Democrats slightly less "bigoted and outdated" than Republicans! Posted by: Jon Henke
on Monday, July 10, 2006
Following the NY and GA gay marriage court cases, Eugene Volokh amusingly notes that the Democratic Party's press release urges "the coming legislative debate 'proceed without the rancor and divisiveness that too often surrounds this issue'" shortly after calling the decision "outdated and bigoted".
I have no objection in principle to emotionally loaded rhetoric in cases like this, but it's difficult to see why the opponents of gay marriage will be persuaded from rancor by a Party calling their position "outdated and bigoted". Especially from a Party whose leadership opposes gay marriage. Harry Reid, Joe Lieberman, John Kerry, Wesley Clark, John Edwards, Howard Dean...all oppose gay marriage.
And yet, when a State Court rules that gay marriage is not a constitutional right, the Democratic Party issues press releases calling their own position "bigoted and outdated"...
"As Democrats, we believe that every American has a right to equal protection under the law and to live in dignity. And we must respect the right of every family to live in dignity with equal rights, responsibilities and protections under the law. Today's decision by the New York Court of Appeals, which relies on outdated and bigoted notions about families, is deeply disappointing, but it does not end the effort to achieve this goal."
I realize that this is a political landmine for the Democrats, and that, aside from their hypocrisy on the issue, they are far more likely than Republican to eventually allow gay marriage. (a position I support for libertarian reasons)
Still, the rank hypocrisy of their position is objectionable on so many levels. If they truly believe it is a moral imperative, then they should, as Martin Luther King, Jr. did in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, make no apologies for their "extremism". As King wrote, "Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection".
There's yet another problem for Democrats, though; after decades of arguing for affirmative action, progressive taxation, an expansive commerce clause and a multitude of nanny-state measures because of some purported "legitimate interest" society has in various forms of social engineering, the Democratic Party is not in a good position to argue that lawmakers do not have the right to assert a "legitimate interest" in limiting marriage to heterosexual couples", as the New York Court of Appeals did.
That's the consequence of support for social engineering; eventually, the wrong engineers will win.
That’s the consequence of support for social engineering; eventually, the wrong engineers will win.
Well said. While I agree with a great deal of liberal/left criticism of specific Bush/Frist/GOP policies and antics, well, these critics are often reaping what they or their ideological forebears have sowed.
I can’t tell you how often I have made that point to my liberal/left friends, which is why I guess I can’t get as exercised as many about this administration. I see this all around me all the time, and if I get in a frothing rage over it every time my entire life will be a slave to my disappointment in my government. Maybe Republican and Democratic partisans have the best of it. At least when their guy is in they can feel proud and happy with the world, however blinkered and hypocritical such an approach may be. I take a different tack, the happy pessimist. I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said something along the lines of "I assume the worst, therefore I am constantly and pleasantly surprised." Cheers!