(Wall Street Journal) - A federal appeals court here ruled Tuesday that California's voter-mandated ban on gay marriages was unconstitutional, in a closely watched case that eventually could lead the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Now comes the day I've dreaded for over a decade. It is something I've tried to warn people about for just as long. Please allow me to educate my international readers on something that even many Americans are completely unaware of....
In a 2-1 vote, a panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said California's 2008 law, popularly known as Proposition 8, had used the state's initiative power to target a minority group and take away a right the group possessed, without legitimate reason.
Doing so, wrote Judge Stephen Reinhardt in an 89-page majority opinion, violated the 14th Amendment's equal-protection clause.
"Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples," wrote Justice Reinhardt, who was appointed to the court by former President Jimmy Carter.
Tuesday's decision is likely just the second stop in a battle that could next be appealed to an expanded 11-judge panel of the same court—or directly to the Supreme Court...
read full story here
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.It's called the "full faith and credit clause" and what it basically means is that a legal contract drawn up in one state must be honoured by the other forty-nine. There is no option in this. No flexibility is given. It says what it says, and when you combine that with the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it creates an incredibly powerful legal argument in favour of gay marriage. So long as one state allows it, based on Article 4, Section 1, along with Amendment 14, ALL STATES MUST ALLOW IT -- PERIOD!
Article 4, Section 1United States Constitution
Those who know and understand the constitution know this day is coming. Up until now, the United States Supreme Court has been avoiding the issue entirely by refusing to hear cases, citing technical problems, etc. The justices know what will happen. As soon as they hear the case, they will be bound by the U.S. constitution itself to rule in favour of gay marriage nationwide. They will be bound by the U.S. constitution itself to nullify all state laws and constitutional amendments banning gay marriage. It doesn't matter how 'conservative' or 'traditional' the justice is. It doesn't matter of the justice is a practising Catholic. In fact, one could argue that makes it worse, because such persons would be even more compelled to follow the rule of law outlined in the U.S. Constitution. They will be 'painted into a corner' so to speak, and they know it with certainty. The only way the Supreme Court can rule in favour of traditional marriage is to ignore the U.S. Constitution.
In the face of this impending Constitutional train wreck, states will be faced with the realisation that all of their millions of votes against gay-marriage are to be nullified by nine unelected judges. State sovereignty will once again be trampled on by the imperial federal government using the infamous 14th amendment -- a product of the Civil War. States will once again be faced with the sobering realisation that this venture into American imperialism has been a complete failure, resulting in the nullification of states rights and the overwhelming will of the people. Oh sure, some congressmen will attempt to put a band-aid over the problem by re-introducing the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), which would overturn a Supreme Court decision in favour of gay-marriage, but just like every time in the past, the act will go down in flames on the House or Senate floor (pun intended).
So there you have it, tomorrow's news before it happens. When it does become reality though, states will be faced with an unpleasant choice. They can either roll over and just let it happen -- like Roe v. Wade. Or they can finally do what they've needed to do for over a century -- SECEDE FROM THE UNION THROUGH STATE-WIDE REFERENDUM. The first act is an act of cowardice, and will likely be chosen by the majority of U.S. states. The second act is an act of courage, and if so much as one state chooses it, there is still hope for the American people. I'm sorry, but there is no other political solution. Either secede or roll over and take it. That is all there is. Every other attempt at finding a third way will result in failure. Mark my words.
The problem the states face is not gay-marriage. The homosexual unions are just a symptom of a much greater problem. So long as civilisation has existed, there has always been a homosexual minority engaging in their acts of perversion in the dark alleys and shadows of the night. Nothing is new under the sun. The problem is that we now have a system of government wherein the minority can reign over the majority under the banner of 'civil rights' enshrined in a Constitution that has been perverted to favour the rights of some over others. Once our federal government was given imperial powers (starting with the Civil War until the present) it would only be a matter of time before the perverse would rule over the godly with an iron fist. The problem is not gay-marriage. It's not even homosexuality. The problem is we have an imperial federal government that makes it possible for nine unelected judges to override the votes of tens of millions of people in their respective states. The only solution is to strip the federal government of this power, and since that is impossible so long as states remain in the Union, the only solution is for them to leave the Union and govern themselves as independent nations, or some loose confederacy of sovereign states with a weak central government. It looks like it's time to start thinking outside the box folks. The days of Empire America are soon coming to an end, but not before the imperial powers in Washington DC try to shove gay-marriage down our throats!
Now as for the Catholic Church, there is something she can do to protect herself in the mean time, but it will require a radical correction that few bishops will want to take. They may have no choice however. The Church could simply refuse to recognise all civil marriage contracts. Thus, every married Catholic (converts in particular) would have to receive the sacrament of matrimony in the Catholic Church. No longer would the Church be able to recognise civil marriage among Protestant converts any more. The Church would then have to lobby the state to abolish the word "marriage" from such civil unions entirely with the hope of avoiding confusion in the future. Even if successful, this would be a hallow victory for the Church, for American civilisation will be lost in the process.