hooray for homophobia...
June 3, 2006 11:12 AM Subscribe
Big Bad Gay Couples are invading!!! Chicken Little! The sky is falling!!! Cafferty highlights the upcoming speech by Bush supporting the Gay Marriage Ban that is trying to be pushed through Congress. I would say this is mundane and irritating except for the responses given at the end. Especially the one about the divorced man. [via crooks and liars]
CAFFERTY: President Bush is going to drag an old wedge issue out of the closet Monday -- you should pardon the expression -- and talk about a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
Heh.
posted by brain_drain at 11:26 AM on June 3, 2006
Heh.
posted by brain_drain at 11:26 AM on June 3, 2006
America was founded by immigrants (who we now shun) like the Pilgrims and the Quakers that were escaping religious persecution. The whole point of America was that you could believe whatever you wanted to believe, and live your life the way you wanted to live your life, the only condition being so long as you did not harm others or their property.
Now we have a situation where religion is being used as a justification to pass this gay marriage ban, to prevent people from living their lives the way they want. The people don't seem to give two shits about the government spying on the lives of Americans either. Seriously. What is wrong with this place? This gay marriage ban is the antithesis of everything it means to be American, whether you believe being gay (or gay marriage) is immoral or not.
posted by banished at 11:40 AM on June 3, 2006 [1 favorite]
Now we have a situation where religion is being used as a justification to pass this gay marriage ban, to prevent people from living their lives the way they want. The people don't seem to give two shits about the government spying on the lives of Americans either. Seriously. What is wrong with this place? This gay marriage ban is the antithesis of everything it means to be American, whether you believe being gay (or gay marriage) is immoral or not.
posted by banished at 11:40 AM on June 3, 2006 [1 favorite]
From the comments page on C & L:
"Michael in Superior, Wisconsin: "Of course now is the time for President Bush to back the ban on gay marriages. Iraq is secure, so are our borders, the government is prepared for hurricane season, no rogue nations are trying to develop nuclear weapons, gas prices are stable, personal income far outpaces inflation, and we're enjoying a time of peace and prosperity. Obviously, there's nothing else he needs to concentrate on right now."
well said. personally I wish Cafferty would run for President...
posted by rmm at 11:56 AM on June 3, 2006
"Michael in Superior, Wisconsin: "Of course now is the time for President Bush to back the ban on gay marriages. Iraq is secure, so are our borders, the government is prepared for hurricane season, no rogue nations are trying to develop nuclear weapons, gas prices are stable, personal income far outpaces inflation, and we're enjoying a time of peace and prosperity. Obviously, there's nothing else he needs to concentrate on right now."
well said. personally I wish Cafferty would run for President...
posted by rmm at 11:56 AM on June 3, 2006
This gay marriage ban is the antithesis of everything it means to be American
All men are created equal (offer not valid in red states)
posted by kgasmart at 11:57 AM on June 3, 2006
All men are created equal (offer not valid in red states)
posted by kgasmart at 11:57 AM on June 3, 2006
I much prefered the C&L link to Victor Wooten playing Amazing Grace.
posted by furtive at 11:58 AM on June 3, 2006
posted by furtive at 11:58 AM on June 3, 2006
The whole point of America was that you could believe whatever you wanted to believe, and live your life the way you wanted to live your life, the only condition being so long as you did not harm others or their property.
That was always a bit of a case of the mouth making promises the trousers couldn't deliver, though, wasn't it? I mean, I can't see gay people or the transgendered ever having been allowed to live their lives exactly as they wanted in the early days of the US. Or, say, Satanists or witches or whoever, for that matter. It's certainly a lofty, admirable goal for a nation, but I'm yet to be convinced that America has ever actually been governed by or had a majority who genuinely agreed with that sentiment.
posted by terpsichoria at 12:04 PM on June 3, 2006
That was always a bit of a case of the mouth making promises the trousers couldn't deliver, though, wasn't it? I mean, I can't see gay people or the transgendered ever having been allowed to live their lives exactly as they wanted in the early days of the US. Or, say, Satanists or witches or whoever, for that matter. It's certainly a lofty, admirable goal for a nation, but I'm yet to be convinced that America has ever actually been governed by or had a majority who genuinely agreed with that sentiment.
posted by terpsichoria at 12:04 PM on June 3, 2006
Re: the divorced guy -
Wayne in Lancaster, PA: "As a heterosexual who's been through two marriages and subsequent divorces, it's obvious to me the president is just trying to protect homosexual couples from the heartbreak and financial ruin that I've experienced"
He's kidding, right? Please tell me he's kidding. The Bush administration has totally destroyed my ability to discern sarcasm from dumb-fuckery.
posted by freshwater_pr0n at 12:12 PM on June 3, 2006
Wayne in Lancaster, PA: "As a heterosexual who's been through two marriages and subsequent divorces, it's obvious to me the president is just trying to protect homosexual couples from the heartbreak and financial ruin that I've experienced"
He's kidding, right? Please tell me he's kidding. The Bush administration has totally destroyed my ability to discern sarcasm from dumb-fuckery.
posted by freshwater_pr0n at 12:12 PM on June 3, 2006
The whole point of America was that you could believe whatever you wanted to believe, and live your life the way you wanted to live your life, the only condition being so long as you did not harm others or their property.
The whole point of America is lost and distorted by the Bush administration. Republicans in with total power have shown us they are neither patriotic or religious.
Hopefully the neocon's shameless use of wedge issues like this will open even Republican eyes by the mid-term election. Ugly un-American Fascism must end in November, or our children will never know freedom again.
posted by BillyElmore at 12:14 PM on June 3, 2006
The whole point of America is lost and distorted by the Bush administration. Republicans in with total power have shown us they are neither patriotic or religious.
Hopefully the neocon's shameless use of wedge issues like this will open even Republican eyes by the mid-term election. Ugly un-American Fascism must end in November, or our children will never know freedom again.
posted by BillyElmore at 12:14 PM on June 3, 2006
He's kidding, right? Please tell me he's kidding.
Dude, I'm in Lancaster, Pa. It's Kool-Aid drinkers as far as the eye can see.
posted by kgasmart at 12:21 PM on June 3, 2006
Dude, I'm in Lancaster, Pa. It's Kool-Aid drinkers as far as the eye can see.
posted by kgasmart at 12:21 PM on June 3, 2006
It's funny how some people (fewer and fewer by the day) think Rove is some sort of neo-Machiavelli. He has one play in his book and it's divide-and-conquer. Got a populace that's ambivalent about Bush and Iraq? Not quite sure invading a desert masquerading as a rogue nation is such a good idea? Well, remind them of teh gay threat, and all those homo babies that will grow up worshipping Satan--get the country talking about another shibboleth, demonizing millions upon millions of the nation's very own populace, and you can get what you want.
But the country isn't ambivalent about Bush and his occupation any longer--70% of the nation thinks he's a loser. And yet Rove is trying to pull this stuff again, because it's the only thing he knows how to do.
It'd be funny if not for the Americans and Iraqis being blown up, shot, and disintegrated on a daily basis.
Without any irony, let me say it again: Worst president ever.
posted by bardic at 12:39 PM on June 3, 2006
But the country isn't ambivalent about Bush and his occupation any longer--70% of the nation thinks he's a loser. And yet Rove is trying to pull this stuff again, because it's the only thing he knows how to do.
It'd be funny if not for the Americans and Iraqis being blown up, shot, and disintegrated on a daily basis.
Without any irony, let me say it again: Worst president ever.
posted by bardic at 12:39 PM on June 3, 2006
If somebody really think your marriage is in peril because of somebody else's then you have other issues far deeper than gay marriage. I've never heard anybody say that their marriage was lessened because of the number of abusive marriages, loveless marriages or marriages ending in divorce or annulment. Their bullet point (it's not an argument, it's just a meme) doesn't hold water unless they're saying "If gay marriage is legalized I'd ditch my wife and marry a guy."
To quote George Washington:
"As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality."
posted by substrate at 12:44 PM on June 3, 2006
To quote George Washington:
"As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality."
posted by substrate at 12:44 PM on June 3, 2006
Conservatives who think Bush has buried the gay marriage issue denounce the planned event as a ruse.
posted by ericb at 12:50 PM on June 3, 2006
posted by ericb at 12:50 PM on June 3, 2006
Also from President Washington:
"It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection, should demean themselves as good citizens."
posted by EarBucket at 12:51 PM on June 3, 2006
"It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection, should demean themselves as good citizens."
posted by EarBucket at 12:51 PM on June 3, 2006
Reposting from the other gay marriage thread --
Another Republican Defender of Marriage:
Another Republican Defender of Marriage:
"Republican Jim Galley, who is running for Congress as a 'pro-traditional family' candidate, was married to two women at the same time, defaulted on his child support payments and has been accused of abuse by one of his ex-wives.posted by ericb at 12:52 PM on June 3, 2006
The San Diego Union-Tribune discovered the personal history in making public-records checks on Galley, who is making his fourth run for elective office in four years. These checks are part of the newspaper's election reporting process.
Galley married his second wife, Beth, in 1982 when, unbeknownst to her, he was still married to his first wife, Terry. Beth and Galley divorced in 1990 after she sought a restraining order alleging abuse.
The child support was owed to his first wife."
[San Diego Union-Tribune | June 02, 2006]
On my gay marriage, by me, a married gay person.
Ever notice how infrequently you hear from the people who are actually getting married as all this is tossed around in the media? It's like watching a bunch of racists try to ramp up the poll numbers for the KKK party by firing up a bunch of crosses, billy-clubbing little kids down the steps of segregated schools, and ranting on CNN about how the noisy nigras are all watermelon-eating pickanninies who are just making a ruckus on the plantation -- with black folks never heard from in the debate.
Fuck that.
posted by digaman at 1:01 PM on June 3, 2006
Ever notice how infrequently you hear from the people who are actually getting married as all this is tossed around in the media? It's like watching a bunch of racists try to ramp up the poll numbers for the KKK party by firing up a bunch of crosses, billy-clubbing little kids down the steps of segregated schools, and ranting on CNN about how the noisy nigras are all watermelon-eating pickanninies who are just making a ruckus on the plantation -- with black folks never heard from in the debate.
Fuck that.
posted by digaman at 1:01 PM on June 3, 2006
The democrats just got lobbed a softball ... if they can keep the debate on *why* this issue is being raised, and question *why* its a priority right now, they could hit it out of the park. If they instead take the issue on its merits, they will play into the republicans hands.
Of course that's assuming that democrats view winning in 2006 as more important in the short term than tactical victories on same sex marriage rights.
on preview - ericb's post.
posted by forforf at 1:01 PM on June 3, 2006
Of course that's assuming that democrats view winning in 2006 as more important in the short term than tactical victories on same sex marriage rights.
on preview - ericb's post.
posted by forforf at 1:01 PM on June 3, 2006
He's kidding, right? Please tell me he's kidding.
Cafferty is sarcastic. Viewers who like sarcasm like Cafferty and respond to his requests for feedback. Cafferty likes feedback with sarcasm.
Is a *whew* in order?
posted by dhartung at 1:05 PM on June 3, 2006
Cafferty is sarcastic. Viewers who like sarcasm like Cafferty and respond to his requests for feedback. Cafferty likes feedback with sarcasm.
Is a *whew* in order?
posted by dhartung at 1:05 PM on June 3, 2006
The whole point of America was that you could believe whatever you wanted to believe, and live your life the way you wanted to live your life, the only condition being so long as you did not harm others or their property.
That's just silly. The whole point of America was to get away from the people who were persecuting you back in Europe and start persecuting others. Sure, if you were a Puritan it was great to come to New England; if you were anything else you'd have done better to stay in Old England. What you're talking about is an idealistic dream that's been held by a minority all along and will presumably continue to be held by a minority.
posted by languagehat at 1:28 PM on June 3, 2006 [2 favorites]
That's just silly. The whole point of America was to get away from the people who were persecuting you back in Europe and start persecuting others. Sure, if you were a Puritan it was great to come to New England; if you were anything else you'd have done better to stay in Old England. What you're talking about is an idealistic dream that's been held by a minority all along and will presumably continue to be held by a minority.
posted by languagehat at 1:28 PM on June 3, 2006 [2 favorites]
What you're talking about is an idealistic dream that's been held by a minority all along and will presumably continue to be held by a minority.
Yes, and many of the most important, world-shaping ideas in the world are precisely that.
posted by digaman at 1:33 PM on June 3, 2006
Yes, and many of the most important, world-shaping ideas in the world are precisely that.
posted by digaman at 1:33 PM on June 3, 2006
I normally find Cafferty to be a bit of a reactionary. Good to see him speaking some truth.
posted by papakwanz at 2:03 PM on June 3, 2006
posted by papakwanz at 2:03 PM on June 3, 2006
The only question is whether this doomed thing will actually get their base to the polls--some are grumbling about it, but they've actually done well under Bush--Roberts and Alito, faith-based funding, abstinence-only sex ed, etc....
posted by amberglow at 2:12 PM on June 3, 2006
posted by amberglow at 2:12 PM on June 3, 2006
Americablog is compiling a list of supporters of this idiotic thing who have skeletons of their own which endanger marriage (among other things...).
Someone mentioned taking out a full page ad in a newspaper with their photos and info...
posted by nevercalm at 2:27 PM on June 3, 2006
Someone mentioned taking out a full page ad in a newspaper with their photos and info...
posted by nevercalm at 2:27 PM on June 3, 2006
Yes, and many of the most important, world-shaping ideas in the world are precisely that.
Absolutely, and I hope it didn't sound like I was putting down the idea, which of course I share. But there's a difference between an idealistic minority dream and "the whole point of America." At the moment, I'm afraid it looks like the point of America is sharpened and sticking in the throat of the rest of the world.
posted by languagehat at 3:15 PM on June 3, 2006 [1 favorite]
Absolutely, and I hope it didn't sound like I was putting down the idea, which of course I share. But there's a difference between an idealistic minority dream and "the whole point of America." At the moment, I'm afraid it looks like the point of America is sharpened and sticking in the throat of the rest of the world.
posted by languagehat at 3:15 PM on June 3, 2006 [1 favorite]
Look, gay marriage can only lead to one thing: gay divorce. And that undermines the sanctity of traditional divorce, which the bible clearly stipulates is between a man and a woman.
posted by uosuaq at 3:36 PM on June 3, 2006
posted by uosuaq at 3:36 PM on June 3, 2006
If somebody really think your marriage is in peril because of somebody else's then you have other issues far deeper than gay marriage.
Oh cripes.
No one thinks that.
They worry that gay marriage will be just another step turning the USA into a decadent, European like sodom & gomorrah spiralling down the liberal to a self-destructive fault toilet of history.
posted by HTuttle at 3:52 PM on June 3, 2006
Oh cripes.
No one thinks that.
They worry that gay marriage will be just another step turning the USA into a decadent, European like sodom & gomorrah spiralling down the liberal to a self-destructive fault toilet of history.
posted by HTuttle at 3:52 PM on June 3, 2006
They worry that gay marriage will be just another step turning the USA into a decadent, European like sodom & gomorrah spiralling down the liberal to a self-destructive fault toilet of history.
Hm. Got news for 'em: the USA is spiraling down that toilet anyway at some point. We ain't staying at the top of this trash heap forever, no nation/empire/whatever does.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but as decadent as Europe is, is it somehow impossible to live a happily married life there?
posted by kgasmart at 4:19 PM on June 3, 2006
Hm. Got news for 'em: the USA is spiraling down that toilet anyway at some point. We ain't staying at the top of this trash heap forever, no nation/empire/whatever does.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but as decadent as Europe is, is it somehow impossible to live a happily married life there?
posted by kgasmart at 4:19 PM on June 3, 2006
It's been my experience that those most violently opposed to homosexuality are those who are pissed off at the courage gay Americans have by telling the world that they are gay. Those that don't have that kind of courage lash out at those that do.
posted by any major dude at 4:28 PM on June 3, 2006
posted by any major dude at 4:28 PM on June 3, 2006
If somebody really think your marriage is in peril because of somebody else's then you have other issues far deeper than gay marriage.
To which "HTuttle" opined:
Oh cripes.
No one thinks that.
They worry that gay marriage will be just another step turning the USA into a decadent, European like sodom & gomorrah spiralling down the liberal to a self-destructive fault toilet of history.
~chuckle~
Well, cripes. Your (or their) thought is more imbecilic than the original, which at least was coherent.
(Or perhaps my irony meter is tuned too low lately....been thrashing wingnuts too long, one supposes).
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 5:00 PM on June 3, 2006
To which "HTuttle" opined:
Oh cripes.
No one thinks that.
They worry that gay marriage will be just another step turning the USA into a decadent, European like sodom & gomorrah spiralling down the liberal to a self-destructive fault toilet of history.
~chuckle~
Well, cripes. Your (or their) thought is more imbecilic than the original, which at least was coherent.
(Or perhaps my irony meter is tuned too low lately....been thrashing wingnuts too long, one supposes).
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 5:00 PM on June 3, 2006
They worry that gay marriage will be just another step turning the USA into a decadent, European like sodom & gomorrah spiralling down the liberal to a self-destructive fault toilet of history.
Is that from one of those random poetry generator websites?
posted by EarBucket at 5:36 PM on June 3, 2006
Is that from one of those random poetry generator websites?
posted by EarBucket at 5:36 PM on June 3, 2006
So HTuttle, when the crowd of locals comes to ass-rape your guests, you're going to throw them your virgin daughters and your wife, right?
posted by zoogleplex at 5:39 PM on June 3, 2006
posted by zoogleplex at 5:39 PM on June 3, 2006
Without any irony, let me say it again: Worst president ever.
And the worst electorate ever makes a matching set. Jesus Christ on a bike, why didn't more of you fucking vote in 2000?
posted by slatternus at 5:53 PM on June 3, 2006
And the worst electorate ever makes a matching set. Jesus Christ on a bike, why didn't more of you fucking vote in 2000?
posted by slatternus at 5:53 PM on June 3, 2006
FYI, Frist also plans to bring up the flag-burning amendment in the Senate this month.
posted by pruner at 6:47 PM on June 3, 2006
posted by pruner at 6:47 PM on June 3, 2006
Great.
Why not bring up Prohibition, again, and make it a threefer...
posted by darkstar at 7:13 PM on June 3, 2006
Why not bring up Prohibition, again, and make it a threefer...
posted by darkstar at 7:13 PM on June 3, 2006
Oh cripes.
No one thinks that.
Gee, then why do they keep calling it "The defense of marriage act", and justify it with question-beggers like "defending marriage as being between a man and a woman" (y'know, kinda like we used to "defend" voting as being something a white person did). So when you say "no one thinks that", on what do you base your information? Or rather, which orifice do you pull it out of?
posted by George_Spiggott at 7:22 PM on June 3, 2006
No one thinks that.
Gee, then why do they keep calling it "The defense of marriage act", and justify it with question-beggers like "defending marriage as being between a man and a woman" (y'know, kinda like we used to "defend" voting as being something a white person did). So when you say "no one thinks that", on what do you base your information? Or rather, which orifice do you pull it out of?
posted by George_Spiggott at 7:22 PM on June 3, 2006
Hey slatternus, we tried to vote, but those we managed to cast were counted, um, creatively.
posted by girandole at 7:27 PM on June 3, 2006
posted by girandole at 7:27 PM on June 3, 2006
with regard to the flag-burning amendment...
from Wikipedia:
During each term of Congress since 1995, the proposed amendment has passed the House of Representatives, but not the Senate—falling four votes short on two occasions in the upper body. As approved by the House of Representatives each time, the joint resolutions have called for ratification by state legislatures—of which a minimum of 38 state legislative approvals would be required (three-fourths of the 50 states) within a period of seven years following its proposal by both houses of Congress. As can be seen by the votes in the House of Representatives, support for the amendment appears to be slipping with only 286 "yea" votes during the 109th Congress in 2005 in contrast to the 312 "yea" votes a decade earlier during the 104th.
posted by pruner at 7:32 PM on June 3, 2006
from Wikipedia:
During each term of Congress since 1995, the proposed amendment has passed the House of Representatives, but not the Senate—falling four votes short on two occasions in the upper body. As approved by the House of Representatives each time, the joint resolutions have called for ratification by state legislatures—of which a minimum of 38 state legislative approvals would be required (three-fourths of the 50 states) within a period of seven years following its proposal by both houses of Congress. As can be seen by the votes in the House of Representatives, support for the amendment appears to be slipping with only 286 "yea" votes during the 109th Congress in 2005 in contrast to the 312 "yea" votes a decade earlier during the 104th.
posted by pruner at 7:32 PM on June 3, 2006
George, when one talks about 'defending marriage', as far as I have ever understood about it they mean 'the institution of marriage', not 'my relationship with my wife'. They want to make sure that the institution of marriage is not weakened/diluted by covering relationships it was not meant to cover, because they feel this will lead to breakdown of society*. While it is possible that a few of them are afraid that they will be unable to resist leaving their wives for teh gay**, I highly doubt that it's a common worry.
*I'm explaining here, not expressing my own opinion
**who was that anti-gay guy quoted on mefi, about how irresistible homosexuality was?
posted by jacalata at 8:43 PM on June 3, 2006
*I'm explaining here, not expressing my own opinion
**who was that anti-gay guy quoted on mefi, about how irresistible homosexuality was?
posted by jacalata at 8:43 PM on June 3, 2006
Let love rule--...it's time for the Democratic Party to stop being chickenshit about gay marriage.
The Party's platform has been five-fold:
1. Shoot a friendly smile toward the gay community
2. With muffled indignance, denounce the proposed anti-gay marriage amendment
3. Whisper something about civil unions
4. Mumble that you, personally, think marriage should be one man and one woman
5. Spend half a second feeling guilty for selling out the gay community
Excepting über-mensch Russ Feingold, there aren't many who will tell that narrowminded Ohio soccer mom who has our nation by the balls to go fuck herself and let America fulfill its destiny of being the greatest, most honorable country in the history of our planet.
Almost everyone knows people who are gay, and anyone with a conscience couldn't look them in the eye and tell them that they have a good reason to deny them the right to marriage.
Look, we've lost two elections by campaigning as moderate Republicans. Let's energize people to listen to their better angels, not finessing our platforms like the tweezers in a game of Operation. ...
posted by amberglow at 10:43 PM on June 3, 2006 [1 favorite]
The Party's platform has been five-fold:
1. Shoot a friendly smile toward the gay community
2. With muffled indignance, denounce the proposed anti-gay marriage amendment
3. Whisper something about civil unions
4. Mumble that you, personally, think marriage should be one man and one woman
5. Spend half a second feeling guilty for selling out the gay community
Excepting über-mensch Russ Feingold, there aren't many who will tell that narrowminded Ohio soccer mom who has our nation by the balls to go fuck herself and let America fulfill its destiny of being the greatest, most honorable country in the history of our planet.
Almost everyone knows people who are gay, and anyone with a conscience couldn't look them in the eye and tell them that they have a good reason to deny them the right to marriage.
Look, we've lost two elections by campaigning as moderate Republicans. Let's energize people to listen to their better angels, not finessing our platforms like the tweezers in a game of Operation. ...
posted by amberglow at 10:43 PM on June 3, 2006 [1 favorite]
There's a petition going around against the ban:
http://www.democrats.org/page/petition/lgbtdiscrmntn/fqgcsc
posted by aletheia at 8:01 AM on June 4, 2006
http://www.democrats.org/page/petition/lgbtdiscrmntn/fqgcsc
posted by aletheia at 8:01 AM on June 4, 2006
**who was that anti-gay guy quoted on mefi, about how irresistible homosexuality was?
Family Research Council founder Paul Cameron:
Family Research Council founder Paul Cameron:
"Untrammeled homosexuality can take over and destroy a social system....homosexuality seems too powerful to resist. The evidence is that men do a better job on men and women on women, if all you are looking for is orgasm....It's pure sexuality. It's almost like pure heroin. It's such a rush....Martial [sic] sex tends toward the boring end....Generally, it doesn't deliver the kind of sheer sexual pleasure that homosexual sex does."posted by ericb at 9:36 AM on June 4, 2006
Politics of the Altar -- GOP leaders are putting gay marriage back on the agenda. Will voters respond?
posted by ericb at 9:38 AM on June 4, 2006
posted by ericb at 9:38 AM on June 4, 2006
What you're talking about is an idealistic dream that's been held by a minority all along and will presumably continue to be held by a minority.
Yes, and many of the most important, world-shaping ideas in the world are precisely that.
And, I might add, with legal acceptance, people wind up getting used to things, which is part and parcel of social acceptance (except for a rew fanatics). More and more, homosexuality itself is beginning to be taken for granted, and that'll eventually happen with gay marraige, too. To use a cliche, it's a war of attrition.
posted by jonmc at 10:39 AM on June 4, 2006
Yes, and many of the most important, world-shaping ideas in the world are precisely that.
And, I might add, with legal acceptance, people wind up getting used to things, which is part and parcel of social acceptance (except for a rew fanatics). More and more, homosexuality itself is beginning to be taken for granted, and that'll eventually happen with gay marraige, too. To use a cliche, it's a war of attrition.
posted by jonmc at 10:39 AM on June 4, 2006
Remember that fifty years ago, black people were still riding in the back of the bus. A hundred years ago, women couldn't vote. A hundred and fifty years ago, slavery was legal. In 2050, this movement will seem quaint and embarrassing--which is why they're so anxious to shove it into the Constitution now, before everyone who supports it dies off.
America's never been a perfect democracy, and maybe it never will be. All we can do is keep pushing toward the ideal of everyone being equal. There have always been people grabbing onto the coattails of history and digging their heels in. HTuttle and his ilk are just the latest, and they'll wind up in the dustbin along with the segregationists, the anti-suffragists, the anti-abolitionists, and all the rest. Good riddance.
posted by EarBucket at 11:16 AM on June 4, 2006
America's never been a perfect democracy, and maybe it never will be. All we can do is keep pushing toward the ideal of everyone being equal. There have always been people grabbing onto the coattails of history and digging their heels in. HTuttle and his ilk are just the latest, and they'll wind up in the dustbin along with the segregationists, the anti-suffragists, the anti-abolitionists, and all the rest. Good riddance.
posted by EarBucket at 11:16 AM on June 4, 2006
The proper response is to laugh and say "that again?" This was *the* wedge issue Rove used to win in 2004, and the gay rights movement played right into Rove's filthy hands by making the issue into a spectacle on the courthouse steps in San Francisco in the early months of the year. Why the *f--K* they couldn't have waited 9 or 10 months for a Kerry administration baffles me.
Every single democratic talking head who finds herself or himself on a television chatfest and is asked about this issue should say "who cares about that? We're in a quagmire in Iraq, with huge defecits, and unsecured ports and borders. Let's talk about reality." And then they should refuse to be dragged back into talking about this.
Frankly, I am sick of this being a front-burner issue on the left, too. Get real, people. If we don't (we meaning rational Americans) have any power, it doesn't matter what we stand for. There are so many more important things. This is a classic briar patch issue. How can liberals be SO stupid as to fall for it AGAIN?
posted by fourcheesemac at 11:36 AM on June 4, 2006
Every single democratic talking head who finds herself or himself on a television chatfest and is asked about this issue should say "who cares about that? We're in a quagmire in Iraq, with huge defecits, and unsecured ports and borders. Let's talk about reality." And then they should refuse to be dragged back into talking about this.
Frankly, I am sick of this being a front-burner issue on the left, too. Get real, people. If we don't (we meaning rational Americans) have any power, it doesn't matter what we stand for. There are so many more important things. This is a classic briar patch issue. How can liberals be SO stupid as to fall for it AGAIN?
posted by fourcheesemac at 11:36 AM on June 4, 2006
and they'll wind up in the dustbin along with the segregationists, the anti-suffragists, the anti-abolitionists, and all the rest.
Exactly. Their legacies will be ones of intolerance and hate.
At the top will be hypocrites like Arthur Finkelstein -- the right-wing, Republican consultant who is considered one of the architects of using "gays" and "gay marriage" as wedge issues.
Turns out, however, that Arty and his male partner (who long ago adopted two children and live on an estate on Boston's North Shore) were legally married in Massachusetts last year.
(previously discussed - 1, 2, 3 and 4)
posted by ericb at 12:06 PM on June 4, 2006
Exactly. Their legacies will be ones of intolerance and hate.
At the top will be hypocrites like Arthur Finkelstein -- the right-wing, Republican consultant who is considered one of the architects of using "gays" and "gay marriage" as wedge issues.
Turns out, however, that Arty and his male partner (who long ago adopted two children and live on an estate on Boston's North Shore) were legally married in Massachusetts last year.
(previously discussed - 1, 2, 3 and 4)
posted by ericb at 12:06 PM on June 4, 2006
From the Newsweek article linked to above:
"Though Bush himself has publicly embraced the amendment, he never seemed to care enough to press the matter. One of his old friends told NEWSWEEK that same-sex marriage barely registers on the president's moral radar. 'I think it was purely political. I don't think he gives a s--t about it. He never talks about this stuff,' said the friend, who requested anonymity to discuss his private conversations with Bush."posted by ericb at 9:04 PM on June 4, 2006
Their legacies will be ones of intolerance and hate.
That's a very optimistic view. I hope you're right.
posted by Mr. Six at 9:56 PM on June 4, 2006
That's a very optimistic view. I hope you're right.
posted by Mr. Six at 9:56 PM on June 4, 2006
That's just silly. The whole point of America was to get away from the people who were persecuting you back in Europe and start persecuting others. Sure, if you were a Puritan it was great to come to New England; if you were anything else you'd have done better to stay in Old England.
languagehat
That's just plain wrong. Only a small portion of the Colonies were Puritan. Even a cursory look at pre-national US history would show you that the colonies had extremely different views, make-ups, and environments. The Massachussetts Bay Colony of the Puritans was radically different from any of the other 12 colonies. One of the initial problems the young US faced was cobbling something out of this random pack of entities. Promoting tolerance and respect for all beliefs and practices was a major issue at the time, and allowed 13 entities of very different natures to agree to come together into one union.
posted by Sangermaine at 11:23 PM on June 4, 2006
languagehat
That's just plain wrong. Only a small portion of the Colonies were Puritan. Even a cursory look at pre-national US history would show you that the colonies had extremely different views, make-ups, and environments. The Massachussetts Bay Colony of the Puritans was radically different from any of the other 12 colonies. One of the initial problems the young US faced was cobbling something out of this random pack of entities. Promoting tolerance and respect for all beliefs and practices was a major issue at the time, and allowed 13 entities of very different natures to agree to come together into one union.
posted by Sangermaine at 11:23 PM on June 4, 2006
A reader of Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish:
"Having just watched George Bush speaking in his desultory way about gay marriage, I felt a secret glee rise up within me. I think we just watched the death of the opposition to gay marriage.posted by ericb at 1:57 PM on June 5, 2006
When a hugely unpopular President rises and speaks with the megaphone of the Presidency about an issue that most consider to be deeply personal, he drags this issue from the realm of family, morals, and religious tradition, into the crass world of politics. By tying gay marriage to the fading star of contemporary 'conservatism', the President has given many people who may otherwise be uncomfortable with the idea of same-sex relationships the concrete reason they need to change their minds. 'If these guys are so hard against it,' millions of Americans without a direct stake in this debate must be thinking, 'it may be a good thing'.
Just as George Wallace's extremism nailed shut the sarcophagus of Jim Crow, so this George will be trotted out as the personification of the bigotry of an era passed. Sometimes, a man's reputation rings louder than his arguments. George Bush's failed Presidency will drag this issue down as does a drowning man a healthy swimmer."
POLL (Center for American Progress): Only 3 Percent Say Homosexuality is America’s ‘Most Serious Moral Crisis’
Asked to name the most serious moral crisis in America today, 28% of Americans cite “kids not raised with the right values”; followed by 22% saying “corruption in government/business”; 17% saying “greed and materialism” or “people too focused on themselves”; and only 3% citing “abortion and homosexuality.”Another poll (Gallup):
What issue do you think should be the top priority for the president and Congress to deal with?posted by ericb at 2:25 PM on June 5, 2006
The top five responses:Situation in Iraq/war: 42%I suppose gay marriage could be classed with "Ethics/moral/religious/family decline", which was the 20th of the 28 issues listed by respondents, important to only 1% of those polled.
Fuel/oil prices/lack of energy sources/the energy crisis: 29%
Immigration/illegal aliens: 23%
Economy in general: 14%
Poor healthcare/ hospitals; high cost of healthcare: 12%
Only a small portion of the Colonies were Puritan.
Exactly. As a matter of fact the Mayflower crossing was funded by a group of private investors (known as the Merchant Adventurers). Of the 102 passengers on board only 50 were Puritans (aka Separatists/Leideners) with the majority being folks recruited by the investors to establish a profitable community in the "New World." Also on board was a crew of 20 -30 sailors.
[I'm currently reading Nathaniel Philbrick's Mayflower and am enjoying it]
posted by ericb at 2:44 PM on June 5, 2006
Exactly. As a matter of fact the Mayflower crossing was funded by a group of private investors (known as the Merchant Adventurers). Of the 102 passengers on board only 50 were Puritans (aka Separatists/Leideners) with the majority being folks recruited by the investors to establish a profitable community in the "New World." Also on board was a crew of 20 -30 sailors.
[I'm currently reading Nathaniel Philbrick's Mayflower and am enjoying it]
posted by ericb at 2:44 PM on June 5, 2006
A caller asks: "Has Senator Burns ever had sex with a transvestite prostitute?" (people are calling senators to see if they are violating the sanctity of marriage too--prostitutes, masturbation, adultery, sodomy, etc) ; >
posted by amberglow at 6:40 AM on June 6, 2006
posted by amberglow at 6:40 AM on June 6, 2006
....By inviting Chambers, Exodus's president, and Thomas, its director of membership, to the White House, Bush is at least implicitly endorsing the ex-gay movement. This is of a piece with the administration's continuing embrace of pseudo-science and its frequent attempts to elevate the institutions of the religious right to places of public authority. In a sense, Bush needs the ex-gay movement, because it provides a veneer of moral justification for his new anti-gay marriage push -- the refusal to offer recognition to gay relationships can only be justified if homosexuality is a choice or a condition that can be cured. If, as virtually all mainstream experts believe, Exodus is wrong, then Bush's attempt to rally support against gay families is simply gratuitously cruel. But mainstream experts carry little weight with this administration. Once again, Bush is using his position to symbolically subvert science in favor of a faith-based parallel reality. Gay people will suffer the most from what he is doing, but truth itself is also a casualty.
posted by amberglow at 6:47 AM on June 6, 2006
posted by amberglow at 6:47 AM on June 6, 2006
The Real Threat to Marriage: Top 10 GOP Adulterers---Daddy Bush, the Gropinator, John McCain and Rudy are the top 4.
posted by amberglow at 3:05 PM on June 6, 2006
posted by amberglow at 3:05 PM on June 6, 2006
Senate Emphasis on Ideology Has Some in G.O.P. Anxious
"Matthew Dowd, who was Mr. Bush's campaign strategist in 2004, said it was a myth that emphasizing same-sex marriage in battleground states like Ohio was critical to Mr. Bush's re-election. He said turnout patterns were comparable in states where same-sex marriage was a chief topic and where it was not....posted by ericb at 9:02 PM on June 6, 2006
But one Republican strategist, Ed Rollins, said it was a mistake for the president and Senate leaders to focus attention on a marriage ban now, in what could look like a panicked reaction to shrinking public support.
'What the president needs to do is look like a leader, not be somebody who looks like a politician who is overreacting to polls,' Mr. Rollins said. 'If anything, he is reminding people of what they don't like about the Republican Party.' "
[New York Times | June 07, 2006]
THE FUBAR FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT BEING A GAY REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN
posted by amberglow at 7:33 AM on June 7, 2006
posted by amberglow at 7:33 AM on June 7, 2006
Jon Stewart Hammers Bill Bennett on Gay Marriage.
video/WMV ; video/QT.
posted by ericb at 9:02 AM on June 7, 2006
video/WMV ; video/QT.
posted by ericb at 9:02 AM on June 7, 2006
...One Republican strategist, Ed Rollins, said it was a mistake for the president and Senate leaders to focus attention on a marriage ban now, in what could look like a panicked reaction to shrinking public support. "What the president needs to do is look like a leader, not be somebody who looks like a politician who is overreacting to polls," Mr. Rollins said. "If anything, he is reminding people of what they don't like about the Republican Party." ...
posted by amberglow at 9:32 PM on June 7, 2006
posted by amberglow at 9:32 PM on June 7, 2006
« Older Flash based Ikea catalog | Open for business. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Doorstop at 11:13 AM on June 3, 2006