And the Ass of Prop Hate8 will be no more.
“If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble,… “the law is a ass—a idiot. If that’s the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is that his eye may be opened by experience—by experience.”
Such a classic quotation.
Frustrated words, fumbled out by the badgered Mr. Bumble with his mumbled mendacity of naivety. And uttered, no less, within the confines of the institutional benevolence of the parish church with respect to the care of the indentured orphans in the workhouse.
Law.
Family law.
Marriage law.
And the Supreme Court of the State of California ruled on the law.
"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." Proposition 8.
Yes, the California Supremes ruled that that is in fact the law. Yes, a minority of the population (52.5% of the 79% of the eligible voters who voted, which is ~41% of the voting population) was deemed able to eliminate a previously recognized equal protection of another minority group. In California at least, it is seems just fine for two wolves and a sheep to vote on the lunch menu, and the majority picks the entree. Just don't call it "lamb." It is "nutin'" to you.
And the be-fumbled Mr. Bumble would legitimately be confused ... for it certainly sounds like the law in California is an ass. How can Prop Hate8 be both the law -- only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California - and then the marriages of some 18,000 same-sex couples still be "valid or recognized in California?"
And in the fine print of the Supreme's decision, a conundrum looms.
The Supreme's ruled in the only way they could. All that legal machinations of technicalities. The law being both the law and an ass in that California constitution-change-process.
So what they ended up saying . . . OK Prop hate8ers! So the word "marriage" won't be used. You won. Your majority said that. But domestic partnerships and civil unions and everything else about them is protected . . . and if you expected to save the State from earthquake, fire, pestilence and tsunami by ridding the sodomistic heathens with their relationships of bestiality from our duplicitous midst . . . it will take a full-blown Constitutional amendment to do that! Dare you. Bring it on!!! For we just ruled 7-0 that that is what you would have to attempt to do!
The GLBT community may not have "won" last Tuesday. But the hate8ers certainly lost.
And then . . .
"Please Sir! May I have some more?"
Oliver Twist was an "other." An orphan. Classless and baseless. Thrown into a workhouse as the ward of the parish church.
And what did he want more of? Another bowl of gruel.
Reminds me of a story from long, long ago. A love story of epic proportions.
For in this case it was the old widow-woman and the young widowed daughter-in-law that were the "other." The classless. The baseless. In more ways than one.
But Naomi knew a little of the law. Two laws that is. The "Levirate Law - which required a living brother to marry his deceased brother's widow and have a son by her." And the "go'el" law, requiring a kinsman to buy back (redeem) a relative or his land.
The clerical legal-eagles can debate the applicability of these laws within the story of Naomi, Ruth and Boaz . . . for there was no brother to marry either of the widows and have a son.
Like so many of the "others" in contemporary society . . . the compelling need to be creative within the constraints of the law . . . to work out of the box as it were . . . in more ways than one.
Naomi . . . and Ruth . . . did just that.
And Boaz too. Marry Ruth, that is. And not Naomi.
Ruth and Naomi, with their intense love and loyalty to each other, had formed their own little "family." It was Naomi , not Ruth, who was the first-in-line to the kinsman. Together, they creatively stretched a law to benefit them.
Whether the story of Ruth makes an ass out of the old Levirate Law or not, it is one incredible story of how gay people construct family within and without the bounds and protections of "the law."
Ruth, as a surrogate mother, provides a son for Naomi . . . a son who became the grandfather of King David, the founder of the Dynasty of Judah.
About that other part of the story . . . that implied "Please sir, Can I have some more?"
In this case, it didn't result in the eviction of the orphan Oliver, but rather, the favored protection and blessing of the kinsman-relationship of a kit-bashed family that became the benefactor of provisions, a source of physical survival.
The law.
But today. A stunning announcement.
The initiation of a "Federal" lawsuit to overturn Prop Hate8!
The filing lawyers?
The ad hoc partnership of Ted Olson (the lawyer representing Bush) and David Boise (the lawyer representing Albert Gore . . . in the 2000 Presidential Election dispute before the Supreme Court of the United States). Ted Olson, that hard-core conservative from the Reagan/Bush era who Bush II subsequently appointed as the Solicitor General, and so tragically, the husband of Barbara Olson, a tee vee "talking head" conservative, who died in American Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11.
From the AP 2009-05-27:
Ted Olson! David Boise! To paraphrase them . . . That Prop Hate8 law is an ass!
Conservatism is fundamentally different from fundamentalism.
In time, more conservatives will understand this. Fundamentalists . . . at their peril.
A little family in an eon of yore, kit-bashed together . . . by love, devotion, loyalty, as the ties that bind them together. The surrogate parenting arrangement to generate offspring . . . To be family.
Like an orphaned Oliver Twist, evicted from the charity of the workhouse, adopted into Fagan's family of renegade thieves . . . with love, devotion, honor, loyalty, their tie to bind their family outside any law of protection . . .
Families in California . . . all kinds of families . . . the day is coming . . . when all can say, "Please, I want some more."
And the Ass of Prop Hate8 will be no more.
The Refectory Manager
Such a classic quotation.
Frustrated words, fumbled out by the badgered Mr. Bumble with his mumbled mendacity of naivety. And uttered, no less, within the confines of the institutional benevolence of the parish church with respect to the care of the indentured orphans in the workhouse.
Law.
Family law.
Marriage law.
And the Supreme Court of the State of California ruled on the law.
"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." Proposition 8.
Yes, the California Supremes ruled that that is in fact the law. Yes, a minority of the population (52.5% of the 79% of the eligible voters who voted, which is ~41% of the voting population) was deemed able to eliminate a previously recognized equal protection of another minority group. In California at least, it is seems just fine for two wolves and a sheep to vote on the lunch menu, and the majority picks the entree. Just don't call it "lamb." It is "nutin'" to you.
And the be-fumbled Mr. Bumble would legitimately be confused ... for it certainly sounds like the law in California is an ass. How can Prop Hate8 be both the law -- only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California - and then the marriages of some 18,000 same-sex couples still be "valid or recognized in California?"
And in the fine print of the Supreme's decision, a conundrum looms.
The Supreme's ruled in the only way they could. All that legal machinations of technicalities. The law being both the law and an ass in that California constitution-change-process.
So what they ended up saying . . . OK Prop hate8ers! So the word "marriage" won't be used. You won. Your majority said that. But domestic partnerships and civil unions and everything else about them is protected . . . and if you expected to save the State from earthquake, fire, pestilence and tsunami by ridding the sodomistic heathens with their relationships of bestiality from our duplicitous midst . . . it will take a full-blown Constitutional amendment to do that! Dare you. Bring it on!!! For we just ruled 7-0 that that is what you would have to attempt to do!
The GLBT community may not have "won" last Tuesday. But the hate8ers certainly lost.
And then . . .
"Please Sir! May I have some more?"
Oliver Twist was an "other." An orphan. Classless and baseless. Thrown into a workhouse as the ward of the parish church.
And what did he want more of? Another bowl of gruel.
Reminds me of a story from long, long ago. A love story of epic proportions.
For in this case it was the old widow-woman and the young widowed daughter-in-law that were the "other." The classless. The baseless. In more ways than one.
But Naomi knew a little of the law. Two laws that is. The "Levirate Law - which required a living brother to marry his deceased brother's widow and have a son by her." And the "go'el" law, requiring a kinsman to buy back (redeem) a relative or his land.
The clerical legal-eagles can debate the applicability of these laws within the story of Naomi, Ruth and Boaz . . . for there was no brother to marry either of the widows and have a son.
Like so many of the "others" in contemporary society . . . the compelling need to be creative within the constraints of the law . . . to work out of the box as it were . . . in more ways than one.
Naomi . . . and Ruth . . . did just that.
And Boaz too. Marry Ruth, that is. And not Naomi.
Ruth and Naomi, with their intense love and loyalty to each other, had formed their own little "family." It was Naomi , not Ruth, who was the first-in-line to the kinsman. Together, they creatively stretched a law to benefit them.
Whether the story of Ruth makes an ass out of the old Levirate Law or not, it is one incredible story of how gay people construct family within and without the bounds and protections of "the law."
Ruth, as a surrogate mother, provides a son for Naomi . . . a son who became the grandfather of King David, the founder of the Dynasty of Judah.
About that other part of the story . . . that implied "Please sir, Can I have some more?"
In this case, it didn't result in the eviction of the orphan Oliver, but rather, the favored protection and blessing of the kinsman-relationship of a kit-bashed family that became the benefactor of provisions, a source of physical survival.
The law.
But today. A stunning announcement.
The initiation of a "Federal" lawsuit to overturn Prop Hate8!
The filing lawyers?
The ad hoc partnership of Ted Olson (the lawyer representing Bush) and David Boise (the lawyer representing Albert Gore . . . in the 2000 Presidential Election dispute before the Supreme Court of the United States). Ted Olson, that hard-core conservative from the Reagan/Bush era who Bush II subsequently appointed as the Solicitor General, and so tragically, the husband of Barbara Olson, a tee vee "talking head" conservative, who died in American Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11.
From the AP 2009-05-27:
"It is our position in this case that Proposition 8, as upheld by the California Supreme Court, denies federal constitutional rights under the equal protection and due process clauses of the constitution," Olson said. "The constitution protects individuals' basic rights that cannot be taken away by a vote. If the people of California had voted to ban interracial marriage, it would have been the responsibility of the courts to say that they cannot do that under the constitution. We believe that denying individuals in this category the right to lasting, loving relationships through marriage is a denial to them, on an impermissible basis, of the rights that the rest of us enjoy…I also personally believe that it is wrong for us to continue to deny rights to individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation."
Ted Olson! David Boise! To paraphrase them . . . That Prop Hate8 law is an ass!
Conservatism is fundamentally different from fundamentalism.
In time, more conservatives will understand this. Fundamentalists . . . at their peril.
A little family in an eon of yore, kit-bashed together . . . by love, devotion, loyalty, as the ties that bind them together. The surrogate parenting arrangement to generate offspring . . . To be family.
Like an orphaned Oliver Twist, evicted from the charity of the workhouse, adopted into Fagan's family of renegade thieves . . . with love, devotion, honor, loyalty, their tie to bind their family outside any law of protection . . .
Families in California . . . all kinds of families . . . the day is coming . . . when all can say, "Please, I want some more."
And the Ass of Prop Hate8 will be no more.
The Refectory Manager
posted by The Refectory Manager | 11:08 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home