Support First Things by turning your adblocker off or by making a  donation. Thanks!

Why do we even have a legislative branch? It seems a waste of time to go to the trouble of electing representatives when federal judges in California are making our laws :

A federal judge in Riverside declared the U.S. military’s ban on openly gay service members unconstitutional Thursday, saying the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy violates the 1st Amendment rights of lesbians and gay men.

U.S. District Court Judge Virginia A. Phillips said the policy banning gays did not preserve military readiness, contrary to what many supporters have argued, saying evidence shows that the policy in fact had a “direct and deleterious effect’’ on the military . . .

The ruling is expected to intensify political pressure in Washington to act on legislation to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” which remains stalled in the Senate despite support from President Obama and the Democratic congressional leadership.

In the text of the ruling Judge Phillips notes :

The Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Act infringes the fundamental rights of United States servicemembers in many ways, some described above. The Act denies homosexuals serving in the Armed Forces the right to enjoy “intimate conduct” in their personal relationships.

By this standard the Judge has also nullified a subsection of Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice—the prohibition against adultery. Since it would infringe on a service members right to enjoy “intimate conduct” in their personal relations to prohibit them from sleeping with a married man or woman, this section has to be thrown out too.

Of course, you could say that my claim is absurd since Judge Phillips never intended to have her rationale applied logically in other relevant areas. I agree. Phillips knew what decision she wanted—and knew what the Obama administration, who threw the case, wanted—and then just pulled a reason out of thin air to provide a legal fig leaf to cover her pro-homosexual activism. The right to engage in sodomy is found in the Constitution, just as the Founders intended, right? No? Well, let’s just say it is and create a new theory of legal interpretation to support our social experimentation.

I say we impeach Judge Phillips. Yes, I know there probably isn’t a valid legal justification or Constitutional warrant for the action. But if the rule of law doesn’t hinder the preference of activists judges, why should stop us from expressing our preference?

(Via: Hot Air )

Comments are visible to subscribers only. Log in or subscribe to join the conversation.



Filter First Thoughts Posts

Related Articles