It wasn’t bad enough that someone like Nancy Pelosi wasn’t all that familiar with the U.S. Constitution. Remember when she was giving a speech before the Center of American Progress? She confused the Declaration of Independence with the U.S. Constitution:
“…to paraphrase what our founders said in the Constitution of the United States; they said the truths that are self-evident, that every man and woman, that men and women were created equal and that we must go forward in recognition of that.”
I understand making an oversight like this. But what makes this one bad is that she was probably reading off of her prepared remarks. And not only that, but she is a federal representative. She should know better. She took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. How can she adequately legislate if she’s not all that familiar with the document with which her proposed laws have to be consistent? Well, she can’t.
Now, we’ve got a U.S. District Judge who made the same mistake. Maybe she happened to be a student in “Professor Obama’s” Constitutional Law class back in the day.
In her official, written opinion striking down Virginia’s homosexual “marriage” ban, District Judge Arenda L. Wright wrote: “Our Constitution declares that ‘all men’ are created equal. Surely this means all of us.”
For our liberal readers, the phrase “all men are created equal” doesn’t appear in the Constitution. It appears in the Declaration of Independence. In the second paragraph, it reads:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Again, we’ve all made oversights like this. But, come on. She’s a district judge, for crying out loud. She even put it in her official ruling. She didn’t even bother checking to make sure, because it was probably second nature to her. The Constitution just isn’t all that important anymore.
To make matters worse, the New York Times, the paragon of journalistic integrity, reported on her ruling, even quoting the judge’s misquote, and they didn’t bother correcting her mistake. So, we’re just going to pretend like this “all men are created equal” phrase is a Constitutional law? Besides, the phrase doesn’t even mean what they think it means.
It’s important, because these people take an oath to support and defend the Constitution. And they don’t even know the document well enough to know the difference between it and the document that officially declared our independence from British tyranny?
Like Michael Minkoff pointed out, the homosexual “marriage” debate has nothing to do with allowing “equal rights” for homosexuals. Homosexuals already have as much right to get married as heterosexuals do. What’s at issue is a redefining of what marriage is.