RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM affiliate group to give Roy Moore a 'Letter from Birmingham Jail Award' » Save the Date: SCOTUS to hear history-making marriage cases on April 28 » Wall Street's biggest put stock in equal bonds » Gross: Tony Perkins makes some sort of 'ugly baby' joke at Hillary Clinton's expense » Really, suddenly contrite Ben Carson? Because you were pretty cocksure before! » ADF links A-Rod's drug suspension with florist's anti-gay discrimination; huh?! » NOM: Marriage means putting choking hazards on your baby's toes » Video: Ben Carson is apparently one felony conviction away from fellating a man » NOM to gay families: Your relationships are 'simply about adult sexual desires' » Maggie Gallagher's new gig  

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

12/09/2010

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