No denying that last week was a big week in the world of Supreme Court jurisprudence. While I am no legal scholar, here are my two-cents on a few of the decisions:
Obergefell v. Hodges. The Court decided that the protections associated with marriage can no longer be denied to gay couples. About freaking time. It always struck me as ironic that we should forbid marriage to a group of people who seem to want it more than anyone else. Though I’m happy with mine, I am no firm believer in marriage as an institution. I think its only value – and this is my opinion, of course – is that it enables you to enjoy certain benefits granted by the government – tax advantages, visitation rights, property rights, etc. That’s the way things work; that’s the way our society is arranged. Given all that, couples of all sorts should be allowed to marry.
Marriage equality is seen by some evangelical Christians as a threat to their beliefs. Those who confer marriage licenses in some official capacity as well as those whose businesses serve the wedding market want the option to deny service to gay couples. Religious liberty statutes are cropping up everywhere. So, my question for these folks is, let’s consider the potential harm on either side. For the evangelicals, if gays can marry, their forfeit is being outraged and offended; it may affect their mood around the dinner table at Christmas. On the other hand, for gay couples, being denied the right to marry means not being able to share your life with the one you love, tend to them when they’re sick, build a life with them, etc. Far greater harm, I would argue.
Glossip v. Gross. Apparently the sight of a death row inmate writhing in pain for an extended period of time was not enough to convince the majority on the court to rule this ad-hoc medical procedure known as chemical execution unconstitutional. Justice Alito basically told the defendant-inmates that they need to identify an alternative method by which they may be done to death; otherwise, this method is good enough. Once again, thank you, Dubya Bush, for appointing this sorry piece of work; and thanks to your father for appointing the even sorrier Justice Thomas.
Enough bloviating for one day. Time for the mattress.
luv u,
jp
That potentially catastrophic confrontation-in-waiting apparently can withstand mock-invasions of North Korea and simulated bombing runs without being “provocative”. So, why are the Russian exercises any worse? If there’s a return to Cold War mentality, it’s on the part of our corporate media. (Most of our politicians have never left that particular ideological space.)
That’s all good, but it’s just a step in the right direction. Gay Americans are still second-class citizens, barred from full civil rights as of this moment. As of now, there is an institutional necessity to allow gays to join the military – with an all-volunteer force like ours, we cannot wage two (or perhaps three) simultaneous wars without providing incentives to talented people of every persuasion to participate. The trouble is, when they return to civilian life (those who don’t choose to make the military a permanent career), they find themselves unable to marry, to raise a family, or to hold certain types of positions in some states. Not a dissimilar situation to that of the late 1940s, early 1950s, when black soldiers returned to the segregated south and a nearly equally racist north. My guess is that it’s just a matter of time before the crumbling edifice of discrimination against gays falls entirely to pieces.