Homosexual Marriage Case Gives Lesson of History (2004)
A judge says that the state of Louisiana must list both homosexual men as the "father" of their joint adoptive baby.
That is because they are, in the eyes of some judges, legally "married" in the state of California. You see, other judges threw out a ban on homosexual marriage there, claiming it was "unconstitutional". Voters responded to the attempt to re-define marriage by judicial fiat by overwhelmingly passing proposition 8. That proposition changed the California constitution so that it banned homosexual marriage. The radical judges there are now trying to find a way to declare the constitution to be unconstitutional!
Before the ban was enacted, a number of homosexuals used the first ruling to get "married" in California. That brings us to the case in our neighbor to the south. The court in Louisiana said that the "Full Faith and Credit Clause" of the U.S. Constitution means that Louisiana must honor the "marriage" in California as valid. They said it was so obvious that they did not even need to take the matter to trial.
That leads me to the top three reasons we are so badly misruled in this country. The number one reason is that the population has lost the virtue required to successfully maintain self-government. The number two reason is that the other branches of government have absolutely let the judiciary walk all over them. This is likely because most of them are posers who pretend to endorse mainstream values but secretly applaud the court's efforts to undemocratically force us left without the consent of the governed (even though the Declaration says that is the only legitimate source for all government power)
The third reason we are so mis-governed is that (with the help of a complicit corporate media who redirect our attention) the public has a short memory. This impacts our ability to learn the lessons of history and dooms us to repeat them.
For example, let's go back a mere four years to 2004. That seems like ancient history in the politics business, but in the essential art of statecraft it is a mere flicker. Senator Blanche Lincoln was challenged by an upstart State Senator named Jim Holt. The state print media clucked about how bad a choice Holt was compared to Lincoln. Even some of the establishment Republicans wrote Holt off as a lightweight.
At the time, Bush was pretending to care about religious conservative voters. Because lawless judges were attempting to use the courts to re-define marriage, conservatives warned that we needed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage. Holt supported that amendment. Lincoln opposed it, saying that they had passed a "defense of marriage act" that was all the protection we needed. Holt warned that the "full faith and credit clause" of the U.S. Constitution would be used to cram nation-wide acceptance of homosexual marriage down our throats if even ONE state allowed them.
So let me ask the fair-minded reader, who did history prove was right? Isn't it crystal clear that the alleged rural "light-weight" Holt had it exactly right and the well regarded incumbent was either ignorant or duplicitous in her answer? The best candidate is the person who understands the times and the law the best, not the one who can kiss up to the papers and raise the most corporate cash.
Blanche Lincoln is coming up for re-election in less than two years. She voted for the bail-out, which alone (in this writers opinion) disqualifies her for further public service. Will the diminished GOP be able to find a credible candidate to oppose her? They don't look like it so far. Will another party step forward?
Free people, in order to remain so, must learn the lessons of history. Don't keep voting for the same people who have already demonstrated their incompetence just because you know their name! Taking an even wider view, how many times will both Republicans and Democrats let us down before we consider the need to support candidates of an alternative party?
The hour is late, and the price of a failure to learn the lessons of history will soon become so dear that my countrymen will no longer be able to pay it.