Remind me when letting the states decide civil rights issues has ever worked out, again.
When I tell my friends that I support letting the states decide if Republicans can marry, they often ask me to leave their sauna, unfriend them on Facebook and return all of their lent toiletries.
In these instances, I’m reminded that the tradition of marriage is so sacred to many Americans that the notion of Republicans being allowed to marry can offend their very being. “Imagine,” their smoldering eyes seem to be screaming, “My dear, normal child being forced to sit in a classroom being forced to learn about Newt Gingrich’s belief that marriage should only between a man and a woman who doesn’t have cancer.”
I try to tell them that not all Republicans are like Marc Sanford, David Vitter or Herman Cain.
Not all Republicans believe in cutting health care funding for new mothers and newborns. Not all Republicans want cut public education funding and use the remaining funding to create charter schools that cherry pick the best students and boot out the rest then use slightly better test scores to funnel public money into private companies.
Not all Republicans are Rick Perry who has executed hundreds of people, many of them likely guilty of crimes, while making it nearly impossible for thousands of poor children women to find basic health care.
That’s just most Republicans, I say. And there are states where no one listens to Republicans. Like Vermont! Or California, recently.
Sure, the Bible has hundreds of passages in favor of slavery and a handful of passages against homosexuality. It never explicitly bans marriage between Republicans. (Though it never clearly says it’s okay other, either.)
So why shouldn’t Republicans be allowed to marry in states that can tolerate them?
Then we’ll decide if they should be able to adopt or drive or congregate to play “sports.”
Nothing says freedom like the right to deny grown adults the ability to enjoy the same benefits as you do because of ancient prejudices.
[Image by Anne Savage]
