Egypt’s Coup … and Ours
Here is what Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institution had to say about Egypt’s coup in a New York Times op-ed: “Now supporters of the Brotherhood will ask, with good reason, whether democracy still has anything to offer them.” As much as I loathe the Muslim Brotherhood and the whole Islamist enterprise, it is difficult to imagine any other response among Islamists than this: Our votes don’t count. They were voted into office; many Egyptians and the army didn’t like the results, so the vote was overthrown.
Here is what Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institution had to say about Egypt’s coup in a New York Times op-ed:
“Now supporters of the Brotherhood will ask, with good reason, whether democracy still has anything to offer them.”
As much as I loathe the Muslim Brotherhood and the whole Islamist enterprise, it is difficult to imagine any other response among Islamists than this: Our votes don’t count.
They were voted into office; many Egyptians and the army didn’t like the results, so the vote was overthrown.
With some important differences – and not all of them to the credit of the United States – the Supreme Court of the United States, colluding judges and the Democratic Party of California did the same thing to the voters of California.
First, in March 2000, the voters of California, by the lopsided percentile margin of 61-38, voted to enact a statute that restricted marriage to one man and one woman. Eight years later, in May 2008, the California Supreme Court struck it down on the grounds that it violated the state constitution.
Having had their vote overturned by the California Supreme Court because Proposition 22 allegedly violated the California Constitution, the citizens of California later that year voted to amend the California Constitution. It would include these 14 words:
“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Known as Proposition 8, it, too, passed in liberal California – by a margin of 52-47.
Immediately challenged by pro-same-sex marriage groups, the California Supreme Court actually upheld the vote. Even a California Supreme Court had no choice but to vote that way since, in effect, it was being asked to vote on whether the California Constitution was constitutional in California.
But the left in America knows that all it needs to do in order to overturn a vote it opposes is to find a left-wing judge or court.
So, the left went to a federal court and found the perfect judge, a gay leftist, former U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker. On August 4, 2010, Walker overturned Proposition 8, asserting, among other personal opinions, that the amendment to the California Constitution “violated the Equal Protection Clause [of the U.S. Constitution] because there is no rational basis for limiting the designation of ‘marriage’ to opposite-sex couples.” (Italics added.)
All of Western civilization for all its history had been irrational in defining marriage as a man-woman institution. So believed one man, and he used that view to overturn – for a second time in eight years – the vote of a substantial majority of Californians.
Walker’s ruling was, of course, upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the most left-wing circuit court in the country. Like Walker and most other leftwing justices, the Ninth Circuit rules according to their ideology, not according to the law and certainly not according to the will of voters.
The left uses left-wing judges and courts to achieve its ends. They uphold votes that support the left, and overturn those that don’t.
But it gets worse.
The left-wing governor and attorney general of California chose not to defend Proposition 8 before the Supreme Court, though it was their legal duty to do so. “Social justice” is the supreme left-wing value; honor and integrity are redefined to mean that which promotes social justice, as the left defines the term.
Consequently, there was no one with legal standing to defend the vote of a substantial majority of Californians before the Supreme Court. And so, the Supreme Court ruled that since no one but the State of California had the legal standing to defend the voters of California, neither the Supreme Court nor the Ninth District Court of Appeals could rule on Judge Walker’s decision. And so one leftist judge’s ruling was allowed to remain in force.
As a result, another vote was overturned and the most important social institution was radically redefined. It was all done by a left-wing judge, a left-wing governor of California and four left-wing justices plus one swing vote on the U.S. Supreme Court.
In America we don’t need the army to overthrow elections. We have left-wing judges to do that.
COPYRIGHT 2013 CREATORS.COM
