A few days ago when I was reading the news I came across an article, which I thought was a bit interesting. The reason I write this, is I’m in need of a slight distraction from my papers.
This is in regards to the US Supreme Court’s refusal to hear a case on same-sex marriage in Mass.
“Critics of the November 2003 ruling by the highest court in Massachusetts argue that it violated the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of a republican form of government in each state.”
“Their attorney, Mathew Staver, said in a Supreme Court filing that the Constitution should ‘protect the citizens of Massachusetts from their own state supreme court’s usurpation of power.’
Federal courts, he said, should defend people’s right ‘to live in a republican form of government free from tyranny, whether that comes at the barrel of a gun or by the decree of a court.’”
Now is it me or are they drying to get a court to do what they said a court shouldn’t do? That is the Mass S.C. Said X, which was against the way they wanted things and so they say that the court is forcing laws upon people, so they say this other court should say Y and reverse X so that everyone has to do what they want. In other words It is okay for the courts to decided things, as long as the court agrees with them, but if not, then the court is forcing its will upon people and ruining the republic. Gerr. why can’t we just get along treat each other with respect, not force our beliefs on others, and have true equality?
— Lyle II