"I'm Not Magic, Lead Yourselves."
--Cory Doctorow
"As a woman I have no country. As a woman, I want no country."
---Virgina Woolfe
A few days ago I was having a debate with a friend(Ben, who used to contribute occasionally to this blog back in our LR days) about a variety of things mainly focusing on our differing political philosophies. I am a socialist and he is a democrat who......reads Ayn Rand. Anyway, eventually we got onto the Constitution and I made the point that, frankly, I don't care what the Second Amendment means, guns need to be limited and controlled otherwise we'd have havoc in the streets.
Now, I've said that before and will almost certainly say it again, however you will never hear a politician say that. Never ever ever. Because we, as a nation, hold the Constitution and The Founding Fathers in such, such high esteem that if you say one word against them you will never be elected to so much as a school board.
Why? Because we, as a people, look for idols, for leaders and the 'Founders Of Our Nation' are the best candidates around. So, just like people do with their religious texts, all we care about is what the Founding Fathers would have done and we lose our common sense.
Honestly is Thomas Jefferson appeared to me tomorrow and told me to support Sarah Palin for President I would still support Obama, because I don't care. I just don't care. I don't believe that the Founding Fathers had more wisdom than any other political philosophers. They did a big, important hard thing in founding our country but I don't believe that they are infallible. They were men.
Perhaps it's just my own arrogance but I don't believe that the Founding Fathers were that much wiser than I am or anyone else is. They were just the first and that's cool and awesome and important but just because you're the first doesn't mean your the best. The Constitution is the Beta and we're treating it like it's perfect.
The title of this post, Leave Me Alone, is a reference to Monty Python's The Life of Brian in which the populace has become convinced that the character of Brian is the messiah and they follow him around. He yells at them to leave him along and thus....THE TITLE!
I think, I believe that once we realize that the Founding Fathers were operating on 18th Century information and thought then, I think, we can begin to talk and think more logically about issues, like gun control.
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Friday, June 24, 2011
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Seriously FoxNews.Com readers, Seriously?
Today I was working on article for the blog and I went on Foxnews.com to see if they had any information about the subject I was writing about. So I'm looking around on their politics page and I see a poll that asks the question "Which is your favorite amendment in the Bill of Rights?". I think it over a little and I decide to go for the first amendment(Freedom speech, religion, assembly, and press) so I click the little vote button and I get to see the results. Here they are:
First -- freedom of speech, press, assembly, religion 42.8% (15,167 votes)
Second -- freedom to bear arms 39.1% (13,849 votes)
Third -- no quartering of soldiers 1% (372 votes)
Fourth -- probable cause, limits to search and seizure 1% (365 votes)
Fifth -- due process, no double jeopardy, no self-incrimination 1.1% (394 votes)
Sixth -- speedy trial, ability to question accusers 0.3% (108 votes)
Seventh -- trial by jury 0.5% (168 votes)
Eighth -- no cruel punishment or excessive bail 0.3% (90 votes)
Ninth -- retain other rights not enumerated 2.5% (896 votes)
Tenth -- federalism, states rights 11.4% (4,022 votes)
So 13,849 people feel that the right to bear arms is better than the right to a speedy trial or the right to a trial by jury or the right to no cruel punishment or the right to due process or the right to have no unwarranted search a seizure. So all I have to say is Seriously FoxNews.Com readers, Seriously?
First -- freedom of speech, press, assembly, religion 42.8% (15,167 votes)
Second -- freedom to bear arms 39.1% (13,849 votes)
Third -- no quartering of soldiers 1% (372 votes)
Fourth -- probable cause, limits to search and seizure 1% (365 votes)
Fifth -- due process, no double jeopardy, no self-incrimination 1.1% (394 votes)
Sixth -- speedy trial, ability to question accusers 0.3% (108 votes)
Seventh -- trial by jury 0.5% (168 votes)
Eighth -- no cruel punishment or excessive bail 0.3% (90 votes)
Ninth -- retain other rights not enumerated 2.5% (896 votes)
Tenth -- federalism, states rights 11.4% (4,022 votes)
So 13,849 people feel that the right to bear arms is better than the right to a speedy trial or the right to a trial by jury or the right to no cruel punishment or the right to due process or the right to have no unwarranted search a seizure. So all I have to say is Seriously FoxNews.Com readers, Seriously?
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
so be careful of those killing in Jesus name, he don't believe in killing at all
So there is this bill in Uganda that will put gay people in prison for life and those who don't report them in prison for three years. Also if the gay person is HIV positive they will be put to death. What's most disturbing about this issue is that Rev. Rick Warren announced his support of this bill and the secret Christian Organization the Family is helping to get it passed.
I have something to ask all these so called Christians, what did Jesus teach? What was the golden rule? What did he say to do when someone hits you on one cheek? WHAT DID HE SAY ABOUT LOVE?!!!!! How do you think God reacted to the Holocaust!st? And now you think that God wants you to put all Gay people in prison?
Jesus was a man of love and this is a law of hate, pure and simple. I call on all Christians to speak out against this bill which is the total and complete opposite of everything that Jesus taught. To Quote Bono "God will not accept that. Mine won't. Will yours?"
This is a bill of Genocide, plain and simple, and no one can honestly say that the Christian God is in favor of Genocide. This bill is sacrilegious and an affront to humanity. If this bill is passed Christianity will be remembered as the religion that supported Genocide and I don't think any christian wants to be remembered that way. Ask you minister to make a statement against it, God and History will thank you for it.
And That's the Way it Is.
I have something to ask all these so called Christians, what did Jesus teach? What was the golden rule? What did he say to do when someone hits you on one cheek? WHAT DID HE SAY ABOUT LOVE?!!!!! How do you think God reacted to the Holocaust!st? And now you think that God wants you to put all Gay people in prison?
Jesus was a man of love and this is a law of hate, pure and simple. I call on all Christians to speak out against this bill which is the total and complete opposite of everything that Jesus taught. To Quote Bono "God will not accept that. Mine won't. Will yours?"
This is a bill of Genocide, plain and simple, and no one can honestly say that the Christian God is in favor of Genocide. This bill is sacrilegious and an affront to humanity. If this bill is passed Christianity will be remembered as the religion that supported Genocide and I don't think any christian wants to be remembered that way. Ask you minister to make a statement against it, God and History will thank you for it.
And That's the Way it Is.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Do Not Mess With The Constitution
So today CNN.com reported that several Republican senators are sponsoring a constitutional amendment that will limit Senators to two terms each and Representatives to three terms each. I personally think this is a terrible idea. The Constitution does not say anything about term limits, and quite frankly I don't see the point. I think the 22nd Amendment is a little silly, why should a President only serve two terms? It was working perfectly fine in the years before that.
But, I think that this proposed Amendment is just totally pointless. Has the Senate been working so poorly that this Amendment is being demanded by the people? Are the people who have served for years in the Senate the worst members of that body? The answer to both these is, of course, no. Ted Kennedy, who is considered by both Republicans and Democrats to be one of the best Senators ever, served for 47 years.
The best part of this whole ludicrous story is that one of the co-sponsors of the bill is Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who is a strong support of a Senator only serving two terms, and just happens to be in the middle of her third term. Can we say hypocrisy ladies and gentlemen? Her spokesman, who is probably trying to get on Jon Stewart, made this statement
"Throughout her career she has fought for term limits and continues to do so, and that is why she is co-sponsoring this bill, But until it is passed, it would do a disservice to Texas and the people of Texas to do away with the seniority she has gained, unless all the states and all of the senators hold themselves to the same standard."
So, she is for term limits, except when she's against them. Incidentally Sen. Hutchison is expected to resign her seat next year to run for Governor of Texas. So this bill won't impact her.
This is a bad idea that seems to serve no purpose. The long serving Senators and Representatives are normally the best. If the people don't like their Congresspeople, they will vote them out of office. That this crazy new idea known as, oh what's the word...Oh yes, DEMOCRACY!! Stop messing with the Constitution.
But, I think that this proposed Amendment is just totally pointless. Has the Senate been working so poorly that this Amendment is being demanded by the people? Are the people who have served for years in the Senate the worst members of that body? The answer to both these is, of course, no. Ted Kennedy, who is considered by both Republicans and Democrats to be one of the best Senators ever, served for 47 years.
The best part of this whole ludicrous story is that one of the co-sponsors of the bill is Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who is a strong support of a Senator only serving two terms, and just happens to be in the middle of her third term. Can we say hypocrisy ladies and gentlemen? Her spokesman, who is probably trying to get on Jon Stewart, made this statement
"Throughout her career she has fought for term limits and continues to do so, and that is why she is co-sponsoring this bill, But until it is passed, it would do a disservice to Texas and the people of Texas to do away with the seniority she has gained, unless all the states and all of the senators hold themselves to the same standard."
So, she is for term limits, except when she's against them. Incidentally Sen. Hutchison is expected to resign her seat next year to run for Governor of Texas. So this bill won't impact her.
This is a bad idea that seems to serve no purpose. The long serving Senators and Representatives are normally the best. If the people don't like their Congresspeople, they will vote them out of office. That this crazy new idea known as, oh what's the word...Oh yes, DEMOCRACY!! Stop messing with the Constitution.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Classic Article: California upholds Prop. 8
I wrote this in May, which was the first month that this blog was up. I think it's still relevant now.
NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here was I thinking that California was more liberal and open than Iowa, here was I thinking that to be on a state supreme court you had to actually read the constitution, here was thinking that justice could beat injustice. Well I guess I was wrong.
Last week on May 28, the California State Supreme Court ruled that Proposition 8 was fine and legal. I feel the need to point out a few pieces of American History, so bare with me.
First, the 14th amendment states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Like the "Liberty" to get married for example?
Second, the Declaration of Independence famously states " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." So all men are "created equal" but, to paraphrase the great George Orwell, some are more equal than others? I think that everyone agrees that is absolutely ridicules.
Third and finally, in LOVING v. VIRGINIA the Supreme Court struck down laws against Bi-Racial marriage, going so far as to say "We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. The power to sterilize, if exercised, may have subtle, farreaching and devastating effects. In evil or reckless hands it can cause races or types which are inimical to the dominant group to wither and disappear. There is no redemption for the individual whom the law touches. Any experiment which the State conducts is to his irreparable injury. He is forever deprived of a basic liberty." reading this one is left to wonder how nobody else has ever noticed that the Supreme court has ruled that marriage is a "basic civil right".
In my personal opinion it doesn't matter what you think of Gay Marriage, the constitution protects it. I know it may be hard to accept it, but I'm afraid we must, because if we have the power to take away gay rights, then they have the power to take away our rights, and we cannot afford set such a dangerous precedent.
NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here was I thinking that California was more liberal and open than Iowa, here was I thinking that to be on a state supreme court you had to actually read the constitution, here was thinking that justice could beat injustice. Well I guess I was wrong.
Last week on May 28, the California State Supreme Court ruled that Proposition 8 was fine and legal. I feel the need to point out a few pieces of American History, so bare with me.
First, the 14th amendment states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Like the "Liberty" to get married for example?
Second, the Declaration of Independence famously states " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." So all men are "created equal" but, to paraphrase the great George Orwell, some are more equal than others? I think that everyone agrees that is absolutely ridicules.
Third and finally, in LOVING v. VIRGINIA the Supreme Court struck down laws against Bi-Racial marriage, going so far as to say "We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. The power to sterilize, if exercised, may have subtle, farreaching and devastating effects. In evil or reckless hands it can cause races or types which are inimical to the dominant group to wither and disappear. There is no redemption for the individual whom the law touches. Any experiment which the State conducts is to his irreparable injury. He is forever deprived of a basic liberty." reading this one is left to wonder how nobody else has ever noticed that the Supreme court has ruled that marriage is a "basic civil right".
In my personal opinion it doesn't matter what you think of Gay Marriage, the constitution protects it. I know it may be hard to accept it, but I'm afraid we must, because if we have the power to take away gay rights, then they have the power to take away our rights, and we cannot afford set such a dangerous precedent.
Friday, September 18, 2009
A rant to end all rants
Yesterday, Nancy Pelosi said that the violent rhetoric coming from the republicans could be dangerous. She said that she had seen the outcome of violent rhetoric before, in the 70s with the assassination of Harvey Milk. Minority leader John Boehner responded by saying that America was in the middle of a revolution.
Now, I feel the need to remind Rep. Boehner something. The last time Americans rebelled 1,200,000 people died, half of them civilians. Are you that arrogant, Mr Boehner? Do you think that your opinions are worth the cost of over a million lives? When you carry signs that say "Let's bury Obamacare with Kennedy" and tee-shirts that say "Civil Liberty or civil war" how long do you think it will be before some nutcase decides to bury Obamacare with Kennedy. With a gun.
I can tell you this, Rep. Boehner, if there is a revolution, I know who goes up against the wall first. I know who's door I will kick down first. Do you think history will thank you for this? Do you think history will even remember you? You have the choice to be remembered as the brave conservative who worked with the Liberal President for the good of the country. Please choose that Rep. Boehner, be remembered as a hero and not a villain.
Rant now done.
Just to clear this up, I do not want to shoot Mr. Boehner I was just making a point that the public will not thank him if he starts a revolution. I would never kick down his door and shoot him. No matter how much of an uninformed idiot he is.
Now, I feel the need to remind Rep. Boehner something. The last time Americans rebelled 1,200,000 people died, half of them civilians. Are you that arrogant, Mr Boehner? Do you think that your opinions are worth the cost of over a million lives? When you carry signs that say "Let's bury Obamacare with Kennedy" and tee-shirts that say "Civil Liberty or civil war" how long do you think it will be before some nutcase decides to bury Obamacare with Kennedy. With a gun.
I can tell you this, Rep. Boehner, if there is a revolution, I know who goes up against the wall first. I know who's door I will kick down first. Do you think history will thank you for this? Do you think history will even remember you? You have the choice to be remembered as the brave conservative who worked with the Liberal President for the good of the country. Please choose that Rep. Boehner, be remembered as a hero and not a villain.
Rant now done.
Just to clear this up, I do not want to shoot Mr. Boehner I was just making a point that the public will not thank him if he starts a revolution. I would never kick down his door and shoot him. No matter how much of an uninformed idiot he is.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
another victory
Across this great nation Gay Rights activists are raising a bottle to the Governor of New Hampshire, who just signed into law a bill legalizing same-sex marriage. He put aside his personal bias against same-sex marriage to do what was right. Bravo!!!
I was reading the CNN political blog about this and some of the people who commented were bringing up the new anti-marriage talking point, that the voters didn't decide to legalize it. Well this raises some questions in my mind.
In the 50s and 60s, if you had taken a vote on whether or not to desegregate the schools in the south, I guarantee you that it would have lost. So should we not have integrate? No, the courts ruled on the law, and the president sent federal troops, federal troops for God's sake, to force the integration of the schools. Can you imagine the fury that would happen if Obama forced states to allow marriage?
What I find hilarious are the conservtives criticizing Sonia Sotomayor for putting her feelings before the law, when every single stinking member of congress who voted for the Defense of Marriage act was doing just that.
Even Obama is not touching this issue because he knows how passionate the right is on this issue, and you know what? I don't care! I really don't give a flying fig as to what the political repercussions would be. I know what is right and it sure as heck isn't discrimination.
The New Hampshire state motto is what, I think, should be the motto for what will, god willing, be the final civil rights movement. So, ladies and gentlemen, Live Free or Die. God bless you Gov. Lynch and God bless all those who made this possible. This is your victory. First we take New Hampshire then we take Maine then we take New York then we take California then we take the whole freakin' country!!! Then at last all will be free in the self-proclaimed "Land of the Free"
I was reading the CNN political blog about this and some of the people who commented were bringing up the new anti-marriage talking point, that the voters didn't decide to legalize it. Well this raises some questions in my mind.
In the 50s and 60s, if you had taken a vote on whether or not to desegregate the schools in the south, I guarantee you that it would have lost. So should we not have integrate? No, the courts ruled on the law, and the president sent federal troops, federal troops for God's sake, to force the integration of the schools. Can you imagine the fury that would happen if Obama forced states to allow marriage?
What I find hilarious are the conservtives criticizing Sonia Sotomayor for putting her feelings before the law, when every single stinking member of congress who voted for the Defense of Marriage act was doing just that.
Even Obama is not touching this issue because he knows how passionate the right is on this issue, and you know what? I don't care! I really don't give a flying fig as to what the political repercussions would be. I know what is right and it sure as heck isn't discrimination.
The New Hampshire state motto is what, I think, should be the motto for what will, god willing, be the final civil rights movement. So, ladies and gentlemen, Live Free or Die. God bless you Gov. Lynch and God bless all those who made this possible. This is your victory. First we take New Hampshire then we take Maine then we take New York then we take California then we take the whole freakin' country!!! Then at last all will be free in the self-proclaimed "Land of the Free"
Monday, June 1, 2009
The rebirth of rock
In the past several years there has been a slew of bands and artists who are a lot like classic bands from the 60s and 70s. Here are a few examples:
Buddy Holly: Bruce Springsteen, they don't sound particularly alike, but they are both singer-songwriters in the same vain.
The Clash: Green Day they have many songs that are similar like Train in Vain and Good Riddance, White Riot and Know the Enemy, Should I Stay or should I go and American Idiot, ect
The Kinks: Van Halen
Bob Dylan: John Mellencamp they both have folk sensibilities and similar lyrics
Joan Baez : the Indigo Girls, really they are almost exactly alike)
The Eagles: The Counting Crows both of them are county rock, but with folk influences and the occasional rocker and a ton of "story songs"
Bob Dylan: James McMurtry almost everything by him is like Bob Dylan
Bob Dylan: Bruce Springsteen, almost everything he sings has dylan-like
lyrics
Janis Joplin: Melissa Ethridge they have the same voice and are strong female rockers
The list just goes on and on. It makes one wonder what Bands will be like thirty years from now. How will they emulate popular bands if all the popular bands are emulating others. On the other hand, Bob Dylan emulates Woody Guthrie and bands still manage to emulate him, so maybe there is hope.
Buddy Holly: Bruce Springsteen, they don't sound particularly alike, but they are both singer-songwriters in the same vain.
The Clash: Green Day they have many songs that are similar like Train in Vain and Good Riddance, White Riot and Know the Enemy, Should I Stay or should I go and American Idiot, ect
The Kinks: Van Halen
Bob Dylan: John Mellencamp they both have folk sensibilities and similar lyrics
Joan Baez : the Indigo Girls, really they are almost exactly alike)
The Eagles: The Counting Crows both of them are county rock, but with folk influences and the occasional rocker and a ton of "story songs"
Bob Dylan: James McMurtry almost everything by him is like Bob Dylan
Bob Dylan: Bruce Springsteen, almost everything he sings has dylan-like
lyrics
Janis Joplin: Melissa Ethridge they have the same voice and are strong female rockers
The list just goes on and on. It makes one wonder what Bands will be like thirty years from now. How will they emulate popular bands if all the popular bands are emulating others. On the other hand, Bob Dylan emulates Woody Guthrie and bands still manage to emulate him, so maybe there is hope.
California upholds Prop 8
NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here was I thinking that California was more liberal and open than Iowa, here was I thinking that to be on a state supreme court you had to actually read the constitution, here was thinking that justice could beat injustice. Well I guess I was wrong.
Last week on May 28, the California State Supreme Court ruled that Proposition 8 was fine and legal. I feel the need to point out a few pieces of American History, so bare with me.
First, the 14th amendment states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Like the "Liberty" to get married for example?
Second, the Declaration of Independence famously states " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." So all men are "created equal" but, to paraphrase the great George Orwell, some are more equal than others? I think that everyone agrees that is absolutely ridicules.
Third and finally, in LOVING v. VIRGINIA the Supreme Court struck down laws against Bi-Racial marriage, going so far as to say "We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. The power to sterilize, if exercised, may have subtle, farreaching and devastating effects. In evil or reckless hands it can cause races or types which are inimical to the dominant group to wither and disappear. There is no redemption for the individual whom the law touches. Any experiment which the State conducts is to his irreparable injury. He is forever deprived of a basic liberty." reading this one is left to wonder how nobody else has ever noticed that the Supreme court has ruled that marriage is a "basic civil right".
In my personal opinion it doesn't matter what you think of Gay Marriage, the constitution protects it. I know it may be hard to accept it, but I'm afraid we must, because if we have the power to take away gay rights, then they have the power to take away our rights, and we cannot afford set such a dangerous precedent.
Here was I thinking that California was more liberal and open than Iowa, here was I thinking that to be on a state supreme court you had to actually read the constitution, here was thinking that justice could beat injustice. Well I guess I was wrong.
Last week on May 28, the California State Supreme Court ruled that Proposition 8 was fine and legal. I feel the need to point out a few pieces of American History, so bare with me.
First, the 14th amendment states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Like the "Liberty" to get married for example?
Second, the Declaration of Independence famously states " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." So all men are "created equal" but, to paraphrase the great George Orwell, some are more equal than others? I think that everyone agrees that is absolutely ridicules.
Third and finally, in LOVING v. VIRGINIA the Supreme Court struck down laws against Bi-Racial marriage, going so far as to say "We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. The power to sterilize, if exercised, may have subtle, farreaching and devastating effects. In evil or reckless hands it can cause races or types which are inimical to the dominant group to wither and disappear. There is no redemption for the individual whom the law touches. Any experiment which the State conducts is to his irreparable injury. He is forever deprived of a basic liberty." reading this one is left to wonder how nobody else has ever noticed that the Supreme court has ruled that marriage is a "basic civil right".
In my personal opinion it doesn't matter what you think of Gay Marriage, the constitution protects it. I know it may be hard to accept it, but I'm afraid we must, because if we have the power to take away gay rights, then they have the power to take away our rights, and we cannot afford set such a dangerous precedent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
