Federal Marriage Amendment: Here we go again!

[Rkitko]

Two articles:

http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid31112.asp
"The same-sex-marriage ban is one of several hot-button social issues Republicans are raising to rally conservative voters ahead of November's congressional elections. Because the measure would change the Constitution, it must pass both houses of Congress by a two-thirds majority and then be approved by at least 38 states."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/18/senate.gaymarriage.ap/index.html
A Senate committee approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage Thursday, after a shouting match that ended when one Democrat strode out and the Republican chairman bid him "good riddance."
"I don't need to be lectured by you. You are no more a protector of the Constitution than am I," Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, shouted after Sen. Russ Feingold declared his opposition to the amendment, his affinity for the Constitution and his intention to leave the meeting.


What Republican leaders are thinking: "Oooh, look! An election around the corner... Now what in the world can we do to stir up our party so that they'll get out there an vote for us? Oh, I know! Let's use the FMA again. Worked great in 2004." :mad:

I frequently talk to Republicans who have unwavering faith in their political leaders. What I honestly don't and can't understand is why they, the religious right, cannot realize that they're being used by their party. If I were them, I'd be completely ticked off that I was just a pawn in their game, but I suppose that this legislation taps into their fears so well that they don't care who uses them as long as those 'dern homosexuals' are kept in their place.

:(

[Melba]

I am personally sick of the Republican party (mostly) using homosexuals as political pawns. Oh yes, let's make the issues about those people...after all they are trying to take over. They want civil rights like everyone else...:eek:
I am all for us having those rights, but I don't think it will happen in my lifetime, at least not happen and remain law for good. I am so tired of small minded people using the GL community as an issue when there a lot bigger things I am concerned about for this country. Yes, our rights matter, but on the grand scale of things, I would rather hear about jobs, economy/oil prices, and national security.....oh and the biggest thing I am concerned about that senseless idiotic war in Iraq. I don't want to be an issue, I want to see this country not totally go down the toilet.

Oops, sorry for the rant.....that post just brought out the feisty girl in me.

[AceOn6]

On the good news front... this week marks the 2nd anniversary of marriage for all in Massachusetts.


On the bad news front... the special interest group that wants to repeal the law did get enough signatures for the repeal issue to be on the November ballot. I hope enough people have recognized that the world has not ended with marriage for all, and will vote accordingly.

[Rkitko]

On the good news front... this week marks the 2nd anniversary of marriage for all in Massachusetts.

On the bad news front... the special interest group that wants to repeal the law did get enough signatures for the repeal issue to be on the November ballot. I hope enough people have recognized that the world has not ended with marriage for all, and will vote accordingly.
Oh, but didn't you know? The sky is still falling, just very, very slowly. So slowly, the nutjobs say, that you won't even notice it until after your family has been destroyed, your kids are homosexuals, and the purple teletubby is President. And you better act quick before you lose this chance to blame a scapegoat!

[Dee]

Ah, but don't forget Ritko, one never knows when the homosexual may be about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5VNe9NTOxA&search=boys%20beware

Even worse, there's a part two in which Ralph gets arrested, Jimmy gets released on probation(?), and a stranger in a business suit plays basketball with Mike who ends up "riding in the shadow of death." :eek:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94LjbWtXMeE&search=boys%20beware

And if that were not enough, in part three the cops arrest the homosexual who wears a bow tie, and we learn that "public restrooms can often be a hangout for the homosexual." Bobby is stalked by one accompanied by the theme from Jaws. Luckily Bobby makes his escape before the ho-mo-sexual can make his move.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPziYI9yhB0&search=boys%20beware

Could it be that Republicans sit and watch Boys Beware at all their caucus meetings?

[Rikki]

Anyone who thinks that their political party (affiliation) isn't using them as a pawn, is delusional.

It's a means to an end (survival) for every "party".

The Republicans use religion as leverage and the Democrats use minority as leverage. Each party picks its battles. And their choices are based on which battles will get the most votes. It doesn't necessarily involve any thought on "how can we serve our constituents best".

Vice Versa, each party plays off of each other and uses the other's leverage as its own leverage to get a negative response.

In my opinion, these characteristics are about par to "I know you are, but what am I?" from a 2nd grader.

[Dee]

Or as a visionary songwriter we might know ;) once sang:

every politician is
a sewer of ambition

And they are!

[Rkitko]

The Republicans use religion as leverage and the Democrats use minority as leverage. Each party picks its battles. And their choices are based on which battles will get the most votes. It doesn't necessarily involve any thought on "how can we serve our constituents best".

As true as that is, I'd like to think the Democrats aren't as sinister in their use of minorities. I'd like to think they really do have their best interest in mind and really do care, though this may not always be the case. However, I DO think that the Republicans only pretend to be in marching step with the religious right and really just use them by dragging up something close to election time that makes the nutjobs froth at the mouth, ensuring they go an vote for anyone that they're told to. I may not be as critical of Democrats because I am one, but I really don't think they've done anything like that in recent history (perhaps they have and I just haven't paid attention?). Just a thought.