Yellow-bellied dogs.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Do you hear that? That, my friends, is the yowling of a pack of mangy coyotes crooning over their scavenged bounty of a trash can packed full of hypodermic needles. You see, the Minnesota GOP-led Legislature recently voted to put a constitutional same-sex marriage amendment up to a voter referendum in 2012.

But why? I'm glad you asked. Why? Because they're yellow, that's why. Given that Governor Dayton is a Democrat, he will simply veto any law passing that goes on regarding the banning of same-sex marriage. But why don't they just do it anyway, like with all the other bills they know will be vetoed?

I'm glad you asked. Why? Because they're yellow, that's why. And here's the irony: they do it with a confidence that they can ban same-sex marriage via referendum. They "know" that the voters agree with them. So why?

I'm glad you asked. Why? Because they're yellow, that's why. Even thinking that the State is behind you can't get these cowards to go on official record with a vote and passage of a bill. They'll do it with budgets. They'll do it with money. They'll do it with anything else. But why not this?

I'm glad you asked. Why? Because they're yellow, that's why. Because if history plays out other than wanted, they aren't saddled with the official vote. The bigot always becomes a hem-hawing, wind-testing, finger-licking coward when the mood changes. But they still want to ban it. So they put it up to a vote.

Yellow. The GOP isn't red. It's yellow. These voter referendums are, quite literally, the biggest closet-moves in the history of democracy. They are anonymous, unknown, and entirely safe. No one will ever have to account for it. No one will ever be guilty. It will all be nicely hidden by navy blue curtains as thousands of cultural curs shakily scribble in their cowardly votes.

Comments

[vnsplshr.livejournal.com]

The intelligent blue state masses among us won't vote this thing into defeat?

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Who knows. The point is, whatever happens, the GOP is to chicken-doodie to back it up anymore.

[major-dallas.livejournal.com]

These voter referendums are, quite literally, the biggest closet-moves in the history of democracy.

Yes indeed, God forbid citizens have any say in the laws they live by *roll eyes*

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I know, God forbid anyone having an opinion about it either!

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that worked so well for California.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Don't you know, this is America, the decisions of the voters are sacrosanct.

[major-dallas.livejournal.com]

Didn't it?

[raven-blue.livejournal.com]

Well said... I am sick and tired of this or that group have majority laws overturned by pushing until they find this or that judge to rule for them.

I look at it this way. Marriage is not really a right. I dont think the government should endorse same sex marriage any more than I think they should endorse traditional marriage. If the couple in question want a civil union then it is becomes a simple contract and if the couple wants a religious union then it should be up the church to approve or deny. As for tax issues, set it up so that a person can simply claim a reliant dependant. Show proof that this person in some capacity relies on you and vice versa and you get the same tax advantages that married people currently do. That way a single man could take care of his widowed mother or siblings could support each other or a gay couple could enjoy tax benefits.

[raichu100.livejournal.com]

This so hard!

When asked if I am in favor of SSM, the short answer is yes. The long answer, however, is that I don't think the state really has any business dictating marriage at all. Marriage should be left to the private sector. If we absolutely have to have some kind of legal status for couples, then civil unions can be issues and marriage handled separately.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Independent of my thoughts of the merit of the bill in question, considering putting a vote up to the public as cowardly is a very strange point of view to me.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

I love referenda. It creates a certain buzz amongst the populace. And mind you, it works - most of the time. People here are scared of minarets? They ban minarets. They're hating burqas? They ban burqas. Awesome direct democracy, amirite?

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Just imagine if France had the right of referendum back in 1789...

OH WAIT.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

How? It's cowardly when then they do it in California about funding issues. It was cowardly when Pontius Pilate asked the crowd what they thought. This is a rather well-known problematic concerning public officials.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

I've always liked (http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/423162.html) the idea of a benevolent dictator who could take all the hard decisions for us. It's so liberating! Father-Knows-Best state FTW!

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I don't see how that's cowardly at all.

[raven-blue.livejournal.com]

Are you suggesting that it would have been better that Pontius Pilate executed Christ on his own? That same logic means that the governer of the State of Claifornia could execute a criminal regardless of what the population might think. The population of course being a jury of his peers who heard the case and decided on the guilt.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

It's cowardly because, in theory, our representatives should understand a shred of constitutional law. They should be able to say, "Whether or not I like it, this bill, if passed, would create a second-class citizenship, would discriminate, and would violate constitutional principles." Allowing the ignorant masses (and yes, I mean ignorant) use their rage, religion, and prejudice vote against other people's freedoms is in direct violation of of our nation's principles, and it takes the burden of informed leadership away from our elected officials.

So, at the end of the day, the GOP can say, "See? WE didn't take your freedoms - all those people did. It's the will of the people, so just accept that you're the scum of society and learn to live with your second class status. But don't blame us. We didn't vote for it."

That's pure chicken shit.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Assuming you buy that line of thinking, I guess.

[raven-blue.livejournal.com]

The problem with constitutional law is that the constitution is not so clear cut as people want to think. Why do you think we have a Supreme court? If that document were so clear then no one would need to have someone interpret it and that is what Supreme Court Justices do, interpret the constitution.

In America at any given time half the population think a thing is constitutionl while the other half think it is unconstitutional. The Supreme court makes rulings one year and the make conflicting ruling another year.

Besides, there are no constitutional promises regarding marriage, or any other relationship based on individual, consenting choice. So while conservatives are off the mark when they try to make an ammendment to define marriage liberals are off the mark in suggesting that there are some rights involved regarding marriage. Or we could look at it another way. If marriage is a right protected by the constitution then that right could amended or even revoked for everyone. This is why it is best to leave it out of constitutional arguments. If it does not belong in the constitution then it becomes an issue that individual states can decide and that is the way it should be.

Which leaves this question: Does the government not recognizing (nor penalizing) a personal choice represent a statement on the rights of the individual or group? The answer is no. The government does not recognize an individual right to wear a red shirt or a to drive a blue car. Marriage, the way it should be treated is just this, a personal choice with no bearing on anyone outside those directly involved.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

As usual it boils down as to whose ox is being gored just how "yellow" it is.

[debergerac.livejournal.com]

when you're wearing rose-colored glasses, doesn't your yellow ox look orange?

jes sayin...

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

Yes, we know. Republicans are evil incarnate and the only thing saving us from them is the brave compassionate souls in the Democrat party.

[raven-blue.livejournal.com]

Dont you love it that when people suggest that we all just get along it usually means you should get along with me and my views. It reminds me of the old coca cola commercial "Id like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony... And buy the world a coke. All those Pepsi drinkers dont get to partake in the perfect harmony unless they surrender their beverage of choice.

[raichu100.livejournal.com]

lol, I never thought of that commercial that way!

and I'm a Pepsi drinker :)

Under L sez as a Southerner:

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Well, they *are* the Party of Lincoln.