Same-Sex Marriage. "We should not even be in this debate." Ron PaulSubmitted by Realdeal on Tue, 04/14/2009 - 21:04
Same sex marriage recently became legal in the state of Iowa due to run away, handpicked judges who have no knowledge of the Iowa Constitution and the law. Our elected officials are looking away, too timid to do their duty. Professor Herb Titus analyzes the Iowa Supreme Court same-gender marriage decision on this WHO podcast from today. For those who have an interest in this controversial issue, you MUST listen to this podcast. It is excellent. It took me 6 minutes to load.
Four states now allow same sex marriage. Be warned that this issue will make its way to your state sooner than later. You should be taking action right now before this is FORCED onto your state by similar hand picked, lawless judges. Believe me, Iowa is proof that your elected officials will not listen to their constituents.
Of the 5 comments which I added, and my original post, the word judge or judicial branch was included no less than 22 times. The intention of this post was to discuss judicial tyranny. Apparently the term "same sex marriage" is some kind of trigger or hot button for people.
For my part, I believe I could have gone about this differently. Anisha's post and follow up comment is proof of that. http://www.dailypaul.com/node/83075#comment-906572 But not even Anisha's post has remained on topic.
If I were to have entitled this post, "Judges Gone Wild- Coming Real Soon to Your State," could we have kept the focus on the judicial aspect? Or if I had written "Guns Banned - Coming Real Soon to Your State," could we have debated how judges are writing the law?
Somehow I doubt it. Except for a couple of comments about Republic vs. Democracy with regard to rights of minorities, and a comment from spacehabits, this thread morphed into a discussion on the human sexual condition.
But the comment that bothered me the most was the comment that challenged my decision to post this on a "libertarian web site." If that is the case, then perhaps the Daily Paul has outlived its title and should be called the Daily Libertarian.
At least Ron Paul was able to stay on topic and not be distracted or hijacked into discussing "who's a homophobe and who is not."
From Ron Paul's statement, "Resisting Judicial Tyranny"......
"The Founders never intended for a handful of unelected, unaccountable federal judges to decide social policy for the entire nation. Just as Texas is not required to recognize medical licenses, law licenses, or driving licenses from other states, it ought not be forced to recognize gay marriage licenses granted elsewhere. Already some same-sex couples have sued in federal court to force the nationwide recognition of their marriages, so the Marriage Protection Act is needed to preserve states’ rights. Federal judges have flouted the will of the American people for too long, acting as imperial legislators instead of jurists."
Let's face it, even libertarians are what they often accuse others of, guilty of changing the focus of what the topic is for their own agenda. I appreciate all the comments though, even if we didn't come to addressing the judicial aspect.
"We should not even be in this debate." Ron Paul
Let this thread fade away.