Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Bryan Preston

Bio

February 14, 2014 - 3:28 pm

The Constitution has the force of law in the United States. The Declaration of Independence, great document though it is, does not. But that didn’t stop  Judge Arenda Wright Allenfrom citing the Declaration of Independence in striking down Virginia’s definition of marriage as only being between one man and one woman.

“Our Constitution declares that ‘all men’ are created equal. Surely this means all of us,” Judge Allen wrote on the first page of her opinion. That line opens the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence and appears nowhere in the Constitution. The line, in which Thomas Jefferson, with signature flourish, borrowed the words of theorist John Locke: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Wright Allen is an Obama appointee, which given the quality of his recent ambassadorial appointments, might go a long way to explaining how a federal judge cannot discern between the Constitution — law — and the Declaration of Independence — not law. It’s very significant in the nation’s history and in the history of humanity, but it is not the law of the land.

The coda on all this is coming soon enough. Polls say a slim majority support redefining marriage. Actual votes tend to say that a majority object. Judges are gonna do that judges are gonna do, and marriage as we know it will be…changed. That’s where this is headed. We’ll either privatize marriage, having no real idea what that means, or we’ll push churches out of marriage, having no feel for the consequences of that, or we’ll just abolish it, or the state will take total control of it — the state being the federal government, in this case, as no state will be allowed to have any arrangement that does not satisfy the most extreme twisting of what was a sacrament easily understood by all.

What shape the family takes in the post-marriage future is anyone’s guess. What happens to faith in America is anyone’s guess, too, but it’s not out of bounds to expect that once this demand is met, others will be invented. The left have collectively proven that they’re not a movement that rests on its laurels. It attacks, accuses others of doing the attacking when they’re really just defending the status quo ante, and when it wins it launches a new attack on something else from another angle.

And if you object or attempt to stop the judicial tanks rolling over 5,000 years of tradition and law, Kirsten Powers will appoint herself pope and excommunicate you. Consider yourself warned.

No standard can possibly include every single person and every single permutation of life. It can’t be done. Standards rule some things in and other things out — otherwise, they’re not standards. The courts are trying to rewire society without any clear annunciation of where they intend to take things, but some advocates of the great overturning have been kind enough to offer a hint. They want every possible permutation of “family” recognized, every objection to same penalized — both with the full force of law. They want more than Powers angrily tweeting at people. They want the state unsettling settled law and codifying confusion.

Liberals are fond of declaring that all of their policy preference are “for the children,” until you talk about marriage, which is mostly about the welfare of children. Then the welfare of children takes second or third fiddle to the whims of adults and imperial courts.

Happy Valentine’s Day…

Bryan Preston has been a leading conservative blogger and opinionator since founding his first blog in 2001. Bryan is a military veteran, worked for NASA, was a founding blogger and producer at Hot Air, was producer of the Laura Ingraham Show and, most recently before joining PJM, was Communications Director of the Republican Party of Texas.
All Comments   (8)
All Comments   (8)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Hey Kristin - go champion a law that will force Mosques to hold a marriage service for 2 gay men or 2 lesbian women. Watch hilarity ensue.
She writes about what isn't Christian, ignoring that Christians are generally the most tolerant faith in America.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
So what's next? Will this ignorant ding bat look in the almanac, or maybe even the koran, to see what is constitutional?

I wonder how many doctors confuse kidneys with livers. Not any I would want to go to. Although after ObamaCare is fully implemented, they might be a majority of the new ones.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
"We’ll either privatize marriage, having no real idea what that means, or we’ll push churches out of marriage, having no feel for the consequences of that, or we’ll just abolish it, or the state will take total control of it."

OR we'll go the route of MEXICO (of all places), which for unique historical reasons has a COMPLETE separation of church and state, to the point where couples wanting a religiously-recognized marriage in Mexico have to go through TWO wedding ceremonies: 1 officiated by a civil authority, and the other officiated by the couple's chosen religious authority. Those who don't care if their marriage is religiously-recognized only need one wedding ceremony, i.e., the civil one.

We're not there yet, but are quickly getting closer to Obama's dream of transforming the U.S. into a third-world country ...
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
I suspect the redefining of marriage will also be the defining issue of 2016. And that complicit with the media, the Democrat nominee, most likely Hillary, will be lionized as having "evolved" on the issue, while the Republican, whoever it is--and I don't think it will matter who it is, will be portrayed as a Neanderthal. And ironically, anyone of faith will be particularly singled out and demonized as intolerant. Just wait.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
Is it a coincidence that this ruling comes almost at the same time that the Marxist Eric Holder announces that felons should get the vote. I'd say that felons have a greater claim to equal protection affording them the right to vote than homosexuals do to claim homosexual marriage. At least felons are actually denied the right to vote. No vote means no vote.

Homosexuals, OTOH, are not at all denied the right to marry. They just have to marry someone of the opposite sex - like everyone else. They can even have children within a normal marriage - as many actually have. Even those males who supposedly could not 'get it up' for a woman no matter what can have their own children with a wife of the opposite sex. Artificial insemination will do the job. All they have to do is find a woman they are capable of loving and who is capable of loving sufficiently to marry and have children with them. There simply is no discrimination against homosexuals in marriage defined sanely.

Is a supposed incapacity to have a sexual relation with a woman an incapacity to love a woman? That does not make sense. Heterosexual males certainly love other heterosexual males, although they would usually be embarrassed to call it that. Go to any veteran's memorial service and watch men choke up as they remember their fallen comrades. It is sometimes said that serving together in battles creates the strongest bonds there are. Watch men cry at funerals for their male friends. Is this not love?

But for some reason, apparently homosexual males who supposedly have no sexual attraction to females whatsoever also are incapable of loving a woman. One wonders what a 'culture' defined by a perverted sexual activity actually thinks love is. A loving relationship without sex is an everyday, normal, relationship.

The homosexual lobby, at its heart, is a post modern, Marxist long march campaign designed to destroy marriage, one of the fundamental pillars of our civilization. The undisciplined and hedonistic 'homosexual culture' was a particularly useful bunch of saps to subvert into working against civilization. Once perverted, easily subverted, I suppose. They will also easily be steered into the next big anti-civilization campaign, the campaign against Christianity, as Christians rightfully call homosexual activity a sin.

Equal protection, by any sane interpretation, doesn't mean "whatever you want, you get". Homosexuals are not discriminated against by marriage as traditionally defined. An understanding that the purpose (teleological, yes, but this can also be written in a more mealy mouthed way if teleology does not suit the purpose of atheist objecters - and, yeah, I know what I said there) of marriage is for the protection of children reveals the utter selfishness of the homo lobby's demands. What effect it has on children, they care not one whit. That is why they demand the right to adopt children. Two daddies is fine they claim.

Remember the feminist, child hating lie, that no daddy is just fine for children (as long as the money comes in from some man) that feminists sang as they tried to sweep the growing number of children in single parent families consequent upon their demand for no fault divorce under the carpet. That turned out to be false as children raised by single women end up in trouble more than any others. Two daddies is the parallel lying sacrifice of the evil homosexual lobby.

This selfishness needs to be exposed in brilliant light.

First, real freedom of speech must be regained, including the freedom of baker's and other people to speak by refusing service.

We are in the right. The truth is on our side. Take it back. This is a war and we must win or, in the end, see the death vision of the likes of Bill Ayers come true.
(show less)
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
"...once this demand is met, others will be invented. The left have collectively proven that they’re not a movement that rests on its laurels. It attacks, accuses others of doing the attacking when they’re really just defending the status quo ante, and when it wins it launches a new attack on something else from another angle."

'Tis the communist dialectic at work - object is to destroy all that they do not hold as their own condition of man. Despite the great and small failures it has suffered over the centuries, communism continues to be the policy of the ego-maniacal, the deranged, and the unlearned.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
well, none of el stupido's ambassadors have been to the country of their appointment, no reason any of his appointed judges should have been fully educated or qualified either. his supreme court appointments so far are a joke as well. everything about these losers is subpar, or worse. just saw where 1/4 of people in the u.s. don't know the earth revolves around the sun. now we know where that % who always side w/ odumbo originates.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Wright Allen is an Obama appointee"...

I was going to google this before reading the post but thought the info would proabably be in it...as I expected. Why was I not surprised in the slightest at who appointed her? Another dangerous moron on the bench...
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All

2 Trackbacks to “Very Confused Judge Strikes Down Virginia’s Marriage Standards”