Thursday, August 5, 2010


Three states. Three voter initiatives passed by wide margins. Three circuit judges overturning the will of the people.

In California, it's supposed to be about same-sex couples' right to feel equal to opposite-sex married couples, because there is a social perception that married couples are superior to couples living together outside of marriage. In other words, having all the same legal rights (pensions, inheritance, adoption, etc.) isn't enough. The government must force individuals, families, and churches to change their beliefs and religious practices so as to accept homosexual marriage. The freedom to practice one's religion without state interference must now give way to people's right to "feel" equal. The citizen's freedom of thought and conscience, the church's "right to refuse service to anyone at any time," and the voter's right to be counted as part of the law-making process, must now be sacrificed to a gay judge legislating from the bench and a special-interest group claiming that anyone who believes or teaches what the Bible teaches about homosexuality is a hate criminal. I would like to see what happens when this judge's new precedent cuts into his cherished rights and freedoms.

In Arizona (my former home state), it's supposed to be about a minority group's right not to be racially profiled or subjected to unreasonable searches. But again, the judge who put a halt to enforcement of the state's immigration laws is legislating from the bench. And whether or not the civil rights of illegal immigrants are being violated, thousands of them continue to take part in activities destructive of law and order, public health and morals, the interests of the American worker and the honest efforts of many legal immigrants struggling along the arduous path to citizenship. I have been pulled over for speeding a few times, and not once has the arresting officer failed to ask for ID. Were my civil rights violated? Apparently not if I had legal ID to show him, but how could he know unless he asked? Bottom line, if the courts strip the police of the authority to arrest law-breakers, what segment of society is going to benefit? I wonder what this judge will say when he gets caught in the crossfire between drug gangs.

In Missouri (my current home state), the referendum--passed only Tuesday by over 70% of the vote--was on Obama's health care plan. The judicial branch hasn't stopped it yet, but they will surely try. Nevertheless they will probably miss the point that a large majority of voters (and not just Republicans) don't want the healthcare bill recently pushed through Congress. And our own Senator Claire M. responds to this referendum by insinuating that the voters are ignorant of what's actually in the bill. That's funny, coming from a member of the Congress that passed the bill without even reading it! It's sad to see more and more American freedoms slipping away. The U.S. has the best healthcare in the world, but we're about to learn what all the "socialized medicine" countries already know: There is no such thing as quality in an entitlement program. When the taxpayer pays for it, you get a crappy product and crappy service--more and more so the longer the system lasts--until the only way to get what you need is to rip the system off. It's an unalterable law of reality. Meanwhile, as the government swoops in to control more of our lives, we lose choices over matters that are nobody else's business...

Stupidest of all, the activists attacking each of these referenda describe them as a tissue of injustice and bigotry, and the people who support them as un-Christian, hateful Nazis. This is a remarkable position to take on "constitutional rights" that have only now, for the first time, been enshrined in law--albeit through the gavel of a judge rather than the decision of voters and their elected representatives. What this rhetoric implies is that our nation has always been a completely unjust, bigoted, Fascist state--until now, or until these activists get what they want. The irony is that by striking these laws down, they may bring the U.S. closer than ever to being what they describe.

At the rate these activist judges are moving, soon it won't matter what the voter wants. Congress is already acting that way. It's time to fire the lot of them and start over with a new ground rule: the people who make the laws must also live under them. And laws should only be made by those elected to make them!

No comments: