Make no mistake, the California ruling overturning a ban on homosexual marriage is not about the state forbidding freedom of association between homosexuals or, forbidding same sex marriage. Homosexuals have the inalienable right to freely associate together and create their own relationships as they please and call these relationships whatever they want to call them. This right has not been violated in California and no one can truthfully question that right. But the argument here is one involving the very structure of the State government, the federally protected right to a “Republican Form of Government“, and, the setting of public policy ___ a process in our constitutional system which commands that the people’s elected representatives, and only its legislative branch of government, decides upon and sets public policy.


The recognition of “marriage” and what constitutes a “marriage” comes within the powers of the legislature, and setting public policy is usually set to further and advance the State’s general welfare and its interests as reflected through the people’s elected legislature. Although the State may not forbid homosexuals to engage in relationship they call a “marriage”, and may not forbid such relationships because of the inalienable right of people to freely associate with each other as they please, the State is not required to put its stamp of approval upon the countless kinds of relationships people may engage in if the legislature does not feel they are within the best interests of the state to do so.


The very purpose of a State’s Legislature, in a "Republican Form of Government" guaranteed by Art. 4, Sect. 4, is to discriminate in the setting of public policy so as to promote the best interests of the state, so long as in doing so the inalienable rights of the people are not subjugated e.g. forbidding two homosexuals to create a relationship which they believe is a “marriage”.


The people of every State in our union have a genuine interest and concern in encouraging procreation and child-rearing within the setting of a traditional marriage composed of one mommy and one daddy. And the State in recognizing such marriages is rationally based in promoting the State’s best interests, and even if it isn't, that is for the Legislature to decide in a Republican Form of Government!


Bottom line is, the California Court engaged in judicial tyranny and subjugated the guarantee to a Republican Form of Government by assuming and exercising the power of the Legislature, setting public policy in accordance with its own personal predilections, and, mandating state recognized homosexual marriages as furthering the best interests of the state. The court has done for the people what the people’s elected legislature has not willing done in the name of the people.


JWK


Those who reject abiding by the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was agree to, as those intentions and beliefs may be documented from historical records, wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to “interpret” the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.