Posted by
Playful Walrus on Sunday, July 12, 2009 9:00:00 AM
The
Los Angeles Times had a few different items relating to the push to neuter marriage.
First up is
this article by Molly Hennessy-Fiske about how the Southern Christian Leadership Conference may actually hold a local leader, Reverend Eric P. Lee, accountable.
The Southern Christian Leadership Conference, a civil rights group partly founded by Martin Luther King Jr., has threatened to fire the president of its Los Angeles chapter because he supports same-sex marriage.
Actually, he has supported court-imposed-against-the-vote-of-the-people neutered marriage licensing.
The SCLC national board notified Lee on May 27 that he would have to attend a hearing at its Atlanta headquarters on June 4 to explain his stance on same-sex marriage. If he did not show up, they said, they would suspend and fire him.
Good for the SCLC, but why is this news? Really? Aren't there cases every day of employees and members of organizations that are disciplined for going against the policy of the leadership? What would happen to a local ACLU leader who was so outspoken that students should actually be able to organize prayer in a public school?
But Lee said he was driven to support same-sex marriage by the teachings of King, who helped found the SCLC to champion civil rights 50 years ago.
"Any time one group of people are denied the same rights as other people, it is unequivocally a denial of civil rights," Lee said.
Everyone, heterosexual or homosexual, has the same rights. This argument is a red herring. I don't seem to remember King calling for the neutering of marriage. What, was he a bigot?
Duke Helfand
covered some of a convention of Episcopalians, who are having to waste precious time dealing with homosexuality advocates who are trying to reorder the entire Anglican communion for the sake of their sexual desires.
Despite warnings about the consequences, liberal Episcopalians at the meeting are championing a flurry of resolutions to expand participation of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in church life, with votes expected in coming days.
I can’t imagine some dude reading from the Scriptures that say God made them male and female while standing there after hes had their genitalia removed by a surgeon so as to appear to be female.
Among resolutions attracting attention is one from the bishop of Maine that would give priests in states where gay marriage has been legalized "generous discretion," under the direction of bishops, to adapt marriage blessings for same-sex couples.
Yes, let's follow Caesar over the Jesus. That's a good thing for a church to do.
Other proposals call for the church to develop and authorize blessing rites for such couples, and to amend church canons so that they use gender-neutral language in reference to marriage.
Based on what? The only condoned same-sex relationships in the Bible are strictly friendships.
Finally,
the paper's editorial board chimes in on the 2010 census.
The paper is essentially saying that same-sex couples should be recognized as married and thus counted that way, and, as a result, DOMA should be discarded... because the couples were counted... and therefore recognized as married! Circular much?
Up to now, the census has simply asked an adult member of the household about the other members and their relationships. If a male said the other adult was his wife, the census would count them as a married couple. If a male said the other adult was his husband, the computer was directed to categorize them as "unmarried partners."
Under the new rules, the computer will stop doing that, though the census probably won't classify these couples as married but as something legally safe, such as "spousal-designated same-sex couple."
I thought the census was there to count the population for the purpose of allocating Representatives? What does it matter to the federal government what relationships exist? Just because two people are legally married does not mean that one of them ceases to exist. I got one of the long census forms in 2000. The only question I answered was how many people were in my household, and their ages.
The 13-year-old Defense of Marriage Act has always been discriminatory,
All laws are discriminatory.
and now it is out of sync with the realities of a changing society.
Changing society? Are there suddenly more homosexual people? More homosexual couples?
With same-sex marriage legalized in six states, the District of Columbia recognizing such marriages performed elsewhere and an estimated 18,000 married gay couples living in California, what's needed aren't convoluted interpretations of the federal law but a push from President Obama for Congress to repeal it.
A handful of states recognize neutered "marriage" licensing. However, the rest of the states and territories recognize only bride+groom unions as marriage – most of them reinforced in their stance by constitutional amendment – amendments that have passed since the 2000 census. This claim of momentum by the marriage neutering crowd is wishful thinking.