RECENT  POSTS:  » Jodie Foster in 2013: 'I am'; Jodie Foster in 2014: 'I do' » AFA promotes its new app in only way it knows how » Robert Oscar Lopez says I perform 'psychological operations routine' on him when I quote his own words from his own web site » Matt Barber's ever-classy site suggests gay people are literally crushing fellow humans » Bryan Fischer is on to our comic book villain–in-chief » Southern Baptist Theological Seminary's Al Mohler 'can't give' us acceptance; good thing we're not asking » NOM fails to trip up Oregon marriage case » Audio: Tony Perkins equates opposing equality with opposing Nazis » 'WaPo' conservative columnist: 'Strident' marriage equality opponents have lost » If you feel like you hear about another marriage case every day, here's why  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

12/08/2008

'A Lie in Defiance of Fun turns attention midwestward

by Jeremy Hooper

Regarding Iowa and the case his team will make in order to stave off the crushing tide of tolerance and respect, the Alliance Defense Fund's Douglas Napier has offered up the following:

The Iowa marriage law is simple, settled, and overwhelmingly supported by Iowans. There’s simply no legitimate reason to consider redefining marriage,” said Napier. “Marriage as one man and one woman has been the law in Iowa for 170 years. It’s supported by a majority of Iowans, was nearly unanimously supported by the legislature, and is supported by the governor. It’s hard to believe we’re even debating it."

We reply:

"It's simple, yes, But it's offensive to say that the state's marriage law is settled simply because the state has passed a DOMA law, and it's counterproductive to suggest that popular opinion is a reason to deny minority rights. Flawed law is always on the table for debate and dispute; flawed opinion is always open to reasoned scrutiny. By bringing marriage equality to the courts, we gays are asking the independent judiciary to weigh in as to whether current law and opinion are right and justified, or if this is yet another time in which human beings have wronged each other in the name of "morality.

It's hard to believe we're even debating it, Mr. Napier? Fine, then don't show up tomorrow to raise debate. Don't challenge Judge Hanson's lower court ruling. Don't raise a stink when gays raise the "radical" idea that their tax-paying lives and loves are worthy of dignity and respect. Because as
we've stated many times before, Mr. Napier: The "debate" is coming from your side. We are telling you that no amount of feet-dragging, banning, polling, legislating, ruling, or ANYTHING is ever going to make us stop pushing for what is rightfully ours. We are telling you, without debate or apology: YOU WILL NEVER WIN THIS CIVIL WAR BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALREADY CHOSEN THE LOSING SIDE!

Happy Holidays!"

ADF attorney available to media after hearing over same-sex ‘marriage’ in Iowa [ADF]

**SEE ALSO: Equal Marriage in Iowa, Closer Than We Think? Queer Orgs "Cautiously Optimistic" [PHB]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

The "Happy Holidays" was a nice touch, considering the other culture battle they're trying to fight.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Dec 8, 2008 9:01:26 PM

and it's counterproductive to suggest that popular opinion is a reason to deny minority rights....its also against the Bill of Rights and the Consitution...This from Justice Jackson (one of unanimous Brown vs. BdEduc Court in 1954)....."“the very purpose of the Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities … One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote.....
...and from T Jefferson in his First Inaugural address:All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.

And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions.
....we can only hope for as much from Barack and his speech.

Posted by: LOrion | Dec 8, 2008 10:39:47 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails