Mattheus over at Leonardo's Notebook has done some good homework on a story Waldo only gave the once-over lightly: that ten Republican attorneys general have asked the California Supreme Court to stay the effect of their marriage equality ruling because they fear their states will be overrun by summer droves of marryin' gays and they need till after the November election to study whether they would have to recognize such marriages comin' home to- you know, mow their lawns and stuff.
Mostly they're hoping the voters of California will do the right thing and kibosh the whole idea, so they can said, "Whoops, never mind, it's all moot now (or, as we say in the Upstate, "it's a mute point").
Mr. Matt scooped around and found that nine of the ten states already have state constitutional amendments in place on the marriage question. So the AGs want to study on something that requires no study. In fact, NYT notes, "In simple numeric terms, the pro-same-sex-marriage camp remains outnumbered nationally: Forty-four states have either a law or a constitutional amendment (or both) barring same-sex marriage, most of which explicitly deny acknowledgment of other states’ same-sex ceremonies, according the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group in Washington."
It's interesting: the nation seems to be of one of three minds on the issue. One is a general idea that some sort of marriage-lite is just fine. Another is that we've already sorted through the separate but equal concept and giving one person less than the other and calling it square won't fly. The third is the basic Republican position, which is to oppose everything and have no acceptable alternate position.
But it is consistent with William F. Buckley's idea that conservatism is standing athwart history and crying "Stop!"
No comments:
Post a Comment