Mawwidge

Bourbon rarely likes to drop politic, aside from developing a certain Italian Prime Minister's cult of personality, but this announcement got Bourbon's attention and approval.

Seemingly inexplicably, the United States has had a very difficult time understanding that homosexuality has existed since before the Greeks, before the Amazons, before Gilgamesh, and probably even before Sodom, yet it's taken until 2008 for a state other than Massachusetts to recognize this and legally protect marriage based on it.

Keeping this un-soap-boxy, let's just look at moronic criticism of the California Supreme Court's decision.

From Maggie Gallagher, president of an organization actually entitled The National Organization for Marriage, yes, "FOR" marriage, not against: "The court was wrong from top to bottom on this one... the court brushed aside the entire history and meaning of marriage in our tradition."  What the fuck Maggie is talking about is probably anyone's guess.  Who the "we" is in "our tradition?"  Again, anyone's fucking guess.  In any case, it's not entirely clear why people would even get upset by such a decision that does not limit anyone's choices, but just increases others'.  Bourbon wonders who's business it is who Bourbon would want to marry if Bourbon had a gender.  For, as we know, Bourbon is above genders.

The California Supreme Court references a decision from 1948 that overturned an interracial marriage ban as precedent that marriage is an important constitutional right and that just because "tradition" has limited this right to certain people at certain times that does not necessarily mean that we must respect "tradition" over "common sense."

The N.O.M.'s obvious religious inspirations are annoying.  The only relationship between religion and constitutional law is that we may make no law that limits the establishment or practice of religion.  Pretty straight-forward.  Now, if the Cali Supreme Court was trying to coerce nosy Christians into marrying the same sex, perhaps one could see a constitutional issue here... wait.  Hold on.

Bourbon thinks.

Great idea!  Bourbon is going to start a petition that would encourage the creation of a law that would require all nosy Christians to gay-marry!  Garry?  Most of them are probably repressed anyway.  Bourbon would accept thank yous and huzzahs later.

Back on topic.

In short, applause to the fine defenders of justice in California, even if only 4 out of 7 agreed that marriage does in fact apply to everyone and that tradition does not always mean right.  To those, like Justice Corrigan, worried about change coming to quickly and legislating from the bench, if we waited around for the majority of Americans to become enlightened, socially, we'd have a lot of broken branches in Alabama and bloody clotheshangers, well, everywhere.

We still may have the clotheshangers due to the use of terms like "judicial fiat" and "sanctity of life."  Bourbon wonders if McCain and others throwing around fancy jurisprudential terms realize that the entire Constitution was created essentially by "judicial fiat."

Sanctity of life?  Don't start.

Anyway.  Bourbon applauds.