It looks like the Republicans in the House will stop at nothing in their attempts to find a loophole to ensure that we remain second-class citizens....now that they realize the FMA and their deplorable attempts to amend the Constitution has no chance of passage, these bigots have introduced the Marriage Protection Act, which would "strip the Supreme Court and other federal courts of their jurisdiction to rule on challenges to state bans on gay marriages."

This piece of legislation only needs a "simple majority" (unlike the two-thirds "super majority" that was needed to pass the equally vile FMA) but fortunately there are a number of outspoken Democrats like Mass. Rep. Jim McGovern who described this bill as "quite simply a mean-spirited, misguided and discriminatory distraction" and accurately compared it with the 5-4 Supreme Court decision that handed W the presidency by reminding the GOP that they "had no problem with activist judges in Bush versus Gore."

~Joe

Well, it passed the House.

[ July 22, 2004, 07:59 PM: Message edited by: Jim ]

Just adding a link, as if to comply with all those icky copyright laws.

House Votes on Federal Gay Marriage Bill

Well, isn't that an interesting thing to say.

--and--

Final Vote Results for Roll Call 410

[ July 22, 2004, 02:09 PM: Message edited by: twin58 ]

Oregon Republican Convention to Gay Delegate: Go f**k Yourself

At Saturday's Oregon Republican state convention:

So much for "working from within"... Kinda hard to do when you're not even allowed to open your mouth!

Well here's an interesting turn - apparently the Bush twins are not too upset about the whole gay marriage thing:

Bush gals to See Gay Vows

The couple in question was profiled in the Washington Post after their wedding in SF last winter - guess they finally got around to having the reception.

My only concern here is - the twins have those eyebrows professionally done - maybe he's not that good a make-up guy

"Originally posted by gamecock:
It looks like the Republicans in the House will stop at nothing in their attempts to find a loophole to ensure that we remain second-class citizens"

It's not just Republicans. Democrats take our vote for granted and then play the same BS "We'll do whatever our polling info tells us to." It doesn't take a Gephardt to realize that, since gays are outnumbered by over 90% of the population, its political hay to say what John Edwards said the other day (and I'm paraphrasing) "Neither myself nor John Kerry have ever been in favor of gay marriage and we believe it should be a state matter." No backbone, no understanding of section 1 of the 14th amendment, no vote. Republicans at least give me the courtesy of not tricking me into voting for them. They'll look me straight in the eye and say "don't." Democrats will tell you they've got your back and then do whatever makes straight people the least unconfortable. Much in the same way that "Don't ask, don't tell" was a triumph(whatever) for gay rights. Screw'em both, I say, I'll find another horse. Rant complete. Feel free to call me an idiot.

"Originally posted by gamecock:
It looks like the Republicans in the House will stop at nothing in their attempts to find a loophole to ensure that we remain second-class citizens"

It's not just Republicans. Democrats take our vote for granted and then play the same BS "We'll do whatever our polling info tells us to." It doesn't take a Gephardt to realize that, since gays are outnumbered by over 90% of the population, its political hay to say what John Edwards said the other day (and I'm paraphrasing) "Neither myself nor John Kerry have ever been in favor of gay marriage and we believe it should be a state matter." No backbone, no understanding of section 1 of the 14th amendment, no vote. Republicans at least give me the courtesy of not tricking me into voting for them. They'll look me straight in the eye and say "don't." Democrats will tell you they've got your back and then do whatever makes straight people the least unconfortable. Much in the same way that "Don't ask, don't tell" was a triumph(whatever) for gay rights. Screw'em both, I say, I'll find another horse. Rant complete. Feel free to call me an idiot.

Brookings Boy, do you really think that Democrats simply take our vote for granted? Three of the nine Democratic primary candidates for President were openly in support of gay marriage. As have other Democrats who went to bat for us in San Francisco, Portland, and New Platz. And do you think that all 46 Democratic Senators who voted not to consider FMA did so because they are all strict Constitutionalists? There is a lot more to supporting the gay community than just the issue of marriage -- Democrats also got hate crime laws and ENDA type sexual orientation clauses passed.

I'll agree, the Democrats haven't championed every gay cause (I won't even go into how the gay community CAN be diverse in its on priorities and opinions). But do you really think the Kerry-Edwards ticket is going to come out and be 100% supportive of gay every issue? No of course not. If they did that they would only get 10% of the vote. They have to do the politically intelligent thing and balance their political stances so they don't alienate the center. But just because they don't run with us arm-in-arm on every issue, don't discount the amazing changes we've seen in the past 20 years, which certainly hasn't come as gifts from Republicans.

Well you and your horse (Nader) can wander in the desert together tilting at windmills (nice mixed analogy, huh?). The political reality is it will be Bush or Kerry; and to stick your head in the sand and not make a choice is simply foolish. If you think a 3rd party choice makes a difference, ask the 1000 people in the Florida Keys who voted for Nader in 2000, or better yet the 80,000 in the entire state that voted for Nader. Just a little reminder--Bush won the state and the presidency by an official count of 537 votes.

Happy tilting . . .

And, thus, the whole idiot portion of my post. You both made completely valid points. I'm not trying to overlook any of that, it's just that I'm predisposed towards tunnel vision when it comes to politics effecting my life. This issue is about more than marriage and the hundreds of rights and responsibilities marriage entails. My problem is still the lack of overall leadership on the national level when considering the democratic party. The politically safe move is to pawn the whole debate off as a state issue. Problem is, the last time civil rights of any kind were left to each state's discretion, "whites only" drinking fountains were all the rage. Kerry voted against the DMA specifically because it was discriminatory legislation. Where is that conviction now? Half measures and "progress takes time" speeches are no longer acceptable. Second class citizenship is now law in Missouri and will be in more states by the second Wednesday of November. By the time he squeaks into office, it won't be a question of whether states should have the right to ban gay marriage, it'll be which states are left that haven't. Kerry knows this and he doesn't care because once that happens it won't be his problem. Leaders have a greater responsibility than getting elected.
As for my vote, the only reasons he has given me to vote for him to this point are; his name isn't George Bush, he spent 4 months in the 'nam hunting charlie, and he wants to raise taxes (always a winner). Thats all fine and good, but a war record and better hair doesn't make you the right candidate, it makes you the lesser of two evils. I haven't been voting long, but every time I vote for the guy I dislike the least, it begins to feel more and more like a wasted vote. I can no longer tie myself to a two party system which is far more concerned with maintaining their power and less concerned with doing what's right. So yeah, until things change I will fight the unbeatable foe (Kind of like the deluded punks who started this country). Don Quixote has my back.

I probably set myself up for another beatin' (deserved, I imagine). If the Falcons would stop looking like crap I might lighten up a bit.

My first election, we had a candidate who was concerned with doing what was right. George McGovern lost EVERYWHERE except Massachusetts and DC. If it takes the lesser of two evils to get rid of El Presidente, then so be it. We've got to get rid of him NOW.


You betcha, Bubba. And well deserved, at that.

Cthulu '04
Why vote for the lesser of two evils?

Brookings Boy, I'll admit John Kerry was not my first choice for President (nor the second, third, or fourth either). But only two candidates have a shot at winning this election and I'm going to vote for the one that truly is the better of the two candidates on the issues I'm concerned with.

In a perfect world, sure a third party candidate could win the White House.....and the Falcons could win the SuperBowl.....

True, I think the last realistic third party candidate was Teddy Roosevelt with the Bull-Moose party (and he still lost). I know thats a flaw in my reasoning and, when I get in that booth, panic will set in and I'll pull the lever for the party of the Burro. Eventually though, we're going to have to stop lowering the bar when it comes to the people that we choose to put in charge of our lives and a couple of thousand ICBMs.

Not to be a smart-ass, MarcusF, but does that mean that if you had to do it all over again you would have voted for Nixon?

As for the super bowl, I'll just settle for two winning seasons in a row.

What have you been smoking? I want some!
My conscience is clear... in 33 years of voting, I've only voted Republican once. And that was in the 1980 primary for Anderson (more to the point, AGAINST Reagan... fat lot of good that did).

If I was still in the Coast Guard, I could score you some grade A dank that would have you voting for Coolidge as a write in.

Anyway, we're getting off thread...

Bush, FMA, Rick Santorum, Fire...BAD!
Unrealistic fantasy of Keith Brooking and I honeymooning in Cabo San Lucas...GOOD!

The call for the gay marriage amendment is renewed by W at the Southern Baptist Convention this morning...

I wonder what LCR's comment will be about this? Probably something like: "We'll get back to you later...our party still has us digging thru the trash from the convention looking for recyclables."

NBC News link

ANYTHING to deflect all the negative press about Bush and his administration. This really isn't a surprise. He has to do SOMETHING to energize the base! Isn't it time to bomb Iran? Find Osama? After all rumor has it we know EXACTLY where he is.... Kind of like we knew EXACTLY where the weapons of mass destrution were... :mad:

BTW - He DOESN'T have nor WILL HE EVER HAVE the votes to actually pass this amendment. Which further illustrates it's all a ploy to energize his base (who's too stupid to realize how amendments to the Constitution work).

Remember - "W"s a UNITER not a DIVIDER!!!

He looks more like a fool as each day passes.

If these conservative evangelists can't see that Bush is just toying with them, I don't know what to say.

He's gone back and forth several times on this issue, it changes every day to what crowd he's speaking to.

Well then, there will be life for this man after his presidency. It sounds as if a career at IHOP would be in order. God only knows he's had PLENTY of experience waffling and flip-flopping. Or, maybe he could become a ballroom dance instructor...plenty of shuffle, slide shuffle going on there. Oh, the possibilities are nearly endless!

Maybe he's being pre-emptive again. Nixon waited too late to find a numerically weak and disliked group (the press) to strike out against before he was impeached.

Bush knows that Gays are one of his most consistent opponents and too small a voting class to matter much - but perhaps disproportionately effective at communicating their opposition to him. That he chooses Gays as a distraction is a.....compliment?