Thursday, April 13, 2006

Massachusetts Gay Wedding

As disappointing as it may be for some readers, this has nothing to do with the issue of homosexual marriage. As far as I'm concerned, homosexuals are no different from the rest of the people – there're gloomy ones as well as gay ones – so I'm one of the last holdouts, who wouldn't surrender the word.

In my book, a gay wedding is the one with a happy bride and a happy groom and a lot of flowers and a lot of smiles and good prospects for growing into a gay marriage.

It is also something that rarely takes place in the house of politics. In its many bedrooms one may find very strange bedfellows, but none is rushing to tie the knot and even when it happens, the faces are about as long as the barrel of an easily distinguishable shotgun. Yet there's no rule without exceptions.

A recent wedding between Democrats and Republicans in Massachusetts is most certainly very gay. And whaddyanno, there's already an offspring – on April 4, the 184th General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (a full name for the current Massachusetts legislature) approved a bill that, according to the Washington Post, "would require all residents to purchase health insurance or face legal penalties."

If you don't believe the Washington Post (and nowadays I wouldn't blame you), look it up for yourself. This abomination has been voted in by 154-2 in the House(*) and 37-0 in the Senate(**), and the reason to call it such was explained by Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute:

"This is the first time in the country's history where simply by virtue of
living somewhere you are mandated to purchase a product. … This is making me buy a product simply by virtue of breathing."
In fact he could've gone a little further and note that if a certain mandate arises not as a result of one's action but by virtue of one's existence, one is in effect a slave, but he didn't, so I have to do it for him. Of course, a usual repertoire of "public good" invocations could be expected from the usual chorus of habitual do-gooders, but if you can't see a shortcut to enslavement behind the smoke, you're already a slave.

I don't know party affiliations of the two House dissenters. Hopefully, they are Republicans, which would mean that there are still two Republicans left in the Commonwealth and that is the good news. The bad news is that there were supposed to be three.

The third Republican, governor Mitt Romney, could've been expected to immediately grab his mighty pen. And he did, but not to strike down this piece of legislative artwork, which might've been typed as well on the second-hand Soviet paper stock decorated by the hammer and sickle emblem, but to cheerfully apply his signature. So, to think of it, there're two weddings – in the legislature, between Democrats and Republicans and between the legislature and the Republican governor. No wonder everyone's so gay.

But where are the cameras, the spotlights, the crowds of elbowing each other reporters? Surprisingly or not – that is for you to decide – neither the Demo-Republican weddings nor their socialist progeny got much of the national news coverage not to mention editorializing. Apparently, the media and the press are preoccupied with the festive plight of (illegal) aliens struggling to retain their "civil right" to come and go as they please, perhaps for the reason of finally realizing how many are around.

Not to mention that the Bush-bashing mode must be of course maintained in full swing. Indeed, how could it possibly be legal for the President of the United States to authorize a release of information that has been classified by some unnamed bureaucrat? Impeach at once!

Meanwhile in the Bay State, (social) Democrats are building a Kremlin on the Beacon Hill – right next to the honorable John Kerry's house – and Republicans are carrying bricks and mortar.

To deem this matter as being one of just local relevance would be rather na├»ve. Wherever Massachusetts visionaries trot, California ones usually follow… and then, who knows. According to Bloomberg News, excited insurance executives already promote this bill as a national model. Wouldn't it be lovely if in November Massachusetts served as a national model for voting the little beacons of enlightenment out?

I'll keep my fingers crossed but wouldn't hold my breath. Some even say that Mitt Romney might be preparing for a presidential run in 2008. Hopefully, by that time he'd figure out whether to run as a Democrat or on the Workers World Party ticket.

(*) There are 139 Democrats and 21 Republicans in the Massachusetts House
(**) There are 34 Democrats and 6 Republicans in the Massachusetts Senate.

Posted by Ele_.
To reply to this post, click HERE.
Requires Microsoft Passport.
Tags: ...