Keyes: Marriage Ruling is Treason!

You can always count on Alan Keyes to take even the usual right-wing batshittery and take it up several notches to flights of rhetorical absurdity rarely matched even in the right-wing fever swamps. He says the Supreme Court’s marriage ruling is “treasonous” and worse than Dred Scott.

This week I published an essay in two parts on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision. I concluded the essay with the words quoted above. Americans still loyal to the premises of right and justice must emphatically reject this decision. They must refuse to submit to it, just as in colonial times America’s first patriots refused to submit to British taxes imposed without regard for the will of legislatures elected by the people; just as in the years before the last Civil War, people of good conscience refused to abide by the Fugitive Slave acts and the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision; just as in the last century people committed to God’s endowment of human justice opposed government sanctioned racial segregation and discrimination, enforced in disregard of the equality of nature conferred by the title of humanity.

The Obergefell decision is a more directly treasonous betrayal of constitutional law and justice than any of those previous acts of tyranny. As ratified by the American people, the U.S. Constitution derives its authority from their sovereign will. In the Declaration of Independence they cite the authority of “the laws of nature and of Nature’s God” and the will and judgment of the Creator and Judge of all the world, as the basis for their claim of sovereignty. By purporting to extend the name of marriage to acts and relations that make no imperative contribution to the common good of human nature as endowed by the Creator, God, the U.S. Supreme Court challenges that will and judgment, treating it as of no account.

That’s because, even if your interpretation of that Deistic language were correct (and it’s not), it is, in fact, of no account. We do not live in a Christian theocracy, no matter how much you wish we did.

What we have here is a wholesale act of judicial nullification. If the United States were a monarchy, the sovereign’s throne would be vacant. But America has no throne. The seat of power is in the heart, mind and faithful courage of the people of the United States. If, from that seat of power, the Creator God still rules, this Court’s supremely treasonous act will not stand.

Would you care to make a wager on that, Mr. Keyes? If your invisible bully buddy is so mad about it, then by all means let him make himself known and strike down the five justices who voted for marriage equality down. Let him come as a booming voice in the sky and voice his displeasure. Until then, you’re just talking out your ass.

POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • RickR

    I haven’t seen Egnorance around the last couple days. Did Ed finally break out the pest spray, or did Eggy slink off on his own?

  • garnetstar

    RickR, I think Egnorance is sulking in a corner to make the grownups feel bad. Because, that’s what West and all these bigots are doing. They do their temper displays, but crying doesn’t get them attention, so they’ll show the grownups by not doing anything.

    All this blather about treason, betraying the constitution, making a stand, what will the bigots actually *do*? Nothing, that’s what.

  • karmacat

    Whatever you do, don’t say his name 3 times.

  • StevoR

    Marriage ruling = treason? Confederate flag = okay?? Hmm .. something wrong with this picture.

  • StevoR

    @1. RickR : Dunno. But Egnornace /Dogshit smelling as bad under whatever name sure never answered the questions asked of him here :

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2015/06/27/chief-justice-roberts-dissent/#comment-434877

    Among other places least that I saw.

    Boldly run away or finally given the martyrdom of a ban the bigot tried so hard to earn, good riddance either way!

    (If ya ca read this Dogshit dont forget to finally answer da fookin’ questions dogshit! Not that I expect ya actually will ..)

  • colnago80

    We do not live in a Christian theocracy, no matter how much you wish we did.

    Well, fucktards like Keyes are working on that assiduously.

  • cptdoom

    All this blather about treason, betraying the constitution, making a stand, what will the bigots actually *do*? Nothing, that’s what.

    Over at the Good As You blog, Jeremy Hooper had a great post contrasting the response to Prop 8 passing – with protests nearly immediately in the streets, with the relative silence by the anti-gay right. Sure we’ve heard them all gnashing their teeth and complaining, but there certainly hasn’t been a grass roots, people in the streets response that is comparable.

    http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2015/07/what-must-drive-the-anti-gay-activists-crazy.html

  • caseloweraz

    Keyes: If the United States were a monarchy, the sovereign’s throne would be vacant.

    What???

  • scienceavenger

    By purporting to extend the name of marriage to acts and relations that make no imperative contribution to the common good of human nature…

    WTF does this mean? Is he on the marriage-is-for-kiddos hobby horse again? He’s a big fan of Randian essentialism on this, dismissing all the counterexamples (sterile heteros, or those who just don’t want kids) as “not true in principle”. His comment is also Randian in the way he confuses group behavior, where procreation is imperative for species continuance, with individual behavior, where it isn’t.

    Oh, and thanks for the “to acts” part Alan. It allays fears that you might ever grasp what you are talking about.

  • scienceavenger

    I guess I should have said “marriage-is-for-creating-kiddos”.

  • dingojack

    They must refuse to submit to it, just as in colonial times America’s first patriots refused to submit to British taxes imposed without regard for the will of legislatures elected by the people; just as in the years before the last Civil War, people of good conscience refused to abide by the Fugitive Slave acts…”

    So the Right must rise up and resist like they did when legislation was imposed without reference to the local legislatures, just like they did when legislation was imposed by the local legislatures

    Well that all makes perfect sense. @@

    Dingo

  • abb3w

    Calling an exercise of judicial supremacy “treasonous”? Damn, wingnuts really hate Article III, don’t they?

  • Dave Maier

    So people miss theDukedog7 .? OK, I’ll do my theDukedog7 . impression:

    “Keyes was right because, um, something about cake!”

    There you go, hope that’ll hold you until he gets back.

  • Synfandel

    re Dave Maier @13

    It just doesn’t feel convincing if you don’t mention the Democrat Party.

  • D. C. Sessions

    abb3w, it’s a kind of love/hate thing. They hate Article III when it’s used to oppress people’s rights (e.g. Brown v Board of Education) and love it when it’s used to support the freedom of the People (e.g. Hobby Lobby).

  • Hoosier X

    What kind of a latte-lapping weenie conservative thinks Dred Scott was a bad decision?

  • http://www.facebook.com/jason.criley jason the cripple

    “What we have here is a wholesale act of judicial nullification.”

    I’m sorry, i’m not a constitutional expert, but isn’t that exactly what one of their powers is, as listed in the constitution?

  • matty1

    Go on refuse to submit by not getting married to someone of the same sex, that’ll show them.