The W
Views: 97745748
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
28.7.07 0939
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Well, there goes the Gay vote Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 3 Next(1053 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (52 total)
ThreepMe
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 487/641
EXP: 1094176
For next: 62950

Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3614 days
Last activity: 3273 days
#1 Posted on 24.2.04 1007.59
Reposted on: 24.2.11 1009.46
http://story.news.yahoo.com/ news?tmpl=story&cid=564& ncid=564&e=2& u=/nm/20040224/ts_nm/ bush_gays_dc

This topic is getting bigger and bigger everyday.
Promote this thread!
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 2858/4700
EXP: 21373469
For next: 463193

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1182 days
Last activity: 979 days
#2 Posted on 24.2.04 1043.44
Reposted on: 24.2.11 1047.46
I don't think the GOP really had the gay vote.

Incidentally, if there is going to be a decision on this one way or another at the federal level, I would rather see it as a Constitutional Amendment as opposed to the federal legislation.

That does not mean I support it though...
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1670/2042
EXP: 6250817
For next: 141982

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2946 days
Last activity: 160 days
#3 Posted on 24.2.04 1044.44
Reposted on: 24.2.11 1048.19
Somewhere, the Log Cabin Republicans' heads just exploded.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 212

Posts: 3938/16104
EXP: 138810464
For next: 2225322

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on 24.2.04 1123.09
Reposted on: 24.2.11 1123.21
    Originally posted by vsp
    Somewhere, the Log Cabin Republicans' heads just exploded.

Well....they did write this two weeks ago (lcr.org), but I don't think there are any explosions in there - in fact, it sounds to me more like they're more than willing to fight from within.
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1671/2042
EXP: 6250817
For next: 141982

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2946 days
Last activity: 160 days
#5 Posted on 24.2.04 1203.55
Reposted on: 24.2.11 1207.01
    Originally posted by CRZ
      Originally posted by vsp
      Somewhere, the Log Cabin Republicans' heads just exploded.

    Well....they did write this two weeks ago (lcr.org), but I don't think there are any explosions in there - in fact, it sounds to me more like they're more than willing to fight from within.


Yep. There are some fun quotes:
No matter what happens in the coming months, Log Cabin will stay in the GOP and fight---fight for fairness, liberty and equality. We will be a strong presence in New York at the GOPs 2004 convention.

THAT's going to be interesting to watch, though I'm sure the more confrontational bits won't make it to TV.

But when LCRs demand to be visible and make their message heard at the convention and the party leadership firmly tells them to STFU, what happens then? How many will stay home in November or (temporarily or otherwise) defect from the Republican camp?

(edited by vsp on 24.2.04 1005)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 212

Posts: 3946/16104
EXP: 138810464
For next: 2225322

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#6 Posted on 24.2.04 1212.32
Reposted on: 24.2.11 1216.54
    Originally posted by vsp
    But when LCRs demand to be visible and make their message heard at the convention and the party leadership firmly tells them to STFU, what happens then? How many will stay home in November or (temporarily or otherwise) defect from the Republican camp?
I think that's a lot of assuming. Keep an eye on their website and we'll find out together!
JayJayDean
Scrapple
Level: 125

Posts: 944/4716
EXP: 21941566
For next: 512661

Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#7 Posted on 24.2.04 1331.58
Reposted on: 24.2.11 1334.34
    Originally posted by vsp
    No matter what happens in the coming months, Log Cabin will stay in the GOP and fight---fight for fairness, liberty and equality. We will be a strong presence in New York at the GOPs 2004 convention.


The 2004 Republican Convention is in New York City? Am I the only one who smells a special Convention-edition of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"?
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 470/2690
EXP: 8764094
For next: 224725

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 3 hours
#8 Posted on 24.2.04 1710.17
Reposted on: 24.2.11 1710.39
You all are making the assumption that the average, not activist, gay person is in favor of gay marriage.
Dahak
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 409/772
EXP: 1432477
For next: 53460

Since: 12.5.02
From: Junction City OR.

Since last post: 1939 days
Last activity: 1592 days
#9 Posted on 24.2.04 2005.59
Reposted on: 24.2.11 2006.32
Sorry but a Constitutional Amendment? That is almost impossible to pass. Hell, I don't see anyway that it will even go through Congress much less have 34 (or however many) states pass it. Plus it cheapens the important amendments anyway.
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 1594/2093
EXP: 6484094
For next: 166596

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 13 hours
#10 Posted on 25.2.04 0211.25
Reposted on: 25.2.11 0211.57
    Originally posted by DrDirt
    You all are making the assumption that the average, not activist, gay person is in favor of gay marriage.


I don't see how this is such a tough assumption. That's like saying "you are all making the assumption that the average, not activist, straight person is in favor of a man and a woman being able to marry."

Actually, I do know Gay (or "LBGTQ") people that are against Gay-marriage - but they are the REALLY activisty people. They're against it (and I'm paraphrasing here) either because they think society needs a revolutionary change in the way we view sex and relationships, and therefor are against all marriage, or because they like the "subversive" aspect of being LGBTQ (ironically, these are usually the people that have the least amont of actualy sex with the same gender) and don't want to see Gay people )or at least the perception of Gay people) turn into a verion of Ward and June Cleaver with Chuck instead of June.
kazhayashi81
Potato korv
Level: 54

Posts: 540/677
EXP: 1171597
For next: 62280

Since: 17.6.02
From: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Since last post: 2614 days
Last activity: 2565 days
AIM:  
#11 Posted on 25.2.04 0344.53
Reposted on: 25.2.11 0345.03
I personally think that infidelity, the divorce rate being through the roof, murdering your spouse for the insurance money, etc. has ruined the sanctity of marriage a lot more than a same-gender couple.

This is one area(along with domestic spending) that I simply despise Bush's stance on.
JoshMann
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 380/2159
EXP: 6269629
For next: 123170

Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL

Since last post: 2205 days
Last activity: 2202 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#12 Posted on 25.2.04 0754.02
Reposted on: 25.2.11 0756.07
(deleted by CRZ on 25.2.04 0813)
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 471/2690
EXP: 8764094
For next: 224725

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 3 hours
#13 Posted on 25.2.04 0839.39
Reposted on: 25.2.11 0839.50
    Originally posted by Dahak
    Sorry but a Constitutional Amendment? That is almost impossible to pass. Hell, I don't see anyway that it will even go through Congress much less have 34 (or however many) states pass it. Plus it cheapens the important amendments anyway.


This has nothing to do with gay marriage or the constitution. This allows "W" to pander to that segment of his support that values social issues over the war on terror, etc. The beauty of this for him is he can say he did something without having to really worry about it. His advisors realize he has to play more than the wartime Prez card.
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 677/3338
EXP: 13028429
For next: 62924

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 18 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on 25.2.04 1159.50
Reposted on: 25.2.11 1201.03
    Originally posted by DrDirt
      Originally posted by Dahak
      Sorry but a Constitutional Amendment? That is almost impossible to pass. Hell, I don't see anyway that it will even go through Congress much less have 34 (or however many) states pass it. Plus it cheapens the important amendments anyway.


    This has nothing to do with gay marriage or the constitution. This allows "W" to pander to that segment of his support that values social issues over the war on terror, etc. The beauty of this for him is he can say he did something without having to really worry about it. His advisors realize he has to play more than the wartime Prez card.


Bull. We have had, how many, like 27 amendments to the constitution? How many of them had to do with personal behavior? Lots.

Number 1, maybe #7, certainly #9, #14, #15, #18, #19, #21 (see 19), and #26, all address personal rights. Dubya (and many others) feel deeply about this, as do many "on the other side." The question is whether it's the will of the people. If it doesn't ratify (See Equal Rights Amendment) then it isn't the will of the people. Dubya sure isn't the only one who feels this way. I'd personally like to see the ratification process down so we can see where we stand in this country.

I think it's kind of interesting - this is the only LEGAL process to change/recognize/deny/ratify a right.

Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.


But when a radical judge tries to change the law, everyone applauds. So Dubya follows the LAW (it's concept unfamiliar to most Libs, Doc, present company usually exempted) and the Judges do not. (see amendment 11) But Dubya is the bad guy.

Yeah. That's the ticket.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 1488/3059
EXP: 11462461
For next: 8984

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1900 days
Last activity: 1834 days
#15 Posted on 25.2.04 1221.06
Reposted on: 25.2.11 1221.19
All this pontificating about how Dubya's just following the law and bowing to the will of the people would play a whole lot better if there hadn't been such a fucking stink over how HE was elected to public office.

Sorry. I know that's a dead issue and we're not supposed to bring it up any more, but it bears mentioning here.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 212

Posts: 3974/16104
EXP: 138810464
For next: 2225322

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#16 Posted on 25.2.04 1231.21
Reposted on: 25.2.11 1232.06
    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
    All this pontificating about how Dubya's just following the law and bowing to the will of the people would play a whole lot better if there hadn't been such a fucking stink over how HE was elected to public office.
So you're saying the law WASN'T followed immediately following the 2000 election? Or have I missed your point?
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 1490/3059
EXP: 11462461
For next: 8984

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1900 days
Last activity: 1834 days
#17 Posted on 25.2.04 1235.58
Reposted on: 25.2.11 1236.16
I'm saying that there are a significant number of people that believe that the Bush-leaning higher-ups manipulated the electoral sustem in order to ensure that Bush got into power, thus going against the will of the people. I don't believe the conspiracy theories as vehemently as some, but there was some monkey business involved, and whether or not it would've changed the outcome it still leaves a bad taste in the mouth whenever I hear/read anti-gay-wedding folks say things like "well, maybe the majority of this country ARE against gay marriages". Which I HAVE heard from several different places.

It was also a direct response to AWA's spiel about radical judges and Bush sticking to the letter of the law.
JoshMann
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 391/2159
EXP: 6269629
For next: 123170

Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL

Since last post: 2205 days
Last activity: 2202 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#18 Posted on 25.2.04 1240.52
Reposted on: 25.2.11 1245.42
    Originally posted by awa rulz
    So Dubya follows the LAW (it's concept unfamiliar to most Libs, Doc


To quote one of your patriarchs, there you go again. That seems like a false and sweeping statement, doesn't it? Especially speaking as one of those so-called libs as well as a former pre-law student.

You don't OWN the law...you just think you do. IF we're making such sweeping statements, that is.

(edited by Blanket Jackson on 25.2.04 1342)
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 820/1084
EXP: 2416796
For next: 45068

Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2900 days
Last activity: 2897 days
#19 Posted on 25.2.04 1242.05
Reposted on: 25.2.11 1246.42
    Originally posted by AWArulz
    Bull. We have had, how many, like 27 amendments to the constitution? How many of them had to do with personal behavior? Lots.

    Number 1, maybe #7, certainly #9, #14, #15, #18, #19, #21 (see 19), and #26, all address personal rights.



Nearly everyone of those Amendments listed have to deal with people who were having right personal rights denied. The one you mentioned that would be closest to the proposed Gay Marriage Amendment is #19, and we all know how well that went.

This is just a political ploy by the President, as he knows there is really no chance this will pass, yet the religious right will love him more for proposing it.



    Dubya (and many others) feel deeply about this, as do many "on the other side." The question is whether it's the will of the people. If it doesn't ratify (See Equal Rights Amendment) then it isn't the will of the people.


The ERA is, what, two states away from being ratified? It generally enjoys support with somehwere around 70-80% of the country. Opposition to Gay Marriage runs around 50-60%, but support for an actual Constitutional Amendment is much lower.


    But when a radical judge tries to change the law, everyone applauds. So Dubya follows the LAW (it's concept unfamiliar to most Libs, Doc, present company usually exempted) and the Judges do not. (see amendment 11) But Dubya is the bad guy.

    Yeah. That's the ticket.



No, he's the bad guy because he is supporting an amendment to the Constitution that denies people a basic right. It's not a special right, it's something enjoyed by everybody else. I have yet to hear any argument for not allowing gay marriage that can't be used to defend the institution of slavery.
Reverend J Shaft
Liverwurst
Level: 66

Posts: 77/1134
EXP: 2430519
For next: 31345

Since: 25.6.03
From: Home of The Big House

Since last post: 18 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#20 Posted on 25.2.04 1313.49
Reposted on: 25.2.11 1314.56
    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
    I don't believe the conspiracy theories as vehemently as some, but there was some monkey business involved, and whether or not it would've changed the outcome it still leaves a bad taste in the mouth whenever I hear/read anti-gay-wedding folks say things like "well, maybe the majority of this country ARE against gay marriages".


Damn, why does this crap always have to be about W and some damn "conspiracy"? Show me evidence that W fixed the election. Until then, leave it the f**k alone - the next election is coming up in less than nine months and you can vote then.

As for "anti-gay-wedding folks", there is plenty of evidence to support the notion that a majority of people ARE against gay marriages.

Like here

By 2-1, people surveyed by the USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll opposed legally recognizing same-sex marriages. But they were closely divided about whether the issue should be determined by the federal government or states.

Or here

A majority of Americans sometimes by as much as a 2-1 margin oppose legalizing gay marriages.

    Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
    No, he's the bad guy because he is supporting an amendment to the Constitution that denies people a basic right. It's not a special right, it's something enjoyed by everybody else. I have yet to hear any argument for not allowing gay marriage that can't be used to defend the institution of slavery.


And in that same vein, John Kerry is the devil himself since HE also said on Good Morning America today that he opposes gay marriage, too. Oh, you meant civil unions? Then say so. And Bush (in the USA Today article I linked to) also does NOT propose a ban on civil unions.

If it doesn't pass, it doesn't pass. No big whoop. But don't portray Bush as some evil dictator looking to undermine America when he is proposing a ban on what he thinks (and evidence supports) most people think is right. That idiot judge in San Francisco was BREAKING THE LAW and now Bush is seeking to resolve the situation. If the people don't agree with him,. IT WON'T F**KING PASS.

The only difference between Kerry and Bush on this is the proposition of an Constitutional amendment versus states deciding on their own.

Sorry if this seems angry, but I'd rather debate the goods and evils of gay marriage or how to go about solving the problem rather than turning every issue into a "Bush is evil" argument.


Pages: 1 2 3 NextThread ahead: California may see the monster again
Next thread: Clinton Library Outsources to Scotland
Previous thread: Bush/Kerry Skull & Bones connection
(1053 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Well, there goes the Gay voteRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.245 seconds.