Silly faggot, dicks are for chicks

Circa 1997 there was a line of T-shirts expressing the sentiment above that could be purchased at any of the dozens of shitty boardwalk souvenir shops in Ocean City, MD. The shirts featured the Trix rabbit, although I wouldn’t bet on its designers having been licensed to use that piece of intellectual (sic) property. I was told that all the souvenir shops were owned by the same family, which made sense considering that they all carried the same garbage merchandise, prominently including that line of fag bunny shirts. I have to assume that this retail monoculture was facilitated by some measure of official corruption in the permitting process, a level of corruption that would probably allow the untrammeled sale of pirate merchandise.

I mention this unfortunate bit of American cultural heritage because its sentiment is the lowest common denominator for all censorious discussions of homosexuality, no matter how intellectually heady they may appear to be at first blush, maybe because the arguments are made by posh Englishmen in the employ of highbrow conservative think tanks. All discussion of the immorality or disorder or dysfunction of homosexuality is divisible by silly faggot. The broad mandate for all uses of censure and positive law in furtherance of heterosexual supremacy, no matter how well-argued and morally thought-out these campaigns may seem or in fact be, is silly faggot. The mass man is not concerned with the failure of homosexuality to be ordered to the conception and rearing of children; he is concerned with the failure of homosexuals to inseminate women because they would prefer to inseminate men, and this preference, having nothing to do with his own sexual preferences or activities, is mysteriously his business. He isn’t so much a useful idiot for the National Review and Intercollegiate Studies Institute* types as a useful vulgarian. (*The latter is basically a less readable and more self-important version of the former. I’ve always found it telling that it shares its initials with Pakistan’s spy agency, but telling of exactly what, I’ve never quite been able to say.) The mass man is upset that third parties are buggering each other. Larry is upset that Bill is putting it up Dave’s ass, not that he’s sexually or romantically interested in either Bill or Dave, mind you, he’s just interested in public morals. In real life, of course, Larry Craig was upset that Bill was engaging in (actually quite timid) sex acts with Monica (see? no need for last names), making him unavailable to obscure US Senators of his own sex, and that Dave (that’s Sgt. Karsnia to you) was an undercover honeypot operative (think for a moment, though, about the sort of twisted fuck who would agree to take on such an assignment).

This is why all censure and legislation of homosexuality is also divisible by Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. As a moral and religious principle, this is a step below Me Likey Boink Slut in the Slit. The latter is merely crass and parochial, not also censorious. It sounds worse, but only to the inattentive. It expresses a positive personal preference, not a negative preference concerning the sexual decisions of others. “Don’t do that because it isn’t in the Bible” is a rash worldview for interpreting an anthology that includes Leviticus, but that’s the state of much of American evangelical Christianity.

We learned today that homosexual couples will henceforth be allowed to marry in all fifty states thanks to a judicial fiat by the US Supreme Court. The alt-right blogosphere should be a hoot for a week or two to come, and its counterweights on the cultural left should be insufferable. There are problems of legitimacy with the institution of same-sex marriage by judicial fiat, but there are also serious equal protection problems with the, shall we say, Mr. Craig, narrow stance that a number of states have taken with respect to same-sex marriage in recent years. The case decided by SCOTUS today, Obergefell v. Hodges, involved Ohio’s refusal to recognize an out-of-state same-sex marriage and list it on a death certificate. This is exactly the sort of asexual administrative nightmare that same-sex couples have often faced due to intransigence on same-sex marriage and partnership rights. Ohio’s refusal to recognize a valid out-of-state marriage also put it afoul of its constitutional duty to reciprocally honor all acts of sovereignty by all other states and territories of the United States of America, no matter how ridiculous or boneheaded or immoral they seem (federalism for the win!).

Say it again: same-sex marriage is not about the sanctity or desacralization of marriage as a religious or sexual institution. It is about the equal protection of the civil rights of civil marriage. It doesn’t matter how you feel personally or how your church feels about gay marriage, or whether non-state actors must officiate same-sex marriages or recognize their legitimacy for religious or other private purposes. Thankfully, Obergefell doesn’t touch on the questions of whether caterers, bakers, wedding photographers, and the like are public accommodations, which are a fucking quagmire. Its narrow purpose was to benchslap the state of Ohio for issuing a bogus death certificate in a spirit of bigotry for the purpose of vexing the decedent’s widower.

What legerdemain was needed to confer a nationwide right to same-sex marriage in the course of adjudicating this dispute is beyond me. It mainly serves to remind me that if I go to law school I will have no time to do worthwhile reading because I will be bound to the writings of lawyers. Chime in about whatever details about this case you find relevant in the comments, and at whatever length you can tolerate; I already write about Arab perverts shitting on infidel rent girls, so I’m in no position to complain about legal pedantry. Will I read yours? Hell if I know, but if it doesn’t look like spam I’ll approve it.

P. J. O’Rourke has compared the workings of SCOTUS to pagan augury, and for all I know he may be right. But he’s right about one thing: we’re much better off with the big decisions being made by undemocratic elders in demure robes than by the Silly Faggot constituency.

Is polygamy the next frontier? Tackle that, too, in the comment thread, if you feel you must. I’m picking blueberries commercially again, so right now I can’t even.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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