Pro same-sex “marriage” Rep. Michael Lawlor (D-East Haven) has told the New Haven Register he expects the Supreme Court’s ruling on the issue “any day now.” That was a week ago. From the Register’s Nov. 23rd above-the-fold front page story:

Peter Wolfgang, a spokesman for the Family Institute of Connecticut, which opposes gay marriage, said a Supreme Court ruling that returned the issue to the hands of the General Assembly “would be the most logical choice.”

“We hope the Supreme Court will do the right thing and kick it back to the people … back to the democratic process,” said Wolfgang.

The co-chairman of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven, agreed.

“If I were on the Supreme Court, I’d find a way to boot it back to the legislature,” said Lawlor, one of the legislature’s openly gay lawmakers and a strong advocate for gay marriage. “That way, they (Supreme Court justices) wouldn’t have to take the heat on it one way or another.

“I’d much rather do it here,” said Lawlor, who doesn’t usually find himself on the same side of an argument as Wolfgang. “In general, it’s much better if the legislature does it than to have the court do it.”…

“If the Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage, it would be the greatest usurpation of democracy in state history,” Wolfgang said.

If the Court imposes same-sex “marriage” by judicial fiat, a Constitutional Convention may become a major issue in Connecticut next year. If the Court honors democracy by not redefining marriage, pro same-sex “marriage” activists in 2008 will launch their biggest assault on marriage yet–and for the first time, they will be doing it during an election year.

As always, we will have more on this story as it develops–in FIC Blog, e-mail alerts and elsewhere.  

One Response to “Will State Court Usurp Democracy and Impose Same-Sex “Marriage”?”

  1. on 30 Nov 2007 at 9:21 pmDoug

    It’s the Christmas season. I am going to be nice. I won’t question or doubt Mr. Lawlor’s motives. I will take what he says at face value, and in that regard, for once, he and I are on the same page. As I have said before on this blog, this is a legislative, and not a judicial matter. Using (and abusing) the courts to usurp the legilsative branch is simply wrong. We saw it with the anti-gun lobby when they started ridiculously trying to sue gun manufacturers for shooting deaths because they were losing ground in Congress and in the state legislatures. Where does this nonsense end? Are auto manufacturers next? Now the gay lobby, or at least part of it, inspired by their cohorts up in Massachussetts, are trying the same tactic. By the way, I can’t help but think that which is very conspicuous; this is a desperate ploy by desperate people who think (if even secretly) that they are losing their battle, so they are cheating to try to win. Their immorality seems to extend even beyond the bedroom, and in their minds, the ends justify the means. From the other side of the debate, this is a bad public realtions move. For those who preach “tolerance,” this kind of underhanded manipulation doesn’t unite people or garner sympathy or respect; instead it only further divides, alienates, isolates, humiliates and castigates. For at least this one occassion, kudos to Rep. Lawlor. Reasonable people can honestly disagree on legitimate issues without forsaking their principles during the debate.


Leave a Reply