Maryland Court Rules Against Gay Marriage
Today, on a vote of 4-3 Maryland’s supreme court upheld a state law that defined a marriage as being between a man and a woman. This, unlike what the liberals would have you believe, does not mean that gay marriage will be forever banned in Maryland. This does mean, however that the state will have to go through the proper steps in order to get it approved, unlike Massachusetts where the judiciary unlawfully forced gay marriage on the books. Gay Marriage is now allowed in Massachusetts even though the law the judges unlawfully told the legislature they had to write has never been written, but I digress. All this ruling does is send gay marriage to the legislature, where it belongs. Gay marriage laws can then be written if so desired, not forced upon the people.
“Our opinion should by no means be read to imply that the General Assembly may not grant and recognize for homosexual persons civil unions or the right to marry a person of the same sex,” Judge Glenn T. Harrell Jr. wrote for the four-judge majority, which also included Judges Dale R. Cathell, Clayton Greene Jr. and Alan M. Wilner.
Simply stated, if you want the law, write the law, don’t ask us to write it for you. This is the way it should be handled. Every branch of government has it’s specific role, and the judiciary in this case has told the legislature it wasn’t the job of the courts to write law. It is refreshing to see this happen for a change.
“We commend the court for upholding the law rather than imposing the views of a persistent minority. This is an outright rejection of judicial activism.
Exactly. But here is a dissenting view:
“The court decided that we are undeserving of the family protections given to married couples simply because we’re partners of the same sex. That’s simply not right.” Kebreau added, “We aren’t giving up. We’ll continue to fight for marriage in the legislature.”
First, the court did not decide you were undeserving of anything, the court said it was the legislature’s job to write laws, not their’s, and this is correct.
Second, the person above was correct to say that they will fight for marriage in the legislature, that is where they should have been fighting all along, not in the courts.
You can read the articles this post was based on here and here.
America's Watchtower 
It’s not “the proper steps” when the issue at hand is a civil rights issue. The judiciary DOES have a job in matters of law: to strike down laws that are unconstitutional, which is NOT the same thing as writing a law.
There is a law on the books that prohibits it, and the plaintiffs would have it struck down (as is the power of the judiciary.)
Why?
Well, let’s look at the facts. Maryland has an ERA that purports to protect Marylanders from sex discrimination.
All else being equal, I would have the right to marry my partner. However, because I am female, it is abridged. This is clearly unconstitutional. Constitutional rights are individual rights, not class rights. I don’t need to show anything but that the adverse decision was based solely on sex (and it was) to establish sex discrimination and subject this law to strict scrutiny.
Sorry, but them’s the facts. I know it hurts that Maryland’s constitution guarantees me the right to protect my family, too – I can refer you to a good counselor to deal with it. Meanwhile, these judges aren’t doing their jobs, and it only takes a slight glance at the decision to see that.
LikeLike