Vincent J. Curtis
16 Sept 15
From the Wall Street Journal:
“Local
officials in several other states also are refraining from granting licenses or
performing ceremonies, drawing stepped-up scrutiny from gay-marriage
supporters.
In
North Carolina, all four magistrates in rural McDowell County have recused
themselves from performing civil wedding ceremonies for any couples. The moves
are allowed under a state law passed in June that allows certain public
officials to avoid marriage duties if they have religious objections. So far,
32 magistrates across the state—about 5% of the total—have done so, according
to the state Administrative Office of the Courts.”
“As
a result of the void in McDowell County, magistrates from neighboring
Rutherford County have been driving in to perform ceremonies three days a week,
during reduced hours. Tonia Hampton, the McDowell
County register of deeds, whose office issues marriage licenses, said the
documents continue to be available during regular hours. “It’s business as
usual for us,” she said.”
“In
Alabama, about a half-dozen county probate judges, who oversee the issuance of
marriage licenses, aren’t providing them to any couples, said Greg Norris, the
Monroe County probate judge and president of the Alabama Probate Judges
Association.
Among
them is Nick Williams, the Washington County probate judge. He said he stopped
issuing licenses immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June that
legalized same-sex marriage—a decision he said he considers “ill-advised” and
“invalid,” because marriage is a state issue.
“By
not issuing licenses to anyone, I’m not discriminating against anyone,” Judge
Williams said.
Under
Alabama law, probate judges “may” issue marriage licenses, but aren’t obligated
to, providing firmer legal ground for those who have objected. But Susan
Watson, executive director of the ACLU of Alabama, said the group is studying
the issue to see “if there’s an avenue we can use to encourage” the holdouts to
resume issuing licenses.”
The method of rebellion against the tyrannical imposition of "law" by the Supreme Court of the United States in respect of gay "marriage" is found in legal guerrilla warfare. It will not be found by standing and fighting on one's religious rights under the First Amendment. Religious objectors will simply get steamrollered or be brushed aside somehow, as happened to the unfortunate Kim Davis. By refusing to get involved in marriage at all, or messing up the system in some other way, are the methods of legal guerrilla warfare.
By bringing the entire legal apparatus of marriage to a standstill, pressure is put on the Supreme Court to deal with the mess they created.
By not objecting on religious grounds but on something else, something based in law, the gay rights fanatics have less of a target to attack. It is also important that everyone who objects to the tyrannical imposition of "law" by the Supreme Court to become engaged in undermining the process. That makes it harder to target any particular person.
To recap: The role of the Supreme Court is to say what the law is or is not. It cannot impose law; making law is the role of the legislature. Thus when in the case of Roe v. Wade and now gay "marriage" it is said that these cases are the "law of the land" it is implicitly admitted that the Supreme Court legislated in the manner of a tyrant. Laws of tyrants are sham laws, and are deserving of no respect.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment