Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Monday, March 25, 2019

Abraham Lincoln said it best.

As the drums of disunion began to drown out the softer melodies of comity and reason, Lincoln, a candidate for U.S. Senate, warned a convention of Illinois Republicans that the nation could not escape its moment of decision.

“A house divided against itself cannot stand,” he said in a celebrated 1858 speech. “I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other.”

The showdown he foresaw came three years later, when the guns began to fire at Fort Sumter

Today we face another division of the house — and another looming showdown. This one will not be resolved with guns — the violence will be rhetorical — but it will be difficult, nonetheless.

We took a step toward the showdown last week when the IRS announced that married, same-sex couples will now be allowed to file joint federal tax returns, just as married opposite-sex couples do. Adam and Steve — or Keisha and Rose — will be entitled to all the federal exemptions and deductions marriage provides, even if they live in states that prohibit same-sex marriage. Washington will recognize their union, even if North Carolina does not.

You may think that is simply proof North Carolina and other recalcitrant states are on the wrong side of history — again — and will eventually and belatedly have to concede the fact. You’re right, except that it may not be as eventual and belated as you think.

Consider Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which reads, in part, as follows: “Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other state.”

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 0

43 responses to “IRS Ruling Moves Us Forward”

  1. disqus_ivSI3ByGmh says:

    About the only way for same-sex marriage to finally be accepted would be for a couple married in Connecticut to file for divorce in North Carolina. While the judge may initially refuse to hear the case on the grounds that Same-Sex Marriage is not recognized in North Carolina, the couple could then hire an attorney to sue the state for failure to recognize Article IV, Section 1 in how it relates to Connecticut having legalized Same-Sex Marriage. This was the same argument used in the Loving v. Virginia case that forced recognition of Interracial Marriage.

    • S1AMER says:

      Actually, such cases have been brought in various hostile states over the past few years. And the couples have lost in state courts.

      The Texas state supreme court will hear the latest case there this fall. We’ll see what happens.

  2. Dominick Vila says:

    The same people who oppose marriage equality, who are determined to make it as difficult as possible for some members of our society to vote, who want to deny seniors the benefits they paid for, who want to limit access to higher education to the privileged few, who are fighting ACA tooth and nail, who oppose making those who own 2/3 of our wealth to pay their fair share of taxes to re-establish fiscal responsibility and stop borrowing, and who are proud to announce that they want to take us back to the good ole days, are the ones who often benefit the most from the very things they purportedly oppose. They just don’t want to admit it, and prefer to blame the boogeyman for their lack of personal and social responsibility.

    • Dominick Vila says:

      Is the National Memo aware that they have a “running script” problem that makes it difficult for contributors to access their threads? If you are, are you working on a solution and, most importantly, have you verified the problem is not caused by a virus? I don’t know about anyone else, but I have been getting some weird messages asking me to change my security code, and I have to restart my computer after failed attempts to open NM threads. I don’t have any problems with all the other websites I log on.

      • Bill Thompson says:

        Dominick I have had no problems with my computer I am in New York

      • latebloomingrandma says:

        I’ve been having the same problems.

      • BarbaraMI says:

        I think it’s caused by the software that controls the ads and petitions. When it wants to show you several at once the conflict makes it freeze up. I notice when the script finally stops the petition or ad at the top of the screen changes. I’m a woman in Michigan so it want to show me two or three petitions to Gov. Snyder plus one for Hilary, …

        • Dominick Vila says:

          Thank you for the feedback. Come to think of it, the problems I have experienced usually occur when ads appear at the top of the screen or when I get petitions from the NM sponsors. It is very annoying.

          • RobertCHastings says:

            I live in NC and am having the same issue.

          • BarbaraMI says:

            I wasn’t able to view NM articles all week. After stopping the long-running scripts four times, Explorer crashed. I changed my default browser to Google Chrome and it works fine again.

            Hope to see you posting again soon.

        • CPAinNewYork says:

          Software revisions cost money. The website is all right as it is.

      • Landsende says:

        Dominick, I didn’t receive NM for about two weeks and emailed them. They indicated they were experiencing problems but hoped to have them fixed soon. If you continue to have problems it might be worthwhile to contact them.

        • Dominick Vila says:

          I didn’t get their daily messages for several days. When they resume their daily transmission the problem was not as bad as before, but I still have problems almost every day. I am surprised they have not issued a statement regarding this problem. I am sure I am not the only one who thought I was having a computer problem and spent a lot of time troubleshooting, until I noticed I did not have any problems accessing other websites.

      • elw says:

        Thank you Dominick for bring this up. I am in California and am having the same problem. I have even considered giving up the National Memo, even through it is my favorite news site. Hope they get it fixed soon, I am running out of patience,

        • CPAinNewYork says:

          You’re running out of patience? Why? Do you seriously have anything else to do?
          Reprogramming websites is expensive. You really don’t need a “thread” and neither does anyone else, including me. Do you really think that your thoughts are that important?

          • elw says:

            Gee CPAinNewYork, you must have taken a ugly pill this morning, relax.

          • CPAinNewYork says:

            Just telling it the way I see it. Engaging in argument on this website is a form of entertainment free of charge. Don’t push your dissatisfaction to the point where those maintaining it decide to pull the plug.

      • edwardw69 says:

        It is a real problem for me. And no problem with other sites. I am becoming leery of opening NM, although it is my favorite. What is a “long running script” anyway? It just happened again with this article.

        • Barbara Morgan says:

          I have had a long running script showing up my computer but it has happened to me on other sites, does the script you see have a x at the top of it on the right side, mine does.

          • edwardw69 says:

            There is an x. I haven’t clicked it. I click the “stop script’ but it usually doesn’t work and I have to shut-off the machine with the five second shutdown.

          • Barbara Morgan says:

            I click the x and it goes away. Might work for you .

      • CPAinNewYork says:

        Maybe you’re on too mant websites. You sound like a bored retired senior.

      • CPAinNewYork says:

        Tell us when you get an answer.

    • TZToronto says:

      Many of those who oppose the things you mention live in states that benefit the most from federal funding. At the same time they’re feeding from the federal trough, they’re decrying big government in Washington. Apparently they think there’s a money tree growing in the backyard of the Capitol Building.

    • RobertCHastings says:

      My wife’s uncle always talks about “the good old days”, that time in our history when things appeared to be simpler, more distinct, more easily comprehended. Most of us realize that time never was as good as it is remembered as being, simply because we understand the fallibility of memory. Our childhoods were as fraught with unidentified and unrecognized dangers as is the childhood of children today. With or without media, very few of us experience news first-hand, the events that shape the world are always received rather than experienced. Life is, and was, lived vicariously, it is just that there are more sources for vicarious living. Drugs, prostitution, divorce, gambling, war, bigotry, hatred, crime, all the ills that poison our society existed during the childhoods of those who yearn for “the good old days”. The time of our lives that is important is today, and what we do today is just as important as what we remember having done yesterday.

    • Barbara Morgan says:

      I grew up in what is considered the good ole days and the only good ole days I recall is the love of my parents and the love of my siblings, which I am lucky enough to still have for all of them are still be alive, our parents are gone.
      So I don’t consider the good ole days good, to much racism, to much violence against women and children, to many dying because of not being able to pay for medical care., minimum wage ranging from 75 cent an hour up to a $1.25 an hour in 1964 to many women dying because of backstreet abortions, and a lots more that meant there were no good ole days.

  3. howa4x says:

    The republican party has become era re enactors. Not civil war buffs, they are trying to re enact the 1950’s ,when women were more subservient, and stayed home having kids. Men were the only real bread winners. Afro Americans were discriminated against in voting and banned from lunch counters, since segregation was ok.. During this period abortions were a back ally thing, and religion ruled. Everyone worshiped on the weekends and most towns had Blue laws prohibiting anyone from doing business on the Sabbath. Gays were called Fags and were subject to arrest for just being one, and Lesbians were more of a perverse oddity. A transvestite was national news. Dissent wasn’t tolerated and those who did it were called commies or trouble makers. People still died from communicable diseases and polio was still a scare. White Christian men ruled this domain unquestioned.
    This is republican nirvana, and what they are trying to get back to.

    • disqus_LcxpBv2uzz says:

      I remember growing up in the good old days in the north, and being too young and naive to understand the ramifications of racism until leaving home to go to college. While traveling south by train, we stopped periodically and it was in North Carolina that I first saw segregated toilet facilities. There were 3 sets of rest rooms: White Women, White Men and Colored. So for the “Coloreds”, it was just like Europe: unisex rest rooms. (I’ve always thought that was pretty progressive, and after numerous trips to Europe, I regularly use the lady’s room here in the states if the men’s room is occupied). But I digress. As the train got deeper into the south, signs appeared in some small towns that read, in effect, “nigger, don’t let the sun set on your black ass in (name of town)”. This was shortly before the Civil Rights Act was enacted, which after seeing such overt racism, prompted me to work for its passage. I wonder if these are “the good old days” that the “good old boys” from the tea parties want to see restored?

      • howa4x says:

        I know traveling by car to Fla in 67 we stopped at Pedro’s south of the border and for the 1st time in my life saw dining rooms and restrooms marked for colored only and white only. In Georgia they wouldn’t serve us because our hair was a little long. Told us to go to the Negra side of town to eat, which we did. At least they had Sam and Dave on the Juke instead of grand ole Oprie

  4. latebloomingrandma says:

    In our country which has “United” in its name, rights should be rights in all 50 states. If the SCOTUS determined that DOMA is unconstitutional, then it should be so in all 50.
    Kind of like–If a=b and b=c, then a=c.

  5. jointerjohn says:

    Let me make this simple. I care not whether any two people who commit to lifelong partnership have dissimilar reproductive organs. To be obsessed with it is sick, as is the far right of American politics. Beware of these people, they are prone to intrusion into our personal freedoms, the next one may be yours.

    • RobertCHastings says:

      I am TRYING to read a book that deals with the philosophical differences between conservative and liberal. The book is entitled “Moral Politics” by George Lakoff, and it demonstrates that both liberal and conservative approach ALL issues from the standpoint of family. Conservatives use the Strict parent approach, while liberals use the Nurturing parent approach. This is a simplistic evaluation of the book, but it makes things a little clearer for me. As strict parents, conservatives see a need for people to get what they need on their own and always tell the truth, etc. As Nurturing parents, liberals see the value of social programs, etc.

      • disqus_LcxpBv2uzz says:

        If this “strict parent” theory is true, then conservatives are failing because they uniformly fail to tell the truth. Look at their track record in the political arena. Res ipsa loquitur.

        • RobertCHastings says:

          The book I am reading was published in 2002, and takes into account BOTH the Clinton impeachment process AND the election of George W Bush. Depending upon just when the book went to the publisher, it may also deal with 9/11and its aftermath. But you are right on target by noting the dissonance between their requirement to tell the truth and their actual behavior. Those who pushed for the impeachment of Clinton had issues of their own. Gingrich was having an affair while his wife was in the hospital receiving cancer therapy and was in the process of being censured by his own Ethics Committee. Bob Livingston, who was in line to replace Gingrich, admitted to no less than five affairs. Henry Hyde was found to have had an illegitimate child in his twenties. It is somewhat hypocritical for the strict parent to censure the child for imitating the parent.

      • jointerjohn says:

        Today’s so-called conservatives love absolutes. They also want everyone to behave the way they see fit, which puts them at odds with their self-professed love of freedom. Liberals are much more comfortable to live and let live.

        • RobertCHastings says:

          precisely the difference between strict parent and nurturing parent.

        • CPAinNewYork says:

          Liberals are as intolerant of conservatives’ opinions as conservatives are of liberals’ opinions.
          Personally, I don’t expect to change anybody’s opinions, so I don’t argue politics with friends. That’s why I do that here, using my alias. It’s fun without endangering my relationships with long standing friends.

  6. lana ward says:

    America is slouching faster and faster toward Gomorrah

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.