"The Official Portrait of Miss InDiana"

"The Official Portrait of Miss InDiana"
aka "Miss Victory"

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

Ed Angleton on 'the enemy of my enemy'

John Price, a close friend and ally of Eric Miller, refuses to acknowledge requests from Hoosiers For Fair Taxation to join the statewide property tax repeal alliance inspite of the fact that the group's founder, Melyssa Donaghy, led the tax revolts in Indianapolis. Melyssa is a heterosexual member of Indy Pride, a local GLBT organization. She joined them in 2005 because she fervently believes that a healthy society embraces diversity, is tolerant of others self-expression, and that judgment of others impedes self-actualization of individuals and society.

In the essay below, Ed Angleton, a former democrat turned Libertarian, weighs in on Eric Miller's divisive February 1st rally that hijacked property tax anger to the issue of gay marriage.
HFFT

Friday, Feburary 1 2007 - Indiana Statehouse
by Ed Angleton


A crowd had gathered to attend a rally that had ostensibly been organized to promote the efforts to repeal property taxes. The sponsering organization, Advance America, and its founder, Eric Miller, have been among the leading voices in the tax repeal movement. But, Advance America, has, in my opinion, a darker, more sinister side. Under the guise of protecting "family values", Advance America has an agenda that would restrict personal liberty, subvert the Bill of Rights, and regulate some citizens of this state to second class status.

Even so, I was glad when they weighed in on the side of tax reform. It was, for me, a situation similar to that faced by Winston Churchill, a dedicated foe of Communism, when Hitler's Germany invaded the Soviet Union. Churchill at the time remarked on his new ally, "If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.

"It has often been said, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". This is not always true. Sometimes, the enemy of my enemy can be a useful ally, but if that ally has his own agenda that ultimately is incompatable with our own belief structure and values, then that alliance must be vigilently monitored. This is most vividly illustrated by another quote from Sir Winston. After the war, Stalin had reneged on his guarantees of free elections in the counties that became known as the Eastern Block, and Churchill described it in his customary elequent way, "From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an iron curtain has descended across the Continent."

Thus, Friday's rally at the stathouse became one in which the emphasis was shifted from tax repeal to support for the amendment banning "Gay Marriage", which goes far beyond that in its scope. An attempt to protest the change of direction away from taxes was shouted down. With "friends" like these, it is doubtful that any real momentum on repeal is possible. Even reform is in jeopardy as the elected minions of Mr. Miller have introduced amendments to bills that would make them unpalitable and unpassable. The alliance crafted to fight an unfair tax is in danger of splitting apart much to the delight of those politicians who think that they know, more than we, what is best for us.

I call upon all men and women of men and women of good conscience must do what they feel is correct, even if it hurts us economically. To do anything else is cowardice.

Remember:
First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.

Variation on a poem attributed to Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

If the alliance is fractured, it is solely the responsibility of Advance America and it's leader Eric Miller for trying to bind these two issues together.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Seems as though Eric Miller has been for the marriage amendment for a long time and never hid that fact from anyone. He also has been working to elimiate property taxes. My take is -(and what most people think) what people do is their own business but since the homosexual community started to try to dismantle marriage to suit it's agenda that has caused the real problem. As far as I can see, anyone can form contracts and legal arrangements, including power of attorney for health and property matters but what the homosexuals want is the tax benefits of legal marriage- meaning married filing joint returns etc. Since marriage and having children only in the confines of marriage seems to have gone by the wayside, I really can't see why homosexuals care if they are married except for tax reasons. They pushed and now mad because people who believe in the institution of marriage as it is as are pushing back. I see more hateful statements from the homosexual side than what I just wrote without malice toward anyone. I shall now await the venom to spew forth. I also dislike the stance that we who do not want to legalize marriage between people of the same sex, are haters and bigots. That has been stated here and on Advance Indiana in tabloid style. That seems to be a method to coerce us into shutting up and like screaming children letting them have their way even though we feel it is detriment to society's framework and standard definition of marrige and confusing to children.

Anonymous said...

Hitler allowed the British Army to escape at Dunkirk. It has been said that Hitler was looking for a deal to end the war reasonably. Mr. Churchill didn't see it that way. But, when the war was over he is said to have said, "We killed the wrong pig". For some reason the revisionist histories of WWII have been a long time coming even as Alan Greenspan, revisionist, can say that the war in Iraq is and always was about oil.

HOOSIERS FOR FAIR TAX said...

We are not happy that Eric Miller is hitching up a gay marriage ban to property tax anger.

The two are in no way related other than both property tax and government intrusion into marriage are oppression.

Ed Angleton said...

The "marriage" amendment has consequences more far reaching than barring the recognized union of any combination other than one man and one woman. It's far more sinister side comes in the form "(b) This Constitution or any other Indiana law may not be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."(1)

Thus, it would be possible for legislation to be passed prohibiting employers for voluntarily granting the legal incidents of marriage such as spousal health and pension benefits to not only homosexual couples but to unmarried heterosexual couples as well.

I also know homosexual couples who have jointly adopted children from overseas. Would allowing their adoptive parents form a legal union be confusing to them?

Ultimately, this is not about whether SJR007 should or should not be passed for that is a question each individual must decide for him/herself, hopefully without hysteria and fear mongering, but about the co-opting of the tax repeal/reform movement for other purposes. This is just wrong, just as I feel that the attaching of amendments to bills in the Legislature and Congress that have no relation to the main purpose of the bill is wrong. One bill should equal one law.

(1) Text taken from SJR007

Anonymous said...

The gay movement in Indiana is staunchly supporting an anti-liberty agenda including HR-1076 -- the hate crime bill that would stifle free speech.

Rather than defend liberty they are making excuses.

Either you're for the gay agenda or your for the libertarian agenda. You cannot be for both.

Ed Angleton said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ed Angleton said...

I never said I fully supported "hate" crime legislation or the "gay agenda", whatever that is. I am writing solely on my objections to combining the tax repeal/reform movement with SJR007, which in my mind would restrict "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" of many of Indiana's citizens, both gay and straight.

The question of free speech in a free society and the repercussions that speech may have, have long been the subject of debate of learned scholars. I shall not engage that debate in this forum, or any other for that matter for I believe that it is a question that can never be adequately settled to anyone's complete satisfaction.

Anonymous said...

February 5, 2008 11:38 AM wrote: Rather than defend liberty they are making excuses.

Ed then wrote: I shall not engage that debate in this forum, or any other for that matter for I believe that it is a question that can never be adequately settled to anyone's complete satisfaction.

Ed, it seems you are doing exactly what February 5, 2008 11:38 AM predicted: making excuses for not fighting a gay-friendly, anti-libertarian agenda.

Ed Angleton said...

Oh, very well done. Let's not bother to quote the whole of my remarks, when making your attack. You sir are not an ethical debater.

If you truly believe in personal liberty and freedom of speech, then allow me the liberty to choose not to debate a topic which has no relevance to the crux of my essay, i.e. the joining of SJR007 to the property tax question.

DavidM said...

Is this really about the right of citizens to have an referendum on gay marriage or is it about property tax relief. Bring this to the public does nothing for the cause of our real cause, property tax relief.

Anonymous said...

DavidM....our REAL cause is property tax repeal/reform. Look how hard people work for it.

On the other hand, it is likely not Miller's true cause. If you doubt me, just watch what he does.

Taxpayer said...

The bottom line here is, or should be, that the government has no business in our bedrooms, and that gay marriage and property tax reform have no relationship with one another -- aside from the fact that taxes threaten EVERYONE's home, whether the owners are gay or straight.

Don't know about any of the other responders, but my straight marriage is in no way threatened by the relationships of my gay friends, some of which have lasted several times longer than numerous straight marriages I know about. Let's get this organization, and this fight, back where it belongs -- on SAVING OUR HOMES.