The Littlest Meap

Last week was not so good for inalienable rights, was it?

The week started out with Rush Limbaugh at CPAC claiming that “We believe that the preamble to the Constitution contains an inarguable truth that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, Liberty, Freedom. And the pursuit of happiness.” Which is all well and good, except for the bitter reminder that these rights (with the exception of freedom) are outlined in the Declaration and not the Constitution. (On the other hand, I’m a pretty big fan of the formation of a more perfect union, the establishment of justice, the insurance of domestic tranquility, provision for the common defense, promotion of general welfare and the security of the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity. Schoolhouse Rocks, anyone?)

Limbaugh went on to explain that “We conservatives think all three are under assault.” And you know what, I generally disagree with Rush Limbaugh, but this is one case where I definitely agree with him. After all, later last week in arguing on the pro-Prop 8 side in Strauss v. Horton, Ken Starr claimed that inalienable rights are those that cannot be taken away without appropriate process and accordingly that in the State of California, a vote by a simple majority of the electorate constituted appropriate process. This argument had me quaking in my rights-loving boots, and I can only imagine Limbaugh was equally concerned, right?

And you know what else happened last week and the week before? The Justice Department released the Yoo memos, which the Bush administration relied upon, and which claims that rights under the First and Fourth Amendments to the US Constitution can be overturned at the will of the President for anyone assumed to be a terrorist. (Terrorists still, fortunately, can rely upon their Second-Amendment rights and are welcome to form a militia if they chose.) At least those were overturned 5 days before Bush left office, so that’s a front where I don’t currently have to worry about that particular subset of things I like to think of as my rights as a US Citizen.

So clearly I am concerned about rights, and I’m concerned about rights slipping away. I too value Life, Liberty, Freedom [to Marry Whom I Choose, for instance?], and the Pursuit of Happiness. So maybe I too am a conservative? Clearly Bush, Yoo and Starr are not, by Limbaugh’s definition.

With all the preparations for Pride this year, it’s already a breathless season. Increasing the fervor of the season, of course, was the beginning of gay marriage in California yesterday at 5 pm. I watched coverage from some of the first gay weddings last night, live on the local news. It’s exciting to live in a state with legal gay marriage again.

On the other hand, a visit to my old roommates last weekend gave me another reminder about the problems that come along with gay marriage–the enforcement of the same norms that affect straight people. For as long as gay relationships exist only outside the law, all sorts of extra-legal legal precedents can sneak their way in. In the case of my former roommates, three lesbians who decided to raise a child together, gay marriage ruins the hopes they had of securing a three-parent adoption for their little girl once she was a toddler and they could argue their parental rights.

For so long, homosexuality has been an outstanding shelter for any number of norm-violating sexual and romantic arrangements–polyamory, kink, domestic partnerships without marriage, etc.– that heteros have engaged in too, but which have generally been more accepted in the queer world than in the world at large. With the harsh light of legal marriage shining on gays and lesbians, will we all line up and join the establishment? What happens to folks who don’t want to?

I continue to hold out hope that the government will step out of the business of providing “marriage” as a concept and will just do civil unions, leaving folks to chose whatever idea of marriage works for them, be it traditional or nontraditional. (This is one of the times I side with libertarians on an issue.) However, the precedent does not seem to be heading that way.

In other news, looks like Google is branding search results containing terms related to gay pride with rainbows. For a limited time only! Catch it while you can!

ETA: As usual, Alison Bechdel has commented on a similar aspect of things that is both subtler than what I’ve said here, and more poignant.