200 anti-gay people have signed a letter to the Supreme Court expressing their intent to defy the law if equality for gays is realized. The letter reads:
As the Supreme Court acknowledged in the 1992 decision of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, its power rests solely upon the legitimacy of its decisions in the eyes of the people. If the Supreme Court were to issue a decision that redefined marriage or provided a precedent on which to build an argument to redefine marriage, the Supreme Court will thereby undermine its legitimacy. The Court will significantly decrease its credibility and impair the role it has assumed for itself as a moral authority. It will be acting beyond its proper constitutional role and contrary to the Natural Moral Law which transcends religions, culture, and time.
Imagine that, a group of followers of the humbling religion of Christianity insisting that their faith makes them above the law. Humbling. Totally. I’m shocked there are no random capital letters. Progress.
Worse, the letter ends with a clear threat that conservatives will refuse to comply with any court ruling in support of marriage equality: “[M]ake no mistake about our resolve. While there are many things we can endure, redefining marriage is so fundamental to the natural order and the true common good that this is the line we must draw and one we cannot and will not cross.”
Oh, they’ll refuse to comply? And what does that look like, exactly? Two married men walking down the street and the bigot yells “I don’t acknowledge your marriage!” and then sprints off to bigot-friendly sanctuary of his church? The state’s going to issue gay people certificates of marriage one day. You don’t have to comply. It’s going to happen.
And part of the irony is who signed the damn thing.
In addition to designated hate group leaders like Family Research Council president Tony Perkins and Traditional Values Coalition chairman Rev. Louis Sheldon, the list included Tea Party activist Ben Carson, Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern (R), former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell (R), former Republican presidential candidate Gary Bauer, conservative movement legend Richard Viguerie, Focus on the Family founder Rev. James Dobson, birther Joseph Farah, and disgraced Abramoff scandal figure Ralph Reed.
Oh look! Some of those people got elected to office (or failed to get elected to office) talking about how much they, and not their unpatriotic opponents, loved America and especially the Constitution. And now look at them, ready to defy the document they swore to uphold when it results in things they don’t like.
There are special jobs in society created just for people who refuse to obey the law: judges and police. These people enforce the law regardless of how proud someone is to break it and regardless of how much a person thinks the law shouldn’t apply to them. I can only imagine hearing someone tell a judge:
As the Supreme Court acknowledged in the 1992 decision of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, its power rests solely upon the legitimacy of its decisions in the eyes of the people. By deciding to prohibit the use of marijuana, the Supreme Court thereby undermined its legitimacy. The Court will significantly decrease its credibility and impair the role it has assumed for itself as a moral authority. It will be acting beyond its proper constitutional role and contrary to the Natural Moral Law which transcends religions, culture, and time.
I’m sure the judge, realizing the importance of remaining stately in their position (and even if that particular judge didn’t agree with the laws against the use of marijuana), would not say the exact words running through their head, which would probably be something along the lines of “Listen here you arrogant little shit; you don’t get to decide what laws you follow and what laws you don’t. If people got to do whatever they wanted regardless of what the law says there would be no point to even having laws. If you don’t want to follow the law, you can get fined or go to jail just like every other lawbreaker.” And that is exactly what any judge hearing a case for discrimination against any one of these people or groups will think of their defiance should the SCOTUS finally allow equality in marriage into the United States.