Tuesday, May 26, 2009

They fought the law -- and the law won. But that won't stop them...

Today, liberals everywhere are upset because the California Supreme Court upheld the voters' approval of a ban on gay marriage that passed 52-48 in November. In doing so, they allowed the 18,000 marriages established before the ban passed to stand -- a bit of an odd ruling due to the fact it creates a small class of 36,000 people -- but probably necessary in the fact that it would have created an ex-post facto type of situation and opened up a challenge to the United States Constitution.

Immediately after the ruling, thousands of protestors erupted in a "Shame on you!" chant. While this emotional reaction by the left is expected, it is truly sad that so many seem so ignorant of the importance of the rule of law. Any ruling contrary to the one made today would have been truly absurd and set California on a dangerous path where laws, even ones established in the Constitution, didn't matter as long as a court said otherwise.

So, although the 4-3 decision calling the statute banning gay marrige is still a bad decision, at least 6 of the 7 California Supreme Court justices had the sense to realize the pandora's box that would have been created had they ruled that a constitutional amendment was unconstitutional.

Indeed, no matter where one stands on the issue of gay marraige, what happened today was a victory for the rule of law. To put it bluntly, opponents of Prop 8 fought the law -- and the law won.

Afterwards, opponents said they would go back to the ballot box with an initiative of their own to repeal the voters' decision in 2008. Of course, this is what should have happened from day one! Rather than trying to overturn the will of the people via the courts, they should spent less time protesting and more time trying to convince some of those who voted yes to vote the other way next time around.

Hopefully in the process liberals will gain a lesson in basic civics and law -- which is the first step in the 12 Step Program towards recovery from liberalism.

Of course, this is separate from the entire debate over the issue at hand -- gay marriage. After all, it isn't just civil law secularists and liberals want to overturn. They want to change moral and natural law -- but what is lost in the frenzy and coverage over attempts to redefine marriage is something that secularists and liberals will never understand:

Marriage can't be redefined. It is what it is. It is and always will be between a man and a woman, and that will never be altered because it can't be. Just because a state legislature or supreme court in Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts or Iowa says otherwise doesn't mean anything as far as the real definition goes. It's no different than 2+2 equalling four or the fact the sun comes up in the morning and goes down at night. A governmental body of any kind saying otherwise won't alter that reality.

What denying reality can do, however, is turn a civilization upside down and put a culture on the way to collapse because people won't know right from wrong, fact from fiction, or reality from fantasy. When we set the precedent that it is government, not God or even the people, that defines what is moral and what isn't, we set ourselves on a course where there are no definitions at all and there are no absolutes -- not marriage, not family, not relationships, not anything.

In such a world where government is our moral, political, and cultural Webster's Dictionary, we put ourselves on the path towards total government control because government defines everything. After all, if government can redefine something as basic as marriage, what else can it redefine? Government can literally change the meaning of something from one year to the next, and there will be no overriding principle -- moral, religious, cultural, or otherwise -- to say differently.

Furthermore, when there is no basic moral compass to govern our decisions and our laws, and things like marriage, life, and family mean only what government says they mean, we put our nation and therefore our lives totally at the whim of what governmental leaders say -- and not just elected government leaders, but appointed ones as well. This isn't a path towards freedom -- it is one towards fascism.

Liberals like to talk about how conservatives exist in a world of blacks and whites where there are no gray areas, that conservatives don't understand the nuances of life and that we are devoid of reality of everyday life. If one even assumes this criticism has some foundation, what liberals won't tell you is that they live in a much more dangerous world of colors -- one where there is no black and white whatsoever, where the world is only gray in a brave new world of perpetual cultural cloudiness.

Liberals attempts to redefine reality aren't just limited to marriage, either. They have already attempted to redefine life -- for nearly 40 years we've had laws which basically deny biology and say an unborn child isn't human because of the mere fact it hasn't been born yet. As a result, we've had an inconsistency in laws where if one kills a pregnant mother in some states, it's two murders, but in another state, it's one murder and if the mother kills her own child, it's a medical procedure.

Of course, some differences in laws between governments -- in this country, states -- is fine. That's federalism. Kansas may opt for a higher sales tax while Missouri may opt for a higher property tax. The same goes for speed limits, driving regulations, business licensing, and other similar laws.

But when governments start treating unchangeable moral absolutes such as marriage and life like speed limits and tax policy -- they put us on a path completely different than the one our founders intended.

Rather than being One Nation Under God, where our rights are endowed by our Creator, we become a nation under nothing, where our rights become the mere whims of cultural fads and government power.