Partly Cloudy


Court didn’t follow Huelskamp’s Law

Gay marriage ruling outrages congressman

By The Mercury

Tim Huelskamp, who represents Manhattan and the rest of the 1st Congressional District in Congress, is at it again.

He’s not just unhappy with the Supreme Court’s ruling Wednesday on the Defense of Marriage Act, he’s outraged. And acting as a voice in the Kansas wilderness, he’s announced plans to introduce in Congress a proposal to make gay marriage unconstitutional.

Such a proposal doesn’t have a chance, but one senses that’s not his point. He’s intent on making more noise than any of the others who object — and there are many — to the Court’s ruling.

Rep. Huelskamp, a Tea Party favorite, resorts to the usual arch-conservative code words in denouncing the five justices who dared insist that discrimination against gay couples is unconstitutional.

Said Rep. Huelskamp: “A very narrow 5-4 Court majority has substituted its personal preferences on marriage for the constitutional decisions of the American people and their elected representatives. In doing so, five activist judges have short-circuited the democratic process.”

For good measure, he added, “The Court had neither logic nor constitutional principles in mind.”

He then waxed moralistic, saying, “These unelected judges have allowed the desires of adults to trump the needs of children,” and argued that research and human experience “all agree that children do best when they have a married mom and dad in the home. This ruling further undermines that ideal, causing harm to America’s children and all of society.”

Possibly, but it’s hard to imagine same sex marriage doing any more harm to children and society than the heterosexual households in this country in which children are neglected or worse.

If it’s loving families that benefit children and society, those ought to include single-parent households as well as households led by gay parents.

Rep. Huelskamp is correct that the Court did not override DOMA in its entirety and did not sweep away states’ constitutional amendments banning gay marriage, including the one in Kansas that he sponsored as a state senator.

And he’s also correct in declaring, “It’s not over.” But the reason it’s not over isn’t because the rights the Supreme Court upheld must be stripped away, as Rep. Huelskamp insists. Rather, it’s not over because public support for — or at least acceptance of — gay marriage continues to grow and now constitutes a small majority in the United States.

Rep. Huelskamp won’t get his federal constitutional amendment. There’s no way he’ll get a two-thirds majority in the Republican-controlled House, where even a simple majority is no longer a certainty. 

Which leaves him ranting that Supreme Court justices aren’t following the law when their real offense is not following Rep. Huelskamp’s Law.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | The Manhattan Mercury, 318 North 5th Street, Manhattan, Kansas, 66502 | Copyright 2017