Do we even need to ask about how the State of the Union address went over at our place? Some of it made me ill, especially Bush’s so-called defense of the “sanctity of marriage“:
Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives. On an issue of such great consequence, the people’s voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage.
Oh, please. Does anyone really feel like Bush cares about the “will of the people” on any issue anymore? And the way I see it, if anything in this amendment debate needs defending, it’s the Constitution that needs to be protected against homophobia, not marriage against, what, loving same-sex partners who want the same rights as everyone else? That’s what this is: he can dress it up in terms of “respect” and “dignity and value,” but underneath it all is an entrenched belief that homosexuality is not an equal way of life. Ugh. Come to think of it, has he even ever said the word “gay” or “homosexual” in public?
Links: transcripts of the State of the Union and the Democratic response, and I’m throwing in the HRC website too, ’cause it always has good info and good vibes that will keep me from going insane thinking about Bush all day.
4 replies on “A sorry State of the Union”
“If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process.”
Translation: If we don’t like the way judges rule in one state, we’ll force our arbitrary will upon the people. By amending the foundational document of the country.
a speech that was hard to stomach
Yesterday I stayed home from work, feeling a little under the weather; my stomach and gut had been bothering me…
I’m wondering, were marriages between Hispanics and non-Hispanics ever met with the same strong feelings and/or laws against miscegenation as those between Blacks and whites in the last century, when the Supreme Court finally struck down the last laws forbidding such latter marriages (in Virginia, and such laws remained on the books in other Southern states until 1998 when South Carolina lifted their ban and 1999 when Alabama was the last to do so, even though they were unenforceable)?
If so, Bush’s brother Jeb might have those same “arbitrary” decisions of judges to thank for being legally allowed to wed his own wife.
And G-d knows straight folk are doing a fine job of treating marriage respectfully, correct? One need only glance at the current Britney escapades or the near 50% divorce rate to see they’re already doing a bang-up job of protecting the institution…