Protecting "Traditional Spaghetti"
My purpose in quoting this news excerpt is not to recapitulate the dreary and clichéd patter of anti-gay politicians, as you will see below.
BOSTON — For anyone paying attention to the Governor's Council recently, the questions were predictable, the exchanges inevitable.
Charles O. Cipollini repeatedly pressed [Massachusetts'] Gov. Deval Patrick's latest state Supreme Judicial Court nominee, Barbara Lenk, with questions about same-sex marriage during Wednesday's confirmation hearing.
Lenk, if confirmed, would be the court's first openly gay justice in its history.
Cipollini, a Fall River Republican whose District 1 stretches from the Rhode Island border to the tip of Cape Cod, has billed himself as a "traditional family values" councilor. He has indicated he thinks marriage should be between a man and a woman.
In the Supreme Judicial Court confirmation hearing for Fernande D.V. Duffly earlier this year, he appeared to conflate same-sex marriage with polygamy and communal living.
Wednesday he said "I am tired of attempts by the court to redefine common words … especially those that we hold dear, like marriage."
"Will the definition of spaghetti be next?"
[from Dan McDonald, "Cipollini presses openly gay SJC nominee on same-sex marriage", SouthCoastToday.com, 28 April 2011.]
Now, it's quite possible that Mr. Cipollini was not paying attention in — what was it? — the 1980s when 'spaghetti' and 'macaroni' fell out of favor and were largely replaced by 'pasta', a term that embraced greater diversity, but it seems to me that 'spaghetti' is a relatively insignificant word over whose redefinition one should fret. Will we be hearing soon about new crusades to protect "traditional spaghetti"?
I suppose we must imagine that Mr. Cipollini holds the meaning of 'spaghetti' especially dear.
2 Responses
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Leave a Reply
To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.
I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.
on Friday, 29 April 2011 at 21.22
Permalink
Oh, it's not the redefinition of a simple word that bothers Cipollini. Inability to put himself in another's place coupled with unwillingness to permit change in something basic in life he learned as a toddler and has always accepted as a given are at the root of his problem.
I'm sure Cipollini could enjoy spaghetti called pasta or something wildly different just as much, if it came to that. The notion of gays and lesbians being free to marry, maybe even move in next door without the neighborhood getting all wrought up and hostile offends his sense of how things should be. Maybe he'll learn in time, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
on Friday, 29 April 2011 at 22.33
Permalink
We both know, SW, that "redefinition" is not the root issue. We know that most contentious political arguments rarely are about what they are ostensibly about.
I've always been prone towards gadflyism and related irritations, but now you make me realize that one of my favorite tactics in these situations is to try to expose the ostensible reasons for the absurd rationalizations that they always are. Maybe then we might talk about the real issues, although I'm skeptical. Sometimes I enjoy the gadlyism too much for its own sake, but not nearly so often as some might claim.