Friday, January 20, 2006

Another Incompetent Ruling

Another Incompetent Ruling

In yet another display of judicial incompetence, a judge in Maryland has ruled that a 33-year-old state law against gay marriage violates the Maryland Constitution's guarantee of equal rights. This is so blatantly untrue that we can easily see the ACLUs campaign against freedom at work. Any child can see that no discrimination is present here. No citizen, or even tourist, is prevented from marrying in Maryland. There would be no point to restricting homos, perverts, or criminals from entering into the bond of marriage. That is why no such discrimination exists. But such a truth does not allow for this attack on decency, which is the ACLUs stock in trade. The ACLU was founded in 1920 by a communist whose stated raison d'etre was the dismantling of the United States, and indeed all nations, in favor of international, stateless, communism. But in a world where the Emperor can be said to be wearing non-existent clothes, a law that says that anyone can avail themselves of marriage can be said to discriminate against a craven movement to destroy our nation.

Indeed, any gay person is able to marry, in Maryland or anywhere else. The only thing that these perverts can not have is the right to break the law in pursuit of the chaos that they seek. No one can prevent a gay man from marrying a gay woman. What the law does prevent is a gay man from marrying another gay man. But, since it also prevents a straight man from marrying another straight man, there is no discrimination. As I have posted before, I once would have sought to marry a straight friend of mine, in that case to facilitate his visa requirement to stay in the United States. That was, is, and should remain illegal, and I am thankful that the law prevented me from making that youthfull mistake. But under the ruling of this Maryland judge, there should be nothing to prevent a man from marrying his own son or daughter.

As the ACLU quotes the judge, Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Brooke Murdock, in its own press release on their sucess in garnering this ruling,
The Court is not unaware of the dramatic impact of its ruling, but it must not shy away from deciding significant legal issues when fairly presented to it for judicial determination.
So this self-appointed decider of "significant issues" with "dramatic impact" is not shy. Well, neither is the appellate division of the Maryland courts. And if even these worthies balk at doing their duty, I have complete faith in the people of Maryland on this issue.

Why is it so important to these scum to destroy the institution of marriage? well, as the ACLUs co-founder Roger Baldwin candidly stated,
I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately, for abolishing the state itself [...]. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the properties class, and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal. [....] I don't regret being part of the communist tactic. I knew what I was doing. I was not an innocent liberal. I wanted what the communists wanted and I traveled the United Front road to get it.
A true and self-appointed iconoclast, Mr. Baldwin's legacy carries forward in its present state today. Communism may have failed, but the State still exists, and is under attack. It would be pathetic if it were not so dangerous. While I am sure that Roger Baldwin's ideological heir Alec does not know the danger he courts, he courts it nonetheless. It is so trendy and fuzzy to want everyone to be equal. What will they say when the first pervert attempts to marry his 12 year old daughter, and have a child together, if they can cite law and stare decisis to gain judicial acknowledgement of their foul deed? Will they be so proud of their progressivism then?

Update For further reading on the communist background and leanings of the early ACLU, Eugene Volokh has put together some great material showing, in their own words, how anti-democratic and yes, even anti-American the founders of the ACLU really were.