- BitsBlog - http://bitsblog.theconservativereader.com -

Wrong, Andrew. (Constitutional Amendment, Part One)

Sullivan today, is predictably peeing his pants [1].

What an idiot.

No, Andrew, the President didn’t declare war, he answered the challanges to our culture from idiots such as yourself, and correctly so.

“After more than two centuries of American jurisprudence and millennia of human experience, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization,” the president said in urging Congress to approve such an amendment. “Their action has created confusion on an issue that requires clarity.”

Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all. Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife. The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage.

America is a free society, which limits the role of government in the lives of our citizens. This commitment of freedom, however, does not require the redefinition of one of our most basic social institutions. Our government should respect every person, and protect the institution of marriage. There is no contradiction between these responsibilities. We should also conduct this difficult debate in a manner worthy of our country, without bitterness or anger.

You accuse Mr. Bush of tamping with the constitution.
You’re the one doing the tampering, Andrew. How is it this wasn’t a constitutional issue for over 200 years?
How is it one of the authors of that constitution, arguably the most liberal of the lot, Thomas Jefferson, thought homosexual behavior a HANGING offense against society? How is it you ignore the messge keeps getting ignored?

I think you’ll find him to be far MORE popular because of this. The bottom line here is you’re wrong.
Period.

Blogger Captain Ed adds:

However, it still should be left to the people to determine the laws under which they will be governed. The Constitution was crafted to require this process, and judges only reviewed the laws to make sure that they did not directly contradict the Constitution itself. Since the 1950s, for better and for worse, the American judiciary has taken it upon itself to craft its own legislation from the bench in the guise of intellectually murky “interpretations” of Constitutional provisions, invoking emanations from penumbras in order to create what the justices saw as a greater social good. But that’s not their job — that’s the job of the Legislature. Judicial activism is an arrogation of power away from elected representatives, who are held responsible to the people on a regular basis, and into the hands of those who hold lifetime appointments, and whose decisions cannot be overruled except by other judges.

Other comments:


Greatest Jeneration

Slings and Arrows [2]