Here's the reply I just got from the man himself:
Dear Mr. [konagod]:
Thank you for contacting me about efforts to uphold traditional marriage. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this important matter.
As you may know, in 1996 over three-fourths of Congress passed—and former President Bill Clinton signed—the Defense of Marriage Act (P.L. 104-199). This federal law defines marriage as "only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."
Under the laws, traditions, and customs of all fifty states, marriage has historically been defined as the union of a man and a woman. However, judicial rulings—and outright lawlessness by local officials in some states—have threatened traditional marriage and moved this debate onto the national stage. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas provides lower courts with the leverage needed to invalidate traditional marriage laws. And the first major assault on traditional marriage came in Goodridge v. Mass. Dept. of Health, when the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court—citing the Lawrence decision—overturned that state's traditional marriage law. As such, constitutional scholars on both sides of the aisle agree that the Defense of Marriage Act and similar state laws are now in peril.
I believe that judges should strictly interpret the law and avoid the temptation to legislate from the bench or color their rulings with personal ideology. During my tenure as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Property Rights, I conducted a series of hearings to determine the steps necessary to uphold traditional marriage. As a result, on January 24, 2005, Senator Wayne Allard introduced a joint resolution (S.J. Res. 1) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States. I am proud to co-sponsor this joint resolution, which would allow the American people to decide on its ratification—rather than permitting traditional marriage laws to be invalidated by judicial fiat. S.J. Res. 1 has been referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary for consideration.
You might also be interested to learn that the Texas Legislature passed a constitutional amendment (H.J.R. No. 6), which was added to the statewide ballot last year as Proposition 2. The "Texas Marriage Amendment" defined marriage as being only between one man and one woman, and on November 8, 2005, Texans voted overwhelmingly to pass Proposition 2 by a vote of more than 76 percent.
I appreciate having the opportunity to represent the interests of Texans in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.
Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator
517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov
Well, allow me to retort!
Wait just a friggin' minute: WHO "moved it onto the national stage?" Don't pin that one on the judges. What an arrogant prick.
"The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas provides lower courts with the leverage needed to invalidate traditional marriage laws." Oh, of course, that was the sodomy law that made me out to be 2/5ths of a person, and criminal, because of something I might do in the privacy of my own bedroom with another consenting adult.
"I believe that judges should strictly interpret the law and avoid the temptation to legislate from the bench or color their rulings with personal ideology." Well, it's too f*ucking bad members of Congress can't seem to apply the same principles!
(Time out: I need to scrape away the insane ASSHATERY before I can continue. My hands are getting gummed up on the keyboard.)
"You might also be interested to learn that the Texas Legislature passed a constitutional amendment which was added to the statewide ballot last year as Proposition 2. The "Texas Marriage Amendment" defined marriage as being only between one man and one woman, and on November 8, 2005, Texans voted overwhelmingly to pass Proposition 2 by a vote of more than 76 percent. " OH, I might "also be interested to learn...?" You wad of slime, I was one of the non-76 percent who voted against that piece of homophobic fascist crap, so you are not really learnin' me something I don't know, but thanks for tryin'.
From Cornyn's bio:
Sen. Cornyn is married to Sandy, his wife of 26 years. They have two daughters.
Good for him! 26 years and even managed to procreate twice. (Did you ever engage in sodomy, John, ever?)
(konagod has been unmarried to his partner of 16 years. We have 5 cats and no legal recognition whatsoever.)
Kay Bailey Hutchinson has not yet responded to my email, but expect more of the same politispeak.
No comments:
Post a Comment