Skip to main content

Whaaah. Take Your Marbles and Go Home.

Well it looks like some people in California think that if their precious sacred sacrosanct holy transcendent building block of earthly existence (doled out by your local county clerk, mind you) has to be extended equally, at law, to others not of their narrow mind they would rather see no one have it.

I say, Amen!

From the Bay area comes word that two California counties with so-called "conservative" (i.e. not really conservative but rather "dominantly religious socialist") populations, will not perform any marriages for anyone, in order to disallow any non-heterosexual citizens from becoming legally joined. Nice to know all these "conservatives" respect the rule of law. (Another giveaway that they are not really conservatives at all, but narrow social collectivist bullies).

Of course, they are not honest about their prejudice, rather saying there aren't enough marriage licenses to go around, or at least resources to handle the additional workload (amazing how socialists always have a government resource answer for whatever their agenda be, left or right).

Officials in Kern and Butte counties cited budget and staffing constraints as the rationale for halting the ceremonies. But clerks in other counties say that claim is specious. Some activists went further, arguing that the decision to stop the ceremonies amounts to poorly disguised discrimination against gay and lesbian couples.

Gee, for counties with "conservative populations" they sure must have boatloads of non-heterosexual would-be marrieds waiting in the wings. Imagine the sustained onslaught.

My view : get marriage out of government and get government out of marriage. Nothing could more defile a "sacred" institution than getting it mixed up with government bureaucracy and the legal system. Anyone who truly views marriage as sacred, especially a so-called "conservative", would want government nowhere near it.

Truth is they aren't "conservatives", at least in any rational, intellectual, or philosophical sense. Reactionaries? Yes. Religious socialists? Definitely. Let's call a spade a spade. Anyone who wants government to enforce their own narrow personal beliefs regarding personal lives of others, to socialize everyone to their viewpoint at the expense of equal protection and due process, is a socialist.

I don't mean a garden political variety socialist - those who want government to have economic control of everyone and everything from cradle to grave, offensive as they are. No, these are more insidious socialists, of the "national socialist" variety, who would have government blatantly discriminate against and dehumanize people not fitting their primitive clannish and (thankfully) increasingly-minority world views.

Our country last tolerated such majoritarian abuses of power and denials of civil rights in the old south...it was called segregation and it was a thoroughly-corrupt vestige of the outright subjugation that preceded it. It found its last odious ditch in the "separate but equal" ruse to legitimize institutionalized bigotry.


My advice : If you want a holy bond, find a church that will have you. If you want a religious union, find a religious temple.

My warning : stop trying to bastardize the "temple" of secular enlightened self-government to enforce your ancient and savage prejudices. There will be equal justice for all, whether or not your personal views can abide it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

The disturbing decline of the Delaware blogosphere: a very unfortunate Around the Horn (even if it's not Friday)

I've noticed a change in my own blog-checking habits over the past several weeks, and I don't know if it's just me or the reality of the last month of a divisive political campaign. I automatically used to check out Delawareliberal first and several times a day, because it was where I could find edgy, thought-provoking, and (dare I say it) funny banter going on. These days visit several other spots first, and my visits to DL are both shorter and less engaged. Why? Because the combination of invading neo-con commenters with the stridency of some of the major contributors has led to such pleasant exchanges as a post dedicated to labeling another blogger racist by donviti, whose own sense of provocative humor is generally so far out there that he makes John Belushi doing Samurai bartender on the SNL look positively pro-Asian. Or I can find Delawaredem and jason periodically spewing the idea that anybody who is not a liberal or progressive Democrat is somehow a non-American,...