Saturday bonus, 1/17/15

Indiana University Law Professor Steve Sanders attempts to rebut the Sixth Circuit same-sex marriage opinion, and a Ninth Circuit dissent, both of which denied that state “mini-DOMAs” were motivated by animus.

These “Mini-DOMAs” were the 31 state constitutional bans on same-sex marriage enacted when the push began to be perceived as a genuine threat in addition to being absurd and oxymoronic.

Because amending state constitutions requires a popular vote in most states, friends of same-sex marriage can mine essentially the entire Nexis news database for evidence of animus against gays during referenda run-ups. Though affecting disinterested scholarship, Sanders is cherry-picking that record as a SSM advocate, and the picking is, I admit, easy.

One of the great frustrations I’ve felt for some 25 years of my own waxing and waning involvement in the “gay rights” debates has been the tone-deafness of people who have reached (so far as I can tell through the miasma) the same conclusions I’ve reached. Their frequent reflexive resort to “bible-thumping” of a sort that’s jarring in our political order is worse than useless; it struck me as counterproductive even at the time, and now that digital cherry picking is passed off as constitutional law, it’s even more counterproductive.

It is their own petard, by which they are hoist. Rational allies alongside in the trenches are just collateral damage. But why should their toxic-smelling rationales outweigh my rationales, or (to kick it up a notch) the tour de force of Robert P. George, Ryan Anderson and Sherif Girgis?

I guaranty that you’ll find plenty of hysterical condemnations of George and company’s sober position, evincing lots of animus against tradition by the pro-SSM side. Start with Piers Morgan and Suze Orman. Sure, they’re pandering to the kinds of idiots who watch, well, Piers Morgan and Suze Orman, but why is their pandering privileged, while that of pompadoured backwoods preachers isn’t?

I doubt that you’ll find any constitutional referendum on any topic where one side had no toxic spokesmen – and I’m unconvinced that it would tell us anything about the merits of the referendum if you could.

I’m 32+ years out of the legal academy, but I am strongly inclined to view “animus” analysis as nothing but the way plutocrats get to overturn the will of the people in favor of their own elite wills – and to congratulate themselves in the process. If what the law says and does is permissible, I don’t give a rat’s ass about whether some supporter, somewhere, spewed garbage in support.

* * * * *

“The remarks made in this essay do not represent scholarly research. They are intended as topical stimulations for conversation among intelligent and informed people.” (Gerhart Niemeyer)

Some succinct standing advice on recurring themes.

Potpourri (if you happen not to be nappin’)

  1. The Article on Islamic Terrorism I’d have written
  2. More Gnostic than Hedonist
  3. Diversity’s a crock; stultifying conformity’s the reality
  4. Secular revolution, too
  5. Tech talk, tech reality
  6. Humane Vitae in an App
  7. Item 4 as limerick
  8. Au revoir

Continue reading “Potpourri (if you happen not to be nappin’)”

Soma Today: Giving Tuesday

It’ “Giving Tuesday,” the day when our civil religion prescribes a token pause in our buying crap so we can resume shopping tomorrow with our consciences suitably whitewashed.

I don’t think it will work for me. I’ve been looking at the family budget, wondering “how can we be spending that much?” and then “how in heaven’s name can a family of four live on 80 hours of $7.25 per hour minimum wage by two workers – mom and dad both?”

There’s talk of a “living wage,” which is “the minimum income necessary for a worker to meet their needs that are considered to be basic” and a click or two up from subsistence. It’s thought to be sorta kinda progressive.

But it’s time for a periodic reminder of the idea of a “family wage,” which is “a wage that is sufficient to raise a family” as distinct from a living wage. It is advocated by the Great Reactionary Oppressor, the Roman Catholic Church, or so I and some Catholic intellectuals read it. The current status quo is supported by business interests, politicians, and sundry others who profit from it in sundry ways:

Be it remembered, however, that once upon a time, in a land far, far away spiritually, it was not thought that universal participation in the money-paid workforce was a thing ardently to be desired. Indeed, the “Family Wage” was the progressive desiderata for a time, and I consider it a mark of our gullibility and collective amnesia that we now pine for a “living wage” and think that life is incomplete without the goods shit we can buy if we – Whoa! What a great idea! – pool two or more living wages under one roof. Look! Kim Kardashian! Chaz Bono! American Idol! Shiny! (HT Mark Shea)

The beast feeds itself. Mrs. Jones goes to work, the first on her block to do so. Before the Jones kids have become notably delinquent, the Joneses have compiled an admirable pile of goods shit we could buy if Mrs. Tipsy would go to work, too. And then the next family down the block follows suit, and before too long, nobody feels they can survive on a single wage. And maybe they really can’t (unless the Missus aggressively gardens, cans and freezes, and what kind of middle-class family still does that?! It’s barbaric!) because the extra worker supply has driven down wages.

And retirement savings? Out of the question! What say we just keep on working? Life is meaningless without a nice paycheck anyway.

(Your Humble Scribe) Remember how Dubya admonished us to get out and shop, to show the terrorists they could not beat the indomitable American spirit? How pathetic we’ve become!

* * * * *

“The remarks made in this essay do not represent scholarly research. They are intended as topical stimulations for conversation among intelligent and informed people.” (Gerhart Niemeyer)

Some succinct standing advice on recurring themes.

Sunday, 10/19/14

  1. What if few can understand?
  2. Exceeding the low standards of the desperate
  3. Creating growth on the cheap
  4. Help yourself
  5. The Synod’s allure
  6. Thoughts on a vacuous but mellifluous neologism
  7. The living faith of the Ancient Church

Continue reading “Sunday, 10/19/14”