Saturday, June 17, 2006

No I Didn’t Die, I Just Wished I Could Have

The good news is we are moved and pretty much settled. The bad news is we have to do this again in a year, which puts us dead-smack in the middle of summer once more (hey this is Arizona, summer starts early here). And it was noooo picnic this year at 112 degrees.

But aside from the gratuitous complaining above --- I am back and just about ready to get into full swing again with discussions and seething rants. There certainly is never any shortage of idiotic things to talk about --- like uhmmmm … that Marriage Protection Amendment. That was a real winner for the GOP --- wasn’t it?

But not all Conservatives are over-the-edge nuts, so in fairness, let me point you to one such person who seems rather sane and reasonable, a rarity amongst today’s so-called Conservatives. His editorial should be required reading for his brethren up on the Hill. Here are some snippets.


But I cannot fathom the political and moral logic that lies behind the so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution, better known as the "gay marriage ban."

If there is any document that needs to be preserved from religious squabbling and moralizing, it is the Constitution.

The Constitution doesn't exist to resolve religious disputes. It exists to provide a just and equitable environment of laws and rights in which citizens can address religious issues, along with equally thorny issues involving human rights, property rights and competing claims for power.

The Constitution doesn't exist to implement a certain "American way of life." It exists to ensure an environment of freedom in which the ways Americans live can flourish and evolve, within a common commitment to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," as stated in the Declaration of Independence.

The Constitution doesn't exist to implement certain religious beliefs. The colonies had been down that road and it was disastrous. The Constitution exists to provide an environment in which all citizens are free to worship and to believe as they choose. It is difficult to imagine a situation more antithetical to the American way than faith by fiat.


Moreover, by ignoring actual causes of family breakdown and targeting homosexuality as the factor requiring sanction, it sets up a classic scapegoating dynamic: If your marriage is in trouble, it must be the fault of gays and lesbians. What then? Pogroms, like those launched by church and czar against Jews in 19th century Russia?

The stability of American society depends far more on freedom, justice, fairness and common sense than on banning certain expressions of human sexuality. History has taught us to ask: If gays are today's target for moralistic repression, who will be tomorrow's?

Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan


No comments: