I get a kick out of how any Supreme Court is a "bunch of liberal wackos legislating laws from the bench" whenever their findings don't sit well with the Fundie crowd.

Don't hear a peep out of 'em whenever SCOTUS upholds the current additions to our pledge though.

Must be a couple of SCOTUS's running about.

"ignoring the constitutionally mandated right of the States/peoples to make law and set the precedent of declaring their own ideology of morality?"

This ruling doesn't effect heteroes at all, sparky. Don't like the idea of gay marriage? Don't have one.

You have yet to establish how Blackstones theories are included in Constitutional and common laws, and how they effect the basic religious neutrality our Foudners built into this nation.

You have yet to establish how the US was Founded as a "Christian Nation", especially considering the secular nature of our Constitution.

The Declaration is a colonial document, and about as "Founding" as the Mayflower Compact. Sorry. Not a US Legal Document at all.

And the Seperation of Church and State was coined by Thomas Jefferson during his Presidency, hardly "1947".

And here is a snippet from a dictionary source long considered the authority of early US legal definitions, Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856 Edition...

ESTABLISH..... 4. To found, recognize, confirm or admit; as, congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856 Edition - Letter E

And do you really need a history lesson concerning the Current Replacement Motto and Additions To Our Pledge? One can hardly use items forced into place in the 1950's as arguments for a debate on Founding Principles.

Well, sexual orientation IS included in hate crime legislation after all.
And you are quite correct conerning the 9th.

First, Blackstone had no "theory."

Second, the foundation of law in the "west" is common law which grew from ancient practice of leaders/rulers exercising a "divine right" to judge disputes. The division between the "throne" and the "judge" grew over time, with the Magna Carta representing a mythical transformation from a king determining justice based on his personal interests to one of independent judges deciding issues on the basis of facts and reason. Over five centuries, England has develop a body of history that recorded the reasoning behind common justice. Blackstone merely sought to organize that history in a coherent reference.

Third, English common law was the law of the English colonies. Blackstone's Commentary was published concurrent with revolt and insurrection in the English American colonies, which placed those with knowledge of the practice of the law outside society (few members of government seek to overthrow the government they are part of - they might seek to control the government, but not to destroy it). Thus, the traitors to the crown needed to bootstrap their own judicial system, and Blackstone was the handbook for this. More copies of Blackstone were sold in the English American colonies than in England.

Blackstone is significant because he marks the point where the law became independent of the government that ruled the people and territory. He wrote of the separation of the law from religious text, as well from the king. Blackstone didn't change the practice of law, but only noted the transformation.

For the US, Blackstone is significant because his record provided access to the history of case law and the framework for the law and its application to the people who needed to bootstrap their government, and today he is significant because he provides the most comprehensive record of the law at the beginning of the American 19th century and the end of the 18th.

Blackstone's Commentary is a snapshot of the law of the English times, and the law of the English had separated from the church. This was understood by the people of the times who wrote the US Constitution, but the fear that this principle along with many others would be ignored by the mob of democracy resulted in the call for a bill of rights.

That said, religious texts were like all other records of history, assumed to be sources of precedent on which common law is founded. And the US Constitution merely became, and is, one of the historical records used in common law to find justice. Blackstone is relevant because it is as much a part of the historical record as is the US Constitution.

But legislation is not natural law. The Declaration of Independence is one of the records of the time, as is Blackstone's Commentary, that the common law of the times was defined by natural law that was superior to any proclamation by any king, or the laws passed by any legislature.

As a political document, the Declaration blames the conflict between natural law and the laws passed by the English Parliament on the King who didn't have the authority to violate natural law. Subsequent writings by the parties to the insurrection and founding of the various independent governments make it clear that many considered natural law to remain superior to any laws by man.

Including the US Constitution.

Natural laws, like survival of the fittest?

__________________
If you want change stop electing "liberal: democrats and "radical" Republicans. Find and support true Conservatives; those who believe in fiscal responsibilities, individual accountability, and a smaller government, with less control of your daily life.

Yep.

Of course, the fittest at survival are generally those who join together cooperatively to advance their survival.

Even joined together the strongest and the toughest would rule (control) the others. Which seems to be the norm in all totalitarian governments. Sorry, but I'll stick our system, where the constitution out weighs those natural laws.

__________________
If you want change stop electing "liberal: democrats and "radical" Republicans. Find and support true Conservatives; those who believe in fiscal responsibilities, individual accountability, and a smaller government, with less control of your daily life.

Which nation has the most powerful military?
Which nation spends more on military power than all the other nations in the world?
Which nation has more weapons of mass destruction than any other nation?
Which nation has called for and led the two largest wars of the 21st century.
Which nation has more soldiers occupying foreign territory?
Which nation has succeeded for two centuries in occupying and then replacing the peoples and cultures of a land with immigrants, and in the end of this process of domination by force of nearly the largest territory in the world, adopted the title of "leader of the free world."?

Isn't the US Constitution a document that expressly defines a cooperative compact of now over three hundred million people?

The US Constitution is the contract between each of the three hundred million who can change or replace the US Constitution by either consensus or violence.

The rule of law was renounced, denounced, and rejected with violent revolution, on false pretences, I would add, and replaced with another, with many of those traitors fully expecting a future insurrection to replace what they created.

But, perhaps you would agree that guns and other arms should be denied to the people by whatever means necessary, say an amendment to the US Constitution, so that no one can invoke the principle of natural law to incite people to insurrection using the arms allowed by the current rule of law???

And don't think the US Constitution can't be changed in ways the majority opposes. Do you really think half the amendments to the Constitution were supported by the majority? And that with a process that requires a supermajority to make a change.

Do you think the President of this country is elected by the majority of the citizens of this country?

I still prefer living here, even with all our "faults", to living in any other country, and anyone who feels differently is, after all, free to leave.

__________________
If you want change stop electing "liberal: democrats and "radical" Republicans. Find and support true Conservatives; those who believe in fiscal responsibilities, individual accountability, and a smaller government, with less control of your daily life.