The Consortium

Can Tony marry AJ now?

From yesterday's convoluted NJ Supreme Court decision:

The State does not argue that limiting marriage to the union of a man and a woman is needed to encourage procreation or to create the optimal living environment for children. Other than sustaining the traditional definition of marriage, which is not implicated in this discussion, the State has not articulated any legitimate public need for depriving committed same-sex couples of the host of benefits and privileges that are afforded to married heterosexual couples. There is, on the one hand, no rational basis for giving gays and lesbians full civil rights as individuals while, on the other hand, giving them an incomplete set of rights when they enter into committed same-sex relationships. To the extent that families are strengthened by encouraging monogamous relationships, whether heterosexual or homosexual, the Court cannot discern a public need that would justify the legal disabilities that now afflict same-sex domestic partnerships.

So under the same logic if Carmela were to, I dunno, swim with the fishes, could Tony then marry AJ so they can - as a same-sex "couple" living under the same roof - take part in the same rights as other couples in New Jersey?  It doesn't matter that they can't procreate, right? 

There is, I am sure "no rational basis" for recognizing incestuous relationships that involve minors but if 2 adult citizens just happen to be related and wanna shack up - whether heterosexual or homosexual - why should they be deprived the host of benefits and privileges afforded to others under "marriage".  Even if it is a heterosexual incestuous relationship and they pop out a couple of 'tards, wouldn't the family be strengthened by the freak parents entering a legally recognized marriage rather than separating and stigmatizing them?  It's just behavior - quit trying to apply your puritanical, moralistic, religion-based biases on our populations you damn theocrats!  Why should the poor citizens of NJ be limited to finding a mate from the pool of non-relations in the state?  Where's the justice?

In fact, it seems like the single citizens of NJ really got screwed here so why don't we just have the entire populace line up like in gym class and count off 1...2....1....2....1...2......and we'll just extend marriage's benefits and privileges to everyone.  All 1's find another 1 and all 2's find another 2.  If there's an odd man (or woman) out, ship 'em to Delaware.  Fair is fair.

BORU

The Ugly Gettin Uglier

I watched what appeared to be a professional women's golf press conference on C-SPAN the other night.  A few minutes and several manish speakers in, I realized it was footage from a National Organization of Women (NOW) convention.  When Kim Gandy, the president of this increasingly irrelevant group, opened the floor for questions a few college girls approached the microphone.  The first one wore one of those anti-Bush T-shirts that pass for clever amongst feminists but come across more like irony.  She cried - wept actual tears - that her right to an abortion was disappearing in this theocracy.  I immediately thought of 2 things:  (1) no matter how much liqour is produced in this country, this young, uhummm, lady is pretty safe from ever getting impregnated; and (2)  if we were indeed a theocracy hers would be the first face deemed necessary to cover with a burqa or brown-paper bag. 

Then - and more scarily - a second young, uhumm, lady shrieked into the microphone about emphasizing pro-consent over pro-choice to protect a woman's right to scrape a little growing baby fetus that had somehow mysteriously appeared in her uterus.  Ummmm.....what?  The thrust of her rant was that a woman has to give consent to the fetus to invade her body and use her blood/nutrients/oxygen.  If a woman does not consent to this invasion, the invader - the child she created - must be removed.  There's even a website for this new wacko movement.  I urge everyone to take a look at the language on this site and challenge you not be repulsed by the ladies who designed it and subscribe to this perverse philosophy. 

Not to say that I am all for these ladies NEVER EVER breeding, but this is some truly twisted (stuff).

BORU

Still Confused.....but not alone

More on Alito and the Casey decision can be found in a commentary in that right-wing rag, The New York Times, by one of those facists from that bastion of reactionary thought, New York University:

Does a father have a right to choose?

BORU