RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: AFA's Fischer urges FLOTUS to fight obesity by fighting lesbians' sexual orientation » Um, but he lost to another pro-equality candidate, Tony » Video: Man misapplies personal trauma to sexual orientation science » WND's editor fundamentally misunderstands nondiscrimination law (part 3 of 3) » Video: Why is this shockingly anti-gay (among other things) speech happening in a Connecticut public school? » Fined NY event space to host same-sex wedding receptions (*but no ceremonies for anyone) » Another day, another far-right pastor pushing Christians to civil war » Joseph Farah still clueless about nondiscrimination law » Hobby Lobby president to join extremely anti-gay activists at 'Star Spangled' event » FRC's Sprigg admits his side put up 'weak defense' in 7th Circuit  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

08/01/2012

Judge rules against discrimination, therefore in need of discrediting label ('black-robed philosopher king')

by Jeremy Hooper

Peter Wolfgang, head of the Family Institute of Connecticut (Brian Brown's old job), isn't so fond of courts determining laws are legally sound (i.e. the very role of courts). But I am glad to hear that he's apparently okay with legislatures in places like New York, where marriage has been fairly passed by the elected representatives:

"It is not the role of judges to behave as if they are black-robed philosopher kings reaching down into the democratic process and saying -- You know, these really big issues like the sanctity of human life or the definition of marriage, we'll take these out of the process; and you little people with your elected representatives, well, they can focus on filling the potholes in your streets," says Wolfgang.
...
"We defeated same-sex marriage every year for a decade at our state legislature," he says. "Then our state supreme court, by a one-vote majority, redefined marriage for our entire state -- took the issue right out of our democratic process -- right after our state legislature had explicitly determined that marriage was between a man and a woman.”
Another 'black-robed philosopher' rules against DOMA [ONN]

Right, Peter. Ya see, it's a funny thing, this whole discrimination thing. It doesn't get to stick around simply because you, a majority vote, a chicken company, or a Huckabee have a strong aversion. Thankfully, for the sake of this great nation, both past and present.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails