” illegal.
The case is the usual story, with a federal judge ignoring state law. On Monday, the Supremes let the lower court’s ruling stand, allowing homosexuals to seek “marriage” licenses and force the state’s governments to recognize their perversion as protected behavior.
The tide seems to be going in an obvious direction as the majority of states now, often against voters’ will, recognize the fetishes of two women or two men as somehow being the equivalent of matrimony, for which the government will grant tax breaks and other special privileges.
Not least of those privileges will be the right to sue the pants off anyone who holds traditional beliefs about marriage. It’s already happened in several states; to deny that it will happen federally once homosexual “marriage” is the law of the land is just naive.
Proponents of homosexual “marriage” like to say that it won’t hurt their own traditional marriages, so what’s the harm?
The harm of course comes from the effect of forcing society at large to endorse what amounts to a sexual fetish as normal. Not only does it open the way for other, even more disturbing, “marriages” from polygamy to child brides, but by changing the central purpose of marriage from the raising of children in a stable environment to a celebration of abnormal sexual behavior, the courts guarantee the decline of traditional marriage.
Simply stated, most anybody from teen to adult knows you don’t need to be married to have sex. And if marriage is being redefined as simply being about sex and government privileges, most sane people will come to the realization that everything that was special about marriage is gone. So why bother getting married? The institution won’t likely go away, but expect it to decline sharply as queer “marriage” clears the last legal hurdles.
Expect a concurrent rise in unwed parents and one-parent households, along with a rise in abortions (because children don’t matter) and an overall decline in births.
Queer “marriage” may not affect your marriage, but it’s going to devastate your children’s chances to get married and have a happy life.
Only two justices, Scalia and Thomas, raised objections to the court’s decision Monday, with Thomas blasting the court for not doing its job and deciding an important constitutional issue.
He also criticized his fellow justices for looking “the other way as yet another federal district judge casts aside state laws.”
“This acquiescence may well be seen as a signal of the court’s intended resolution of that question,” Thomas wrote in an opinion joined by Scalia.
Alabama may yet have the final say on what happens in its own state, however, as Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore issued an order, obeyed by most counties, not to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples.