Subscribe via RSS Feed

Backlash: Still Substantive, Not Procedural

[ 22 ] March 2, 2012 |

Remember all the assertions that same-sex marriage would be easily preserved as long as the rights were declared by legislatures rather than courts? Well, there was never any actual evidence for the theory, and New Hampshire provides us with yet another dis-confirming data point.

To state the obvious, opponents of same-sex marriage are outraged by decisions like Goodridge because they oppose same-sex marriage, not because they have some a priori commitment to Bradley Thayer‘s theory of judicial review.

Comments (22)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. c u n d gulag says:

    “Live Free or Die” – ‘But Don’t Get/Stay Gay-married!’

    The Conservatives have nothing to offer the voters in the upcoming elections in 2012, so all the can do is offer a medley of their greatest hits, hoping people will continue to vote against their own best interests:
    Homophobia.
    Racism.
    Misogyny.
    Xenophobia.
    Banging on the drums of war.
    And general all around fear and hatred.

    Oh, and their reason d’etre – do any and every thing that pisses off the Liberals.

    • rea says:

      You forgot tax cuts for the rich.

      • c u n d gulag says:

        Yes, I guess I did.

        It was probably because I was too busy counting all of the money that’s ‘trickled down’ to me over the last three decades.

        Sometimes, it’s hard to keep my head above all of the $100 dollar bills, and I go under, which causes oxygen depletion and, hence, memory loss.

        Sorry.

        Also two – Deregulation.
        Also three – Birtherism.

        Somebody throw me a lifesaver!
        I prefer cherry.

  2. BradP says:

    An angry thought that I probably won’t stand by at a later date:

    Sometimes a ballot is morally indistinguishable from a bullet, and I feel a certain obligation to use whatever methods necessary, including force, to prevent these people from voting.

  3. Davis X. Machina says:

    So the NH legislature has a majority large enough to repeal, over a veto, a law that polls basically 55-45 or better the other way.

    A triumph for democracy.

    • joe from Lowell says:

      New Hampshire is up there with Wisconsin in terms of the voter backlash coming this fall.

      • mds says:

        I find it somehow funny that backlash over homophobic legislators ignoring the will of the electorate might play a role in stopping the New Hampshire GOP’s deranged rampage on “bread-and-butter” issues. It would finally flip the whole “wedge issue” dynamic around.

        • joe from Lowell says:

          There are a lot of conservatives in New Hampshire, but very few of them are South Carolina-type conservatives. Imagine yourself as a flinty, get-off-my-property New England conservative sitting at home in Nashua on election night 2010, reveling in the victory of the party that ran on low taxes, deregulation, and shrinking government, and then watching them devote themselves to this sort of thing for the next two years.

          • mds says:

            Well, in the ‘bagger legislators’ defense, they did try to defund the state, dismantle regulations, bust unions, and destroy public education. They just also took time to demonstrate that they at least are South-Carolina-type conservative dumbshits. (Did you know that the Pill causes prostate cancer?) So whatever excuse flinty New England conservatives want to use to cover their embarrassment with actually getting what they claim to want, only with theocratic frosting on top.

          • Scott Lemieux says:

            Right. David Souter is a New Hampshire conservative.

  4. actor212 says:

    “a priori” or “a prion”?

    Cuz the latter actually makes more sense…

  5. Uncle Kvetch says:

    On the day of the first referendum victory for SSM we’re going to hear how this is far too weighty and momentous an issue to be subject to the whims of the sheeple. With the entire fate of our civilization hanging in the balance, we can rely only on the cool, dispassionate reasoning of our most learned judicial sages.

    • Malaclypse says:

      With the entire fate of our civilization hanging in the balance, we can rely only on the cool, dispassionate reasoning of our most learned judicial sages the Pope, because that’s what freedom of religion now means.

      FTFY.

    • rea says:

      We’ve already heard that–when the California Legislature passed a bill for gay marriage back in 2005, it was vetoed by the Governor on the grounds that the issue needed to be decided by the courts.

  6. DrDick says:

    It has been obvious for decades now that not only to the Talibangelicals have no commitment to any theory of justice, they have no a priori commitment to democracy. They know what is right and proper and are determined to impose that on everyone else, regardless of the law or the will of the majority of the people.

    • joe from Lowell says:

      Just as neo-conservatives are people who use conservative means to achieve allegedly liberal ends, these people are neo-nihilists. They use Nietzshian means to achieve allegedly Christian ends.

      But in both cases, the ends get lost. It’s imperialism/will to power, all the way down.

      Vee believe in nozzing, Lebowski! Nozzing!

  7. efgoldman says:

    It seems to me, if the right to SSM s rescinded, there is excellent cause of action under Article 2 of the NH Constitution:

    All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights – among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this state on account of race, creed, color, sex or national origin.

Leave a Reply




If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.

  • Switch to our mobile site