"A FIREBALL IN THE NIGHT: THE SO-CALLED ‘GAY MARRIAGE’
AMENDMENT, II"      

Steven Jonas, MD, MPH

As I noted last week, my second column for The Political Junkies appeared on March 4, 2004. The topic was the so-called “Gay Marriage Amendment” (in reality the Homosexual Discrimination Amendment).  It has become quite obvious that the Republican Religious Right (RRR) will be making much of this one in the current session of Congress.  It is one of their two domestic wedge issues (the other being immigration of course --- Fox"News"Channel gave that strategy away very early in the year) leading into the 2006 Congressional campaign.  This is the second of a two-part edited re-run of the original column. 

IV.                The Georgites have been attacking the whole concept of an independent judiciary since they took office.  They have done this both directly and by appointing to the bench judges who do not believe in it, but rather believe that the judiciary should be subservient to the Executive Branch (as long as that branch is in the hands of the Right Wing of course.)  (See my Schiavo Case columns, especially those of April 14 and 21,2004.). 

When a reactionary Supreme Court gutted large parts of the New Deal back in the 1930s, using a specific interpretation of the vaguely written Interstate Commerce Clause, in opposition to the “will of the people,” the Right was all for that (and still very much is).  Bush has made a point of linking his support of this amendment to the role of "a few activist judges."  "Activist judge" in the Georgite vocabulary means "any judge who renders an opinion on the meaning of the Constitution that does not agree with ours."  

V.                  The introduction of this proposed amendment also recognizes, as I said above, that unless they were to get full control of the Supreme Court, that that body reading the 14^th, would eventually have to rule that gays are entitled to marriage, not just   “civil union,” under the (civil) marriage laws of each and every state. 

The original Constitution discriminated against one group of people, the African-American slaves (and did not recognize the existence of another, the Native Americans).  Otherwise, it promoted rights, not denied them.  It took a Civil War to eliminate that original written discrimination and then another century of struggle before the meaning of the 15th Amendment, the Original Voting and Civil Rights Act, was actually put into enforceable law.  This new amendment would reintroduce into the Constitution formal discrimination against one group of people, based on who they are, what their nature is, as people, not anything they might have done that violates laws other than those on the books that already discriminate against homosexuals. 

VI.        While many Republicans are racists, many are not. 

The Party does have its Southern Strategy that is based in racism.  However, that force is gradually losing its political utility, especially as the nation becomes darker skinned and more multi-cultural. Since the time of the Great Depression and the New Deal, and now especially that the Cold War is nothing but a memory, the Right has relied on racism as its base for gaining and maintaining political power. With the political utility of racism possibly diminishing for the short term, it is clear that certain Right-wing forward planners have recognized the need to target a new group against which discrimination could be rallied for political purposes.  Who better for their purposes than the homosexuals? 

In 1995 none other than Newt Gingrich said, when addressing the issue of AIDS (The Freedom Writer, “Inside Glen Eyrie Castle,” August, 1994, p. 1): “AIDS is a real crisis.  It is something you ought to be paying attention to, to study.  AIDS will do more to direct America (sic) back to the cost of violating traditional values, and to make America (sic) aware of the danger of certain behavior than anything we’ve ever seen.  For us, it’s a great rallying cry (emphasis added).” 

VII.  The demolition of the Wall of Separation between Church and State 

One could see a reactionary, Georgite Supreme Court using this amendment and its "original intent" as they would interpret it, to justify such laws under the Constitution.  They could do this simply because the Constitution would now (literally) discriminate against a particular group of people, based on who they are, using a certain set of religious criteria.  (Just see the Dred Scott decision, the only one that the strict constructionist Chief Justice Roger Taney felt he could make under the Constitution as then written.)  Since the basis of the definition of marriage the amendment uses is religious, not civil, by putting it into the Constitution, Jefferson ’s "Wall of Separation" would essentially be demolished.  Again, by its mere introduction of the amendment the Republican Religious Right has signaled the beginning of its formal assault on that Wall. 

VIII.             Bush said that the definition of "marriage" is based on its ''cultural religious and natural'' roots. 

Not that we could fairly expect this dumb and ignorant man to know any better, but it is of course simply not true that the definition of marriage is historically immutable.  In the 19th century, it meant that the woman became the property of the man and that her property did too.  In the Middle Ages there was "droit de seigneur," the right of the feudal lord to have the first night with any woman any of his male serfs married.  Perhaps they are thinking about re-establishing that, the qualification for "seigneur" status to be something like a minimum of $100,000.00 per year to the Georgite campaign fund. 

IX.                I don't want to go too far out here, but this could be the first step on the road to outlawing homosexuality. 

The Republican Religious Right holds that being a homosexual is a matter of choice.  Focus on the Family’s Jim Dobson rails away on that one incessantly.  As Trent Lott once told us when he was Republican Majority Leader and the third leading Republican politician the country, it is after all a sin (and that because the Bible, at least the particular translation that Lott reads, says so.  In that regard, one must ask if God spoke English, a language not around when he supposedly laid down the “inerrant” text of his thought.  Much more importantly, one must ask why should those of us who do not believe that the Bible is “the word of God” and even if it were, why should it govern the behavior of those of us who do not think that its dictates and dictums should be given the force of legal authority over any person other than those individuals who want to follow them.)

In Nazi Germany, before the Yellow Star came into wide usage following the passage in 1935 of the Nuremberg Laws that put discrimination against Jews into the German legal code, known homosexuals (other than those in the upper reaches of the Nazi Party such as Ernst Roehm, Commander of the SA until his murder by Hitler for political, not sexual discrimination, reasons, on The Night of the Long Knives, June 30, 1934) were required to wear a Pink Triangle.  Only then did the Nuremberg Laws come.        

Conclusion. 

I believe that this battle must be fought on these grounds, not only on fairness or state rights.  This amendment has meaning for everyone, because if the homosexuals are first, who could then be next to have the rights that they presently have under the explicit elements of the Bill of Rights, under the 9^th, and under the 14^th eliminated?  Why, for example, could the next step not be an amendment defining marriage solely as a religious institution and perhaps specifying which religion(s)?  Further, if it were first the gays in Germany , then the Jews, if the gays were to be the first to be Constitutionally discriminated against, I just wonder who would be next.            

Let us not limit the argument simply to the rights of homosexual American citizens, as American citizens (which argument should of course be used as well).  Let us remember the words of Pastor Niemoller in Germany which went something like: “In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me --- and by that time no one was left to speak up for me.”           

 In 1820, an Act of Congress called the Missouri Compromise permitted the expansion of the institution of slavery beyond its original boundaries.  Thomas Jefferson referred to that Act as a “Firebell in the Night,” warning of future bloody conflict over the institution of slavery.  For our time, the mere introduction of this amendment, a rallying cry for the Republican Religious Right with enormous implications for the nature of our society, with all of its grave potential consequences for the future of Constitutional democracy in the United States, supported as it is by the present President of the United States, present as it is in the 2004 National Platform of his Party, should be regarded as well as a “Firebell in the Night.” 

Author’s Note: Well after I prepared this revisit to the March, 2004 column, back in Dec., 2005, the following item appeared on CNN news: “From Ed Henry, Feb. 13, 2006. WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Monday he plans a vote in early June on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, a move likely to fail but sure to spark a fiery election-year debate. Frist, a Tennessee Republican, told CNN he's planning the vote for the week of June 5 because he wants to deal with the issue "as early as possible" before the Senate calendar fills up in a busy election year. Frist said he doesn't know how many votes the ban will receive, but Republican and Democratic aides privately acknowledged the vote will probably fall far short of the 67-vote supermajority needed to advance a constitutional amendment.” 

________________  

Dr. Steven Jonas is a contributing author for The Political Junkies (www.thepoliticaljunkies.net).  He is a Professor of Preventive Medicine at Stony Brook University (NY) and author/co-author of over twenty books. Dr. Jonas is one of America 's most perceptive Democratic political analysts.

In his book The New Americanism, Dr. Jonas presents his proposal for that “new vision and mission” for the Democratic Party that so many, for so many years, have been urging it to find.  A new vision and mission are obviously needed with increasing urgency as the Georgites drive our nation towards frank theocratic fascism with increasing speed and determination.  Dr. Jonas finds the needed vision and mission in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.  "The New Americanism: How the Democratic Party Can Win the Presidency  is available from Amazon.com (go to "Books;" enter the title) and BarnesandNoble.com (same). 

He is also the author of The 15% Solution: A Political History of American Fascism, 2001-2022.  Under the pseudonym "Jonathan Westminster" this book was originally published in 1996.  It was republished with a New Introduction in 2004.  Under Georgite rule, the “fictional non-fiction” scenario of this work of “future history” is, most unfortunately, becoming all too real, now almost day-by-day.  The 2004 edition is available at www.barnesandnoble.com (search with the book title) and www.xlibris.com (click on “Bookstore,” then “Search” with the title).  Both versions are available at www.amazon.com (go to "Books;" search with the title).

Dr. Jonas is also a Contributing Editor for the Weblog http://planetmove.blogspot.com/, produced by The Planetary Movement Ltd. UK (http://www.planetarymovement.org/), TPJ's own Michael Carmichael,  President and Chief Executive Officer, and a Contributing Columnist for the Project for the Old American Century, POAC, http://www.oldamericancentury.org/. By invitation, Dr. J's TPJ columns are posted periodically on the weblogs Thomas Paine's Corner (http://civillibertarian.blogspot.com/), and Jack’s Straight-Speak, http://jack-dalton.blogspot.com/.

2006
April 2, 2006         "A Fireball In The Night:                        
                            The So-Called ‘Gay Marriage’ Amendment, I

Feb 22, 2006         “The German Reichstag Fire of 1933 and 9/11: Some Comparisons. A Revisit,
                              Part II” 
Feb 16, 2006         “The German Reichstag Fire Of 1933 And 9/11: Some
                            Comparisons.  A Revisit, Part1" 
Feb 9, 2006           "A Comment On The Democratic Alchemy,’
                             Appearing In The American Prospect”         
Feb 2, 2006           "Vengeance Is Mine, Saith The LORD"

Jan 26, 2006          "George Bush And The Doctrine Of Original Intent"       
Jan 19, 2006          "Let's Hear It For Original Intent (Version 2)"
Jan 12, 2006          "A Quick Visit To Mexico"
Jan 5, 2006            "Why The Patriot Act, Redux: Fascism In The Here And Now, Cont." 

Dec 22, 2005          "Why The Patriot Act, Redux: Fascism In The Here And Now"
Dec 15, 2005          "An Iraq Exit Proposal"
Dec 10, 2005          “Exiting Iraq, The Georgite Way"
Dec 1, 2005            "The Future Of The Democratic Party, VIII:
                              A Politically Viable Progressive Position On The War" 

Nov 25, 2005            “The Future Of The Democratic Party, VII: ‘The Ten Commitments’”
Nov 17, 2005            "The Future Of The Democratic Party, VI: An Organizing Proposal For Progressives” 
Nov 10, 2005            “The Future Of The Democratic Party, V:
                               There Is No Middle Ground"
Nov 3, 2005              “On The (Possible) Indictments.”

Oct 27, 2005            “The Future of the Democratic Party, IV:
                                Bush, Bennett, Miers, and the DLC.” 
Oct 20, 2005            “The Future Of The Democratic Party, III:
                                First Thoughts On Dealing With The DLC.”
Oct 13, 2005            “The Future Of The Democratic Party, II: On The Republicans” 
Oct 6,  2005             “The Future Of The Democratic Party, I”

Sept 29, 2005          "The Bush Flood, And The Georgites: New Orleans, III"
Sept 22, 2005          "On The Great New Orleans Flood Of 2005, II"
Sept 15, 2005          "On The Great New Orleans Bush Flood Of 2005, I"
Sept 8, 2005            "Let's Hear It For Original Intent"
Sept 1, 2005            "An Iraq Solution"

Aug 25,2005             "Some Thoughts On The Atomic Bombing Of Japan"
Aug 18, 2005            "Why God Sent Us George W. Bush" 
Aug 12, 2005            "John Bolton And The Nuclear Option II"
Aug 5, 2005              "The Significance Of The Karl Rove Speech"

July 28, 2005             “Iran Nukes, Revisited"
                                 (Expanded Edition)
July 21, 2005             “Iran Nukes, Revisited"
July 14, 2005             "The Dick Durbin Disaster" A Follow Up
July 7, 2005               "The Dick Durban Disaster"

June 23, 2005            "Why All Of This Repression Abroad?"
June 16, 2005            “Not Very Intelligent Design"
June 8,2005              "Pat Buchanan's "What If, "III?"
June 2, 2005             "Pat Buchanan's 'What If,' II?"

May 26, 2005            "Pat Buchanan's 'What If?'"
May 18, 2005            "The Schiavo Case, V: The Attack On Science" 
May 12, 2005            “Possible Explanations For Bush-Behavior On And Around 9/11"
May 5, 2005              "Bill Frist's Declaration Of War"

April 28, 2005            "The Schiavo Case, IV: The Definitions Of Life And Death"
April 24, 2005            "The Schiavo Case, III: Further Legal Considerations And Their Political Implications"
April 14, 2005            “The Schiavo Case, II: William Bennett And The Beginning Of The End Of The Separation Of Powers"
April 7, 2005              "The Schiavo Case And The Locus Of The 'Police Power'"

March 31, 2005           “John Bolton And The Nuclear Option"
March 22, 2005            Of "Moolahs," Putin and Bush
March 17, 2005            Georgite "Freedom And Democracy"
March 10, 2005            "We Won't Have To Worry Any More"
March  3, 2005             "Iranian Nukes"

February 24, 2005        "Going Nuclear In Iran"
February 16, 2005        “The Georgite Social Security Scam: Bases For Suspicion”
February 10, 2005        “The Georgite Version of ‘Freedom and Democracy’ ”
                                   “The Coming 2nd Civil War (Unless),” No. 6
Feb 3, 2005                  “WMD Discovered --- In Washington”

Jan 27, 2005                 “Comparing George W. Bush And Adolf Hitler”
Jan 18, 2005                 “The Bush Second Inaugural: A Preview” “The Coming 2nd Civil War
                                    (Unless),” No. 5 
Jan 13, 2005                 “The Georgite Concept of Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law”
Jan 6, 2005                   “The ‘Unless’ Of The ‘Coming Second Civil War’ Series; Part II”  

Dec 30, 2004                 “The ‘Unless’ of the ‘Coming Second Civil War’ Series, Part I” 
Dec 23, 2004                 “The Real Meaning Of The ‘Faith-Based Presidency;’ Part II”
Dec 15, 2004                 “The Coming Second Civil War (Unless)” 
Dec 9, 2004                   “The Real Meaning Of The ‘Faith-Based Presidency’ ”      

Oct 28, 2004                 Why The Patriot Act?”
Oct. 21, 2004                “The Cheneys’ Daughter Flap”
Oct 14, 2004                 “George Bush’s America” 
Oct 7, 2004                   “The Debate” 

Sept 30, 2004                “Four 800 Lb. Gorillas In The Campaign Room” 
Sept 23, 2004               "Fixing The Kerry Campaign, 9/15/2004"
Sept 16, 2004               "Lessons From Japan.  Part II: Successful Occupations"
Sept 9, 2004                 "Thoughts On the Third Anniversary of the Tragedy of 9/11/2001"
Sept 2, 2004                 "Lessons From Japan, Part 1"

August 26,2004             “Dealing with the Republican National Convention and Related
                                     Issues”
August 18, 2004            "The Best Of Dr. Jonas"
August 12, 2004             “Some Thoughts For and About The Kerry Campaign, VI”
August 5,2004                “Some Thoughts For and About The Kerry Campaign, V”

July 29, 2004                “Some Thoughts For and About The Kerry Campaign, IV”
July 22, 2004                “Some Thoughts For and About The Kerry Campaign III”              
July 15, 2004                “Some Thoughts For And About The Kerry Campaign II”
July 7, 2004                  “Some Thoughts For And About The Kerry Campaign,I”
July 1, 2004                  “Counsel To The President”
June 24, 2004               “ ’You Know me Al:’ On the German Reichstag Fire of Feb. 27, 1933
                                     and the 9/11/01 Bombing of the World Trade Center, Part II”
June 17, 2004               “ ‘The Ralph Nader Problem’ --- A Re-run plus”
June 10, 2004               “Ronald Reagan’s Legacy”
June 3, 2004                 “’You Know Me Al:’ On The Reichstag Fire Of Feb. 27, 1933 And The
                                      9/11/01 Bombing Of The World Trade Center, Part I”

May 27, 2004                “On Fascism -- And The Georgites”
May 20, 2004                “On John Ashcroft -- And Jefferson Davis”
May 13, 2004                “Karl Rove’s Personal Political Notebook”
May 6, 2004                  “Possible Explanations For Bush Behavior And 9/11” 

April 29, 2004               “On George Bush and Religion, Part 2”
April 22, 2004               “What Condi Rice Might Have Said”
April 8, 2004                 “On George Bush And Religion”
April 1, 2004                 “Some Political Thoughts For Senator Kerry”  

March 25, 2004              “Brief Essays”
March 16, 2004             “You Know Me Al: The Iraq War --- So What Was It About, Anyway?
March 11, 2004             “A Word (Or Two) On Ralph Nader”
March 4, 2004               “A Firebell In The Night” 

February 27, 2004        “On Doctor Dean”

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information please review Title 17, Sec. 107 of the U.S. Code. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

privacy policy

© 2002- 2008  OLDAmericanCentury.org and OLDAmericanCentury.com