afchief #fundie

afchief #fundie rr-bb.com

Listen people. The SCOTUS ruling last year in favor of Gay marriage means NOTHING!!! The SCOTUS cannot make, change or remove laws. Courts only offer opinions. Opinions can change when judges change. The law cannot be changed by a “judge.” If that were the case, our “laws” would be as constantly changing as the “judges” are. If “judges” ruled that sodomy was illegal in 1986, how did sodomy become “legal” today? Did the law change, or did the “opinions” of the “judges” change? There is NO gay marriage law on the books. Laws can only be made by one of two ways in America: by an act of the Legislative Branch, or by a citizen’s initiative through a direct vote of the people. Courts can never make laws. They just tell us that they can, and we believe it, and teach it to others until the lie eventually becomes accepted as “truth.”

Here is my point: All the hubbub over homosexual marriage is a cleverly designed smoke screen. Who cares what the Supreme Court says? They are merely rendering their “opinion”. The people of 30 states have already spoken on this issue. No court “opinion” can nullify the vote of the people. Did anyone vote to give Kagan, Sotomayor, and Ginsburg the power to change the institution of marriage?

We have to begin to push back. We must attack the lies head on. They have distracted us and they have us focusing on “religious liberty” or “conscience” or “deeply held religious beliefs.”, but those are the wrong arguments. We must stand and fight on the Truth. Courts do not make laws. A court decision does not carry the force of law, and it most certainly does not “change” the law. Abortion is illegal, homo marriage is a fraud, and religious values cannot be separated from government.

It's time to make one simple request of the judges: Show me the law! Show me the law that legalizes abortion. Show me the law that legalizes homo-marriage. Show me the law that separates church and state.

42 comments

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

The SCOTUS cannot make, change or remove laws. Courts only offer opinions. Opinions can change when judges change. The law cannot be changed by a “judge.”

The judge states what the law is. Not all laws have the same value; the Constitution is the most important law and no law is valid that conflicts with it. Judges use the Constitution as a yardstick to judge whether a law is valid or not. The final say is that of the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court says that same-sex marriages are legal, that corporations have rights like people, or that Gitmo is a valid place of detention under the jurisdiction of the United States, then that is the law as it stands. You will either have to live with that or try to amend the Constitution.

Who cares what the Supreme Court says?

You did, afchief, when you quoted Marbury v Madison.

Did anyone vote to give Kagan, Sotomayor, and Ginsburg the power to change the institution of marriage?

The Senate voted to confirm their ability to state that same-sex marriages were legal in the United States.

Show me the law!

Let's begin with reading the Constitution, starting with Article 3, where it says that the judicial power of the United States is vested in the courts, and the Supreme Court has the final say, "both as to Law and Fact." If you don't believe the words of the Constitution as to the Judicial Branch, why then should you have any more faith in what it says about the Legislative Branch?

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Pip, antichrist

afchuff installing himself as Ruptured Retards' self-appointed Judge Dredd?

Mega-City One Judges don't take too kindly to 'JIMPs' (Judge Impersonators) you know.

...and how long before RR's mods throw him into the Iso-Cube of being bar(re)d?

"It's time to make one simple request of the judges: Show me the law! Show me the law that legalizes abortion. Show me the law that legalizes homo-marriage. Show me the law that separates church and state."

Judge Dredd: 'Resyk. Grand Hall of Justice has no problem with cits who marry: as long as it doesn't affect others. 'Grud'? 'Jovis'? You show me yours, and I'll show you Death, Fear, Fire & Mortis. It's an Iso-Cube for you; two years for wasting a street judge's time. Court is adjourned!'

--EDIT--

#1910880

"I think achief has started lurking here. It would explain him finding Rapture Ready."

Your theory has some evidence to back it up:

This post by him was just last week. Yet, look at the join date: 2007.

That post was one of just six to date on Ruptured Retards.

old comment by SpukiKitty

What's afchief's whole point, anyway? That the U.S. Constitution isn't valid? That the U.S.A. was founded as a Theocracy? That the Puritans were the real Founding Fathers?

He denies and ignores what is so clearly written in the Constitution. When folks show him all the exact words and proofs he demands, he ignores it then asks the same questions!

He talks as if the Supreme Court doesn't exist or has validity!

There's an over-riding point or premise that afchief is apparently trying to hint at and hoping others catch on to.

It seems to be "The Whole U.S. Government, founded in the mid-late 18th century by a bunch of mostly Deists and Freemasons in Boston and Philly is not valid or real".

old comment by John

The law cannot be changed by a “judge.”

But the Constitution itself is a law. It forbids Congress or the states from passing certain laws. The judges aren't changing a law - they're enforcing it. They're declaring that Congress or the states have passed an illegal law and are in violation of the Constitution.

Show me the law that legalizes abortion. Show me the law that legalizes homo-marriage.

Laws don't legalize things. Everything is legal by default unless a law makes it illegal. And the Constitution makes it illegal for the government to pass certain laws. Abortion isn't legal because a law says it's legal. It's legal because the Constitution forbids passing a law against it.

old comment by Swede

Oh NO! Not this broken record again?

The people vote in a president and a party. That party then nominate and vote for people for different governmental positions, who nominate and vote for people higher up in the government, who in turn nominate and vote for people in the highest levels, one of which being the Supreme Court (the name is a hint that these are not just any hick lawyers). In short, the people did elect the Supreme Court judges, and their rulings are therefore the vote/voice of the people.

Neither Kagan, Sotomayor nor Ginsburg changed the institution of marriage. They just said that it's unconstitutional if men are allowed to marry women, while women aren't allowed to marry women.

You want to push back against the Constitution and the Founding Fathers? Well, have fun with your treason conviction and lifelong prison sentence.

You're the ones blathering about religion; religion havs no part in government, as you have Separation of Church and State. They are talking real life, which you know nothing about, whatsoever.

That's not how it works, nitwit. Everything is LEGAL until there's a law AGAINST it.

The Separation between Church and State came before there was a state, so that's above and beyond mere laws.

old comment by Taln_Reich

No, the Judges do not just offer an opinion. They say what the Law means in the case brought forward to them. If you kill a man to get his wallet, and the Judge comes to the conclusion that's murder, than the law says you can't kill a man to get is wallet. If you kill a man holding the trigger of a nuclear bomb hidden in New York, who threatens to detonate the bomb, and the Judge comes to the conclusion that's self defense, than the Law says you can kill a man to save a city from otherwise certain destruction.

And if the supreme court, the Judges who Judge what the constitution, the law that says what laws can be made, conclude that making a law against same-sex-marriage is against the constitution, than the constitution says you can't make a law against same-sex-marriage. And that verdict is just as valid as the prision sentence you get for killing someone just to get his wallet.