Much is being made of Rick Santorum’s criticism of the ideological tilt of college educations.  Here is one story.  We are supposed to believe that indoctrination doesn’t occur on campus and that it doesn’t undermine traditional mores and thought – especially when they are religiously based.  There’s even more to be unhappy about on campus.

Steve Forbes has written, “During the past 30 years overall inflation in the U.S. was 106%; health care costs went up 251%.  College tuition and fees?  They soared 439%.”  Graduates of the college class of 2010 had acquired an average $25,250 in debt, but there were many students who had much higher levels.  That was a 5% increase over the prior year.  There is no indication that increases in tuition costs and indebtedness will grow more slowly.

Conservatives have an opportunity to provide hope to those who have not yet entered college.  Because they are not tied to these massive institutions politically, conservatives can begin to offer true alternatives to the bricks-and-mortar educational behemoth.  Of greatest importance should be a push for online educational options that can greatly reduce the costs of most college courses – in particular, generalized lecture classes.  Non-college options may also be preferable in technical fields that require the use of sophisticated machinery and equipment.

All things being equal, education clearly benefits society.  In the world of the early GI Bill and the following decades one could afford to romanticize about the college experience, but in times of prolonged sluggish economic growth and high unemployment parents and prospective students need to be more realistic.  When a good private college or university routinely charges $50,000 year, a new educational model is needed.  Hopefully, the presidential campaign will provide an opportunity for more discussion of this critical issue.

Comments: - |

The persecution of professing Christians is, in one sense, indiscriminate: it knows no race or region.  Ethnicity, denomination, language, and historic customs of comity and protection are immaterial to those who would crush the men, women, and children who claim the Name of Christ.

One of the most difficult and immediate of such crises is occurring now in the Nuba Mountains of Sudan.  According to U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf, who recently visited the region, the government of Sudanese president Omar Hassan al-Bashir, a recognized international war criminal, has instituted a campaign of “ethnic cleansing, mass murder and rape, all carried out by uniformed soldiers of the Khartoum government” (Source).  In tandem with this effort, al-Bashir is having his air force conduct bombing raids of refugee camps, placing thousands at risk of being killed or maimed.

Many of the Nuba are Christians.  They are also dark-complected, which in the Arab supremacist philosophy of al-Bashir makes for a deadly combination.  Our U.N. Ambassador, Susan Rice, said recently that “this conflict has affected more than 500,000 people and if there is not a substantial new inflow of aid by March this year, the situation in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile will reach stage 4 of an emergency which is one step short of a full scale famine. This is exceedingly grave, and underscores the urgency of the situation.”

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof yesterday published a moving column titled, “The Man Who Stayed Behind.”  It’s the story of Ryan Boyette, an American missionary who served with Samaritan’s Purse *.  When, out of concern for their workers, Samaritan’s Purse asked all its staff to leave the threatened areas, Ryan and his Nubian wife chose to remain with the persecuted and endangered Nubians.  After intense prayer, he chose to resign from his position with Samaritan’s Purse to do so.

Visit the Websites of Christian ministries the Persecution Project website or Save the Nuba to learn more about the crisis, or read about how the Samaritan’s Purse ministry is working actively to help those in greatest need. Also be sure to visit FRC’s RealCompassion.org to link to Christian ministries helping the persecuted and oppressed around the world.

* To listen to FRC President Tony Perkins’ recent interview with Samaritan’s Purse founder Franklin Graham, click here.

Comments: - |

Ginni Thomas of the Daily Caller interviews FRC’s Senior Fellow for Family Empowerment Ken Blackwell. Don’t miss Blackwell’s description of the growth of government under the Obama presidency:

Comments: - |

This week, after an Iranian court sentenced Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani to death because he refused to recant his faith in Christ, the White House and the State Department issued statements calling for his release. Last fall, Speaker Boehner issued an equally strong statement.

Let us pray for this brave man, who refuses to renounce his Savior, and his young family, that God would protect and free Pastor Youcef and strengthen and encourage his wife and children.

Comments: - |

Earlier this week, I wrote about my personal boycott of Starbucks because of its overt endorsement of a radical social agenda. For those caffeine-starved souls who have joined me and are now experiencing gargantuan headaches or, worse yet, visions of decaf (my heart goes out to you), take courage. The Christian coffee house movement is alive and well, and likely has an outpost in a neighborhood near you.

Many Christian entrepreneurs have taken advantage of the renewed coffee culture to open stores that not only serve great coffee but also share the love of Christ in sometimes subtle, sometimes overt ways. For example, at Jacob’s Well Christian Coffeehouse in Rockville, Connecticut, they have been “sharing the Good News through the Performing Arts since 1995.”

At Barnabas Christian Coffeehouse in Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin, their name comes from an early church leader whose name meant “Son of Encouragement.” As their website says, “Everyone, at some point, needs to know that someone cares enough to share a burden or a joy. Encouragement, prayer, and most of all, the love of Jesus Christ, are the focal points at the Barnabas Coffeehouse.

And at the Coffee Connection in Mt. Shasta, California, their “sole purpose is to further the Gospel of Jesus Christ … This is accomplished primarily through the performing arts, fellowship and various community outreach programs.”

Christian coffeehouses offer live music, display art, produce plays, and provide neighborhoods with safe and friendly alternatives to venues less conducive to conversation, recreation and reflection. And, often, they provide opportunities to talk about eternal things in an unthreatening atmosphere.

No one should argue for Christians segregating themselves into isolated enclaves: We have been left in the world for a reason, and most fundamentally that is to win others to Christ. That, in turn, means engagement with those who have not yet met Him – at work, in community activities, and in places of business (like coffee shops). Yet an inviting, welcoming, open place, such as that available in Christian coffeehouses, can be a great way to introduce a friend to the reality that faith in Jesus is not only not weird, but transforms lives.

There are also coffee roasters from which you can order your daily java online; a couple of them are noted below. Here is just a small sampling of what’s available; your local listings should be able to tell you what Christian coffee shops are closest to you:

• Blanchard’s Coffee
• Urth Caffe
• Locally Roasted Coffeeshop
• Hebrews Coffee Co.
• Ebenezer’s Coffeehouse
• Espresso Cafe
• A Christian Coffeehouse Primer

Comments: 2 |

I live in Maryland, where lawmakers in Annapolis may be voting to end marriage. They don’t realize that that’s what they are doing. Former Vice President Dick Cheney is said to be working the phones, trying to persuade Republican holdouts to join Democrats in ending marriage.

Why is it ending, and not just expanding marriage rights to confer the legal status of marriage on same-sex couples? Consider constitutional expert, GWU law professor Jonathan Turley. He spoke to an overflow crowd at the Newseum in 2008.

He said: “Opponents say that this will lead to polygamy. I’m for that.” Turley was wildly applauded by the audience, which included law students, congressional staffers, and, of course, enthusiastic journalists.

Turley is surely right. Recognizing same-sex couples as married will lead to polygamy and the end of marriage as a civil institution in America. That’s because when everyone can marry, there is no marriage left. That’s doubtless why Turley today is working to legalize polygamy.

Consider this thought experiment. Twin brothers announced on a TV talk show that they were gay. Under the laws proposed, can they marry? If not, why not? They’ve certainly had a “committed relationship” since before they were born. What constitutional principle could you invoke to say these twins cannot marry each other? And if these twin brothers may marry, why not a twin brother and sister?

Continue reading »

Comments: 6 |

Over the weekend, the New York Times published a front page article by Jason Deparle and Sabrina Tavernise reporting on new data by Child Trends (“For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside Marriage,” Feb. 18, 2012). But the objective data that the unassuming title portends quickly gives way to a remarkable synthesis of logical flaws, selective data interpretation, and glaring oversights which all culminate in an irredeemably confused analysis of contemporary American demography.

Click here to read more about this topic on the MARRI blog.

Comments: - |

Hockey fans are not noted for being sedate. Civility is fine, but hockey fans can be relied upon to “get loud.” When the Washington Examiner leads with a story about the hometown Capitals’ looming contest on ice with “three straight Canadian foes,” the folks in the stands can settle in for some great stick action.

That line on “double anthem days” is a reference, of course, to the playing of the “Star-Spangled Banner” and “O Canada,” the national songs of the two friendly neighbors. Friendly now, but certainly not when those anthems were written. The U.S. and Britain had been fighting a cold war on the frontier and across the Great Lakes ever since the Treaty of Paris had been signed in 1783. Under that treaty, Britain grudgingly acknowledged American Independence. And the Americans grudgingly accepted the British presence in Canada.

Maryland license plates now show “the rockets red glare, the bombs bursting in air” above Fort McHenry as we look forward to the Bicentennial of the War of 1812. For Canadians, that war formed their national consciousness. They celebrate Laura Secord, the brave Loyalist lady who rode to warn the British army of the advancing Yankees, the way we remember the midnight ride of Paul Revere.

Continue reading »

Comments: - |

Clarke Forsythe and Mailee Smith of Americans United for Life recently penned an op-ed in The Washington Times regarding a hearing that will be taking place in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8^th Circuit on Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, a case disputing a South Dakota statute, which was enacted in 2005, that mandates all women receive information of the medical risks of an abortion.

Planned Parenthood filed suit to prevent the South Dakota statute from becoming law, and one might be curious to know why they would prevent informed consent.  Is it wrong for a woman to know the risks that may happen to her body during such a procedure?  Besides ending the life of her unborn child, there are potential medical risks stemming from death to the emotional impact after the procedure.

There have been numerous studies that found an association between abortion and suicide.  Other studies have found a link between abortion and depression (which is a major risk factor for suicide).  For example:

A 1995 study by A.C. Gilchrist in the British Journal of Psychiatry found that in women with no history of psychiatric illness, the rate of deliberate self-harm was 70 percent higher after abortion than after childbirth.

A 1996 study in Finland by pro-choice researcher Mika Gissler in the British Medical Journal found that the suicide rate was nearly six times greater among women who aborted than among women who gave birth.

A 2002 record-linkage study of California Medicaid patients in the Southern Medical Journal, which controlled for prior mental illness, found that suicide risk was 154 percent higher among women who aborted than among those who delivered.

My colleague, Jeanne Monahan, recently mentioned in her op-ed, “The mental toll of abortion,” that there have been a large number of informed consent laws passed in state legislatures throughout the country.  Isn’t better that a woman receive more information for such an important decision?

The question remains:  What is Planned Parenthood so afraid of?  Are they afraid that the information will save a life, or are they afraid of the fact that a woman might be concerned on the long-term ramifications of having an abortion?

Comments: 2 |

My home state of Washington has produced some of America’s leading corporations and entrepreneurs: Microsoft and Bill Gates; the Nordstrom, Boeing and Weyerhaeuser families and their eponymously named companies; the Eddie Bauer sporting goods empire; and the nearly omnipresent Starbucks (almost 11,000 stores worldwide).

Starbucks emerged in the 1970s at Seattle’s Pike Place Market.  One of my sisters bought me a bag of cocoa powder from this location more than three decades ago; if I still had it, it likely would fetch a nice collector’s price.

For many years, I’ve enjoyed going to Starbucks, becoming acquainted with any number of “baristas” and drinking enough of its variously flavored beverages that “grande” characterizes my waistline as much as the size of a given drink.  Even when traveling in the Middle East, the taste of a frappuccino has been a welcome reminder that one can go home again.  And I’ve always been glad to go into a place that, in some ways, still reminds me of home (there’s a reason Starbucks’ interiors usually are muted; it’s a Pacific Northwest thing).

With Microsoft and several other major firms, Starbucks last month endorsed the effort of some of the Evergreen State’s leading politicians to enact homosexual “marriage.”  Although this initiative passed in the state legislature and was signed into law by departing Gov. Christine Gregoire, it likely will be on the state ballot in November.

What is a bit maddening, given Starbucks’ strident advocacy for the redefinition of marriage, is CEO Howard Schultz’s claim that he is non-political.  As he said just a few days ago, ”I have no interest in public office … I have only one interest, and that is I want the country to be on the right track.”

Schultz continued, “I just feel that for some reason, over the last few years, there’s been a fracturing of understanding and sensibility about the responsibility that the leadership in Washington must have to the people who are being left behind … And I’m significantly disappointed about the ideology, the partisanshipness, and, obviously, the way in which everyone in Washington is focused on one thing right now, which is reelection.”

To Schultz’s credit, he authored a pledge, now signed by a fairly large group of CEOs, in which they promise, “I join my fellow concerned Americans in pledging to withhold any further campaign contributions to elected members of Congress and the President until a fair, bipartisan deal is reached that sets our nation on stronger long-term fiscal footing.”

This is admirable, and no doubt motivated by a patriotic desire to see the U.S. once again become the engine of economic growth that, for so many decades, it has been.  Yet the key to a strong economy is a strong family – a family composed of a father, a mother, and children.  The hard data prove it.  By supporting a movement that would further vitiate the already weakened family unit, Schultz is tacitly but actively advocating the continued erosion of the institution – the two-parent, heterosexual, traditional and complementary family unit – without which no economy or society generally can thrive.

Continue reading »

Comments: 2 |

A British reviewer of a history book I researched fairly sneered at my author’s admiration for past American presidents. Just go to Mount Rushmore, he mocked, and you’ll save the effort of reading it.

Challenge accepted! South Dakota’s Mount Rushmore is a tribute to four outstanding American leaders: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt. These were four distinguished Americans whom our Great Republic (Churchill’s description of us) chose to elevate to the pinnacle of power and authority. Admiring Britain’s storied past as I do—except, of course, for the tyrannical King George III—I would ask my British friend if any nation on earth has been so blessed with great leaders as America has. For Britain, the list of great leaders might include Gladstone and Disraeli, Churchill and Thatcher. But, under their parliamentary system, the voters chose the parties and the parties chose the Prime Ministers.

I sincerely believe our fathers chose well in the 1930s honoring the four presidents of Mount Rushmore. With apologies to the Beatles, I call Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and TR the “Fab Four.” But I would go further. I believe we could confidently choose four more presidents for a Mount Rushmore II.

Continue reading »

Comments: 1 |

Patrice Hill of the Washington Times has published the first installment of a two-part series on the economic difficulties facing “millennials” (“Millennials Forced to Put Lives on Hold”).  The unemployment rate is 15.8% for those ages 18-29 – which is twice the national average.  Among the problems facing Millennials is student debt – an issue of great interest here at FRC:

The result was an explosion of student-loan debt as families stretched to send their children to school. Today’s college freshmen are taking on twice the load of student debt as freshmen did 10 years ago, according to Standard & Poor’s Corp. It is becoming more common for students to take on as much as $100,000 in debt just to get a bachelor’s degree.

While taking on debt to get the education and training needed to obtain good jobs makes sense, the dearth of entry-level job openings since the Great Recession started in late 2007 has made it impossible for many graduates to pay off their loans, said S&P analyst Robert McNatt. Defaults among young graduates have escalated to levels near 9 percent.

While graduates can postpone payments on their loans until they get jobs, the debt cannot be discharged through bankruptcy and “can become a serious burden” for people who have had trouble securing regular work or high-paying jobs, Mr. McNatt said.

Comments: - |

Sir Isaac Newton was, most likely, one of the ten greatest scientist who ever lived.  #1 is a distinct possibility.  Newton also believed that theological and scientific investigations were not alien to each other.  He was deeply interested in the Jewish people believing that that they would ultimately return to their ancient lands.

Aron Heller (AP) wrote a fascinating article this week describing how some 7,500 pages of Newton’s handwritten notes have been placed online by Israel’s national library (National Library of Israel).   The collection is available here or displayed here.

Heller’s account of how Newton’s theological papers ended up in an Israeli museum is fascinating:

How his massive collection of work ended up in the Jewish state seems mystical in its own right.

Years after Newton’s death in 1727, his descendants gave his scientific manuscripts to his alma mater, the University of Cambridge.

But the university rejected his nonscientific papers, so the family auctioned them off at Sotheby’s in London in 1936. As chance would have it, London’s other main auction house — Christie’s — was selling a collection of Impressionist art the same day that attracted far more attention.

Only two serious bidders arrived for the Newton collection that day. The first was renowned British economist John Maynard Keynes, who bought Newton’s alchemy manuscripts. The second was Abraham Shalom Yahuda — a Jewish Oriental Studies scholar — who got Newton’s theological writings.

Yahuda’s collection was bequeathed to the National Library of Israel in 1969, years after his death. In 2007, the library exhibited the papers for the first time and now they are available for all to see online.

The widespread availability of these papers should make it easier for Christian scholars to examine Newton’s writings on science, theology, the Bible, and the Jewish people.   One scholar noted that they have found “no negative expressions toward Jews” by Newton.

Comments: 1 |

“Social repair requires sociological thinking,” says David Brooks, in his February 13th New York Times column. Sociological data consistently has revealed the significant role the intact family can have in reweaving the disintegrating social fabric. However, sociological thinking must be done within the correct paradigm. Patrick Fagan, director of the Marriage and Religion Research Institute, states that “Sociology done well cannot but reflect the way God made man.” A correct anthropology in light of our state as fallen creatures must inform attempts at “social repair.” Sociology is reflective, but cannot be fundamentally reparative. Repair begins with grace from outside us that constrains our passions and reorders our will to what is good. The family is one means of such grace and the data cannot help but reflect the goodness of this first structure.

Click here to learn more.

Comments: - |

Here’s an interesting story. This photo shows two Communist banners hung on the Acropolis at the base of Parthenon. Note the KKE – the initials of the Greek Communist Party.

Source (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2010-05-04-greece_N.htm)

Notice that the mainstream media never mentions the presence of Communists in massive demonstrations–here or abroad. The Communists can rally by the thousands, brandish hammer-and-sicklebanners–and get into violent fights with the police. They can smash windows, stomp police cars, and set fire to public facilities and you will never read about it or see it so described on TV.

Oh, you may see the demonstrations, the clashes, but the anchors will decorously look away from the red stars and Communist slogans. As Marx said: “Whoare you going to believe, me or your own lying eyes?” Actually, that was Groucho, not Karl.

I took my 15-year old son to Seattle on a business trip in 1996. He wanted to see the place where he was born. We took in the great tourists sites, including the first Starbucks and Pike Place Market. But then we saw a large demonstration that threatened to turn violent. “Justice for Janitors,” read the placards. Most of the marchers were Hispanic and many of the signs were in Spanish. They were being hemmed in by Seattle mounted police.

A horse will not step on a man intentionally. But a horse can betripped and made to fall on a man. Or it can be spooked and, in panic, run over a man.

I showed my son the Communist organizers who were on walkie-talkies in those pre-cell phone days. Their instruments were bigger than their shoes, but they needed them. They stood up on a hill, at a very safe distance. They were egging on the marchers, urging them to get in closer to the horses. If one or more of the horses injured a demonstrator, the Communists would have a new martyr for their cause. “Justice for Julio” would be their signs in their next demonstration.

What I am not saying here is that every time workers strike or demand better working conditions, the Communists put them up to it. Nor am I saying that Hispanics are being manipulated by Communists. That was the charge of too many in the 1960s who wanted to maintain segregation, who called Civil Rights a Communist ploy.

What I do want to point out is that the mainstream media–colorfully called the “Drive-By” media by a famous fur ball behind the Golden Microphone–do in fact drive by whenever they come upon Communists instigating violence.

The Greek Communist Party–KKE in the photo from USA Today–has been trouble for decades. Prime Minster Winston Churchill flew to Athens on Christmas Day, 1944. He wanted to put down the Communist attempt to seize control of Greece as the Nazis were being driven out. The American Left hooted and booed at Churchill, calling him “imperialist”and “war monger.” But Churchill prevailed. And Greece’s freedom was maintained.

After the Second World War, President Harry Truman began aiding Greeceand Turkey in their efforts to stay out of the Communists’ grasp. The Greeks and Turks surely hated each other, but they feared being dragged behind the Soviet Union’s Iron Curtain even more.

So, the next time you go by an Occupy Wall Street encampment or happen upon union demonstrators sitting in at the Wisconsin State Capitol, or your state capitol, make it a point to check out the “literature” on view there. You may be surprised to learn that the Communists, who were supposed to have vanished like those demons on Bald Mountain when the Evil Empire collapsed, have not gone away. In fact, they never left!

Comments: - |

One of the many advantages of working in Washington is to be literally around the corner from history. Ford’s Theater, where President Lincoln was shot on April 14, 1865, has been refurbished and used to stage many an interesting play about the nation’s storied past. It’s a short walk from my office to step into time.

Last night, I attended Necessary Sacrifices, a play about the sometimes stormy relationship between editor, orator, abolitionist Frederick Douglass and President Lincoln. Richard Hellesen has taken the two brief office meetings between the harried president and the acknowledged leader of America’s black community and turned them into compelling drama.

Continue reading »

Comments: - |

Click here to subscribe to The Social Conservative Review.

Dear Friends,

Despite his claim of finding a “compromise” on requiring religious organizations that offer health insurance to include contraception and abortifacients, President Obama has only superficially cost-shifted the burden of payment.

Religious leaders across the spectrum understand the threat: If Uncle Sam can mandate that they violate their consciences through an obvious fiscal sleight-of-hand, religious liberty and the free exercise of conscience experience erosion not easily repaired and all too easily exploited. Such respected scholars as Harvard’s Mary Ann Glendon and Princeton’s Robert George – and FRC’s own Dr. Pat Fagan – have published an open letter stating, in part:

“The simple fact is that the Obama administration is compelling religious people and institutions who are employers to purchase a health insurance contract that provides abortion-inducing drugs, contraception, and sterilization. This is a grave violation of religious freedom and cannot stand. It is an insult to the intelligence of Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Jews, Muslims, and other people of faith and conscience.”

Last week, FRC President Tony Perkins hosted a distinguished panel of leaders from across the theological, educational, and political spectrum to discuss the grave implications of this threat. You can view a video of the webcast, titled “Healthcare Mandate: Violating the Separation of Church and State,” here.

FRC also urges you to sign the Manhattan Declaration’s “Mr. President, I Still Believe” to let Mr. Obama know that social conservatives will not accept the diaphanous and condescending coverlet of faux accommodation. Are you prepared to take action – at the least, to write, speak out, and pray – to retain our precious liberties of religion and conscience?

Sincerely,

Rob Schwarzwalder
Senior Vice President
Family Research Council

P.S. February is the month when we celebrate Valentine’s Day – which is the latest publication of FRC’s Marriage and Religion Research Institute, “162 Reasons to Marry,” is so timely. You can download a copy for free here.

Educational Freedom and Reform
Homeschooling

• “Education a la Carte,” Rod Dreher, The American Conservative
• “HSLDA to Appeal Criminal Conviction for Homeschool Family,” Home School Legal Defense Association

Continue reading »

Comments: - |

So, Barack Obama urged the men of America – he called them “gentlemen,” specifically – to “go big” on Valentine’s Day. He said he speaks from experience that it is unwise to forget.

Good counsel. Yet why did this man whose views on marriage are “evolving” (read that, becoming ever more sympathetic to homosexual unions) not include “ladies” in his exhortation?

Perhaps because it is only normal for a man to think of traditional marriage when he talks about Valentine’s Day. The husband and the wife, the boy and the girl: Heterosexual romance is what comes to mind when one thinks heart-shaped candy boxes or red roses sent with a private note.

As a man married for three decades, I appreciated the President’s charge. Yet in it was a subtle reminder of what we all know, intuitively: Love is something to be shared by a man and a woman.

Mr. Obama’s call to remember that gallantry, affection, and initiative are qualities a man should possess, and direct toward the female love of his life, likely was unintentional. Still, it was welcome.

Comments: - |

In the past, there has been controversy about American courts using foreign court decisions as an argument in favor of a particular decision.

But what about using jokes?

That’s exactly what the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit did last week. In support of their ruling that adoption of California’s marriage amendment, Proposition 8, violated the Constitution, Judge Stephen Reinhardt, writing for the 2-1 majority in the case, consulted such eminent jurists as Shakespeare, Lincoln, Sinatra, and Marx. Groucho Marx, that is. Oh, and don’t forget Monroe. Not James, the president, but Marilyn, the movie star.

These sources were cited by Judge Reinhardt to illustrate the social importance of “marriage.” He declared, “We need consider only the many ways in which we encounter the word ‘marriage’ in our daily lives and understand it, consciously or not, to convey a sense of significance.” He proves the point with this passage:

Groucho Marx’s one-liner, “Marriage is a wonderful institution . . . but who wants to live in an institution?” would lack its punch if the word ‘marriage’ were replaced with the alternative phrase. So too with Shakespeare’s “A young man married is a man that’s marr’d,” Lincoln’s “Marriage is neither heaven nor hell, it is simply purgatory,” and Sinatra’s “A man doesn’t know what happiness is until he’s married. By then it’s too late.” . . . Had Marilyn Monroe’s film been called How to Register a Domestic Partnership with a Millionaire, it would not have conveyed the same meaning as did her famous movie . . . .

I wonder if it never occurred to Judge Reinhardt that quoting jokes might be taken as a less-than-serious way of arguing that amending the California constitution violates the Constitution of the United States. I also wonder if it even occurred to him that the four jokes he quoted were all ones denigrating marriage. They might make a reader puzzled as to why homosexuals are so desperate to redefine the “institution” in order to live in it.

In any case conservatives can legitimately say that Judge Reinhardt’s decision was a joke. The proof is right there, in Section V.B.

Comments: 1 |

Continue reading »

Comments: - |