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


You guys, Brian Brown is *DEMANDING* SCOTUS finally do him a solid

by Jeremy Hooper

Brian Brown, National Organization For Marriage president, will never get it. Or more accurately, he likely does get it, he just knows he has to mislead whatever supporters he has left:

"It is simply illegitimate for the opinion of a federal district judge to trump the decision of millions of Floridians and attempt to redefine marriage in violation of Federal law," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "Federal judges are acting as if the US Supreme Court has ordered same-sex marriage to be imposed, but in reality the Court has ruled that states have the right to define marriage. We demand that the US Supreme Court act immediately to review the pending marriage case before them and swiftly reaffirm that states have the right to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman."
"The US Supreme Court has never ruled that traditional marriage is unconstitutional," said Brown. "In fact, they have specifically ruled that states have the right to define marriage. It is a travesty of justice that states are allowing federal judges to single-handedly decide the laws of marriage. Florida officials should not go along with this illegitimate decree and should demand that state and local officials continue to enforce the marriage amendment that was overwhelmingly adopted by Florida voters in 2008.

FULL: National Organization for Marriage Says Same-Sex Marriage in Florida Is Illegitimate, Calls On Florida Officials to Enforce State Law and Demands US Supreme Court to Reaffirm Right of States To Define Marriage As Union Of One Man And One Woman [NOM]

What doesn't Brian get, precisely? Well, for one, the fact that Judge Hinkle, like the scores of other federal judges who have stricken state marriage bans, said point blank that the very act of showing up to the polls to ban a minority population form marriage (what Brian calls "the decision of millions of Floridians") is itself an unconstitutional act. Brian makes it sound like this judge, like all of the other judges, is just disregarding the fact that this vote happened. In truth, these judges have very much acknowledged that voters made these unfortunate choices in the respective years that such bans came before them. And they are saying that these voters do not have the right to violate the equal protection of certain Americans simply because they feel like it.

When Brian says "illegitimate," let's be perfectly clear here: he means "bad because me and my personally-held Catholicism disagree with it!" If it were a reverse situation and judges were one after another striking down legislation that had enacted same-sex marriage, Brian would be all about the judiciary and its role. If fate was smiling on Brian, he would be crowing about how the courts are doing their job in applying the tenets of the US Constitution in order to protect citizens from the tyranny of a minority. YOU. KNOW. HE. WOULD. But that would of course never happen, since the arc of justice always—always, every time, in every instance, eventually—bends toward justice, and judges, by and large, tend to be big fans of the concept. This means Brian, being in the position that he is and having chosen the unconstitutional framing that he did, has no choice but to brand all of these judges as wrong and confused and improper and willing to perform "illegitimate" acts at the risk of their careers and reputations in order to fulfill some sort of "activist agenda." In short, he has to bear false witness since actual witnesses in actual courts can't ever get the job done.

What a legacy.

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