Friday, April 21, 2006

The Anniston Star Confronts God's Ordained Party

The Anniston Star of April 21, 2006 went two for two in getting after the ReThuglicans. First, in "Politcs in 3G" they write in part,

God, guns and gays … again. All the signs for the November elections point to a Republican revival of the election strategy that has kept them in control of Congress for the past 10 years. ...

Don’t look over there, the GOP strategists will say. Instead, they will trot out the old culture war standbys that fire up their base of religious fundamentalists. ...

GOP leaders would have us believe the judge in the Terri Schiavo case is a bigger threat than Osama bin Laden. That a homosexual couple moving in next door is more of a danger to citizens than the poorly planned and awfully executed reconstruction of Iraq. ...

That an angry protester torching an American flag is a bigger threat to the nation than the damage done to our reputation in Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, Bagram Air Base and the secrets places where American ideals against torture or abuse are betrayed. ...

Not surprisingly, the GOP is back to old faithful. The party’s politicians will spend the next seven months campaigning that the heathens will take over if they aren’t returned to power.

Someday, somewhere, we expect a thoughtful voter to ask a pointed question of these Republicans: If you control all levers of the federal government — and have done so for the past five years — why haven’t you won the culture war already?

Of course The Star knows there is no "culture war". "What's the Matter With Kansas" by Thomas Frank is perhaps the best illustration of how the boardroom knows they can't get the heartland to vote with corporate interests. So they trot out these "values" issues to get the little man to vote against his own financial interests.

The Star, in "A Bad Repeat", then tackles the proposed Constitutional Amendment banning same sex marriage that we'll be voting on in the June 6th primary. The writing, portions selected, below, points out,

Alabama gets its 2006 shot in the culture war early. In the June 6 primary, voters will have their say on a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

While Alabama could not manage to take segregationist language out of the state Constitution in 2004, it will most likely pass a ban on gay marriage.

Well sure, the typical Alabamian might say, there ought to be a law defining marriage as being between a man and a woman. But such a law already exists in Alabama.

In 1998, Montgomery passed precisely such a law. It remains on the books today and has withstood legal challenges. (A similar federal statute — the Defense of Marriage Act — is the law of the land and has been so since 1996.) ...

That the state is redundantly voting on gay marriage and not on streamlining our governing document says more than we need to know about Alabama and its problems.

I'll of course vote against the Amendement as to me this is simply a civil rights issue. I could live with a Civil Union approach as a compromise yet marriage is something that government recognizes for certain benefits to each partner. Churches can make their own decisions. I'll follow the Constitution and reasoning. Peace ... or War!