TRANSFORMING VIRGINIA (PART III) - RE-DEFINING MARRIAGE

Waiting for the 'other shoe to drop' can be distressing.  But you know, in the pit of your stomach it is going to drop; probably not in the direction you're hoping for.   Well, on Monday, July 28th the 'other shoe' dropped and it definitely was not what we were hoping for.  No, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit struck down Virginia's marriage amendment as unconstitutional.  By the way, the amendment doesn't ban anything - it just solidifies the meaning of traditional marriage and does not recognize marriages from other states that allow two people of the same sex to get 'married'. 

 

What does this decision mean?  Actually, it covers a multitude of 'unintended consequences' but for now I want to look at it in the following three ways.  

 

First, I don't think anyone has really pursued how it affects the act of voting.  Haven't we always been told that every vote counts?  Haven't we always been told the place to show your pleasure or displeasure is at the ballot box?  Haven't some politicians been removed via recall vote by irate citizens displeased with their most stringent gun laws? (Colorado comes to mind).  Haven't we always and forever followed the simple rule that the majority vote dominates?  Something suddenly changed?  Bear in mind the key word here is "VOTE".  Also bear in mind the following:  Citizens in thirty three (33) states including Virginia VOTED to add to or amend their constitutions to define marriage as between one man and one woman.   As of this date, at least 15 of those states have had their VOTE overturned by activist judges.  Really,  tell me how anyone was denied "equal protection".  We all had the ability to vote our preference.   

To the best of my knowledge and understanding, the major complaint by the LGBT plaintiffs hinges on this section of the Constitution in Article XIV, Section l. ".....nor shall any State.....deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."  Well, that's the part I have strong disagreement with and I really need someone knowledgeable to explain to me how a judge can set aside the legitimate votes of citizens thereby violating their equal protection of the law! Secondly, the plaintiffs are also using the 2013 Supreme Court decision in DOMA (enacted on September 21, 1996 under then President Bill Clinton) to make their case.  We are talking about a law that has stood for 18 years.  Well, and I repeat from previous posts, that decision left untouched this portion: 

"Section 2. Powers reserved to the states

No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship."

And, how can we forget that Article X of the Constitution says:  "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people".  Since the Constitution comes nowhere close to even mentioning marriage, following Article X how can anyone even be so bold as to ignore the fact that for decades it has been within the purvue of the states to write their marriage laws.  Suddenly, the states no longer have that right?  Suddenly a legitimate ballot item open to all voting age citizens of a given state is null and void by the gavel of 2 or 3 'politically correct' judges as opposed to millions who actually took the time to vote?  This is still America?

 

This decision will not only transform Virginia.  It will transform every other state that has sought to keep marriage a natural union between one man and one woman.  It is not homophobic or hateful or mean or even unjust.  What is unjust is the trampling of a citizen's right to express his/her opinion at the ballot box only to have it overturned by activist judges who want to be 'on the right side of history'. 

 

If you really want to see for yourself what the 'unintended consequences' of these decisions breed, I suggest you travel to Disney World early in June for part of your education and please, by all means bring the children.  Maybe you can go to http://massresistance.org to see how well Massachusetts is faring since their legislature allowed two people of the same sex to 'marry'.  Then there is always California with their gay pride parades that will truly pop your eyes out.  Those are your previews.  More to come. 

 

One of the 'unintended consequences':  this is a young boy - Boston MA 2005.  Soon to be in your neighborhood if the LGBT PC people have their way.