Conservative pundits, political leaders and activists have answered the constitutional, moral and sociological aberration of “homosexual marriage” in a way the far left could only have fantasized they would.

Surely someone in the conservative establishment knows that Massachusetts’ homosexual “marriages” remain illegal and cannot be legal unless the Legislature passes a new law. Here is the stark reality that conservatives patting Gov. Mitt Romney on the back can’t grasp: In one of the greatest executive blunders in American constitutional history, placebo-“conservative” Romney violated the state constitution and personally conjured up sodomy marriages by ordering state officials – in effect – to pretend that the Legislature had actually passed such a law. Mitt Romney, out of ignorance and sheer terror of being branded “homophobic” by the media, violated his oath of office, struck down constitutional democracy and saved our legislators their responsibility of voting – and by voting, putting their jobs on the line.

Massachusetts’ outlaw judges must have soiled their underwear laughing in shock, seeing a “conservative” Republican governor stupid enough to enforce a law that had never even been passed. Even their ruling specifically acknowledged that a law must be passed before any legality could be conferred on sodomy “marriages.” No knowledgeable person who is not trying to trick you will ever tell you that a court ruling is a law, or that judges can make laws. A sixth-grader can read the Massachusetts Constitution and understand the plain language.

The fake marriages of the Romney administration are fake not only because ceremonialization of anal sodomy is quite the opposite of marriage and a “same-sex family” is a crime against any child held captive to its delusions – these “marriages” are also fake because they remain illegal. The reason no one knows this is because conservatives are acting as if judges and executive orders make law – a proposition that not one American soldier since the colonial period would have died for.

Four of seven judges ruled that sodomy marriages should be made legal and told the Legislature to legalize them – after an appellate judge threw the case out because the constitution says courts have no legal authority on marriage.

But the Legislature never made sodomy marriage legal.

That’s legally an insurmountable obstacle. A legislature cannot delegate its legislative authority to a court or to a governor. Legislatures and governors have no obligation to obey judges. If the Legislature passes no law, there is no law. The constitution cannot be nullified by court rulings or executive orders – no matter how earnestly a handsome, genteel, Republican governor claims he is “bound to enforce the law.” Conservatives and libertarians are just too addicted to losing to grasp the fraud that is under way: Friendly, harmless Mitt Romney chose to enforce the Globe’s editorial page and trash the state constitution. It’s that simple.

Four judges, a newspaper and treasonous Republican legal advisers bluffed a naive businessman-governor into ordering that every state employee pretend, in effect, that we have no constitution, no self-government, no democracy, on the claim that an “aw shucks,” gentleman governor just has to do anything the nice judges tell him to do.

What this says about the gullibility of conservative leaders and pundits and about their sloppy inattention to basic constitutional government is stunning. No statute on homosexual marriage has been passed by the Massachusetts Legislature or signed by the governor. Huffing and puffing and jumping up and down by judges can’t make a new law – as admitted in the Goodridge ruling itself. Despite Romney’s unimaginable blunder in enforcing a “law” that does not even exist, sodomy marriages are a scam maintained by the fact that most lawyers and politicians have never read their own state constitution (ask them!) and get their constitutional law from sources like the Boston Globe.

The job of those who revere constitutional self-government or marriage or the innocence of children is not to “reverse homosexual marriage.” It is to stop the masquerade of state officials enforcing something that remains as illegal as cannibalism.

As Mr. Romney remembers, the three dissenting justices and a dozen or so Harvard law professors told him the Goodridge ruling violates multiple passages of the state constitution. Romney’s legal obligation remains today what it was when the court “struck down” the constitution. It is well summed up in the following:


As President Andrew Jackson once observed, judicial “precedent is a dangerous source of authority, and should not be regarded as deciding questions of constitutional power.” This observation is especially significant in determining the scope of the constitutional powers of the office of governor, a separate and independent branch from the judiciary.

Again, as President Jackson put it, the chief executive officer of a government is bound by his oath of office to decide matters of constitutional right and power according to the executive’s interpretation of the constitution, not according to the judiciary’s interpretation. Such executive intervention into the judicial processes does not violate the separation of powers. … Alexander Hamilton stated in Federalist No. 78, the exercise of judicial power is subject to the check and balance of the executive branch which, alone, has the power to enforce a judicial order. Thus, if a court order is contrary to the law … the governor, vested with the “supreme executive power,” should intervene to stop any action taken pursuant to that court order.

[T]he great English legal authority … Blackstone stated: A court opinion or order and the law are not the same thing, in that a court opinion or order may be contrary to law, and therefore, not law at all. If the governor allows (an illegal) court order … to go unchallenged, then he would fail to “take care” that the “law” … is “faithfully executed.”

Dr. Herb Titus, constitutional scholar, JD, Harvard University (cum laude)

Liberal journalists are the last people you’d go to for a constitutional opinion – especially journalists working under the Boston Globe’s activist homosexual editors, who would fire anyone who dared report what the state constitution says. But why are conservative journalists playing along with the suspension of constitutional self-government under a “conservative” Republican governor whose constitutional malpractice has aided official demolition of marriage, childhood and constitutional democracy around the world?

Romney must demand the resignations of the four outlaw judges and fire the lawyers who tricked him. Then we’re back to constitutional self-government.



John Haskins is associate director of Massachusetts-based Parents’ Rights Coalition.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.