The Michigan ACLU represented twenty-one same-sex couples in a 2005 lawsuit that sought to re-define the family as anything they determined under the guise of “health benefits.” A constitutional amendment from 2004 was approved by a majority of the voters in Michigan and defined the union between a man and woman as the only agreement recognized as a marriage “or similar union for any purpose.” Fortunately, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled 5-2 that state entities cannot provide health benefits to homosexual couples.
The 5-2 decision affects up to 20 universities, community colleges, school districts and governments in Michigan with policies covering at least 375 gay couples.
The court ruled that while marriages and domestic partnerships aren’t identical, they are similar because they’re the only relationships in Michigan defined in terms of gender and lack of a close blood connection.
Voters “hardly could have made their intentions clearer,” Justice Stephen Markman wrote, citing the law’s “for any purpose” language.
Tony Perkins’ op-ed in USA Today last week sheds light on the scope of powers of the judicial branch and how the left has abused it:
To some critics of his [McCain’s] view that judges should interpret and not make the law, the debate is merely about different forms of judicial activism — liberal vs. conservative.
American history powerfully refutes that view. The Federalist Papers set forth the argument that the judicial branch of the national government would be the “least dangerous” to liberty. In Alexander Hamilton’s famous words, the federal courts would have “neither force nor will, but merely judgment.”
Those words are carefully and perfectly chosen. Force — the police power — is a feature of the executive branch; will is the voice of the people through their elected officials.
Through the centuries, overreaching judges have attempted to seize power on questions that span the social and political spectrum. Activist U.S. Supreme Courts gave a green light to slavery in 1857 and to child labor in 1905, overturning duly enacted laws.
In our time, the Supreme Court has given the nation abortion on demand, thereby creating a national issue and actually delaying — because it doubted — the ability of the American people to reason together to solutions. Today, various courts claim the power to levy taxes, strike down the national motto, remake the institution of marriage, seize private property for non-public purposes, and run state agencies.
Liberals have turned to the courts because the rest of the country refuses to move as far to the left as they would like. In Michigan, liberals expect the ACLU and the courts to deliver their agenda. It’s disguised as “health benefits.” But do not be fooled. This blatant attack on God’s design for the family is obvious and, fortunately for conservatives, not even able to be crammed through as a breathingist decision.
Liberals will attack me calling me evil for supporting a ruling that denies health coverage to people and even some children. The ruling plainly says that only married couples are allowed to receive the benefits of marriage. Since homosexuals cannot marry in Michigan, employers will have to find creative ways to provide those benefits, which they are probably capable of doing and will be monitored by the state insurance board. More power to them. I don’t have a problem with that. I do have a problem with homosexuals using the courts to create special laws that would grant them “family” status, which is legally reserved for what is coincidentally a biblically-based family.