It works out like this: If you don’t think the Supreme Court should just make up some “constitutional right” to homosexual behavior, then you are a HOMOPHOBE and unfit for public service. Senator Rick Santorum has discovered this in the last couple of days.
Here’s the main offending Santorum quote from an interview with the Associated Press: “If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything.”
Because of this quote, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has called for Santorum to be ousted from his leadership post. Seriously. Of course, Santorum’s perfectly reasonable response that he was talking specifically about the merits of a legal case and was not saying anything about homosexuals one way or another did not mollify the Democrats.
Perhaps some of the problem can be gleaned from this quote attributed by ABC to a “leading gay activist” who says, “Question: can a politician assert that gay sex ought not be ‘elevated’ to the protection of a constitutional right without being considered homophobic? No — the issue is do gay people have the same right to privacy as heterosexual people do.”
The only likely place you could even try to get this out of the actual constitution would be the 9th Amendment, which says, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” However, this would go to Santorum’s point. You’d have all kinds of rights. You’d have a right to take drugs, or do all kinds of things. The courts have never been real big on the 9th Amendment, and would certainly be interpreting it in a highly selective way to push a personal political agenda on the part of the judges.
Now, I’m all in favor of homosexuals, and legalizing drugs, and a lot of other things. It’s just not the job of the courts to do those things. They are supposed to be the least powerful branch of the government, as they are the branch least answerable to the people. If you want special protections and favor, then take it to the legislative branches that make the laws.
At about this point, we’re supposed to be walking on eggshells to try to show how tolerant and understanding we are. Mostly this is to avoid even, as they say, the appearance of impropriety. However, stuff such as this quote does not make me more inclined to appeasement or mollification. “It was deeply offensive,” said Mike Mahler, the co-editor of Erie Gay News. “It was plain, flat-out mean. There is just no other word for it. He should step down.” This dishonest political grasping does not make me inclined to some kind of brotherly outreach. No, this makes me inclined to want to slap Mahler so hard that the penis falls out of his mouth.
Yeah, I can already hear the machinery gearing up. They’ll be running ads against Santorum in his next election bid about how he was practically right there on the other side of the country helping to crucify poor Matthew Shepherd.
It’s a damned sad state of affairs that questioning the propriety of legislating from the bench can get you tarred and feathered like this. I don’t like Rick Santorum. Best I can tell, he’s just another sleazy politician. However, this kind of cheap moral intimidation that the Democratic queer nation is pushing rates far worse than anything Santorum has done in life.
It speaks just as badly of the press that these charges are presented as some kind of even arguably reasonable complaint. They do not deserve to have their complaints presented as one side of a reasonable debate. They are transparently nothing of the kind. The complainants deserve nothing but ridicule.Powered by Sidelines