AUDACITY OF THE RULING CLASS

AUDACITY OF THE RULING CLASS

By Domenick J. Maglio PhD. Traditional Realist

Instead of allowing the American people to decide the debate of what comprises a marriage the court has imposed it on the people. More than half the states approved the Defense of Marriage Act. Not only did the Supreme Court strike down this act, which was legally passed legislation by both federal and state representatives but the redefinition of marriage will stifle open debate. This act of political will by a razor sharp 5-4 decision has equated heterosexual and homosexual marriage.

The court overreached on the Roe-Wade decision to legalize abortion before a national consensus had been reached. The elites have done it again. This latest social engineering attempt of changing the definition of marriage will not settle the issue. It will further divide the powerful but small number of progressive elite advocates from the people. This radical decision will strike at the heart of our Constitutional Republic. The Constitution and our Bill of Rights especially the First Amendment will be directly in conflict with this attempt at redefinition of marriage.

There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution to validate this Supreme Court decision. The 5-4 majority did not use a rational, well reasoned legal argument to justify the decision as there is nothing in our Constitution that speaks to marriage. Rather they arrogantly injected social justice propaganda to justify the equating of marriage between a man and a woman with a same sex relationship although procreation has historically been the purpose of marriage.

This ruling has lowered the sanctity of the sacred relationship of marriage to the feelings of fulfillment of homosexual couples, as Justice Kennedy noted in his rationale for the ruling. A same sex relationship can be respected and treated in a dignified manner by legal contracts but it will remain profoundly different from the relationship between a man and a woman.

Throughout civilized history the sanctity of marriage was between a man and a woman. In all major religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam, marriage has been defined solely as between a man and a woman while homosexual relations have been condemned. This offensive, unwarranted and unjustified tactical decision of redefining marriage is a monumental attack on natural law and religion that will destabilize our law and order.

There will be an inevitable battle between our First Amendment religious rights and the redefining of marriage. It is a shot across the bow of every person of faith.

Many Americans of faith will be unable to practice their beliefs freely. It will cause an unnecessary hardship to them as we have already seen with owners of businesses who have chosen not to be a party to homosexual marriage ceremonies for religious reasons.

This Supreme Court decree will force all God fearing people to deny their beliefs or suffer serious legal consequences for practicing them. As Justice Scalia noted, “opponents to the decision will be crucified” as enemies of the human race by same sex advocates and the media. It will change the experience of being an American. Citizens will not be free to express what their religion dictates. Freedom of speech and religion will no longer be securely protected by the Constitution. There will be a flood of cases against Christian practices and beliefs.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, currently considered an icon by the homosexual community, compared the strong negative reaction to this decision to the Supreme Court’s 1989 flag burning ruling. He forecast the storm would blow over in two or three months attempting to minimize the grave future impact.

Since there is no constitutional justification for this audacious decision, in his closing paragraph on the gay marriage decision, Justice Kennedy sanctimoniously said….” “Their plea is that they respected it so deeply (marriage) that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness excluded from one of civilizations oldest institutions. They ask for equality and dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants that right to them. The judgment of the Court of Appeals of the 6^th Circuit is reversed.”

Instead of specifically identifying what in the Constitution supports this rogue decision he offered psychological babble and self-perceived rejection and slights to the homosexual community to legitimize the decision. He uses political correctness to smear anyone who attempts to deny homosexuals this newfound equal status. There are no longer laws or even social discourse condemning homosexuals to live in loneliness. They have the right to have relationships with who ever they want.

For thousands of years civilized nations did not include homosexuals in the concept of marriage. Marriage was only between a man and a woman and often monetary incentives were given to increase procreation by nations for their survival and vigor.

The only reasons offered to support the decision of redefining marriage are social justice and sympathy for not being equal to historically sanctioned marriage between a man and a woman. The consequences for the social and religious fabric of society are being ignored. Most importantly, this political decision violates the First Amendment of our Constitution.

This ruling class edict needs to be reversed as quickly as possible for the survival of our Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Republic.