RECENT  POSTS:  » Where art thou, Jeremy? » Video: Ad for blemish remover/ tourist spot for our new, bettered America » Whether justified or Kim Davis-ed, individualistic rage rarely outplays broader truths » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall'  

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


If Prop 8's shitty, it's shitty, irrespective of Jerry or Arnie

by Jeremy Hooper

One of the oddest far-right spin jobs related to the current Prop 8 appeal is how some of these folks are acting like California's governor and attorney general are issuing some sort of de facto veto power by opting to not defend the flawed, unconstitutional marriage ban in court. Like take this assessment from Concerned Women For America's resident Concerned Man, Mario Diaz:

[T]he "standing" song and dance routine was so deprived of common sense, it might be worthy of an Oscar. Apparently, even though the power in our form of government rests with "we the people," the proponents of homosexual "marriage" believe it is a very anemic people indeed as, according to them, the governor and the attorney general by themselves can overturn a properly enacted state constitutional amendment simply by refusing to defend it. [SOURCE]

Uhm, how exactly are Brown and Schwarzenegger "overturning" the odious amendment? The burden that Prop 8 is up against is the U.S. Constitution, not any one politician, office holder, or activist. Yes, both Brown and Schwarzenegger are refusing to defend Prop 8 on appeal, because they will not (and should not) defend something that they and a lower court find unconstitutional. But it is the lack of constitutionality that led to both gentlemen's decisions, not the other way around!

The only way the far-right's "it's all about 'the people'" bucket holds any water is if our nation is meant to be a land where majorities are free to do whatever to whoever whenever they like, governing stipulations be damned. In a land with equal protection, due process, minority safeguards, and a citizenry not "de-peopled" on the basis of sexual orientation, their bucket is too hole-y to even be called a bucket at all. It's more like a hot air sieve.

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