What To Do When Confronted With An Illicit Supreme Court Decision

I'd like to expand on my previous post, where I exhorted real Americans to honor their Constitution and conscience in defiance of the Supreme Court's latest attack on society. Many of you might be wondering what this means, especially considering that you are being told from all other quarters that the ruling is now "the law of the land" and obligates you to meekly fall in line. Not so.

First, even if you accept the offensive premise that the Court may place itself over the Constitution and unilaterally determine the law of the land, the decision has no effect whatsoever on private choices or conduct. The decision stems from the Fourteenth Amendment, whose prohibitions reach only STATE ACTION. If you as a private citizen do not wish to officiate a homosexual wedding, bake a cake for one, photograph one, or attend one, the decision doesn't constrain you one bit, and you have no need to try to carve out religious or other cramped "exceptions" to a rule that doesn't even exist here. So, all private citizens may do or say as they please on this subject without fear that their assailants have a new legal arrow in their quiver.

Second, no real American can accept the offensive premise that the Court's decisions are themselves the law of the land. The Court is merely a co-equal branch of the federal government, along with the executive and the legislature, all of which are inferior to the law of the land and lack the power to change it. The only thing the Court can do under the Constitution is adjudicate specific controversies between specific parties -- anyone not a party to this lawsuit is not bound by the decision in any way, shape, or form. The decision is merely precedent to guide lower courts in the event of future controversies among other parties. As such, anyone in a position of public authority who was not a party to this lawsuit may refuse to issue licenses for homosexual weddings, if that is what the law of his jurisdiction allows or requires. When the predictable lawsuit is filed to force his hand, he can defend his actions by citing the plain language of the Constitution, the rich history underlying it, its clear reservation of all non-delegated power to the several states, and a reminder that the Constitution is superior to the U.S. Supreme Court. Whatever judge is presiding over the case should honor and uphold the Constitution rather than the Supreme Court's dereliction from it. If he abdicates his duty, then the matter can be appealed until either the Constitution or the Court ultimately prevails, at which time other parties and other controversies may emerge.

Surely some readers with a legal bent are shrieking right about now that public officials and judges who flout Supreme Court precedent are unfit for office. But I ask you what is worse: a public official who disregards a Supreme Court decision, or a Supreme Court that disregards the Constitution? Only the latter amounts to outlaw behavior worthy of removal from office.

If you need a refresher on the Constitution and how the Supreme Court has bludgeoned the Fourteenth Amendment beyond recognition, read the following articles that I previously posted here: I, II, III, IV, V. You can find a lot more of them by clicking on the "14th Amendment" tag beneath this post. 

By the way, there are some calls from "conservatives" to amend the Constitution to reverse what the Supreme Court has done here. This is perverse and illustrates once again the impotence of mainstream activism. It is the burden of the proponents of gay marriage to amend the Constitution and federalize an issue that is reserved to the states under the existing one. We are not confronted with a Constitution that needs changing on this issue; rather, we are confronted with outlaw activity by people who care nothing for rules and refuse to be bound by them. When your opponent takes off his gloves and wields a knife, keeping on your gloves in obeisance to the rules is an act of suicide.

Despicable

There is no other way to describe what the Supreme Court has done with regard to gay marriage, however predictable this latest outrage might have been. The issue never was about whether gays could marry, no more than in other cases where the issue was not about abortion, flag burning, prayer in school, sodomy, or anything else the Court made sanctimonious pronouncements about. Instead, the issue was WHO DECIDES, and there is nothing in the Constitution that strips the states of their discretion over these matters. The Supreme Court has steadily, and once again, committed treason by stealing the awesome power of amendment away from the people and claiming that power for the central government. And make no mistake, this is amendment rather than "interpretation," for there is no possible way to read the Constitution as compelling us all to endorse gay marriage. The people who fought and died to establish this country -- or who fought and died to preserve it, as is the official narrative of Lincoln's war -- would have puked their guts out if they knew their sacrifices had been to enable this.

At the end of the day, the Supreme Court does not have the power to amend the Constitution, so this decision is as worthless as the paper it's written on. The decision does not resolve the issue, no more than Dred Scott resolved the issue of chattel slavery. Since the Constitution is supreme -- over and above the noxious individuals sitting on the Court -- it is the prerogative of every true American to disregard what the Court has perpetrated and go on living life as the law and our conscience dictate. Salvation comes from within, not from without, especially in times like these.

God speed.

EDIT:

I fully expect that we will soon witness lawsuits claiming a fundamental right to polygamy and incest, regardless of the Constitution and the destructive impact of these practices. The mere desire to do it is justification enough, in this feral time we inhabit. 

SECOND EDIT:

Justice Thomas is the only one of the bunch who notices perhaps the largest defect with the legal challenge: nobody has restricted homosexuals from doing anything. There is no government force against homosexuals that the Court is stepping in to prevent; quite to the contrary, the Court is unleashing government force against the rest of us to compel us all to celebrate and endorse homosexual relationships. The vast majority of the citizenry are under attack, not homosexuals, who at worst were denied a benefit rather than a right. It is the majority that is being denied its rights. I've made this point numerous times, and it's shocking that only one of the supposedly nine greatest legal minds in the country has mentioned it.

The Stars And Bars Under Attack? I'll Fly Them

It appears there is a renewed witch hunt against all things Confederate, including the battle flag, in the wake of lunatic Dylann Roof's recent shooting of several black churchgoers. The young murderer wore several such insignias and claims to have acted with the intent of sparking a race war.

Before I comment on how ridiculous and offensive it is to stamp out this symbol of the Confederacy, I should pause to mention that another lunatic named John Brown murdered several innocent people in the mid-1800s with the same intention of sparking a race war. He was hanged before he could find out that he had succeeded beyond his wildest dreams, for the war he helped to launch caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. And yet, John Brown was and is hailed as a hero for his cowardly, murderous actions. I see only two choices here: both John Brown and Dylann Roof are lunatics worthy of scorn, or they both are heroes worthy of praise by the people they claimed to represent. I choose the former, but everyone else should ponder that one for a little while.

As for the flag, it was flown by men with more character, courage, and righteousness in their fingernails than any modern politician has in his entire family. The vast majority of Confederates owned no slaves and had no aspirations of doing so; while they tolerated chattel slavery (as did the United States under the Constitution), what they fought for was to preserve their lives and homes from an invasion by a murderous, lawless, and rapacious regime that would, and did, impose a form of slavery that was universal and perpetual. The Confederacy was freer with chattel slavery than we are today without it, hands down. The cause of the Confederate soldier was noble -- he was willing to fight to prevent the tyranny that we now endure, in the face of overwhelming odds and almost certain death or disfigurement.

I pray for that kind of courage, as should all men, and I will continue to honor my ancestors who showed it. The shriveled souls who demonize them, or those of us who honor them, can go straight to hell.

This Pope Is Not A Man Of God, But A Man Of The World

It appears that the nominal Pope's latest encyclical will have nothing to do with the mission of the Church or its founder, which is to preserve man's soul from a fallen world and to speak truth to power. No, this "Pope" is issuing a clarion call to enslave and degrade man with global government so as to preserve the world, linking arms with the powerful to enforce the philosophical and empirical lies of modern environmentalism.

Is it any wonder that the Church's membership (and that of all Christian denominations) is shrinking? People go to church as a refuge from the world, to return "home" for a moment to remember what is eternal and unshakeable in the face of the world's lies and injustice. Yet modern Christian churches offer no refuge from the world, rather an echo chamber for it -- political correctness, equal opportunity priesthood and ministry, military pageantry, celebration of unrepentant sin, and now paganism.There is no reason to go to church when all you find within is what already bedevils you without.

But the good news is that this insane era we live in forces everyone to choose. You can no longer coast on the efforts of your ancestors or the institutions they built. Both church and state are putrid now, so you must either identify with them and make yourself putrid, or stand apart and build something new, virtuous, and enduring for your descendants.

Relish Jury Duty

The other day I was getting ready to lift weights when I overheard someone in the locker room complain about having to report for jury duty. This is an attitude shared by the vast majority of Americans, the same ones who insist that voting in elections is a civic duty even though a jury vote is far more meaningful.

Let's review. Voting for a pre-selected slate of sycophants, mediocrities, and liars to assume control of the bloated political apparatus will do nothing to improve your life or anyone else's, even if by some miracle your vote tips the scales in favor of Tweedledum over Tweedledee. By contrast, your vote on a jury can easily tip the scales; it will make an immediate difference in people's lives; and it can foil the government's machinations. On this last score, you as a juror have the right to "nullify" a law you disagree with, a glorious power dating back to the colonial era and that not even the president possesses (at least theoretically). It makes no difference that the facts show a clear legal violation; if you as a citizen find the law unjust, it is your right and duty to refuse to enforce it. This power frightens the establishment, so much so that it actively lies to jurors by telling them that they must enforce the law when triggered by the facts. Consider that a military tribunal tried and convicted the plotters behind the Lincoln assassination, and for the specific reason that the establishment feared jury nullification should the matter be tried in a civilian court.

Unfortunately, today the establishment doesn't have to work very hard to keep jurors in line. The ignorance, apathy, and sloth of most Americans today take care of all that. What supreme irony that they attack someone like me for not participating in the electoral Kabuki theater, when I am the one eager to cast a vote that truly counts.

Scientists Fiddle With Global-Warming Data

This should come as a surprise to no one:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists have found a solution to the 15-year “pause” in global warming: They “adjusted” the hiatus in warming out of the temperature record. New climate data by NOAA scientists doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting pre-hiatus temperatures downward and inflating temperatures in more recent years.

Science is only as good as the people practicing it. It is one thing to say "I fucking love science" (which often graces my Facebook feed), but quite another to engage in the spirit of critical thought and independent inquiry that science truly entails.

Most of the people who bleat that they love science have no intention of thinking for themselves, but rather parrot the latest opinions of scientists who are just as prone to error, self-interest, politics, and sin as anyone else. If you love science, you cannot simply facepalm people who express unorthodox views on issues such as anthropogenic global warming, vaccines, gender distinctions, racial distinctions, or any number of others. You have to analyze those views and come up with your own coherent basis for opposing them. If you refuse to do so, you don't love science -- you hate it.

What Is A Rebel?

There is a great deal of confusion over what characteristics make someone a "rebel." The popular image is a person who defies social convention as to dress, language, and/or behavior to do whatever he wishes, usually in a loud and obnoxious manner. But giving vent to the id is not an act of rebellion; it is an act of surrender. It also plays right into the hands of government, which seeks to degrade society and thereby sow chaos, which always enhances government power. Huxley's Brave New World hits the mark much closer than Orwell's 1984, since people addicted to gratification are quite easy to manipulate and control.

A true rebel is not a thoughtless animal at the mercy of his impulses, nor is he a useful idiot for tyrants. He asserts control over himself and becomes capable of identifying and resisting injustice. This is the sort of person those in power fear, not the human debris making war on a bourgeois society that no longer even really exists.