Black ministers should speak their minds. However, as the discussion was about "activist judges" I will point out that major civil rights decisions were written by "activist judges." The nation is the better for their activity. I'll stick by my assertion that "activist" goes with the assignment to the Supreme Court and appellate courts.
On the other subject, please give me an example of the 200-year history of laws/legal interpretations that define marriage. Finally, I agree with the black ministers: gays are not entitled to be classified as a "minority group." Nevertheless, individuals are also entitled to seek the full protection of the law, as Steven will confirm. RBS >-----Original Message----- >From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 4:26 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now! > > >Okay, how about 200+ years of laws being interpreted a >certain way, only >to have judges granting new "rights" to certain >minority groups. There >are a lot of black ministers meeting in Atlanta today >to fight the gay >marriage acts in Georgia. They are demanding that gays >not equate their >movement with Civil Rights, since gays are not being >forced to drink >from a separate water fountain, sit in the back of the >bus, or prevented >from voting. Nor have they been enslaved. > >When judges ignore the rights of the majority, in favor >of only the >minority, then we have a serious problem. > >Gary Smith > > >Ron Scott wrote: >> >> >> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: Gerald Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 11:39 AM >> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >Subject: RE: [ZION] Vote Now! >> > >> > >> >Just because a judge is an activist judge, does not >make him a >> >thoughtful one.< >> >> I'm growing weary of the tiresome assumption that "activist >> judge" is a negative description. By definition any appellate >> judge worth his gavel is an "activist judge" because >he is often >> asked to interpret constitutional law. I daresay >that one man's >> "activist judge" is another's "strict constitutionalist." I >> recommend the following: instead of tossing about meaningless >> catch phrases, spend more time explaining what you mean, >> demonstrating why a particular court's decision violates the >> spirit and intent of the U.S. Constitution. >> >> >> RBS >> >> > > > >Gerald (Gary) Smith >geraldsmith@ juno.com >http://www.geocities.com/rameumptom > >//////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >////////////////////// >/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// >/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// >//////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >///////////////////// ----------- > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// --^---------------------------------------------------------------- This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For Topica's complete suite of email marketing solutions visit: http://www.topica.com/?p=TEXFOOTER --^----------------------------------------------------------------
