Love Wins at the Expense of the Tenth Amendment

I started blogging six years ago. Barack Obama had been in office for about six months and was starting to push his health care law. I viewed it as something egregious and I had to starting writing about it. Unfortunately, I was never really consistent and I haven't written anything in a while. In fact, it's been almost three years since I've written anything in this blog. Until now, where something egregious is occurring: the Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriages.

      My problem is not gays marrying. There are churches that will perform same-sex wedding ceremonies and employers that will provide benefits for same-sex couples. Now you won't get a license, but if you find a combination of the two and get married, I won’t stop you, nor will I think you are evil. I do, however, prefer the traditional definition of marriage, not because of religious reasons, but because of its inherent support of children. A man and a woman are biologically required to produce a child, and every child deserves a mother and father. A married man and women best support these principles.

      The problem I have with this is we now have a Supreme Court that is now writing laws. There is nothing in the constitution that requires the redefinition of marriage. The fourteenth amendment, the basis for the Court's ruling, is not even about marriage. The Constitution is silent on what marriage is, but throughout history is has been known as a fundamental right defined as a union between a man and a women, and it is perfectly legal for individual states to define it in law as such. This definition should be left up to the individual state, its people, and their elected representatives. It is not lawful for the Supreme Court to redefine marriage for everyone else.

The Court's ruling apparently only applies to civil marriages, so it would still be unlawful to force any church to perform a same-sex marriage. For now. It is only a matter of time before a church is sued on the basis of discrimination.I shudder to think about this case going up before the activists on the Supreme Court and they decide to redefine religious liberty.

While everyone celebrated and said, "love wins," the more tragic truth is that the Constitution lost, since the Supreme Court is changing it as they see fit. It's sad to see that most people cannot see this- they are blinded by the urge to do good for their fellow man and the reward that follows. The claim that anyone can marry regardless of their sexual orientation may inspire people and let you think that the country is now a wonderful place, but beware: the judicial activism that accompanies it will have a long-term effect on your liberty.

Anyway, don't mind me, I'm just rambling.