First, let me say that the USSC’s recent (non-)decision was the correct and logical one, if the only issue was the law and the wording within the Constitution. The choice, you see, was made the moment government made being married a legal matter, hundreds of years ago. That said, however, there are larger things at work, here.
One of the advantages of having a huge library of previous writings on file, is the ability to refer back to those writings and those positions. Saves much in the way of repetitive writing and also, gives you a checkpoint on your own consistency. Back in 2004, I wrote a comment over at Dan Drezner’s place, which addresses some of the issues aside from the law, and the Constitution.
“‘A prohibition on homosexual unions wasn’t written into the constitution because such things were assumed, and therefore never legally defined.
Proof of these assumptions is easy enough to find.
It is interesting for example, that Jefferson, (arguably the biggest social liberal of the lot) thought homosexual acts to be worthy of hanging… (I commend Fawn Brodie’s Jefferson to your reading list) and yet he never indicated anything of the sort in his … our… documents.
Clearly, there was some assumptions made on the part of the founders in this area…. cultural assumptions.
And here, we walk a legal fine line, I fear.
Government, you see, does not operate inside a cultural vacuum. Rather, it exists inside a cultural context it must not run afoul of, lest it become irrelevant to the people it’s supposed to be governing. Yet, while law and government is a more exact science, culture is less so. And so, codification of the culture is problematic at best.
Given this, Jefferson, and the rest of the founders apparently took the attitude that their best tack would be to write laws and a framework that would at least not run afoul of the existing culture, without specifying without attempting to codify the bounds of that culture.
Dan, I think, is right insofar as such an amendment not passing, because it, unlike the remainder of the constitution, it attempts to define the social boundaries of the culture it’s charged with governing.
But I wonder what it is then, that the culture has to protect itself, in the end, if not government.’
This is, it seems to me, the legal vs the cultural. And clearly the founders were making choices based on cultural assumptions. This is today resulting in questions such as Holman W. Jenkins Jr, in the WSJ asks
“If marriage is a mere “legal” right, who can’t get married? If any two people have the right to the legal benefits of marriage, why not three people? Why not two brothers? Why not a man and his father?
It’s hard to see on what basis marriage could logically be denied to anybody. Right now, the state doesn’t ask if a man and woman are heterosexually inclined, if they love each other, if they intend to have children. Marriage largely regulates itself, with the exception being government efforts to prevent marriages intended solely to obtain a green card. But in the world ordained by the Massachusetts supreme court, wouldn’t the state be obliged to make sure two women who want to get married are really lesbians and not just two women trying to acquire the legal advantages of marriage? How else to stop marriage from becoming a right available to any group of people who simply want to organize their affairs as “married” persons?
Right now, the law makes no formal presumption about the sexual orientation of people getting married, just their gender: They have to be of opposite sexes. Yet that small stipulation seems to have succeeded, for the most part, in keeping marriage from becoming a mere contractual convenience. ”
I’ve already written at some length about all of this, incidental to the Canadian SC ruling last June.(02)
The problem is a bit more basic, even than a religious question in our increasingly secular society. At it’s root, this is a matter of which will triumph… law and government, or the culture that created said law and said government. Like it or not, the values being railed against by those seeking to install this travesty, are not simply religious values. They are also deep in the roots of our culture. The implications are simple enough to see, then…
Clearly, what we have here as the result of this ruling are more questions than answers. I say again, the issue is what triumphs, government, or the culture that gave it life? Has the monster created to protect the culture, turned on it’s master?
I suggest it has, and it’s because we have entrusted the power of government to those who don’t believe in traditional American culture, who are using the power of government to over-ride and debase that culture. And that is a theme which will continue to pop up in posts I already have in the pipeline.
Editor’s note…. this post is echoed at TNR’s main page.
As a young man the emperor was always just given what he wanted and had no idea how wealth was created, what uses it could be put to — besides buying choom and stuff — and generally despised anyone who had it. Except for himself, of course. He thought the wealth of others was all gotten through theft and he dreamed of the day when he could steal it back and give it to his friends.
Still the emperor was young and impressionable and he believed these silly things.
Link to read the whole article, by Clarice Feldman, American Thinker.
From WHEC (Rochester, NY)
The first Ebola patient diagnosed in the United States died Wednesday morning in a Dallas hospital Wednesday, a hospital spokesman said.
Thomas Eric Duncan was pronounced dead at 7:51 a.m. at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas, where he was admitted Sept. 28 and has been kept in isolation, according to spokesman Wendell Watson.
Health officials have identified 10 people, including seven health workers, who had direct contact with Duncan while he was contagious. Another 38 people also may have come into contact with him.Health officials have identified 10 people, including seven health workers, who had direct contact with Duncan while he was contagious. Another 38 people also may have come into contact with him.
Duncan is dead. The state is spared the cost of a trial for attempted murder.
As if Dallas weren’t enough of a circus already, Reverend Jesse Jackson has announced that he will be working with community leaders in Dallas to make sure that Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan receives “the best humanitarian relief” available.
Hat tip: Amy Miller, Legal Insurrection
Duncan should have never been alliowed to enter the country. Maybe, just maybe, the Reverend Jackson will be good enough to escort Duncan’s corpse back to African, from where he should have never left.
Snark of the Day from Bill Maher:
“Freedom of speech, freedom to practice any religion you want without fear of violence, freedom to leave a religion, equality for women, equality for minorities, including homosexuals, these are liberal principles that liberals applaud for but then when you say in the Muslim world this is what’s lacking, then they get upset.”
Hat tip: Dana, Patterico’s Pontifications.
Libturds. like Ben Affleck feel safe condemning western culture, because civilized people don’t call for death for a political difference of opinion.
I note that Maher is a turd, but in this case the turd is right.
The Ebola virus has planted itself inside the beltway. Will the regime finally take the treat seriously, from NBC Washington:
A patient is being evaluated for Ebola at Howard University Hospital in Washington, D.C., a hospital spokesperson confirmed Friday.
That person has been admitted to the hospital in stable condition and is isolated. The medical team is working with the CDC and other authorities to monitor the patient’s condition.
The regime’s obsession with open borders will be the death of us yet.
Why? From the Wall Street Journal:
MONROVIA, Liberia— Ashoka Mukpo, an American freelance journalist diagnosed with Ebola, and the NBC News team he worked with here will be flown to the U.S., yet another demonstration of the international repercussions of the epidemic sweeping West Africa.
Mr. Mukpo is scheduled to be picked up Sunday night in Liberia and will be transported to the Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha, his father, Mitchell Levy, said Friday.
Shame on NBC. Mukpo went to Africa to get infected. Let him stay in African until cured. Mukpo is just the type of case Dim Won, b/k/a Barack Obama promised to keep out of the country.
As democrat candidates are fleeing President Obama a/k/a Dim Won like rats, he tried them all to his sinking ship of state. DIm Won as attributed by Daily Caller:
“I am not on the ballot this fall. Michelle’s pretty happy about that. But make no mistake: these policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them.”
Dim Won will on the ballot, with every candidate with a “D” for their party label.
Snark of the Day from Andrew Klavan, PJ Media:
It was the arrogant action of a man who doesn’t know what’s important because he doesn’t know what’s true. He lives inside his own insistent fantasy world rather than the real one.
Klavan hangs the moniker of President Stardust on Dim Won. It might well be President Don Quixote.
The political media establishment has gone to war on the National Football League over the alleged premise of domestic violence. I am no fan of domestic violence, but let us keep our priorities in order, as bad as domestic violence is, drunk driving is a far worse problem. Honoring a drunk driver is a down right bad idea, from WHEC, Rochester, NY:
News10NBC has learned the Danielle Downey Classic will be held at Brook-Lea Country Club in July 2015.
Danielle Downey, a Spencerport grad and former LPGA golfer, was killed in a one-vehicle crash in the state of Alabama in January.
The Danielle Downey Classic will be the first Symetra Tour event in Rochester in the 35-year history of the tour.
by Erin Edgemon, al.com:
Toxicology results show former Auburn University and LPGA golfer Danielle Downey was intoxicated at the time of her fatal crash on Jan. 30.
Alcohol was ruled a factor in the single-vehicle crash that occurred on Lee Road 57, four miles west of Auburn, the Alabama Department of Public Safety released on Tuesday.
Downey’s blood alcohol content was at 0.242 percent at the time of her death.
According to Alabama law, a driver is under the influence with a blood alcohol content of 0.08 percent or higher.
at 0.242 the late Downey was in Rosemary Lehmberg territory, and had utterly no business behind the wheel.
What is the difference between Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the late Fidel Castro? Aside from the fact that Castro is probably dead, Castro was a tyrant who put his political opponents in jail, from Marc Morano, Climate Depot:
New York City – Environmental activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lamented that there were no current laws on the books to punish global warming skeptics. . “I wish there were a law you could punish them with. I don’t think there is a law that you can punish those politicians under,” Kennedy told Climate Depot in a one-on-one interview during the People’s Climate March. The interiew was conducted for the upcoming documentary Climate Hustle.
Kennedy Jr. accused skeptical politicians of “selling out the public trust.” “Those guys are doing the Koch Brothers bidding and are against all the evidence of the rational mind, saying global warming does not exit. They are contemptible human beings. I wish there were a law you could punish them with. I don’t think there is a law that you can punish those politicians under.”
Kennedy is only a wanna be tyrant, all all his fellow leftists. If Kennedy honestly believes anthropogenic global warming is a real problem he ought to be willing to actually do something about it. As it is, Kennedy thinks we solve his imaginary problem by putting real people, like the Koch brothers in jail, while not affecting Kennedy’s chosen lifestyle.
Snark of the Day from Karen, Lonely Conservative:
I’d rather do laundry than read or listen to a feminist, especially the academics.
Blessed are the clean.
From the BEEB:
With the results in from all 32 council areas, the “No” side won with 2,001,926 votes over 1,617,989 for “Yes”.
Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond called for unity and urged the unionist parties to deliver on more powers.
UK Prime Minister David Cameron said he was delighted the UK would remain together and said the commitments on extra powers would be honoured.
Great Britain 307 years young, and still breathing.
Some reprobate democrat senator is waging a war on women, and my junior Senator, Kristen Gillibrand, is protecting, him or her, from Moe Lane, Red State:
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand is giving more details, and dropping f-bombs, about her experience with sexist comments she’s received about her weight, saying she couldn’t tell a male colleague “to go f—- himself.”
“At that moment, if I could have just disappeared, I would have. If I could have just melted in tears, I would have. But I had to just sit there and talk to him. And I switched the subject and I didn’t hear another word he said, but I wasn’t in a place where I could tell him to go f—- himself,” Gillibrand told HuffPost Live in an interview posted Monday.
Look Gillie, this is a matter of personal integrity, or your personal lack thereof. If you refuse to stand-up tos this democrat reprobate, Dirty Harry Reid, Chuckie Schumer, Mrs. Clinton or Little Dickie Durbin perhaps, you can not be depended t5o stand-up for the citizens of New York Stte, who you purport to represent.
John “Waffles” Kerry continues to wage his never ending war with his own mouth, from CBS News:
Secretary of State John Kerry backtracked on the language he had used to describe the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS, also known as ISIL), saying in an interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday that, “we are at war” with the group.
“I think there’s frankly a kind of tortured debate going on about terminology,” said Kerry, who rejected the word “war” in an interview with CBS News State Department correspondent Margaret Brennan last week and warned that people shouldn’t get “war fever.”
Forbes Kerry can not keep clear thought from one interview to the next. He is incapable of understanding foreign policy, much less representing, or heaven forbid, actually explaining it.
Snark of the Day from Tom Maquire: Just One Minute:
The Times noted that our Arab allies seem a bit tentative. No kidding – Obama and Kerry were wrong about the surge in ’07, wrong about the Iraqi troop withdrawals in ’11, wrong to walk away from post-Qadaffi Libya in ’11, wrong not to arm the moderate Syrian rebels in ’11, wrong to draw a faux red line in 2013, and now no one will get behind him? The headless chickens have come home to roost.
Dim Won and Lurch, quite the pair.