The W
Views: 95750026
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.4.14 0221
The W - Current Events & Politics - Well, there goes the Gay vote
This thread has 12 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.70
Pages: 1 2 3 Next
(1501 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (52 total)
ThreepMe
Morcilla








Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3518 days
Last activity: 3177 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.17
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.



"Are you kidding me? A soda with MY name on it? Now more than ever, SODAS RULE!" - Edge to Christian Smackdown Sept 7th 2000
Promote this thread!
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1086 days
Last activity: 883 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
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...



Liberals sometimes claim to believe in personal freedom, but their concept of liberty seems limited to matters related to sex....Yet outside the sexual realm, liberals are downright illiberal. They want to control every aspect of our lives: what we eat, what we smoke, what we drive, how we defend our homes and families, how much of our own money we're allowed to keep.
- James Taranto

vsp
Andouille








Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2850 days
Last activity: 64 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Somewhere, the Log Cabin Republicans' heads just exploded.




"It looks like it was a larger dog with tighter skin, and then someone grabbed him by the anus and pulled him as hard as they could."
-- David St. Hubbins of Spinal Tap, explaining the Shar-Pei
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 40 min.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.65
    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.



CRZ
vsp
Andouille








Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2850 days
Last activity: 64 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    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)

"It looks like it was a larger dog with tighter skin, and then someone grabbed him by the anus and pulled him as hard as they could."
-- David St. Hubbins of Spinal Tap, explaining the Shar-Pei
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 40 min.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.65
    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!



CRZ
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.99
    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"?



To get ass, youve got to bring ass." -- Roy Jones Jr.

"Your input has been noted.
I hope you don't take it personally if I disregard it." -- Guru Zim
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 13 hours
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.78
You all are making the assumption that the average, not activist, gay person is in favor of gay marriage.



Perception is reality
Dahak
Frankfurter








Since: 12.5.02
From: Junction City OR.

Since last post: 1843 days
Last activity: 1496 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.73
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.



Marge I am just trying to get into heaven not run for Jesus.
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
    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.



I wonder how much money George W. Bush gave Paris Hilton.
kazhayashi81
Potato korv








Since: 17.6.02
From: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Since last post: 2518 days
Last activity: 2468 days
AIM:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.74
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.





"I do not have puppet cancer!"
JoshMann
Andouille








Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL

Since last post: 2109 days
Last activity: 2106 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.43
(deleted by CRZ on 25.2.04 0813)
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 13 hours
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.78
    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.



Perception is reality
AWArulz
Knackwurst








Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 2 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.58
    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.




Rasslin' republicans - visit it soon
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1803 days
Last activity: 1737 days
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.23
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.



"You're A Big Hunk Of Hero Sandwich, And You Wanna Save The Girl!"

CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 40 min.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.65
    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?



CRZ
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1803 days
Last activity: 1737 days
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.23
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.



"You're A Big Hunk Of Hero Sandwich, And You Wanna Save The Girl!"

JoshMann
Andouille








Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL

Since last post: 2109 days
Last activity: 2106 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.39
    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)


"Americas top dog is a big, slobbering, barking dog named Josh" [AP]
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni








Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2804 days
Last activity: 2801 days
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.02
    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.



Weekly Visitor - PSSSSHAW!

Jersey Is Dead - New Stuff! Unemployment is your friend!
Reverend J Shaft
Liverwurst








Since: 25.6.03
From: Home of The Big House

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 14 hours
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.36
    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 Next
Thread rated: 5.70
Pages: 1 2 3 Next
Thread ahead: California may see the monster again
Next thread: Clinton Library Outsources to Scotland
Previous thread: Bush/Kerry Skull & Bones connection
(1501 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Kentucky license plates do not say Land of Lincoln. However, I think it'd be neat if Obama started hitting his Hawaiian roots hard, and in 2012 we have Obama/Hawaii vs. Palin/Alaska for IT ALL! I guess it's all in the context.
The W - Current Events & Politics - Well, there goes the Gay voteRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.237 seconds.