[vielen Dank zum Hrn. Krienke]
The press has been aflutter about California’s controversial Amendment 8, better known as their Same-Sex Marriage Ban. The outrage on both sides has seen the heaviest of publicity. At first, individual municipalities in Cali allowed same-sex unions at the local level, and then a legislative ban was put into place for the State. Earlier this year, the California Supreme Court overturned this ban, resulting in the issue being referred to public referendum, and some highly-public weddings, including the unfair union of smokin’-hot Portia deRossi to dog-maul Ellen deGeneres; but it has also overshadowed the very same plight in two others states, like Arizona’s Proposition 102.
And what about Florida? Florida’s ballot also sees a similar measure on the ballot. Known as Amendment 2, the measure seeks to re-write Florida’s constitution and define marriage exclusively as the union of a man with a woman. Ironic, that the state which is home to South Beach, Key West, and Fort Lauderdale, which draw in millions of gay travelers and billions of gay dollars every year, should do a sudden about face and slap one of its own heaviest contingencies in the face with nothing but raw insult.
In fact, as a Republican, it calls into question the profitability of such a system: in Florida we should be catering to such social minorities. Gay people are well known for their aesthetic superiority and their ability to perform nearly any task in the job market with aplomb. Without the economic burden of raising children, gays boast the highest disposable income of any particular social segment. However, thanks to rampant social conservatism which affects Florida like a plague, Floridian women still earn less than men; Hispanic, African-American, and Caucasian ethnic groups are still neck-cutting antagonists toward with one another, and Floridian culture stays zip-locked in the shopping malls with a Miami Vice mentality.
Obviously, the freedom to marry the gender of your choice is is going to distress the religious Right the most. But we at the Palmetto Patriot would like to remind America that the whole damned country was founded on the principle of separation of church and state. Not only are we guaranteed freedom to practice whatever religion we choose, but at the same time we ought to be guaranteed our freedom from other people’s religions! What a relief this would be from all the Jerry Fallwells and the Oral Robertses out there who make Evangelical Christianity seem more tyrannical and insane than Shia Islam. What a joy it would be to be free of the hypocrisy of Catholic priests who avow celibacy for life, only to later be caught in child abuse and pornography. America is replete with its own fundamentalist extremists, spiritual terrorism is on the rise. Yes, such extreme conservatism amounts to cultural terrorism.
It is indeed wonderous to recall the days shortly after 9/11 when the USA had a shot at garnering sympathy and support from the whole world. It was magical how nearly every elected official homogenized the American population into one contiguous mostly-White, totally Protestant mass. Such homogenization was essential pretext for the later legislative and military abominations that befell us at home and the world at large, and yet how essential false and fallacious all of it was. It amounted to nothing short of whipping up religious fervor into a froth of outrage against anything that wasn’t WASPy, in a ghastly mirror of Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Muslims are the new Jews. And they’re not Muslims, they’re terrorists. Funny, isn’t it, that America should come so close to the nation-state it changed its own foreign policy to defeat?
To bring us back on point, religious sentiment has no place in politics. This is a most Republican point of view, if you paid attention to the last two centuries, and anyone who says or does the opposite is a hypocrit.
You may not approve of same-sex marriages. You may not like homosexuals, and you may not want any of them near your neighborhood, and we’re fairly certain the feeling is mutual. But think for a moment about all those Protestants, Lutherans, Quakers, Calvinists, Pilgrims, and Amish who were laughed out of Europe for their religious beliefs. In certain terms, it is absolutely unfair for us to curtail the rights and freedoms of others, as detailed in and guaranteed by the charter documents of this country, because of collective religious sentiment… and we do emphasize the word sentiment.
On the other hand, whereas marriage rights, laws, and clauses form a unique cultural bridge between church and state, the social institution of marriage can be seen as a tax shelter for those who would choose to breed, and in many cases, indiscriminantly so. Gay couples could single-handedly re-stimulate the economy if they had more of a tax-incentive to join the mainstream. After all, it’s not just procreation that the governement is after, it’s the household: small business, entrepreneurism, even government itself could not exist without the household, and why should we forbid certain groups from forming households? We do not dissolve the marriages of infertile couples because they cannot reproduce. There’s a strong chance that gay couples will have children, one way or another, and there is even scientific evidence that the children of gay couples grow up psychologically better-balanced that the norm.
It has been long-rumoured that Florida’s current Governor, Charlie Crist, is himself gay, and yet he was overwhelmingly elected to office. Should we deny the Governor his God-given right to marry any long-time pool boy or personal assistant he sees fit? Absolutely not.
To summarize, voting for Amendment 2 for religious reasons is tantamount to the Neanderthal practice of clubbing a potential mate on the head and raping him/her. In an economic viewpoint, voting against Amendment 2 is a strong and sound economic statement: more tax breaks for higher disposable income families mean more money pouring through the marketplace and a stronger economy. Plus, it helps to bring Floridian culture out of the dark ages it’s experienced since Fidel took over and Don Johnson re-invented the 3-day stubble look.
So, whereas The Palmetto Patriot takes no official stance on any religious issue, we must sharply say a fervent “HELL NO” to Florida’s Amendment 2 on economic and ethical grounds. In today’s impending doom of an economy, we cannot afford to alienate any social group, and must rise to the occassion. We strongly urge you, our reader to consider both sides of this equation and do the right thing.
L. Grant dePook
[Translation: Obama is the Black Fidel Castro]
[Extra Thank Yous to Sunshine State of Mind for this]
Besides the obvious choice for the new Ruler of the Known Universe, there are quite a few issues on the ballot if you live in Florida, especially if you live in that miasma of mysterious Bermuda-Triangle-energy known as Miami-Dade County.
Knowing on the spot, in your polling booth, exactly what the issue is and who it affects can be daunting to say the least. You could let the mass media inform your opinion, and there’s Google and Wikipedia of course, but the Palmetto Patriot has been spelunking around the internet while we examine our absentee ballots.
We’ve found the following web resources of extreme value in synergy with the above named ones:
Project Vote Smart could permanently alter the way you vote. This website tabulates all the issues and candidates on the ballot by your ZIP code. There is a considerably valuable option here which looks at incumbents’ past voting behavior, with a zoom-in on the individual docket issue and outcome available.
We found this extremely useful in digging up some dirt on Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Sen. Gwen Margolis. There is also a tab on each candidates’ nav panel for their opinions on important issues, which was very telling when we considered Diaz-Balart’s rival for the upcoming Congressional seat, Mr. Raul L. Martinez. Martinez is a multi-term former Mayor of the eyesore/headache known as Hialeah, Florida, thank you Wikipedia. In the early 90s, Martinez was indicted multiple times on many charges of racketeering, extortion, and conspiracy, and has refused to speak to PVS regarding his stances on important issues in this election. Nice one, Raul, thanks for all that. Diaz-Balart represents older, Cuban exile and staunch Catholic interests, as you can see by his voting record HERE and HERE. He also voted against the recent federal bailout, which delivered even more of our financial fate into the hands of the Federal Reserve and ultimately, the World Bank Group. So even though we voted against Diaz Balart last time around in favor of Libertarian Frank J. Martinez, we’ll give hm some credit. So as you can see, in the 21st Congressional District it’s a clear battle between minor evils: lawful/smarmy and the chaotic/criminal.
As we mentioned, Sen. Gwen Margolis has popped her antediluvian head up on a different spot this ballot, since she has decided to resign from the Florida State Senate. This time, she is pursuing the post of Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser. The Senator’s voting record is clearly posted on PVS, but little was known in cyberspace about the candidates for this new Miami post. So we’d like to thank Eye on Miami, who’d elaborated on the candidates’ campaign practices in the illuminating “Miami-Dade Property Appraiser Race: Who Gives a S***?”. Well, we give a big ole dookie, considering the hurricanes and insurance and real estate busts in the last few years. The Palmetto Patriot gives a shout out and a thank you to Eye on Miami for revealing both Margolis’ heavy-handed gang-busters “I want it” approach to campaign funding, and that of her lead competitor, Jim Shedd, an ex-law-enforcer whose contributions primarily come from one gracious benefactor, who’s caught like a dear in headlights by the Margolis machine. Resistance is futile.
These two issues on the ballot are going to have a direct impact on your congressional voice and your property taxes, Miami-Dade County. We suggest you draw your own conclusions, but vote, baby, vote!
L. Grant Pooka
Q: What’s the difference between a terrorist and Sarah Palin?
A: Lipstick! (D’uh!)