Visualize impeachment...

Error message

Last week an NPR pundit opined on the U.S. Supreme Court’s strategy to impose sodo-matrimony on the nation. Speaking of last summer’s decision to overturn only part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, the pundit explained the High Court “didn’t want to get too far out in front of the people.” This sort of cant is supposed to lull us into believing that We the People and our Injustices are headed in the same direction toward the Promised Land of sexual liberation and tolerance. In other words, the Injustices are in the vanguard as they appeal to the better angels of our nature to acquiesce in homosexual marriage. With gentle nudges, they’re only accelerating the transition from our budding, enlightened inclinations toward actions we would eventually take anyway.

In reality, for the last fifty years the Supreme Court has exercised a debasing cultural and spiritual influence on our nation. Any moral capital the Court won in outlawing segregation in 1954 was years ago forfeited as it rampaged through state law after state law after state law erected to protect the weak and innocent. Abortionists, murderers and rapists on death row, and pornographers have been frequent recipients of the Supreme Court’s solicitude and succor. Then as if that weren’t enough, in the 2003 decision Lawrence v. Texas, homosexuals were enshrined in the constitutional Pantheon. The Court has an insatiable appetite for strong delusion.

A more honest pundit would have said that...

the Low Court doesn’t want to get too far beneath a degraded and cowed people as it helps drag our nation to perdition. Is it any surprise that Christians have been softened up to accept sodo-matrimony with barely a murmur of protest after decades of ubiquitous pornography and sex without consequences, all of which are promoted under the aegis of constitutional rights? Even then, Christian morality hasn’t been totally abolished. A more honest pundit would have admitted that the Low Court can only thwart and diametrically oppose the people when it overturns their laws. If the people were really of a mind to do so, they would elect willing legislators to erase these marriage-protection laws from the books.

But the people of Indiana aren’t yet of a mind to join the radical chic in celebrating the marital union of Adam and Steve. That’s why U.S. District Court Judge Richard L. Young in Evansville, Indiana made the first move in the incrementalist end-game toward Hoosier sodo-matrimony. He ruled that the State of Indiana must recognize as married two lesbians who were wed in Massachusetts. So far his ruling purports to apply only to them and is only in the form of a temporary restraining order that could be later dissolved.

Only a very dull boy would fail to see where this is going, especially since Judge Ricahrd L. Young is presiding over other cases in which litigants are seeking to overturn the federal and Indiana Defense of Marriage Acts.

The People of Iowa had the good sense to oust three Iowa Supreme Court justices in 2010 after those justices had decreed that bans on same-sex marriage violated the state constitution. Federal Judge Richard L. Young should be impeached. It’s a pity Hoosiers must rely on their Congressmen and Senators to do this work. But they should loudly and persistently demand it nonetheless, as should state lawmakers whose laws are so contemptuously trashed by the federal judiciary.

As I write this, I watch my two-year-old daughter playing on a little scooter in our garage. I wonder at what point she’ll be given the choice to burn incense to the gods of Sexual Liberation or face imprisonment or death. Brothers and Sisters, we must prepare ourselves and our children for the coming persecution. It’s speeding toward us in all its bland, bureaucratic menace and will arrive at our doorstep much sooner than we suppose.

Ezra Hale is the pseudonym of a man serving in an upper-level, executive branch position of state government. Ezra is a licensed attorney and for several years practiced law in state and federal courts. He is a graduate of ___________ School of Law, where he served as editor-in-chief of the Law Review.