Re: The Devil On JOA!?

"kstahl" <ktsahl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:056dnRWcSOUnnfHfRVn-uA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>> At least Conservatives don't use the judiciary to create new laws, 
>> something our Constitution reserved to the legislature.
>> 
> 
> That is a phony argument created by Conservatives. Judges interpret laws

>  according to their understanding regardless of politics. It 
> conservatives who want to laws to be interpreted in ways that are 
> favorable to the conservative viewpoint and whereever possible they want

> to create laws that will propagate conservative nonsense in ways that 
> fly against the intent of the U.S. Constitituon.
> 
> Recent case is the Shaivo matter. Conservatives were claiming foul when 
> both conservative and liberal judges interpreted the laws fairly and 
> based on the actual laws themselves while conservatives felt that the 
> religious viewpoint should have outweighed the actual laws.
> 
> There has never been a new law created by the judiciary. The U.S. 
> Constitution simply does not allow that. Laws are passed by congress and

> signed by the president. However, laws must pass the litmus test of the 
> Constitution and where they violate the spirit and intent of the 
> constitution the laws are declared void. But to claim that the judiciary

> creates new laws is simply silly.

Here's an example of what I meant. The Massachusetts Supreme Court 
recently ruled that the centuries-old marriage law was found to
discriminate against gays, and they issued an order which in effect
blackmailed the Massachusetts legislature to rewrite the marriage laws.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/18/same***.marriage.ruling/

Since when does one part of our government (judiciary) issue ultimatums
to another arm of the government (legislative)? What happened to the
Constitutional provision of separation of powers? Activist liberal judges 
are running amuck, 'interpreting' age-old laws with meanings never
intended.

-- 
John Richards