Tony Perkins thinks America will 'discard' judges' rulings for marriage equality

It's like I said before, in lieu of providing proof of their arguments in court cases (such as the recent marriage equality victories in Pennsylvania and Oregon), anti-gay organization leaders such as Family Research Council president Tony Perkins are whining about "activists judges."

What I didn't count on is how folks like Perkins would take the visage of dotty old men shaking their fists at the sun while talking about open rebellion against the courts:

Like a dozen black-robed activists before him, Judge Michael McShane argued, "Because Oregon's marriage laws discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation without a rational relationship to any legitimate government interest, the laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution." The state's failure to defend its own constitution, and the failure of an openly homosexual judge to recuse himself, demonstrate what an overreach this decision was. The deluge of rulings hit Pennsylvania next, where Judge John Jones wrote one of the harshest opinions yet, insisting that laws affirming natural marriage should be discarded "into the ash heap of history."

While both judges cited the Supreme Court's June decisions as a rational basis to destroy marriage, the high court said nothing that would give a federal judge the right to redefine marriage. In an interesting twist, both rulings came down within hours of Politico's new polling -- which showed that a clear majority of likely voters in swing states (52-48%) are digging in on their support of natural marriage.

Obviously, the Left's strategy of forcing this agenda through the courts is backfiring -- and it's only a matter of time before the country begins to discard the opinions of unelected judges on the same ash heap where Jones tried to send marriage. Just as the country has never accepted the Supreme Court's declaration of a "right" to destroy unborn human life in Roe v. Wade, we will never accept the Court's assertion of a "right" to change the definition of our most fundamental social institution. The courts can ignore natural law, or even suppress it, but they will never succeed in subduing it.

So according to Perkins, based on a poll which has nothing to do with marriage equality, court rulings are backfiring. In addition,  states should ignore the opinions of judges because they aren't elected anyway.