We learn that, on the heels of the movement which gave us a form of "marriage" unknown to Western Civilization, another movement hopes to give us yet another unknown -- a form of "citizenship" which allows men to govern a community without actually joining it. Courtesy of this story from FoxNews we read all the eerie similarities. The article's in black, my comments in blue.
WASHINGTON — A scattered movement growing across the country would buck decades of conventional wisdom and allow homosexuals the right to marry non-citizens the right to vote in local elections, a move that proponents say would give same-sex couples the same control over their lives as heterosexual couples. immigrants the ability to directly impact government in their communities.
"We're a stronger society as a whole if we have a good quality of life and everyone participates," said Ron Hayduk, acacemic bobbling-head #557788339929921128835453428 political science professor at the City College of New York and a supporter of the movement.
"There is no reason why homosexual couples shouldn't be able to enjoy the same rights as heterosexual couples. This is a mechanism to make sure that society is accountable to all married persons regardless of sexual orientation. "There is a greater likelihood that our representatives will be responsible to everybody," Hayduk told Foxnews.com. "This is a mechanism to make sure they are held accountable."
Critics, however, dismiss the idea. They say the right to marry is a sacred privilege and responsibility of a man and a woman. They say the right to vote is a sacred privilege and responsibility of the American citizen. Giving marriage rights to homosexual couples "just fundamentally cheapens marriage," said Rev. Steven Camerota, director of the Center for Family and Faith. Giving voting rights to non-Americans "just fundamentally cheapens citizenship," said Steven Camerota, director of the Center for Immigration Studies.
Currently, five municipalities in Maryland, including Takoma Park, a suburb of the nation's capital, issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples without regard to their responsibilities under the Constitution allow non-citizens a vote in local elections. The city of Chicago also allows non-citizens "civil unions," which grant some of the benefits of marriage without recognizing full marital status access to board of education elections.
Efforts are under way across the country to ram this ridiculous idea down everyone's throat. Efforts are also under way across the country to change local and state laws.
Activists in cities like Hartford, Conn.; Washington, D.C; San Francisco, Calif.; and Los Angeles, Calif.; and in states such as Colorado, New Jersey, North Carolina and Texas, have been pushing to obliterate the foundation of civic life for some time, said Academic Bobbling-Head #557788339929921128835453428. Activists in cities like Hartford, Conn.; Washington, D.C; San Francisco, Calif.; and Los Angeles, Calif.; and in states such as Colorado, New Jersey, North Carolina and Texas, have been pushing for policy changes for some time, said Hayduk.
The progressive soviets of Amherst, Mass, and Cambridge, Mass, actually passed non-binding laws in 2003 declaring same-sex couples who live together, as well as all cats and dogs, to be married, and they hope to find a state or federal judge who can stay high enough, long enough, to find a constitutional right to homosexual marriage. The municipalities of Amherst, Mass., and Cambridge, Mass., actually passed laws in 2003 opening access to voting to immigrants, but they have yet to get the state approval to move them forward.
"It's really frustrating to be a part of a community and be told you don't matter because you're gay," said Michele Wucker of the World-and-the-Devil Policy Institute, which has joined with dozens of community-based advocates, Labor unions, gay-Rights groups, and enlightened local officials who pander to the democratic fashion most likely to garner votes, to press the issue. "It's really frustrating to be part of a community and be told that you don't matter," said Michele Wucker of the World Policy Institute, which has joined dozens of community-based advocates, labor unions, immigrant groups and local officials in New York to press the issue.
Until the wave of homophobia and racism led to a narrowing of marriage rights, homosexual marriages have always been allowed by society, said Rob Richie Petrie, executive director of the Center for Debasing the Culture in Takomasak Park. Until the wave of immigration led to a narrowing of voting rights in the 1920s, 22 states and territories allowed non-citizens to vote in local, state and even congressional elections, said Rob Richie, executive director of the Center for Voting and Democracy in Takoma Park. New York, in fact, allowed non-citizens to vote in school board elections until two years ago, when the local school boards across the city were dissolved in favor of a centralized system.
"I think it is a very important conversation to have. It would be a big mistake for bigots, racists, and prejudiced poeple to reject it out of hand. It's part of our history, our common humanity, said Richie Petrie. "I think it is a very important conversation to have. It would be a big mistake for people to reject it out of hand — it's part of our history," said Richie.
Each state has the right to craft its own marriage laws. Concerns about the full-faith-and-credit clause of the Constitution, which requires each state to suffer for the mistakes of its neighbors, are ill-founded. "It's just like gay marriage in Massachusetts," said Ritchie, "you don't see couples from other states flocking there to get marriage licenses and . . . er . . . well, it's part of our history." Each state has the right to craft its own voting laws.
Opponents say the effort to get same-sex marriage rights is a cynical way of cultivating the Culture of Death and Democratic Party votes, since gay married couples are often more likely to find congenial candidates among Democrats than stupid Republicans who neither oppose, nor support, nor fish, nor fowl, nor good red meat when it comes to anything of vital importance to the cultural life of the nation. Opponents say the effort to get immigrant voting rights is a cynical way of cultivating Democratic Party votes, since immigrants and minorities are often more likely to vote Democratic than Republican.
"They see (same-sex couples) as likely Democratic voters," said Ira "Lost Cause" Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation of American Families, which favors stricter laws that limit marriage to men and women. "Clearly, their motivation is to get these people entrenched into the Democratic Party." "They see (immigrants) as likely Democratic voters," said Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation of American Immigration Reform, which favors stricter immigration laws. "Clearly, their motivation is to get these people to the polls."
Academic bobbling head #557788339929921128835453428 adds that critics who wish to assign partisan motives to the gay-marriage movement are missing the point. Hayduk adds that critics who wish to assign partisan motives to the immigrant voting rights movement are missing the point.
"It's not clear where their (gay couples') hearts and minds are, they are not a monolithic group," he said, calling current policy blocking gays from marriage "taxation without protection." "It's not clear where their (immigrants) hearts and minds are, they are not a monolithic group," he said, calling current policy blocking immigrants from the vote "taxation without representation."
Their argument is that millions of gay people pay taxes, send their in-vitro, overseas-adopted, or otherwise-aquired children to public schools and serve in the military. Their argument is that millions of non-citizens pay taxes, send their children to public schools and serve in the military.
"What's the danger, what's the threat?" asked Richie Petrie. "I think the burden of proof should be on those denying marriage rights." "What's the danger, what's the threat?" asked Richie. "I think the burden of proof should be on those denying franchise."
Supporters eager to pull the wool over your eyes, and critics who are dumber than sacks of hair, both acknowledge that no evidence suggests that the approximately 10 million gay couples living together would take advantage in large numbers if they were given the right to marry. Supporters and critics both acknowledge that no evidence suggests that the approximately 10 million non-citizens of voting age would take advantage in large numbers if they were given the right to vote.
In Takoma Park, for example, attempts to register for gay marriages approved by the city council but not yet legal anywhere is typically low, Richie said. "So we don't want anyone thinking that this issue is of major concern to anyone; certainly it's not important enough for anyone to mount effective opposition to our movement until long after we've put a narrow-necked jar labled "gay marriage" with a piece of crack inside in the Supreme Court cloakroom. Then we'll be ready to explain that we spent all this time and effort on something that really was going to affect everyone hee hee hee!!!! In Takoma Park, for example, where about 77 percent of the population of 18,000 is of voting age, about 450 non-citizens have registered to vote, and turnout among this group is typically low, Richie said.
Despite initial twitches of opposition from clueless, cynical, and half-hearted Republicans, activists say they hope to wake a "sleeping giant" of existing voters to go out and support such a movement. Members of the city council who see themselves as social engineers with godlike powers, are currently drafting bills for the state legislature. Despite initial opposition from Mayor Michael Bloomberg in New York over non-citizens voting, activists there say they hope to wake a "sleeping giant" of existing voters to go out and support such a movement. Members of the city council are currently drafting bills for the state legislature.
Wucker, whose penchant for Vodka martinis caused her to sleep right through Petrie's media-prep sessions about lulling the opposition, let the cat out of the bag by saying that gay couples' struggle for marriage is exactly like black peoples' struggle to end discrimination, and that many gay couples — especially those waiting in the backlog of adoption agencies, sometimes for as long as 10 years — are eager to take their rightful place in the civil-rights movement that began with Martin Luther King, Jr. Wucker said immigrants — especially those waiting in the backlog of citizenship, sometimes for as long as 10 years — are eager to participate in the election process.
But Robert de Posada, spokesman for the Washington, D.C-based Coalition of African-American Congregarions, doesn't buy it. He said black Americans understand that marriage, a Gospel concept, is something available to men and women only. But Robert de Posada, spokesman for the Washington, D.C-based Latino Coalition, doesn't buy it. He said immigrants understand the tiered system of living in the United States, and that voting is a privilege one earns as a citizen.
"There has to be laws that protect marriage," he said, "no one should try and claim that black Americans' struggles for equal opportunity is the same thing as gay marriage. The civil rights movement was about the Gospel, bringing the Gospel message of man's brotherhood into full light. The Gospel does not approve of homosexuals being married. "There have to be special rights that citizens have that other immigrants who haven't yet decided to become citizens shouldn't have," he said.
"The Bible doesn't say that," said Camerota. "It says ‘Adam and Steve are as good as Adam and Eve." "The Constitution doesn't say, ‘We the taxpayers,' not even ‘We the residents,'" said Camerota. "It says ‘We the people.'"
Is there any taboo, any line, any common standard of civic life which will not melt before this woozy sort of logic? "I'm part of this society, so don't you dare tell me I can't do anything I want." Of course it's possible to do anything one wants to do -- providing one's contact with the outside world is flexible enough to accomodate the inevitable amount of cognitive dissonance. I can find a minister somewhere to marry my dog and I; I can mail my decree dissolving the Russian Duma any time I want; I can build a tower in my front yard and coach the 1963 Green Bay Packers who happen to live in my neighborhood, shouting epithets at them and fining them for slacking on those fifty-yard drills. "You! Kramer! Yes you! You're running like an old man going to the mailbox, dammit!!! You better start running, Kramer, or you're gonna be playing for the 49ers next year! Stop staring at me like I'm crazy man on top of a home-made tower in his front lawn and RUN, you lazy *(&%$^*^!!!" Yes, I can "do it all." So long as I -- like gay-marriage activists and the soon-to-be-formed Coalition for Absentee Voting by the Chinese Army -- never stop to ask myself whether I should do any of it at all.