Call us now:
An Open Letter to Republican Candidates Trump, Carson, Fiorina, Bush, Christie, Kasich, Pataki, Graham, Gilmore and Perry
Dear Candidates:
I write you today about Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who is refusing to issue marriage licenses to homosexuals. From your public statements, I must assume you are comfortable with her being jailed for defying a judge’s order to “follow the law”. (Mr. Gilmore and Mr. Perry, I know you have failed to weigh in on the issue, but your silence shouts loudly.)
Your statements were varied, but basically the same: “We are a nation of laws, and we must follow the law.” I agree. However, I find your definition of “law” highly suspect.
Davis has run afoul of the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision, in which five unelected lawyers – in a nonsensical, ridiculous and utterly lawless ruling – imposed their personal preference on the other 320 million of us. In a rambling political essay – it certainly wasn’t a legal analysis – they declared that six thousand years of human history, common sense, and the U.S. Constitution is no longer legal here. Men can now pretend to marry men, women can pretend to marry women. Because The Five say so, and for no other reason.
That is tyranny. That is dictatorship. But it’s not law.
Just my opinion? Not even close. The “ruling” was so bad that Justice Antonin Scalia, in his dissent, stated that “[t]his is a naked judicial claim to legislative—indeed, super-legislative—power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government.” He called it “an opinion lacking even a thin veneer of law”. He said of our five dictators-for-life: “[t]he Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie.” He predicted that state and local officials would begin to openly defy these despots.
Enter Kim Davis. She is a follower of Jesus Christ, and has refused to participate in the sinful act of homosexuals pretending to marry. She is refusing to issue marriage licenses to them. That is her right under the U.S. Constitution. But she, an office holder elected by the people of her county, was summarily thrown in jail by a federal judge for defying of his order to “follow the law.” Lawlessness begets lawlessness. The tyrants in Washington D.C. embolden the tyrant in Kentucky.
We citizens are rapidly getting tired of following the “law” of tyrants. Obergefell is just the latest in a long procession of personal opinion being forced on us without legal basis. Many of us have come to the conclusion that it’s time to prove Scalia right. It’s time to ridicule them. To ignore them. To defy them. Kim Davis knows this, and I know it. Kim Davis will not comply. I will not comply.
But you, Candidates, have told us we’re wrong in our defiance. This left me wondering what other people from history you think should have been jailed for refusing to comply. I know you’re busy, so I’ll keep the list to three. Please check all that you think have a legitimate criminal record:
- Rosa Parks, jailed for defying segregation laws
- Samuel Burris, jailed for helping slaves escape through the Underground Railroad (after all, the Supreme Court declared black slaves to be property – that law was
settled, right?) - Gordon Hirabayashi, jailed for refusing to politely go to an internment camp
I eagerly await your response.
7 Comments
Comments are closed.
The most high law is God. I was told by CPS I could not punish my 16 yr old daughter because of her sexuality liking girls being “gay” nor could I punish her from social media. Taking phones and internet away from my teenagers. Who are they to tell me what I should have to accept in my household?
I have been saying almost the same thing since the first candidate spouted off ” It’s the Law” The court never has and hopefully never will have the power to make laws. It is NOT law. It is a judicial opinion minus a law. The opinion has no merit because it was not a law being evaluated for constitutional relevance. If congress were to pass and the “president” were to sign it, it would be law. At that point the Supreme court could evaluate it vs. the constitution.
I hope that whoever is elected has at least a smattering more knowledge of the Constitution than the ones speaking “its law” have.
The court DOES have the power, because the executive and legislative branches have abdicated. It’s SO important that we start electing officials that not only KNOW the law but FOLLOW it! We have some really good presidential candidates who are willing to take on the establishment power structure in both parties. But without legislators to match, nothing much will be accomplished.
just a quick question? who makes the laws? the Supreme Court? or The Congress?
Congress makes the laws. The Supreme Court thinks it’s Congress and makes its own laws. Congress thinks the Supreme Court is Congress and lets it get by with it.
As far as “marriage” is concerned, that was always left to the States to regulate and make laws. It wasn’t supposed to be in the hands of the feds. So, who makes the marriage laws? The STATES. And as far as I know, the voters of Kentucky did not want gay marriage legalized.
Amen! This is not a thinly-veiled power grab because there is no veil. States need to stand up and tell them to go pound sand.