BNN provides English-language US and world news, analysis and opinion from all over the Internet. We strive for high standards, ethical behavior, and the presentation of multiple responsible points of view.
|
Get More Traffic For Your Blog! Blog Explosion brings hundreds of interested visitors to your blog - without costing you a cent. BNN News Archive Page |
Monday, March 14, 2005
Harvard Defines Marriage...Yeh Or Ney? Gays and lesbians are entitled to marry under the California Constitution, a judge here ruled today in a decision that opponents to same-sex marriage vowed to appeal.There are two things that scare me about this whole same sex marriage thing (none of which has to do with homophobia); the blurring of gender distinctions and judges who hold their personal opinions higher than the rule of law, the Constitution they give lip service to, the legislative process, the will of the majority, holiness and righteousness, American traditions, and common sense. The blurring of gender distinctions “Women, you can have it all – a loving man, devoted husband, loving children, a fabulous career.” These words from Jada Pinket Smith (wife of Will Smith) who, during a speech at Harvard, so offended the BGLTSA (Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, and Supporters Alliance) that Smith had to launch an immediate PR damage control campaign to apologize for excluding gay relationships from her statements. Scarier than the prospect of these students one day seated on a court bench are the imminent speech codes which will force us to assimilate gender neutral language into American culture. The days are coming when your son or daughter will meet the human of its dreams. Judges with Partiality It has been well documented that Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Chief Justice Margaret Marshall promised attorney Mary Bonauto in advance that her lawsuit, Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, would pass the courts ruling. You can’t do that as a Judge! And according to an indictment calling for the removal of Marshall filed by Massachusetts State Rep. Emile Goguen, the chief justice violated the state’s Code of Judicial Conduct by failing to recuse herself from the Goodridge case due to her partiality as revealed above as well as during a pro-gay marriage speech delivered in May 1999 to the Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association. I lament we will always have a measure of activist Judges so long as we place humans on the bench, that’s obvious. What troubles those of us on the right is their unrestrained authority which reaches past the legislature and past the expressed will of the people, nevertheless I think SSM really is dead on arrival. It seems we have forgotten that even the highly concentrated Democratic State Legislature in Massachusetts voted for a Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage on March 11, 2004 which will likely be vindicated by voter Referendum to follow judging by the overwhelming support for Rep. Goguen, Massachusetts’ notorious opponent of the SSM ruling who was since reelected in a a landslide (71%). But the troubling part of this L.A. Times article was when “Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office today declined to comment on Kramer’s ruling. ‘It’s up to the courts to decide. We have this decision today, and we’ll see where this decision ultimately leads us,’ said Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Margita Thompson.” So long as America is defined by the people, we’re cool, it’s when American culture is defined by Harvard when I begin to worry. Michael Gallaugher blogs at Christian Conservative. Blogger News Network is advertiser-supported, and your visits to our advertisers help BNN to meet its expenses. Help keep us afloat! posted by BNN Archive at 5:50 PM |
Subscribe to BNN and get a daily bulletin of all our news postings. Interested in writing for BNN? Want information on our news service? Contact The Editor Writing for BNN BNN Editorial Policies Previous Posts
|
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home