« No rights are inalienable! Ken Starr said so | IT's Blog

Tax season, gay marriage, and waiting for the courts


As April 15th looms, my wife and I presented our accountant with a challenge. 

We were married during the interregnum of happiness in California, and remain married today, though in a legal limbo. The US Government does not recognize our marriage, nor would it recognize a civil union. The solution to this, for now, is to file our joint California return, and separate returns with the Fed. 

Technically, if one of us were contributing more than the other to the household, we could even be liable for Gift Tax. We aren't in that situation, but isn't it an amazing thought? Hey, straight people! Do you have to keep receipts of whether husband or wife paid the electrical bill and get hit with gift tax for living together? 

The Cailfornia Supreme Court may decide that our marriage ceased to exist on November 4th when the pitch-fork carrying mob voted narrowly to rip us asunder. I wonder, do we have to file an amended return with California in that case? 

Meanwhile, the Iowa Court Decision handed down today is bittersweet.
Sweet, because it allows my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters in Iowa to experience the awesome joy and power of Real Marriage. And make no mistake, actually Being Married is and continues to be an incredible thing to me and my wife, not only in the depth of our commitment to each other, but in taking our place in the tapestry of society as a stable married couple raising kids, and yes, willing to pay the "marriage penalty" in taxes. Sweet too because it was a unanimous decision in a conservative midwestern state. 

The bitter part of my reaction comes from knowing what will be unleashed in Iowa: the uneducated attacks, the flood of money from out of state religious groups, the attempt to let the Mob Vote on the rights of an unpopular minority. I hope that the Iowa Legislature stands up to the Mob, something that wasn't possible in California given our ludicrous amendment mechanism. 

Religious beliefs are not the grounds for Constitutional decisions. The effort to make this an issue about religious freedom cuts both ways. Many churches want to marry their gay parishioners, and see no conflict in doing so. The civil is not the religious. As Andrew Sullivan points out in his essay Modernity Faith and Marriage, the Catholics deny remarriage after divorce in their church, yet can live with the fact that such remarriage is legal in the civil sphere.
Catholics accept the word marriage to describe civil marriages that are second marriages, even though their own faith teaches them that those marriages don't actually exist as such. But most Catholics are able to set theological beliefs to one side and accept a theological untruth as a civil fact. ..... Catholics can tolerate fellow citizens who are not Catholic calling their non-marriages marriages - because Catholics have already accepted a civil-religious distinction. They can wear both hats in the public square.

And that's all we seek here. A civil-religious distinction. 

Meanwhile, we Californians wait on our Supreme Court. Will they stand up for the rights of a persecuted minority against the Mob? Or will they capitulate? Ken Starr freely admitted in the hearing that by this process, ANY right could be eliminated. Not just gays, but immigrants, minorities, religion are all open targets:  no rights are inalienable.   It's a breathtaking attack on the foundational principles of Constitutional Democracy  by promoting he rule of the mob, the tyranny of the majority. (The conservatives should be careful with that argument, lest they become the minority.) 

Constitutional Democracy exists in part to protect the rights of the minority; otherwise they would not consent to be governed. As Evan Wolfson wrote at the HuffPo,
At various civil rights moments in American history, the courts' vital role in enforcing equal protection, and judges themselves, have come under tremendous pressure. Recall, for instance, the "Impeach Earl Warren" billboards following Brown v. Board of Education, the vitriol against the California Supreme Court when it had to strike down a 1964 constitutional change that undermined protections against race-discrimination......
 If the Court, and if this Chief Justice, vote to uphold Prop 8's damaging blow to American constitutional principles, it will be a terrible mistake, failing their obligation under and to the California Constitution. If in so doing, they compound that mistake by selling short, or sidling away from, the truths set forth so powerfully in Chief Justice George's 2008 ruling -- the fundamental nature of the freedom to marry, the way in which exclusion from marriage itself denies equality and imposes the stigma of second-class citizenship -- they will do a powerful disservice to the people, to the Constitution, and to history, which for the moment still ranks them alongside the judges who struck down race discrimination and the subordination of women in marriage in the face of the passions of the moment, and were vindicated. Failure of judgment and duty now will tarnish their own legacy, wreak real harm on gay people and their loved ones, and shatter the faith of millions in the courts and their legitimate and crucial role in our constitutional system.
Are you listening, SCoCal? What lesson are you going to send our children?

Cross posted at Daily Kos and StreetProphets

2 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Civil rights are civil rights. Period. Fuck those who don't get it. Shame on everyone who doesn't stand up for gay rights. That includes every last one of them with that lame "I support equal rights but marriage should only....." How about this one you lame idiots: "I support equality but I think public schools should only be for........" Lame. Stupid and/or cowardly. Take your pick. I think the cowards are the worst. Stop rec'd this post without putting your name to it. You're either for the cause or against it.

Sign here, please:

user-pic

Thanks for continuing to post on this, IT. I rec'd it yesterday but did not have time to respond.

To Doomer, you can look back in my posts and see that I have stood up forcefully for this. But yes, I add my name here - and proudly so.

Leave a comment

IT

user-pic

Following: 1
Followers: 4

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

  • Favorite Blogs http://friends-of-jake.blogspot.com

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address