Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Home RSS
 
 
 

Why we need marriage amendment

March 15, 2012
The Journal

To the editor:

On March 9 The Journal reprinted a St. Cloud Times editorial which accused our state representatives of passing the buck on policy issues by allowing them to come before the state's voters as proposed constitutional amendments.

It cited the marriage amendment as a "classic example." Since "there is already a law (policy) in place," no constitutional amendment should be necessary.

One cannot help but wonder whether the editors at the St. Cloud Times have been paying any attention at all to what is going on in America today. Do they really think that just because a law is passed, that law will remain in force? Have they not noticed a pronounced proclivity on the part of our courts to usurp the constitutional function of the legislature and impose their own supposed "wisdom" on the people? Have they not heard the term "judicial activism"?

Of course, it is also possible that the people at the St. Cloud Times understand all this. It is possible that they would really prefer that the people's will not be done in certain matters.

We the people aren't stupid. We can see what is going on. If the courts are not going to allow the laws passed by our representatives to stand, we will go over their heads and get things done by way of constitutional amendment. The will of the people will be done, one way or another.

Michael A. Thom

New Ulm

 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web