Skip to content

Trampled Under Foot: When The Levee Breaks

25 June 2011 @ 14:57

When the Levee breaks I’ll have no place to stay….

A bill allowing the ‘marriage’ of homosexuals has been passed by the Legislature in the state of New York.  Governor Cuomo will sign the bill into law.  Thus, The Empire State has joined the Neighborhood Of Make-Believe  by joining the in the fantastic denial of Reality that is ‘gay marriage’.

Stacy McCain has a report up on the political implications for The Real Stupid Party in New York State.  A highlight:

The four GOP state senators in New York who voted for this bill have destroyed all hope that the Republican Party can ever make a real comeback in that state. As I said on Twitter last night: “Will the last conservative leaving the NYGOP please turn out the lights?”

Was it not Harry Truman who said: ‘If the choice is between a Democrat and a “Democrat”, the people will vote for the Democrat every time’?

The Grand Old Party of New York State has branded itself as The Grand Old Useful Idiot Party.

While the political fallout from this certainly interests me, the implications of it on American Society and Culture weigh more on my soul.

The prophecy laid down by Antontradamus in Lawrence v. Texas hath been fulfilled!…

Driving-That-Quartrain, 13:17: The Texas statute undeniably seeks to further the belief of its citizens that certain forms of sexual behavior are “immoral and unacceptable,” Bowers, supra, at 196–the same interest furthered by criminal laws against fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality, and obscenity. Bowers held that this was a legitimate state interest. The Court today reaches the opposite conclusion. The Texas statute, it says, “furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual,” ante, at 18 (emphasis addded). The Court embraces instead Justice Stevens’ declaration in his Bowers dissent, that “the fact that the governing majority in a State has traditionally viewed a particular practice as immoral is not a sufficient reason for upholding a law prohibiting the practice,” ante, at 17. This effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation. If, as the Court asserts, the promotion of majoritarian sexual morality is not even a legitimate state interest, none of the above-mentioned laws can survive rational-basis review.

In the Comments section of Stacy’s post, a Paul Kersey comments:

This is such a loser of an issue for Republicans and Conservatives. I, as a member of both, could care less what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their relationships. It does not affect me at all. What does matter to me is the size and scope of our government, and that is what the Rs and Cs should focus on. Drop the social stuff; concentrate on the fiscal stuff.

My Friend In The Ether, The Pagan Temple responds:

Its just not that simple. There’s more involved here than the right of gays to engage in homosexual relations or to marry.

Exactly. One of the pillars of Western Civilization is the institution of monogamous marriage. By destroying the definition, the Left has successful blown away another support that undergirds the greatest civilization the world has ever known. A is A; marriage is the sacred joining of a man and a woman together to form a family, one of the chief stabilizing units of any society. When you take the ying and yang balance that is necessary for a family to function properly and replace it with ying and ying or yang and yang, you undermine a culture’s fragile stability. That is the goal of the Leftist – to bring about the destruction of The West, so that on it’s ruins they can build their Utopia, Heaven On Earth, Immanentize The Eschaton.

A mere fifteen years ago, practically no one would have thought that in 2011 gay marriage would have made such headway. Today, if we continue to ignore Justice Scalia’s warning, can you deny that adult incest and bestiality are likely to be sanctioned in the near future? That door has been wedged open, the possibilities are endless.

By the way: there’s nothing that has ever stopped homosexuals from marrying.  They just have to marry someone of the opposite sex.  What arrangements the couple work out is between them as long as the children that issue are protected.  ‘Ahh’, say the Leftists, ‘but that means you want people to have to live with lies and that’s not nice, it’s oppressive!’  We all have to live with lies that are told to protect others.  That’s Reality; that’s life.  What is better: (1) satisfying your base urges and saying to Hell with how doing so affects others or (2) being considerate of others and protecting the ones you love and/or respect from your low longings?  The first is narcissistic Nihilism; the second is Civilized, Moral, and Humane.

‘This is slowly becoming a world in which I cannot permit myself to live.’
Howard Roark

6 Comments
  1. Otis P. Driftwood permalink
    25 June 2011 @ 16:13 16:13

    Definitely a two-part story, the big story being the decline of morals and values in our society. And it is scary to think about what is next, you raised an excellent point on that. We’re going down the tubes, that’s for sure.

    And second, I guess the four GOP senators who voted for it weren’t counting on getting reelected anyway.

    • bobbelvedere permalink*
      25 June 2011 @ 17:31 17:31

      Otis: Ah, Otis…it makes me despair sometimes. I wonder what will be next.

  2. Rob De Witt permalink
    25 June 2011 @ 20:38 20:38

    One of the pillars of Western Civilization is the institution of monogamous marriage. By destroying the definition, the Left has successful blown away another support that undergirds the greatest civilization the world has ever known. A is A; marriage is the sacred joining of a man and a woman together to form a family, one of the chief stabilizing units of any society.

    Mais of course, mon frere. What is generally not recognized about the “long march through the institutions” routine is that the institutions referred to by Antonio Gramsci were not government, education, etc, but more basic things like love of country, family, civil order, etc. When the pillars are sufficiently eroded, things fall apart. When you disallow mention of Mohammedan terrorism and Black Racism, race wars will result.

    He believed (and we’re watching that belief in action) that if sufficient chaos could be generated in a society the great masses would beg for totalitarianism just to turn down the noise. Apply that to everything that’s happened since 2008 and the pattern is clear.

  3. Adobe Walls permalink
    25 June 2011 @ 21:31 21:31

    Make mud bricks.

  4. A_Nonny_Mouse permalink
    26 June 2011 @ 15:33 15:33

    What these Lib-Prog’s are doing to our language, and their corruption/ destruction of traditional (and once perfectly-well-understood) meanings of words which have been used for centuries to describe basic fundamentals of life and law, is making me absolutely CRAZY.

    Here they’re redefining a word that has had only one meaning for centuries –“marriage”– and upending all the concepts that surround it. Now what is “husband”? what is “wife”? Are we giving up on assuming that “marriage” leads to “family” — do children have any place in our brave new world of redefined terms? Do we even consider the “nuclear family” as being the foundational unit of society any more? And, back to the “perfectly understood” idea — what will be the NEXT foundational concept of Western civilization to suffer Progressive Humpty-Dumpty-ization (so that a “perfectly understood” word and and fundamental social concept can suddenly be changed around to mean “whatever I WANT them to mean”, as the Alice-in-Wonderland character asserted)? Take the notion of “rights” for example. Or “vote”. Or “freedom”. Will the new definition of these words add to, or subtract from, their “historical” meanings?

    Why are these activists pushing so hard to obfuscate and twist the original meaning of “marriage”? Do we really need to elevate same-sex couplings to the status and respect and social recognition of marriage-as-formerly-understood (=as the cornerstone of society)? Do we want to risk tearing down a defined and necessary element critical to our social structure simply because some folks with “unnatural” appetites want to feel better about their standing in society? Or, perhaps, is the real target the power of language itself to convey precise meaning? If there is no precision of thought, if words have no standard meaning, a tyrannical State can announce “We’re guaranteeing your rights” as its minions work tirelessly to strip every vestige of what we once knew as our “God-given rights” away from us.

  5. 30 June 2011 @ 17:59 17:59

    marraige was long ago ruined by straight people and divorce, spousal battery, incest and child abuse – what is left for gays to wreck exactly?

    also, gay marriage is a civil secular marriage – and nothing whatsoever to do with religion – just legal kinship and all the thousand plus rights that the government gives to married couples and has no legal basis to deny equal access to gay citizens

    gay marriage was rolled out in Canada years ago and unsurprisingly, nothing untoward has occured – kinda like we let gays serve in the military back int eh 1990’s – and again, nothing untoward happened.

    do you really want to US to be the last of the western secular democracies and not the leader it once was?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: