Monday, June 12, 2006

More of the gay marriage thing


Whereas Lou Dobbs gets it right last week (seen here), someone named Star Parker (whoever that is) got published in my paper this morning about the "marriage amendment".

You can read the foolishness here.

All done?
Yea, whoever they are, they are a little insane for sure.

Missing from the column about how we as Americans can unite and marginalize an entire group of people was support for further legislation that would also ban divorce in most circumstances.

Surely if those that oppose gay marriage are REALLY worried about the institution, they would support making divorce illegal.
Then again, if divorce was outlawed, only outlaws would divorce.

(BTW, the above three sentences are the body of the email that I sent to the editor of the Tribune)

Please, can we just get back to the business of RUNNING THIS DAMN COUNTRY!!
Oh, what do you think of the rainbow, nice touch or whut?

11 comments:

LA said...

Star Parker writes, "As many have noted, 45 out of 50 states already have enacted protections for traditional marriage, either through statute or constitutional amendment. Consistent with this, polls show Americans overwhelmingly opposed to legalization of homosexual marriage. Support drops off, however, when the issue becomes amending the federal Constitution."

Wait a minute, what about the neocons' beloved states rights? I guess they only support states rights when it comes to abortion, etc. But notice that THIS issue needs a constitutional amendment.

Also, interesting that the author keeps referring to it as the "federal" Constitution. Is that to differentiate it from some other Constitution? Which one might that be?

And I didn't know the "liberal elite" is "now controlling our courts." So tell me, was this article published in the "fiction" section of the paper or something?

And yes, the rainbow was a nice touch.

Ricardo said...

They don't want to run the country there's too many things going wrong that would make them look "bad". All wag the dog nonsense that has given hateful people the chance to land in papers and TV shows.

Mike V. said...

in this case, LA, states rights means "activist" judges, of course.
not going along with the will of the people.

it's wagging, ricardo, it's wagging..

Tom Harper said...

That's true, Rightwingers' stand on gay marriage is refuted by their total lack of interest in divorce or any of the other real threats to marriage.

To see the Right's true colors on marriage or any other "moral" issue, check this out.

Mike V. said...

Whoa, awesome link, Tom.

D-Max said...

Yeah. It's soo insane to support a 5,000 year old institution.

Mike V. said...

LOL!

So, allowing gays to marry will somehow upset this "5000 year old institution"??

RIGHT.

Tell me, what is the origin of marriage?

LA said...

d-max - WTF are you talking about?

Tecknomage said...

Then there's the Constitutional issue of equal treatment under the law. They want to take another group outside Constitutional protections. Ask Blacks or Hispanics.

The other issue; that many, if not all, of the amendment's proponents also want to band any other form of legally recognized union (such as Civil Unions) of Gays.

Finally, they do not believe in true freedom. Their definition of freedom is limited to forcing everyone into having to agree with their limits on personal behavior. They are the moral Gestapo in your bedrooms and your personal life.

Mike V. said...

yea, the rethugs have tried to frame the 14th amendment thing like: "they can get married, just not to a man if they are one"
which, to anyone with a working brain knows that amounts to separate but equal.
now, I know that all the fucking rubes out there that voted for Bush don't even know what I'm talking about there, but some of us have read a history book in our lives.
We're also not fucking bigots..

yea, teck, I wonder every day how the party that was supposed to be about the "government that governs best governs least" figures on how it's kosher to peek under my covers.

fucking assholes..

michele said...

Yea blame clinton for everything,
bush has so much blood on his
hands it's unreal.Here by way of
blogmad,stop by for a visit.