Five Grossly Un-American Justices Ruled Against Traditional Marriage
The word “family” as we and others around the world know it will soon disappear from the daily lexicon of human beings.
The family normally consists primarily of a female who, after giving birth, is entitled to be the “mother” and a male, who after creating a birth with his female partner in the marriage, is given the title of “father.” Just observing animals or insects, let alone humans, is enough education to understand why the word was conceived and the mating process, save for those convoluted participants, inevitably produced offspring enhancements of the couple’s personal genes, thereby creating the “family.”
Now that the miracle of birth has been voided by the “marriage” of two same-sex providers, the new “partners,” because of their inherent deficiencies, will have to depend on other more normal humans to provide the elements that create a family, no thanks to five not only misguided but mentally deficient justices (I cringe when calling them by that misnomer) who stepped far out of character and bounds with their choice of vote.
Already there is great turmoil and dissatisfaction in America over these five un-Americans who now welcome un-constitutional conduct favored by socio-communists around the world. Predominately liberal Democrats who follow the homosexual beliefs and practices that our president favors at the disapproval of the Islamic culture, which he also is fond of.
Methinks our “please everybody but good old fashioned traditional conservative loyalists in the mold of our Founding Fathers” president is weaving himself into some very deceptive and sneaky behavior patterns.
As stated above, there is already contention and confusion as reported by Family Research Council president Tony Perkins in his July 10 “Washington Update”: “By redefining marriage, the Supreme Court’s five justices did more than undermine democracy. They undermined their profession, too. And for principled judges across America, that was just as offensive.”
Perkins goes on to say that “[t]he country’s confidence in the courts was already in a free fall — slumping to its second lowest score (Gallup Poll — 32%) since 1973.”
You may recall that was when the Court performed in another liberal Democrat injustice, called Roe v. Wade, which still rankles citizens to this day.
Perkins goes on to say, “Now as the highest court in the land chases the cultural winds, the rest of the bench is left to clean up the mess. In Louisiana, justices at the state supreme court reflected the deep division the June 26 decision caused when its effects made their way to the justices doorstep this week. Soon, what should have been a routine order certifying the ruling became anything but.”
The Louisiana Supreme Court unloaded on the Supreme Court for putting them in this position, said Perkins. “In a fiery dissent, three of the seven judges erupted over the high court’s unconstitutional farce on marriage and eviscerated whatever rationale the majority used to justify it. Justice Jeannette Knoll led the charge, with a blistering criticism of ‘five lawyers’ playing the ‘super-legislators’ who imposed their ‘will over the solemn expression of the people.’ ‘Unilaterally,’ she wrote, ‘these five lawyers took for themselves a question the Constitution expressly leaves to the people and about which the people have been in open debate — the true democratic process.’ Calling it a ‘mockery of rights’ and an ‘utter travesty,’ Knoll warns of the ‘horrific impact these five lawyers have made on the democratic rights of the American people to define marriage.’”
You can bet your next pair of new boots that in court after court all across these United States you will be hearing similar, if not worse, diatribes hurled at the unwise and foolish two old men and three crotchety, vigorously anti-American women who all talk like they would rather be in Soviet Russia than here in the U.S.
Perkin, reminds us, “In Louisiana, where the 2004 marriage amendment won in a 78% landslide, you can’t blame the justices for blasting SCOTUS’s stampede over voters. ‘Simply stated,’ Knoll vented, ‘it is a legal fiction imposed upon the entirety of this nation because these five people think it should be.’ Her colleague, Justice Jefferson Hughes took it a step further and said that his bench should flat-out defy the Supreme Court. ‘Judges instruct jurors every week not to surrender their honest convictions merely to reach agreement. I cannot do so now… [Marriage’s] definition cannot be changed by legalisms.’”
At my age I have to wonder how soon this country will implode and wither away into a vast nothingness, with the inefficient and country-killing executive order travesty he holds over all of our heads.
I seriously doubt and just as strongly hope that the good people in this country wake up before we end up, and maybe I’ll live to see a fresh new loyalty to our country instead of the recent celebrity brat Ariana Grande who said “I hate America” as she enjoyed all its fruits and benefits. She should be put in a glass case for good Americans to see up close and learn to recognize traitors.
I would be remiss if I neglected to mention there was more favorable news about a judge in Toledo, Ohio, that Perkins mentioned came face-to-face with the consequences of the Supreme Court’s decision: a same-sex “marriage” request. This particular judge was a black man and happened to be named (ironically) Allen McConnell.
“A former leader in Toledo’s NAACP chapter, McConnell — a Democrat — apologized but said that his personal beliefs prevented him from officiating. After a brief delay, the court found another judge to marry the couple. Despite that very minor inconvenience, the Left is demanding McConnell’s impeachment. So much for a religious liberty balancing act!
"On Monday, July 6, McConnell explained, ‘I declined to marry a non-traditional couple during my duties assignment. The declination was based upon my personal and Christian beliefs established over many years. I apologize to the couple for the delay they experienced and wish them the best.’”
Sometimes even judges are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Nobody should ever be put in a dichotomy such as that.