So I was on Bob Bruce’s Radio Experience the other day. He asked me what bothers me most about the drive to clean out the Iowa Supreme Court.
My brain, such as it is, jammed with answers. I rambled on until it seemed best to stop. I’m not sure exactly what I said. This is common when you mix me with microphone.
Afterward, I thought about it some more.
And what bothers me most is that we’ve lost sight of how this saga started, and what it was about in the first place. It was about gay and lesbian Iowans who wanted civil marriage licenses, conveying the same sort of legal recognition on their families that many of us enjoy. They wanted the rights and privileges that come attached. They wanted the intangible pleasures of being hitched for real.
So they asked for licenses, and were denied under Iowa’s defense of marriage act. They turned to the courts, where questions of constitutional equity are settled. They won at the District Court level. Then, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that our government failed to make a compelling legal case for denying these couples equality.
Couples got married. The story could have ended there.
Instead, we’ve witnessed the swift fabrication of a vast industry of outrage, built with the clear intent of making us forget those couples and see this issue as being all about us. It’s all about our traditions and our marriages, our right to vote and our Constitution, our demands and our anger. It’s about activist judges and Republican politics and growing the influence of our most righteous crusaders.
A judicial retention drama was manufactured to sustain this industry, market its message and keep it profitable. Its leaders know that kicking David Wiggins off the Supreme Court has no impact on the legality of same-sex marriage. But it keeps their coffers full and names in the news.
They need that to achieve the main goal, and that is to use Iowa’s constitution to sever legal ties binding these Iowa families, deny civil rights to future couples and shove all of them back to the days when they lived as less than full citizens of their state. I’m convinced they won’t succeed. But outrage sells, so I don’t expect this factory to shut down any time soon.
You can vote any way you want, for any reason you want. It’s your right. But understand that a no vote will help sustain and grow this outrage industry. That bothers me. Maybe it bothers you.
n Comments: (319) 398-8452; todd.dorman@sourcemedia.net
Yep, Todd’s spotted what many of us have been saying for a long time. Grifter Bob is making serious bank by fleecing the sheeple who buy the spiritual snake oil he pedals from his out-of-state-bus-of-hate.
Not long ago I went down to Green Square Park to see for myself just what Vander Plaatz was pedaling – I like a good side show as much as the next guy – and saw a very small handful of folks who were hell-bent on cramming their religion down the throats of We The People. There were no rational arguments against same gender marriage, only Old Testament rantings. I asked ‘em if they thought we should ban pork production, cotton-poly blends, tattoos, barbers, shrimp, and menstruating women in public. No, of course not, because that all somehow got voided by Jesus, they said. But not the gay thing. Evidently they believe that still stands. I asked them how someone else’s civil marriage adversely impacted their own marriage. Destroys the fabric of society, they said. How? Traditional marriage must be maintained! (note change of subject) When I asked ‘em to define “traditional marriage”, they said “Biblical marriage”. Which kind of biblical marriage? There are at least 8 different types of marriage described in the Bible. Did you capture your wife when you were killing all the men of her village per God’s instruction? Did you rape her then pay her father off? Did your brother die and leave her to you in his will? Of course not.
Nope, there’s *NO* rational reason to oppose same gender marriage. But as long as there’s sheeple to fleece, Grifter Bob or someone like him will be their to make serious bank off them. Scare ‘em good, Bobby…scare ‘em good.
Thank you for another well written column.
I keep hoping that people will realize our judges did what, per their oath, they had to do, uphold the constitution. However, the outrage industry keeps several false statements alive.
Dorman,
What is frightening about the “Outrage Industry” is that even though these people seem initially motivated by a desire for the kind of attention that leads to speakers fees, book deals, and contributions, eventually they manage to sucker enough people in that what they started turns into a real movement with real consequences.
We can look at the Tea Party which has had a very short trajectory, which started as Koch funded astroturf, quckly morphed into a movement that has taken over the Republican Party and is now in the process of destroying it.
It is tempting to think we can deal with crazy people simply by ignoring them in a “don’t feed the trolls” maneuver. Except these “trolls” have, as you say, made it all about us.—”It’s all about our traditions and our marriages, our right to vote and our Constitution, our demands and our anger”. Which means we may have to go point by point with these people.
Case in point, Catholic bishops using the First Amendment to justify denial of health care benefits based on a religious doctrine that 90% of Americans, including Catholics, ignore. The bishops can’t be classified as part of your “Outrage Industry” but they are certainly being used by the “Outrage Industry”. Worse, the bishops are trying to turn back the clock 50 years and potentially awakening old fears that Catholic politicians cannot be trusted, that the Vatican will actively interfere in our elections and with our government. These old fears almost cost John Kennedy the election in 1960 and did cost Al Smith the election in 1928.
With the current effort to back door elect state judges, what we have is an effort to increase the power of the state to supress the rights and liberties of real people by arguing that the abstraction “the People”, not the courts, have the power to determine the legality of our laws.
“…abstraction “the People”, not the courts, have the power to determine the legality of our laws.”
The people elect representatives to write our laws. Those representatives appoint judges to rule on those laws. If the people don’t like the laws, they elect different representatives to write new laws. So yes, the people have the to power to determine what laws we live by.
A note on the Tea Party. In general, Republicans have won every election cycle since they formed.
Mr Fisher,
The “People” do not have the power to rule on whether or not laws passed by elected legislative representatives are constitutional or not. That was the issue, not whatever voice the “People” might have in enacting laws
As for the Tea Party winning every election cycle since they were formed, Big Hairy Deal. There’s only been one election since they were formed.
The problem the TPer’s create for the Republican Party is that high profile TPers tend toward whackjob—Christine O’Donnell case in point. And then there’s Michelle Backmann
Sometimes winning big is the worst thing that can happen to a political movement. Winning attracts attention. The TP is so far out of the mainstream that if the Republican Party doesn’t figure out a way to get rid of them, they can kiss themselves goodbye for many years to come
Again, the people elect representatives to write our laws. The constitution is a body of laws. If the people don’t like the laws, they elect different representatives to write new laws, including amendments to the constitution. So yes, the people do have the power to determine what laws we live by. It’s the basic principles of this nation.
It’s interesting to see that we can agree on a issue, and yet still disagree.
Hopefully the gullible who followed huxter Bob and his ilk will have reconsidered and will not vote likewise this time. On the other hand, my experience with people who have been given the gift of gullibility, it’s the gift that just keeps on giving. I’m not making any bets.
One of the hardest things for a person to do is to admit that they’ve been duped. Most will go to great lengths to deny it even after they have realized the truth. While Grifter Bob has dim prospects to ever become an elected official, his future as a con man is assured.
The Outrage industry isn’t limited to this issue; it’s country-wide and growing strong. Every time we turn around, there is someone in our faces screaming about this or that. Often they demonstrate their ignorance by showing they know little about that which they seem to be demanding. If people would stop claiming to know what’s best for everyone and worry about their own lives, we’d all be a lot better off. It won’t stop though, as there’s too much money and notariety to be had. Sometimes I think they create situations just to get dollars in the door, and their name splashed around the globe. The sad thing for me is – if they’d redirect their energy toward helping solve some of society’s problems rather than creating a few, we’d have a much better America.
I sincerely hope that people who vote to oust the judges realize that they aren’t gaining anything by doing so. It’s labeled as being against gay marriage, but it is actually about being against the Iowa Constitution and its protection of equal rights for all. One day they may find themselves part of a group being discriminated against and wish they had a constitution that protected them.
This is true on many levels, but is not isolated with this cause as others point out. Just replace Bob Vander Plaats name with Al Gore, change this to global warming, and it’s the same thing. This is what happens when the government retains too much power and becomes too big. It works fine when it’s your side controlling people, but your side doesn’t always win. Then, the people that think the government should be telling everyone what to do scream the loudest when things don’t go their way.
We as a people reap what we sow. The more power we give the government and other special interest, the less freedom we all have.
Mr Fisher,
Oh piffle.
Al Gore produced a documentary film with the intention of providing information so that people could make their own decisions. Gore has been a private citizen leading a low profile life for over a decade.
The very suggestion that Al Gore is interchangeable with Bob Vander Platts or global warming with homophobia is ludicrous.
Besides that, it looks like Mother Nature is in the process of making the case that Al Gore couldn’t
Funny isn’t it that reality should have such a liberal bias
Total nonsense — issues raised by Al Gore and Bob Vander Plaats are not remotely related. For one thing the issues raised by Al Gore are not Constitutional in the remotest sense the the other is. Don’t try to change the subject by linking them (obvious tactic).
I see you don’t agree with this article when it is an issue you agree with. How much money has Al Gore made off Global Warming? What else does he do other than tout Global Warming? These two cases are clearly similar with the exception of the issue involved. We could discuss the constitutionality of the EPA sanctions on private property, but we’ll leave that for later.
One man’s outrage is another’s fetish.