Last evening, I was walking downtown through Salt Lake City with my fiancee to my home in the avenues. As we walked, there was much making merry from the gay pride community because of the legalization of gay marriage in all 50 states. They seemed to be enjoying themselves; there was music, smiling, celebrating.
While I'm a straight man who subscribes to traditional, conservative values in my personal life, I have strong feelings regarding the government's role in this whole marriage debate, and they're not what you might think.
You see, I would love for the government to get out of marriage altogether. I believe that marriage, as a contract between two people, should not be administrated by anyone except the governing parties, with the exception of a lawsuit within divorce.
(I believe that the cultural acceptance of divorce has caused the government to become more and more involved in marriage. While this is a topic for another time, I'll just say here that the cultural tendency to not keep commitments sits at the root of this problem, of divorcing for minimal reasons and not working our marriages out.)
On Friday, June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States of America greatly overstepped their bounds and struck down laws in several states defining marriage between one man and one woman. Similarly, the day before, they redefined the Affordable Care Act -again- offering changes to how that law is executed in all 50 states.
In both these cases, states right's were viciously disregarded. Even President Barack Obama, a very left-winged thinker and governor, has affirmed that while he would like to see these changes in all 50 states, the right to enact such decisions ultimately lies with the states.
I take issue not with the repugnant
morality of these decisions (again, a different argument for a different day), but with the highest judicial body now legislating from the bench.
In essence, they told all 50 states they must issue marriage licenses to any couple, gay or straight, who asks for them.
You might argue that because the judicial system issues these licenses, then that's their perogative. You might also argue that the Constitution delivers the right to liberty, that homosexuals are a protected class under many state laws, and that the Court has repeatedly upheld marriage as a human right.
All this is fine. You're probably correct in these arguments. If the court had used this logic, it's decision might be a little more praiseworthy.
What was incorrect was the controversial, 5-4 decision, based on emotional logic and an extremely loose interpretation of the 14th ammendment, which doesn't even fall under the bill of rights and was written to free slaves. Also incorrect was the direct disregard to the fact that Congress has not enacted any legislation at all regarding marraige, and specifically made a point to leave the execution of a health insurance exchange up to the states.
To the five justices on the Supreme Court who causes these changes: shame on you. All of you.
This decision sets a nefarious precident for all future Court proceedings. This court, where such terrible decisions were almost never made, has become like all the rest of the courts: corrupt servants of special interests, driven by popular opinion instead of rule of law.
I personally hope our next president can appoint better justices than those who now occupy that High Bench, who will put rule of law and the definition thereof above all else, even at the expense of their own popularity.
*This article was originally published on the author's personal blog on June 27, 2015*
No comments:
Post a Comment