MAINE: A ballot measure to overturn Maine’s law recognizing the right of homosexual couples to marry won by around a 6-point margin. Apparently, the good citizens of Maine want to be able to smoke weed when they get sick (that ballot measure won), but not enough of them want to extend equal rights to gay Mainers. They are not helping to dispel my view of many so-called “libertarians” as selfish bastards.*
NEW JERSEY / VIRGINIA AND OBAMA: Despite what the mainstream media and the Republican Party say, neither of these races was a referendum on Obama’s policies, as exit polls show. In both states local issues predominated. New Jersey’s Jon Corzine was identified with high taxation and corruption, and was defeated simply because no one wants to vote for the Sheriff of Nottingham for Governor. Virginia’s Creigh Deeds actually ran away from any connection with Obama while his inept campaign sputtered into irrelevance. So while Faux News and the Republicans are crowing – wrongly – over the New Jersey-Virginia twin bill, they should be more worried about…
NEW YORK’S 23rd DISTRICT: As Stephanie Miller says, this is an example of “Republicans eating their own.” After basically forcing moderate Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava from the race in favor of Conservative Party candidate Douglas Hoffman, the radical rightists of the country (teabaggers, birthers, and other assorted nutjobs) caused the Republicans to lose a seat they had held since the Civil War. (It seems that only Communists can do ideological purges and still maintain a grip on power.) And speaking of civil wars, the debacle in the 23rd is only the opening shot in what looks to be a battle for the direction of the Republican Party, a battle where moderates are basically being told that they are no longer welcome in the GOP.
JOE LIEBERMAN: Okay, he wasn’t up for election, but I have to say something about the Senator from the State of Big Pharma and Defense Industries: Go away. Seriously. Just freakin’ leave. You’re an embarrassment to yourself and to Connecticut. Nobody likes you.**
_______________________________________________________
* I know a few very principled libertarians who are completely consistent – they want to legally smoke pot, yes, but they also don’t care if homosexuals marry, because they actually believe in individual rights. There are too many socially conservative libertarians who think libertarianism begins and ends with economics (freakin’ teabaggers). It doesn’t.
** Except for Aetna, Purdue Pharma, United Technologies, General Dynamics, Citigroup…
8 comments:
I am a libertarian who thinks gay marriage should be allowed (as a second-best option; my first choice is to get government out of the marriage biz altogether).
Your position is something we both agree on. Frankly, I have my own issues with the practice of marriage as it is currently understood.
How interesting that you chose to point out the Maine vote first, Bob. There was much more to this vote than just changing marriage from man and woman to man and man or woman and woman. I'm not sure what you have read or seen but I enjoyed the commercials most of all.
Also, libertarians had nothing to do with this vote.
Steve, I mentioned the Maine vote because I was surprised by it; Maine is supposedly a center of "independent thinking", whatever that is, and the perception is that it is more libertarian than it is liberal. Juxtaposed with the passage of the measure to allow use of marijuana - another pet libertarian cause - this vote to deny equal rights to homosexuals is very, very odd. It's as if Maine's population is composed of religious fundamentalist stoners. As Dominic Holden writes in The Stranger, "I'm trying to wrap my mind around the voter who's fine with pot stores in the middle of town but, criminy on a cracker, don't let two men enter into a state-sanctioned contract that has no bearing outside their home! I've always looked at drug policy, gay rights, abortion, and death with dignity through the same lens: It's about liberty to do what someone wants in the sanctity of their own body. And I'm guessing that most Maine voters who voted for pot yesterday have a libertarian mind about a woman's right to chose and end-of-life care. But the thought of two men having dirty gay poop sex—I'm sure that's what it's really about—short circuits their logic when they consider gay marriage. At least those are mostly older voters. They'll all be dead soon—unless the medical marijuana keeps them alive."
I think your a little off base. Many people in maine, myself included approved of the civil rights law for civil unions and stopping discrimination against "sexual orientation", however many people including myself believe marriage is between a man and a woman. To say it is now between a gay couple or a group of individuals is not marriage.
"But the thought of two men having dirty gay poop sex—I'm sure that's what it's really about—short circuits their logic when they consider gay marriage. At least those are mostly older voters." Many of those older voters were in fact younger voters and it didn't have anything to do with "dirty gay poop sex". Do lesbians engage in poop sex as well as heterosexuals?
When the civil rights came in 2005 the gay rights group met with religous leaders for support and recieved it (except for a few churchs). Yes, even the bishop supported that law. The gay leaders stated "This is not a stepping stone for marriage or an enforcment on religions who don't condone the gay lifestyle. This is for the ending of discrimination"
Well, low and behold these same leaders were caught on tape at a rally after the gay law was passed this year and before it was reversed, "we have been working on this since 2005". Most people could care less what consenting adults do but that doesn't change what the meaning of marriage is.
There is no justifiable reason why "marriage" should be limited to the union of one man with one woman, and even though I am against the very concept of marriage as a government-recognized institution in the first place, the symbolism is important. Homosexuals are trying to lose their status as the "other" - they want to be recognized as equal. If their unions are treated differently - or named differently - they will still be regarded as different.
As far as religious leaders' views on secular government contracts, their opinion should be of a weight equivalent to the amount of taxes they pay to the government.
I can see this subject can lead to long night debates. Here's a question, why just gays and heterosexuals? What about bisexuals? Couldn't a man, man and a woman who are in a commited relationship get married?
Here is another thing you might find interesting with Maine voters. I work with 2 openly homosexual men. One voted for gay marriage the other was against. I think Maine has gotten the image of "libertarian views" is the fact you really can't figure out how they are going to vote. I will say they do vote how they think things should be. Independent governors are commmon and just recently the city of Auburn wrote in a black man for their mayor even though he wasn't even running. It left the democrats and republicans scratching their heads.
Post a Comment