Sunday, December 09, 2012

Reupholstering the deck chairs

on the USS Constitution?

After the stellar performance of the Roberts Supreme Court on Obamacare, I look forward to the penumbras and emanations in the Constitution revealing a heretofore undiscovered intent to make the sex of spouses irrelevant. Very forward looking. Very "living."

I wonder if the change in constitutional interpretation has any link to changes in Biblical interpretation. When Biblical interpretation among Protestants was predominantly literal, was that a cultural paradigm that taught men how to read serious texts of any kind? And when Protestantism became more and more attached to making the Bible a subject of historical-critical reading, binding its original and literal meaning to a dusty unfashionable age long-past, how could its value be saved but by gleaning (and projecting) overarching themes and values and then adapting them, as rationalized and/or imagined, to the needs of the present? Living Word of God. Living Constitution. I guess sometimes you have to destroy the village to save it.

If the court finds that the Constitution forbids limiting marriage to male/female couples, then every state in the Union must allow it. There can be no more "husbands" and "wives", only "spouse A" and "spouse B". (And one day, "spouse C" and "spouse D", since limiting spouses to two would eventually be revealed as an oppressive and arbitrary imposition of cultural and religious norms on the free individual...who would nevertheless be required to buy health insurance*).

If the court finds that the Federal Constitution does not forbid such a limitation --Oh, the H8!-- then  the state-level pushes will continue with new levels of outraged righteousness and most likely with a drive for a constitutional amendment to rectify what would doubtlessly be christened as a new Dred Scott decision. Gay, after all, --and increasingly, transgender-- is the new Black du jour.

If the second scenario ensues, it would be like a Romney presidency, only slowing down the inevitable. If the first, then the acceleration of the imposed State religion of Liberalism would continue apace. "We All Deserve The Freedom To ______________ (fill in the blank)." ("...Purchase Compulsory Health Insurance!").

When I was trying to articulate why a gay man would turn Right, I used the image of a city under siege. The cranky, intolerant and irascible were defending the walls while the open-minded and tolerant were sitting around having cocktails and discussing how to redecorate the bedroom. Of late I have come to imagine that the open-minded and tolerant have hired some cheap undocumented laborers to take stones out of the wall so they could build an art piece in that bedroom.

*The divorce procedures for plural marriage would be hilarious. A new legal specialty in the offing!

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...