How SCOTUS Instantly Changed Lives & Looking Forward

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

McCain, Graham, & Lieberman on Marriage Equality

-First. Senators Lieberman and McCain make the claim that the issue of marriage equality should be left up to the states vis-a-vis the tenth Amendment to the United States constitution. The People who hold this view should, as such, also be against the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The problem is that they are NOT against DoMA They are talking out of both sides of their mouths as hypocrites tend to do. Also, in terms of the states rights argument, when we are talking about civil liberties, that does not really hold water. How many states would still have slavery if we waited for states to nullify that practice? how many states would have Jim Crow laws still on the books? How many states would still have interracial marriage as illegal? How many states would not allow women to vote?

-Second. Senator Graham mentions religion. The problem here is that America is not a theocracy, so ones religious view in terms of law are essentially moot.

-Third. Senator Graham then goes on to conflate the issue of marriage equality for same-sex couple with polygamy. Since there is currently no legal grounds for polygamy whereas we currently have established marriage rights for two people, again the question Graham poses is moot (Straw Man). Polygamy is a separate debate. 

-Fourth. Senator McCain also brings up religious beliefs. I have mentioned this in previous blog posts but I will mention it again. While yes some people's interpretation leads them to be AGAINST marriage equality, there are some whose interpretation leads them to be FOR marriage equality. Thus, banning marriage equality goes against their religious beliefs. In other words, BANNING MARRIAGE EQUALITY INFRINGES UPON PEOPLE'S RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. Again, we have right-wing hypocrisy. Social conservatives argue for their own religious freedom but against that of people with other religious beliefs.

-Fifth. Senator Graham, like many of his compatriots on the right, advocates for voting on marriage equality. The problem with having the majority vote on the rights of the minority is that the minority has an inherent disadvantage. This is what history tells us. The founder were keenly aware of the possibility of this in a democratic society when they were forming this nation. There is a term for this phenomenon: majority tyranny. The right has been advocating this for years when it comes to LGBT equality. The fact that Graham is for this shows that he has little understand of the founders' intentions.

-Lastly, Senator Lieberman mentions that in his state of Connecticut where marriage equality is the law, there has been no substantive change except that same-sex couples have the same legal rights (at least at the state level, remember DoMA) as their heterosexual counterparts. I could not help but notice that the Republicans flanking him said nothing against that statement, probably because he is right. In places where marriage equality is the law, the marriages and rights of those against equality have not changed, but the lives of same-sex couples have been bettered. That is the real point of all of this, and that is why marriage equality should be the law EVERYWHERE.

Band of Hypocrites

Hypocrisy is definitely nothing new to politics on either side of the aisle. Hell, it is pretty much a daily occurrence. I have to say though that during last night's GOP debate on CNN, I was particularly disgusted. Time and time again, the four remaining candidates talked ad nauseum about individual liberty, freedom, and so on and so forth. The problem is that each one of those men, to varying degrees, have talked about restricting the rights of LGBT Americans. 

Each one of these candidates has talked about being against marriage equality. Three of them (excluding Ron Paul) have signed a pledge that states, in part, that they will support and fight for a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality. What is even more hypocritical about this particular issue is how it goes categorically counter to their constant speech about states' rights. There are several states that have enacted marriage equality, as well as several others which are currently in the process of following suit. Such an amendment as these Republicans would support is a "screw you" to the rights of those states to expand the liberty of their citizens, as well as any who would in the future aim to enact marriage equality.

Then there is Don't Ask Don't Tell, which three of the four GOP candidates (Ron Paul again being the exception, he voted for DADT's repeal in 2010) have said they would try to reenact. DADT is a rule that flies in the face of equal rights as well because it forces gay, lesbian, and bisexual soldiers to at best hide who they are, at worst, outright lie. This is a problem not faced by their heterosexual counterparts.

There are several other issues where these Republican candidates abdicate the principles of individual liberty and equal rights such as (but not limited to) adoption, parenting, employment-discrimination, etc. They have made it clear that regardless of their repetitive rhetoric on individual liberty, freedom, and equal rights, that they are against those fundamentally American principles.

One more thing: If Newt Gingrich ever utters the words "sanctity of marriage," someone needs to cram those words down his throat until he cokes on them.