The House today is going to be voting on the Gay Marriage Amendment. It's a symbolic thing, since the issue has already been killed by the Senate. And since they already know that it'll fail in the House as well.
But, hey, it's all about the politics, right?
This is an issue they think they can use as a pathetic hammer in the fall elections to attempt to instill fear in a populace that really does not fear or oppose.
To the conservative wingnuts in Congress, marrige is 'between a man and a woman' because anything else would 'destroy the institution of marriage.' How it might destroy it is never explained. Because it can't be explained. But it will. Trust us.
Nevertheless. the vote today in the House is even more blatantly political than past actions. From the AP:
WASHINGTON - A proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages is expected to fail again in the House, frustrating conservatives who have made it a legislative priority but also giving them an issue they can put before voters in November.In other words, the issue's dead in every sense except to be used as a campaign issue.
The House vote scheduled for Tuesday has little legislative significance because the Senate has already effectively killed the proposal for this waning session of Congress. But President Bush has asked, and social conservatives demanded, that gay marriage be on the agenda in the run-up to the election.
How sad. How pathetic. And just to attempt to pull a few votes from a few evangelicals and assorted conservative wingnuts. And some uninformed voters who are susceptible to fear-mongering.
We've got a faltering economy. A never-ending war in Iraq. A deficit that will haunt our great grandchildren. Hunger. Homelessness. Major problems in our public schools. Cancer, AIDS. MS. A host of other diseases that need our immediate attention. Racism. Sexism. Hate.
And they're worrying about a gay marriage amendment? An amendment that's already justifiably dead.
Think about it: Two people love each other. They want to get married. To pledge to live their lives together as one, as a couple. Committed to each other; to monogamy. Exactly how does it hurt ANYONE what sex the partners are? You're not invited into their bedroom anyway.
But, if it can become a campaign issue, the GOP will make it one.
Maybe that's why the GOP's running scared in this midterm election. It can't find the issues for the rhetoric.
My suggestion: Want a gay marriage amendment? How about this one: "...marriage in the United States shall consist of the union of consenting adults. Neither the Constitution, nor the constitution of any state, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of consenting adults."
There. Did that hurt? Threaten your marriage? Didn't think so.
And so it goes.
2 comments:
what is up with Reitz and the mold problem?
Not going there, Mark. I don't think I need to be in the middle of an R running for office by attacking a D to get his name in the paper.
Post a Comment