Liberty and Justice For All?

Column: Salt & Light

Columnist: Kevin Slinger

This Submission: Liberty and Justice For All?

An activist judge in Louisiana this last week overturned the state’s constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage. The will of the people was blatantly ignored by this rogue judge as just weeks earlier the measure was passed by an overwhelming majority in that state.

Focus on the Family’s Dr. James Dobson stated in response, “These tyrannical judges continue to show an eagerness to legislate from the bench, imposing their own agendas, and those of their activist allies, upon American families. The will of the people of Louisiana could not be clearer - this amendment passed with the support of nearly 80 percent of the votes. Yet this judge saw fit to disenfranchise those voters in favor of a radical social agenda.”

Just weeks earlier a Washington state judge ruled that the state’s Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was unconstitutional, though voters in that state passed the DOMA in 1998 over the veto of Governor. The judge also refused to allow state legislators to intervene in this case.

We’ve also had three activist federal judges, in separate cases, rule the partial-birth abortion ban act unconstitutional because it does not include an exception for the health of the mother. This procedure, however, has never been found to be medically necessary for the health of the mother. There is, however, a provision in the 2003 partial-birth abortion ban act for the life of the mother. This procedure is clearly infanticide. Regardless, the vast majority of this nation believes this procedure should be banned (75-80 percent), our legislators passed the bill, and President Bush signed it into law and it should stand as the law, period.

In other cases, we have judges removing any semblance of God from public life, from simple crosses being removed from city emblems to Ten Commandments displays being removed from court houses against the will of the people. I thought that our government was to be of the people, by the people and for the people, not of the judges, by the judges and for the judges.

These are exactly the kind of judges John Kerry will continue to appoint if he is elected president, judges who do the bidding of the ACLU and other radical left-wing groups. Why? Because Kerry is not the moderate he portrays himself as publically. Look at the facts.

During the second presidential debate, I heard Kerry say that he would only appoint judges who were strict constitutionalists and that he didn’t believe in a litmus test, contradicting what I’ve heard him say on several other occasions and the fact that in April of 2003 he stated that he would only appoint pro-death (let’s call it what it really is) judges who share his views. That, however, would be a litmus test, much like the one he’s proposed for our nation globally.

He has also played a role in the filibustering of many of President Bush’s judicial nominees if they’ve shown so much as a hint of a pro-life stance. Kerry said, in 1984, that he would vote against “any restrictions on age, consent, funding restrictions, or any law to limit access to abortion.” He is also the first presidential candidate to ever be endorsed by the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. What I find truly amazing is the fact that Kerry recently stated, while campaigning in Iowa, that he believes “life begins at conception.”

Kerry not only voted against the partial-birth abortion ban at least 6 times, he stated, “There’s no such thing as a partial-birth... it is a late term abortion.” He has also voted at least 3 times against requiring parental notification for a minor’s abortion, voted to allow federal money to be used to distribute the morning-after abortion pill to our children in America’s schools, and voted at least 25 times in favor of using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions. The record doesn’t lie.

Delving deeper, we also find that in 2003 Kerry voiced support for population control efforts, in ‘96 said he could support euthanasia, in ‘98 voted against invoking cloture to the human cloning prohibition act, voted against expanding the child tax credit at least 18 times, voted against marriage penalty tax relief at least 22 times, and voted against expanding adoption tax credit at least 7 times.

As for DOMA, Kerry was one of only 14 senators to vote against the ‘96 act which banned the federal recognition of gay marriage, under former President Clinton and in August of 2003 he expressed “moral outrage” over the Vatican’s statement on gay marriage.

Kerry has also stated that he is opposed to same-sex marriage, but supports civil unions. However, his own words in an article he wrote for The Advocate, a homosexual-activist magazine, Sept. 3, 1996, contradict even this.

Here’s an excerpt; “Antigay forces might have their day with the Defense of Marriage Act, but as my friend Rep. Gerry Studds declared on the floor of the House, “We are going to prevail just as every other component of the civil rights movement in this country has prevailed. There is nothing any of us can do today to stop that. We can embrace it warmly, as some of us do; we can resist it bitterly, as some of us do, but there is no power on earth that can stop it.” Gerry has it right. We will win this fight for civil rights. We will win the fight for equal protection under the law.”

He also stated in an interview, just last week, with the same publication, that he doesn’t predict the future and could change his mind on same-sex marriage.

These issues alone, and how they are handled, will affect our nation and our children’s futures well beyond the four year presidential term. They will have repercussions for the next 40 to 50 years. Our liberties are not only being threatened, our national morality hangs in the balance. Please... chew on that a while before you go to the polls.