That one person can strike down the valid voice of hundreds of thousands who exercised their part in democratically choosing to pass a law that upheld their deep moral beliefs is truly frightening to anyone who values the democratic process. A judge can't declare an amendment to a state constitution to be federally unconstitutional when the Constitution does not mention or protect the so-called "right" that is allegedly being violated.
Piecing together disparate and irrelevant statements from previous Supreme Court and appeals court decisions in order to disingenuously coat judicial activism with the thin veneer of contrived legitimacy is the true violation of the constitutional rights of millions of people.
- 10 things you never knew about the FBI
- Lawrence and Windsor won't trump Utah...
- In our opinion: The long-term outlook for...
- My view: Balancing personal conviction and...
- Robert Bennett: Hamas and its financial...
- Letter: Policy disagreement
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Re-enactment...
- In our opinion: With Shurtleff and Swallow...
- Lawrence and Windsor won't trump Utah... 110
- Mary Barker: The Romney I may have... 72
- Stuart Reid: Translations of religious... 61
- In our opinion: The long-term outlook... 47
- My view: Balancing personal conviction... 47
- Letter: Policy disagreement 45
- In our opinion: Use market forces and... 33
- The complicated political views of... 32