Activist (n.) judges (v.)
You have to laugh at this, a comment the anti-gay Rev. Jason McGuire made about yesterday's high court rejection of his attempt to put the kibosh on civil marriage equality in New York state:
“Essentially this was a case that didn’t look at the morality of gay ‘marriage’, but the legality of the process and procedure by which it became law. What is most troubling is that the court has surrendered its rightful role as a check and balance on an out-of-control Legislature. It is the last defense against legislators that simply pursue political aspirations, rather than the interests of the people they were elected to represent. This was simply put not good government.” [NYCF]
Oh, so in this case the "pro-family" forces like the courts? That's interesting, considering that every time a court keeps in check the out-of-control legislatures that have passed anti-equality laws in violation of basic freedom, this same movement works overtime discrediting not only whatever court made the decision but also the very nature of the independent judiciary. Funny how the courts are a "defense" when rejecting civil freedoms for LGBT people but are "activist" when siding with our basic worth (or in this case, the procedure that got us there).
The court did not take this case because this case was without merit. I know that Jason Mcguire, a man who has said that named gay lawmakers are going to hell, believes his and Liberty Counsel's own press releases saying otherwise. Fortunately for the rest of us, the courts have a higher standard.
comments powered by Disqus