The Supreme Court Legislates Again

1 view
Skip to first unread message

jose soplar

unread,
Jun 30, 2003, 6:19:22 PM6/30/03
to
The Supreme Court Legislates Again
Chuck Colson

The Supreme Court has passed another law, this one supplanting the law
passed by the people of the state of Texas in its democratic process.
But you say the Court doesn't pass laws. Well, as Justice Scalia in
his angry dissent said, the Court is supposed to be a court, but it
has become a super-legislature overriding the decisions of the people.
What a travesty.

By a 6-3 vote, the unelected nine based their decision to make sodomy
constitutionally protected on the so-called "right to privacy."

Justice Kennedy, who wrote for the majority, said that the issue was
"two adults who, with full and mutual consent from each other, engaged
in sexual practices common to a homosexual lifestyle." To deny that,
he said, would reflect animus. And, he added, times and circumstances
do change. Maybe, but the Constitution doesn't.

And what about the 1986 decision that Kennedy and this majority
overthrew? In abortion cases, they constantly lectured us, they can't
change the law that people have come to rely on.

Well, most Americans seem to be applauding the decision, and I guess
there's a libertarian streak in all of us. We don't like the
government in our bedrooms.

But if laws are unreasonable, we ought to change the law through our
legislatures, not the courts. As George Will wrote,
"'Unconstitutional' is not a synonym for 'unjust' or 'unwise.' . . .
Legislators can adjust laws to their communities' changing moral
sensibilities without creating, as courts do, principles, such as the
broadly sweeping privacy right, that sweep away more than communities
intend to discard."

Precisely. If the right to privacy protects adults engaged in private,
consensual sex, how are we going to outlaw polygamy? The polygamist
and all of his wives practice private, consensual sex.

How are we going to maintain laws against incest? It's private,
consensual sexual behavior in the security of one's own bedroom. Why
stop a forty-year-old man having sex with his consenting
nineteen-year-old daughter—or son? And why stop siblings as long as
there's consent?

And what about pedophilia that's "consensual," or "intergenerational
intimacy," as the North American Man-Boy Love Association calls it?

One even has to raise the question of bestiality. Peter Singer, the
eminent bioethicist at Princeton, argues that animals can consent
since consent needn't be verbal.

Sen. Rick Santorum was vilified for raising these questions. So was
Bill Pryor, the Alabama attorney general nominated for the Circuit
Court. Critics say they're making homosexuality and bestiality or
incest morally equivalent. Nonsense. They're simply pointing out that
that's what the court is doing—making it inevitable, in fact.

The gay lobby immediately hailed the decision as the prelude to gay
marriage. Of course! As Justice Scalia said in his dissent, this
decision "effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation."
Well, will the media apologize to Santorum? They ought to. Will they
lobby now to reinstate the Catholic priests who are pedophiles? After
all, much of that was "consensual." Hardly.

What we can hope and pray for is nothing less than a miracle—that two
sensible judges will be appointed to join Scalia, Thomas, and
Rehnquist. Please, Lord, may it happen.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/chuckcolson/cc20030630.shtml

Roger

unread,
Jun 30, 2003, 6:40:55 PM6/30/03
to
Charles Colson
Known within the Nixon administration as the "evil genius," special counsel
Charles W. Colson served seven months in prison in 1974 after pleading
guilty to obstruction of justice in the Watergate-related Daniel Ellsberg
case. Colson's more notorious ideas, according to some reports, included
spreading false information about Ellsberg and firebombing the Brookings
Institution. He was also indicted for his role in the Watergate cover-up.

Colson became a born-again Christian and in 1976 founded the Prison
Fellowship Ministries. The volunteer-based organization is designed to bring
Bible study and a Christian message to prison inmates and their families.
Justice Fellowship, a subsidiary of the group, was founded in 1983 to
develop Bible-based criminal justice and prison reform. In 1993, Colson won
the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, worth more than $1 million,
for his work with the ministry. In 2000, Florida Governor Jeb Bush restored
Colson's civil rights 25 years after his release from prison. Colson is a
syndicated radio host and commentator and has written many books, the
royalties from which he donates to Prison Fellowship. He lives in McLean,
Va., and Naples, Fla.


"jose soplar" <joses...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9312d9f1.03063...@posting.google.com...

> nineteen-year-old daughter-or son? And why stop siblings as long as


> there's consent?
>
> And what about pedophilia that's "consensual," or "intergenerational
> intimacy," as the North American Man-Boy Love Association calls it?
>
> One even has to raise the question of bestiality. Peter Singer, the
> eminent bioethicist at Princeton, argues that animals can consent
> since consent needn't be verbal.
>
> Sen. Rick Santorum was vilified for raising these questions. So was
> Bill Pryor, the Alabama attorney general nominated for the Circuit
> Court. Critics say they're making homosexuality and bestiality or
> incest morally equivalent. Nonsense. They're simply pointing out that

> that's what the court is doing-making it inevitable, in fact.


>
> The gay lobby immediately hailed the decision as the prelude to gay
> marriage. Of course! As Justice Scalia said in his dissent, this
> decision "effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation."
> Well, will the media apologize to Santorum? They ought to. Will they
> lobby now to reinstate the Catholic priests who are pedophiles? After
> all, much of that was "consensual." Hardly.
>

> What we can hope and pray for is nothing less than a miracle-that two

MHirtes

unread,
Jun 30, 2003, 8:14:02 PM6/30/03
to
In article <9312d9f1.03063...@posting.google.com>,
joses...@aol.com (jose soplar) wrote:

> The Supreme Court Legislates Again
> Chuck Colson
>

> http://www.townhall.com/columnists/chuckcolson/cc20030630.shtml

Once again, Jose copies an article from Clownhall. Big surprise, huh?

jose soplar

unread,
Jul 1, 2003, 12:31:45 PM7/1/03
to
MHirtes <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.com> wrote in message news:<mhirtes-EC77A4...@news.central.cox.net>...

The source is known as Townhall, but you are forgiven, nobody expects
liberals to be very bright.

Roger

unread,
Jul 2, 2003, 1:22:08 AM7/2/03
to
"jose soplar" <joses...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9312d9f1.03070...@posting.google.com...

Showed him.


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages