Morality is not determined by the church you attend nor the faith you embrace. It is determined by the quality of your character and the positive impact you have on those you meet along your journey
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Damn! Gay couples are coming out publicly all over the place.
You know I think that when Freedom and Justice embrace "teh gay" that is pretty much all she wrote.
This is going to change this country for the better. At lasill eitwt. And you know, it will either be the end of the GOP, or it will begin to change them into a more humane group of rich white guys. No, it will be the end. Hallelujah!
GOP Sen. Murkowski Says She’s ‘Evolving’ On Gay Marriage
Acknowleding the sea change in America on same-sex marriage, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) on Wednesday said her own views on the issue are also "evolving."
"The term 'evolving view' has been perhaps overused, but I think it is an appropriate term for me to use," Murkowski said, according to the Chugiak-Eagle River Star. The senior Alaska senator has previously expressed opposition to gay nuptials.
She added that her state may ultimately revisit the issue at some point and that she's evaluating her own position "very closely." In 1998, Alaska passed a constitutional amendment that defined marriage as between one man and one woman.Â
"It may be that Alaska will come to revisit its position on gay marriage, and as a policy maker I am certainly revieiwing that very closely," Murkowski said.
Murkowski seemed to suggested that her two young sons have inspired her to moderate on same-sex marriage — emblematic of the views held by most young Americans on the issue.
"I've got two young sons who, when I ask them and their friends how they feel about gay marriage, kinda give me one of those looks like, 'Gosh mom, why are you even asking that question?'" she said.
Rush Limbaugh Expects Gay Marriage Will Eventually Be Legal Nationwide
Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday conceded that gay marriage will eventually become the law of the land in the U.S., agreeing with proponents of same-sex marriage that "the genie's not getting put back in the bottle" on the issue.
"A lot of people have no personal animus against gay people at all," Limbaugh said on his radio show, according to a transcript. "It's instead, you know, a genuine, I don't know, love/respect for the things they believe define this country as great. They get up every day and they see all this stuff under attack. They see it all under assault. And I think they're just worried about the survivability of the country. And to which the opponents say, 'Well, the country's changing and you better get with it and understand it because this genie's not getting put back in the bottle.' And I think that's right. I don't care what this court does with this particular ruling, Proposition 8. I think the inertia is clearly moving in the direction that there is going to be gay marriage at some point nationwide."
Limbaugh added that the political ramifications of same-sex marriage are still unknown, especially for the Republican Party: "I mean, the Republican Party, for example, could be looking at its ultimate demise here, depending on how it deals with this. Because they do have multiple millions of voters who are evangelical Christians who on religious grounds alone don't support homosexual marriage and are not going to support a political party that does. So then the Republicans in that circumstance would be faced, if you were to lose multiple millions of voters over this, they are going to have to replace them somewhere. How do they do it? Do they try to siphon off most of the gay vote that's going to the Democrats?"
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) said Thursday that his decision to publicly support same-sex marriage was driven by personal interactions with gay couples in his home state.
"I just think it’s time. You know, I spent most of my life – and I’m 56 years of age – on a farm 12 miles west of Big Sandy," Tester said during an interview on HuffPost Live. "And over the last six years for sure, and some time before that, I’ve gotten to know a lot of different people, a lot of folks that I normally wouldn’t know, and found them all to be good and I respect [them]. So I guess it’s broadening the horizons that I had before that’s gotten me to this point.
"I think it’s just the people you run into, the people you meet, the goodness in people and the example they set," Tester continued. "And it just kind of takes away a lot of the stereotypes that were in my head and I got to a point where, you know, I asked myself as a policymaker, as a U.S. senator, is it right that I should be denying somebody the right of happiness? And it wasn’t and that’s why we made a decision."
... "I really think that people’s right to happiness shouldn’t be dictated by some policymaker in Washington, D.C.," he said. "I’ve come to know a lot of people that –- sexual orientation is such where they're in love with people from the same sex, and I just don’t think it’s our role in the government to say no you can’t be married. They love one another just as much as my wife and I love one another or more. And I think it’s important that we give them that ability to be happy."
"evolving" yeah, I thought those right wingers didn't believe in Evolution. What's next for them, coming to the realization that trickle down economics doesn't work?
A group of state Republicans is calling for the resignation of Republican National Committeeman Dave Agema over an antigay posting on his Facebook page.
Agema’s posting Wednesday, during U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments regarding the legality of same-sex marriage, was based on an online article titled, “Everyone Should Know These Statistics on Homosexuals,” which appeared under the byline Frank Joseph, M.D.
The post depicts gays as sexually promiscuous, rife with sexually transmitted diseases and responsible for “half the murders in large cities.”
Dennis Lennox, a Grand Traverse County Republican precinct delegate and former county drain commissioner, issued a statement Wednesday signed by 20 other Republicans condemning Agema’s “deplorable actions” and calling for his resignation.
Under the Gaydar How gays won the right to raise children without conservatives even noticing.
No one knows for sure how the Supreme Court will rule on the two high-profile gay marriage cases it is now considering. The betting, however, is that, regardless of the outcome, progress towards marriage equality will persist. A majority of the public now believes gays and lesbians should have the right to wed. Nine states and the District of Columbia have laws on the books conferring such rights. A stampede of Democratic elected officials has announced support for same-sex marriage, and in its recent “autopsy” report the Republican National Committee hinted its members should do the same.
Although progress has been unusually swift, this story of same-sex marriage rights has followed a familiar path, one blazed by women and African Americans in their struggles for equality. Members of an out-group, advocating for their rights, demand a fundamental change in the legal interpretation of the constitution, which causes a series of high-profile court cases, state and federal laws and counter-laws, and all of it accompanied by a broadly-held national conversation that leads to a change in public attitudes, laws and legal interpretations.
But this isn’t the only way that civil rights advance
Views On Gay Marriage Shift Among Republican-Leaning Demographics
Acceptance of gay marriage has increased at a significant rate among traditionally Republican demographics, including blue-collar workers, seniors and Southerners, according to an analysis by FirstRead of polls from NBC News and the Wall Street Journal.
Blue-collar workers’ views on gay marriage have actually shifted more than any other group since 2004. Eight months before George W. Bush was re-elected, just 18 percent said they were in favor of same-sex marriage, and 80 percent were opposed.
Eight years later, a plurality was in favor. In the December NBC/WSJ poll, 47 percent said so versus 43 percent who remained opposed.
Though older voters remain opposed to same-sex marriage, they have nevertheless demonstrated a 43-point shift on the issue. Voters in the conservative South have likewise shown a 43-point shift on the issue
Michigan GOP committeeman under fire over antigay Facebook post
A group of Michigan Republicans -- led by Dennis Lennox, a Republican precinct delegate -- is now calling for Agema's resignation, releasing a statement Wednesday condemning Agema's "deplorable actions."
“This isn’t about what we believe either politically or as women and men of faith,” the statement read. "This is about common decency and realizing that you cannot win an election by insulting a wide swath of the electorate."
On Thursday, the national organization GOProud also weighed in on Agema's Facebook post, urging members of the Republican Party to "not tolerate rank anti-gay bigotry."
“Mr. Clement,” Ginsburg replied, “the problem is if we are totally for the states’ decision that there is a marriage between two people, for the federal government then to come in to say no joint return, no marital deduction, no Social Security benefits; your spouse is very sick but you can’t get leave; people — if that set of attributes, one might well ask, what kind of marriage is this?”
“Standing five feet tall, from Brooklyn, New York!” Maddow crowed like a boxing announcer, “Appointed by President Bill Clinton, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg frankly kind of winning the day today by christening this particular variety of second-class American citizenship as ‘skim-milk marriage,’ which is what it forever will be known as now.”
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor left the lawyer defending California’s Proposition 8 grasping for words Tuesday with a question about whether the state law banning gay marriage amounts to discrimination.
Outside of the marriage context, can you think of any other rational basis, reason, for a state using sexual orientation as a factor in denying homosexuals benefits? Or imposing burdens on them? Is there any other decision-making that the government could make -- denying them a job, not granting them benefits of some sort, any other decision?
Charles Cooper, the attorney arguing against gay marriage for the state of California, struggled to find a response.
“Your Honor, I cannot,” Cooper said. “I, I do not have, uh, uh, any, uh, anything to offer you in that regard.”
“If they’re a class that makes any other discrimination improper, irrational, then why aren’t we treating them as a class for this one benefit?” Sotomayor then asked.
Cooper answered that marriage needed to be protected because of “responsible procreation” is a “vital” interest to the state and society and because “same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples are simply not similarly situated.”
Both sides of the marriage fight were presented on a national stage this week. It wasn't even close
It didn’t take long for the empty truth about the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act to be exposed Wednesday, and there was little equality opponents could do. At the Supreme Court hearing, Elena Kagan, the newest justice, read from the House Report from Congress when it passed the law in 1996, which summarized DOMA’s entire legal underpinning: “Congress decided to reflect and honor a collective moral judgment and to express moral disapproval of homosexuality.” According to people in the room, there were gasps and laughter at the so-called “gotcha moment.”
It was a duh moment, but a necessary one. Yes, DOMA’s about discrimination. That disapproval of gay people, not tradition or government uniformity, is at the root of the act is blatantly obvious both to anyone who observed it at the time and to everyone who has changed their Facebook profile photo this week. But it needed to be set out on a national stage, a few feet away from rainbow-festooned children asking what the big deal was. This week, both sides put forward their best cases and it quickly became clear the opposition to equality is based not on law or reason, but bigotry.
This is going to change this country for the better. At lasill eitwt. And you know, it will either be the end of the GOP, or it will begin to change them into a more humane group of rich white guys. No, it will be the end. Hallelujah!
ReplyDeleteLOVE IT!
ReplyDeleteQuick, someone send it in to the palin's Liberty pose site! It's the winner!
LOVE IT! Congrats to the artist, a perfect image for our times.
ReplyDeleteGryphen...wonderful post, simply wonderful! A picture means 1,000 words.
ReplyDeleteGOP Sen. Murkowski Says She’s ‘Evolving’ On Gay Marriage
ReplyDeleteAcknowleding the sea change in America on same-sex marriage, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) on Wednesday said her own views on the issue are also "evolving."
"The term 'evolving view' has been perhaps overused, but I think it is an appropriate term for me to use," Murkowski said, according to the Chugiak-Eagle River Star. The senior Alaska senator has previously expressed opposition to gay nuptials.
She added that her state may ultimately revisit the issue at some point and that she's evaluating her own position "very closely." In 1998, Alaska passed a constitutional amendment that defined marriage as between one man and one woman.Â
"It may be that Alaska will come to revisit its position on gay marriage, and as a policy maker I am certainly revieiwing that very closely," Murkowski said.
Murkowski seemed to suggested that her two young sons have inspired her to moderate on same-sex marriage — emblematic of the views held by most young Americans on the issue.
"I've got two young sons who, when I ask them and their friends how they feel about gay marriage, kinda give me one of those looks like, 'Gosh mom, why are you even asking that question?'" she said.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/gop-sen-murkowski-says-shes-evolving-on-gay
Rush Limbaugh Expects Gay Marriage Will Eventually Be Legal Nationwide
ReplyDeleteRush Limbaugh on Wednesday conceded that gay marriage will eventually become the law of the land in the U.S., agreeing with proponents of same-sex marriage that "the genie's not getting put back in the bottle" on the issue.
"A lot of people have no personal animus against gay people at all," Limbaugh said on his radio show, according to a transcript. "It's instead, you know, a genuine, I don't know, love/respect for the things they believe define this country as great. They get up every day and they see all this stuff under attack. They see it all under assault. And I think they're just worried about the survivability of the country. And to which the opponents say, 'Well, the country's changing and you better get with it and understand it because this genie's not getting put back in the bottle.' And I think that's right. I don't care what this court does with this particular ruling, Proposition 8. I think the inertia is clearly moving in the direction that there is going to be gay marriage at some point nationwide."
Limbaugh added that the political ramifications of same-sex marriage are still unknown, especially for the Republican Party: "I mean, the Republican Party, for example, could be looking at its ultimate demise here, depending on how it deals with this. Because they do have multiple millions of voters who are evangelical Christians who on religious grounds alone don't support homosexual marriage and are not going to support a political party that does. So then the Republicans in that circumstance would be faced, if you were to lose multiple millions of voters over this, they are going to have to replace them somewhere. How do they do it? Do they try to siphon off most of the gay vote that's going to the Democrats?"
Read more from the show's transcript here.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/rush-limbaugh-expects-gay-marriage-will-eventually-be?ref=fpb
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) said Thursday that his decision to publicly support same-sex marriage was driven by personal interactions with gay couples in his home state.
ReplyDelete"I just think it’s time. You know, I spent most of my life – and I’m 56 years of age – on a farm 12 miles west of Big Sandy," Tester said during an interview on HuffPost Live. "And over the last six years for sure, and some time before that, I’ve gotten to know a lot of different people, a lot of folks that I normally wouldn’t know, and found them all to be good and I respect [them]. So I guess it’s broadening the horizons that I had before that’s gotten me to this point.
"I think it’s just the people you run into, the people you meet, the goodness in people and the example they set," Tester continued. "And it just kind of takes away a lot of the stereotypes that were in my head and I got to a point where, you know, I asked myself as a policymaker, as a U.S. senator, is it right that I should be denying somebody the right of happiness? And it wasn’t and that’s why we made a decision."
...
"I really think that people’s right to happiness shouldn’t be dictated by some policymaker in Washington, D.C.," he said. "I’ve come to know a lot of people that –- sexual orientation is such where they're in love with people from the same sex, and I just don’t think it’s our role in the government to say no you can’t be married. They love one another just as much as my wife and I love one another or more. And I think it’s important that we give them that ability to be happy."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/28/jon-tester-gay-marriage_n_2971715.html
"evolving" yeah, I thought those right wingers didn't believe in Evolution. What's next for them, coming to the realization that trickle down economics doesn't work?
ReplyDeleteA group of state Republicans is calling for the resignation of Republican National Committeeman Dave Agema over an antigay posting on his Facebook page.
ReplyDeleteAgema’s posting Wednesday, during U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments regarding the legality of same-sex marriage, was based on an online article titled, “Everyone Should Know These Statistics on Homosexuals,” which appeared under the byline Frank Joseph, M.D.
The post depicts gays as sexually promiscuous, rife with sexually transmitted diseases and responsible for “half the murders in large cities.”
Dennis Lennox, a Grand Traverse County Republican precinct delegate and former county drain commissioner, issued a statement Wednesday signed by 20 other Republicans condemning Agema’s “deplorable actions” and calling for his resignation.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/michigan-republican-faces-calls-for-resignation-after-anti
Under the Gaydar
ReplyDeleteHow gays won the right to raise children without conservatives even noticing.
No one knows for sure how the Supreme Court will rule on the two high-profile gay marriage cases it is now considering. The betting, however, is that, regardless of the outcome, progress towards marriage equality will persist. A majority of the public now believes gays and lesbians should have the right to wed. Nine states and the District of Columbia have laws on the books conferring such rights. A stampede of Democratic elected officials has announced support for same-sex marriage, and in its recent “autopsy” report the Republican National Committee hinted its members should do the same.
Although progress has been unusually swift, this story of same-sex marriage rights has followed a familiar path, one blazed by women and African Americans in their struggles for equality. Members of an out-group, advocating for their rights, demand a fundamental change in the legal interpretation of the constitution, which causes a series of high-profile court cases, state and federal laws and counter-laws, and all of it accompanied by a broadly-held national conversation that leads to a change in public attitudes, laws and legal interpretations.
But this isn’t the only way that civil rights advance
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/may_june_2013/features/under_the_gaydar043855.php
Views On Gay Marriage Shift Among Republican-Leaning Demographics
ReplyDeleteAcceptance of gay marriage has increased at a significant rate among traditionally Republican demographics, including blue-collar workers, seniors and Southerners, according to an analysis by FirstRead of polls from NBC News and the Wall Street Journal.
Blue-collar workers’ views on gay marriage have actually shifted more than any other group since 2004. Eight months before George W. Bush was re-elected, just 18 percent said they were in favor of same-sex marriage, and 80 percent were opposed.
Eight years later, a plurality was in favor. In the December NBC/WSJ poll, 47 percent said so versus 43 percent who remained opposed.
Though older voters remain opposed to same-sex marriage, they have nevertheless demonstrated a 43-point shift on the issue. Voters in the conservative South have likewise shown a 43-point shift on the issue
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/views-on-gay-marriage-shift-among-republican-leaning
Michigan GOP committeeman under fire over antigay Facebook post
ReplyDeleteA group of Michigan Republicans -- led by Dennis Lennox, a Republican precinct delegate -- is now calling for Agema's resignation, releasing a statement Wednesday condemning Agema's "deplorable actions."
“This isn’t about what we believe either politically or as women and men of faith,” the statement read. "This is about common decency and realizing that you cannot win an election by insulting a wide swath of the electorate."
On Thursday, the national organization GOProud also weighed in on Agema's Facebook post, urging members of the Republican Party to "not tolerate rank anti-gay bigotry."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/27/dave-agema-homosexuals_n_2965310.html
“Mr. Clement,” Ginsburg replied, “the problem is if we are totally for the states’ decision that there is a marriage between two people, for the federal government then to come in to say no joint return, no marital deduction, no Social Security benefits; your spouse is very sick but you can’t get leave; people — if that set of attributes, one might well ask, what kind of marriage is this?”
ReplyDelete“Standing five feet tall, from Brooklyn, New York!” Maddow crowed like a boxing announcer, “Appointed by President Bill Clinton, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg frankly kind of winning the day today by christening this particular variety of second-class American citizenship as ‘skim-milk marriage,’ which is what it forever will be known as now.”
Watch the video, embedded via MSNBC, below:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/28/maddow-congratulates-justice-ginsburg-on-winning-the-day-in-doma-arguments/
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor left the lawyer defending California’s Proposition 8 grasping for words Tuesday with a question about whether the state law banning gay marriage amounts to discrimination.
ReplyDeleteOutside of the marriage context, can you think of any other rational basis, reason, for a state using sexual orientation as a factor in denying homosexuals benefits? Or imposing burdens on them? Is there any other decision-making that the government could make -- denying them a job, not granting them benefits of some sort, any other decision?
Charles Cooper, the attorney arguing against gay marriage for the state of California, struggled to find a response.
“Your Honor, I cannot,” Cooper said. “I, I do not have, uh, uh, any, uh, anything to offer you in that regard.”
“If they’re a class that makes any other discrimination improper, irrational, then why aren’t we treating them as a class for this one benefit?” Sotomayor then asked.
Cooper answered that marriage needed to be protected because of “responsible procreation” is a “vital” interest to the state and society and because “same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples are simply not similarly situated.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/27/sonia-sotomayor-gay-marriage_n_2965105.html?ir=Politics&ref=topbar
In Supreme Court, anti-gay movement is humiliated
ReplyDeleteBoth sides of the marriage fight were presented on a national stage this week. It wasn't even close
It didn’t take long for the empty truth about the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act to be exposed Wednesday, and there was little equality opponents could do. At the Supreme Court hearing, Elena Kagan, the newest justice, read from the House Report from Congress when it passed the law in 1996, which summarized DOMA’s entire legal underpinning: “Congress decided to reflect and honor a collective moral judgment and to express moral disapproval of homosexuality.” According to people in the room, there were gasps and laughter at the so-called “gotcha moment.”
It was a duh moment, but a necessary one. Yes, DOMA’s about discrimination. That disapproval of gay people, not tradition or government uniformity, is at the root of the act is blatantly obvious both to anyone who observed it at the time and to everyone who has changed their Facebook profile photo this week. But it needed to be set out on a national stage, a few feet away from rainbow-festooned children asking what the big deal was. This week, both sides put forward their best cases and it quickly became clear the opposition to equality is based not on law or reason, but bigotry.
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/28/in_supreme_court_anti_gay_movement_was_humiliated/