Mike Huckabee Expects Civil Disobedience in Response to Gay Marriage Ruling

28 Jun 2015 | Author: | No comments yet »

Decisions in last 3 Supreme Court cases expected Monday.

The Verge basically ground to a halt yesterday morning, as our staff read and reacted to the Supreme Court’s historic ruling making gay marriage legal across the United States.

—Lethal injection: Death-row inmates in Oklahoma are objecting to the use of the sedative midazolam in lethal-injection executions after the drug was implicated in several botched executions.On Friday, Scott Walker warned that “five unelected justices” on the Supreme Court had threatened the “millennia”-old institution of marriage by extending it to same-sex couples.NEW YORK — Back in 1996, President Bill Clinton signed a law stipulating that the federal government would not recognize marriages between same-sex couples.Over a remarkably brief period of time, same-sex civil marriage has gone from being a cause advanced by a small handful of activists to one that’s been embraced by 60 percent of Americans, including a majority of Republicans under the age of 30. We run a news organization, but we’re also people — an increasingly diverse group of people that cares deeply about tolerance, inclusivity, and respect.

Their argument is that the drug does not reliably induce a coma-like sleep that would prevent them from experiencing the searing pain of the paralytic and heart-stopping drugs that follow sedation. In case you missed any the first time around—from a sharp take on why polygamy should be legalized next to a reminder of the legal challenges gay couples still face—here they are to get you caught up over the weekend. In a statement that lapped many of his more cautious rivals, he called for a constitutional amendment allowing states to decide the issue for themselves.

As we contemplate the monumental Supreme Court decision establishing a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, it’s worth stopping to consider why support for same-sex marriage has grown so rapidly. —Independent redistricting commissions: Roughly a dozen states have adopted independent commissions to reduce partisan politics in drawing congressional districts. But barely a day later, in front of an audience of 4,000 conservatives in Denver on Saturday night — a Western Conservative Summit that had been ripping the court and lamenting same-sex marriage for two full days — Walker didn’t mention either.

As recently as 2004 there was widespread despair among proponents as voters in 13 states approved constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. We are all more connected now, all more aware of how our individual decisions impact and intersect with the decisions of everyone around us in an endlessly expanding network diagram.

The case from Arizona involves a challenge from Republican state lawmakers who complain that they can’t be completely cut out of the process without violating the Constitution. After running through his stump speech without mentioning the Supreme Court’s recent controversial rulings, Walker had another chance with radio host Hugh Hewitt, who asked the likely presidential candidate if he’s “all-in” when it comes to defending religious liberty. The incredible speed at which gay marriage went from a laughable idea to an evil banned across the country to something our citizens overwhelmingly support is testament to that network. Others, while wary of appearing too optimistic, suggested gay marriage might take hold by 2020. “In that climate, it sounded ambitious and bold, but it rallied a critical mass of leaders to believe maybe it was attainable,” said Evan Wolfson, president of the advocacy group Freedom to Marry that played a key role in developing the campaign’s strategies.

When we look back at defenders of segregation, for example, we look upon them differently than we do on those who argued that Eisenhower’s Interstate Highway System was going to be a colossal flop. The justices also could say Monday whether they will take on important cases for the term that begins in October on abortion, affirmative action and the power of unions that represent government workers.

Less prominent candidates, from Mike Huckabee to Carly Fiorina to Rick Santorum, devoted large portions of their remarks to the Denver crowd to their fury at the court. While I’m sure that many of the politicians who have had a sudden conversion on the subject of same-sex marriage in the last few years are entirely sincere in their change of heart, and would have shifted on the issue even if doing so came at great personal cost, I imagine that rather a lot of them are as calculating and self-interested as the rest of us: They saw where the young and influential were heading, and they didn’t want to get left behind. In 1991, Hawaii’s Supreme Court found the state’s refusal to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples to be discriminatory, launching the wave of legislation and lawsuits that culminated in the US Supreme Court’s affirmation of marriage equality yesterday. District Judge Robert Shelby alluded to the public opinion shift in his December 2013 ruling striking down Utah’s ban on gay marriage as unconstitutional. “It is not the Constitution that has changed, but the knowledge of what it means to be gay or lesbian,” he wrote. But 40 years before Hawaii came to its senses, small groups of queer men and women around the country were meeting in secret, under threat of arrest, to discuss their political situation.

The Mattachine Society formed in 1950 in Los Angeles with a goal of bringing gay men together to offer emotional support and education about gay culture. The Daughters of Bilitis, founded in 1955 in San Francisco, brought lesbians together and worked to educate one another and the public about female homosexuality. Conservatives are far more likely to oppose same-sex marriage than liberals, yet opinion among conservative voters is shifting, and I’d be shocked if conservative politicians didn’t shift with it. But for me anyway, yesterday belonged to the brave queer people who came together in the face of near-universal scorn and disgust to begin building an atmosphere of mutual tolerance, acceptance, and love. A letter from the Immigration and Naturalization Service asserted that the couple “failed to establish that a bona fide marital relationship can exist between two faggots.” In Hawaii, three gay couples filed suit after being denied marriage licenses in 1990, and the case dragged on for five years while a backlash materialized.

Hawaii lawmakers voted in 1994 to limit marriage to unions between a man and woman, and in September 1996 Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibited federal recognition of same-sex marriages and said no state could be forced to recognize such marriages that might become legal in another state. The reason he gave was that arguments that can be made in the language of individual freedom almost always win out in the constitutional realm over those grounded in other considerations. However, same-sex marriage began in Massachusetts in 2004 under an order from the state’s high court, and soon legislators and voters in other states were legalizing it without court pressure. Wolfson said he found himself crying tears of joy as he read Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion and reflected on the many gay couples over the decades who had joined the battle for marriage equality. “That underscores how long a struggle this has been before we got to the thunderbolt of justice,” Wolfson said. “I can understand why people see it as happening fast — but this overnight triumph is more than four decades in the making. And transgender individuals who are incarcerated or held in immigration centers have it bad: many trans folk who are incarcerated end up spending months in solitary confinement.

Of course she was quick to follow up by telling me that now that I could legally marry in all 50 states I had zero excuses for not doing so, and the sooner the better. We still have battles to fight and specific national concerns with which to grapple, but this particular issue was resolved a decade ago and met with its own share of fanfare. And taking a moment for sobriety: intolerance can be pernicious and shockingly resilient, can wriggle into cracks and crevices only to emerge and shatter your day when you least expect it. (You don’t have to be LGBT to be familiar with these specific and terrible qualities, of course.) The right to marry is a hard-earned victory, but it’ll just as quickly become a crutch for people looking to prop up their microaggressions and their casually sinister behaviour.

It doesn’t ease the sting of people’s slurs, doesn’t erase strangers’ disgusted faces when I kiss my boyfriend goodbye, doesn’t stop acquaintances from asking when I chose to date men or how much I love shopping and gabbing with my gal pals. It was like any other wedding, with the couple in a white dress and tuxedo — except that five years ago, their marriage would not have been recognized by the state of New York. Virtually my entire Twitter feed, and the Verge’s entire Twitter audience was an outpouring of love and unbridled excitement about this announcement.

Certainly glad enough that it helps block out the asinine dissenting opinions coming from Justices Scalia and Thomas, but mostly glad that it’s proof that progress is possible. The stakes are high, and every bloody news story gives us all the reason in the world to believe that the pendulum may swing back to undue a century’s worth of momentum. A day to recognize the years of struggle, pain, trying days, and perilous nights the LGBTQ community and its allies have been through to reach this point.

The majority of states — 33 — don’t protect against housing discrimination, either; gay, lesbian, bi and trans people can be evicted from the homes they rent or denied housing altogether. That’s to say nothing of how trans inmates are treated in the prison system — denied hormones, housed in the wrong facilities, or otherwise abused and harassed. Besides the joy of knowing that my gay, lesbian, queer, and bisexual friends are finally getting rights that I can take for granted, my favorite part of yesterday’s ruling has been reading the same phrase in statement after statement: “redefining marriage.” It’s something that you’re only supposed to say if you hate the decision, but it rings true to me, because redefining things is the central project of progressive politics. We are willing to take an institution that is rooted in ownership, control, and (literal) patriarchy, and turn it into something that reflects — or at least reflects *more* — love and equality.

We see so much news break over Twitter these days that, for a minute, it didn’t hit me that we were truly experiencing a milestone moment in our country’s history. Still, buried somewhere under the weight of that realization, yesterday’s news has planted hope that reminds us how powerful we are when we fight, communicate, and endure together.

Here you can write a commentary on the recording "Mike Huckabee Expects Civil Disobedience in Response to Gay Marriage Ruling".

* Required fields
Twitter-news
Our partners
Follow us
Contact us
Our contacts

About this site