Americans Trade Their Right to Habeus Corpus For Marriage Equality?


Let us get this straight. The government has the right to jail us forever, for no reason, as long as we can get married there?

How quick Americans and the media are to forget about the stripping of our basic human rights, as seen so casually and easily with indefinite detention made permanent law by the National Defense Authorization Act.  Throw us a social bone — the basic right to marry — and the country’s most atrocious crime against its people is a distant memory, even though groundbreaking progress against the nasty 2012 NDAA provisions by Occupy activist Chris Hedges is going on right now.

As it stands, Section 1021 is open to an interpretation that could subject anyone who has ever come into contact with Al Qaeda or “associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States,” to indefinite detention. Considering Al Qaeda is just a convenient legal name for a non-grouping of groups that have similar distaste for US foreign policy, it was easy for the judge and even the government’s own lawyers to see how just about anyone can fall into a zealous government’s definition of “any person”.

(Judge) Forrest found the language too vague, and repeatedly tried to get government attorneys to say that the reporters’ fears were unfounded. The lawyers declined.

“At the hearing on this motion, the government was unwilling or unable to state that these plaintiffs would not be subject to indefinite detention under [section] 1021,” Forrest wrote. “Plaintiffs are therefore at risk of detention, of losing their liberty, potentially for many years.

“An individual could run the risk of substantially supporting or directly supporting an associated force without even being aware that he or she was doing so,” Forrest wrote. “In the face of what could be indeterminate military detention, due process requires more.”

We are all caught up on a man’s stated opinion on a social issue directly affecting some of us*, when in fact it is that same man’s actions that affect all of us, but on a much deeper level.  Why are social issues so much more important to us than foundational issues — the foundation upon which we can afford to debate these social issues at all?

Why is there so much back-patting for Obama on social media, while his actions are backstabbing to the same fans/base?

Bread and circuses.  Join us on Facebook and read The Shock Doctrine.

*Indeed, marriage equality does affect all of us, some more directly than others. Debate over this perspective is best discussed outside of jail, so feel free (because you currently are) to comment below.


About OccupyEducated

Comments

  1. Nope says:

    The only choices we have are either NDAA and marriage equality (Obama), or NDAA, no marriage equality, longer wars, etc (Romney).

    • OccupyEducated says:

      sick, isn’t it? Although, to be clear, it’s not marriage equality, it’s Obama giving his opinion on something he currently has no control over. And Obama doesn’t seem to be ending any wars anytime soon. Shifting troop location, maybe, but still warring with them, + drones + economic warfare.

      Anyway, should we start fighting for what we really want some other time? Post election?

Speak Your Mind

*