Friday, February 20, 2004
From Tom Tomorrow's site:|
It all depends on how you define the word "people"I dub this "shrill" and order this poster, and Tom Tomorrow, to sit in the shrill corner with Paul Krugman.
(Note: this entry posted by Bob Harris)
Here's Bush on gay marriage today:
"I am watching very carefully, but I am troubled by what I've seen," Bush said.
-- snip --
"I am troubled by activist judges who are defining marriage. People need to be involved in this decision," Bush said. "Marriage ought to be defined by the people not by the courts."
This is wrong in so many ways... it's hard to know which specific idiotic idea AWOL had in mind.
For one, what's happening in San Francisco began with a decision by local elected officials, not by "activist judges."
Second, the judicial system has only responded so far by not immediately responding to screaming pleas for oh-my-god-make-it-stop-make-it-stop injunctive measures from freaked-out conservatives, whose cases haven't been thrown out but will simply be heard a little later, possibly by the end of the week. This is the opposite of judicial activism.
(Of course, impatience is as much a hallmark of reactionary thought as fear of people who are slightly different and willful insistence on known falsehoods. Combine this with a blinding terror of human sexuality -- that exposed breast is burning my eyes! It burns! It burrrrns! -- and you've got either the modern conservative movement or an emotionally-damaged six-year-old.)
Third, and most importantly, our dumbass-in-chief misses one of the primary purposes of judicial review, established from the very outset of our republic: in a just society, the civil and and constitutional rights of the few cannot be left merely to the whims of the many. Obviously. Jeebus. Bush's position flies in the face of common sense, any basic understanding of American history, and a large body of constitutional law. Maybe Bush was AWOL when they taught Marbury vs. Madison, too.
And finally, even taking Bush's multiple idiocies wrapped in a single statement at face value: um, aren't all those people getting married... people?
Comments: Post a Comment