Friday, July 10, 2015
Democrats want to ban words ‘husband’ and ‘wife’
U.S. Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA), along with several other congressional Democrats, has introduced the Amend the Code for Marriage Equality Act, which would literally do away with such terms as “husband” and “wife” from federal law.
“The Amend the Code for Marriage Equality Act recognizes that the words in our laws have meaning and can continue to reflect prejudice and discrimination even when rendered null by our highest courts.
“Our values as a country are reflected in our laws. I authored this bill because it is imperative that our federal code reflect the equality of all marriages,” Capps said.
"In light of the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry and that states have an obligation to perform same-sex marriages, Rep. Lois Capps (CA-24) introduced a bill to ensure that the United States Code reflects the equality of all marriages.
"The Amend the Code for Marriage Equality Act of 2015 would strike the use of gendered terms such as “husband” and “wife” from the federal code and replace them with more gender-neutral terms, such as “spouse” or “married couple.”
"The proposed legislation would not only ensure that the code reflects marriage equality, but it could also make several positive changes to the U.S. Code by removing areas of gender discrimination written into federal law.
"For instance, it is currently illegal to threaten the President’s wife – but not the President’s husband. Capps’ bill would update the code to make it illegal to threaten the President’s spouse. The bill would correct a number of these types of discrepancies in the code," Capps' office said in a statement.
One of the problem’s with progressive good intentions is the failure to examine the future issues caused by the proposed solution.
“The New Deal” and “The Great Society” were intended to bring more good than harm. They have been terribly destructive to the African-American family and to the poor in general, and as a result to 2 to three generations of poor children.
As with so many progressive ideas, cultural and political, we don’t have to imagine how they will affect lives. We have the slow decline of western culture and families in Europe which clearly show us the long-term, destructive effect of devaluing the traditional family.
Marriage is not just a religious institution. It is a fundamental building block of our society.
The consequence of changing definitions can’t be ignored. Many bad laws come into being to take care of a special situation and then are enforced in a way never intended or envisioned by the writers.
Remember, the unintended consequences not the intended consequences are the problem. Allowing naked men to parade around a girls locker room because they claim to be transgender is not the intent of laws trying to protect gay students from the very real bullying they experience, but it is an inexcusable, unintended consequence. –that actually happened!
In “A Man For All Seasons” the young son-in-law tells Thomas Moore that he would strike down all the laws of England to get at the devil. And Moore replies, and what then would you have to protect you? I am not saying that their cause isn’t just, or that the slow wheels of change are fair, but crashing through the barriers will not be best for the gay community or the country in the long run.
As much as anything, this kind of situation is one of the hard pills conservatives have to swallow. We look bad, because we don’t rush in to fix things. If you want to do it right, you might have to spend more time.
Posted by High Plains Pundit