Chickens pecking over HJR3
If there’s anything new to contribute to the marriage debate, it might be a calling-out of both sides for their cowardice.
OK, timidity then. Let’s keep it respectful, to use a favorite term of one of the prominent — paid — backers of the constitutional amendment to protect marriage by restricting it to our kind of people.
Protect marriage. Preserve families. Nurture children. None of these “arguments” for denying equal rights has squat to do with the lives of homosexual couples. And the proclamation that this minority’s quest for first-class citizenship should be put to a majority vote is un-American on its face.
Tell the truth. You don’t like gay people. Or, your followers and funders don’t. And you live in fear of the day they stop being feared.
Now, equal time for the “equality” side. An impressive lot, boasting participation by big business, academia, elected officials in both parties. Would that they had the guts, or the will, to say the right thing first and always: that sex and religion are being used as a club and it is time to put a stop to it.
Instead, the emphasis is on workforce development, the state’s image, more practical priorities for the legislature, and the dreadful fuss and expense of a referendum battle.
Worst of all, there’s no demand for repeal of the existing segregationist law. Indeed, many a prominent opponent of HJR3 cites that law to reassure bigots their job is already done.
Forgive me my stereotype, here of all places, but how downright Hoosier this Armageddon is.