Monday, April 17, 2006

Observations

  • It is good news that the Indiana Democratic Party and the Indiana Civil Liberties Union have been rebuked by a U.S. District Court in their attempt to have the photo ID law declared unconstitutional. I've written about this before (see posts from last month as well as a year ago last month for more) on this blog, and there is not much to say that has not already been said.

    The complaint by Democrats and the ICLU that the requirement for a photo ID represents a "poll tax" is false, because the law makes provisions for those who cannot afford the cost of a photo ID to get one for no cost. I hope the Democrats and the ICLU decide to drop their objection and not obstruct the electoral process with more lawsuits. It does not look good for Democrats when they oppose an anti-fraud measure on the grounds that it would cost them votes.

  • The news was not so good at the Indiana Court of appeals, which saw a 2-1 ruling permitting adoptions by same-sex couples. Beyond the rightness or wrongness of the decision, I find it highly unfortunate that the courts are again legislating from the bench. While the federal court made the right decision in not revoking a legislative act, the state court decided to sidestep the legislature and make law rather than interpret law.

  • I am still amused by the hypocrisy of those who proclaim "separation of church and state" in response to those in opposition to the Bloomington City Council's proposed "gender identity" ordinance. This argument fails on three grounds:

    1. The city brought in a minister to speak for the ordinance from a "Christian" perspective in a city-endorsed time spot; why are the advocates of "separation of church and state" not scolding the City Council?
    2. The Constitution prohibits government from establishing a state religion, but it does not prohibit moral values in government.
    3. It is the Bloomington City Council, not opponents of the "gender identity" ordinance, who are trying to put moral values into law.

  • Animal "rights" jihadists in Britain stooped to the utterly despicable level of stealing the remains of an 82 year old woman who died in 1997 and held those remains hostage in an attempt to blackmail a family that bred guinea pigs for medical research. (See more in this BBC article and this article in the Guardian.) These animal "rights" jihadists are truly a bunch of despicable, sick, depraved, disgusting, evil perverts.