Rishell, Roemmelt Wrong On Marriage Amendment
By Greg L | 5 August 2007 | 13th HOD District, Jeanette Rishell | 15 Comments
It was going to promote domestic violence. It would irreparably harm the civil rights of large numbers of Virginians. It would usurp powers from the courts. No, it wouldn’t mean cats and dogs being together, but it would certainly be pretty darned close. What was it? It was the Marriage Amendment, which passed overwhelmingly in Prince William County. And have any of those “unintended consequences” come to pass? Nope.
In fact, as Joe at NOVATownHall reports, the Ohio Supreme Court recently ruled in State v. Carswell which was being used by detractors of the amendment, including Jeanette Rishell and Bruce Roemmelt, to say that prohibiting same sex marriage would create a host of profound problems and be proven unconstitutional. According to the court, pro-Marriage constitutional amendments at the state level aren’t going to suddenly strip women from protection under domestic violence laws. That surprises pretty much no one.
I wonder when we can expect an apology from Roemmelt and Rishell for their efforts last year to mislead voters. Had there been people harmed by this law, we certainly would have had every liberal public service law firm in the country falling over themselves in order to represent a plaintiff. There have been no plaintiffs. Had women lost any legal protections as a result of the Marriage amendment, we would have heard about them non-stop from the liberal press. They have been silent. Rommelt and Rishell didn’t just talk about a chance of these dire consequences happening, they described them as an absolute certainty. And they were wrong.
So when we hear these two “social justice” activists on the campaign trail this year, is there any reason to take seriously anything that they say, given how accurate their statements were on the Marriage Amendment last year?
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
15 Comments
Views: 1081
Loading ...
Jeanette really is out of touch with this district, I just wish she would stop lying while campaigning. The fact the measure passed by a pretty decent margin should have been a huge wake up call to her.
citizenofmanassas-
It was a wake up call. That’s why she is lying about her position on cracking down on illegal’s
Just curious - if you could, would you fire homosexual pubic school teachers?
Like I said, just curious to see opinions.
Wow, ok - public, obviously.
Matt,
Absolutely not. A person’s sexuality is a private matter.
Imagine the support Jeanette Rishell would receive if she were a member of the Republican party! Just say Democrat and everyone is labled the villian. This area is caught somewhere back in the 1950’s.
Manassas Citizen-
Ms. Rishell would never have received the Republican nomination!
Reminds me of the bleatings of the hoplophobes when shall issue concealed carry was proposed: Blood in the streets! Wild west! Shoot outs over fender benders!
Well, sorry, rabbit people, but none of those things happened - nor will they. There were no apologies, no retractions.
Time honored, sleazy left winged tactics. When you don’t have a reasonable, fact based opposition - smear, smear, smear.
Top Ten Reasons to Make Gay Marriage Illegal
01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all like many of the principles on which this great country was founded; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of marriages like Britney Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in America.
09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans. .
I love Anon 8:25’s post! Of course, satire is so much more effective when it reflects and does not distort reality, i.e., you might want to spend your time addressing arguments actually made, not your far-Left caricatures (5-10) of the arguments of opponents of homosexual “marriage.” Of course, why should we be surprised when an advocate of perversion perverts his/her opponent’s arguments?
According to him/her:
1. Perverse sexual behavior is akin to wearing eye glasses and sweating (polyester IS a crime against nature);
2. Being tall is a behavior (were it that it were so!);
3. The slippery slope that, of course, is a legitimate argument against any action by the Bush Administration is ab initio invalid when applied to efforts to obtain state sanction for perverse sexual behavior;
4. Skin color is a behavior (after all, Michael Jackson has proven that in America, anything is possible, and a poor black child can grow up to be a rich white man);
5. Examples of bad marriages justifying re-defining it to be something that it never was;
10. All changes to the “foundation of society” and “new social norms” are positive. After all, look at all the good resulting from casual, anonymous sex, lowering the age of sexual consent, rampant drug use, smoking, etc.
JY,
My problem with your argument is who gets to decide what is perverse amongst consenting adults? What if I think something is perverse and you don’t? Who determines who is right and who is wrong?
I just do not want the government making those kinds of decisions for me. We all are too different.
Perverts rule!!
I will never understand why some people who have alternative lifestyles simply cannot resist acting like a 3 year old. Where does this overwhelming urge to display the gross out factor come from? Any person of average intelligence would know to keep their private life private.
Attention-seeking behaviors only tend to alienate others, regardless of the issue involved. You not only hurt your cause but you hurt other people who might want to maturely take their life down a path that the majority does not take….in private.
“I will never understand why some people who have alternative lifestyles simply cannot resist acting like a 3 year old.”
Dolph, your prefatory statement is the answer to your question.
JY,
I am not quite ready to say that all people with alternative lifestyles act like 3 year olds. I know many people with lifestyles very different from my own who act like mature adults. I also know some who act like complete jerks and flaunt their lifestyle in everyone’s face.
My tolerance level includes alternative lifestyles and stops at immature behavior.
For the record, straight, female, married once with children and grandchildren here.
Dolph