Law, Crime & Justice

The Gay Marriage Debate

  1. Brian Tubbs

This archived discussion is "read only" due to the absence of an active Feature Writer/moderator for this topic.



Top
1.   Oct 3, 2006 8:51 PM

» Feature Writer Brian Tubbs - Basic Government 101

In response to Judicial Activism posted by njkaters:


It's not a matter of being pro-legislature. The Founding Fathers set up our government in a very basic framework:

The Legislature (listed first in the Constitution, which was no accident) was the exclusive lawmaking branch.

The Executive was charged with carrying out the law - and influencing public policy through the veto power and in his (so far it's been 'his') visible position as national leader.

The Judiciary was charged with interpreting the law - according to the intent and understanding of the legislative process. THAT principle can be seen in the writings of Hamilton (though he was "looser" on the point than the rigid Jefferson), Madison, Jay, and (going back) William Blackstone (the most influential jurist on America's founding).

That's the way it was set up. That's the way it is supposed to be. This should not come down to a matter of opinion.

The intent of the Founding Fathers should be a controlling influence on us, until and unless the nation decides to go a different direction via the constitutional process. Examples of that are nationalizing the right of women to vote, direct election of U.S. senators, reforming the Electoral College, etc., etc. These are all VALID, legitimate changes from the intent of the Framers. Why? Because the changes were made according to the prescribed, constitutional process.

It is NOT acceptable for the courts to redefine the Constitution or change the meanings of laws duly passed by the legislative branch. That was NEVER the intent of the Framers, including the "loose constructionists" like Hamilton.

Bringing this back to gay marriage...

If we are to bring about gay marriage in this country, it needs to be done the right way. Not by the Supreme Court redefining and expanding the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment - but by one of two ways: 1) The states individually decide via their respective legislatures, or 2) The U.S. Constitution is amended to allow for gay marriage (just as the Constitution was amended in the early 1900s to give women the right to vote).

Suite101
Feature Writer Brian Tubbs
Feature Writer for Protestantism


Post this Discussion Post to facebook Add this Discussion Post to del.icio.us! Digg this Discussion Post furl this Discussion Post Add this Discussion Post to Reddit Add this Discussion Post to Technorati Add this Discussion Post to Newsvine Add this Discussion Post to Windows Live Add this Discussion Post to Yahoo Add this Discussion Post to StumbleUpon Add this Discussion Post to BlinkLists Add this Discussion Post to Spurl Add this Discussion Post to Google Add this Discussion Post to Ask Add this Discussion Post to Squidoo


This archived discussion is "read only" due to the absence of an active Feature Writer/moderator for this topic.

Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.