I'm actually more angry today about SCOTUS's ruling in Lawrence than I was yesterday when it was released. My post last night pointed to the complete inconsistency of the Court, an inconsistency which galls me to practically no end, especially when it is applied in opposition to moral principles held dear by myself and millions of other Americans.
Why do the majority members of the Court find it necessary to take upon themselves the re-ordering of American society as they see fit? Why can't they simply allow the elected representatives of the people to change society according to the desires of the people, rather imposing upon all their own pet ideologies? Many people think sodomy laws are silly and ridiculous, because they are unenforceable. Fine. Then why can't the people's representatives take the necessary steps to repeal them? Why does the Court have to impose itself in the process and hand down a ruling which by its very nature is so broad as to legalize every form of consensual human activity?
The fact of the matter is, there is no constitutional basis for the Court's ruling, as the dissents make clear. It's nothing more than the imposition of the majority member's personal ideologies, disguised in legalease.
Here are some of the articles which probably initiated my blood pressure increase:
- A Roe v. Wade for gay rights.
- The Constitution lives and mutates
- Lawrence does more than strike down an archaic law