Quote of the Day: Ace on Coulter and Farah

Joseph Farah at WorldNetDaily has stepped off the precipice and printed private emails from Ann Coulter, in a dispute over Ann's speech at the GOProud "HOMOCON" convention. Really now, does Farah believe he can slay a monster by printing their private conversation? Apparently so. In general, I agree with a column at Hot Air that this takes the focus off of health care, the economy, jobs and Iran nuking Israel. I found a quote from Ace at Ace of Spades that is pretty much my position (the following are snippets - please read it all here.

The GOP cannot be an overtly, officially religious party charged with monitoring everyone's personal sins. It cannot be. Ever. I view the party on morality as I view it on economics. A government cannot create wealth; it can only, and should only endeavor to, foster a wealth-friendly environment in which wealth-creation is likely.

Similarly, a government cannot mandate what sort of sex is legal and what sex is illegal. It can only foster a morality-friendly environment win which moral behavior is likely.

There are situations when the government is required to make some kind of official legislative choice on matters typically deemed moral. The law of marriage is an obvious one; drug prohibition has typically been considered another.

But the party cannot agitate to expand and multiply the number of decisions it will make on "behalf" of citizens, against their will, to enforce a morally hygienic lifestyle.....

Coulter is not a gay marriage advocate, but an opponent, which leads me to conclude that Farah is ultimately not agitating for a policy position like traditional marriage only, but simply for that which is impermissible: taking an anti-gay-person stance, period.

It's true that 90% of gays (including conservative-leaning gays) want gay marriage. It's also true that a significant portion of the greater conservative caucus is Paulite in its hostility towards the use of military force, and a larger (but now no longer majority, I don't think) part of the caucus is neocon in its faith in military solutions.

We generally disagree on these issues without attempting to cast out the unbelievers. (Okay, admission: During the height of the Iraq War, and the height of manufactured "Paulmania," with all of his appearances on Truther Alex Jones' show, I sure did welcome the prospect of purging the party of such people. But as a general rule, we don't do that.)

Farah's position is essentially that gays simply cannot be conservatives at all and must be purged from the party. He does not seem to be an opponent of a policy, but an opponent of specific people. That doesn't strike me as fair, conservative, or keeping with the American way of doing things...

Read J.E. Dyer's Hot Air column here. If you want to read all the dreadful details, do an Ann Coulter Joseph Farah search.

Posted by Maggie @ Maggie's Notebook

California To Get Rid Of Marriage

by Findalis Why is it that I am not surprised at the tactics that Gays and Lesbians will go to force the idea of Gay marriage on the nation. On November 4, 2008 the voters of California passed Proposition 8 which states:

Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

This passed 52.3% to 47.7%. Thus the voters of California spoke saying no to Gay marriage. This is not the end of the arguement. The supporters of Gay marriage are not going to take that lying down. They have a new tactic. Get rid of marriage. No I am not joking.

California's top election official says supporters can start collecting signatures for a proposed ballot measure to strike the word "marriage" from all state laws. Supporters of this ballot measure want to replace it with the term "domestic partnership," while keeping all the rights of marriage in place. Read the full story here.

Domestic Partnership is not the same as Marriage. In a partnership, one can just leave the partnership without legal recourse. In a Marriage it takes a divorce to dissolve it. One can have multiple partners in a Domestic Partnership. In a Marriage a person can have only one spouse at a time. Forcing all people in California to give up Marriage in favor of Domestic Partnership is wrong. But knowing the liberals, idiots, nincompoops in California they will now pass this idea overwhelmingly and sound the death knoll of the American Family. If this measure passes how long do you think it will be before it is brought to every state in the US? Marriage is not a right, it is a privilege. If it was a right the government would have to supply each and every person in the nation with a spouse. They don't. And a couple planning on marrying should not have to go and get a Domestic Partnership license but a Marriage license. Changing the name of Marriage to Domestic Partnership is just a bad idea.