Jon Kyl is a Jerk -- Part Two
---
The Republican Policy Committee of the United States Senate — Jon Kyl, Chairman — has issued a 16-page bulletin on "Why a Marriage Amendment is Necessary."
Thefour-word 16-page Jon Kyl answer is, unsurprisingly, "Because of activist judges."
Of course, the real answer is almost as succinct: "Because it's an election year."
The bulletin is actually quite factual — it mostly summarizes the various lawsuits being filed "by the same cadre of legal activists at the American Civil Liberties Union, the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Lambda Legal Defense & Education Fund, and the Freedom to Marry coalition." (The fact that there are real people, real victims of discrimination, behind all these lawsuits is conveniently omitted.) I don't quibble with the nitty-gritty of the bulletin — just the histrionics.
I will quibble, however, with this:
It's also an odd thing for a Republican to say — unless of course it's an election year. So much for the Republican tradition of embracing federalism. It's a great thing until it isn't, in which case federal solutions, including constitutional amendments, suddenly become "necessary."
Put differently, state referendums were the right way to do it — until the Republicans ran out of states. Then, just in time for another important election, it suddenly wasn't the right way to do it anymore. Funny how Kyl wasn't mentioning how ineffective or inadequate all those bigot amendments were going to be back when Republicans were introducing them ad nauseum. Go figure.
Kyl's problem is of course not with "patchwork laws" or "full faith and credit," but with the fact that in some places — quite a few actually — things simply aren't going his way. Kyl's other problem is that nothing else is going well for the Republicans these days either. So they must pander to the last unwavering (i.e., unthinking) fragment of their base they have left — the red state redneck bigots.
Meanwhile, Kyl's explanation as to:
--why equal protection, equal treatment and equal dignity in marriage law should be subject to majority vote (i.e., mob rule)
--how gay marriage is a true "threat" to anything
--why those states that choose not to go down the bigot path should be forced to accommodate those that do
will, I suppose, all have to wait for a future RPC bulletin.
The
Of course, the real answer is almost as succinct: "Because it's an election year."
The bulletin is actually quite factual — it mostly summarizes the various lawsuits being filed "by the same cadre of legal activists at the American Civil Liberties Union, the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Lambda Legal Defense & Education Fund, and the Freedom to Marry coalition." (The fact that there are real people, real victims of discrimination, behind all these lawsuits is conveniently omitted.) I don't quibble with the nitty-gritty of the bulletin — just the histrionics.
I will quibble, however, with this:
It is hard to imagine how the nation could function with vastly different answers to the marriage question on a state-by-state basis.That's an odd thing to say, since marriage laws have been crafted on a state-by-state basis since the Founding. Marriage has always been a state issue.
It's also an odd thing for a Republican to say — unless of course it's an election year. So much for the Republican tradition of embracing federalism. It's a great thing until it isn't, in which case federal solutions, including constitutional amendments, suddenly become "necessary."
Put differently, state referendums were the right way to do it — until the Republicans ran out of states. Then, just in time for another important election, it suddenly wasn't the right way to do it anymore. Funny how Kyl wasn't mentioning how ineffective or inadequate all those bigot amendments were going to be back when Republicans were introducing them ad nauseum. Go figure.
Kyl's problem is of course not with "patchwork laws" or "full faith and credit," but with the fact that in some places — quite a few actually — things simply aren't going his way. Kyl's other problem is that nothing else is going well for the Republicans these days either. So they must pander to the last unwavering (i.e., unthinking) fragment of their base they have left — the red state redneck bigots.
Meanwhile, Kyl's explanation as to:
--why equal protection, equal treatment and equal dignity in marriage law should be subject to majority vote (i.e., mob rule)
--how gay marriage is a true "threat" to anything
--why those states that choose not to go down the bigot path should be forced to accommodate those that do
will, I suppose, all have to wait for a future RPC bulletin.
Posted by Kip on
28 March 2006
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.