“Legal Fiction”: LA Supreme Court Blasts Gay Marriage

553

In one of the most public and blatant rebukes of the Supreme Court’s decision on gay marriage, the Louisiana Supreme Court dismissed a case this week centered around the state’s ban on same-sex unions. In a 5-1 decision, the LA court determined that they would abide by the national ruling since, well, they really didn’t have a choice. Despite the legal consequences of the high court’s ruling, however, there was one holdout.

Justice Jeff Hughes wrote a blistering dissent, insisting that he would stand for his religious beliefs. “Judges instruct jurors every week not to surrender their honest convictions merely to reach agreement,” he wrote. “I cannot do so now, and respectfully dissent. Marriage is not only for the parties. Its purpose is to provide children with a safe and stable environment in which to grow. It is the epitome of civilization. Its definition cannot be changed by legalisms.”

And though Chief Justice Jeanette Knoll voted in favor of abiding by the Supreme Court’s decision, she too had harsh words for the nation’s judicial branch. “I write separately to express my views concerning the horrific impact these five lawyers have made on the democratic rights of the American people to define marriage and the rights stemming by operation of law there from,” Knoll wrote. “Simply stated, it is a legal fiction imposed upon the entirety of this nation because these five people think it should be.”

Tyranny of the Minority

These harsh opinions may not change the law of the land, but they point out the absurdity of five unelected judges thwarting democracy in service of an obvious agenda. Using some of the flimsiest legal rationale ever seen on the national stage, the Supreme Court’s liberal justices decided they knew better than millions of Americans. Nay, they decided they knew better than the whole of human civilization from the beginning until now. It must be amazing to be possessed of such wisdom.

Their ruling on gay marriage invalidated the will of the people in dozens of American states. It essentially said, “Sorry, your opinion doesn’t matter.” It moves us further towards a centralization of power, putting the direction of this country in the hands of fewer and fewer people. These people don’t care about preserving democracy; their sole goal is to recreate the country in the image of their liberal beliefs.

A Thoughtful Debate

Because the left has carefully enshrouded public discussion in a blanket of political correctness, it’s impossible to even have a reasonable debate about the implications of gay marriage. At some point along the line, we should have put aside questions of morality to address a very simple, fundamental question: What’s best for society? With passions high on both sides, we never got to have that debate.

Since that debate is out the window, we need to have another one. We need to decide how much power we are willing to cede to the federal government. Are we fine with five unelected individuals having a vote that is stronger than that of millions of regular Americans? Are we fine with a Constitution that stands open to endless amounts of interpretation? Are we willing to finally admit that we have left democracy behind?

This is about much more than gay marriage and religious freedom. This is about returning power to the states and, when possible, to the people themselves. Enough with “legal fictions.” Enough with chasing trends. This is about nothing more or less than freedom. And it’s high time we started taking it back.