July 30th, 2008

Moose With Mug

Boatload of Crazy

When I reviewed his novel Empire for Some Fantastic, I knew that once and for all Orson Scott Card had officially crossed over the line to "completely and totally mental in regards to his opinions on political and social issues." However, the insanity I witnessed in that novel doesn't even come close to his new opinion column in the Mormon Times, "State job is not to redefine marriage." He's now gone bat-shit crazy.

I know it's as easy as shooting dead fish floating at the top of the water in a barrel, but I just want to highlight a few of my favorite bits of insanity:

The first and greatest threat from court decisions in California and Massachusetts, giving legal recognition to "gay marriage," is that it marks the end of democracy in America.

Wow, gay marriage is ending democracy in America! It seems to me that all the actions undertaken by the Bush administration over the past seven years in order to circumvent the Constitution and Geneva Conventions represent a greater threat to democracy. Silly me.

These judges are making new law without any democratic process; in fact, their decisions are striking down laws enacted by majority vote.

Yeah, because the tyranny of the majority is a democratic right. How dare the courts ever strike down laws enacted by majority vote! Think of all those uppity state and federal court decisions in the 1950s and 1960s that started striking down decades of legal segregation. Bastard judges.

We already know where these decisions lead. We have seen it with the court decisions legalizing abortion. At first, it was only early abortions; within a few years, though, any abortion up to the killing of a viable baby in mid-birth was made legal.

Warning: slippery slope ahead, followed by ridiculous assertion of "fact." Can he actually point to any states laws that made it legal to abort a fetus mid-birth? I don't care if he's referring specifically to a "partial birth abortion," which is a misnomer to begin with. The way he constructed his argument, he made it sound like any woman could choose to abort even if she was in labor.

How dangerous is this, politically? Please remember that for the mildest of comments critical of the political agenda of homosexual activists, I have been called a "homophobe" for years.

Oh, poor Card... demonized as a "homophobe" for his "mildest of comments critical." It seems to me that when you are part of a minority that is treated with contempt & derision and is outright feared by a large segment of the population, there's very little in the way of mild, critical comments. Gays just want the same rights that heterosexual couples enjoy -- Card should read up on the recent Monica Golding scandal at the Justice Department and see what some gay individuals still face on a regular basis.

The laws concerning marriage did not create marriage, they merely attempted to solve problems in such areas as inheritance, property, paternity, divorce, adoption and so on.

Guess what, Orson, gay couples have a need to solve those very same problems when their long-term commitments to their partner dissolve. Marriage is... gasp... a social contract! You've undermined your own argument with this statement.

And now my favorite bit:

If a court declared that from now on, "blind" and "sighted" would be synonyms, would that mean that it would be safe for blind people to drive cars?

At this point, I actually passed out in front of my monitor, woke up 10 minutes later and discovered I had experienced a nosebleed. I think when confronted by the overwhelming stupidity of this statement, my brain shut itself down and rebooted in an effort to protect itself from exploding.

I know this post wasn't truly all that necessary, but sometimes you're just not sure when those dead fish in the barrel are actually zombie fish. In that case, they just need killin'. :-)