Friday, August 06, 2010

That's not how you're supposed to make meatloaf!

Fellow Diners,

Even the Cultural Diner is subject to the occasional visit from the health inspector. You know those folks, right? Sent out by health department as a consumer advocate, to ensure food the public is consuming will be, if not tasteful, at least not poisonous.

It seems to me lately, however, that the health inspector might actually be a Diner employee. I can't prove this, just like no one can prove the media is a Democratic puppy dog, either.

Anyway, let me tell you what is on my mind. I know not everyone likes meatloaf, but I do. I like the way that no two meatloaves (sp?) are the same. Each franchise plays around with the ingredients, adds a pinch of this or a dash of that, and, voila! The secret, and perhaps, unrepeatable secret recipe. Now, the Diner undergoes a renovation every few years; the redesigns are usually nothing drastic, yet over time the place has become unrecognizable to some. Yet the management here is not stupid. They always keep a few of the traditional favorites on the menu, so as not to alienate the older, longtime customers still attached to tradition. Old habits die hard for the traditionalists, a customer base the Diner serves only grudgingly as the rest menu drifts further and further away from the old codgers' tastes. We all know, they'll die off someday anyway, and then we can remove meatloaf from the menu. To be replaced with some sort of "Iron Chef"-du jour, naturally.

Nobody really knows who was the first one to decide that steak and potatoes would go great together. Some claim that the two just sort of fell yogether on one plate by accident once. Others claim there is no good reason but prejudice that keeps two potatoes, or two steaks, from being on the same plate together; and we would still call it steak and potatoes. Hmmm. Something about that may not sound right to you. It didn't sound right to some customers at the Diner either. So when the health inspector told them the menu was going to change, they got together and petitioned for steak and potatoes to remain on the menu; and for steak and potatoes to remain, steak and potatoes. Problem solved, right?

Well, not so fast. Now the health department says those old codgers can't do it that way. It's unfair to the folks who want to order steak and steak; or potatoes and potatoes. This decision threatens to ripple through your local franchise of the Diner, too. So watch out.
_______________________________________________________

Yesterday, federal district court Judge Vaughn Walker overturned California's Proposition 8, which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

While the immediate impact is limited to the state of California, the consequences of this egregious bit of judicial overreach threatens to be nationwide.

Two years ago, the California Supreme Court ruled that denying same-sex couples the right to marry violated the state constitution. In response, supporters of traditional marriage followed California's legal and democratic process: They collected enough signatures to put a proposed amendment to the state constitution on the ballot.

After a hard-fought campaign in which they were outspent by the other side, Proposition 8 supporters, including many African American pastors, enacted the referendum. Having lost the democratic battle, the losers again returned to the courts, this time the federal courts.

They argued that denying same-sex couples the right to marry violated the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Throughout the 13-day trial, Judge Walker's sympathies were clear to observers.

He ruled yesterday that "moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians." Warming to the task, he added that "the evidence shows conclusively that Proposition 8 enacts, without reason"—note that, "without reason"—"a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite sex couples."

Even though his ruling isn't surprising, his dismissal of the opinions of the people of California and five thousand-plus years of human tradition is breath-taking. Then again, inasmuch as Walker is one of the few openly gay federal judges, maybe his dismissal shouldn't shock us, either.

Let's be clear. What's at stake here goes beyond California and even beyond marriage itself. The reasoning that overturned California's law, that said that the right of gays to marry is a fundamental constitutional right, would, if applied nationally, overturn similar laws throughout the country.

As Catholics and Mormons, who led the Proposition 8 campaign, points out, it would be a mistake to think that the battle about the definition of marriage is only over marriage—disastrous as that is. A loss on this issue will have devastating consequences for our personal freedoms.

Catholics and Mormons point to the weakening of parental rights, of course the attack on religious freedom and individuals practicing their faith in public. People who oppose same-sex marriage will be forced to choose between full participation in public life and fidelity to their convictions.

So what comes next? An appeal to Ninth Circuit, the most liberal circuit court in America, and an expedited appeal to Supreme Court.

But my hopes are instead in the groundswell of public outrage and resistance. This is re-writing the Constitution of the United States and undermining the most basic institutions of civilized society.

This is why I have signed the Manhattan Declaration. You should come to http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/, and sign on and get your friends to sign on. It's time we took a stand. Millions of us have got to speak up and say, "No, we'll give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, never to Caesar what belongs to God."

And steak and potatoes will remain steak and potatoes.

Which way do I steer for my Cheeseburger in Paradise?

Omnivorously yours,

~Bill