Re: The Devil On JOA!?

John Richards wrote:
> 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.
> 

The judges rightfully decided that when the previous law had been 
written it did not properly take into account the possibility that there 
would be a need to provide for gay marriage. Times have changed and the 
law had become outdated by normative societal standards of today.

Adultery used to be considered a felony in many states. In some states 
those laws are still on the books. If they were enforced stringently, 
there wouldn't be enough prisons to hold those felons. Even *** outside 
of marriage use to be considered at least a misdemeanor or not a felony 
in many states. In most cases these laws are simply ignored and if 
someone tries to bring a case to court it is normally thrown out. The 
legislature is very slow to act on these things but the judicial system 
is more attuned to prevailing sentiment. By and large, only xtians are 
opposed to laws permitting official recognition of gay unions and the 
practicing xtians represent a minority in our society but tend to make a 
lot of noise.

Shall I start laying out all of the other archaic laws that have been 
effectively overturned by judicial decisions when legislatures are so 
en***bered that they unable to change laws in a timely manner? But no 
one would accuse a judge of writing legislation for not sending someone 
to jail for carrying around an ice cream cone in their back pocket in 
Kentucky.

However, to say that a judicial decision that effectively overturns an 
outdated law or that violates the constitution is creating legislation 
from the bench is a silly argument and really not anything that can be 
taken seriously by those who understand how the judiciary works. It is 
just that on certain laws where xtians feel that their opinions outweigh 
the court that the court should do as xtians dictate rather then in 
accordance with the judge's experience and knowledge.