Whether you support the decision or not, the Supreme Court last week authored a historical decision striking down the Defense of Marriage Act, granting same-sex couples the same federal benefits heterosexual couples enjoy.
The outcome certainly advances history towards a wider acceptance of same-sex relationships.
But the congressional representative for the Lake of the Ozarks area, Harrisonville-native Vicky Hartzler, now in her second term, disparaged the court's decision in a statement released June 26.
Hartzler appeared at a press conference in Washington the same day and was included in the CBS Evening News' coverage of the court's ruling.
Among Hartzler's statements;
"Today the Court got it wrong. The activist ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act ignored the votes of a bipartisan majority of Congress. This alarming precedent disempowers Congress from making national policy with respect to marriage."
Firstly, in no way should Congress dictate the terms of marriage whatsoever.
But I never thought I would read a self-proclaimed Republican-to-the-bone rebuke the court for taking away congressional power.
I would have thought Hartzler a champion of less government regulation. I guess she doesn't prescribe to the same Republican party that fostered the presidency of Ronald Reagan.
"It is wise public policy upholding the reality that every child needs a mom and a dad, and society benefits when they do."
Line up, single parents across the country. Turn your children in. You're not giving your children what they need.
I believe children need love, stability and a good grounding in moral virtue. Those provisions can be derived from any number of parental combinations.
"We will continue to work to protect marriage..."
This one gets me every time. The term 'protect [or defend, take your pick] marriage' is used for one aim: to instill fear, distrust and create a divide between Americans based on their differences.
Marriage doesn't need protecting from Rep. Hartzler, because marriage means something different to everyone. I resent Rep. Hartzler's desire to create a wedge between heterosexual people and everyone else.
The only people in need of protection is 4th district constituents from speech actions used for the sole purpose of demonizing and hurting others.
I dislike Rep. Hartzler because she insists on this contradictory platform of government power in combination with attempts to continually marginalize a segment of her constituents.
If you get a chance to meet Rep. Hartzler, suggest to her that she cast stones at a person granted a divorce the next time she sees or interacts with him or her. Hartzler wouldn't do it, even if the Bible dictates such an appropriate punishment, because the law classifies that reaction as assault, but more importantly, society has determined that the historical and biblical penalty for divorce is inhumane and outdated.
Page 2 of 2 - Why does Hartzler insist on embarking on and maintaining a crusade to ruin the lives of other people, many of whom live in her district?
I wrote in a column some months ago that sometimes people, whether they like it or not, need to be dragged into societal realities. Rep. Hartzler can — and should — maintain her personal beliefs. But they shouldn't impede on the lives of others when they've done nothing to deserve condemnation. It's rather entitled of her.
I implore — and hope you do too — Rep. Hartzler to search within herself to identify if she truly wants spend her time in our broken capitol waging war against American citizens who merely want to pursue their God-given right to happiness and life-fulfillment, instead of solely addressing issues in desperate need of attention in this country.
Because to preclude a very real portion of the American population from a basic right is much like the ancient punishment for divorce — antiquated.