It’s not all bad news for politics. Not all Republicans are limp noodles when it comes to taking on the hard pieces of legislation.

North Carolina passed Amendment 1 that proposed to amend the North Carolina Constitution making it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. On May 8, 2012, North Carolina voters approved the amendment 61% to 39%. State law already defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. The amendment was found unconstitutional by a federal court on October 10, 2014.

Once again we see federal courts taking away the sovereignty of the states as guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment which states:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The power to define marriage is not something that was delegated to the United States by the Constitution or anybody else, therefore, the states have constitutional authority to protect the long-standing creational ordinance of marriage as being between one man and one woman.

First, the Preamble to North Carolina’s constitution states that “Almighty God,” not the federal courts, is “the Sovereign Ruler of Nations,” and by extension the Ruler of North Carolina.

Second, in Article IX, Sec. 4, North Carolina is designated a “Christian state.” This means the “Almighty God” of the Preamble is the God of the Bible, therefore, the definition of marriage is a biblical definition and can’t be redefined by any court or legislature.

In order to protect itself from the unconstitutional and unprincipled ruling by the federal court, “S.B. 2 was introduced earlier this year [2015] by Sen. Phil Berger (R-Rockingham) to allow magistrates to recuse themselves from officiating over the services, as well as to permit register of deeds workers to opt out of issuing licenses due to religious objections. The bill comes with one condition: that the individual remove themselves from the marriage business altogether.”

What was the legislative response?:

“In February, the Senate voted 32-16 in favor of the bill, sending the matter on to the House, which likewise passed the measure 67-43.

“But homosexual advocates in the state urged Gov. Pat McCrory to veto the legislation, stating that judges shouldn’t have the right to decline to participate simply because of their religious convictions.”

A better constitutional alternative would have been to say no to the federal court decision based on its unconstitutionality and the protective rights found in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

McCrory stated. “Whether it is the president, governor, mayor, a law enforcement officer, or magistrate, no public official who voluntarily swears to support and defend the Constitution and to discharge all duties of their office should be exempt from upholding that oath; therefore, I will veto Senate Bill 2.”

That’s right. These magistrates swore an oath to “support and defend the Constitution,” and now they were being forced to break that oath since the US Constitution makes no provision for the redefinition of marriage and the North Carolina constitution sanctions only heterosexual marriages.

As promised, Republican Gov. McCrory vetoed the bill.

“But legislators decided to take the matter up for a second vote to override McCrory’s veto. A three-fifths majority vote is needed to do so.

“On Monday [June 1, 2015], the Senate voted 32-16 in favor of the override, sending the matter on to the House, which [also voted on the veto].

“‘If someone takes a job, they don’t park their First Amendment rights at the door,’ sponsor Phil Berger declared. ‘They are entitled to exercise those rights.’”

If more states would hang together on the same-sex marriage issue (and other issues), the Federal Government would have a difficult time enforcing an unconstitutional ruling.