What democratic process?

NPJ - CunninghamI’ve always suffered from a little bit of millennialism in that I’m perfectly okay with the idea of gay marriage. Who am I to deny two people who love each other the ability to live their lives together in a union recognized by law? Ideally, an institution like marriage wouldn’t be under the purview of the government, but things are what they are.

What I do not agree with, however, is the means that were taken to make it the law of the land… primarily because the body that did so does not have the Constitutional ability to make law.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America handed down a decision to legalize gay marriage in the United State via judicial decree, thereby taking the democratic process out of the equation. The Supreme Court’s majority, led by Anthony Kennedy, had to make up a Constitutional right to marry, and left it so broad that we are already seeing calls to legalize polygamy, despite earlier assurances from the left-wing commentariat that such a “slippery slope” wouldn’t actually be in play.  However, the issue of gay marriage is now a reality in the United States.

Which, again, is fine by me. The Supreme Court, however, has further paved the way for un-elected dwellers in Washington D.C. to make law while being totally unaccountable to voters, thus destroying the idea of elected government that was so vital in the formation of this country. The fact of the matter is that the birth of our nation arose from the idea that we should be represented if things are to be decided for us. Kennedy’s opinion completely eradicates that.

And what’s worse is the potential this creates with regard to our churches. The removal of the tax-exempt status of churches is now being tossed about by people who believe themselves to be the American public’s intellectual betters. This entirely foreseeable development has been a deep fear of the religious right-wing, and the battle for religious liberty was an effort to help stave some of this off. If churches lose tax-exempt status, then it opens the floodgates for tough government regulation and, worse, multiple lawsuits from those who wish to sue a church because it would not perform a same sex wedding.

All of this has been downplayed as a possibility by the Left. “No no, you’re paranoid,” they would tell anyone who had these fears. However, less than 48 hours after the Supreme Court’s decision, TIME Magazine posted a column calling for an end to tax exemptions for churches, POLITICO had a piece on legalizing polygamy, and everyone who was told this was a paranoid delusion is seeing it turn to a horrifying reality.

There is no doubt that there is a movement against Christianity within this country. Even those who are not evangelical in their beliefs can see it, and they will withdraw themselves from society in fear of the coming mobs. It is a dangerous precedent the Supreme Court has set, and we will watch as it unfolds. The next presidential election is key for either side of the political aisle, because the likely retirement of Justice Ginsberg will leave an opening that will decidedly swing the court one way or another.

Joe Cunningham is a conservative commentator, Front Page Editor at RedState.com, and a teacher in south Louisiana. You can find him on Twitter at @joec_esquire.

One thought on “What democratic process?

  1. Why only two…….who are we to force our morality on those that want to construct their loving family unit anyway they desire. Marriage is a human right found in the penumbra of our founding legal documents.

Comments are closed.