Is there any issue that this man isn't on the wrong side of? Rhetorical question, of course. Follow me below the fold...
But First, A Word From Our Sponsor:
Top Comments recognizes the previous day's Top Mojo and strives to promote each day's outstanding comments through nominations made by Kossacks like you. Please send comments (before 9:30pm ET) by email to topcomments@gmail.com or by our KosMail message board. Just click on the Spinning Top™ to make a submission. Look for the Spinning Top™ to pop up in diaries posts around Daily Kos.
Make sure that you include the direct link to the comment (the URL), which is available by clicking on that comment's date/time. Please let us know your Daily Kos user name if you use email so we can credit you properly. If you send a writeup with the link, we can include that as well. The diarist poster reserves the right to edit all content.
Please come in. You're invited to make yourself at home! Join us beneath the doodle...
|
As he runs for the Texas governorship, Greg Abbott continues to use his Attorney General position to defend the status quo of disastrous Republican policies. HB 2, which shut down 80 percent of abortion-providing clinics in the state and essentially terminated the reproductive rights of huge numbers of women in the state? Abbott is still defending it, at the Supreme Court this time, arguing that driving to a clinic that managed to survive HB 2's path of destruction is a "manageable inconvenience" (never mind women in the Rio Grande Valley, many of whom are low-income, who have to travel up to 250 miles to obtain care). The $5.4 billion in public education cuts passed in 2011 by the Republican legislature, which have been ruled unconstitutional because they fail to provide equal opportunity for students? Yep, Abbott is appealing that one to the Texas Supreme Court, claiming that it's his job to do so. In addition to the attack on public schools being, you know, fucking evil, he is also potentially putting state taxpayers on the hook for $8.5 million in legal fees if the appeal loses. And, of course, Abbott is wasting no time at all in promising to appeal the recent federal court ruling striking down the state's voter ID law. Because, well, you know why.
So, given Abbott's track record of being out of touch on pretty much everything, his view on and robust fight against marriage equality is not shocking. It has not been a central issue in this governor's race, but it should not be forgotten that thousands of gays and lesbians in Texas are being denied equal protection under the law. It should also be noted that Wendy Davis, far from running away from the topic, has come out strongly in favor of gay and lesbian Texans and their right to marry, referring to marriage equality as a "strong belief" of hers. In the meantime, you can guess who continues to defend the status quo by providing a defense of the 2004 constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriages, which was struck down by a federal judge in February. Said Abbott in response to Davis, who also expressed support for dropping the legal defense of the ban:
Unlike Senator Davis' positions on the issues, the Texas constitution is not subject to change on the latest whims of the day. Senator Davis' comment suggesting the Attorney General not enforce the Constitution mimics an Obama-style approach to government, and Texans deserve better.
Yes, Texans
do deserve better. The same Texans
who have made huge strides on this issue since 18 percent of them voted in favor of the ban in 2004. The culture has changed nationwide on LGBT rights, and Texas has not been immune to that sea change. Meanwhile, the Republican leadership has remained static, clinging to that 2004 vote and repeating the same tired arguments as if the sands have not shifted underneath their feet. Which really makes for some awkward moments when they have to
explain their anti-gay positions to the public. Like Abbott did
in the final gubernatorial debate, when he and Davis were asked about the topic of marriage equality. When asked by "John in Fort Worth" what he would tell a 10-year-old girl whose fathers want to get married, this was his response:
John, I want you to know there are good and decent people on both sides of this issue. I believe in traditional marriage. That’s what 75 percent of Texans agreed with less than a decade ago when they passed a constitutional amendment in the state of Texas saying that marriage in Texas is a union between one man and one woman. Now, for me personally, this is more than a constitutional amendment. I’ve been married to my wife Cecilla for more than 33 years now.
No, I didn't cut it off. That was his full response. When asked by the moderator if that is what he would tell the girl, Abbott smugly replied:
That's what I just told John.
"Awkward" doesn't even begin to describe what is wrong with this. When queried by a child as to why her fathers legally can't get married, marking her family as different, Abbott's hypothetical response is to rub his own marriage in the girl's face?
Really?
On the other hand, here is Davis' response for comparison:
I favor marriage equality, and I want to make sure that people who love each other, who are willing to be in a committed relationship with each other and who desire to marry in our state, have the opportunity to do so. This is a constitutional provision in our law right now, but it’s been challenged. It’s been challenged by Mr. Abbott, and we await the court’s decision on whether this is actually in keeping with the U.S. Constitution and the equal protection clause of that Constitution. If this is not remedied in the courts, as governor I will be happy and will welcome a bill that will allow us to put once again before the voters of his state, a decision on whether to repeal what is now our constitutional ban against marriage equality in this state.
I don't often read the
Houston Chronicle, but I had to check out their recent editorial
urging Abbott to drop the state's bigoted defense of the marriage ban, especially in light of the groundbreaking progress made across the country
just in the past week. The editorial really does hit the nail on the head. It begins by providing an analysis of Abbott's puzzling answer in the last debate:
Abbott didn't answer the question because he couldn't. Ever since a federal judge in San Antonio struck down Texas' gay marriage ban in February, declaring it unconstitutional, the Texas attorney general has listed several reasons for continuing to defend the thing. They range from baseless to ridiculous.
But kids have a better nose for bull than many of us grown-ups do. They don't get political motivations or poll numbers. Yet, they have a firm grasp on the important stuff - love, families, honesty.
The usual, tired "states' rights" and "natural procreation" arguments would be lost on the small child of a gay couple. Nor could he bring out the "your fathers' marriage would be like bestiality or pedophilia" argument. The argument that voters decided this issue in 2004, which is practically ancient history when it comes to marriage equality, clearly doesn't hold water.
I recommend reading the entire editorial, because it's well worth it. But the central question posed is why Abbott insists on spending the state's money to defend a marriage ban that, even if upheld by the conservative Fifth Circuit when it finally sees its day in court, will almost undoubtedly be overturned by the Supreme Court. No, it's not because it's his "job."
Seven attorneys general in other states had the same duty. But they ultimately drew a line, refusing to make arguments they believed illogical, refusing to defend statutes that they and judges deemed unconstitutional. "It's about placing people over politics," a tearful Kentucky AG Jack Conway said last year when he vowed not to defend a law he believed discriminatory.
[...]
General Abbott, tell your client - the state of Texas, or Gov. Rick Perry - that this battle will cost more than its worth. Tell your client you want to put people before politics. Tell your client that you don't want a legacy of discrimination.
Tell your client you won't keep defending legal arguments you can't even explain to a 10-year-old girl.
And if, in November, you become the client, the governor, tell yourself to do what's right.
In short, there
is no reason for Abbott to keep up a losing fight, aside from firing up his hateful base and satisfying his own antipathy toward gay people.
The Battleground Texas mission of flipping the state back to Democrats is one that is vitally important to the interests of LGBT Texans, who are not protected in any way other than the state's hate crimes law (which covers the L, G, and B, but not the T). It starts with Wendy Davis and Leticia Van de Putte. In addition to our own TexKos Weekend of Action on October 25-26, tomorrow (which is National Coming Out Day) is the Wendy Davis campaign's "Out for Wendy" Day of Action, with canvassing events being held across the state (hit the link for details). The state will be dragged into the twenty-first century on this issue one way or another, to be sure. But as a gay Texan who would like some civil rights beyond hate crimes protections in the foreseeable future, it would certainly help to have an LGBT-supportive Democratic leadership not fighting tooth and nail against progress.
TOP COMMENTS
October 10, 2014
Thanks to tonight's Top Comments contributors! Let us hear from YOU
when you find that proficient comment.
From lineatus:
I'm waiting to for the punditocracy to ask this pertinent question about the Palin slugfest, posed by joynow.
|
TOP PHOTOS
October 9, 2014
Enjoy jotter's wonderful PictureQuilt™ below. Just click on the picture and it will magically take you to the comment that features that photo. Have fun, Kossacks!
|