the what hatch doesn’t get list

Posted on July 9, 2004 by Lessig

Ernie’s beginning a list.

This entry was posted in bad law. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to the what hatch doesn’t get list

  1. Edward says:
    July 9, 2004 at 11:48 am

    I’m not a fan of Andrew Sullivan but here is an excerpt from his blog suggesting something else Hatch doesn’t get:

    QUOTE OF THE DAY: “For a simple and compelling reason, traditional marriage has been the norm in every political community for 5,000 years.” – Senator Orrin Hatch, National Review. Hatch is a Mormon.

  2. Barry D Bayer says:
    July 12, 2004 at 7:11 am

    Pat Leahy is listed as a co-sponsor of INDUCE!
    Is my information incorrect?
    If not, why is Leahy getting a pass on this one?

  3. Dave Ethington says:
    July 12, 2004 at 9:28 am

    Hatch is a Mormon.

    So am I. What does that have to do with the Induce act?

  4. Rob says:
    July 12, 2004 at 3:52 pm

    I think he was insinuating that Hatch is a hypocrite by talking about traditional marriage being the norm for 5000 years while the old Mormon practice of polygamy is “untraditional”. It all depends what you consider “traditional” I suppose. To a Mormon in those days, I’m sure polygamy was traditional.

    I’m more interested in this “simple and compelling reason” Hatch mentions. I doubt it is simple or particularly compelling.

  5. Dave Ethington says:
    July 12, 2004 at 5:53 pm

    I’m sure there are many people who take exception with Hatch’s views on marriage and with that statement in particular. My point was that nowhere in the Mormon faith is there justification for the abominable INDUCE act, so why even bring it up?

    As one of his constituents, I used to feel he was pretty clued in and fairly represented our state. But now I think he’s really lost all sense of balance. He knows he’ll get re-elected no matter what, and that most of Utah (and the country) pays no attention to Intellectual property issues. The induce act didn’t even make the local papers (as far as I could find, anyway).

  6. Rob says:
    July 13, 2004 at 7:57 am

    My point was that nowhere in the Mormon faith is there justification for the abominable INDUCE act, so why even bring it up?

    Well, this is a thread about Orrin Hatch, not just the INDUCE act. Also, you seem to not realize that the way Americans discuss politics is to impugn the character of the opponent. Then once you’ve tarred your opponent with whatever brush is handy on one issue, you can automatically discount him on any other position: “President Clinton is a philanderer, therefore his views on healthcare and foreign policy are indefensible.” Or, “Orrin Hatch is a hypocrite when he talks about traditional marriage, therefore we can summarily dismiss anything he proposes regardless of their merits.” It doesn’t make any kind of logical sense, but most Americans don’t care about logic. That’s too much like thinking, and thinking hurts our brains.

Leave a Reply