Texas Republicans Call For Jail Time For Supporters Of Gay Marriage

[freetobegay]

(Dallas, Texas) The Texas GOP is calling for prison sentences for any clerks who issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The platform committee of the state Republican Party said the plank will firmly establish the party's position on gay marriage.

The party already is on record as opposing gay marriage. But, the tougher wording is seen as an indication Republicans want to make gay marriage a key issue in the November election.

The plank says that government officials who perform same-sex weddings or issue marriage licenses to such couples should face felony penalties.

Kirk Overbey the platform committee chair said that a criminal penalty would be an important asset in fighting what he calls "behavior that hurts society."

http://www.365gay.com/newscon04/06/060304txGOP.htm

[AntiCoup2K4]

1. There could be a big silver lining in this cloud.

It took an arrest for "sodomy" to get that law changed in Texas, by way of the Supreme Court, right? Though I can't see how the Hell they could possibly call it a "felony" to issue a marriage license.

[amber dog democrat]

2. What, are there no live oak trees ?

We used'ta string em up fer prevert behaviors back in the good old days.
Theys worse than horse thieves....

[seabeyond]

3. get it at its source. outlaw

the activism

[Warpy]

4. "If I owned Hell and Texas

..I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas," --Gen. W. T. Sherman

[Lucky Luciano]

5. Would this imply that three such convictions

would get a life sentence in prison without the possibility of parole?

I, for one don't care too much about the issue of gay marriage - but don't be offended if you are gay. The reason - My not caring is kind of a ringing endorsement. If gay people want to get married it has nothing to do with me! I can't understand why non-gay people care so much. Do they have some kind of latent homosexual feelings they are repressing? Weird - I would rather not waste my energies the way these fundies waste theirs.

[ChickMagic]

6. One of the docs where I work

was going on and on to me about the evils of gay marriage. He was completely discombobulated when marriage licenses were being issued in Massachusetts. Every single time I see him I ask, "So, how's your marriage holding up?" :evilgrin:

[freetobegay]

8. Good for you!

And thanks. :)

[ChickMagic]

12. Anytime

m'dear! :hug: It gives me joy to see the look on his face. :D

[tekriter]

9. Almost got my ass kicked here at work...

when a bunch of my freeper colleagues were droning on an on about the usual party lines - weakens marriage for everybody, next thing they'll wanna marry a cat, etc.

So I joined them, and one of them lit into me "what does our resident liberal have to say about this" - so I asked them to be specific about what part of their marriages was imperiled by gays getting married. They started with the old generalizations and I stopped them. "What about your marriages is SO WEAK that two guys getting married a thousand miles away is ruining your life"?

I told them that my marriage was just fine, sorry to hear about theirs.

[ChickMagic]

14. What gets me

is how on earth does it affect them in any way? What do they care about who loves whom? And, by the way, Britney Spears drunken Las Vegas marriage didn't weaken it at all, did it? Liza and David Gest(sp?) didn't cheapen it, did it? TV shows like "Who wants to marry a millionaire" doesn't cheapen it, does it? But two people who have made a life together for often many years getting hitched is awful, I tell you, AWFUL! :eyes:

[Taylor Mason Powell]

52. That's brilliant!!

I gotta remember that one. :-) Thanks for the chuckle!

[mmm]

7. republicans scare me

[trof]

10. That's their job.

You could look it up.
;-)

[Beatrix]

11. BAHAHAHA

Christ I love reading the republican Texas platform.  It gets
better every time.  Anyone want to know what the last one
said?

  "We reclaim freedom of religious expression in public
on government property, and freedom from government
interference." 

     Support government display of Ten Commandments. 

     Dispel the "myth" of the separation of church
and state. 

     "A strong and vibrant private sector [should be]
unencumbered by excessive government regulation" 

     Oppose Campaign Finance Reform 

     Oppose any form of gun control 

Abolish: 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; 
position of Surgeon General; 
EPA; 
Department of Energy; 
Department of Housing and Urban Development; 
Department of Education; 
Department of Commerce and Labor; 
National Endowment for the Arts 
2. ECONOMY 
     Abolish the dollar in favor of the gold standard. 

     Abolish the IRS 

     Eliminate income tax, inheritance tax, gift tax, capital
gains, corporate income tax, payroll tax and property tax. 

     Repeal minimum wage law. 

     " ... gradually phase out Social Security tax"
for a system of "private pensions" 

3. UNITED NATIONS 
     " ... we immediately rescind our membership in, as
well as all financial and military contributions to the United
Nations." 

     We should " ... evict the United Nations from the
United States and eliminate any further participation." 


4. FAMILY 
     "We believe that traditional marriage is a legal and
moral commitment between a man and a woman. We recognize that
the family is the foundational unit of a healthy society and
consists of those related by blood, marriage, or adoption. The
family is responsible for its own welfare, education, moral
training, conduct, and property." 

     "The practice of sodomy tears at the heart of our
society..." "The party oppose[s] decriminalization
of sodomy." 

     Oppose all forms of abortion - even in cases of rape or
incest. 

     "We unequivocally oppose United States Senate
ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of
the Child." 

5. EDUCATION 
“We call for the abolition of the U.S. Department of Education
and the prohibition of the transfer of any of its functions to
any other federal agency.” 

     Support official prayer in public schools 

     Oppose Early Childhood Development Programs 

     "We support ... a program based upon biblical
principles..." 

     Terminate bilingual education 

     "Since Secular Humanism is recognized by the United
States Supreme Court as a religion ... Secular Humanism should
be subjected to the same state and federal laws as any other
recognized religions." 

6. THE ENVIRONMENT 
     Oppose the "myth" of global warming 

     Reaffirm "the belief in the fundamental right of an
individual to use property without governmental
interference" 

     Oppose EPA management of Texas air quality 

7. THE MIDDLE EAST 
     " ... Jerusalem is the capital of Israel ... "
therefore, the United States should move its embassy from Tel
Aviv to Jerusalem. "

[donco6]

13. So, how exactly do they propose paying for anything

without any taxes?

I just don't get their logic.

And going back to the gold standard - Jeez. Don't they know anything about history and why we ABANDONED the gold standard?

[greekspeak]

16. Almost as scary as the Constitution Party's platform

They call themselves the Constitution Party, but they mean the constitution as THEY want it. In other words, amend it to match their agenda, adding and repealing as desired. I go to school with a very conservative woman who HATES Texas because it was so nuts there. She was basically a second class citizen, and expected to act as one. To her Dallas is hell on earth.

[JayS]

17. Now, Now.

To be fair, that is an interpretation of their platform.





From: http://www.texasgop.org/library/platform.php

2002 Republican Party of Texas Platform
Preamble
The delegates of the 2002 Republican Party of Texas believe that our Party Platform expresses the fundamental beliefs and truths that were recognized by our country's founders. The compassionate conservative principles of our Party are tested and proven. We believe that the officeholders of our representative republic do not truly represent their electorate until this platform is applied as the standard for their decision-making. We call on Texas Republicans to work diligently to elect representative Republicans and to personally implement the following ten core principles of the 2002 Texas Republican Platform:

We respect and cherish the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and our Founders' intent to restrict the power of the federal government over the states and the people. We believe internal self-government is the best government, balanced by limited civil government, which provides for the people those things which cannot be achieved individually.
We believe that human life is sacred because each person is created in the image of God, that life begins at the moment of conception and ends at the point of natural death, and that all innocent human life must be protected.
We believe that good government is based on the individual and that each person's ability, dignity, freedom, and responsibility must be honored and recognized. We believe that, while equal opportunity is a right and a privilege, equal outcome is not. We insist that no one's rights are negotiable and that individual freedom demands personal responsibility.
We believe that government spending is out of control and needs to be reduced. We support fundamental, immediate tax reform that is simple, fair, and fully disclosed.
We believe that traditional marriage is a legal and moral commitment between a man and a woman. We recognize that the family is the foundational unit of a healthy society and consists of those related by blood, marriage, or adoption. The family is responsible for its own welfare, education, moral training, conduct, and property,
We believe that a well-educated population is fundamental to the continued success of our Republic; and that parents have the right, as well as the duty, to direct their children's education and to have the choice among public, private, and religious schools. Competition improves education, with no child being left behind.
We believe that the future of our country depends upon a strong and vibrant private sector unencumbered by excessive government regulation.
We believe that a strong America ensures a free America. While we recognize that our nation is a major participant in the global community, we must also vigilantly protect the sovereignty of the United States. Freedom is never free, and we honor all those who have served our nation to protect our liberty.
We believe all Americans have the right to be safe in their homes, on their streets, and in their communities. We support enforcement of the laws through the Courts imposing swift and sure justice with stiff penalties, truth in sentencing, and respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens.
We believe that personal and public integrity is the cornerstone of a stable and lasting society and it is the key to preserving the freedoms for which our founders pledged their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor."
“God Bless Texas!”


Full Platform Here:
http://www.texasgop.org/library/RPTPlatform2002.pdf

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JayS]

21. If each one of us did a summary of their platform we would...

...each come up with something radically different. For instance, the shortened version lists the abolishment of the ATF. That statement taken by itself sounds pretty wacky. When you read that it is more of an issue of jurisdiction then it does not sound so strange.

[Beatrix]

22. I didn't do a summary

I posted EXACT QUOTES from the GOP Texas platform.

You are the one who actually posted the summary rather than quotes from the real thing.

[JayS]

24. I posted the Preamble to their platform. The actual platform...

....is linked to at the bottom of my post. It is extremely long and sleep inducing.

[Beatrix]

26. I know

still that doesn't change the fact I posted exact quotes. There was nothing misleading or incorrect about it.

[JayS]

27. Taking quotes out of context changes the meaning of the...

...quotes.

[Beatrix]

28. Really?

Which quotes have a different meaning if in "context"?

It's a platform for god sakes - not a book. A platform generally lists tons of positions with out going in to explicit detail on each one. Generally you can take small quotes and still be true to the meaning.

[JayS]

31. I gave an example in post 21.

For instance, the shortened version lists the abolishment of the ATF. That statement taken by itself sounds pretty wacky. When you read that it is more of an issue of jurisdiction then it does not sound so strange.




Another example is this quote which, when pulled from the full interview, sounds really strange. In the full interview it most likely appears Kerry was merely inattentive.

******************
Q: Do you find it necessary to kill animals for photo-ops?
A: I don't think the Democratic Party should be the candidacy of the NRA. And when I was fighting to ban assault weapons in 1992 and 1993, Dean was appealing to the NRA for their endorsement, and he got it. I believe it's important for us to have somebody who is going to stand up for gun safety in America and make certain that we make our streets safe, our children safe, and not allow people to get assault weapons in America.

Source: CNN "Rock The Vote" Democratic Debate Nov 5, 2003
****************

[Beatrix]

40. Wrong

Everything quoted is what the repubs intend to do under their platform. Even in context - will the ATF still be abolished? Yes. Therefore whether or not it is in context is irrelevant.

In fact nothing placed in context that was quoted will change the fact that what was quoted will still be done.

The only thing adding context does is explain weird republican "reasons" WHY they will do it - so it "doesn't sound so strange". The fact is it will still be done.

[JayS]

42. You are trying to make a political statement by pulling one...

...sentence away from the body that gives it its intended meaning. This is a type of "spin" and is what we complain about the other side doing.

[noiretextatique]

29. thanks for confirming Beatrix's post

nothing here to be "fair" about, imho.

[JayS]

33. Putting it out in that way without at least identifying it as excerpts...

...is misleading and makes us guilty of the same thing we accuse our counterparts of.

[noiretextatique]

34. right...as i said, i find nothing in your post

that discredits Beatrix's post.

[JayS]

36. I did not discredit her post. I just pointed out that it was an...

...interpretation, created by the selective editing of the platform.

[noiretextatique]

38. and your post wasn't?

i didn't see much difference, in tone or substance, between either excerpts.

[JayS]

39. I only posted the Preamble. The actual platform is quite...

...long. The example I gave is just one of many to show how you can change the meaning and substance of a quote by taking it out of the intended context.

[noiretextatique]

41. god...the meaning wasn't changed

the preamble is just puts a pretty face on the specifics of the platform. the only people who are being misled by this are those who choose to be, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary...in the preamble and the platform.

[JayS]

44. What are you talking about? I am comparing an...

..."abridged" platform to the actual preamble and platform and showing how the two do not compare due to some selective editing.

[noiretextatique]

45. i understand, however, you protest too much

since the meaning wasn't changed *substantially* by the editing, in my opinion...i acknowledge that you think it was. the nuances you seem to think are important really don't change the substance of the message, which is one that i do not support, and i am not shy about saying it because people who support this agenda will not vote democratic anyone.
that is clear from both your excerpts and the other poster's.

[JayS]

47. hehehe I try not to protest too much. :) I have been listening...

...to Kerry getting ripped for pretty much the same thing except there it is more the addition of words to a context where they don't exactly belong that he is getting called on...so I guess I am more sensitive to the issue these days.

[noiretextatique]

51. i hear you...

i guess someone has to keep us honest :D

[LiberalFighter]

30. Need to get this out to the public so they know how mentally imbalanced...

they are.

[JayS]

32. They'll just put out the full platform and make us look silly. n/t

n/t

[IrateCitizen]

15. Just proves that Texas is the national laboratory for bad govt.

So says Molly Ivins.... :shrug:

[Cyrano]

19. Molly Ivins wrote a great piece a few years back

when Texas passed an anti-sodomy law. She wrote a line that went something like this: "Upon passage of the measure, the Republican house and senate leaders shook hands, thereby breaking their own newly passed law that a dick can't touch an asshole."

[dsc]

20. I really wish this news outlet would tone down the purple headlines

That headline is very misleading. It implies that Texas GOP is calling for the elimination of the first amendment. While the plank is stupid and divisive it is vastly different to call for the jailing of clerks who break the law and people who advocate changing it.

[JayS]

25. Yup, it diminishes the integrity of the news outlet when they...

...do stuff like this.

[noiretextatique]

46. advocating politcally-motivated selective prosecution

of city/state employees is vastly different from advocating jailing supporters of gay marriage.

[dsc]

48. Yes it is

Even politically motivated prosection of real crimes is different from prosecution of speech. Action is still action.

[noiretextatique]

49. yes...it sure is

especially when those 'real crimes' further one political parties stated anti-gay agenda. too bad they don't spend more time on some of the real crimes Enron committed...but that probably wouldn't be as poltically popular.

[dsc]

50. again I am not claiming it is wise policy

but the headline implies that every supporter of same sex marriage would be jailed under their proposal. That is baldly false. Our side shouldn't use purple prose headlines to make misleading claims. We are better than that.

[noiretextatique]

53. i have no problem with the headline

if they could jail call for jailing everyone who supports gay marriage, they would. would any clerk act independently to issue licences without the approval of a city council or a mayor? i don't think that was the case in sf...they acted at the behest of the mayor. perhaps a better law for out texas friends would be to propose jailing any mayors or city councilfolk who propose issuing license to same-sex couples, inviolation of state law. i'm not sure who things are structured down there though.

[dsc]

54. I have no idea either

but no matter what the Texas GOP would have done, they didn't do what the headline said they did. I am glad to see a news sorce geared toward gay and lesbian news. But I am disappointed at the overall quality of this source. This isn't the first time they have resorted to purple prose headlines. If we are going to be taken seriously as people and political actors we can't be shouting fire all the time.

[noiretextatique]

55. the people who support he texas GOP

are not going to take us seriously, regardless of what we do. still your point is taken...the headline should be accurate.

[CO Liberal]

23. If The "Log Cabin Republicans" Have a Branch in Texas...

..I imagine it will be disbanding.

[spanone]

35. Some people are just eat up with ignorance.

[JayS]

37. "eat up"

Actually it is et up, as in Ed Earl and Billy Bob got et up by faar ants. :)

[0007]

43. Street waking must be prison time

[TexasMexican]

56. So whats the current penalty...

for performing an illegal marriage?

I take it from the article that the GOP wants to make it a felony of some sort, but what is it now, a misdemenor or what? Fine? Jail time?

I have no problem with punishing people who perform illegal marriages but a felony is a bit overboard, a fine, maybe a few days in county, and loss of job seems appropriate to me.

State penitentiaries are not places to put political prisioners, they should be murderers, rapists, and robbers.