February 17, 2004
San Francisco
As everyone knows, I love the City of San Francisco. Even though I am in exile accross the bay, I consider it my city, and would move there in a second. As it is, we go to mass in San Francisco, so we are there at least once a week as a family. I am there at least one other time for lectura dantis, and often Amalia and I go over just to take walks, look at the boats, etc.
One of the great things about the city is that it is a remarkably normal place, for the most part. One can easily be in North Beach and not see a Rainblow Flag, men holding hands and purses, and the other sort of depravity that one thinks of when hearing "San Francisco." It is the same in most neighborhoods in the City. So, I find it particularly terrible when San Francisco's wretched government decides to defy the state government and God over the marriage issue.
Hopefully the state will step to the plate for the defence of marriage. I am not too optimistic, as the Gubernator has been fairly pro-sodomy. Obviously we need to storm Heaven with prayers, as He is probably the only one who can do anything about this abomination (a mini volcano erupting at Market and Castro would be a powerful sign).
If you don't live in San Francisco, consider this advanced warning as to what you will be facing in two years. What starts here eventually even hits Wyoming and Alabama, so pay attention to the Western Front, where all is not quiet at all.
I am strongly opposed to legislation by constitutional amendment. If a marriage definition amendment were to happen, it would have some good consequences, but ultimately it would reinforce the notion that rights are whatever 51 percent of the population or two thirds plus one or nine judges or the Mayor of San Francisco thinks they are.
I am not sure what is left for people to do, besides presenting lists of 10 good men in the City.
Posted by erik at February 17, 2004 10:15 AM | TrackBackAlright, I expect to see you in fedora at the Mardi Gras festa on Sunday! We can call this whole thing the San Francisco Mardi Gras Putsch!
Posted by: Erik Keilholtz at February 17, 2004 3:27 PMErik,
You are getting all fired up for Lent my friend. You are right, San Francisco should be retaken by a militantly straight populace. We won't need a flag, let us all dawn fedoras and pinstriped suits like da mayor, that way everyone will know who we are.
Ryan
Steven,
No. A dictator who thinks that he metes out rights based on his fancy is JUST AS bad (not worse, not better) as a democracy that has such a defective view of law. The difference is that a dictator eventually dies. A populace Hell-bent (I mean that literally) on expanding peculiar Teutonic notions of the individual will only die when it defies Eternal Law so much that punishment comes to the whole populace (or, on a more optimistic note, said populace repents).
I am all for a strong executive, but he must work within the law and the Church. I will probably post more on this, as I have been thinking about the shape of the inevitable dictatorship that is on the horizon (I agree with what I have heard is in Pynchon's new introduction to 1984 (I have not read it and am relying on second hand information), that fascism did not see its sunset in the 20th century, rather its very early beginnings. While Pynchon probably bemoans this, I applaud it). The questions we have are not whether nor even when, rather who and in what manner.
Ryan,
Boy Wonder is even worse than I expected. He is the spitting image of a Kennedy. Don't count on the spineless Archbishop to do anything. I am thinking that San Francisco should be invaded by militantly straight, Catholic families, but we need a flag, an emblem as upfront as the spectrum flag or the equal sign (actually I think we should reclaim it by printing stickers in the same typeface that equate sodomy with death and hellfire).
Posted by: Erik Keilholtz at February 17, 2004 3:04 PMErik,
I was wondering when someone I know would tackle this subject. I too am disgusted by boy wonder and his actions. Moreover, we must get that do nothing bishop to speak up and smack the crap out of Mr. Newsom as he claims to be a Catholic. The church, and the state have been very explicit in their opinions on this matter e.g. the defense of marraige act passed under President Bill defines marraige as between a man and a woman as well as the California defense of marraige act. I think we need to stop boy wonder from defying the law and trying to make our beloved city into the Las Vegas for Gays. Besides we already have people in the dirty M state pushing this issue from the bench. Just my two cents.
Carthaga delunda est
Ryan
Dear Erik,
I'm astounded, breathless even. You object to a definition of two-thirds of the populace yet you long to be dictator in which the voice of a single person delineates the rights and regulations of all.
I think an amendment a fairly good idea--as too much of our law is now handed down from the bench, the only recourse and protection is to legally enshrine a definition that cannot be compromised.
shalom,
Steven
Posted by: Steven Riddle at February 17, 2004 11:47 AM