Slog Comments
What He Said: Doug Wright
1
Absolutely spot on....
But you must then accept that a vote for Obama is still perpetuating hegemony and violence around the world. You also don't get to walk away clean because you disagree with your candidate on these issues.
But you must then accept that a vote for Obama is still perpetuating hegemony and violence around the world. You also don't get to walk away clean because you disagree with your candidate on these issues.
3
@1: That would be true, if there were a credible anti-war candidate. As much as I would love for someone like Jill Stein to have a chance, the reality is that either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney will win this election. Anything else is fantasy land. So not only is my vote for Obama a vote for progressive social policies, it is also a vote for the least war-happy credible candidate.
5
@1 / @4: I'm down with not requiring someone to solve every single problem in the world at once. I wish you luck finding your SuperPresident.
6
I suppose if the candidates were Mitt Romney (R) and Adolf Hitler (D) who supported same-sex marriage, anyone that voted for Mitt would be castigated as heartless, self-loathing, bigoted, homophobe.
11
@7 This is called a Godwin. Rest assured, when it occurs it's like tilting a pinball machine too far - nothing else you do or say matters, and you automatically lose.
13
@6: If the only way you can feel good about voting for Romney is by comparing Obama to Hitler, you're a sad, strange little man and you have my pity. But then again, I feel that way about most Log Cabin Republicans: it seems like there are other political choices out there that don't wish People Like You would just stop existing.
On the post-relevant side of things: any links to that Facebook post? I'd also like to share it.
On the post-relevant side of things: any links to that Facebook post? I'd also like to share it.
14
@ 2/3/5 I'm not looking for, or even hoping for, perfection. Of course Romney's worse -- horribly worse. Duh. And I would vote for Obama if I were in a swing state (thankfully I'm not). What I'm saying is that making a point of "you don't get to walk away clean" for selectively overlooking some policies while others are horrific, cannot be applied only to the opposition.
Nobody's walking away from this clean.
Nobody's walking away from this clean.
16
Doug Wright puts his finger on it: civil liberties.
I think that both progressives and conservatives underestimate the importance of such an approach in widening support for gay rights. I'm almost 50, and I was brought up in a sheltered suburban environment and a Catholic upbringing which couldn't possibly be more heteronormative: basically, "gay" was synonymous with "perverted".
I didn't suddenly become pro-gay because I slid along the Kinsey scale, or started to hang with gay people (hell, until law school I didn't know a single out gay), or gained empathy. It was simply that gay rights were presented to me in a civil rights context and, click, that was it. Done. I was a fairly rational young man and I couldn't see a single damned reason why civil liberties for citizens in a democracy should be parceled out on the basis of who you slept with. You're a citizen, you've got rights, and that was that.
I think that both progressives and conservatives underestimate the importance of such an approach in widening support for gay rights. I'm almost 50, and I was brought up in a sheltered suburban environment and a Catholic upbringing which couldn't possibly be more heteronormative: basically, "gay" was synonymous with "perverted".
I didn't suddenly become pro-gay because I slid along the Kinsey scale, or started to hang with gay people (hell, until law school I didn't know a single out gay), or gained empathy. It was simply that gay rights were presented to me in a civil rights context and, click, that was it. Done. I was a fairly rational young man and I couldn't see a single damned reason why civil liberties for citizens in a democracy should be parceled out on the basis of who you slept with. You're a citizen, you've got rights, and that was that.
19
@14 While it's true nobody is walking away clean, the issue being addressed is that most people you speak with will say they are voting Romney/Ryan solely because of the economic argument and that they don't necessarily agree with him on anything else.
That's fucking ridiculous.
Even if Romney's plan could be enacted to perfection (which it can't, but we'll ignore this for the sake of argument)
Which legacy would you rather leave your children?
Leaving them with a growing deficit and a shaky economy.
Leaving them in a world where women and the LGBT community are treated as second class citizens.
There are a list of issues that should be considered, however human rights should always be at the top of the list. A 'No' should always be a deal breaker.
That's fucking ridiculous.
Even if Romney's plan could be enacted to perfection (which it can't, but we'll ignore this for the sake of argument)
Which legacy would you rather leave your children?
Leaving them with a growing deficit and a shaky economy.
Leaving them in a world where women and the LGBT community are treated as second class citizens.
There are a list of issues that should be considered, however human rights should always be at the top of the list. A 'No' should always be a deal breaker.
20
Lugh beat me to the point I wanted to make. The only way to not be compromised in some way by this process is to simply not participate in it.
I don't mean that to imply false equivalence in this case. I don't consider the choice between Obama and Romney a particularly difficult one. But I'm a long way from happy about it.
I don't mean that to imply false equivalence in this case. I don't consider the choice between Obama and Romney a particularly difficult one. But I'm a long way from happy about it.
21
6 - yes, which is still true when you rename Adolph Hitler (D) to Bigfoot's Dick (D).
Language <> Intent. But since you're voting to negate your own civil rights, you're a moron, and you clearly don't get this.
Language <> Intent. But since you're voting to negate your own civil rights, you're a moron, and you clearly don't get this.
24
"My taxes and take-home pay mean more than your fundamental civil rights, the sanctity of your marriage, your right to visit an ailing spouse in the hospital, your dignity as a citizen of this country, your healthcare, your right to inherit, the mental welfare and emotional well-being of your youth, and your very personhood, faggot."
25
Not participating compromises you, too, I think. You then become one of those who allowed things to get worse because you refused to try to make them better. We're adult humans - none of us have totally clean hands. If you think you do, it's just because you are letting somebody else shovel your share of the shit.
26
We are not fooled.
You can get all that shit through Civil Union.
Except if your ":personhood" depends on us approving of your relationships you need serious help.
You can get all that shit through Civil Union.
Except if your ":personhood" depends on us approving of your relationships you need serious help.
27
If you people really think Obama is a friend of Gay "Marriage" then you can be bought cheaper than a Juarez street whore....
28
@26: Ummmm, no, one can't get all that through Civil Unions. First, the term itself is vague and flexible and may mean lots or nothing. Second, it exists more to rationalize the rights-denying position than it does to grant rights; it's there to make nice folks feel just normal enough about what is, in reality, a bigoted position. Third, if one could get all the benefits of marriage through a civil union then why have separate categories?
And you did get the "separate but equal" thing being unconstitutional, right?
And you did get the "separate but equal" thing being unconstitutional, right?
29
@25 : Yes. Absolutely.
Inaction in a dynamic system is still action. Things are happening whether you lift a finger or not.
I'm able to be somewhat forgiving of inaction through cowardice or laziness, two unfortunate but very human weaknesses. Self-righteous inaction, on the other hand...
Inaction in a dynamic system is still action. Things are happening whether you lift a finger or not.
I'm able to be somewhat forgiving of inaction through cowardice or laziness, two unfortunate but very human weaknesses. Self-righteous inaction, on the other hand...
30
And Fuck your self righteous piety, ASSHOLE.
When Obama closes Gitmo and quits killing innocent women and children in drone strikes get back to us.
How many murdered children is it worth to massage your pathetic ego?
Buy some fucking self-esteem and quit nagging the rest of humanity to validate your degeneracy.
When Obama closes Gitmo and quits killing innocent women and children in drone strikes get back to us.
How many murdered children is it worth to massage your pathetic ego?
Buy some fucking self-esteem and quit nagging the rest of humanity to validate your degeneracy.
31
28
Homosexual pairings are not "separate but equal".
They are "different and not as good as" Traditional Heterosexual Marriage.
but Bitching about it may be a luxury you don't have;
President Romney will work to amend the US Constitution to outlaw homosexual "marriage", so maybe you better take your Civil Union and say "Thank You Very Much..."
Do you know how many states' voters have already voted to outlaw homosexual "marriage"?
Only six more needed to amend the US Constitution.
And many of those states also outlawed homosexual civil union.
So you may not want to be too picky......
Homosexual pairings are not "separate but equal".
They are "different and not as good as" Traditional Heterosexual Marriage.
but Bitching about it may be a luxury you don't have;
President Romney will work to amend the US Constitution to outlaw homosexual "marriage", so maybe you better take your Civil Union and say "Thank You Very Much..."
Do you know how many states' voters have already voted to outlaw homosexual "marriage"?
Only six more needed to amend the US Constitution.
And many of those states also outlawed homosexual civil union.
So you may not want to be too picky......
32
Shorter @30: Right A should not be granted because of Misconduct B. But if Misconduct B were to cease tomorrow, Right A should still not be granted.
33
And don't be misled by Obama's Pussy Presidency as to what a Real President can accomplish.
It won't take a SUPERMAJORITY in both houses of Congress and 20 years to get the job done.
Expect the Constitution to be amended before the midterms.
It won't take a SUPERMAJORITY in both houses of Congress and 20 years to get the job done.
Expect the Constitution to be amended before the midterms.
34
32
Has Obama given you Gay "Marriage"?
You are a credulous sucker.
No wonder Obama doesn't respect homosexuals.....
Has Obama given you Gay "Marriage"?
You are a credulous sucker.
No wonder Obama doesn't respect homosexuals.....
35
@31: Got news for you, frothie: I ain't gay and I ain't American, so there's nothing for me to take. I just rather like the idea of an America that lives up to its democratic and egalitarian ideals rather than one that validates bigotry. You're basically just a big ol' steaming pile of rage and hatred. So, voters have voted to outlaw gay marriage. So what? At one point they voted to outlaw black voting, interracial marriage and to shove every Japanese American into concentration camps. Stopping the majority from doing hateful stuff is one of the reasons sane democracies have constitutions and inalienable rights.
36
@34: I live in Canada, bro, so I'm not at issue here. We've had gay rights for quite some time, and gay marriage and gay divorce too. And you know what? We seem to have done it without straights like me or you freaking the fuck out and trying to deny other people their rights.
37
I'm not likely to vote for Romney, but I think jobs and the economy are more important than whether or not the federal government officially recognizes Terry as Dan's husband. The proper rebuttal to Doug Wright's remarks would be to say that any gay person who votes for Obama has to look into the eyes of an unemployed family man and say "Me having official validation for my narcissistic deviant lifestyle is more important than you being able to to provide for your family."
39
@22 Profundity? The only thing that can be distilled from your comments is a cold hard petrified turd.
40
#35 - I'm pretty sure Americans didn't actually vote for disenfranchisement of blacks, the criminalization of interracial marriages, or the internment of Japanese citizens. None of those things, to my knowledge, were put to a vote.
41
@37 Yep because it's just a word! There aren't over 1100 rights tied to that word or anything. I shall do it in a bipartisan fashion! For these purposes I will pretend you are the person I am talking to.
Dear Ken,
Get a godamn job you mooch, stop suckling on the tit of society and the economy will bounce back naturally! That's how it works! Now, as for me, I think you having over 1100 more rights than me because of your sexual orientation is pretty fucked up. I'm voting for Obama because he won't make things worse for me. Thank you for your time.
Dear Ken,
Get a godamn job you mooch, stop suckling on the tit of society and the economy will bounce back naturally! That's how it works! Now, as for me, I think you having over 1100 more rights than me because of your sexual orientation is pretty fucked up. I'm voting for Obama because he won't make things worse for me. Thank you for your time.
42
"narcissistic deviant lifestyle"
Three words used when "untermenschen" would have conveyed what you meant in one. Don't you want to be three times as efficient and only 1/3 as euphemistic?
Three words used when "untermenschen" would have conveyed what you meant in one. Don't you want to be three times as efficient and only 1/3 as euphemistic?
43
"deviant lifestyle"
BTW, can you please point me to the American laws which deny civil rights to rubber fetishists, watersport enthusiasts and scat freaks? As I understand it, people are free to marry each other to obtain such sex (etc) from their partners. Their deviancy is to be indulged, but two guys who want a picket fence and a 401K are suddenly a menace.
Oh, and one other thing: If narcissism is to be a reason for denying basic civil liberties, then actors, politicians and models must all be banned from marrying.
BTW, can you please point me to the American laws which deny civil rights to rubber fetishists, watersport enthusiasts and scat freaks? As I understand it, people are free to marry each other to obtain such sex (etc) from their partners. Their deviancy is to be indulged, but two guys who want a picket fence and a 401K are suddenly a menace.
Oh, and one other thing: If narcissism is to be a reason for denying basic civil liberties, then actors, politicians and models must all be banned from marrying.
44
Wow. That is very persuasively phrased. Still, it is fair to say that a strong economy helps gay citizens the same as everyone else. To assume that a gay voter will always vote on gay rights is to reduce him or her to his or her gayness and ignore everything else about his or her personhood. I'm a woman, but just because someone is pro-choice doesn't mean I ignore the rest of their platform. I'd vote for an anti-choice candidate if there were more pressing matters that I felt that candidate could handle better than the other guy.
Allowing any one issue to decide our votes makes us too easy to manipulate. That's why all these conservative politicians oppose gay rights and abortion in the first place. Most of them don't give a rat's hindquarters, but they know that they can win over conservative voters with lip service.
@40 No, but they voted for executive and legislative officers who supported and enforced those policies. That's how the system works.
Allowing any one issue to decide our votes makes us too easy to manipulate. That's why all these conservative politicians oppose gay rights and abortion in the first place. Most of them don't give a rat's hindquarters, but they know that they can win over conservative voters with lip service.
@40 No, but they voted for executive and legislative officers who supported and enforced those policies. That's how the system works.
45
@40: Re Japanese internment, point partially conceded. But if it had been put to a vote in early 1942 would it have been defeated? (Yeah, I laughed too.)
Re: interracial marriages etc.: My knowledge of American history isn't as good as it should be, so thanks for clearing up for me that all of the Jim Crow laws appeared by magic and much to the surprise and dismay of the voters and legislators of the South.
Re: interracial marriages etc.: My knowledge of American history isn't as good as it should be, so thanks for clearing up for me that all of the Jim Crow laws appeared by magic and much to the surprise and dismay of the voters and legislators of the South.
47
@37 This is not my opinion, mind you. This is the kind of thing Gay Dude for Romney will be writing once he gets better at the whole trolling thing. I'm just trying to show the boy how it's done.
49
@6 lol, thanks for underlining the fallacious straw man bullshit that led to the LCR endorsement so pointedly. Godwin's law right out of the gate ftw. /sigh
51
@36
Oh Canada, eh?....
when we want Canada's opinion we beat it out of them.
if a waterboard isn't handy, that is.....
Oh Canada, eh?....
when we want Canada's opinion we beat it out of them.
if a waterboard isn't handy, that is.....
52
@51: If I wanted your opinion, I'd read your entrails. And yet you keep showing up here with your viscera inside your abdominal cavity...
53
Hello, Jobs And The Economy people! If jobs are important, if the economy is important, vote for Obama! That's all there is to it!
The only reason I can think of that anyone would vote for Romney is BECAUSE they think gay marriage is evil and that abortion is murder. His current stance on these issues is the ONLY thing that could possibly make him attractive. (Attractive to hateful people, of course.)
@6's post is an interesting enough conjecture, but it bears no relation to what is happening in this election. A Republican win would be an utter disaster for our economy as well as for human rights.
The only reason I can think of that anyone would vote for Romney is BECAUSE they think gay marriage is evil and that abortion is murder. His current stance on these issues is the ONLY thing that could possibly make him attractive. (Attractive to hateful people, of course.)
@6's post is an interesting enough conjecture, but it bears no relation to what is happening in this election. A Republican win would be an utter disaster for our economy as well as for human rights.
54
@40,45: Japanese internment was done by executive order (I had to look that up), so it was slightly less democratic, though still performed by an elected president. Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation laws were enacted by state legislatures. In a representative democracy, that's about as close as you'll get to letting the people vote.
55
Japanese internment was done by executive order by a Democrat president.
Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation laws were enacted by Democrat state legislatures.
Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation laws were enacted by Democrat state legislatures.
56
I entirely get the spirit of the OP; when the FMA passes, I know about a dozen people who will come screaming to me about how They Never Meant This to Happen, and who will all demand that I console them. They know Mr Romney has winked at almost everybody, and are cheerfully gambling the lives of others because deep in their hearts they just "know" that his wink at THEM is the SINCERE one.
57
The point that seems to be missed in any discussion about this, though, is that Obama is doing reasonably well with the economy - not strikingly well, but as well as could be expected given the reality of his position. Whereas all we know about the Republican economic plans are that they are not as likely to improve the economy as the measures that have been taken in the last four years.
This keeps being framed as 'civil rights vs economy' and that is just not reflective of reality. The real choice is something like "some civil rights, possibly, and slow recovery of the economy, possibly" vs "no real chance of civil rights, and no real chance of economic recovery".
This keeps being framed as 'civil rights vs economy' and that is just not reflective of reality. The real choice is something like "some civil rights, possibly, and slow recovery of the economy, possibly" vs "no real chance of civil rights, and no real chance of economic recovery".
58
@ 51, well, in my part of Canada, the economy is rolling along quite healthily, gays are getting married, and the world has not come to an end. Our men also apparently have bigger dicks http://www.targetmap.com/viewer.aspx?rep… Maybe it's time to ask for some advice.
59
@55: You make a great point! It's uplifting to see how much progress has been made in the Democratic party with respect to civil rights. As Lyndon Johnson predicted after signing the Civil Rights Act, "We've lost the south for a generation." He was a little off though, since it's continued for longer than one generation.
60
@58,
That map was fun as hell. I looked at the key and had initially assumed they were charted in inches.... "Holy fuck, they have an AVERAGE 16 inch penis down in Venezuela!?"
That map was fun as hell. I looked at the key and had initially assumed they were charted in inches.... "Holy fuck, they have an AVERAGE 16 inch penis down in Venezuela!?"
61
58
Canada exists at the indulgence of the US.
You realize when we say "North American Energy Independence" we mean we are taking the western provinces....
btw, the African nations put you to shame.
perhaps you should seek advice from Zimbabwe
Canada exists at the indulgence of the US.
You realize when we say "North American Energy Independence" we mean we are taking the western provinces....
btw, the African nations put you to shame.
perhaps you should seek advice from Zimbabwe
62
59
Actually the Democraps swapped the oppression of their father's Jim Crow segregation and out right chattel slavery their grandfathers practiced for the virtual slavery of government dependence.
The debilitating chains of dependency and lack of self reliance are crueler than bands of steel.
The destruction of the Black Family is the legacy of LBJ's "Great" Society.....
That, and an abortion rate 3.5X that of whites.
It is almost as if the KKK designed the Democraps social engineering policies....
Actually the Democraps swapped the oppression of their father's Jim Crow segregation and out right chattel slavery their grandfathers practiced for the virtual slavery of government dependence.
The debilitating chains of dependency and lack of self reliance are crueler than bands of steel.
The destruction of the Black Family is the legacy of LBJ's "Great" Society.....
That, and an abortion rate 3.5X that of whites.
It is almost as if the KKK designed the Democraps social engineering policies....
63
@37 Civil rights are economic issues, asshole. The govt has been pumping money into making jobs for white dudes over the last 4 years, so don't give this "unemployed worker" bs while POC, gays, and women get fucked over ECONOMICALLY by conservative policies. Fuck you for getting yours and then calling people narcissistic for demanding to be included.
64
@62:
"Oh boy, that sucks. We can't make black people work for free any more since slavery was outlawed."
"What are we gonna do instead?"
"We'll make them dependent on government handouts! Instead of us not paying them to work, we'll pay them to not work! It's the exact opposite, but it's sort of the same, right?"
Seriously, Alleged, even you should be able to see how nuts that idea is.
"Oh boy, that sucks. We can't make black people work for free any more since slavery was outlawed."
"What are we gonna do instead?"
"We'll make them dependent on government handouts! Instead of us not paying them to work, we'll pay them to not work! It's the exact opposite, but it's sort of the same, right?"
Seriously, Alleged, even you should be able to see how nuts that idea is.
65
64
So you haven't noticed a huge and growing underclass in this country with no hope or even aspiration of providing for themselves?
Who depend on the government for their every need?
Who don't care or won't even notice if the economy picks up because getting a J.O.B. is the last thing on their mind?
Who look to Sugar Daddy Barack to provide their every need?
Did you know the ranks of food stamp recipients are up 50% (15 MILLION) under Obama?
Thank You, Barack!
And more people go on disability that get jobs?
Thank you, Massa! Where duz I vote?
You should educate yourself on this topic, youngster.
Because 42¢ of every dollar Sugar Daddy hands out enslaving Democrap voters in government dependence comes out of your future earnings.
So you haven't noticed a huge and growing underclass in this country with no hope or even aspiration of providing for themselves?
Who depend on the government for their every need?
Who don't care or won't even notice if the economy picks up because getting a J.O.B. is the last thing on their mind?
Who look to Sugar Daddy Barack to provide their every need?
Did you know the ranks of food stamp recipients are up 50% (15 MILLION) under Obama?
Thank You, Barack!
And more people go on disability that get jobs?
Thank you, Massa! Where duz I vote?
You should educate yourself on this topic, youngster.
Because 42¢ of every dollar Sugar Daddy hands out enslaving Democrap voters in government dependence comes out of your future earnings.
66
@ Doug Wright
Calm down! Go take a 'Golden Shower'! Conservatives are too smart to be taken in by your selfish, one issue voting preferences. (And besides, they don't suffer freaks gladly anyway.)
Calm down! Go take a 'Golden Shower'! Conservatives are too smart to be taken in by your selfish, one issue voting preferences. (And besides, they don't suffer freaks gladly anyway.)
67
@65: I honestly haven't noticed. If you have, it's because your a delusional bigot who doesn't let facts or truth get in the way of The Truth.
69
This thread's troll appears to be the typical Craigslist DL closet case/hate yourself afterwards/keep going back for more type. If you weren't thinking about other guys penises troll, why do you spend SO much time here on the Slog saying how unworthy homos are? Go suck more CL dick, por favor.
71
For some real fun, check out the mayor's race here in San Diego. We've got a progressive non-LGBT candidate (D) who voted for DOMA and then apologized for it, vs a "gay" City Councilman who has made some pro-LGBT symbolic votes but who has been hobnobbing with (Republican) homophobes.
Guess who's got the support of the LGBT community here? (Hint: It ain't the Repub)
Guess who's got the support of the LGBT community here? (Hint: It ain't the Repub)
72
Mr Bascomb - Well, that sounds like a mixed bag of fun. Apologies being cheap, I hope your progressive at least pledged never to support DOMA or any of its cousins again.
73
@1 - yes, exactly. And to everyone who immediately tried to make that statement about Romney - you;re missing the point. The fact that your war-mongering is not as foul as the proposed war-mongering of your opponent doesn't absolve you or your supporters from the consequences of your policy. If you vote for Obama (and I hope you do), you have to accept that you're OK with supporting drone strikes as long as it means [insert your reasons here].
74
Hmmm comparing gay marriage and the future economy of our country is a little disturbing, esp to see so many agreeing with it. I am a republican and i dont care if you are gay or not. I do think its a sin however. I am of the opinion that you can do whatever you want as long as it doesnt trample my religious beliefs. However, if you are trying to force me to change my religious beliefs to have to agree with you in saying gays should be allowed to marry then you can jump off a bridge, the constitution protects my right to believe that homosexuality is morally wrong. The fact that you believe your rights to marry your partner, which may i remind you isnt protected by the constitution, is something to compare to a failing economy and 4 more years of the same, doesn't show any intelligence at all and frankly makes you look like a dumbass.
75
@74
You really should pick better arguments than the ones you chose to use.
While you are correct in that the constitution of the United States does not give Gay people the right to marry, it also does not give YOU the right to marry anyone. In fact the constitution is rather silent on the whole matter.
Freedom of religion in this situation just means I cannot force your church to marry a same-sex couple in a religious ceremony. It has no effect on the civil ceremony of marriage performed outside of a church. And while marriage as you think of it may have religious overtones it is actually it's civil effects that make it important. If there were no civil benefits to marriage then most gays would probably not care one way or the other. BUT there are those benefits that you (and I) get from being married that they do not get.
Now what I want to know is why YOUR misguided religious belief that gays should not be allowed to marry should over-ride MY enlightened religious belief that they should be. Before you decide to use the religious freedom argument think about the fact that not everyone subscribes to an Abrahamic religion (Judaism, Christianity and Islam/Muslim are all Abrahamic) and therefor do not necessarily have the same ideas about sin that you do or even have the concept of sin in their religion in the first place.
As for the economy argument one should be cognizant of the fact that it failed while George Bush was in office. One should also be aware that the president (no matter what his party affiliation is) cannot actually do very much in the way of repairing that economy without someone in congress actually introducing a bill which gets passed by both houses and sent on to his desk for a signature. A signature that is mostly symbolic by the way since the president has three options with a bill. He can sign it into law, he can let it become law without actually signing it as a way to say it stinks but it is better than nothing or he can veto it. And even if he vetoes the bill it can still be made into law with a 2/3rds majority in the two houses voting for it to pass anyway. So if you want to bitch about the failing economy make sure you vote out the republicans in congress who are failing to introduce and pass bills that would fix the economy as they are the majority in the house and have the ability to pass anything they want there.
And before you decide that I'm part of that 47 percent that Mitt puts down be aware I have a more than full time job that makes it possible for you to survive at all in Modern America. I drive a semi. So if you wear clothes, buy food, use a vehicle of any sort or even have a house that wasn't built by you using logs you cut after making your own axe just remember that it was someone like me (and possibly even me that made it possible.
More...
You really should pick better arguments than the ones you chose to use.
While you are correct in that the constitution of the United States does not give Gay people the right to marry, it also does not give YOU the right to marry anyone. In fact the constitution is rather silent on the whole matter.
Freedom of religion in this situation just means I cannot force your church to marry a same-sex couple in a religious ceremony. It has no effect on the civil ceremony of marriage performed outside of a church. And while marriage as you think of it may have religious overtones it is actually it's civil effects that make it important. If there were no civil benefits to marriage then most gays would probably not care one way or the other. BUT there are those benefits that you (and I) get from being married that they do not get.
Now what I want to know is why YOUR misguided religious belief that gays should not be allowed to marry should over-ride MY enlightened religious belief that they should be. Before you decide to use the religious freedom argument think about the fact that not everyone subscribes to an Abrahamic religion (Judaism, Christianity and Islam/Muslim are all Abrahamic) and therefor do not necessarily have the same ideas about sin that you do or even have the concept of sin in their religion in the first place.
As for the economy argument one should be cognizant of the fact that it failed while George Bush was in office. One should also be aware that the president (no matter what his party affiliation is) cannot actually do very much in the way of repairing that economy without someone in congress actually introducing a bill which gets passed by both houses and sent on to his desk for a signature. A signature that is mostly symbolic by the way since the president has three options with a bill. He can sign it into law, he can let it become law without actually signing it as a way to say it stinks but it is better than nothing or he can veto it. And even if he vetoes the bill it can still be made into law with a 2/3rds majority in the two houses voting for it to pass anyway. So if you want to bitch about the failing economy make sure you vote out the republicans in congress who are failing to introduce and pass bills that would fix the economy as they are the majority in the house and have the ability to pass anything they want there.
And before you decide that I'm part of that 47 percent that Mitt puts down be aware I have a more than full time job that makes it possible for you to survive at all in Modern America. I drive a semi. So if you wear clothes, buy food, use a vehicle of any sort or even have a house that wasn't built by you using logs you cut after making your own axe just remember that it was someone like me (and possibly even me that made it possible.
76
75
Freedom of Religion means that you can not force everyone in the nation to alter the civil institution of marriage to make it conform to YOUR enlightened religious belief.....
Freedom of Religion means that you can not force everyone in the nation to alter the civil institution of marriage to make it conform to YOUR enlightened religious belief.....
Comments (76) RSS