The Christo-fascists at Family Research Council ("FRC") have their panties in a serious knot over Perry V. Schwarzenegger and have filed an amicus (or "friend of the Court") brief in the case. A copy of the brief can be found here. It's the usual hysterical stuff that is a hallmark of FRC's propaganda and uses the same tired BS reasoning that is being trotted out yet again:
*
"But the right to enter into a marriage is not at issue because Proposition 8 does not bar any of the plaintiffs from entering into a civil marriage–they are free to marry on the same terms as any other citizens. . . . Opposite-sex marriage is available to both heterosexuals and homosexuals on an equal basis. Moreover, although Proposition 8 may have a disparate impact on homosexuals seeking to enter into a same-sex marriage, that impact is not constitutionally cognizable in the absence of proof that Proposition 8 was enacted with the intent or purpose of discriminating against homosexuals. . . . As an institution, marriage exists for the primary purposes of “ensuring a stable legal and societal framework in which children are procreated and raised, and providing the benefits of dual-gender parenting for the children so procreated."
*Never mind modern medical and mental health knowledge on sexual orientation. And never mind elderly couples who marry after child bearing age or where couples decide not to have children. Hopefully the brief will help demonstrate that there are NO legitimate reasons to ban same sex marriage and help underscore the fact that when all the smoke and mirrors are stripped away, religious based discrimination is at the heart of Proposition 8. Then, in a fundraising ploy to shake money from sheeple, FRC's press release about the brief filing states as follows:
*
"The marriage laws of all fifty states would be endangered should this lawsuit succeed. As with abortion, the Supreme Court's involvement would only make the issue more volatile. As such, it's time for the far Left to stop asking judges to redefine our most fundamental social institution. "The plaintiffs are really asking for a wholesale recasting and redefinition of this vital human institution that has been the foundation of civilization's progress for millennia.
*
"The marriage laws of all fifty states would be endangered should this lawsuit succeed. As with abortion, the Supreme Court's involvement would only make the issue more volatile. As such, it's time for the far Left to stop asking judges to redefine our most fundamental social institution. "The plaintiffs are really asking for a wholesale recasting and redefinition of this vital human institution that has been the foundation of civilization's progress for millennia.
*
In sum, it's FRC's standard tired screed that seeks to punish same sex couples for not Christianist religious beliefs. One can only hope the court recognizes this deep seated animus and rules to end religious based discrimination.
No comments:
Post a Comment