Bachmann, Rand Paul and Others: Ridiculous Reactions to Supreme Court Ruling on DOMA

Well, you knew this was coming.

After the Supreme Court announced its ruling which struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, the “religious right” was out in full force making asinine statements.

First, let me repeat my stance on these kinds of Republicans—they’re not Christians.  These people follow Republicanity.  A handful of Bible excerpts mixed with their delusional conservative ideology.  It’s a dangerous entity which has essentially turned a political party into a faith based cult.

Some of the comments I’ve read from a few of these individuals are pathetically laughable.

For instance, Michele Bachmann (come on, you knew she was going to have something ridiculous to say) and her comments following the ruling:

“Marriage was created by the hand of God.  No man, not even a Supreme Court, can undo what a holy God has instituted.  For thousands of years of recorded human history, no society has defended the legal standard of marriage as anything other than between man and woman.  Only since 2000 have we seen a redefinition of this foundational unit of society in various nations.  Today, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to join the trend, despite the clear will of the people’s representatives through DOMA.  What the Court has done will undermine the best interest of children and the best interests of the United States.”

First, this is about the definition of marriage according to the United States government—not religion.  You know that Constitution Bachmann claims to represent?  She threw it out the window with this comment.  Our First Amendment clearly states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”  Establishing laws based on religion is a clear violation of our First Amendment.

Now imagine Bachmann being around when slavery was still widely accepted.  Just take out “legal standard of marriage as anything other than between man and woman” and insert “the legal right to abolish slavery” and you get:

“For thousands of years of recorded human history, no society has defended the legal right to abolish slavery.”

So her argument here, essentially, is that any progress of a society is wrong because “history shows us” that the situation being used to advance that society has never been done.

It’s a great thing our Founding Fathers didn’t think this way—right Michele?

Then “despite the clear will of the people.”  What will of the people?  Most polls show a near 60% (and growing) support for same-sex marriage among Americans.

Now let’s take a look at what Rand Paul had to say on the ruling while talking with Glenn Beck:

“If you change one variable — man and a woman to man and man, and woman and woman — you cannot then tell me that, you can’t logically tell me you can’t change the other variable — one man, three women.  Uh, one woman, four men…. If I’m a devout Muslim and I come over here and I have three wives, who are you to say if I’m an American citizen, that I can’t have multiple marriages?  I think this is the conundrum and gets back to what you were saying in the opening — whether or not churches should decide this. But it is difficult because if we have no laws on this people take it to one extension further.  Does it have to be humans?”

Yes, you’ve just read Senator Rand Paul saying same-sex marriage could lead to bestiality.  Probably the most ignorant statement of the day (so far).

These kinds of ignorant arguments are some of the very same ones people used against interracial marriage decades ago.

Hey Rand, here’s a real simple way to define marriage.  Now try and follow me with this, because I know your small brain can’t handle thoughts outside of your right-wing propaganda.

Marriage, as it relates to our government recognizing it, has nothing to do with religion—period.  Which is why same-sex marriage, as recognized by the government, should be legal according to our First Amendment.  People don’t have to be married in a church or believe in any kind of religion whatsoever in order to be married.

So marriage can be defined as this: A legal agreement, between two consenting adults (who are not currently married) regardless of gender.  Then simply apply all the current laws and rules heterosexual couples have dealt with for decades.

It’s that simple.

Then there’s Mike Huckabee:

“My thoughts on the SCOTUS ruling that determined that same sex marriage is okay: “Jesus wept.”

I’d believe him, if Mr. Huckabee could first show me a single instance where Jesus Christ spoke out against homosexuality.  And even if he did “weep,” it’s probably because hateful hypocrites such as Mike Huckabee continue to use his name to spread hate, fear and judgement—when those are exactly the opposite of the values for which he lived.

And probably the most top to bottom load of crap I have read thus far came from Chairman of the Republican Party in Alabama, Bill Armistead:

“I am disappointed to learn that SCOTUS has struck down DOMA and will now require that federal benefits be extended to homosexual couples.  This is an affront to the Christian principles that this nation was founded on.  The federal government is hijacking marriage, a uniquely religious institution, and they must be stopped.  This is a nation founded on Christian values and the Bible is very clear on marriage – one man and one woman.  Alabama’s state law banning gay marriage will prevent these benefits from being extended in Alabama, but our tax dollars will still go to support a lifestyle that we fundamentally disagree with.”

The “Christian principles that this nation was founded on.”  Let me just go ahead and quote Founding Father John Adams and the Treaty of Tripoli on this one:

“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..”

But I’m sure that little tidbit won’t get in the way of Mr. Armistead’s right-wing rhetoric that’s based on what he wants to be true instead of what is true.

The federal government didn’t “hijack marriage,” marriage was never meant to be regulated by government.  The only reason government has any involvement at all is because of legal issues such as property, finances and child custody.  I’m pretty sure plenty of marriages in Alabama are done by a Justice of the Peace, which has absolutely nothing to do with religion.  In fact, his stance against same-sex marriage infringes on the rights of those Christian churches who wish to marry same-sex couples but aren’t legally allowed to—because of the government of Alabama.

Ironic, right?  Attacking the government for “hijacking marriage” while simultaneously stating that the Alabama state government will continue to “hijack marriage” away from churches who would marry same-sex couples.

Then I love how he says what the Bible is “very clear” as it relates to marriage.  Well, the Bible is also very clear on stoning women who commit adultery, much older men sleeping with very young women, forbidding the consumption of shellfish (I believe fishing is a huge part of Alabama’s economy—which includes shellfish) and wearing blended fabrics/cotton—just to name a few.

But it’s a damn good thing our First Amendment clearly states that the Bible doesn’t matter as it relates to our laws.

However, I can’t wait for the national challenge to any bans on same-sex marriage to come in front of our Supreme Court.  You know the decision that will rule that any state denying same-sex couples the right to marry is unconstitutional–because people like Huckabee, Bachmann and Armistead have clearly shown that their only defense is based on religion…

Something our Constitution clearly forbids being a factor when determining our laws.

The reaction of these people puts on display the ignorant nature of many Republicans.  These people loudly boast about their love for their faith and our Constitution—yet don’t understand either.

They talk about Christianity often, yet don’t seem to understand a single value for which Jesus lived.  Then they talk about our Constitution, yet seem to oppose it every single time it protects rights they disagree with—which is pretty often.

The problem is, Republicans do love a Constitution, just not ours.  They love a Constitution they wish existed, but never has.

But these kinds of comments shouldn’t shock anyone.  Many Republicans often seem eager to prove that they’re simply out of touch with most Americans and unable to grasp reality.

And with many of their reactions to the Supreme Court striking down the Defense of Marriage Act, they’ve proudly proved their ignorance once again.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments