This blog gets indignant
Let’s imagine a world in which the Mormon Church, the Catholic Church and 52% of Californians decided that Lawyers were icky, and therefore ought to be stripped of their rights to get married. Existing marriges, with the the cuts of a million pens across ballots would be erased. Families would be ripped apart, thousands would find themselves in legal limbo.
We should hardly be surprised when, after the vote came down, Lawyers were outraged. Boycotts and legal challenges might be the tamest possible response. Indeed, if there were riots, we should understand exactly what caused them. The fact that Michelle Malkin fails to understand the outraged demonstrations in the wake of the Prop 8 vote is a failure of both empathy and imagination.
I don’t read hateful bigot Michelle Malkin, but hateful bigot John Weidner decided to post one of her columns verbatim. What is, morally/legally, the difference between Lawyers and Gays? If we can deny rights for Gays, why can’t we deny rights for Lawyers?
And if, California decided to dissolve John Weidner’s marriage because he and his spouse “chose” the lawyer “lifestyle”, I would think of less of John were he not to demand justice. If John didn’t feel the smallest quiver of rage, he wouldn’t be a respectable human being..
Quite frankly, the fact that we’re seeing mostly peaceful demonstrations, rather than insane riots, is mystifying. We’re going to see some pretty epic legal battles going forward. And the Anti-8 coalition has the full throated support of this blog. And screw anyone who would dissolve a marriage because they found it distasteful.
