Same Sex Marriage: U.S. Supreme Court Gets it Wrong, Again
By: David Deschesne
Fort Fairfield Journal, July 8, 2015
The recent Same Sex Marriage ruling legitimizing homosexual marriage by the U.S. Supreme Court shows how the court has once again succumbed to political pressure to come up with a ruling that both defies law and facts.
The Supreme Court is supposed to rule on issues as they relate to the rules codified in the U.S. Constitution. While the majority claimed homosexual marriage is a “Constitutional Right,” they failed to admit the fact that there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that describes marriage, or even attempts to legislate on it. The Same Sex Marriage ruling was made up out of thin air by a political activist court with no foundation in law or reality.
This, however, is not the first time the Supreme court defied facts, law and logic to render what amounted to a purely political decision.
For example, in the infamous Dred Scott v. Sanford case (60 U.S. 393) the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that forcefully enslaving black people was legal.
“In 1834, the plaintiff, Dred Scott, was a slave whose owner transported him from Missouri, a slave state, to Illinois, a free state, and enslaved him there until April or May, 1836. At that time, his owner transported him to the Territory of Upper Louisiana, which was acquired by the United States from France. The plaintiff continued to serve until 1838, despite the provision of the Missouri Compromise prohibiting slavery in this territory...The Court determined that the class of persons to which the plaintiff belonged did not constitute a part of the sovereignty and was not intended to be included under the word citizens in the Constitution. The class could, therefore, assert none of the rights and privileges of United States citizens. The black race was regarded as an inferior class of persons, who had been subdued by the predominant race, and, irrespective of emancipation, remained subject to their control.” (See The Guide to American Law Vol. 4, pp. 188-189, ©1984 West Publishing.)
The ruling had no basis in the Constitution and no reference to human rights—except the rights of the slave masters—and thus was a decision rendered to appease the political correctness of the day.
In Nix v. Hedden (149 U.S. 305) the U.S. Supreme Court made another hysterically bad ruling when they ruled tomatoes were vegetables when in fact they are fruit.
Vegetables grow underground and are the roots of plants, such as potatoes, carrots, beets and radish. Fruit grows above ground, either on a vine, plant or tree. Some examples of fruit are; strawberries, apples, bananas, cucumbers and tomatoes.
However, political expediency ruled the day once again as the U.S. Supreme Court declared tomatoes are vegetables simply because the government wanted to tax them as such.
The ruling states, “Botanically speaking, tomatoes are the fruit of a vine, just as are cucumbers, squashes, beans and peas. But in the common language of the people, whether sellers or consumers of provisions, all these are vegetables, which are grown in kitchen gardens, and which, whether eaten cooked or raw, are, like potatoes, carrots, parsnips, turnips, beets, cauliflower, cabbage, celery and lettuce, usually served at dinner in, with, or after the soup, fish or meats which constitute the principal part of the repast, and not, like fruits generally, as desert.” Nix v. Hedden (149 U.S. 305)
This case arose from a taxation suit where under the 1883 tariff act, fruits could be imported duty free. As in most cases which will benefit the federal government financially, the Supreme Court did its duty, ignored facts, and ruled in favor of the entity which pays their salary.
In the future, we can expect the next societal hurdle to be bestiality (humans having sex with animals) to be deemed “Constitutional” by a degenerate U.S. Supreme Court, relying on the recent ruling on homosexual marriage as a 'right' and given their past proclivity to making rulings that fly in the face of reality and fact.
