Friday, August 31, 2007

Black Robe Ruling

A Polk County, Iowa judge on Thursday struck down Iowa's law banning gay "marriage".

The ruling by Judge Robert Hanson concluded that the state's prohibition on same-sex "marriage" is unconstitutional and he ordered the Polk County recorder to issue marriage licenses to six gay couples.
Read full story by clicking HERE.
Here we go again, judicial fiat at its best!!
When are people going to wake up and realize that the judicial system does NOT make law, but applies it. The people spoke at the ballot box in Iowa to ban same-sex "marriages", so what is the problem?
Don't give me this highly refutable "civil-rights" jargon, because there is no weight to that argument as I have stated time and time again.
House Minority Leader Christopher Rants, R-Sioux City, said the judge's ruling only illustrates the need for a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.
Plain and simple.
Des Moines lawyer Dennis Johnson said the Defense of Marriage Act, which the Legislature passed in 1998, contradicts previous court rulings regarding civil rights and should be struck down.
What are these other civil rights court rulings and do they relate to racism or to sexual orientation? They probably relate to another failed juxtaposition of racism and sexual orientation that so many try to justify. And where were these contradictive court rulings when the Legislature passed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1998???????
Sick and tired yet??

6 Comments:

Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Oh...yes...you did see what happened in Iowa, and already wrote about it! It must have been a busy evening for you, my friend!

7:37 AM, September 01, 2007  
Anonymous omd said...

Pray my friends. Pray in earnest every day.

7:49 PM, September 01, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Tyler,

Spreading the truth is a never ending task.

Please forward my newsletter to as many people as you possibly know.

Thanks for your help.

OMD,

Praying and sending newsletters. It is a full-time job.

Scia

9:16 AM, September 02, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“The people spoke at the ballot box in Iowa to ban same-sex "marriages", so what is the problem?”

The problem is the judge ruled that it was unconstitutional. A few years ago there was a vote that denied any public service to illegal immigrants in Arizona. A judge ruled that was unconstitutional as well. I hated it, but that’s just the way things go sometimes.

Ken Weaver

11:15 PM, September 05, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

The judge declared a law null and void - and a judge cannot do that, as I understand it. The law cannot be struck down, only ordered to be changed and/or modified to make it comply with the constitution.

This judge clearly overstepped his bounds, and sadly doesn't come up for re-election until 2010.

7:46 AM, September 06, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“The judge declared a law null and void - and a judge cannot do that, as I understand it. The law cannot be struck down, only ordered to be changed and/or modified to make it comply with the constitution.”

I think you are mistaken. Judges routinely must decide the constitutionality of laws passed by public vote and laws passed by the legislature. In our litigious society, laws are challenged on what seems like a daily basis. Newer laws are not able to contradict older laws without directly addressing them; and newer laws must not go against federal laws. If there was a nationwide vote to ban the public use of firearms and it passed with 100% of the vote, it still would not pass the judicial system because of the 2nd amendment to the constitution. So that new law just passed by public vote would not be permitted to be enforced. A judge would then strike down that law, if the legislature wanted they could modify it to co-exist with the 2nd amendment but it is not the judge’s responsibility to address that concern.

Ken Weaver

9:10 AM, September 06, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

Sign my Guestbook from Bravenet.com Get your Free Guestbook from Bravenet.com