My photo
I am retired from government, law enforcement, politics and all other pointless endeavors. I eat when I am hungry and sleep when I am tired.

Saturday, June 27, 2015


Regarding the Same Sex marriage ruling, elevating our emotional preferences to the status of rights is a blow to the very concept of law. So called Human Rights are merely a subterfuge around coherent law.  Isn't it obvious that most if not all talk about Human Rights is an appeal to both emotion and a subversion of law? If so called Human Rights are a species of law, why are they not enacted? If they exist in a sort of ghostly hovering state above our actual law, what is to keep them from being called forth in the service of emotional tantrums. That is exactly what just happened. 

No right to marry someone of the same sex existed at the time of the founding. No one asserted such a right until the day before yesterday in historical terms. Yet these campaigners have the intellectual dishonesty to assert that the "right" they want is to be found in our Constitution. This is to treat our Constitution as a piƱata. An object that must be broken to access to it's goodies.

The campaigners for same sex marriage had an honest and lawful route open to them. They could have sought a constitutional amendment. They chose to get their way via a judicial ukase instead. What they have actually achieved is a further lessening of the seriousness of both marriage and law. It is now clear that the Supreme Court is merely another political branch. This shouldn't surprise us as the left in America, from the Communists to the Liberals, have always denied that it could be anything else. The left sees everything as political power working itself out through whatever institution is in play at the moment. And so Justice Kennedy, an old fashioned centrist/liberal see's nothing wrong with bending the supreme law of the land to the mores of the moment.

I've read that several Justices performed same sex "marriages." Two Justices are obvious lesbians. Yet they all voted. The appearance of objectivity it seems, is an antique concept.

This not to say that there is no such thing as natural law. "Natural" is the key word here. To see what is natural for man it is necessary to look to man's History. Has there ever been a successful culture with no normative understanding of family structure? Has there ever been a society that disestablished that natural order out of deference to their abnormal members? How did that work out? I suggest that the term decadence covers this area and it is synonymous with decline.

The same sex campaigners are not acting out of love for homosexuals so much as a disdain and a grudge against the normal order. They want what we cannot give.

No comments:

Post a Comment