A silver lining or dark cloud; the gay marriage debate.

[Cleita]

If it's true that 25% of the gay vote in 2000 went to Bush, I think that in 2004 it will be 0%. On the other hand if our election process has been compromised with electronic tampering, it could be that the Bush consortium doesn't care because they will deliver the election to Bush regardless. Or, worse, they could have a martial law scenario up their sleeves to pull out at the right moment.

Alienating a sizable voting block of our population is never a good unless you have other plans for them. Hitler, marginalized the Jews and later gays in the same manner. I am beginning to feel really uneasy about this now.

[LoneStarLiberal]

1. Potential Quagmire As Well As Potential Bellweather

If our candidates allow themselves to be mired in a semantic debate of legality and the ethical and moral whims of the current times, then it's going to be a quagmire.

If our candidates instead seize the truth of this issue and do nothing but reiterate over and over again that this is a non-issue because the Constitution makes no conditions on an individual's freedom in the most practical form of "life, liberty, and the right to pursue happiness" and that Democrats love the Consitution and only thugs would want to start junking up the Consitution with conditions on our basic freedoms, we'll crush these evil doing Republican Taliban (Talibublicans).

Screw the conservatives and the Republicans. This has shit to do with that treasured conservative bogeyman, the "activist judge." This is conservatives and Republicans wanting to start tinkering with the Consitution and making our basic Consitutional freedoms conditional on their whims.

[Devlzown]

3. Well said.

All our guy will have to say is, "I want to talk about jobs and foreign policy and our future and all George Bush seems to be concerned about is kicking around gay people." The shrub can act like George Wallace in this election if he wants to, but I like to think America isn't so far gone that it will fall for that shit.

[kayell]

2. I have to admit, I've been having terrible nightmares lately about the

possibilities of a theocracy in this country. The Handmaids Tale has always seemed like too real a possibility for a US dystopia. Getting people all riled up for the fascism/corporatism that * and the BFEE look like they are heading for would be a lot easier if they had not only a external (terrarists) but an internal enemy like gays to focus peoples attention on. Throw in the usual fun effects of sexual and religious hysteria and we could be in for some scary times. I sure hope that I am just paranoid. I hope that there are enough people in this country who won't fall for this crap.

[Cleita]

4. I hope I'm just paranoid too.

But, if gays are the targetted scapegoat of the new regime, whose to say people won't look the other way like most Germans did when the Jews were discriminated against, lost their business and properties, were refused service in shops and restaurants and eventually just started disappearing.

[Sapphocrat]

5. 'other plans for them'

Last night, foreigncorrespondent and I were chatting via IMs, and I said something like: If * is installed again, my leaving the U.S. is no longer just a matter of fc and I finally being able to start a life together; it will supersede any thoughts of convenience, any worries of leaving my mother alone, anything else -- because my leaving will become a matter of survival.

Literal survival, I mean.

I just shrug at the folks who think we're getting all upset about some nightmarish scenario that "can't happen here." It happened in Germany, and a lot of people refused to recognize it even after it had already begun.

Tomorrow belongs
Tomorrow belongs
Tomorrow belongs to me...

[Cleita]

6. I wouldn't blame you.

The Jews who survived the Third Reich were the ones who took action, whether trying to get out of Germany or fighting back when they could.

[Pobeka]

7. Here's one straight male not looking the other way!

First off, it's just a matter of human decency, and basic morality.

Practically, we must realize every single one of us is a minority, in some respect.

The strength of this country relies on us respecting the rights of the minority groups, and bonding on our commonalities, not being splintered by hate.

[TahitiNut]

8. Well, well ...

... I'll say a big 'Amen' to that! :thumbsup:

One of my favorite buttons: "I'm Straight but not Narrow!"

To think of the number of problems we have that're far more important than who loves whom boggles the mind!

"What the world needs now is ..."

[David__77]

10. Fascism is always a threat, but...

Don't let yourself worry about it. Instead, organize your friends. Be militant about your beliefs. If there's going to be polarization in this country, we need to make the costs TOO HIGH to make us scapegoats. That's the thing, the people in power value a certain stability. If we make it known that we will FIGHT, then it is more likely that the long knives don't come out against us. Note that Bush is trying not to endorse an amendment outright. He's afraid of the polarization that would take place.

[David__77]

9. Us Stonewall Democrats will try to deliver 90%+

I think the LGBT community is very diverse--for one thing, we need to remember that many people are just coming out for instance. They might not have evolved politically yet, or realized their instinctual home of the GOP is against them. But, like my spouse, most realize that the GOP is against them and become Democrats or independent progressives.

But, among out LGBT people, who are a significant electoral force, we should strive for 90% against Bush. I think it's doable. We have more organization in place this time than in 2000, thanks to the Stonewall Democrats. Interestingly, the radical right is mad at Bush for not being viscious enough in his anti-gay announcements. I welcome whatever damage he receives from whatever quarter.