Special Marriage
Another Eureka! moment, thanks to the NYTimes via the International Herald Tribune ("Exploiting Terry Schaivo").
…supporters of Schiavo's parents, particularly members of the religious right, leaned heavily on Congress and the White House to step in. They did so on Monday with the new law, which gives "any parent of Theresa Marie Schiavo" standing to sue in federal court to keep her alive.
This narrow focus is offensive. The founders of the United States believed in a nation in which, as Justice Robert Jackson once wrote, we would "submit ourselves to rulers only if under rules." There is no place in such a system for a special law creating rights for only one family.
For years, we politically oppressed Gays and Lesbians have petitioned our government for equal rights on any number of fronts, and been taunted in return by critics (self-proclaimed non homophobes) with their favorite bumper-sticker cry of "No Special Rights".
It's suddenly clear that we were wrong to insist that we were not demanding special rights, merely equality.
With the current "marriage is a sacred institution", "non-federally instrusive small government" congress and their urgency to pass special-rights legislation, it's clear that we'd make more headway if we did demand special rights, since those seem to be in favor now.
Just imagine: Isaac and I could be married by a special act of congress, made out in our names and conferring no precedent whatsoever. Cool! Even better, we could show our gratitude by making a campaign contribution to Tom DeLay, thanking him for his special intervention.
Now, do we really think he'd turn down an offer like that just because of his principles?