Comedian Robin Williams lashing out at President Bush: "It's
nice to have a President who confuses his commandments and
amendments." OK, fair enough. But here's John Kerry justifying why
he supports lesser civil unions for gays but favors amending state
constitutions to ban gay marriage, from his
interview with MTV:
"What is distinct is the institutional name or whatever people look at as the sacrament within a church, or within a synagogue or within a mosque as a religious institution. There is a distinction. And the civil state really just adopted that."
So, where are the Democratic voices rising up in anger over Kerry's adopting the position that religious sacraments shoud be dispensed by the state, at the expense of legal equality for gays? Don't hold your breath. Even this MTV story leads with an assertion of Kerry's support for granting gays "equal rights under the law," then buries his remarks about sacraments being an exception.
One thing is clear: this is going to be the nastiest presidential campaign in memory, with both sides sinking to new lows to ignite the emotions of their respective bases. And the partisan news media (and make no mistake, they're all partisan -- especially those who feign "objectivity") can't be trusted. George Orwell was never so right about how politics debases the simple meaning of words (e.g., "equality.").
-------
Addendum: A correspondent disagrees with my
assessment and points out that Kerry also said, "It's the rights
that are important, not the name of the institution." OK, but even
assuming that civil unions would be separate but otherwise equal to
marriage on a state level, Kerry still supports a state
constitutional amendment to ban same-sex "marriage" on the basis
that marriage is a sacrament. Sorry, but I just don't see how that
differs from Bush's reason for supporting an (admittedly worse)
federal amendment.
-------
Joel Kotkin's Sunday op-ed in the Washington Post compares the ideological and theological divisions in 2004 America with those of England just before its 17th-century civil war. He writes:
All Americans have a stake in improving the quality of the political discourse on both sides. Issues such as the war on terrorism, the role of the state in private life, the nature of marriage and the fear of obsolescence are the issues that divide Roundhead and Cavalier America today. And they are weighty enough to be treated with something more than dueling hyperbole.
But I woundn't count on a return to bipartisan civility, not to
mention rationality, anytime soon.
More Recent Postings