The World O' Crap Archive

Welcome to the Collected World O' Crap, a comprehensive library of posts from the original Salon Blog, and our successor site, world-o-crap.com (2006 to 2010).

Current posts can be found here.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Sunday, December 21, 2003 by s.z.

I Still Think They Weren't Really Americans



"The latest New York Times/CBS News poll has found widespread support for an amendment to the United States Constitution to ban gay marriage," the NY Times reports.

Apparently, 55 percent of those polled favored an amendment to the Constitution that would allow marriage "only between a man and a woman," while 40 percent opposed it. (And presumably 5% voiced their approval of pie.)

The NYT says supporters of the ammendment included "people traditionally supportive of gay rights," such as Democrats, women, and East Coasters. The largest factor determining attitudes toward the issue is reportedly how marriage itself is viewed.

For a majority of Americans — 53 percent — marriage is largely a religious matter. Seventy-one percent of those people oppose gay marriage. Similarly, 33 percent of Americans say marriage is largely a legal matter and a majority of those people — 55 percent — say they support gay marriage.

Personally, I'm with those who with those who say marriage is largely a religious matter. . .and since we don't look to the government to oversee religious matters, homosexuals should get the same rights as heterosexuals from the state (everybody who meets the qualifications, gender not being one of them, can fill out the paperwork and get a "civil union"), while churches should be free to sanctify whatever unions they deem worthy of their blessing, and "supersize" them into marriages. (But I guess this view won't make me popular with Roy Moore, Roy Moore wannabe Ann Coulter, and President Bush, who all seem to want me to worship their way, and to make sure the government sees that I do.)

The study also showed that:

The most positive feelings toward gay people were registered among respondents under 30, and among those who knew gay people

So, some Americans DON'T know gay people?? I grew up in one of the most conservative, traditional locales in the country, and yet the boy-next-door, the boy-across-the street, and the woman-in-the-house-four-doors-down were all homosexuals (and also, you know, people). And when I grew up and got out in the the bigger world, I found there were homosexuals EVERYWHERE -- and some of them had seemingly loving, supportive, monogomous, long-term relationships. I can't believe that my experience is unique. So, I really wonder about these Americans who don't know gay people -- are we sure they actually ARE Americans?

I also found this portion of the article interesting:

President Bush had been noncommittal about a constitutional amendment immediately after the Massachusetts ruling, with the administration worried that support for a ban on gay marriage would alienate moderate voters. But last week Mr. Bush for the first time voiced his support, saying, "I will support a constitutional amendment which would honor marriage between a man and a woman, codify that."

The statement signals the White House's increasing confidence that it can exploit the matter in the presidential campaign, both to energize its evangelical supporters and to discredit the eventual Democratic nominee.

While I'm sure that Andrew Sullivan is still clinging to the belief that Bush didn't REALLY say he will support the constitutional amendment (and if he did, it was because it was backwards day, and so he really meant that he WOULDN'T support it), but to the rest of the Log Cabin Republicans, well, I hope this shows them how much the President values them and their rights. And I hope it shows everybody else what a jerk this President (and the Rove he rode in on) is.

3:37:12 AM
comment []

The Ghost of TownHall Past: Special Guantanamo al-Qaeda Espionage Edition.

3 Counts Against Translator Are Dropped

WASHINGTON, Dec. 20 — The Air Force has dropped three counts in an espionage case against a Syrian-born airman who worked as a translator at the prison camp in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

The lawyer for Senior Airman Ahmad I. al-Halabi, Donald G. Rehkopf Jr., said on Saturday that once those charges were removed, "simply the gut of the case was gone."

A single count in the charge that accused the airman of "aiding the enemy," a capital offense, was dropped. Also dropped were counts that dealt with e-mailing information about detainees and committing espionage by transmitting information to unauthorized recipients. Airman al-Halabi still faces 17 charges. He was arrested in July.

Lt. Gen. William Welser III, commander of the 18th Air Force at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois, convening authority for Airman al-Halabi's general court-martial, gave no rationale for his decision to drop the charges.

However, it seems that al-Halabi is still going to be tried for "Serving unauthorized pastry, i.e., non-military baklava."

But if al-Halabi didn't transmit classified information to unauthorized recipients, didn't email any prisoner information, and didn't aid the enemy, then it appears that all he may have done was unwisely collect greetings from the prisoners, presumably with the idea of someday, somehow, passing them along to the prisoners' families . Which (as I opined back in September) would constitute a security breach and disobedience to orders, but would hardly pose a serious threat to our national security, and would in no way suggest that "we just can't trust those Muslims, since they may all be spies," as some pundits suggested).

Since al-Halabi's case was the strongest of the Gitmo cases (at least, per media accounts), and since it seems to be going the way of Chaplain Yee's (who is no longer thought to be a spy, but only to have aided al-Queda by downloading porn and having had an affair), I think it's time to revisit some of our Town Hall friends' statements about the cases:

John Leo

The worst fear, one Air Force official said, is that an al Qaeda-inspired network is operating at Guantánamo.

Mona Charen

Does this mean that there are no loyal American Muslims? Obviously not. But it does suggest that simple common sense should dictate caution on the part of our government.

[snip]

We are always at pains to prove how open-minded and accepting we are as a nation -- which is fine, to a point. But we cannot permit political correctness to keep us from self-preservation.

Michelle Malkin

Islamist Fifth Columnists are benefiting from the very guarantees of religious freedom being denied to devout Christian soldiers such as Daniel Moody who are risking their lives for the War on Terror overseas. This dangerous deference to radical Islam -- rooted in a cowardly fear of offending -- is not only a threat to our soldiers' constitutionally protected rights, but to our national security.

Frank Gaffney, Jr.

Otherwise, the danger is very real that serving members of the armed forces could be subjected to ominous proselytizing intended to give rise to clandestine Fifth Column activities in this country and a whole new front in the War on Terror.

[snip]

We cannot, however, allow Islamists among them to use our guarantees of religious freedom – or, for that matter, other civil liberties – to destroy the U.S. military and governmental institutions established over two centuries ago to promote and safeguard those liberties, and the millions of Americans of all faiths who hold them dear.

So, I think you can expect apologies from Leo, Mona, Michelle, and Frank for having rushed to judgement (and for having been too quick to look for an Islamic conspiracy behind the Gitmo incidents). These mea culpas should start apearing any day now. And I'm sure that Congressman John Kyl (R-Arizona), as well as the Air Force and the Pentagon, will add their own regrets for having overreacted and sensationalized things too. Just don't hold your breath.

2:51:07 AM
comment []

Rush Limbaugh, Taking Sides

We had a caller on Friday who asked me what I thought about the recent dust-up between Matt Drudge and Bill O'Reilly. Let me set the table here for people who don't know about this. A lot of people read Drudge but not a lot of people watch O'Reilly.

[snip}

The thing to do with guys like O'Reilly is to just ignore them.
That's what Bill gets for trying to take over Rush's spot as Chief Blowhard of the Right while Rush was in rehab.


1:29:43 AM
comment []

Not A Man, Not Yet a Woman

But if I were a man rather than part of the frivolous, nonproductive chattering class, Roy Moore is the man I'd like to be.

--Ann Coulter, writing (but not blogging) at Human Events Online

1:26:03 AM
comment []

No comments:

Post a Comment