And in other news...
The sun rose in the east, there's violence in the Middle East, and Hugh Hewitt went off on same-sex marriage in his latest blog-column, in response to a Time magazine column by Andrew Sullivan:
"Not once in the long history of this country, not at the federal level or in any state, has a legislative body backed by the signature of an executive, defined marriage as open to two people of the same sex. In fact, whenever the question has been presented to popular vote, same sex marriage has been rejected overwhelmingly."
I don't think I've ever seen a single sentence that has been "technically" accurate but nonetheless so misleading.
I especially like Hewitt's "backed by the signature" clause, which he uses to invalidate the fact that the legislature -- the people's representatives -- of the most populous state in our union, California, voted last year to recognize same-sex marriages.
The Governator, of course, vetoed that bill.
Hewitt also seems somewhat, well, forgetful in reviewing the growing trend of legislatures voting in civil unions -- which have been passed and signed into law in California, Connecticut and Vermont among other states. I know from Hewitt's previous writings that he opposes Civil Unions and considers them to be the "same" (as in equally as bad) as same-sex marriage. Curious that he ignores this.
The sun rose in the east, there's violence in the Middle East, and Hugh Hewitt went off on same-sex marriage in his latest blog-column, in response to a Time magazine column by Andrew Sullivan:
"Not once in the long history of this country, not at the federal level or in any state, has a legislative body backed by the signature of an executive, defined marriage as open to two people of the same sex. In fact, whenever the question has been presented to popular vote, same sex marriage has been rejected overwhelmingly."
I don't think I've ever seen a single sentence that has been "technically" accurate but nonetheless so misleading.
I especially like Hewitt's "backed by the signature" clause, which he uses to invalidate the fact that the legislature -- the people's representatives -- of the most populous state in our union, California, voted last year to recognize same-sex marriages.
The Governator, of course, vetoed that bill.
Hewitt also seems somewhat, well, forgetful in reviewing the growing trend of legislatures voting in civil unions -- which have been passed and signed into law in California, Connecticut and Vermont among other states. I know from Hewitt's previous writings that he opposes Civil Unions and considers them to be the "same" (as in equally as bad) as same-sex marriage. Curious that he ignores this.
posted by Mike at
2:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home