SCOTUS Victimized By "Do Nothing" Congress

I was listening to a radio segment from the Christian group Focus on The Family as they expressed obvious disappointment with the Supreme Court's decision on gay marriage.

I keep hoping for someone, anyone, who can offer a measured dissent that doesn't describe the majority opinion as mysticism or applesauce. What I really don't want to hear is another Supreme court justice crying about living during these days of Do Nothing.

If the founding fathers can be credited for one very important thing, it's having the wisdom to recognize the wicked heart of man. By virtue of their recognition, disagreements by moral compass and disagreements by political tactic are masked motives that don't have to cripple our democracy. According to justice Antonin Scalia, "Any country that lets 9 unelected officials create laws, hardly deserves to be called a democracy". Would that be the case if the 5-4 decision was in your favor Scalia? Was it the case when that same nine sided with you in deciding that a cruel and unusual lethal injection capital punishment is now nothing more than "we know its bad, but do you have something better?"

A few of us out here had questions about America's democracy label long before the recent decision on marriage, but I can feel your pain Scalia. I would like to ask, how can the congressional representative's in our republic consider themselves caretaker's of democracy while way too afraid to do their jobs in fear of adding to Obama's legacy?

Inaction from Congress has catapulted Obama into the hero republicans hoped to avoid instead of sharing some good stuff with the current Congress, which just so happens to be a majority republican.  Something similar is happening to the judiciary branch who showed their hands long ago when initial concerns over the ObamaCare, "established by the state" language first arose, and the SCOTUS worried that Congress would quibble instead of do the normal work of clarifying laws with language adjustments and amendments.

Somehow, the SCOTUS was supposed to pretend that political forces weren't trying to use them and a loophole to circumvent a law that congress can overturn with their current majority.  It would require an override of Obama's certain veto, but it would also signal to America that Congress understands and intends to use the fullness of their legislative powers: power that the Supreme Court prefers in the hands of legislators, a loose description for America's current Congress.

Did anyone notice that Congress isn't threatening to override the Supreme Court's decision on marriage the same way that they threaten ObamaCare? They could if they thought that the Supreme Court went too far. Focus on The Family think so. They teased that aforementioned program so well, that I couldn't wait to hear why the rule of law had truly been compromised instead of another angry dissent. Ten seconds into the program and the host says this:

"First of all, it doesn't matter what the Supreme Court recognizes as marriage. What matters is what God recognizes."

End of story. I changed the radio station to a baroque symphony so I could post this reminder that executive orders and Supreme Court laws supporting same-sex marriage come when civil, productive congressional discourse doesn't. 

And that's all by design.