Translate

Wednesday, March 16, 2005

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

By now you have probably heard about the San Francisco Superior Court judge who declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.

Well, fake journalist/rent-boy homunculus Jeff Gannon™ has heard about it too. And boy is he ever, uh, still on the side of those who hate him for who he is. Whaaaa?

Fear not, for the ever-intrepid Gannon™ is even-handedly on the case. Witness the seemingly reasonable comment from the lone "pro-homosexual" spokesman:

Seth Kilbourn, Vice President for the pro-homosexual Human Rights Campaign’s (HRC) Marriage Project praised the decision, saying, “Hard-working, tax-paying Californians are now one step closer to equal rights under law, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender. We laud the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda, the ACLU and the plaintiffs in this case for bringing their stories forward and securing this important victory for equality.”


Yes, "Mister" Kilbourn, we've all heard your little happy talk about "equal" this and "rights" that. What about our rights not to see two guys holding hands, huh? How equal is it now? You know, God created Adam n' Eve, not Adam n' Steve! Haw haw haw!

Fortunately, Our Hero™ gives "equal" time (and then some) to the Defenders Of Marriage®.


Groups opposed to gay marriage were quick to respond to the ruling as well. Robert Knight, director of Concerned Women for America’s (CWA) Culture & Family Institute called San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer’s ruling “nonsensical.”

“Yet another irrational judge, like his counterparts in Massachusetts, can’t find a rational reason for defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman,” he said. “That’s because these judges are no longer acting rationally, and are imposing their own radical agenda, ignoring the law and the will of the people.”

Knight added, “Californians should remove Kramer from office because of this scandalous ruling. We also need to enact a constitutional amendment, at the state and federal levels, to protect marriage once and for all.”


Yeah, protect it, because if we give them the same rights as us, they'll....uh, they'll....dammit, they'll attack it and stuff! Don't you know that it's under attack? Oh, why won't someone please think of the children?

Eh, you get the idea. Here's another of these loons in the article:

Randy Thomasson, Executive Director of Campaign for California Families, which had full-party status defending marriage for a man and a woman in the Kramer’s court said, "This is a crazy ruling by an arrogant San Francisco judge who apparently hates marriage and the voters. Kramer has trashed the people's vote to keep marriage for a man and a woman and violated his oath to uphold the law instead of making new laws out of his own head. This is the worst type of judge. This case will be immediately appealed."

He continued, "It's hurtful and insulting to the voters when a judge attacks the voters and destroys the sacred institution of marriage for a man and a woman. This outrageous ruling will inspire average citizens to rise up and fight to protect marriage as it naturally is - for a man and a woman, a husband and wife."


Exactly what are they protecting, and exactly how could letting gays have the same rights as the rest of us undermine what's already in existence? Seems to me like they're just broadening it ever so slightly in definition. Not one of these halfwits has been able to explain exactly what the big deal is or the specifics of the "attack on marriage"; they just know they don't like it.

And there are several other opponents profiled in the article. Gannon™ ends up with the one pro, with one paragraph, and five con, each with either two or three paragraphs. This is "fair and balanced", I imagine. More likely, there's just more wingnut interest groups because there's more money in it, and that's really all these demagogues are after.

Here's the kicker -- this activist hippy judge they're all raving about? He's a Republican, appointed by Pete Wilson, and Roman Catholic to boot. This is anything but a stereotypical lefty judicial activist.


The native of Brookline, Mass., earned his law degree at the University of Southern California and practiced civil law in San Francisco before then- Gov. Pete Wilson named him to the bench. Over the years, the 57-year-old Roman Catholic and registered Republican has gained a reputation for being compassionate, respectful and unbiased.


Which is certainly more than you can say for Jeff™, who can now add "self-loathing" to his voluminous ledger of descriptives. Or maybe he was just "gay for pay" all along....

7 comments:

vonKreedon said...

This slays me:

Robert Knight, director of Concerned Women for America’s (CWA) Culture & Family Institute

Oh yeah, these women are so concerned about Americas culture and family that they are all at home caring for their family and of course have a man as director of their concerned women's institute. It's Republican inclusivity at its most blatant.

And yeah, what the hell does keeping gays from enjoying the civil rights of marriage have to do with defending marriage? Serial marriages, pre-nups, familial child abuse all seem like things that marriage and family might need some defending from, but including committed homosexuals within the civil marriage rights!?!

Deb said...

I'd love to hear a rational reason to define marriage as between and man and woman only, but so far all I've heard is religious babbling and the old bait-and-switch of "why do these activist judges hate America?" It's so hard to debate when the other side is frickin' loonie.

Thanks for that info about the hippie, activist judge though. It's heartening to know that some people on the other side still actually think and stuff.

Heywood J. said...

vK:

I thought about riffing on a guy running a putative women's organization, but for one, it seemed kinda sexist, and for two, for all we know, CWA is just another innocuously-named 'turf group.

I really think the key to this issue is money, as in fundraising. Look at the known (or suspected) gays who are well-entrenched in the GOP besides Gannon -- Ken Mehlman, David Dreier, Scott McClellan, possibly even Rove. I seriously think these guys just looked at the money that people like Jerry Falwell and Benny Hinn were raking in from their rubes, and found the perfect fundraising issue. All these different organizations -- who's bankrolling them? Day-to-day operations for an organization that not only doesn't produce anything, but only gets out there every once in a while to mobilize the faithful -- talk about your non-profit. Someone's paying the bills for all these weirdos.

And as you and Deb (and many others) point out, not only is there no logic to their argument, but no responsible MSM entity has really scrutinized that "logic" and laid it out. And it would be so easy to do so, obviously. As with everything else, sheer laziness on their part.


Deb:

I think the facts about Kramer -- that he can't be conveniently painted as some so-called lefty activist -- may give this ruling some real legs. And about time; if there's anyone that deserves to have the piss taken out of them, it's these "marriage defense" idjits.

And you're right -- all this heat and rhetoric, and yet none of them have ever offered a rational, non-biblical reason for their issue. In a sane universe, they'd have been slapped back to their caves long ago.

Craig Heath said...

Heywood, et al - after the children, the overriding concern seems to be "Won't someone think of the voters?". The suggestion is that the voters are the end-all be-all of our political life. I seem to remember that we are a Republic? Someone (executive, legislative, judicial branch) is expected to put the brakes on damn foolishness, even if popular by fifty-percent-plus-one. Especially if it is popular, idiocy with power needs to be checked, as it is the most dangerous combination outside of shaped plutonium and pressure-wave chain reaction ignition.

I try to list the major anti-gay-marriage arguments here (ahem), and torture them for their rational secrets, to no avail. No doubt I missed some. If you have a moment, drop a line to add to the list.

Keep asking the HOW questions - exactly HOW does a married gay couple undermine heterosexual marriage? By what mechanism does ensuring basic rights for one demographic threaten your 22-year marriage to Marge? When two people of the same sex vow to love and care for each other through life, which marble column of civilization is chipped? Childless couples, heterosexual or otherwise, threaten the Republic by placing which specific people in danger?

The answers offered to these questions will be the same as the original, amorphous charges. That will prove the lack of their stance - more specific questions will elicit the same response. It will be expressed in a bit more shrill tone, but the content will not change. That's the giveaway.

Margaret Romao Toigo said...

I think that we need to turn the tables on these so-called protectors and defenders of marriage who degrade its meaning every time they suggest that marriage is mainly about procreation -- because that is the only way that they can rationalize their position without using the Scriptures. They know that Biblical arguments won't fly in the courts which is why they use the procreation/tradition arguments in their court cases.

I made a small attempt at outlining this concept and I hope that others will expand and improve upon the idea that we must recognize same-sex marriage in order to protect and defend it from those people who would reduce it to nothing but a license to have sex and reproduce.

bill naka said...

Just thought i would say hi from Japan. Doing some blog surfing and found your site. Im looking for some cool styles of gift subscription for my own blog. Theres some really amazing blogs about. if you have time check out my site you will find information on gift subscription. Well when i get my blog running hope you come and check it out.

Anonymous said...

It's great blog! Luckily I purchased a Tall Chest Jewelry Box from Stauer Key store at Couponalbum.com & saved 10% by using coupon code STR10..!!