Saturday, July 17, 2004


Who Exactly Is Redefining Marriage?

Republican Senators have a mantra——they are so much better than Democrats at boiling hatred into simple-minded sound bites for the cognitively shrunken (i.e., vast majority of Americans):

"A small group of UNELECTED ACTIVIST JUDGES are REDEFINING MARRIAGE against the will of the American people" [referring to the Massachusetts high court which on February 3, 2004 found that denying same-sex couples the right to marry violates the Massachusetts state constitution].

Of course ACTIVISM of any sort is bad in the view of power-crazed patriarchal crooked control freaks, which pretty well describes most Republicans. Passivism is the desired role we the people (especially women people) must take. And given the barely 50% of the eligible voters who take that little action every few years, we the people have complied well with the passivity preferred of us by the party in power.

Language is a constantly and, usually, gradually evolving function of human social interaction. But is it these ACTIVIST JUDGES who are suddenly changing the meaning of "marriage"? Or are they actively doing their constitutional duty of interpreting and upholding the Constitutions of their state and country?

To the everlasting disgrace of Bill Clinton for signing the absurdly named Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), and all those cowards (like NY Senator Chuck Shumer, but not John Kerry) and blindered members of Congress who voted for it, that statute codified a newly restrictive definition of marriage. Defining marriage as "the union of one man and one woman" as DOMA does, ignores the essential meaning of marriage: a close and intimate union.

The Republican/Puritan's newly constrictive redefinition of marriage eliminates such notions as "the marriage of music and dance" or "a marriage of ideas" from the common language, and thus the mind. We already gender everything and limit our understanding of gender to only two possibilities, male and female. The absurdity of this dominant paradigm of mainstream consciousness keeps us nicely busy idiotically allocating. Who's the guy, music or dance? Which ideas are married, a male idea and a female idea, or is it a transgressive pairing of same-sex ideas——or horrors! more than two ideas married at once!

The Bush/Frist/Hatch/Santorum (Senator Rick Santorum from Pennsylvania who'd best be in a sanitorium in Transylvania) attempt at making narrow-mindedness Constitutional shames the slave-owning founders further and further sets back the advancement of equal rights, mutual respect, and individual freedom over which the United States remains at civil war.

It isn't activist judges who are redefining marriage.

It's the narrow minds elected by the narrowed minds which the Republicans have been wildly successful at constricting since Ronald Reagan made greed good, ketchup a vegetable, and thinking and questioning bad (following in the footsteps of Republican former Vice President Spiro—no lo contendre—Agnew), who are the ones trying to redefine—and demean—the meaning of marriage by narrowing it.



This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?