Showing posts with label supreme court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label supreme court. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

A Day That Will Live in Blasphemy

On December 7, 1941, Imperial Japan launched a covert bombing raid on the US Navy's base at Pearl Harbor, in Hawaii. Over 2400 Americans were killed. On the next day, FDR took to the podium and asserted that it would be remembered as "A date that will live in infamy." It was seen as such an atrocity that public opinion swayed away from isolationism enough that America entered WWII, just as the Japanese had hoped to prevent them from doing, with a preemptive strike. But part of the fleet was out at sea, and had evaded the attack.

That was a day that would live in infamy, and which is now almost forgotten. I heard that Japan recently granted, or was trying to grant, itself the right to have a standing military, whereas the occupying US forces had written into Japan's constitution decades ago that Japan would “forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.”

More memorable to Americans, June 23rd, 2015 will not be regarded by most as a cause for despair but a cause for celebration. However, the few Christians in this country regard it as something else entirely. It was on that day that 2 men and 3 women (Justices Breyer, Kennedy, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsberg) usurped the throne of God and professed to create law, let alone ethical truths, out of thin air as if empowered to decree what is good and evil without, and contrary to, the perfect will of God. The opinion, in full, with the dissents, is in a single file here: Obergefell v. Hodges (c. 500 KB)

It was on that day that the judgment America has been heading to was underwritten by its representatives in the abdicated cause of justice. A handful of people have consented to the doom of this country by setting themselves up as enemies of His, and daring Him to do something about it. This is the legacy of the Flower Children and their parents. What will ours be? Will there be anything left to leave?

Romans 1
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting...32  knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

"Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing."
~ Rak Chazak

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

In the News: Proposition 8 and DOMA Head to SCOTUS This Week

A landmark moment in time may come without a landmark ruling.

Proposition 8 is a law in California that bans gay marriage, in conflict with the State's supreme court that ruled that the state could grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

DOMA, the Defense-of-Marriage-Act, is a federal law signed by Bill Clinton in the '90s. 

The major news outlets are pretty much all saying the same thing: the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States, for future reference) is likely to avoid making a broad ruling, since neither case directly asks the question, 'is it Constitutional or unConstitutional to ban same-sex marriage?'

I'm placing a 'bet' on how the week's cases will turn out. Here's my prediction:

PROP 8: Thrown Out

The SCOTUS will likely throw out the Proposition 8 case on the basis that the plaintiffs do not have "standing" to bring the suit. 

What does this mean? This website explains the issue of standing with a number of examples. As best as I can summarize my understanding of it, it seems that for you to bring suit against someone before the SCOTUS, you have to be able to prove that you a) are actually affected by the law/governmental action in question, or b) are indeed a person whom the government would sue for noncompliance if the law were to go into effect.

Apparently, the case may get thrown out because the plaintiffs are not directly affected by the federal district court's ruling that Prop 8 is unconstitutional.

The end result of this is that the lower courts' decisions would stand, rendering Prop 8 ineffective within California, and thus gay marriage would continue within that State. 


However, this would have no impact on any other State, or the nation as a whole, only CA


DOMA: Struck Down

The SCOTUS may very well rule that DOMA is unconstitutional. I don't have a lot of faith in the Court after the Obamacare "guess it was a tax after all, guys" decision that was split along ideological lines. I think DOMA will be struck down in the same way. It will be 4-5 with Kennedy casting his lot with the liberal activist judges once again.

But this will only decide whether the FEDERAL government can ban gay marriage.

This would be a loss for whichever side is on the losing end, for sure. But if it is struck down, it will only mean that the US government can't ban gay marriage in all the States. It would not give the Federal government the power to compel States to adopt gay marriage--that's the other side of the coin. If the government has the power to compel, then it has the power to ban. So if the power to ban is struck down, then so is the power to compel.

What's left is the question of whether individual States can ban gay marriage.

Based on the reasonable guess that the SCOTUS will not use Prop 8 to decide that issue, it seems that the same-sex marriage 'debate' will remain unresolved even after this week is over.



~ Rak Chazak