Monday, May 10, 2010

A Vote for Kagan is a Vote for Counterfeit Marriage. Catholics MUST Oppose

President Obama has nominated Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court. Catholics MUST oppose her.

Ms. Kagan is "an ardent abortion supporter" according to Charmaine Yoest, the president of Americans United for Life. Maggie Gallagher, of the National Organization for Marriage, said "A vote for Kagan is a vote against marriage."

Today's press release from the "Human Rights Campaign", the largest homosexualist lobbying group in the country, bolsters Gallagher's point:

Human Rights Campaign Praises President Obama’s Nomination of Elena Kagan to the United States Supreme Court

"We are confident that Elena Kagan has a demonstrated understanding and commitment to protecting the liberty and equality of all Americans, including LGBT Americans" said HRC President Joe Solmonese...

Issues that are critical to the LGBT community may reach the Supreme Court in the next few years, including issues related to marriage equality, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, the Defense of Marriage Act, and the new federal hate crimes law. When issues like these come to the Supreme Court, it is vital that we have fair-minded judges to rule on these cases."

Kagan seems dishonest as well. When questioned by Senator Jon Cornyn on February 10, 2009, during her Solicitor General confirmation hearings, she appeared to deliberately camouflage her position on counterfeit marriage. The Senator asked her:

"'Given your rhetoric about the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy—you called it “a profound wrong—a moral injustice of the first order”—let me ask this basic question: Do you believe that there is a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage?'

Answer: 'There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage.' "

But many legal experts have pointed out that her answer pertains to the Constitution as currently understood, not as it would be interpreted by, say, Justice Elena Kagan, when ruling on a case, say Perry v. Schwarzenegger, where the question actually comes up.

Kagan's answer even temporarily fooled the honest Professor William Jacobsen. But he is already rethinking his position, based on Kagan's letter to Senator Arlen Spector of March 18, 2009, where she wrote:

"Constitutional rights are a product of constitutional text as interpreted by courts and understood by the nation’s citizenry and its elected representatives. By this measure, which is the best measure I know for determining whether a constitutional right exists, there is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage."

But that is not a single "measure." Kagan has introduced three things that may well be in tension: "interpreted by courts" vs. "understood by the nation's citizenry" vs. understood by "its elected representatives." We know that in Maine and California the citizens asserted their rights to self-government in opposition to the interpretation of the courts and elected representatives. In Massachusetts the elected representatives refused to even let the citizens, their masters, vote on the issue. The question of same-sex "marriage" is subsumed under the larger issue of the American people's right to self-government.

It should also be noted that Kagan was approved on March 19, one day after the above letter was written, so I think it is safe to say she knew the confirmation was in the bag, and felt free to be a little more honest.

Kagan's horrific record on abortion is public record.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the pro-life women's group Susan B. Anthony List told, "In the past Kagan has been a strong supporter of the pro-abortion agenda. She has vigorously opposed the de-funding of taxpayer-funded clinics which promote abortions, despite the fact that a majority of Americans do not want their tax dollars to fund abortion providers."

As Tom Peters said yesterday: "Again, Catholics helped elect this President who is systematically entrenching an ideology which holds responsibility for the deaths of millions of babies. Elections do matter."

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

No comments: