Posts Tagged ‘gay marriage’

Once again a court discovers new obligations that never existed before…

Posted: August 4, 2010 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Tags: , ,

…that is if Drudge is correct. Update: he is

Remember when civil unions came up and the claim was nobody was talking about gay marriage? I do.

Remember when the defense of marriage act was passed and people were claiming that a constitutional amendment was not necessary? I do.

The argument for gay marriage has been a study in prevarication during its pursuit. From the initial rulings in Vt. to the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s 4-3 ruling to apparently today, the courts have created and imposed upon the people non-existent rights among a populace that has strongly objected.

The advocates of Gay Marriage continue their fear of the people. When they can they have kept them from voting (re Massachusetts) and when they can’t get have used to courts to legislate what they can’t win at the ballot box all with the loving support of a media completely out of touch with the public.

So once again we will go to the higher courts until we reach the supreme court.

Again we have done this to ourselves, by voting in people who ignore our will, by electing people who appoint judges who legislate from the bench.

From healthcare to illegal immigration to this, our elected officials have continually ignored the people will. As long as the people allow them to get away with it, they will continue to do so.

memeorandum thread here.

Update: from the hotair post

the EP ruling is that there’s no rational basis for limiting marriage to straights.

If that is true I await the rational basis to deny polygamy from the court.

Update 2: Brian Brown on the ruling at the corner:

Q: What’s next for marriage in California?

A: This will go to the Supreme Court, where we expect to win. Remember that originally, the gay legal establishment opposed this case, because they fear what we anticipate: that they don’t yet have five votes for a constitutional right to gay marriage. Two lawyers with very big egos (Olson and Boies) pushed this case over more sober heads, and I think in the end gay-marriage advocates will regret that they did.

Time will tell.

Why is this a story?

Posted: July 13, 2010 by datechguy in media, opinion/news, tea parties
Tags: , ,

I found this Washington Post story at Memeorandum odd:

While many conservative organizations immediately decried a federal judge’s decision last week to invalidate the federal ban on recognizing gay marriages, tea party groups have been conspicuously silent on the issue.

Conspicuously silent? Why would the Tea Party as an organization have anything to do with a Gay Marriage any more than the ASPCA, the Sierra Club, or the American Dairy Association would? Why is an organization whose focus and purpose is fiscal reform care?

Short answer: It wouldn’t. But the goal of the media is to break up tea party support. So lets go for it!

The large tea party-affiliated organizations, including FreedomWorks and the Tea Party Nation, declined to comment on Tauro’s ruling because of their groups’ fiscal focus. “That’s just not something that’s on our radar,” said Judson Phillips, founder of the Tea Party Nation. He acknowledged, however, that some in his group — though not a majority — are opposed to the Defense of Marriage Act.

Opps bad luck Washington Post, no doughnuts for you.

Now individual members like myself might oppose gay marriage in general and that ruling in particular but I would no more expect the tea parties to worry about that than I would the Sable Baseball league.

The gay marriage ruling a game changer in Ga-4? UPDATED

Posted: July 9, 2010 by datechguy in elections, internet/free speech, opinion/news
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

I had already given my appraisal of Ga-4, but this Gay Marriage ruling is a gamechanger. I’ve already declared Liz Carter the stronger candidate on the republican side. Her position on Gay Marriage wasn’t going to hurt much, economics was the issue and her gay marriage position wouldn’t matter in the house.

Now almost certainly another push will come for a constitutional amendment and Carter’s vote goes from unimportant to critical. With Cory Ruth a Black minister on the ticket some conservatives already had pragmatically decided he was the best choice to oppose Hank Johnson in a majority black district. Now this ruling gives social conservatives a reason to defect. Ruth would also put black ministers on the spot. They might support Johnson over Carter but they would have a very hard time endorsing Johnson over a black minister who opposes gay marriage.

If the election was this Tuesday rather than next Tuesday it might have been too late to hurt Carter, but Ruth will have a full week to play this up. It is his best chance to pull this off. This is where the mettle of both candidates will be tested. Can Carter hold on? (perhaps) Will she flip flop (not a chance), does the youthful Ruth have the killer instinct to use the advantage that he has just been given? (no idea) And can Victor Armendariz use this to take enough votes who might defect from Carter who might not like Ruth to force his way into a runoff? (very unlikely)

If you asked me yesterday to bet money it would have been Liz all the way. Today, I just don’t know, if it was Massachusetts Liz would still win. In Ga? This is where all the hard work and goodwill she established before this ruling is put to the test. This is WHY you put in that work and fight so hard. You can’t match on every issue so the strength of personality makes a ton of difference.

On the democratic side it’s the same. Johnson was going to win it in a walk but he has supported Gay Marriage right along so unless he flip flops Vernon Jones has the same opening that Cory Ruth does, and it’s my impression that Jones has more of a killer instinct than Ruth. Will it be enough? I just don’t know.

In a general election Carter v Johnson the dynamics would not change, but Ruth vs Johnson would really be tough for the democrats. What black minister wants to risk their congregation and living to endorse a candidate in favor of gay marriage when the alternative is a fellow black minister?

If Jones pulls it off then he plays this card against Liz to counter the character issue. From everything I’ve heard about Vernon I don’t know if it would be enough

It sure isn’t going to be boring.

Update: I talked to Liz Carter this morning. She confirmed that her position on marriage remains unchanged. In her opinion this is a 10th amendment issue and the Federal government has no business dictating to individual states on this or any other issue not constitutionally prescribed (obamacare anyone?). The 10th amendment grounds on which this ruling is based is consistent with her position. There is no better year to be running on this idea.

It would be very easy to change or clarify a position to head off a potential problem. We have seen pol after pol to this and conservatives are sick and tired of it. It is really refreshing to see someone unwilling to play that game. That’s a sign of integrity, rare in a pol, but not surprising to anyone who has spent any time at all with Liz Carter.

While I’ve been back in Massachusetts she has continued to work hard picking up some solid endorsements. She has also continued to make inroads in the black community taking the campaign directly to them. It’s really hard to demonize a person that you have made a personal impression on. This is where retail politics pays off big and will likely still pay off. Tip O’Neill always said “All Politics is local”. Liz Carter has learned this lesson well.

Update 2: Of course it is easier to take advantage of a new issue with the base if you aren’t advocating moving Haitian refugees to the US en masse to congress.

It’s always Massachusetts isn’t it?

Posted: July 9, 2010 by datechguy in elections, internet/free speech, opinion/news
Tags: , , ,

How is it the judges here are such idiots?

A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman.

Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

This is going to be a big game changer. Liberal sites on Memeorandom are all over it.

First of all those who said a constitutional amendment was not necessary have no leg to stand on, however those who were saying that knew it was false when they said it, they were playing for time. Little did they know that time state after state, even ones as liberal as Maine and California would reject Gay Marriage at the ballot box. So much for stalling for time.

Second of all democrats in borderline districts are now going to be in even worse shape. If the party opposes an amendment even more seats will be lost in swing states.

Third of all this is a big issue in both the Black and Latino communities and it’s an issue that the democratic party is on the wrong side of. They don’t want to deal with it but now they have no choice.

Fourth of all suddenly the Elena Kagan nomination becomes perhaps something worth fighting for and a test vote on gay marriage that democratic senators don’t want to have.

Finally this forces the president to make a call. If he comes out in favor of gay marriage that will be a bridge too far for the religious Black community particularly with only one vote making the difference on the court. There is no barrier to break anymore. That will be the difference in 2012. Expect him to speak against this ruling, but avoid introducing a constitutional amendment unless he is sure it will be defeated.

In one respect the timing isn’t bad for democrats, this is going to be a bad year anyway so you might as well get it all over with.

Older Entries
Newer Entries