Wednesday, March 02, 2011
Amendment in the works?
Interesting to watch the response to the Supreme decision on the Phelps bunch. Because the decision was 8-1 instead of the usual 5-4 on controversial matters, neither party can simply blame the judges of the other party.
The Repooflicans hate the Phelps bunch because they desecrate soldiers; the Democrats hate the Phelps bunch because they desecrate the Holy Sacrament of Homosexuality, which is second only to the Holy Sacrament of Abortion.
As always, all "responsible" commentators on both "sides" are horrified that a church is opposed to homosexuality, because all "responsible" commentators know the mind of God better than Jesus and Paul knew the mind of God.
Will this bring us the first serious Amendment since 1933? We've had some minor amendments since then, but they were technical fixes to dates and succession patterns, the sort of thing that could have been done with legislation since we no longer worry about following the document in any case. McCain and Obama, two candidates of equally questionable citizenship running in the same election without any checking or verification, proved that we have stopped worrying about the details.
The 21st was the last serious change because we've been letting court decisions do all the substantial "amending" since then.
This Phelps decision has the potential to convince both "parties" in Congress that they can no longer sit back and let judges make all the laws. I'm not especially interested in this case, but I'm interested in the potential to break the logjam, start changing some other bits that have proved to be bad ideas. Repeal 14, 17 and 19 for a start. Ideally drop the whole thing and go back to the Articles of Confederation, which would serve us VASTLY better in these times. ¶ 5:33 PM
The Repooflicans hate the Phelps bunch because they desecrate soldiers; the Democrats hate the Phelps bunch because they desecrate the Holy Sacrament of Homosexuality, which is second only to the Holy Sacrament of Abortion.
As always, all "responsible" commentators on both "sides" are horrified that a church is opposed to homosexuality, because all "responsible" commentators know the mind of God better than Jesus and Paul knew the mind of God.
Will this bring us the first serious Amendment since 1933? We've had some minor amendments since then, but they were technical fixes to dates and succession patterns, the sort of thing that could have been done with legislation since we no longer worry about following the document in any case. McCain and Obama, two candidates of equally questionable citizenship running in the same election without any checking or verification, proved that we have stopped worrying about the details.
The 21st was the last serious change because we've been letting court decisions do all the substantial "amending" since then.
This Phelps decision has the potential to convince both "parties" in Congress that they can no longer sit back and let judges make all the laws. I'm not especially interested in this case, but I'm interested in the potential to break the logjam, start changing some other bits that have proved to be bad ideas. Repeal 14, 17 and 19 for a start. Ideally drop the whole thing and go back to the Articles of Confederation, which would serve us VASTLY better in these times. ¶ 5:33 PM
