Sunday, March 05, 2006

The Amendment

A number of bloggers have now chimed in on The Amendment--most of them ambivalent-to-negative on it.

One wonders if some of the Highly-Educated-and-Scrivening-Class is perhaps educated beyond their level of intelligence. They are certainly pumped full of their Elite-vitamins.

Some try to wiggle around with the "Second Sentence," ruminating about the meaning, purpose, yada yada. It's not that hard, boys and girls: it's a defense against the Even-More-Highly-Educated-Bunch in the State of Massachusetts, which would be happy under the 'full faith and credit' clause of the USConstitution to dump their brand of pointy-headed horseapples on the State of Wisconsin's residents. Lawyers are particularly prone to fret over the Second Sentence, which tends to prove the maxim that law is far too important to leave to lawyers.

But that's merely an indirect and Oh-So-Civilized method of attacking the First Sentence: only a man and a woman will be considered to be Spouse and Spouse-ette, husband and wife, man and wife...you get the idea.

It's precisely the well-deserved utter contempt for lawyers that brought about The Amendment in the first place. If you don't understand yet that the AntiChristianLibertineUnion considers it their mission to pervert language, you don't get the first maxim of war propaganda: "To Hell with Truth!!" Need we remind you that a fervent aspirant to the High-Priests-of-Decadence group has questioned ontology itself? Does "It depends on what the meaning of 'is' is?" ring a bell with you?

So The Amendment made it even more a challenge to them.

As to the overall purpose--yes, it is to unabashedly proclaim that the privileges of marriage granted by the State shall remain reserved only to those marriages which have the actual, real, potential for offspring. That's because offspring are in the public interest. One could argue that the State should take away such privileges, which is fine. Argue THAT in an election campaign. Argue THAT at the Country Inn in Waukesha. In other words, tell married couples that the State will now proceed to take away the tax breaks associated with children and with being married. C'mon: tell us that only the State can make such rules, and only the State grants privileges to marriage. Let's make Positive Law the grounds for debate, to show that it is Lawyers and Legislators who are the real gods...just like in the self-defense argument, where the State of Wisconsin still affirms that the State alone allows or dis-allows self-defense. Yeah.

What? Don't have the nerve? Cat got your tongue?

Perhaps the most inane remark was made by some blogger who declared that 'homosexuality MUST be natural, because it occurs.' (He also used the inflated 10% figure, instead of the real <5% figure--which tells you something.) This is directly analogous to the statement 'Anger is natural so murder is OK.'

This is the deception-by-elision argument. Skip the important part of the equation so you don't have to defend, ah, buggery...or murder.

See, in between the condition of anger and the act of murder, there is a knowing, consenting, actor--just as in between the condition of homosexuality and the act of buggery there is a knowing, consenting, actor. We have all the sympathy in the world for people who are afflicted by a homosexual orientation, which is a grave disorder. We have much less sympathy for those who think that they are "entitled" to privileges of the married because they want to act on this condition. As a society, we have decided to tolerate homosexual activity (in most cases.) But toleration of such activity should not be mis-read as a sign of approval, nor of acceptance.

The Educated Elites would have us believe that it is "natural" to pack fudge. Wrong. Alternatively, they would have us believe that the Leviathan State is the sole grantor of natural rights, and the sole legislator of 'right and wrong.' Wrong again.

Every State which has acted to protect marriage through referendum has done so by an overwhelming margin. Wisconsin will be no different, with or without the Elites.

4 comments:

Terrence Berres said...

"the privileges of marriage granted by the State"

Once you misconceive this as an issue of grants of privileges by the State, you're on the slippery slope.

allendrury said...

Backward and misguided right-wing conservatives, and religious throwbacks to the days of scarlet letters and demonizing dancing, took Wisconsin hell bound today with a vote in the State Assembly. With hate as their rallying cry, and injustice as their driving force, they voted today to place a constitutional amendment before the public in November that outlaws gay marriage, while threatening companies across the state who offer domestic partner benefits. Are civil rights now up to the majority to decide?

It is hard to imagine a time when all we had to fear from Republicans in Wisconsin was Senator Joe McCarthy! But this is really the same type of hysteria, only aimed at different people.

These under-educated and zealotry-driven band of Assembly Republicans who forced this issue on the public can’t stand the thought of a family that doesn’t somehow look like those that live in their lily white neighborhoods. They can’t stand the fact that while their marriages decay around them like ant hills in a downpour, more and more gay men and women have committed and long lasting relationships. More gay people are adopting babies from those straight couples that couldn’t find love before they used the plumbing. It is baffling to me how sanctimonious the Assembly Republicans looked as they marched into the Chambers today wearing pressed suits and red dresses. (Lots of us know their double lives.) It is a banner day for the GOP when they can rejoice in the virtues of literally over 1,000 benefits afforded to those who can obtain a marriage license, while denying those rights to loving gay relationships. How much whiskey would one with a conscience need to consume in order to sleep after committing such acts on the Assembly floor during the day? Yet these folks sleep with no second thoughts. That should tell every citizen of the state something.

Ahhhh…but we know that there are those solid Republican assemblymen who bring their zipper problem from the hinterlands to Madison, while the bride they professed to love and cherish, along with their prized little tax deductions, milk the cows back in the dark ages where they reside. Surely it is gay marriage, or just the very thought of it, that led these upright church going members of the GOP to stray from the marriage bonds. Or, maybe they are just on their ‘starter marriages’.

Well, it is time now to play by the same rules that brought us all to this point in our state tonight. Divorces and sex outside of the heterosexual marriage bonds by all those pompous conservative legislators is fair game from this point in. There have been rumblings over the internet and around the political folks of Madison about ‘outing ‘ these hypocrites that preach under the dome on the one hand, and live the life of a wayward priest on the other hand. As their hero President Bush would say, “Lets roll!” The safeguarding of their names was just the way things were always done in Madison. That day is over! (Tommy, you left in time.)

allendrury said...

State Representative Polly Williams never learned an important life lesson.

I recall as a boy my dad stopping on the side of the road and helping a stranger with a car problem. It took a few minutes and after the situation was resolved the thankful man reached into his wallet and was about to hand some money to my dad. My father put his hands up, declined the cash, and told the guy to stop for someone else in need of help someday. With that, we were back in our car, and on our way.

Years later, after I had finally become employed in the Wisconsin State Legislature I made a personal vow that I would someday help open the door to another eager person, like myself, hoping to work under the Dome. In time a fresh and engaging face entered our office looking for directions within the building. I gave him a Blue Book and talked about employment opportunities in the Legislature. In time he was employed there and became a personal friend and confidant. Today, his family can be proud of him as he now works for the Minnesota State Legislature and serves his state with honor.

But on Tuesday night Polly Williams, an African-American Democrat from Milwaukee, a Jesse Jackson supporter in the 1980’s, voted for placing a constitutional amendment on the November ballot outlawing ‘gay marriage.’ Apparently she never learned the lesson of history about how civil rights are fought for by those who have already attained them. She must be blind to the idea of social justice being a continuing battle where those who can make a difference stands up for those who need defending.

Along every step of the way in the long history of civil rights for African-Americans, and for women, there have always been others who have put out their hand and said, “Let me help you on the journey.” Jews, Catholics, and the Irish each had their own personal battles to wage for justice in our nation, and knew that what they had attained was important, and therefore fought to allow others to also enjoy those same rights. The 1960’s brought out the best in these people as they sought civil rights for blacks throughout the south.

From fighting slavery, to ending Jim Crow laws, from ensuring one-person one vote, to making it possible for a woman like Polly Williams to have an equal say on the floor of the State Assembly, there have always been others who have helped to make today’s society more just.

So how did Polly Williams forget all that had brought her as an African American woman to the State Assembly? How did she not remember that once one gets justice and civil rights you do not forget the next person on the ladder that needs to be pulled up into equality?

The concept of ‘passing it on’ may be quaint to some, and forgotten by others, but a healthy dose of it on Tuesday night would have made Wisconsin a lost less ugly today.

Dad29 said...

Allen, have you thought of getting your own blogsite? They're free, you know.