There are those who claim that history repeats itself. This, I do not believe, but see why they say such things. Recently we have had at the forefront in our legal system the fight over homosexual unions. The question has been, is it legal or should it be legal for people of the same sex to marry one another? There are many who would say that this is simply history repeating itself.
For years, states have sought to protect themselves. They have passed laws; then the Federal Courts would deem these laws unconstitutional. In response, the states would vote on referendums and write amendments banning same-sex unions. Now we are at the point that there is little states can do but acquiesce to the federal will. Here is where history comes into the discussion.
Before our Constitution was ratified, there were a group of men seeking to stop its being made the law of the land. They called themselves the anti-federalist. And though there were many issues that these men had with our constitution, one that these men all agreed upon was the problem of federal government against the state government.
Many times we have had the issue of states rights and federal jurisdiction. Once again, we are faced with the prospect of seeing state power conceded to an overreaching federal government. As is the case in Florida with same-sex unions.
Judge Robert Hinkle had ruled that the Florida state ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. This had been decided with many other states as well.
But because there was some question to what his ruling meant he had put a stay on his order. This meant that though Judge Hinkle ruled in favor of same sex marriage, the ordering of clerks to issue marriage license was stayed until Monday the 5th.
The question was not to the ruling but to the extent of its order. The association of county clerks said that the order only applied in Washington County. Washington county was where the original lawsuit occurred and this, the association thought, was the only county which this order effected.
The Judge ruled yesterday that this was not the case, but that it was the duty of every county to issue these licenses. He wrote:
“History records no shortage of instances when state officials defied federal court orders on issues of federal constitutional law. Happily, there are many more instances when responsible officials followed the law, like it or not. Reasonable people can debate whether the ruling in this case was correct and who it binds. There should be no debate, however, on the question whether a clerk of court may follow the ruling, even for marriage-license applicants who are not parties to this case,”
I am glad to find that there are clerks that feel compelled to resist this order. Many, so that they will not be forced to do something against their consciences, have suspended marriage services at their county courthouses. So that they will not have to preform services for Sodomites, they will not perform any services. Yet, it seems that these same clerks will issue licenses to the same Sodomites.
It also bears mentioning that the State Attorney General is leaving the way open for the counties to determine their own course of action. She said: “My office will not stand in the way as clerks of court determine how to proceed,” Which seems a very political course. She is not coming out strong handed against her county clerks nor does she sound defiant to the federal court judge.
Either way, we see the eroding once again to the power of the states. There has to be a stopping point. We, as a people have to see that this destroying of states rights is a destroying of our individual liberty. We must demand that our state governments stand and tell the federal government no!