I think people of both points of view, accept the democratic process. What they don’t always accept is a bunch of self-important, self-appointed judges saying this is culturally the new norm.
Judges are self-appointed? So I could decide tomorrow I wanted to sit as a judge on the Supreme Court?
So where do I go sign up?
No wonder the woman managed to tank Hewlett-Packard's stock, she's as stupid as a bag of hammers.
And 42% of Californians voted for this bozo when she ran for Senate.
Wow. Just...wow.
"Hang on while I log in to the James Webb telescope to search the known universe for who the fuck asked you." -- James Fell
Agilent is the "real" Hewlett Packard. HP is now a shell of what the company was. And she helped bring it down. As an EE, the HP name used to mean "High Priced" but the products were top notch, easy to use and always performed. Then they split and HP became this consumer computer/printer maker and the $H!T hit the fan. Long live Agilent.
Hewlett and Packard must be spinning in their graves.
Poor choice of words, but she is essentially correct.
Many present and past members of the Federal judiciary (most conspicuously justices of the USSC) have conferred upon themselves the extra-Constitutional power to REVISE the Constitution - to create new "Constitutional rights" at will - when there is no such power in the Constitution itself. They are "self-appointed" authors of a revised Constitution. They were not appointed with this power.
If the people of the United States wish to use the "democratic process," to change laws regarding marriage, they have the right to do so. They can elect legislators who feel the same way they do, and encourage them to pass laws that they like.
But the judiciary stepping in and rendering the democratic process meaningless is bullshit.
