| Wednesday, March 3 2004 |
What he said.
I'm oft to point out that my lack of support for same-sex marriage has little to do with the content and everything to do with the context. It's the context which irks me, and that context amounts to public officials disregarding the rule of law to forward an agenda. It's their job to follow the law created by the people whether they like a given one or not.
Hugh Hewitt sums this concept up superbly in his WorldNetDaily article.
But put aside the politics, and put aside the particulars of the debate. The real issue here is the rule of law and the precedent that the mayor of San Francisco and other small-time, small-minded publicity addicts are setting.
No matter what your particular cause, you have to be taking notes right now. Whether it is Second Amendment absolutism, or a certain view that the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause allows for prayer in school, a passion for a particular issue burns in many hearts across America.
Previous to February 2004, however, enthusiasts of minority views and radical views knew that the law would not allow them to indulge their own concepts of how the world ought to be. The mayor of Small Town, Anywhere, couldn't start issuing permits for machine guns even if he believed that such permits were constitutionally protected, and the prayer warrior who happened to be the county administrator in Middle Sized Burg, America, couldn't take his view of the Constitution into a classroom and begin leading worship with the Lord's Prayer followed by a few of the great old hymns.
And this is exactly why the cries of Constitutional protection and/or similes to the Civil Rights struggle and Martin Luther King tick me off to no end.
My right to keep and bear arms is protected by the Constitution. However, should I decide to load up my M-16, sling it over my shoulder and walk around in Times Square, I'll be arrested even though it is my Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms.
Even though that pisses me off, I respect the law which has been drafted by the majority of the people of New York. I think they're off their rocker. I think they're a load of gun-grabbing, socialist, commie dipwads. But,
they are the majority, be it a true one or simply one due to amiable leftists and horrible voter turnout. Even though I disagree with the laws they have devised, vehemently in some cases, it is my duty to abide by them as a responsible member of society.
I can try to change them all I want, through the processes afforded everyone to do exactly that, but I must
abide by them in the meantime, else they become meaningless.
This is why gay rights activists going on about "equality" and "separate but equal" issues shove me into rassinfracking ramminhiemering mode. We want equality, they say. And they want it now, through an
unequal interpretation of the law.
I wonder how many pro-SSM people realize how extremely hypocritical this concept is.
UPDATE: Baldilocks has more on the equation of gay marriage to the civil rights struggle.
posted by Mr. Lion
@
14:30 hours | comments
(0)<<
More
Articles
CopyRight © 2002-2004 CapitalistLion.com All Rights
Reserved
Syndicated news: RSS 2.0 - RSS 1.0