Homosexual activists fret over Neil Gorsuch’s judicial philosophy and record; Log Cabin Republicans noncommittal

Let the “Borking” Begin: Homosexual legal group Lambda Legal runs photo of Trump’s SCOTUS nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch, with the word “Dangerous” printed over his face.

By Peter LaBarbera

Trump giveth, and Trump taketh away. Days after giving homosexual activists a huge gift by NOT rescinding a 2014 Obama executive order forcing federal contractors to have an LGBT “nondiscrimination” policy, Trump offered up a constitutional “originalist,” Judge Neil Gorsuch, to replace deceased Justice Antonin Scalia.

That led the coddled array of deviant-sex-and-gender leftist groups, otherwise known as the LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) movement, to go ballistic [see my LifeSiteNews piece here].

Note that, regarding one 2015 decision by Circuit Court Judge Gorsuch involving a gender-confused prisoner, the LGBTQ Lobby almost literally has its (transgender) panties in a wad. (The poor fella in the case, a “male-to-female” transsexual, was not permitted to wear “feminine undergarments” in jail. Boo-hoo.)

It is hardly shocking that the same homosexual and transgender activists who create “rights” based on sodomitic inclinations and same-sex/gender-confused feelings would fear a man like Gorsuch, who is being compared to the brilliant conservative Justice Scalia. The latter repeatedly eviscerated the “living, breathing Constitution” judicial philosophy of “progressives” that discovers “rights” out of thin air to accommodate modern social ills like abortion-on-demand, homosexuality and pornography.

Even honest liberals might agree with this: it is difficult to find a “constitutional” right for two dudes to “marry” seeing that sodomy itself was illegal in most colonies and a taboo at the time of the Constitution’s framing. (“Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state, punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment and/or hard labor,” the left-biased Wikipedia reports.)

So even though the newly elected Trump choked badly by telling 60 Minutes that legalized same-sex “marriage” via the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling is “settled law” (while somehow Roe v. Wade is not), the Supreme Court could be just one more Trump appointment away from reversing it and sending “gay marriage” back to the states. That freaks out the Homosexual Lobby, which, like the Left in general, regards its SCOTUS victories as permanent, and pro-family wins like the 1986 Bowers v. Hardwick decision upholding sodomy laws as temporary.

Here’s a quick rundown with links on some of the larger LGBTQ organizations’ hostile statements against Gorsuch; most of these are excerpts (note source links attached to group name). Also note the nuanced, noncommittal statement of the homosexual Log Cabin Republicans on Trump’s nominee:

GLAAD (formerly Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination):

“Neil Gorsuch’s harmful history of discrimination against the LGBTQ community renders him completely unfit to sit on the highest court in the land,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, GLAAD President & CEO. “He has record of advocating for anti-LGBTQ rhetoric or supporting candidates that are in favor of open discrimination against people and families who simply want to be treated the same as everyone else. Gorsuch’s presence on the Supreme Court will affect the law of the land for generations to come – long after Trump is out of office, and will turn back the clock on equality and acceptance.”

LaBarbera: “It would be a YUUGE mistake for Trump to break his pledge to pro-marriage Republican voters who put him in the White House”

LGBTrump? Donald Trump has a long history of pro-homosexual advocacy. He now says–as he did in 2015–that the homosexual “marriage” is “settled” due to the Supreme Court Obergefell ruling –which was eviscerated in a dissent by Trump’s ideal SCOTUS Justice, the late Antonin Scalia. Above is Trump’s 2000 interview with the “gay” magazine The Advocate, in which he suggested adding homosexuality to the federal Civil Rights Act. Read about it HERE. Click on graphic to enlarge.

AFTAH Press Release, November 15, 2016; americansfortruth@gmail.com

CONTACT: Peter LaBarbera or Brad Wallace: 312-324-3787

CHICAGO – AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera called on President-elect Donald Trump to revise his estimation that the Supreme Court has “settled” the issue of homosexual “marriage”–and instead honor his pledge to America’s voters to defend natural marriage against the “shocking” 2015 Obergefell ruling.

[Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH.org) is dedicated to exposing and opposing the LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) agenda. Sign up for AFTAH updates.]

In an interview with CBS “60 Minutes” Sunday, Trump asserted that the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling imposing homosexual “marriage” on all 50 states was “settled” law, and that “gay marriage’ as a political issue is “done … And I’m fine with that.”

That directly contradicts what then-candidate Trump told GOP primary voters in South Carolina last February: that he opposed the “shocking” Obergefell decision and that evangelical voters can trust him to protect real, man-woman marriage. Trump said he favors letting the states decide marriage laws for themselves.

Just prior to the Iowa caucuses, where he was appealing to evangelical voters, Trump said he would like to see Obergefell overturned: “If I’m elected I would be very strong in putting certain judges on the bench that maybe could change things, but they have a long way to go.”

The late Antonin Scalia—whom Trump holds up as the type of Supreme Court Justice he would appoint–ripped into Obergefell in a powerful dissent—saying it was a “naked judicial claim to legislative–indeed, super-legislative–power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government.

“[T]o allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation,” Scalia wrote.

AFTAH’s LaBarbera described what is at stake with Trump and marriage: “Many millions of evangelical, Catholic and moral-minded voters trusted Mr. Trump with their votes because they did not see him as just another slippery politician. Now it is up to President-elect Trump to show that he is worthy of that trust by clarifying his defeatist statement on Obergefell.

“America cannot become great again by defying God, and homosexuality-based ‘marriage’ is about as godless as it gets,” LaBarbera said. “Trump needs to do all he can to reverse the Supreme Court’s unconstitutional Obergefell ruling—just as he pledges to overturn Roe v. Wade and abortion-on-demand.

Rubio Aide Supports Radically Redefining Marriage: Rubio campaign aide Rich Beeson signed on to an amicus brief for the Supreme Court Obergefell case supporting the legalization of “marriage” based on homosexuality. Graphic: AFTAH; photo by Fox News.

Folks, Sen. Marco Rubio is known as a social conservative, so this revelation of a top campaign staffer (Rich Beeson) signing on to a Republican PRO-homosexual-“marriage” friend-of-the-court brief–for the Obergefell SCOTUS case nationalizing “gay marriage”–is a big deal.

In the next few weeks AFTAH will be reporting facts about the remaining candidates in the Republican (and Democratic) primaries. [See our report on Trump’s past radical pro-homosexual advocacy HERE.] We are non-partisan and do not endorse any candidate–nor do we refrain from pointing out pro-homosexual advocacy wherever we find it. (AFTAH does not carry water for Republicans: this writer once caught a lot of GOP flak for co-authoring a report for Concerned Women for America about President George W. Bush’s “Homosexual Agenda.”) As I have said many times, God does not make a special provision for Republican homosexualism compared to the Democratic variety.

Moreover, GOP establishment big shots are pushing the Party to ditch social issues–and include the homosexual activist “Log Cabin Republicans” in the Party’s “big tent.” As you can read below, Rubio staffers have met regularly with Log Cabin Republican staffers, and the head of CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference; 202-347-9388) just allowed Log Cabin Republicans to serve as a sponsor for next year’s gathering. The following is an excerpt from our friends at LifeSiteNews (which relies heavily on The Baptist Message, which broke the story). — Peter LaBarbera, AFTTAH

__________________________

LifeSiteNews reports:

Marco Rubio’s deputy campaign manager is a gay ‘marriage’ activist

First published by LifeSiteNews Feb. 18, 2016; to read full article, click HERE; sign up for LifeSite daily updates HERE

CHARLESTON, South Carolina, February 18, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – A pivotal member of Marco Rubio’s campaign actively encouraged the Supreme Court to impose gay “marriage” on the entire nation by judicial fiat.

Senator Rubio’s deputy campaign manager, Rich Beeson, signed a legal brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to redefine marriage in last summer’s Obergefell v. Hodges case.

The amicus curiae brief, which was signed by 300 Republican operatives whose names spill over 24 pages, argued that having the court discover a nationwide right to same-sex “marriage” served “conservative values.”

The case against sodomy: How to use reason and natural law to argue against homosexual acts and ‘gay marriage’

Explaining Why Homosexual Behavior Is Wrong: Robert Reilly, author of ‘Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything,’ will speak at AFTAH’s annual dinner-banquet Saturday, October 17th at Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, IL. Sign up online HERE. Tickets are $20/person or $200 for a Table of 10. Send a check with “AFTAH Banquet” on the memo line to: AFTAH, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. For a printable PDF color flier of the event, click HERE.

What: Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’s (AFTAH) annual dinner-banquet fund-raiser

Who: Keynote speaker: Robert Reilly, author, ‘Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything’ [order it HERE or on Amazon]. Reilly served as a Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan and was the Director of the Voice of America.

When: Saturday, October 17, 2015, 6:00 PM Central; doors open at 5:30.

Where: Christian Liberty Academy, 502 W. Euclid Ave., Arlington Heights, IL 60004. Map HERE.

Cost: Only $20 per person. Sponsor a Table of 10 for just $200. Or sponsor 5 attendees for $100. Send check made out to “AFTAH” to: AFTAH, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. Or sign up online using our safe credit card form (check the box for Banquet Registration or to sign up to sponsor a Table of 10).

PDF Flier: For a printable PDF color flier on the Oct. 17 event, click HERE.

UPDATE: Stellar pro-family advocate Linda Harvey of Mission America (and a WND.com columnist) will also be speaking at the AFTAH banquet Saturday, Oct. 17!)

_________________________

Second AFTAH Banquet in Wash., DC on Nov. 21: Americans For Truth will be hosting Robert Reilly for a second dinner-banquet in the Washington, D.C. area on Saturday, Nov. 21. Stay tuned for more details.

_________________________

Crafting a Principled Strategy: At a recent speaking appearance in Chicago, Reilly explained how the dominant pro-family movement strategy of the last decade of focusing on a positive defense of natural marriage and consciously avoiding discussing homosexuality is “the losing strategy. That is how we lost.” Reilly continued:

“The entire issue is based on the morality or immorality of sodomy. And once you’re no longer willing to address that issue or if you concede that issue, you have lost, and you’ll get rolled on the religious freedom issue as well.”

Amen. It is such clear and principled thinking that sets Reilly apart from many pro-family leaders. We live in bizarre times in which even some who profess to be “conservatives” are making the radical case for “marriage” based on the sexual perversion (and sin) of homosexuality. Shame on them for debasing conservatism and Christianity all at once. But I am greatly encouraged that Reilly’s well-reasoned approach is beginning to gain ground as we endeavor to rebuild the foundation for an aggressive defense of Truth on this vexing issue. We greatly look forward to Bob’s presentation October 17: please mark your calendars and tell your friends! This article below appeared in many online publications, including CNS News. – Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Email: americansfortruth@gmail.com; Phone: 312-324-3787 

_________________________

Below is an excellent column by Robert Reilly that lays out the compromise in the pro-family legal strategy that helped pave the way for the imposition of homosexual “marriage” by the courts, culminating in the Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling:

Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Goes Against the ‘Laws of Nature and Nature’s God’

By Robert R. Reilly | June 9, 2015 |

Why have the pro-natural family forces been losing in court?  Intentionally or not, Judge Richard Posner explained the reason in a 7th Circuit Court ruling (Sept. 4, 2014), in which he decided against the Indiana and Wisconsin laws restricting marriage to a man and a woman:

“The state [Wisconsin] does not mention Justice Alito’s invocation [in the Windsor case] of a moral case against same-sex marriage, when he states in his dissent that ‘others explain the basis for the institution in more philosophical terms.  They argue that marriage is essentially the solemnizing of a comprehensive, exclusive, permanent union that is intrinsically ordered to producing new life, even if it does not always do so.’ [U.S. v. Windsor, 133 S.Ct. 2675, 2718 (2013).] That is a moral argument for limiting marriage to heterosexuals. The state does not mention the argument because as we said, it mounts no moral arguments against same-sex marriage.”  Baskin v. Bogan, 766 F.3d 648, 669 (7thCir. 2014) (emphasis added).

While Justice Alito recognizes that there is a moral argument for limiting marriage to heterosexuals, it was not only the State of Wisconsin that failed to make such a case. Neither have the States of Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, or Tennessee in Obergefell, the decisive case now before the U.S. Supreme Court.  I believe that this is one of the key reasons that the pro-natural family position has been losing in most of the cases thus far.

Catholic In Name Only? The American Catholic Lawyers Association accuses Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the Obergefell decision imposing homosexual “marriage” on the nation, of failing to “uphold the divine and natural law that marriage is between a man and a woman.” Kennedy is a Roman Catholic.

The following was released by the American Catholic Lawyers Association, Inc.:

Press Release on Obergefell v. Hodges

July 27, 2015, Fairfield, NJ – The American Catholic Lawyers Association (ACLA) announces its objection to the majority ruling in the case of  Obergefell v. Hodges regarding same-sexThe marriage.  Sodomy, as the Supreme Court itself observed in Bowers v. Hardwicke, before overruling itself a mere seventeen years later in Lawrence v. Texas, is immoral and perverse conduct that the U.S. Constitution was never intended to protect; and the Constitution is forbidden to transgress those aspects of the divine and natural law binding on all men and all nations. Nor was the Constitution ever intended to take away from the States the right to punish sodomy or to codify the truth of both divine and natural law that marriage is between one man and one woman.

Moreover the Obergefell decision is invalid in that two of the Justices were required by the U.S. Code, Title 28, Part I, Chapter 21, § 455, to recuse themselves because of “impartiality that might reasonably be questioned.” Both Justices Kagan and Ginsburg failed to recuse themselves despite having a public record of advocacy of “same-sex marriage,” with both having conducted “same-sex wedding” ceremonies.

Finally, the American Catholic Lawyers Association protests in the strongest terms the actions of Justice Anthony Kennedy.  Because he was the deciding vote, God gave him, as a professing Catholic, the opportunity to uphold the divine and natural law that marriage is between a man and a woman. Instead, he did the unthinkable and attempted to overturn that truth with false human reasoning.

As a Catholic jurist, especially one protected by the life tenure that ensures judicial independence from popular sentiment, Justice Kennedy was bound to obey a law higher than his false notion of “liberty,” the law that God has inscribed in human nature.  Justice Kennedy failed in this sacred duty, violated the oath to God he took upon ascension to his high office, and thereby inflicted incalculable harm on society.

In a teaching that applies universally under the natural law, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in a statement whose publication was ordered by John Paul II, declared that even “[i]n those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application.” [“Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons”, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, June 3, 2003]

Accordingly, we call upon the Court to overrule this decision at the first opportunity. Further, we call on the Bishop of Justice Kennedy’s diocese or any competent Church authority to impose appropriate canonical sanctions in keeping with the 1983 Code of Canon Law promulgated by John Paul II, which provides: “Those who have… been obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.” CIC (1983) § 915. The Catholic faithful are not immune from the authority of the Church when they don judicial robes or enter legislative chambers. On the contrary, the Church imposes a higher duty on Catholic public officials precisely in virtue of their public offices—a duty to defend and protect the common good according to the higher law.

____________________________

AMERICAN CATHOLIC LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, INC. is a federally tax-exempt organization dedicated, since 1991, to defending the rights of Catholics in civil and criminal courts throughout the nation, both state and federal, and in public discourse and debate. Donations to the work of the Association are tax-deductible in accordance with IRS Code § 501(c)(3).

CONTACT PERSON: John Obriski, Administrative Assistant,973.244.9895; obriski@acla-inc.org. ACLA website: http://www.americancatholiclawyers.org/

DeWine closes door on filing motion to rehear Obergefell v. Hodges

NOT IMPARTIAL – Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg officiates a homosexual “wedding” before the Court made its decision imposing government recognition of such counterfeit “marriages” on the entire nation. Ginsburg and Justice Elena Kagan, who also officiated a homosexual “wedding” ceremony,  lacked the integrity to recuse themselves from the “gay marriage” case as they should have. AFTAH and Grace Gospel Fellowship will host a “Ted Talk” on the homosexual agenda post-SCOTUS’ Obergefell ruling, Tues, Aug. 18, at 7:00 PM, at Grace Gospel Fellowship Church in Bensenville, IL. Click on photo to enlarge.

Upcoming AFTAH Event: Tuesday, Aug. 18: Scott Lively will join Peter LaBarbera, Pastor John Kirkwood and Rev. Bill Owens of the Coalition of African American Pastors (CAAP) at Grace Gospel Fellowship Church in Bensenville, IL, for a “Ted Talk and Q&A” on: “The Homosexual Agenda and Its Assault on Freedom after the SCOTUS Obergefell Ruling.” Event starts at 7:00 PM; doors open at 6.30; appetizers and light refreshments will be served. Grace Gospel is located north of I-290 on Rt. 83 (Google Maps has it as “Grace-Gospel Center”). The event is free but donations will be accepted.

Grace-Gospel Fellowship
4 North 220 Route 83 (Frontage Road)
Bensenville, IL 60106
(630) 834-0550

Folks, this is a long-shot, but worth trying. Our friend Scott Lively of Defend the Family International–who received the AFTAH “Truth Teller Award” in 2011, at the banquet which was terrorized with a brick attack–writes:

_______________________

UPDATED: Scott Lively writes:

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine has closed the door and said he will not file a motion to rehear Obergefell v. Hodges.

But the battle is not over. There is a meeting with Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette today to ask him to file the motion to rehear the marriage case.

Professor Forte’s memo has also been delivered to the AGs in Tennessee and Kentucky. We have four days and one last chance to overturn this travesty–if just ONE judge is sick, absent, or worried about their “legitimacy,” we WIN.

These Attorneys General have standing in this case, and can file a motion to rehear it. No matter where you live, please call them now!

TAKE ACTION:

A) Call Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette and leave this message:

“Please file a Motion for Rehearing in the marriage case. Fight for the voters in Michigan who passed the Marriage Amendment and for our freedoms.”
MI Attorney General Bill Schuette: 517-373-1110 
Ask to speak to a supervisor and explain that we have only 4 days left to file a motion to rehear the marriage case and protect our freedoms!

B) Call the Attorneys General of KY and TN. Urge them to file a “Motion for Rehearing” in the Supreme Court marriage case–before Monday, July 20th. Ask them to present the new information about how Justice Ginsburg violated federal law by officiating a homosexual “wedding” after the oral arguments but before the ruling.

KY Attorney General Jack Conway: 502-696-5300
TN Attorney General Herbert Slatery: 615-741-3491

________________________________

AFTAH Exclusive: NYC parade belies SCOTUS claim that homosexual marriage “safeguards children”; homo-fascist tells AFTAH president that freedom doesn’t apply to him because ‘you’re anti-gay”

PART ONE: WARNING: Offensive images, expletives and graphic descriptions

Homosexual Sadomasochistic “Pride” – Brought to You by Walmart: This float for the New York city homosexual “leather” bar The Eagle rolls down Fifth Avenue at the New York City “Pride” parade Sunday. Note the black-and-blue flag at left symbolizing “leather pride”–the S&M counterpart to the rainbow-colored flag symbolizing “gay pride.” Sadistic/masochistic “leather” fetishes involve extreme behaviors that glorify domination, brutality, pain and human degradation. This includes “master-slave relationships” in which one partner becomes the “sex slave” of his “master.” Homosexual leathermen revel in some of the vilest practices invented by mankind, including hand-arm-rectal “fisting.” Note the policemen looking on at lower left: one wonders what they are thinking. Photos may be reproduced provided credit given as follows: “Photo: AmericansForTruth.org.”

TAKE ACTION: Call Walmart’s Corporate Offices: 

Call Walmart’s headquarters in Bentonville, Ark., at 479-273-4000 and choose ext. 3, then ask for the office of CEO Doug McMillon. Or call 1-800-WALMART (925-6278). Write Walmart online HERE (click the “Community and Giving” option). When I called the first number I was routed to Customer Relations. Send the CEO a fax: fax CEO McMillon directly at 479-204-0798. Urge Walmart to STOP financing the celebration of sexual immorality and extreme gender confusion like New York City “Pride.” Tell them that you are offended as a customer that Walmart would sign on as a top-level funder of a New York City’s debauched homosexual “pride” parade that featured nudity, perversion, vulgarity, gender rebellion and even an S&M float being flaunted in front of young children. See also this past AFTAH article on Walmart’s capitulation to the LGBTQ agenda. 
_____________________________

By Peter LaBarbera; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

Americans For Truth Exclusive

New York City’s annual homosexual “Pride” parade–sponsored Sunday (June 28, 2015) for the first time at the highest “Platinum” level by Walmart Corporation–featured nudity, lewdness, vulgarity and even a sadomasochism float–subjecting the many young children who either marched in or viewed the parade to behaviors and messages that are highly inappropriate for their age and emotional immaturity. [See photos below.]

This AFTAH writer observed most of the parade, which was dominated by major corporate sponsors. One of the bases for the Supreme Court’s stunningly radical June 26 ruling creating a “constitutional right” for homosexual “marriage” is that it “safeguards children and families.” But in truth homosexual parenting harms kids in a variety of ways. It was precisely homosexual (and pro-“gay”) parents who brought impressionable children to observe this highly-sexualized parade glorifying immorality and gender confusion. This is just one example, but a very troubling one, of how “gay parenting” harms children.

I asked a woman who was hostile to me being there about the propriety of exposing kids to lewd behaviors and vulgarity. She said she didn’t agree with everything that goes on at the “pride” parade but that nobody was forcing people to attend it. However, that right to choose does not extend to minor children, who are taken to such bawdy events by their parents and subjected to the perverseness and homo-eroticism that naturally flow from a parade celebrating deviant sex and gender. One such child was a girl standing next to me who appeared to be about 10 or 11; she was evidently dropped off by her father (I saw a man check on her once), who left her alone for hours to view the “pride” parade.

Walmart Champions “Pride” in Homosexuality: Walmart marchers at New York City’s homosexual “Pride” parade carry massive “rainbow flag” symbolizing the celebration of homosexuality, bisexuality and transgenderism (extreme gender confusion). Walmart was a top-level “Platinum” corporate sponsor of Heritage of Pride, which runs the parade and the extended “pride” activities in late June in the Big Apple.

“Gay” Bully Exercises Special Rights
At one point half-way through the parade, as I stood near the corner of Fifth Avenue and 10th  Street (near the homosexual “pride”-celebrating Church of the Ascension), two homosexual activists, a man and a woman–started verbally challenging me, escalating to outright harassment. They had figured out that I was not a homosexual enthusiast and were upset that a moral critic was taking photos at “their” parade, even though it was a very public event.

Abusing Authority? Current U.S. Supreme Court: Standing in back (left to right): Justices: Sonia Sotomayor; Stephen Breyer; Samuel Alito; and Elena Kagan. Front row, sitting (left to right): Justices: Clarence Thomas; Antonin Scalia; Chief Justice John Roberts; Anthony Kennedy; and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Click to enlarge.

“The High Court often acts as if it has been entrusted with the raw power to decide for us the most important public policy issues facing the nation.” — William Olson & Herb Titus 

The article below is the first in a series on the courts and homosexual “marriage”; the destructive effect of judicially-imposed counterfeit “marriage” on the nation; and how we as citizens can fight back against this immoral legal/cultural juggernaut. We have taken the liberty of putting quotation marks around the word same-sex “marriage” even when the authors do not–as part of our ongoing struggle to preserve the real meaning of words against “progressive” semantic distortions. Yes, it’s a pain in the rear but it’s the right thing to do.

Kudos to attorneys and pro-family advocates Bill Olson and Herb Titus for conceiving of this project and giving so much of their time and energy toward these in-depth articles together. Thanks also to the U.S. Justice Foundation for financing this project. Should you want to help support this important work, contributions may be made to the U.S. Justice Foundation. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

__________________________

Reconsidering the U.S. Supreme Court’s Authority to Mandate Same-Sex ‘Marriage’

(Part one of a series)

By William J. Olson and Herbert W. Titus

On April 28, 2015, nine unelected lawyers drawn from three elite law schools (Harvard, Yale, and Columbia) listened to 90-minutes of oral argument about same-sex marriage and then retreated behind a wall of red velvet drapes to confer secretly about whether the U.S. Constitution requires that the U.S. Supreme Court impose same-sex “marriage” on the entire nation.

Consider for a moment the process by which that decision will be reached.  When the Court decided to hear the Obergefell consolidated cases from the Sixth Circuit, that decision was reached in secret. The Justices consult only with their colleagues and their law clerks, also drawn from elite law schools.  When a decision in the case is issued, presumably before the end of the current term toward the end of June, the Court will address only those issues argued by parties and the amici curiae that it cares to address.  Its opinion will contain only those reasons for its decision that the Court chooses to reveal. The majority decision may be agreed to by as few as five of these nine justices unaccountable to no one but themselves. And then, the Court will expect the American people to set aside their individual and collective judgment and passively abide by whatever decision is reached — based on a doctrine no where found in the U.S. Constitution–“judicial supremacy.”

Although the Supreme Court’s only constitutional responsibility is to resolve “cases” and “controversies” brought before it, the High Court often acts as if it has been entrusted with the raw power to decide for us the most important public policy issues facing the nation. While the Court would have us believe that those decisions are mandated by faithful adherence to the constitutional text, the truth lies elsewhere. In his autobiography, Justice William O. Douglas provided a glimpse behind the curtain as to how the Supreme Court really works. In his autobiography, he explained that Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes had once explained to him: “[a]t the constitutional level where we work, ninety percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections.”