Injustice can’t balance the politics of privilege
By Derek Joy
The Autumn of 2014 is in full stride.
A scant two months hence looms the Mid Term Elections.
Sure. The big prize in Florida is the gubernatorial race between incumbent Rick Scott and Democratic hopeful Charlie Crist, the former Republican Governor.
Absent from the ballot is a key issue winding its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And that battle is the Constitutional rights of gays and lesbians to marry.
Yes. Floridians voted to ban gay marriages only to have it challenged, and ultimately ruled unconstitutional by the courts at various levels. Created a ball of confusion in other states where gay marriages had been legally sanctioned.
Funny how it all hinges on the definition of marriage. Until the bruhaha began, marriage had been considered an act between man and woman. But that has changed.
Interesting enough, English has never been designated as English. Yet American citizens, particularly here in Miami, are forced to speak Spanish, sometimes other languages – in order to get hired. No court challenges on that.
Curiously, the court challenges have been never ending when it comes to gay rights.
Many would agree that laws in America are largely predicated on the natural order. As such, consider the laws of nature, laws of science. Likes attract. Opposites repel. And, for every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction.
However, none of that seems to be a focal point in the application of the rule of law. While opponents of gay marriage employ arguments that embrace the tenets of Christianity, supporters focus on human rights.
Tragically, human rights will go by the way side if there are no humans to argue the matter. Scientific fact. Two people of the same sex cannot procreate. So, what happens then?
Perhaps the real argument will come to light as the court challenges wind their way to the U.S. Supreme Court for a final decision. Truth is people can love without ever marrying.
Consequently, the question is whether or the real argument is to gain the financial benefits of marriage as a political privilege. Would there still be a raging battle for gay rights were it not for financial gain?
Undoubtedly, the quest is one to gain insurance benefits for a mate/spouse, social security and retirement benefits. Therein lays the real fight. Not just one to marry a person of choice.
Take away the financial benefits and political privilege, and what do you have?
