RECENT  POSTS:  » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama  

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

06/17/2010

If Prop 8's overturned, elections will be replaced with pissing matches. Or something.

by Jeremy Hooper

And now yet another social conservative will take the federal Prop 8 trial and disingenuously act as if it's the right to vote itself that's on trial. Hit it, Alliance Defense Fund attorney Austin Nimocks:

"[The Prop 8 trial] is a question over whether our most basic and important fundamental right -- the right to vote -- is going to be trumped by the courts" ..."No right is more important in this country than the right of a free society to express their will at the ballot box."
...
"Right now, the plaintiffs are continuing to ask a single judge to trump the voices of seven-million Americans," ... "It's the most basic, fundamental, constitutional question we have in this country -- and the will of the people should prevail."
Final Prop. 8 arguments heard [ONN]

Right. Because that's what we gays are challenging: The nature of referendum itself. Not the constitutional implications of said referendum. Not the ability of majority tyranny to overturn a civil rights ruling. Not the religious freedom vs. equal protection questions. No, no -- it's that we hate the plebiscite, not the prejudicial plays.

Uh huh, Austin. And the Scopes trial was all about the right to buy, sell, and consume bananas while still feeling comfortably human, not an acceptance of our known world's factuality.

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


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails