Thursday, May 10, 2012

Liberals hate federalism

Gay blog Gawker is outraged at Barry for not following up his personal support of gay marriage with a push for Federal legislation. O's placing of the legal issue with the states outrages him. (Did I say outrage twice?)
Well, before Roe v. Wade, abortion was a state-by-state issue, too. So was slavery. There are 44 states in which gay men and women are currently barred from marrying one another. Obama's position is that, while he would have voted the other way, those 44 states are perfectly within their rights to arbitrarily restrict the access of certain individuals to marriage rights based solely on their sexual orientation.

That is a half-assed, cowardly cop-out... Equality is not a state-by-state issue. There is no reason other than ignorance and hatred that two men can get married in New York and not North Carolina. At a time when vindictive hucksters are rolling out anti-gay marriage amendments across the nation, and when conflicting state and federal laws portend an insoluble morass of divorce, custody, and estate issues, and when gay Americans are turning to the U.S. Constitution and the courts to seek an affirmation of their humanity, "it's a state-by-state issue" is a shameful dodge.
(My italics and bolding, btw.)

Equality, the obsession of the Left, can never be less than a Federal issue, right? 'Cause any equality issue --and everything with them is eventually an equality issue-- is too important to leave to local yokels in states. So really, what good are the states after all?

And if you oppose an equality agenda, you are ignorant and hateful. There can be no argument against equality.

At the founding it was certainly true that the states were massively important to the people of the United States. Over time, especially after the War Between Them, they have come to seem, especially to liberals, just local departments of the Feds, good for nothing but sending congressmen to DC. After all, we're all Americans, right, and don't we have a right to "have our humanity affirmed" --so speciesist-- by Washington? And states' rights, clearly enshrined in the Constitution, have become a codeword for racial segregation.

Outrage on, girl.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Turns out the Constitution clarifies that the President may approve or veto laws, but not initiate them.

Hey, you're welcome all y'all who can't be bothered to read the foundation document of this nation! No prob!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...