Re: The Devil On JOA!?

"kstahl" <ktsahl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:PdWdncKt16rzovHfRVn-hA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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. 

There is no suddenly discovered "need" to provide for gay 'marriage'.
If there is a need for new laws, only the legislature can take the
initiative.

>  Times have changed and the 
> law had become outdated by normative societal standards of today.

Old-fa****oned marriage (man-woman only) is outdated? The fact 
remains that in the past few years most states have overwhelmingly 
passed new laws defining marriage as being between a man and a woman,
as has the federal government. And even the liberal John Kerry agreed
with that sentiment. AFAIK, only the state of Massachusetts has legalized
gay marriage. So how can you call something that is so far out in left
field
a "normative societal standard"?

-- 
John Richards