Thursday, February 26, 2004

FMA's Author is a Buffoon

From Newsmax:

It's best for children to be raised in a two-parent household. That's what most researchers have discovered, and it's what Matt Daniels believes....

As he leads a conservative movement to define marriage as that only between a man and a woman, he says he's not driven by a disdain for gays. Instead, he wants children to have the kind of life growing up he was denied.

"The absence of my father from our family left us vulnerable …. My mother probably would not have slipped into a lifelong depression had she had another person to bear the burdens of raising a child," he told the Los Angeles Times.

I really don't understand this line of argument at all. How exactly do failed hetrosexual relationships require that the government be prevented from granting gay couples equal legal rights? This is the sort of logic they use on WBUH or in backwards regions such as the binational state of Patrickstan-Efghunistan.

However, Matt Daniels is not content to make one ridiculous statement per interview. As newsmax reports (and decides):

The amendment would not keep states from allowing same-sex civil unions or domestic partnerships. Daniels said he believed that only such a broader amendment could be passed.

Doesn't bar civil unions, eh? Here is the full text of the Federal Marriage Amendment

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.

Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.

Hmmm, so the FMA doesn't just bar gay marriage, but "legal incidents thereof", the rights associated with marriage. Very interesting, since the whole point of civil unions is to provide these rights. The only reason why that provision against "the legal incidents" of marriage", would be to bar civil unions.

In light of these facts, Matt Daniels (and Judge Borke, the infamous pot smoker, for that matter) is either a buffoon or a liar, either way, he is not the sort of person you'd want rewriting the constitution.


Post a Comment

<< Home