Scott Sherman Online

CA Says My Family Deserves "Equal Dignity and Respect." Them's Fighting Words to Some!

Is this how people felt when horse drawn carriages were being replaced by motorcars? I feel so lucky to be living in this time when so much progress is happening right before my eyes. 

With fairness in their hearts and the law on their side, the majority Republican California Supreme Court ruled that is was against their Constitution to deny same sex couples the same rights and privileges granted their straight brothers and sisters.

"An individual's sexual orientation -- like a person's race or gender -- does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights," Chief Justice George wrote.  "Reserving the historic designation of 'marriage' exclusively for opposite-sex couples poses at least a serious risk of denying the family relationship of same-sex couples . . . equal dignity and respect..."

Unfortunately, my family doesn't live in CA, we're in Maryland, where the justices of our Supreme Court, just this last September, heartbreakingly upheld a 1973 ban on equal marriage rights, even though it was clear they knew it was wrong. Absent clear evidence of discrimination, the court declared (because, God knows, LGBT people aren't discriminated against in housing, jobs, family court, hospital visitation rights, inheritance laws, tax status, insurance matters or anything like that...) "judicial intervention is generally unwarranted no matter how unwisely we may think a political branch has acted."

In other words, if the people in the majority decides to merrily oppress the minority - have at it! Why would the courts - of all institutions - show an interest in Constitutional principles? Why, the whole thing is just silly.

Luckily, the California Supreme Court still thinks it has a responsibility to enforce equal protection under the law. You go, CASC!

Meanwhile, I can't wait to see that the nutters in CA - not to mention the rest of this great, free Nation, have to say about the prospect of people of whom they don't approve enjoying the same basic marriage rights that only they're entitled to abuse through adultery, divorce and domestic violence.

Already, the charmingly named Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council explains

Can A Good and Decent Person Be Anti-Gay?

What makes a person good and decent? Its a question I  asked myself when I read the following story in my news feed. (The story is after the break). It's a question that prompted me to sit down at the computer and write the following rant, which poured out over 45 minutes on a rainy Saturday morning when I should be playing with my kids.  This is probably my longest post ever, but I had to get it off my chest. I feel better now.

People fighting for equal marriage rights have long argued that so called "defense of marriage" acts will have unintended consequences. By passing laws that, by their very definition, label LGBT people as somehow "other," alien, lesser, as not deserving the same rights and responsibilities as other human beings, you were setting up millions of Americans for a future of legalized discrimination and persecution.

Now, to be fair, I know some good and decent people who struggle with the idea of two men or two women getting married. I get it. It's new, it's different, it's not something they ever considered. Change is scary. They feel threatened. Maybe it's not what they learned in church, or in school. I get it.

Now, to my mind, that's where a good and decent person starts. But a good and decent person is open to forming new opinions and beliefs. They'll realize that a strong and moral society evolves, that people become more free, not less, and that the prejudices of the majority must never be used as excuses to oppress a minority. They'll understand that equal marriage doesn't threaten anyone -  more loving couples and families strengthen our culture.  That, even if they'd make different choices for themselves or their family, even if there religion teaches otherwise, it's wrong for them to use the law to force their beliefs on their neighbors. A good and decent person can change.

Oops, I Misplaced 190,000 Guns!

I understand that strange things can happen during an occupation, but here's one that really gets your attention:

The US has lost about 190,000 weapons issued to Iraqi security forces since the 2003 invasion, according to an official report published in Washington.

The weapons include AK-47 machine guns, pistols, body armour and helmets, some of which will have ended up in the hands of insurgents.

The disclosure adds to the picture of the chaotic and clumsy administration of Iraq that has been emerging over the last four years.

Apparently, about 30% of the weapons that we've issued that have disappeared into thin air.

So, how do you lose track of almost 200,000 weapons, many of which may be used against our own forces? It doesn't look like answers are coming soon. According to the UK's Guardian:

No one in the Bush administration knows what happened to the weapons or where they are now.

Free the Methodists!

I understand that when you've been talking for a long time, you may start saying some odd things, but I thought this quote from President Bush that came towards the end of his press conference this week was particularly strange:

Now, the interesting debate is whether or not a nation, you know, like Iraq can self-govern, whether or not these people even care about liberty.

As you've heard me say before, I believe -- strongly believe that freedom is a universal value, that freedom isn't just, you know, for Americans or Methodists, that freedom is universal in its application.

"American's and Methodists." How do you come up with that pairing?

Has the liberty of Methodists been threatened in some way of which I'm unaware? Do we need to kill a few thousand of them so that they can share in the kind of freedom currently being enjoyed by the people of Iraq?

Just wondering...

Can I See the Future?

A couple of days ago, it was announced that the phone records of a woman accused of running a prostitution service in Washington DC were going to be made public.

Can someone tell me how I knew - not suspected, mind you, but knew - that the first politician who would be revealed as a client would be a conservative who ran on a "family values" platform.

Sure enough, Louisiana Senator David Vitter has confessed "This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible. Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling. "

I'm glad he takes responsibility, as I assumed he'd been forced at gunpoint to consort with whores.

According to Wikipedia, in October 2005, this paragon of virtue "compared gay marriage to hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which came through the same geographical areas. Vitter said 'It's the crossroads where Katrina meets Rita. I always knew I was against same-sex unions.'"

Vitter also proposed to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban same sex marriages. In June 2006, he said "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one ... I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."

Given the realities of poverty, terrorism, AIDS, wars, climate change and every other ill known to humankind, you have to admire the sheer madness of someone who thinks that equal marriage rights is the most important issue facing the United States.  Would someone please tell those starving children to shut up!

Of course, Vitter was also a big fan of abstinence-only programs (for others!) and against a woman's right to chose what she does with her own body (other than service his needs for money, that is). 

Obviously, Vitter should immediately resign and apologize to the people of this country for being a hypocritical sack of..whatever.

My favorite part of the story is that his wife, who thought she had a right to judge the marriage of other people, once said "I'm a lot more like Lorena Bobbitt than Hillary [Clinton]. If he [Vitter] does something like that [adultery], I'm walking away with one thing, and it's not alimony, trust me."

She was referring to the incident of Lorena Bobbitt, who severed the penis of her husband.

If Mrs. Vitter is more honest than her husband, he better hide the knives. 
 

The Kids Are Alright

A poll conducted by the unlikely trio of The New York Times, CBS News and…wait for it…MTV, reveals that young Americans are "leaning left."

Here are some bullets from the article:

• Young Americans are more likely than the general public to favor a government-run universal health care insurance system, an open-door policy on immigration and the legalization of gay marriage
• More than half of Americans ages 17 to 29 — 54 percent — say they intend to vote for a Democrat for president in 2008.
• Forty-four percent said they believed that same-sex couples should be permitted to get married, compared with 28 percent of the public at large.
• They are more likely than their elders to support the legalization of possession of small amounts of marijuana.
• In the current poll, 62 percent said they would support a universal, government-sponsored national health care insurance program; 47 percent of the general public holds that view
• In one potential sign of shifting attitudes, respondents, by overwhelming margins, said they believed that the nation was prepared to elect as president a woman, a black person or someone who admitted to having used marijuana.

Holy cow, I was born into the wrong generation. Imagine: They want to share marriage and insurance benefits with everyone – not just a select few! They're Democrats ! They'd vote for a woman or a black person! They don't think you should spend a few years in jail for smoking a joint!

One weird finding was that they think the war in Iraq is going well. They "were more optimistic about the outcome than was the population as whole. Fifty-one percent said the United States was very or somewhat likely to succeed in Iraq, compared with 45 percent among all adults."

But apparently, young people tend to support this country's wars." Contrary to conventional wisdom, younger Americans have historically been more likely than the population as a whole to be supportive of what a president is doing in a time of war, as they were in Korea and Vietnam, polls have shown."

I'll chalk up their enthusiasm for armed conflicts to child-like optimism and leave it at that.

On almost everything else though, I love these kids. They're proving that the next generation is going to be better, smarter, fairer and kinder than the present one.

Seeing how bright the future looks reminded me of this quote from Tony Kushner from Angels In America:

The world only spins forward. We will be citizens. The time has come.

Read the whole story here.