The best commentary on the Kim Davis case I have seen yet. Anna Maria Perez nails it: Judicial tyranny by a gay activist judge. Check it out!
For days people have been arguing about Kim Davis’s refusal to hand out gay marriage licenses in Kentucky on social media. This issue isn’t even about gay marriage. The Supreme Court unconstitutionally threw out the laws and constitutional amendments of all states which banned gay marriage. This was a large majority of the states. These laws were legislated by legislative branches of government or voted on by the people and passed legitimately. The Supreme Court has no constitutionally enumerated authority to rule on the Constitutionality of a law or to throw out a law. None. You will not find these powers listed in Article 3 of the U.S. Constitution, as the 10th Amendment requires.
Federal Judge David Bunning found Kim Davis to be in contempt of court when she refused to break Kentucky state law and hand out marriage licenses to homosexual partners. She based her decision on religious grounds. …
View original 1,264 more words