Michael Geer, President of the Pennsylvania Family Institute, is an ignorant pea brained jerk. And that's me in a mellow mood. The PG published his letter to the editor (and NOT mine). He makes two points in response to the PG's editorial that the “marriage protection” amendment is unnecessary (and redundant)
First, [t]he PG editors seem unwilling to look beyond Pennsylvania's borders when it comes to understanding the debate over the proposed Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment, SB 1250
Ahem. Mr. Geer. You didn't do your homework on this one. Please consider Ohio where the amendment you propose allows men who batter their partners to avoid conviction of domestic abuse because they aren't married. Or Michigan where a similar amendment deprives state and municipal entities (including colleges) from offering domestic partner benefits, hampering their recruitment efforts. Or Florida, where a proposed amendment, will impact approximately 17,000 children with same-sex parents.
So, yes indeed, let every Pennsylvania voter — every resident, adult and child alike — look outside our state to see what havoc this legislative hatred brings into the lives of thousands of people, heterosexuals included. I suppose you could say that those Ohio women shouldn't be shacking up with men outside of marriage. Or that Michigan should send more recruiters to Oral Roberts University anyway. And, shucks, Florida loses children in the child welfare system so often, that what's another 17,000 anyway?
How does any of this protect your marriage? Because none of you have made that clear. You just hide behind the next argument.
Without a Marriage Protection Amendment, Pennsylvania's marriage law is at risk from a legal challenge that could arise at any moment. It's time for lawmakers to let the people decide and pass SB 1250. To the Post-Gazette, it may be bigotry, but to most Pennsylvanians, it's simply fair.
Let the people decide. That worked out well during Reconstruction and the following … well, forever years. It took the people nearly 140 years to decide that women should vote (maybe someone should remind the Christian Women's Groups of that). If only that pesky Supreme Court would stop interfering, the people could just keep on deciding who deserves civil rights and who doesn't.
Wrong, Geer. The CONSTITUTION decides. Check out the comments from City Council Pres. (and honorary lesbian) Doug Shields in a previous post. The people don't get to decide to create a second-class group of citizens because our very existence offends you. Life isn't fair, Geer. A lot of things offend me — people who kill animals, parents who abuse their children, the entire system of senior support services in our nation — but what especially offends me is when religious bigots like you want to impose your moral belief system on the rest of us, especially when you play some sort of quasi-democracy shell game.
You can't cry “freedom of religion” in the name of Constitutional law and then turn around to strike out the parts of that document that you don't like. That's just wrong. There's nothing fair about it.
I just hope some more people decide to call their Senators. You can bet your Bill of Rights that Geer has mobilized a full flotilla of Christians to make those calls. Are we gonna let him get away with this?