Another Battle in the Culture War

There is a very good reason why only 17 amendments have been added to the U.S. Constitution since the first 10 amendments -- the Bill of Rights -- were ratified in 1789.

The biggest reason is that the framers of the Constitution had incredible foresight. (Okay, that didn't extend to emancipating slaves and women's suffrage, but they pretty much got everything else right.)

And as it is, most of those 17 amendments were enacted to fine tune existing amendments.

This also explains why previous efforts by right-wing Republicans to push through frivolous constitutional amendments banning American flag burning, authorizing school prayer, guaranteeing the right to use the word "God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and making English the "official" language have crashed and burned in recent years.

These flops did not deserve to be memorialized as constitutional amendments. Most, in fact, had nothing to do with making the Constitution more whole, but merely were battles in the never-ending right wing "culture war" for the heart and soul of America.

Now comes the Federal Marriage Amendment, a piece of unbridled bigotry that would ban same-sex marriage. It's arrival is timed for the Republican lunatic fringe to pander to its political base just as mid-term elections approach. You see, the fringe is very worried that it may lose its grip on the GOP and perhaps Congress, as well.

At least it doesn't have to worry about losing its grip on reality. It has none.

The Federal Marriage Amendment doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of passing. The fringe and their helpmate in the White House know that, but why spend time on the more pressing matters facing the republic when you can kanoodle your base and take gratuitous swipes at so-called "activist" judges (all liberals, off course) who allow those danged state-enacted same-sex marriage initiatives to pass legal muster in the first place?

The Economist's Lexington believes that the perennial push to ban gay marriage is doing more harm to traditional marriage than good:

This is because culture warriors ignore one important point: for the most part the culture wars take place inside individuals rather than between committed ideologies. They are as much struggles between the left and right side of the brain as they are struggles between the left and right side of politics. Consider that great American everyman, Tony Soprano. He has been horribly vexed in the current series because one of his best captains, Vito Spatafore, has been spotted in a gay night club dressed in full regalia. His mob colleagues soon beat him to death, but Tony is caught between sympathy for his friend and his macho instincts, and inevitably winds up talking to his therapist. He starts off by saying that he does not give a damn about what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. He then changes tune entirely; he is a “strict Catholic”, he says, and he agrees with “Senator Sanitorum” that “if you let this stuff go too far” everybody will soon be doing unmentionable things with dogs.

Touché! Methinks that the fringe and Republicans in general put themselves at even great risk because of this horse hockey.

While public opinion polls show that Americans do not approve of single-sex marriage, the margin grows smaller by the year. Homosexuality is no longer the taboo that it once was for many Americans, including those coveted suburban housewives (formerly known as soccer moms) who can swing an election. Many people know someone who is gay or have a gay family member. It's just no longer a big deal.

Meanwhile, the same polls show that those former soccer moms are a whole lot more concerned about things other than same-sex marriage. Like decent schools. Making financial ends meet. Health-care costs. Getting cousin Charlie, the Army sergeant, home from Iraq will all his limbs intact.

And what has the Republican-dominated Congress done about those issues? Nada. Zip. Zero.

Pardon me for asking, but isn't there also a bit of a disconnect between the conservative mantra that government should be smaller and less intrusive and an amendment that is utterly at odds with that principle?

Just wondering.

CLOSE, BUT NO CIGAR

There are, in fact, several worthy amendments that passed Congress but remained unratified because they were not approved by three quarters of the states within the set time limit that the Constitution requires. With expiration date, they include:

Article I of Original Bill of Rights (1879)
Anti-Title Amendment (1812)
Child Labor Amendment (1937)
Equal Rights Amendment (1982)
District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment (1985)