Judicial Arrogance

[PoliticalChic]

"...you made the assertion that the Hughes quote is the position of judges today,..."

It is.

And we just have to take your word for it? Nothing from a SCOTUS judge from, say, this century?

Coulter:


1. If liberals could trust the voters, they wouldn’t need the Court to invent ludicrous ‘constitutional rights’ for them in the first place.

2. The only limit on liberal insanity in this country is how many issues liberals can get before a court…A lot is at stake for liberals with the court. If they lose a liberal vote, they will be forced t fight political battles through a messy little system know as ‘democracy.’

3. When conservative judges strike down laws, it’s because of what’s in the Constitution. When liberal judges strike down laws (or impose new laws, such as tax increases), it’s because of what’s in the New York Times.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The fury of the gay rights movement was so palpable during the Indiana controversy that it’s easy to forget the Hobby Lobby RFRA case, a case that had nothing to do with gay rights.

Abortion battles continue to rage, sometimes with an intensity that matches or exceeds the arguments over gay marriage.

...just over the horizon are new, widespread battles over the very definition of what it means to be male or female.


Simply put, the sexual revolution questions everything about sexual morality and identity—demanding changes in every aspect of traditional sexual morality and, consequently, orthodox Christian theology.


... radical sexual autonomy, freedom from any form of moral judgment, and government support to ameliorate the consequences of sexual libertinism are present in the fights over abortion, gay rights, and now transgender issues. Those who surrender on one issue tend to surrender on others as well. With similar moral principles implicated, similar moral outcomes result."
Imprimis A monthly digest on liberty and the defense of America s founding principles
The Battle of Indiana and the Promise of Battles to Come



It is the anti-American demand that every knee bend to the Left's demands....

Said behavior is a prime example of every totalitarian predecessor.

And at the heart of the issue is the absurd belief of Liberals/Democrats that the morality of judges is somehow more correct than that of traditional, religious Americans, whose believes stem from "the wisdom of the West. It is from the precepts of the Bible that the legal systems of the West have been developed- systems, worked out over millennia, for dealing with inequality, with injustice, with greed, reducible t that which Christians call the Golden Rule, and the Jews had propounded as “That which is hateful to you, don not do to your neighbor.”
David Mamet

 

[alang1216]

Begin with this fact: I am never wrong.

Blasphemer! I thought only God was never wrong?

 

[alang1216]

" Regardless, the sexual revolution marches on and the Left’s definition of “civil rights” has expanded—not only does it prohibit class-based discrimination in places of public accommodation, it now requires conscription into the revolution itself.

I have never heard of class-based discrimination in places of public accommodation before. I have heard, and support, prohibiting race-based discrimination. Can you provide details?

It’s no longer enough for bakers, florists, and photographers to provide service to everyone, regardless of sexual orientation. They must participate in and facilitate any kind of action or ceremony their customers desire—no matter how offensive to their beliefs—so long as those ceremonies further the ideals of the sexual revolutionaries.

Under pressure from activists and the national media, Indiana modified its law to state that it could not authorize a provider to deny services to anyone on the basis of multiple protected criteria, including race, sex, and sexual orientation."

If you provide products or services to the public you should do just that. Should a Muslim doctor be allowed to refuse emergency medical attention to an 'infidel'?

[
No longer is it enough for the Left that every other citizen be non-judgmental, no matter how bizarre their practices.....

...now every citizen must praise same, or actually part-take.....

Pretty much the antithesis of liberty.

'Bizarre' is not a valid judgement, whereas 'unsafe' is a valid judgement. Your exercise of liberty should not limit the liberty of others without real justification.

 

[alang1216]

[Recent events have revealed gaping holes developing in the imagined monolithic worldview of Liberals!

Imagined is right. Only a tin-foil-hat, black-helicopter, conspiracy-theorist type would believe that all liberals, progressives, socialists, and communists share a single worldview, or in fact share much of anything.

 

[alang1216]

Coulter:

1. If liberals could trust the voters, they wouldn’t need the Court to invent ludicrous ‘constitutional rights’ for them in the first place.

2. The only limit on liberal insanity in this country is how many issues liberals can get before a court…A lot is at stake for liberals with the court. If they lose a liberal vote, they will be forced t fight political battles through a messy little system know as ‘democracy.’

3. When conservative judges strike down laws, it’s because of what’s in the Constitution. When liberal judges strike down laws (or impose new laws, such as tax increases), it’s because of what’s in the New York Times.

Was she talking about the civil rights fight of the 50s and 60s? Where in the Constitution does it say Blacks have a right to vote?

 

[alang1216]

Simply put, the sexual revolution questions everything about sexual morality and identity—demanding changes in every aspect of traditional sexual morality and, consequently, orthodox Christian theology.

So Christianity should be the established religion of the US? Sounds unconstitutional to me.