On 07/11/2006, at 2:49 AM, jdiebremse wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm guessing the server problems with Brin-L ate the end of the
previous thread on this topic, but I still haven't heard a good
argument for discrimination on gender preference for marriage.
Except that the previous thread didn't discuss that question at all.
The question was not whether legalized gay marriages were a good idea,
the question was whether legalized gay marriages should be imposed by
the courts.
That was one question. I asked the other as well:
"So you disagree with the way the decision was made. Do you disagree
that gay couples should be allowed civil unions?"
This is the single-biggest difference between liberals who advocate
judicial activism and conservatives who advocate judicial restraint.
The former seem to take the position that Court decisions can be
driven
by whether or not something is a good idea. The latter insist
that the
Courts should stick to interpreting the law; recognizing that the law
may occasionally be immoral, unjust, or just plain a bad idea; but
that
under our system of government, the writing of laws is reserved for
the
legislative branch of government.
Which you've said before, and I agreed that judicial activism is a
bad thing. But the "liberal vs conservative" thing is a waste of
time, John. The world doesn't divide that way in real life, because
some conservatives want judicial activism too (witness the post-Dover
furore where a conservative judge who showed due process was accused
of judicial activism by people who wanted him to be an activist
judge... *brain explodes*), and liberals who respect the role of the
courts and the role of the legislature in making law. Your paragraph
would have had exactly the same sense if you'd substituted "liberals"
and "conservatives" for "people", because there are a range of views
across the US political spectrum.
What courts are for is *justice*, and that means overturning or
preventing enacting of unconstitutional or illegal laws (as the
British courts have had to do when the UK government has infringed
European Human Rights laws), and I doubt you'll disagree with that.
Charlie
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
