Letters to the Editor
-
A Breath of Fresh Air
When I saw the news on my computer at work, I emitted a (golf) "Woo-Hoo!"
Whether this thin edge of the wedge will somehow be blunted remains to be seen, but to this layman it seems like a sound and rigorous ruling that may at last advance the interests of equality and gay rights.
I imagine that Fred Phelps and his motley crew have locked & loaded, and are marching in formation to California, humming "Onward, Christian Soldiers!" as they step. No more Mister Nice Guy!
I appreciate Glenn's usual thoughtful and lucid commentary; in fact, I assigned it to a certain young relative as homework. This Will Be On the Quiz! I warned.
-
@bearpaw1 @Derbig Mooser
Thanks, and I would love to take credit for "heckler's veto," but it was coined by a University of Chicago law professor named Harry Kalven, Jr. It's one of the more useful phrases I picked up in law school.
-
@-- stevedew
It's a sockdolager, baby! (I think that's the word I want) Just like Mother makes, if you ask me.
I would thank you for accrediting (If that's even a word) the phrase, and thus saving me from making a fool of myself when I used it, but there's no need to involve you in something as futile as that.
-
Glenn:
http://tinyurl.com is your friend (and free). Or one can use the URL filed at the bottom for an easy blue clicky.
Others should note that too.
But it's your blog, so who am I to complain? ;-)
In any case, thanks for the link.
Cheers,
-
@Derbig
Dangerous in this way, birth defects:
Doctor: Birth defects increase in inbred polygamy community
By The Associated Press
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- A rare, severe birth defect is on the rise in an inbred polygamous community on the Utah-Arizona border, according to a doctor who has treated many of the children.
Intermarriage among close relatives is producing children who have two copies of a recessive gene for a debilitating condition called fumarase deficiency. The enzyme irregularity causes severe mental retardation, epileptic seizures and other effects that often leaves children unable to take care of themselves.
Dr. Theodore Tarby has treated many of the children at clinics in Arizona under contracts with the state. All are retarded, the neurologist told Salt Lake City television station KSL-TV.
The children live in the twin polygamist communities of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Ariz.
Tarby believes the recessive gene was introduced by one of the community's polygamist founders.
Community historian Ben Bistline said most of the community's 8,000 residents are in two major families descended from a handful of founders who settled there in the 1930s.
"Ninety percent of the community is related to one side or the other," said Bistline, a former member of the sect, the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
"They claim to be the chosen people, the chosen few," Bistline said. "And their claim is they marry closely to preserve the royal bloodline, so to speak."
Isaac Wyler, also a former follower of the church led by fugitive Warren Jeffs, told KSL that he was related by marriage to some of the victims.
"I've seen some children that can talk and communicate a little," Wyler said. "And I've seen others that are totally laid out. They have no movement. They can't do anything by themselves. Literally, if they're 8 years old, it's like taking care of a baby."
Tarby saw the first child with the deficiency in the community 15 years ago. He said the oldest victim is now about 20.
In March 2000, Tarby co-authored an article in the medical journal "Annals of Neurology" describing eight cases of fumarase deficiency. It has now grown to 20 known cases in the community.
Tarby said the victims require and receive constant care from parents and close relatives...
As well as contributing to a stagnant gene pool. Totally opposite of what the clash of civilizations clowns profess, i.e. "make more white babies".That is a stagnant gene pool and evolution basically stops.
-
Judicial activism
A very well developed legal framework for evaluating laws under an "equal protection" framework exists. This framework has a long legal history, and all courts that evaluate equal protection arguments must follow it. In a very short nutshell, the court must determine whether a law treats groups differently. Next, the court must decide how to evaluate whether its ok to treat groups differently -- whether it should apply a rational reason test or a strict scrutiny test (there's a third test for women under US Supreme Court jurisprudence not applicable here). Strict scrutiny applies where a law treats people differently based on their membership in a protected class. If strict scrutiny applies, then the state must show both a compelling interest in treating the groups differently and that no other viable alternative exists to the different treatment. Where a "strict scrutiny" test applies, there is almost never an acceptable justification for treating groups differently.
The first two steps in this case are not controversial. The law clearly treats same-sex couples differently from different-sex couples and in California, sexual orientation is a protected class. So, the question becomes whether protection of the historical institution of marriage as between a man and a woman constitutes a "compelling state interest." This is where the prejudices and political beliefs of judges can come into play. In the past, California courts rejected the notion that a compelling state interest existed in prohibiting interracial marriage. The whole notion of the strict scrutiny test is that where people are treated differently because of their membership in a protected group, it is likely that historical prejudices regarding the protected group have caused the different treatment rather than any legitimate state interest. Thus, if a judge can remove his/her political, moral, religious beliefs, etc. from the decision, he/she would, in all likelihood, reach the decision reached by the California Supreme Court today. As Glenn notes, reaching today's decision required the opposite of judicial activism -- it required that the judges apply well established law in a non-partisan, unbias manner.
-
@Arne
Arne, if you haven't noticed, all you have to do to chase Electro away is: threaten to quote his own archived letter back to him and he hauls his ass away. It's worked twice so far. He claims it's a "smear" which is, as I'm sure you appreciate, hysterical.
I bet it would work with the others, too. There are some doozies in there ("read Electro's other letters") which really could use another Talmudic gloss or exegesis. And I'm just the guy to dredge 'em up and ask for enlightenment. I hope you would be, too, if I'm not here. It seems to work.