Cheers for Alabama and Voters!

Former Senator Tom Coburn recently called for a constitutional convention. I second that, especially after watching the way that voters across the country are being disrespected by judicial opinions, most recently on same-sex marriage.

Do voters matter in this debate? I think you would hear an overwhelming "YES" from the Founding Fathers.

My view on same-sex marriage is that marriage is between a man and a woman. This is rooted on my Catholic upbringing as well as my understanding of the institution of marriage in history. For centuries, marriage has been the foundation on which the family unit has rested. It's not perfect but it has worked rather well. Let's be carefully about changing the definition of marriage to satisfy a very small segment of the population.

Nevertheless, my definition of marriage is just that, or my opinion. I have opinions about speed limits, stadium curfews, and the DH rule in baseball. My opinion does not have to be the law of the land, specially if I'm on the losing side of the elections.

My problems with all of these "judicial opinions" is that decisions about marriage should be made by voters after rigorous debate in the political arena. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that mentions marriage. It has been always a state matter. Furthermore, there is nothing profound about judges. They are not endowed with any special knowledge of what the meaning of marriage is.

In other words, we do not have "a national marriage law" that Alabama or any other state is violating. A judicial opinion by a federal judge is not the law of the land!

I would be happy to participate in a national debate about the definition of marriage. Let legislators propose laws and let's have up and down votes. Let those who favor "same sex marriage" propose a constitutional amendment, or what was never done with abortion.

Then let's respect those laws, bans or constitutional amendments as passed Texas and other states.

Alabama is the latest state to see its decisions challendged by a federal judge who believes that he knows best. I'm glad to see that Alabama is fighting back:

"On the day that same-sex unions became legal in Alabama, local officials in dozens of counties on Monday defied a federal judge’s decision and refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, casting the state into judicial chaos.

Gay couples were able to get licenses in about a dozen places, including Birmingham, Huntsville and a few other counties where probate judges complied with the judge’s decision. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled early Monday that it would deny Alabama’s request to put the marriages on hold.

But in the majority of counties, officials said they would refuse to license same-sex marriages or stop providing licenses altogether, confronting couples -- gay and heterosexual -- with locked doors and shuttered windows."

Again, cheers for Alabama. It's time that states start standing up to "out of control" judges and federal agencies, like the EPA, sticking their noses in everything.

I would be happy to accept "same-sex marriage" if the voters decided to change the traditional definition of marriage.  

Here is my message to judges or others who believe in same-sex marriage: Get in the political arena and persuade voters! Please don't overturn what often large majorities of voters, of every ethnic group, vote for.

Please respect voters or that constitutional convention is going to happen a lot sooner than people think!

P.S. You can hear my show:  (CantoTalk) or follow me on Twitter.

Former Senator Tom Coburn recently called for a constitutional convention. I second that, especially after watching the way that voters across the country are being disrespected by judicial opinions, most recently on same-sex marriage.

Do voters matter in this debate? I think you would hear an overwhelming "YES" from the Founding Fathers.

My view on same-sex marriage is that marriage is between a man and a woman. This is rooted on my Catholic upbringing as well as my understanding of the institution of marriage in history. For centuries, marriage has been the foundation on which the family unit has rested. It's not perfect but it has worked rather well. Let's be carefully about changing the definition of marriage to satisfy a very small segment of the population.

Nevertheless, my definition of marriage is just that, or my opinion. I have opinions about speed limits, stadium curfews, and the DH rule in baseball. My opinion does not have to be the law of the land, specially if I'm on the losing side of the elections.

My problems with all of these "judicial opinions" is that decisions about marriage should be made by voters after rigorous debate in the political arena. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that mentions marriage. It has been always a state matter. Furthermore, there is nothing profound about judges. They are not endowed with any special knowledge of what the meaning of marriage is.

In other words, we do not have "a national marriage law" that Alabama or any other state is violating. A judicial opinion by a federal judge is not the law of the land!

I would be happy to participate in a national debate about the definition of marriage. Let legislators propose laws and let's have up and down votes. Let those who favor "same sex marriage" propose a constitutional amendment, or what was never done with abortion.

Then let's respect those laws, bans or constitutional amendments as passed Texas and other states.

Alabama is the latest state to see its decisions challendged by a federal judge who believes that he knows best. I'm glad to see that Alabama is fighting back:

"On the day that same-sex unions became legal in Alabama, local officials in dozens of counties on Monday defied a federal judge’s decision and refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, casting the state into judicial chaos.

Gay couples were able to get licenses in about a dozen places, including Birmingham, Huntsville and a few other counties where probate judges complied with the judge’s decision. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled early Monday that it would deny Alabama’s request to put the marriages on hold.

But in the majority of counties, officials said they would refuse to license same-sex marriages or stop providing licenses altogether, confronting couples -- gay and heterosexual -- with locked doors and shuttered windows."

Again, cheers for Alabama. It's time that states start standing up to "out of control" judges and federal agencies, like the EPA, sticking their noses in everything.

I would be happy to accept "same-sex marriage" if the voters decided to change the traditional definition of marriage.  

Here is my message to judges or others who believe in same-sex marriage: Get in the political arena and persuade voters! Please don't overturn what often large majorities of voters, of every ethnic group, vote for.

Please respect voters or that constitutional convention is going to happen a lot sooner than people think!

P.S. You can hear my show:  (CantoTalk) or follow me on Twitter.