God, Genitals and Harriet Miers

So, the Jesus-freaks are up in arms about Harriet Miers' nomination for the Supreme Court. And many of us (the non-deital aligned and rational blokes of this nation) have scratched our heads a lot about the right-wing uproar. Could it be that fundamentalists are afraid she might suddenly turn pro-life one day down the line? Hardly. If anyone really thinks Bush would select someone who wasn't adamantly 'towing-the-line' on this issue, then they haven't been paying attention to his style of governance for the past five years. So, is it that she might possibly rule on other issues in less than an uber-Christianly manner? Again, another strike. Not only are her evangelical electives being pushed front and center in her nomination, she's the sort of Christian that Jesus tracked down for her 'born-again' conversion smack dab in the middle of the offices where she worked. Alrighty, then it has to be that these angst-ridden WASPs are upset about what many liberals are also offended by; the fact that she's never, ever held a judicial post. Well, besides some highly-educated Republicans such as Robert Bork and a random politician here and there, I don't sense that her lack of time on any bench is really bothering the religious right that much. They've been told for too many years now that judges are mostly vile and evil pseudo-dictators re-writing the fabric of their beliefs from the bench. And from various articles I've read and the comments of nutbars like Dobson, Robertson and Falwell, it seems that a trial-by-fire nominee, as opposed to a previously jaded judge, has a certain appeal to pre-programmed God-fearing folks. So, again, where's the rub, as my old friend Willie Shakes used to ask? Well, all I can say is praise be to the Founding Fathers that we still have pithy comedians and commentators in our midst, because thanks to them, I get it now.

Last night, as is the case most every Friday night, I watched 'Real Time with Bill Mahr' on HBO and during one of the show's ending segments, Mr. Mahr went on a rant about this particular topic. And the revelation his acerbic wit laid in front of me made me blink as much as Bush during an interview as I realized how simple the answer really was…and how it's always the driving force behind any damned thing that gets the Godfreaks going…yes, once again, it's about sex. How could I have been so blind? (no masturbatory innuendos intended)

I've since discovered a few other places where this sentiment has been expressed, but I believe the outline of the issue by Mr. Mahr is the most concise and practical of them all. Though I can't yet find the transcript of his rant, which would be too lengthy to post here anyway, I'll do my best to convey the basics of this dissection of the dissent using Mr. Mahr's suggestion as a springboard (and, naturally, heavily laced with ad-libs and expansions from myself)…

FACTS: Harriet Miers is a 60 year-old woman who has never been married and never had children.

PROBLEM: There are only five possible explanations of the sexual life-choices/preferences that could result in this outcome;

1) she is a heterosexual woman who is still a virgin. Frightening concept, but considering the tone of her past love-letters to Bush, it could always be a remote possibility.

2) she is a heterosexual woman who has had sexual relationships with a man (or men) outside of wedlock. Heaven forbid! That would mean she's merely an old slut to many Christians prudes.

3) she is a lesbian. This only deserves one listing because, in the minds of a fundamentalist, if she swings this way then it really doesn't matter if she's ever consummated it or not…she's just as damned either way.

4) she is asexual or only has sex with herself. Bible-thumpers would find this an even worse transgression than having guilt-free sex with men…women, if they aren't 'funny', are supposed to lay down and submit to males, hopefully with a baby popping out eventually. Not sharing it has got to be a sin somehow.

5) she is (in the exact words of Mr. Mahr) a chick-with-a-dick. No summary of the GOP's problems with this potential twist needs added by me.

So, in a nutshell, there you have it. Christians are upset because they can't figure out which way she swings, or if she even swings at all (again, no innuendo to possibility #5 above is intended). I still can't believe that I didn't figure this out on my own. As I said a minute ago, it's almost always about the genitals when it comes to the outcries of the sexually repressed. Of course, these people that can't decide if she's got God up her skirt or not are generally the same ones belonging to the segment of our society with the highest rates of divorce, infidelity, pedophilia and infanticide. Go figure... Jage