WHY DOES IT MATTER WHETHER JUDGES TWIST THE CONSTITUTION TO UPHOLD GAY MARRIAGE?

[Draggingtree]

:

7/2/2014

Why Does It Matter Whether Judges Twist the Constitution to Uphold Gay Marriage?

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:49 am

 

As I mentioned last night, yesterday another federal court decision threw out yet another same sex marriage ban. I would like to take a moment to explain why I think it’s important for such moves to be made legislatively and not by judicial fiat. I will do so with the aid of a long-time commenter.

 

The key thing, for me, is the rule of law.

 

The Constitution simply doesn’t say anything about same sex marriage. If one adheres to the concept that words must be interpreted according to the original understanding of those words, as I believe one must, then it is plain that the people who passed the 14th Amendment in 1868 were not thinking of same sex marriage when they used the words “equal protection.” Now were they thinking of abortion (looking at you, Ruth Bader Ginsburg) or anything else having to do with gender. As Raoul Berger has shown in his extensive scholarship, “equal protection” provided all races with access to the courts, the right to own property, and the right to engage in contracts.

 

 

Anyone who defends twisting the Constitution to obtain a result they like today has no basis to complain about Obama’s power grabs.

 

The same idea applies: the end seems good, maybe not to you, but to many . . . so who cares if some old document purports to restrain him?

Comments (16)

[Cyber_Liberty]

fta:

 

Anyone who defends twisting the Constitution to obtain a result they like today has no basis to complain about Obama’s power grabs.

When I look around, it seems people that are OK with the Judicial twisting of words are perfectly happy with Obama's greedy grabs for more power. A win is a win, no matter the cost. They will go back to trashing the President when one is a ®.