And To the Republic For Which It Stands
One Nation Under God
With Liberty and Justice FOR ALL (except gay people and all the people whose sins I don't particularly like )
No, of course it doesn't go like that.
Liberty and Justice FOR ALL is what I said every day as an elementary school kid in American public schools. Then I grew up to be an Amreican lawyer and did something else, I swore to defend and uphold the US Constitution in a ceremony to be admitted to a Federal Court. It is part of my profession, my livelihood. So I take it seriously.
Now what the catholic church in America is losing sight of, and in Washington, DC in particular, is that the guarantees of Liberty and Justice For All embedded in our pledge and constitution do not discriminate according to level or type of sin- we ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God in some way or another and that is why we all need a Savior, including the Archbishops of the world and everyone wearing a red beanie yarmulka and everyone who wants one. Great Sinners all of us.\
We don't have a Constitution in the US that ranks degree of sin. We don't say- hey, you over there, our sin police have detected that you are full of sloth, and your neighbor full of Avarice so we are going to deprive you of the First Amendment.
But what we do with one kind of sexual 'sin' (if you believe it to be sin) is elevate the sexual sin of homosexuality arena over all the others, and reduce the person to that sin, regardless of whatever else they may be about as a person, dehumanize them into charactures of the sin, and deprive them of their civil liberties. They may have six brothers and sisters, be regular church goers, even catholic church goers who work with ministries, sing in the choir or conduct it, give generously every time the red cross comes calling for blood, support their parents, wax their cars, but all we call them is "Gay" in the public policy arena.
We call people whom we believe are sinful in the sexual perversity arena "Gay" or "homosexual" and that is all we have to know about them to deprive them of civil liberties. We don't do this for any other sin. We don't say- he's a "SLOTHER" or She's an "AVARICA". Or he's a "Wankerific" or she's a "GREEDO" after other sins (wanker being the british term for someone jacking themselves off- a "JACK OFF") thus no Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination for you. No emminent domain pay-off for you. No First Amendment free speech rights for you-if we don't like what you espouse we shall lock you up. No. We don't do that. That would be outrageously unconstitutional, we all agree. Even Maddoff got his constitutional fifth amendment rights. But we do that with Gay people.
This my friends is not Constitutional. It is not American. It is as unAmerican as that McCarthy Commttee in the fifties.
Deciding that something is Unconstitutional, as all federally admitted lawyers are obligated to examine in conjunction with a duty to defend and protect the Constitution might agree, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with an assessment of it's degree of Sin.
This is why the Catholic Church is more than a bit misguided and off its rocker actually in spending a fortune persecuting the civil rights and liberties of Gay people. We are a country that lets in all sinners. Even ones who practice the Art of Defamation in the Church.
Now what of that encyclical of Humana Vitie in the 70s or whatever it was that blasted the use of contraceptions as being thwarting of life and all the speculation that any lifting of the ban on contraceptives would lead to support for the gay 'agenda.'
First, that was before the AIDS epidemic, and before they even had technology in which it is clearly proven that a condom can stop the spread of disease. It is not even speculation. It stops the spread of diseases. We had not even isolated various STDs at the time that was written and the AIDS epidemic was totally an unknown phenomenon. Gay people before the invention of the condom were being gay. They just were not 'out of the closet" with anyone but themselves. It is not like more gays became gay and wanted not to have sex with opposite sex people because they now then can freely get condoms.
Sometimes the arguments forwarded linking contraception to gayness or sexual perversity in general are laughably illogical. All contraception clearly does not lead to sexual perversity. Most contraception is practiced among married or monogamous persons who have sex more regularly. They may have two kids they can care for rather than six, with three going to the State or being aborted. All contraception may lead to more married sex for example. It may lead to less STDs and less HIV transmission, and clearly it has prevented these from spreading. It may lead to less people dying from having sex, and it does lead to less mortality.
A doctrine that evolved in the early 70s that presuppposes a state of science that we long evolved from should have absolutely no bearing on the Constitutional question of whether we regard one type of sexual perversity the sort of sin we deprive persons of their constitutional rights of- like the right to marry- a long established penumbral liberty interest and right.
We deprive felons of a right to vote (and even that is under question) because we in years past thought it had some relevance to their ability to vote correctly I imagine, or some other made up rationale that must have survived strict scrutiny required when one deprives it of a fundamental right (probably not, ...that's next for correction). But no one has ever identified what rational interest much less what "compelling" one under the strictest scrutiny the State or Society in general has in depriving one particular sin category of their constitutional liberty interest of marriage. What is the State's interest in depriving anyone of a recognized ceremony for a monogamous commitment.
The Catholic church worldwide is not totally lock step on point about the persecution of Gays agenda of the church. The church itself has had a subliminal "don't ask don't tell" policy about itself in the hierarchy which has been rumored to be about a third latently 'Gay.'
Don't give me that "if they let the Gays marry there will be less heterosexual marriage" nonsense because there is absolutely nothing supporting such speculation. It's hypothetical and made up. I know married gay people, have worked with a few, and knowing them does not give me five seconds pause concerning the fact that I have no interest in same sex sex and am highly attracted to the opposite sex.
So here the theologians should take a back seat (way way at the back of the bus) to the Constitutional scholars- and those who maintain the Republic For Which It Stands- One Nation Under God, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
I think that's even inscribed on the Supreme Court.
Amen Amein.
But there are Archbishops who want to pit the Catholic Church against the Flag. And those, my friend, should be stopped. Because they confuse their morality with constitutionality- and foundational principles of various private societies and a public Republic need different things, different pillars to support it.
We have here a Republic, if only we can keep one. The church has governance over itself, not the Republic and the liberties and justice for which it stands, FOR ALL. Even the Wankerific church folks.
The church in America is a non profit corporation- one that exempts itself and is exempted by various statutory clauses from having to be compliant with a number of laws regarding non-discrimination in it's own hiring, firing, etc. But that does not give it the right to impose its self serving discriminatory policies on society at large. If it were a shareholder owned corporation, accountable to shareholders with a Board accountable to them, it's feasible they would have voted out the Board by now. Because a huge amount of resources have been wasted on this fight. They are on the wrong side of this Republic on this one. Whether Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Kennedy, Sotomayor, and Thomas will line up or are 'disciplined' to line up or not- wrong side.
Don't get me started on that sin of 'PRIDE."
We will now be retrofitting all males over the age of 15 with a Wanker "Scram" bracelet that monitors wanker activity and if you do it again you will have ten days to turn in your passport and voter registration card or be arrested. Spilling seed is a big sin according to the Bible so
you don't get any constitutional rights of travel or vote in our democracy. Sorry. You can't help it? Made that way? No girls around? Sorry. One more time and it's jail for you buddy.
No comments:
Post a Comment