I didn't come out of the closet to my fellow Republicans until June 2003, 2-3 days after the Supreme Court handed down Lawrence v. Texas. County Executive Joe Ortwerth was speaking out against that ruling at a meeting of St. Charles County Pachyderms, and I raised my hand, and said something like, I'm one of the few gay people in the country who is NOT popping a cork over this ruling. I've studied a lot about constitutional law, especially about the 14th Amendment, and I'm absolutely disgusted with judicial activism like this. I've learned that constitutional law is a lot like a box of choc'lits; ya never know what yer gonna git.
Sorry but a gay man going to a Republican meeting and proclaiming “JUDICIAL ACTIVISM” after a pro-gay ruling is kind of sad.
You may feel sad FOR me, but I assure you that I do not feel any sadness about the fact that I want the legislative branch of the federal government and the state governments to create the laws that give us gay people equal rights, not the judicial branch. What does make me feel very, very sad is judicial activism -- judges making some laws, pretending that their interpretation of the Constitution(s) made them come to the conclusions that they did, when the truth is that they gave in to the temptation to use their own values to come to their conclusions. The reality of judicial activism makes me feel much sadDER than whatever sadness you feel for me.
Sorry that we don't feel any empathy for your sadness over "judicial activism" when some of us don't have the privilege to wring our hands over how we get equal rights and protection from homophobia.
I hope that your fellow Republicans in 2003, who I'm sure only cared about the judicial activism and didn't see homosexuality as an abomination that needs to be purged, were very proud of you for attacking your fellow LGBT people for being happy about a ruling that banned dictatorial, theocratic laws that made them illegal.
