Boehner & Clement’s marriage of Lies & Nasty

I awake this morning to find that my government is attacking me. Weird, I could have sworn they were supposed to protect my pursuit of happiness, my life and my liberty. I could have sworn I paid lots of taxes to be treated fairly, decently, and with honesty by my own government. I could have sworn there were even founding documents of this nation that do state certain inalienable rights. I must have been misinformed. For I find the Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner – who any 10 gay men pay enough taxes to cover his salary, I’m sure – and the lawyer he hired, Paul Clement, for apparently what will turn into a few million dollars of gay people’s taxes (Oh, don’t worry, you heteros aren’t paying for this assault on us, we got it covered, you wouldn’t want to spend hetero tax dollars on gay stuff, I’m told, often, “no taxes for gay” anything, of course,) – have filed a brief with a court to defend the most Orwellian named law that prevents the pursuit of happiness for a specific clearly identifiable group of peaceful productive citizens, in a Bill of Attainder sort off way, merely because they don’t like gayness.

How weird to find this with my morning’s routine of coffee and headlines. How sad.

Their brief says this:

Plaintiff appears oblivious to the irony of maintaining that homosexuals have limited political power in a case in which her position is supported by both the State of New York and the United States Department of Justice.

Which to be fair, this website – lists as the most outrageous comment in the brief. Well, I suppose one could quibble on the most outrageous, and it’s their bold.

For instance, from here I find this on the brief:

2. SEXUAL ORIENTATION IS A CHOICE: Clement’s argument against the immutability of sexual orientation is shallow and duplicitous. He points out that people “choose” to identify as gay, confusing selecting one’s orientation with identifying with it. He suggests that if sexual orientation were immutable, it could be determined at birth. And most deceptively, he implies that because scientists have not agreed upon a clear cause for sexual orientation, they do not have consensus that it is not a conscious choice— they do. He even attempts to tell Ms. Windsor that she is wrong about her own sexual orientation:

Whether a classification is “immutable” is of course a legal conclusion — not a scientific one— and the Attorney General’s selective reading of scientific evidence warrants no deference from this Court. His conclusion and the Plaintiff’s argument are also both wrong.

And this one is so easily destroyed I can’t imagine no one has gone for the obvious – why, it behooves the people doing this case to come up with a few million depositions from gay people that they were indeed born gay and plop them right on the Supreme Court justice’s laps. How many millions of us must say this to be believed? It’s beyond reason to keep to this bizarre idea that we are 10,000,000 liars – for we must all be making the choice and lying about it no? Still, being the romantic I am, I can sort of envision something like the scene in “Miracle on 34th Street” where the postmen bring in bag after bag of letters to Santa, and the judge rules, “well, if the United States Post Office says he’s Santa, I’m not going to argue with them.” Again – how many millions of times must we say we’re or or – how many websites must we put us to get the stories and the comments? Oh, and – they’re good at picking up on the vile lies and nasty of the NO GAY! Movement.

More to the point – here’s the question we keep asking – “when do we choose to be gay?” How come no one who believes, on faith and fury alone, that being gay is a choice, that we must therefore be denying our inner hetero, that we are consciously, continuously, purposefully waking up every morning hetero, and then going gay by noon, I guess – “When do we do this?” And “how?” How come they can come up with no answer? And then, in the process – they call us liars. I mean really, millions of us? So adamant? What more friggin’ proof do you need?

Not to mention, it appears, from this logic of theirs, that being hetero is far more mutable than being gay – for fully ½ the gays almost certainly tried that hetero stuff, and they “changed” – yah, right, meanwhile, fully 100% of those ex-heteros declare that they knew perfectly well that they were gay, but they followed hetero advice – of the sort Boehner and Clements and Bachmann and Sprigg and Tony Perkins, the very author of the law in question – and the rest of the incestuous polygamy of the NO GAYS! Movement – given all the time – “Oh, try to be hetero. Pray.” And lo, what happens? The hetero is abandoned. Mutable indeed, not worthy of continuing, precisely because the gayness is such a strong force within that it is immutable. For when 10,000,000 keep insisting something, well, as the phrase had it, “50 million Elvis fans can’t be wrong.” Not to mention the 300,000,000 or so more of us across the globe, but hey them’s just ferreners.

One could go on through the Boehner-Clement marriage of Lies and Nasty for quite some time, in a great tome of destruction, which a good lawyer would put together – for about the only word that is truthful and decent in this mush is “the.”

But I’d rather look again at this astounding sentence:

Plaintiff appears oblivious to the irony of maintaining that homosexuals have limited political power in a case in which her position is supported by both the State of New York and the United States Department of Justice.

The plaintiff, is of course, the 10,000,000 of us – this is not one woman’s case – for we are talked about in the abstract “homosexuals” here – it is all of us, it is me – Well, the Respondents, which are I suppose Boehner & Clements and the United States Government, and all its people, including, oddly its gay folks – for the Speaker speaks for me, does he not? Isn’t he supposed to be above the partisan divide on such national things as the pursuit of happiness and liberty for all so as to represent all of us against the power of the Senate and the Presidency? And against the power of the mob? Sure he is. He’s not the Majority Leader; the Republicans have one of those. He’s the Speaker of the House – which represents us all. I pay for that sucker. All gay folks pay for them. Indeed, I’d say the 10,000,000 gay folks pay more in taxes than it costs to operate that confounded place whose Speaker pushes such mush. He’s supposed to stop the mob, not join it.

The Respondents are astoundingly, miraculously even, for could they be this blind? — convoluted in their reasoning. Are they really this “OBLIVIOUS TO THE IRONY” that the very law in dispute and their own friggin’ brief is proof that “homosexuals have limited political power in a case in which her [our] position is” being fought by themselves. The very idea that this case must be argued is proof of limited political power. Meanwhile, the State of New York had rancorous debate over the issue. It’s been settled, perhaps, for all of a week or two. The forces against us, DOMA loving forces, are now campaigning furiously to stop the bliss, including protests at the weddings themselves. In every state with gay marriage there are forces out to destroy the pursuit of happiness and the recognition of it – in states were it doesn’t exist they’re passing two, three and four or more laws to really enshrine NO GAYS! in the law books, the constitutions and the rules and regulations of the bureaucracies. Are Boehner & Clement that oblivious? Really?

Why, members of Boenher’s own party, presidential candidates even – Rick “Outlaw the Gays” Santorum, Tim “Hate the Gays” Pawlenty & Michelle “I want Ex-Gays” Bachman have teamed up with Tony “Gays are Domestic Terrorists” Perkins and Peter “Export the Gays” Sprigg to meet up with Bradlee “Execute the Gays” Dean and Somebody “Get rid of the Gays” Vander Platte in a bus tour calling for ridding the nation of gay people. What on earth? Are Boehner and Clement that oblivious? And you have the gall and audacity to say we face no discrimination? And we have political power? Are you out of your minds? No wonder why you couldn’t get a debt deal of any consequence, Mr. Boehner, you’re an idiot. When members of your own party are out to get rid of us, I’d dare say you have some hell of a nerve filing a brief like this with my money.

And the DOJ might be on our side, in their wishy washy way of on again off again defense or non-defense of DADT and DOMA itself – but the rest of the government is obviously very dead set against us – which is precisely why you are “OBLIVIOUS TO THE IRONY” of having the temerity to use gay people’s tax dollars to hire a man to argue against our existence while saying we face no discrimination. Not to mention the hypocrisy and the flimflam.

It’s beyond fantasy, really, but oh too deadly serious. When a government and one of a nation’s political parties is all for essentially rounding up and imprisoning, or otherwise harrying (what a great Medieval word to use, they seek to harry us, indeed, to destroy, subjugate and eat out our existence, like theocrats of old,) a peaceful productive group of its own citizens one wonders what the world is coming to. I thought this was America, not Syria.

Mr. Boehner and Mr. Clement – you have filed with a US Court a ball of lies and nastiness, absurdities and delusions unlike I have ever heard of. You should be ashamed of yourselves, and withdraw it. It’s unbecoming a decent nation and it’s intellectual dishonest. And did I mention the hypocrisy? Egad, what mush.


1 Comment

  1. You my acquaintance are a genius

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: