Frank Rich is using AIDS again as a political football. Time out.
JUDICIAL TYRANNY? Two polls in the immediate wake of the Goodridge decision in Massachusetts reverse some assumptions in the current debate about the role of courts. Clear majorities in polls commissioned by both the Herald and the Globe support the court’s ruling. Overwhelming majorities support the substance of the ruling – equal benefits for gay couples under civil unions (without the “m-word”). It should be recalled that the Massachusetts legislature had a chance to amend the constitution and didn’t; and that they still can do so if they want. So let the voters and representatives in Massachusetts do what they want. What a federal Constitutional Amendment would now mean is that Massachusetts would effectively be denied the right to do as it sees fit in an area always reserved for states. It seems to me this would violate pretty basic federalist principles. Isn’t it a perfect solution to let one state try this out for a while? Such marriages will not be transportable, and I have come to believe that that is a good thing for the time being. Of course, if Massachusetts should be left alone, so should Mississippi. In a country as diverse and as divided as this one, we need federalism more than ever. In wartime, when we need a cultural war like we need a hole in the head, that applies more than ever.
The Dish 