Saturday, March 30, 2013

Loony Moonie On Sodomy

The editor emeritus of The Washington Times is very anxious, & takes to the pages of said Times to go off on "the love that dare not speak its name." Yes, he typed that, & he really would prefer no one speak it, although he does manage to name-check it: "Sodomy." And just as the discerning reader seeing the phrase "Now I'm not a racist, but ..." knows instantly that the typist is a racist & is about to drag out yet another ancient stereotype or three, when "sodomy" appears in any context other than "Rum, sodomy & the lash" the reader knows there's a  homophobe at work. (In this case a four or five-yr. old homophobe who thinks it's  "yucky.") We'll go out on a limb & figure he's not intentionally funny or pathetic, but anyone who goes back to Jimmy & Amy Carter to make an alleged point about Sen. Portman (Hypocrite-Not Unless It Affects Me Personally) & his son is just fucking sad.

Enough intro: It's written at a grade level appropriate for the sorts of people who take The Washington Times seriously, so most readers here should breeze right through  & it's so inane we doubt it'll raise blood pressure or cause heads to slam on desks. Hell, some might even feel a twinge of pity for the old bastard as his world collapses around him. Not us, obviously, but someone, maybe.
Sodomy is the latest hot thing in Washington. You don't have to participate in it to think how cool it is. The love that dare not speak its name has become the passion that shouts from the housetops. Closets are emptying all over town.

From now on - "going forward," in the cliche of washingtonspeak - reporters and pundits need not interview candidates for Congress. They'll just talk to their kids to see what the candidates think. The Children's Hour hasn't been this popular since Jimmy Carter reassured us that he had consulted little Amy about arms control and she agreed that nuclear war is not good for living things.

Rob Portman, the senator from Ohio who was almost Mitt Romney's running mate, took his marching orders from his son after the boy told Mom and Dad that he was gay. The senator couldn't wait to announce it in the newspapers, writing a long op-ed about it in the Columbus Dispatch. We're all for privacy in modern America until we get the urge to "share" the smarmy details of our lives.

Mr. Portman explained the deviation from his convictions of the past, when as a member of the House of Representatives he voted for the Defense of Marriage Act now being argued at the Supreme Court, as a function of evolution. Evolution has hit hard in Washington, as the pols line up to tell everyone how they've learned to appreciate the yucky expansion of the marital bed.

First it was President Obama, whose mind turned out to be a triumph of Darwinian speculation. Then it was Joseph R. Biden, or maybe the vice president leaped first and the president tagged along; then Hillary Rodham Clinton, followed by Bubba, who can't remember everything he evolved from in that dark and mysterious land of the magic huckleberry*. Evolution soon spread across the partisan aisle, first to Mr. Portman and then back across to Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri.

A first cousin of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. arrived in Washington from San Francisco on Monday and announced that she is a lesbian and will attend the Supreme Court hearings as a guest of Cousin John. "He's a smart man," says Jean Podrasky. "He is a good man. I believe he sees where the tide is going. I do trust him. I absolutely trust that he will go in a good direction."

Ordinarily no one can guess what a Supreme Court justice will say or do, but Chief Justice Roberts demonstrated in the Obamacare decision that he tries to fit respect for the Constitution into his decisions when he can, but a good public opinion of the court is more important. Like Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, he's a swinger, too.

Over the weekend Karl Rove, ever in pursuit of the hip and the hot, said he could "imagine" the next Republican presidential nominee endorsing same-sex marriage. Karl suffers a stunted imagination. Republicans of Karl's ilk are demonstrating evolution on steroids and by 2016 there may not be room on either ticket for anyone but a man of lace, lavender and peau de soie. Or Hillary.

Handicapping Supreme Court deliberations is a fool's game, as any lawyer will tell you, and ordinarily the justices don't read the Gallup poll, or Rasmussen either. But this is a new day and who knows? Chief Justice Roberts' cousin may be on to something.

The latest uninformed speculation is that the high court will find a middle ground, to leave it to the states to define marriage and what sanction to give synthetic versions of it. The Washington Post, always lustful about the latest fashion, decrees that "the political argument over same-sex marriage is over." That's what other wiseheads said about abortion 40 years ago after Roe v. Wade.

Nobody wants another 40 years of angry debate and contentious argument over a "right" found not in the Constitution but in a "penumbra," like the one the high court found to support Roe v. Wade. If the justices find another one, the debate will no more end than a penumbra ended the abortion debate. Like the abortion debate, the same-sex marriage argument is one between personal convenience and moral conviction.

Gays in America seek something beyond the power of the courts to convey - the blessing of the straight society they profess to disdain, and the recognition that homosexual union is equal to marriage as society has known it since before the Flood. Thousands of years of tradition, nurtured by the church, the synagogue and the mosque, can't be dissolved by whim or caprice, however artful.

Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
Curiosity piqued: Has anyone seen professions of disdain for straight society from any but the most radical of radical queers? It's even money that we have more disdain for society, straight or otherwise, than the average gay person.

Which "Flood"? Sandy, in New York? The Great Mississippi Flood of 1927?
*No fucking idea. We doubt if Pruden knows what the hell he's talking about either.


Yastreblyansky said...

I'm always amazed and kind of moved by the willingness and eagerness of gay people to get married, move to the suburbs, have kids, serve in the military, go to church and believe in Cheeses... Like sweet creatures from a different, better world. Makes me feel like such a nasty cynic.

Glennis said...

Rob Portman...took his marching orders from his son after the boy told Mom and Dad that he was gay. The senator couldn't wait to announce it in the newspapers, writing a long op-ed about it in the Columbus Dispatch. We're all for privacy in modern America until we get the urge to "share" the smarmy details of our lives.

Ugh. I don't know or care who Wesley Pruden is, but he sure as hell is a dishonest, hateful jerk.

Although I knew the Portman story, I hadn't actually read his op-ed, so this quote of Pruden's compelled me to look it up. What kind of deranged soul-pinched shrivel-hearted shit-head could possibly interpret Portman's op-ed like that? Nothing in Pruden's words bear any resemblance to what Portman wrote.

"marching orders?" hardly. His son came out to his parents, which surprised them and made them think. "couldn't wait to announce it?" As Portman writes, he spent two years thinking about it. "Smarmy details?" I can't even imagine what Pruden is referring to - Portman wonkishly writes about policies and legislation, and only directly refers to his son in a single paragraph.

And don't get me wrong, I am not a Portman apologist; he's still a Republican wingnut. But this creep Pruden is someone I'm glad resides three time zones away from me.

Big Bad Bald Bastard said...

First it was President Obama, whose mind turned out to be a triumph of Darwinian speculation

What does that even mean?

Also, the author doesn't even mention what the queers are doing to the soil!

M. Bouffant said...

Child-Like Editor:
Just demonstrates that sexual orientation really hasn't much to do w/ anything but sexual orientation. And probably that one must be a nasty cynic not to be sucked into bourgeois domesticity. (No offense to Aunt Snow, whom we are not getting wrong, even if she married & reproduced.)

Pruden is 76, for one thing.

The Prez "evolved" on the issue, BUT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS EVOLUTION, SO THERE!!

lokywoky said...

"Thousands of years of tradition, nurtured by the church, the synagogue and the mosque..."

Yeah right. Last time I looked at The BOOK revered by all three of these so-called religions it nurtured marriages of one man and 300 wives plus 600 concubines. Or one man and his wife plus his (dead) brother's wife. Or one man and his wife plus all the female slaves he brought back from the latest war. Or .... yeah, I could go on and on.

Yup. Traditional marriage. As defended by the likes of the Newt. Or Rush. Or all those pedophile priests.

Give me a break.

M. Bouffant said...

Legal Editor:
"The mosque?" Hah. Guess Wes
(& we) both forgot what the Mohammedans allow.

Here's more funny: "Furthermore, polygyny was one of the various measures to prevent illegal relationships or delinquent sexual behavior." Sounds a bit like the pro-Proposition Eight lawyers, doesn't it? Gotta keep those horny men controlled!

Glennis said...

My spouse and I are sitting around the house eating milk-chocolate malt easter bunnies from England, after having spent the last week driving around Santa Barbara wine country with our "reproductive issue" (aged 24) and having eaten heartily at all of LA's most interesting and curious food establishments. So, yeah, bourgeois domesticity. And I am now officially 90 days from unemployment.

And Wesley Pruden can go fuck himself.

M. Bouffant said...

Local Editor Warns:
OK, now you're just digging your own grave.

We can't believe (yes, we can but ...) they're actually closing the venue. Do "future plans" involve selling it for development?