In preparation for hearing the case before the 9th Circuit Court, those who want the Calif. gay marriage ban have filed their reasons why they are repealing the lower court ruling and why the ban should be kept. The pro-gay side has now filed their rebuttal.
The issue of the case is gay marriage. But the topic under discussion is much larger. The opening paragraph of the rebuttal says:
This case tests the proposition whether the gay and lesbian Americans among us should be counted as “persons” under the Fourteenth Amendment, or whether they constitute a permanent underclass ineligible for protection under that cornerstone of our Constitution.
Should state judges be elected? 39 states do it that way. But the dysfunctional Supremes in Michigan and the drive to recall three justices in Iowa who voted for gay marriage has several notable people involved in the justice system -- including Sandra Day O'Connor -- saying elected justices leads to a loss of an independent judiciary, which can have fatal consequences for a democracy. Judges are either corrupted by the money needed to get election (and we know where that comes from) or are looking over their shoulders at the mobs with pitchforks ready to turn them out of office.
Alas, the reforms to make a judiciary more independent has to go through the same voters who want judges under their thumb and complain about activist judges. Perhaps we can argue that elected (and partisan) judges violate the federal constitution.
But then we find some of the appointed Supremes can be just as partisan as those who are elected.
A school in London, England is combating bullying of gay kids by adding a new topic to the curriculum. Kids learn about famous gay people. The list includes Alan Turing (who created the ideas behind the computer), Oscar Wilde, James Baldwin, and Andy Warhol. It is working -- kids don't use "gay" as a derogatory term so much. Alas, if tried here in America, the Fundies would scream "indoctrination!" Sigh.
No comments:
Post a Comment