@jcboy,
jcboy wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
I see the function of the courts as being the enforcement of what the law actually says.
I’d be interested in hearing your version of what the law actually says, but keep in mind before you post The Constitution is the supreme law. Go ahead, I could use a chuckle this evening.
It's fascinating that you are unable to argue without trying to involve the character, knowledge level, etc. of your debating opponent, all of which are irrelevant to making or disproving any point.
The Constitution makes no reference whatever to marriage. Therefore, it is hard to see how laws that existed in the Founders' times and for centuries afterwards can be violations of the Constitution. If they were, one would think that the Founders, who wrote and ratified the Constitution, would have indicated some dissatisfaction with them.
I would prefer the courts to enforce the law as it's written, rather than using it as a springboard for forcing their personal politics down the throats of the electorate. I'd rather that issues be determined by the votes of millions of citizens, or their elected representatives, which is the same thing, than by a handful of people.