Someone has to say it - the NJ decision may have lost us the Senate

[Mr_Spock]

That RW brown-noser (Charley Gibson) on ABC Nightly News was salivating with excitement over the impact this may have on some of the close races. They even had a political commentary with George Stephanopolis & they went so far as to say it "may be just the shot in the arm that the Allen campaign needs at this time". I found it disgusting but I was working and did not realize what channel my portable TV was on or that the nightly news would lead with this story. It may very well be just enough to lose the one seat that would be the tipping point in this election. I see we are mostly trying to ignore this here, but the RWers are not going to let this die - my heart almost fell out of my chest when I heard there was going to be ANOTHER gay marriage decision RIGHT BEFORE AN ELECTION. This sucks - why couldn't they wait two weeks in order to remove this as an issue anyway? :(

[LeftyMom]

1. Somebody did say it. It was homophobic then too.

Human rights are more important that petty political concerns.

Defending them is the reason to get dems elected, not something we should do when it won't harm anybody's political aspirations.

[Mr_Spock]

5. Political strategizing is homophobic?

Do you think it may have an effect on the Virgina race?

[LeftyMom]

9. Putting political strategy ahead of human rights is unacceptable.

If we're not the party standing up bravely for civil rights we don't deserve to hold any office, let alone the Senate.

[KAZ]

14. Perfectly stated. Thank you! n/t

n/t

[karlrschneider]

The thing is, we can't GET the Senate without smart political strategy.

Or the House or much of anything else. Please don't shoot the messenger.

[Mr_Spock]

26. I'm already bleeding to death

:rofl:

I had no idea this was percolating like this - I suppose I should have known people were trying to avoid discussing this issue.

[karlrschneider]

38. I hear ya. Hell, I can't stop farting!

:crazy:

[justin899]

211. Percolating?

You didn't realize telling people to wait for rights you take for granted would result in your bigoted bullshit beinig challenged?

I don't believe you. No one is that fucking stupid.

[meganmonkey]

50. We have to vote against it

before we can vote for it, huh. How many election cycles are we supposed to do that for, exactly?

:shrug:

[Irreverend IX]

130. We at least could have stalled it...

For two frickin' weeks while we work on getting Dems elected.

[Radical Activist]

119. And when we get the Senate we won't rock the boat for fear of losing it.

It never ends. At some point you have to choose to stand up for principle and stick with it.

[cboy4]

125. E X A C T L Y

It never ends.

Well said!

[Mr_Spock]

132. True enough

I would still prefer not to have that RW shill Gibson salivating on national TV about this - do the courts have no common sense at all? They can delay corporate lawsuits for years but they can't slip 2 weeks to avoid being a political football?

[Mr_Spock]

24. Yes, of course we are the party of civil & human rights

...but that doesn't mean we cannot talk about a possible issue that may effect the elections being held in just two weeks, does it?

[LeftyMom]

32. We don't sound like it today.

Today I'm wondering how many DUers would have lamented the timing of Brown vs Board of Education or bitched about that minister who kept marching around and distracting people from the war.

[Mr_Spock]

40. I am talking about the upcoming elections & politics

...and I'm sure that this will motivate some RW ignoramuses to vote for Allen in Virginia - do you disagree? Doesn't this play into the equation? Won't Democrats support gay rights like 10000000% more than the RW bigots who are in power now?

[LeftyMom]

52. The rightwing ignoramuses are already going to vote for Allen

We can't let fuckwits dictate policy. Anyhow, Felix will probably say some new rediculously bigoted thing to appeal to his base of redneck assholes. :shrug:

[Mr_Spock]

59. I am hoping that Allen loses and that this will be a mute post

I just found it awfully angering that Charley Gibson was salivating over this - and he was trying to motivate people to see this as an issue this election - doesn't that piss you off and make you have some fear it could have an effect?

[LeftyMom]

71. No, this is the reason I don't watch MSM news.

That shit is bad for the blood pressure. Five minutes in the middle of the night during Katrina, and I knew that 1. They were dumb as posts and 2. Announcements and analysis are faster and better online. Stop watching, it makes people angry and stupid, good little consumers.

[Mr_Spock]

76. I did make a mistake - in fact I wasn't even watching it!

I was in my garage working on my car and I use the TV to keep me company. It only gets broadcast TV and it just so happened my hands were tied up and I was forced to listen to this BS. Gibson REALLY WAS salivating over this - it was DISGUSTING!!!!

[KamaAina]

112. In that case, the blame lies with Gibson

for being a partisan shill while anchoring a "news" broadcast, and NOT with New Jersey judges who issued a cautious and nuanced verdict that, for once, came down on the side of people's basic rights.

[lynne]

184. Virginia also has a Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment on the ballot -

- that has been a pretty hot issue statewide. Allen is for it, of course. Webb is against it. Kaine doesn't like it but says he'll sign it if the amendment is voted in.

Since the topic is already a big issue in Virginia, today certainly could have an impact on both the amendment and senatorial race.

[Midlodemocrat]

272. It might have a hard time passing. It's very close and there are a lot

of undecideds.

[Chovexani]

216. Oh, the irony kills me.

Won't Democrats support gay rights like 10000000% more than the RW bigots who are in power now?

You mean Democrats like you who keep telling us to shut up and get on back of the bus so they can get elected? :rofl:

[novalib]

36. Which Right Of YOURS????

Which RIGHT of YOURS would you care to give up for TWO WEEKS in order to win an election?????!!!

[Mr_Spock]

44. I would gladly hold off for two weeks to have supporters of civil rights

In office for at least the next two years - that's a tradeoff I'm willing to make. The decision still has to be ironed out in the legislature anyway - that'll take plenty of time...

[pnwmom]

48. If I thought it would win us the Senate, I would gladly give up my rights

for two weeks. I would take a vow of silence, even go to jail for two weeks if that would do it. How about you?

[novalib]

60. Which Right, EXACTLY?

The right to exercise free speech?

The right to be secure in your home?

Your reproductive rights?

UNLESS yoou have actually had some right denied you, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT IT IS LIKE!!!!!

[pnwmom]

110. I already answered that question.

I would be willing to be mute for two weeks, even to go to jail for two weeks, if that meant that the Senate went to the Democrats.

I grew up with a gay father, so yes I know what it is to be a second-class citizen. When I was growing up, a child of a gay parent was actually a more of a third-class citizen. All of the burden, none of the fun.

[justin899]

208. Claiming you have a gay father and using a rainbow avatar

does not give you carte blance to speak for gays or make excuses for heterosexual supremacists in order to get more heterosexist Democrats elected.

[LostinVA]

237. You said it

And, I can make my avatar anything I want and also write all kinds of stuff.

[Sapphocrat]

124. Try 45 years and get back to me. n/t

[pnwmom]

175. No one's asking you to wait another 45 years.

But I've been waiting as long as you have, assuming you are 45, since I have a gay father. Another couple of weeks is a drop in the bucket.

[Sapphocrat]

182. What are you waiting for?

No, seriously, I'm not being at all facetious -- it's a serious question. What are you waiting for? You're straight, aren't you?

As for "another couple of weeks," you know it's not just "another couple of weeks." It's waiting "another couple of weeks"... "next election cycle"... "maybe six months"... "oh, definitely within the next 20 years"...

I'm not in a rest home yet, but every "couple of weeks" scream by these days. They added up to 45 years before I knew it.

And I really cannot wait another 20 years.

[pnwmom]

189. I know LOTS of kids of gays, including myself, who have been

waiting for their parents to be able to marry.

And it WOULD only be a couple of more weeks. I am talking about the NJ legislators who have already announced they are going to introduce a same sex marriage bill.

What harm could there be in waiting to vote on it till after the election? And it might even be more likely to pass then. So much the better.

[Sapphocrat]

120. Oh, PLEASE.

We were blamed for the outcome of the 2004 elections due in no small part to the Lawrence v. Texas decision.....

...which came down in July, 2003.

Two weeks, two years, 20 years, it doesn't matter. It's always going to be the "gays' fault." Fuck that. Find somebody else to scapegoat this time.

[Mr_Spock]

128. I'll email your thoughts to Gibson & Stephanopolis

...love how this has been personalized to be about me - and I'm not even running for office!

[Sapphocrat]

131. And I love how you didn't address my point. n/t

[Mr_Spock]

134. Your point is it will always be "something". This IS something

Why are you personalizing this issue, but not others that don't effect you, but affect other people. That's obvious right? Don't shoot the messenger - this really is a political forum and there really are elections in 13 days. This is an issue worth discussing - the dick-head on the national news thought so - and now it is out there and we ought to acknowledge this as being a real issue to discuss and deal with.

[Sapphocrat]

139. Then you tell me...

...what a politically advantangeous time would be -- for you -- to grant us something even remotely resembling your status in this country?

When is it not something? And who in the world are you so pissed at? If not us LGBTs, then who? Do you actually think we have anything to do with the timing of judicial decisions? I only WISH we had that kind of power!

As for the question of why I am personalizing this issue, don't insult my intelligence; you're smarter than that. You know perfectly well why: Because we get kicked in the teeth every election cycle, and no matter how you frame the issue, or how many times you cry "Don't shoot the messenger," the message is always exactly the same, and crystal clear: It's the gays hurting the party! If the gays would just shut up and wait their turn, we wouldn't lose every election.

So you tell me: When is our turn for equal rights? You tell me exactly how many seats we need to hold in Congress, who needs to be in the White House, which issues more important than my rights need to be addressed first, how those issues are going to be resolved, and when this magical set of circumstances is going to fall into place.

And if you have any tips on how the LGBT community can influence the timing of any court in the nation so our silly little civil-rights struggle doesn't interfere with your plans, just sing right out.

By the way, speaking of timing: Thanks for throwing cold water all over the first piece of good news we LGBTs have had all year. You might have at least let us enjoy it for 24 hours.

[Mr_Spock]

146. This is about the bigotry that motivates RWers

Nothing more. I thought the decision was great, then I had to listen to that RW pin-head gloating over how he thought this would "help" the Republicans. It isn't about me. It isn't about gays. It's about the wellbeing of our nation and ALL of it's citizens. I wish we were better than this as a nation - just yesterday I was dicussing with someone how the RW hatred was negatively affecting the attitudes toward the wiccan/pagan/witch folks, never mind the hatred they witnesses against Muslims. We are ALL suffering at the hands of this evil empire and ALL of us (or mostly all) here on DU have been fighting and giving and volunteering like animals to take back our country from these hateful rotten RW neocon bigots. Smack me down for thinking that an issue that has already gotten press that says it may be damaging to all of our hopes and dreams is something we should deal with. I have been attacked as if by animals for simply bringing up a possible issue in this political season - on a political site!! This site is about DEMOCRATIC politics first and formost. Stop browbeating me - this is a legitimate issue.

[Sapphocrat]

174. You're dodging. Again.

Your problem is the timing of the decision. You worry that it's going to hurt Democratic candidates in elections throughout the country. We all understand that by now.

My question to you, again, is: When is the right time for LGBT American to win equal rights? What set of circumstances needs to be in place before we are allowed our place at the table?

These are very simple questions.

And as much as I appreciate your sentiments toward LGBTs, Wiccans, Muslims, etc., your stance strikes me as entirely theoretical. IOW, it all sounds very nice, but when push comes to shove, you cut and run. I don't know of any nicer way to say it.

What I want to see is action behind your words. As my father used to say, don't tell me something won't work unless you have a better plan. I am asking you what your plan is. I'm asking you when the timing is right.

And now I'll add this question: Why are you going into panic mode now? Assuming you're right (although I think you are dead wrong), what do you intend to do about it? How do you plan to counter this big, scary, anti-gay backlash you expect?

And that, sir, is discussing the issue. I'm not even close to browbeating you. But I am "smacking down" your Chicken Little hysteria over something that may or may not happen. Do you worry every time you get a fever that it's malaria? Wait for the diagnosis -- but if you're already convinced you're at death's door, then how do you plan to cure the disease?

Finally, I am well aware that this site is about Democratic politics first and foremost. And without Democrats like me, the party would be considerably smaller. Which is not a threat that I am (or any other gay Democrat is) going to take my/our ball and go home -- but a reminder that either the Democratic Party is a big tent, or it is not. Either I am equal to you in this party, or I am not. Either you will take the high moral road for me, or you will not (in which case, don't expect me to ever give a damn again whether or not your wife can get a legal abortion if she wants one, because, hey, this pro-choice thing is really dragging the party down, and after all, it doesn't affect me, a childless lesbian).

To put it very simply and clearly: The party owes me EXACTLY as much as it owes you.

So don't you try to guilt me out about not taking into consideration the wellbeing of the Democratic Party at large. I'll never have an abortion, so I really don't have to stick my neck out for pro-choicers -- but I do. I don't belong to a union, so I really shouldn't care if American laborers get a cost of living increase this year -- but I do. I don't have children, so I really shouldn't feel compelled to vote in favor of parcel taxes to fund our local schools -- but I do. Not because I'm a saint, but because that -- taking care of people I don't have to take care of, and taking a personal risk to do so because it is the right thing to do -- is what makes me a Democrat.

The day the rest of the Democratic party does the same for LGBT Americans -- willingly, readily, and without regarding us as an inconvenient liability -- is the day I will be equal to you.

Incidentally, I do not appreciate being compared to an animal.

[pnwmom]

177. Here's a simple, practical suggestion.

The NJ decision is with us. It's good. We applaud.

But let's wait another two weeks before the new marriage bill is actually voted on in the NJ legislature. Would that be so terrible, if it helped a few Democrats in some close contests?

(Plus, I think it is more likely to actually PASS if we wait till right after the election. That timing would give constituents plenty of time to digest the new reality before the next election cycle.)

[Sapphocrat]

181. But again...

...who here -- gay, straight, or otherwise -- has any influence whatsoever on whether it's voted on tomorrow or in six months?

What it all boils down do is that the nonexistent, monolithic "gay community" is given far too much "credit" (for lack of a better word) for influencing the wheels of justice. Things like the NJ decision are totally out of anyone's control. But (I think) you've been around long enough to know that when it comes to such things, there's a widespread knee-jerk reaction to "blame the gays" (again), as if we had anything to do with the the timing, or the decision itself.

Granted, the people who brought suit in the first could be "blamed" for setting the wheels in motion, but it's a far stretch to "blame" anyone for using the system in the way it was meant to be used -- and ludicrous to think the plaintiffs have any control over the timing of the decision.

But you've seen it, pnwmom: No matter what it is, where it happens, or when it occurs, it's always laid on the doorstep of "the gays". You know that... better than any other straight person on DU, I'd venture to guess.

So, fine, let the NJ legislature wait two weeks -- if you can figure out a way to influence that decision.

What poisons my blood is the hysterical reaction to every gay-positive decision, regardless of the timing. Again, two weeks, two years, or 20 years before an election doesn't matter -- it always comes back to bite all gay people in the ass, and it always turns into a gang-scapegoating on DU.

This will be the fourth election cycle we gay DUers have had to put up with this ("Oh no! I want gays to have rights, but WHY NOW?!") -- so perhaps you can understand why some of us are a wee bit sensitive to it.

And, honestly, every justification, every bit of backpeddling, every excuse I've seen tonight, in more than one thread, is just a repeat of everything I saw in 2000, and 2002, and 2004.

I had hoped that this time, it wouldn't happen. But I can see it's just getting started. Again.

And boy, does it hurt. Again.

[pnwmom]

185. I understand where you're coming from,

but I don't think Mr_Spock meant this as a slap in the face to gays and lesbians. I really don't. He's worried about the way the news media is already portraying this decision. He's not blaming gays for it, anywhere that I can see. But he's worried about the backlash.

We don't have to beat him up for that. He's a supporter, and we need all of them that we can get. A lot of us do think that this issue helped sweep a number of loathsome Republicans into office in 2004. It was a sickening time, as I recall. No one in their right mind wants Rove to succeed in that kind of tactic again.

But hopefully that won't happen. My gut feeling is that the idea of gay marriage has already lost most of its shock value.

If I lived in NJ now I would be calling my legislators and asking them to wait till after the election for the actual vote. Why not make it a little easier for people like Mendendez? But that's just me.

[justin899]

215. Bullshit!

but I don't think Mr_Spock meant this as a slap in the face to gays and lesbians.

Yeah, people normally attack rulings they're in favor of. :eyes:

He's worried about the way the news media is already portraying this decision.

And? The mostly straight main stream media is biased. This is news? It's no different than the biased coverage of civil rights demonstrators. WTF should that make a difference now?

A lot of us do think that this issue helped sweep a number of loathsome Republicans into office in 2004.

I see you are totally clueless. This has been rebuked 50 ways from Sunday in numerous reports and studies since 2004. You should try checking some of them out.

If I lived in NJ now I would be calling my legislators and asking them to wait till after the election for the actual vote.

And as you've pointed out you're not actually gay yourself so you really wouldn't be giving up much of anything by doing that, would you??

[Mr_Spock]

250. I didn't attack the ruling!

I was disturbed at the TIMING of the ruling. Thanks for the deliberate attempt at distorting my position - again in this thread!

It makes a difference because of the mostly straight and many RW bigots who might be watching such a program.

[Mr_Spock]

180. Many responses to your many questions...

When is the right time for LGBT American to win equal rights? What set of circumstances needs to be in place before we are allowed our place at the table?

I would say about 200+ years ago when the Constitution was written. I can't understand the idiotic reasons that the RW trolls have for being against marriage for people who want to spend their lives together and share resources & rights. As far as I'm concerned they are holding back rights that you already deserve. I have an aunt that I was hoping would get married when they legalized it here in mass. Unfortunately they broke up after 40+ years together :( (maybe the pressure to get married showed up flaws in the relationship?). My aunt cried when she saw how dedicated I was to the gay marriage issue and after reading a letter I sent to President Bush. Anyway, anytime is a good time as far as I'm concerned. As far as politics and getting Democrats back into power goes, 13 days before an election may motivate some RWers who were disheartened, and I've been waiting for many, many years to see the Dems take back control of Congress - if this motivated enough Repukes who would have stayed home, then I think the timing would be very bad - especially since it will be months before the legislature looks at this decision anyway.

cut and run

I don't even have to say anything more about that comment - lol - why?

Why are you going into panic mode now?

I am not - I simply repeated the sentiment expressed on the nightly news. I see thousands of post here use to discuss and brainstorm an issue without a solution proposed by the O/P - I think it's legitimate to bring up issues not being discussed that I think are important. This is an important issue to discuss right before an election IMHO.

I do not appreciate being compared to an animal

"attacked, as if by animals" in no way compares you to an animal - I was describing the piling on going on in this thread - I feel like I am being ripped apart by hyenas - it was a metaphor describing the feeling of trying to defend what I think is a legitimate topic here.

Please read some of the hateful words that have been directed at me and please show me where I have responded in kind or have provoked such hatred.

[justin899]

214. To anyone who's not a total dumbass this IS a personal issue

It's only a "political" issue to happy-go-lucky straights who have all of their rights INTACT and/or apologist enablers who claim they have gay parents then go on to defend anti-gay politicians under the guise of "winning" elections.

To everyone else, it's a human rights issue.

[Mr_Spock]

260. 13 days before an election

You'd have to be a dumbass not to see that this is a POLITICAL issue as well as a human rights issue.

Sorry that I seem naive to so many, I am not trying to be.

[LostinVA]

143. It is about you -- you declared your hope we would shut up and stay

in the back of the bus.

Fuck that. I'm tired of these disgusting threads on here today. I knew DU was sexist, and I suspected it was racist, but this level of homophobia is appalling.

[Mr_Spock]

153. Please point out where I suggested that anybody "shut up"

or where I have professed anything but support for gays.

I am really being unfairly attacked on this topic - which is clearly a legitimate topic today.

I have seen no other thread on this topic - this is my first.

Please tell me why this topic is taboo - it is a real and legitimate issue - as discussed during the national news boradcast this evening. I am discussing the news of the day with my opinion that it may hurt the Dems - this is a "disgusting thread"?

[pnwmom]

160. He didn't say that.

I'm tired of all the slander.

[Mr_Spock]

164. I think this is from someone elses post earlier today...

There must have been some really provocative posts on this earlier - I think I may be getting anger that is meant for someone else.

I've never been attacked like this before :(

It's kind of overwhelming. Thanks for your support. :hug:

[justin899]

220. And I'm tired of the people

who claim to be pro-gay rights always preaching political expediency.

[Rockholm]

232. Exactly. Thank you Sapphocrat.

[TahitiNut]

Amen.

Just another reason I'm an independent liberal.

[Ignacio Upton]

39. In our political strategy, we are trying to fight to preserve HUMAN RIGHTS

Habeus Corpus could be further decimated if we don't take Congress, and I'll be damned if the timing of this decision (which I agree with, for the record) is going to let a bunch of dumbass bigots sway the election. I wish that the decision could have been made a month ago so Foley could have drowned it out. Or it could just be made next session. Just curious...was the Republican-appointed Chief Justice who sided in favor of the ruling a Kean Sr. appointee or a Whitman appointee?

[pnwmom]

41. Political strategy can be used in the service of civil rights.

Or we can shoot ourselves in the foot.

I think we might have come further, faster, if the MA decision had not been timed as it was. I think we lost a lot of ground in the 2004 elections.

I don't think the new decision has to have the same negative impact. But I wish those 2 NJ legislators had waited for two WEEKS to introduce their new marriage bill. When the Menendez race is so close, why do anything to unnecessarily drive more conservatives to the polls? (And yes, I know, the argument is that there are no fundies in NJ. Maybe not, but there are plenty of conservative Catholics, and I'd like them all to stay home.)

[mcscajun]

73. Oh, we have fundies in NJ, too.

I couldn't give you exact placements and head counts, but as one example, we have a town in NJ called
Zarephath. It is the location for Somerset Christian College, established by The Pillar of Fire Church, headquartered in Colorado but with outposts worldwide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillar_of_Fire_Church

They are definitely fundamentalist, and proclaim themselves such: "The Pillar of Fire believes in the fundamental doctrines of the orthodox Christian Protestant denominations. Our theological position may be described as Wesleyan-Arminian.
I. We believe in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as verbally inspired of God, inerrant in the original writings, and that they are of supreme and final authority in faith and life."
http://www.belleview-college.org/at/PillarofFireDoctrinalStatement.htm

[Irreverend IX]

222. Nothing is too holy to be used for political purposes.

Sorry, but those are the facts. We must fight ruthlessly and give no quarter or be defeated.

[cboy4]

117. Sorry. HOMOPHOBIC.

Human rights are non-negotiable.

one edit -- I'm not saying you are.....I'm saying that political strategy is

[LostinVA]

141. Your statement is homophobic

And this thread is flamebait.

You KNOW that.

[pnwmom]

165. Gays and lebians are not uniformly of your opinion.

I think there may be a generational divide on this. The older gays and lesbians that I know think that the MA decision, timed as it was, did lead to significant Republican gains in the 2004 election. And that we might have made faster progress on the Federal marriage issue if we hadn't had the backlash as a result of the MA court decision.

Also, many gays and lesbians, and their families, are more concerned about getting the actual rights than whether the word "marriage" is used or not. Anyone can get "hitched" in a civil union in Vermont and married in another service and wear a ring and call themselves married. What they can't do -- and what may have been delayed for years, if not decades -- is be married in the eyes of the Federal government. They can't get social security or any other federal benefits.

Is it worth the trade-off? State rights now in exchange for solidifying the Republican position in Congress and delaying Federal rights? Everyone has to decide that for themselves.

I hope that this NJ decision won't have the repercussions that the MA did. But the NJ Senate election will be a squeaker. I was hoping Foley was turning off lots of Repub conservatives. Now I don't know. Maybe this will lure a few critical voters back to the polls.

But hopefully there will be a couple more serious Republican scandals before this is all over.

[justin899]

218. And YOU Don't Speak For Gays!

Straight people who happen to have gay parents shouldn't presume to speak for gays. It's a completely different situation than being gay yourself.

The older gays and lesbians that I know think that the MA decision, timed as it was, did lead to significant Republican gains in the 2004 election.

Well, they think wrong. Numerous reports show that wasn't the case.

Also, many gays and lesbians, and their families, are more concerned about getting the actual rights than whether the word "marriage" is used or not.

Something which isn't called "marriage" doesn't confer the SAME RIGHTS AS MARRIAGE, and never will.

The groups pushing the amendments go into state court after they're passed to try to remove health benefits from same-sex partners of state employees, even though they're not "married" and don't refer to their relationship as a "marriage." It's not about the word. It's about the recognition. Falling for the trap that it's "just the word" theist addicts are concerned about will only hasten second-class rights under the law by pushing for worthless laws like "Civil Unions."

[helderheid]

15. THANK YOU.

[pnwmom]

33. It's not homophobic, it's a reasonable concern. I think the MA decision DID

set us back several years, timed as it was. That decision helped to sweep a number of Republicans into office, IMO.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I'm hoping that the NJ decision won't have the same backlash. The initial shock was two years ago -- and the sky hasn't fallen in. Also, the Courts have left it up to the legislature to decide whether to amend the marriage law or to construct a civil union with the equivalent protections. So the argument cannot be made that the Court is overriding the people's wishes. The people in NJ, through their legislators, will now have the chance to decide whether they want to have same-sex marriages or the equivalent in civil unions.

[Mr_Spock]

82. I really appreciate your thoughtful arguments in this post

I am getting my ass kicked for even bringing up this taboo topic, but I remember 2004 and I live here in Mass so I really am sensitive to the timing of certain political events. There were Mass legislature people who lost elections due to this issue (on both sides - perhaps evenly split thankfully) - but people are a lot less open minded outside of the NE as I am sure you are aware.

[pnwmom]

113. I bet a lot of the division here is split along generational lines.

The middle-aged gays and lesbians I know tend to think that, strategically speaking, we would have gone further and faster if we had all pushed together for the Vermont model of civil unions. There wouldn't have been the big backlash, the Repubs might not have solidified their position in Congress, and we might be a lot farther ahead than we are now.

The younger people I know, gay and straight, can't figure out what the problem is. Will and Grace and TV in general has made a big difference in their outlook. Barring a huge backlash or a Republican dictatorship, I think the kids' viewpoint inevitably will determine the future.

[davidinalameda]

178. amen to that

you go girl!

[longship]

2. Yes, it was inevitable that somebody would say it.

However, this kind of projection is most certainly misplaced here since we really do not know what kind of response will result from this decision. Some of the GOP prognosticators are actually taking the opposite opinion.

I vote that it will have little or no effect.

[Mr_Spock]

8. I certainly hope you are right

I felt that it had a negative effect in 2004, though there is no way to know for sure. I just don't want RWers to get any motivation before the election. You know how bigotry motivates them :(

[LostinVA]

145. It did NOT have a negative effect in 2004 -- but nice meme

That was debunked two years ago.

[pnwmom]

167. Show me.

[bluestateguy]

3. They can say it, but they would be wrong

The decision was slippery: it mandated the same rights as marriage, and refused to say that marriage is a constitutional right. It sent the matter back to the legislature for them to resolve the issue. If the Court had outright legalized marriage as a constitutional right, that would have had a more explosive impact.

Hand wringing and whining about it won't accomplish anything anyway.

[Arkana]

4. Gibson only wishes.

"Macaca" has torpedoed Allen's campaign, and the shenanigans that his fellow Pukes have gotten up to in the last month have done nothing to help. They are going DOWN on November 7, and they know it, and they will grasp at any straw they can, no matter how disgustingly bigoted or racist it is.

[novalib]

6. Somebody Has To Say THIS

Somebody has to say this:

BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS ARE IMPORTANT!!

DECISIONS THAT UPHOLD BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS NEED TO BE -->CELEBRATED<--!!!!!

[Mr_Spock]

10. I totally agree

But politicing is a different animal than basic human rights. I wish they would just legalize gay marriage, but I do not think this should be done less than 2 weeks before an election as it can motivate the RW bigots to get out and vote :(

[novalib]

21. If You WAIT....

If you wait until the time is right, then the human rights may never come!

There will NEVER be a time when the RW bigots won't shit their pants over basic human rights being recognized for gay people!!!

Two weeks before an election is better than two weeks after an election.

Because -- TWO WEEKLS WITHOUT BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS is just WRONG!!!

[Mr_Spock]

34. I agree, we should never have to compromise on basic human rights

...but to cover all of ones senses and not acknowledge the bigotry of the other side and what may motivate them - well, I really, really thouhgt this was a forum for political discussion - no?

[novalib]

46. Who Is NOT??!!

Who the hell is NOT ackowledging the bigotry of the other side??!!

And who here is denying that the NJ decision will likely motivate the other side???!!!

And who here is suggesting that this is not a forum for political dicussion??!!!!

What some of us here are saying is that BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS are VERY IMPORTANT!!!

Others seem to say that people should just be content with second-class status if doing so helps to win elections!!

I say BULLSHIT to that!!

[Mr_Spock]

54. Well I agree with you 100000000% then

I was simply raising the possibity that this issue could hurt the Dems based on the instict of the hate-mongers to stir up the bigotry of people in this country.

[novalib]

63. "Somebody Has To Say This"

Gee -- "simply raising the possibility" blah blah blah.......

Well, SOMEBODY HAS TO SAY THIS --

The NJ Decision Ackowledges the Basic Human Rights of an entire GROUP of PEOPLE!

And that's a GOOD THING!

[Mr_Spock]

87. It's a GREAT thing - I totally am glad they decided the way they did

I am simply thinking of the possibility that the RW hate mongers will pedal this as they did in 2004. I hate this sort of fear mongering and i don't want to be exposed to it if at all possible. If it helps them get out the bigot vote then I am even more pissed at the timing of this.

[novalib]

91. Profound. SIMPLY Profound!

Here's a profound insight into the obvious:

"RW hate mongers will pedal this as they did in 2004."

Well, DUH!

RW hate mongers will do exactly that -- THAT IS WHAT RW HATEMONGERS DO!!!

You say now that you are PISSED at the timing of this decision!

But, you keep saying that you are "simply" thinking of the possibility -- or that you are "simply" pointing out something or another.

Methinks you are PISSED. And methinks you are pissed because an entire group of people have had their basic human rights acknowledged!!

[Mr_Spock]

96. That last sentence is a total and deliberate mis-characterization

I am offended and I hope you will apologize once you calm down. I have screamed at people in support of gay marriage and I do not appreciate you stooping to that sort of attack to make a point. We are all pissed about this - this I will agree on.

[meganmonkey]

98. You either support it or you don't.

You don't get to vote against it before you vote for it. How many election cycles can that excuse be used?

You support it or you don't. And if you don't, you are homophobic.

So which is it? Do you support it or don't you?

[Mr_Spock]

103. I don't see why I should have to prove my worthyness, but

I have relatives that I care about who could not see their loved one when they were in the hospital. I've had to experience the homophobic mother-in-law (assuming they could get married) completely withold all inheritance for the lover - that SO disgusted me. I have helped show compassion for someone I knew was gay and it gave them the courage to come out - and they are a much happier person today. I support my gay relatives and shun my relatives who are homophobic bigots. I am completely in support of gay marriage and always have been, and always will be.

But I also recognize a political issue when I see it. And this is a political forum.

Charley Gibson lead off with this story and he was salivating over it. He and Stephanopolis were in agreement that this could invigorate the Allen campaing.

Is it homophobic to discuss the political issues of the day that may influence whether the Dems have control of the Senate or not? Or should I be politically correct and say to myself "oh, this may offend someone, so I should not bring it up - even though this is a political forum"

[meganmonkey]

111. You aren't simply bringing up the potential effect

of this court decision on the election - you are framing it in a way that legitimizes all the RW bullshit. By essentially scapegoating gays, you are giving credibility to the idea that this is some big gay agenda, a planned event with suspicious timing. When in reality, this is a civil rights triumph for 2 individuals who were being discriminated against, and for every other gay person in New Jersey. And it is a stepping stone for gay rights across the country. It shouldn't be part of a political game, but your point of view perpetuates that.

The 'political game' does not give anyone an excuse for supporting discrimination. This is a political reality that effects real people, not a game.

How many rights must be conceded to win this game? And at what point does 'winning' become impossible because we have given up so much?

:shrug:

[Mr_Spock]

121. It was portrayed that way on a national broadcast news show!

Please step back for a minute and take out your personal feelings. Stop making it about me - it's about politics and the media making this an issue. I tend to agree with the media thinking it may be an issue, but I am NOT the only person thinking this. I'm sorry that discrimination exists. I know we are (thankfully) somewhat insulated from the bigotry here (why I love DU), but this timing on this issue IS a political topic that we can't just play "see no evil" too. This is not about "giving up" anything - it's about winning back our country so we can have MORE good news like this in the future.

[meganmonkey]

242. It's not about me or you

It is about human rights.

It is not about the media or politics, it is about HUMAN RIGHTS.

The Dems keep letting the media and the RW push them further to the right and then wonder why they keep losing? Maybe if they'd stop worrying about the so-called 'swing voters' (who, IMO are totally imaginary) and start worrying about the other half of the country who doesn't even bother voting because both parties are so compromised, they may be able to get somewhere. And conmpromising further is NOT going to make that happen.

If we want to win, let's forget about this 3% so-called swing voters, and go for the rest of America, specifically the left-leaning independents who don't bother voting because the Dems keep moving further and further to the right.

You're right - it IS a game. And the Dems are falling for the trap and losing every time.

:shrug:

[seaglass]

231. You are either with us or against us, huh? Where have I heard

that before?

I don't agree with the OP, by the way. I am from MA and living through one of the nastiest Governor's races in my lifetime and gay marriage has not even come up as an issue (and by the way there are a lot of MA residents against gay marriage).

I just can't stand the argument you put forth. A person can feel that the timing is politically bad without being against gay marriage.

[meganmonkey]

236. The timing is bad

Okay, that's obvious. I am not arguing with that. I disagree with the scapegoating, however.

But the thing is, the timing wasn't controllable. And no one will answer my main concerns which are:

How many election cycles do we use the "It's Not Time Yet" excuse?

And: How many things are we supposed to set aside for a 'better time'? Where do we draw the line?

And: At what point is 'winning' meaningless because we no longer stand for human rights?

[novalib]

100. Who is This "WE" Of Whom You Speak??!!

"We are all pissed about this"

"WE are ALL pissed about this"????!!!!!

Just who is this "WE" you are speaking about????!!!!

Some of us think it is a GOOD thing to have someone acknowledge the BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS of gay people!!

[pnwmom]

115. I think he is saying that you are obviously as angry with him

as he is with you.

You and he = we.

[Irreverend IX]

138. MY CAPSLOCK KEY IS BIGGER THAN YOURS.

Every time you post with poor netiquette, God kills a kitten.

[pnwmom]

57. But if it just adds years to the timeline of when we get the REAL THING

by which I mean a FEDERAL law that recognizes gay marriage -- are you sure the trade-off is worth it?

In other words, people in NJ might get a NJ marriage or civil union a little earlier, but if it causes a backlash across the country that slows down change in the Federal law, I'm not so sure we should be applauding.

[Mr_Spock]

61. That's always a fear

The penny wise & pound foolish thing has dogged progress in this country for year & years.

Fear mongering really does work - as much as I HATE to admit that :(

[justin899]

221. There won't be a 'Federal Law' which explicitly acknowledges same-sex marri...

by which I mean a FEDERAL law that recognizes gay marriage

How the hell do you keep coming up with this nonsense?

We do not need or WANT a federal law which is for the explicit purpose of recognizing "gay marriage" because that would in and of itself be separate and almost 100% unequal.

What we have to do is repeal DOMA which Clinton and most Democrats supported. Prior to the passage of DOMA there was no federal definition of 'marriage.' If your state recognized your marriage then you were married in the eyes of the federal government. That's the way it was for most of this country's history. Writing some sort of special law pertaining to gay marital rights (which would never pass anyway--the dumb bastards can't even pass a gay-inclusive hate crimes statute or inclclude sexual orientation in existing anti-discrimination legislation, so I don't know why anyone with a brain in their head would even suggest a federal "law" recognizing gay marriage)would be a set back, not a move forward.

In other words, people in NJ might get a NJ marriage or civil union a little earlier, but if it causes a backlash across the country that slows down change in the Federal law, I'm not so sure we should be applauding.

I'v never seen such idiotic statements from someone who claims to support gay rights. "The backlash" "The backlash." People were spouting this same bullshit 40 years ago when the Civil Rights Act was passed. They were right (with regard to losing the South), but 40 years later most of us think it was a good law and the right thing to do. Unfortunately, the Democrats around today would never pass a law like that. They would be using despicable political expediency arguments like you just did while simultaneously claiming to support equal rights--but just not right now.

[Ms. Toad]

226. It will not add years until we get the real thing

It will decrease the wait.

Mass has marriage and hasn't imploded. Vermont has civil unions and hasn't imploded. Aside from the relatively few hard core bigots, same gender marriage is only an issue for people because they fear the unknown. New Jersey will make it one less state where it is unknown. Once it stops being unknown the opposition to federal rights will vanish. It will only stop being unknown one state at a time - delaying this decision would have helped maintain the fear based opposition of middle America.

And, btw, I am one of those "middle aged" or "older" gays and lesbians you have been speaking so freely on behalf of in a number of posts and you don't speak for me.

[Irreverend IX]

136. Because -- TWO WEEKLS WITHOUT BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS is just WRONG!!!

Two or four more years (at least) without those rights is worse, and that's what you'll get if this decision costs Democrats the election. I don't think it will, but the point remains.

[novalib]

self-delete

sorry --dupe!!!

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

53. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

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

[novalib]

66. I Said TA TA!!

What part of "TA TA" Do you NOT UNDERSTAND???

Stick around, hon, and I'll show you SICK!!

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

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

[novalib]

86. (Self-Deleted Message!)

No point in having this message here now!

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

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

[Bluebear]

230. Yeah!

(Although i missed all the fun lol)

[DURHAM D]

7. This won't be up long so just wanted to say two things.

1) Unless all (or a majority) of the judges on the NJ Supreme Court are gay - homosexuals did not control the timing.

2) Goodbye

[Mr_Spock]

I think the 'Goodbye" is very mean - this is a real issue

I think we ought to discuss it - unless you believe that RWers are NOT motivated by bigotry?

I am sure they are.

[LeftyMom]

23. I think you're missing the point.

You're looking at this as a political issue. For many DUers, this is a matter of basic rights for themselves or people they love. Nobody should have to wait for the right time to have their human dignity honored. History tells us that the time where rights are extended without conflict never comes. We have to stand up for our brothers and sisters instead of asking them to wait for equality.

[Mr_Spock]

72. But it's 13 days before an election - I am not asking people to wait

I am simply pointing out the obviousness of this as a possible issue. I would prefer to put my hands over my eyes too but I am not going to do that so close to an election. This is a political forum and this is a political season. I am VERY strongly for gay marriage (search my posts on this topic if you want), I am simply pointing out the POLITICS of this issue - and setting my personal feelings aside for now.

[LostinVA]

147. Who fucking CARES that the election is 13 days away???

ONly people who would throw us under the wheels.

Would you tell a black DUer that Affirmative Action had to eb taken away so we could win the election? HUh? HUH? Ora women's right to vote? FUCK NO. So, take your hands off of MY RIGHTS and go back to working in your garage or whatever you said you were doing.

YOU have ZERO right to mess with my BASIC civil rights just to get off on a "political strategy" post.

But, we ALL know that wasn't what you wanted to do. You anted to puke all over our celebration.

I call flamebait.

[pnwmom]

168. Lots of us care. Even other gays and lesbians and their families.

You don't speak for everyone here.

And I have seen NO ONE here argue that rights of anyone should be taken away. Only that the timing, politically, was unfortunate.

[karlrschneider]

11. You will be ridiculed and vilified here on DU for merely reporting this.

Some DUers don't seem to 'get' it that there are millions of knuckledraggers who hate gay people, the repugs know this very very well and will seize on the decision to rally their fundy base. And I agree with you, the timing sucks.
:grr:

[Mr_Spock]

13. Yeah, I understand why I am being ridiculed - don't want to acknowledge

the reality of the bigoted country we live in :(

Oh, well, it is a real issue that should be strategized on - we know the bigots will want to run with it...

[karlrschneider]

25. I knew you would understand, was just trying to help put it in perspective.

:D
KS

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

12. It won't make any difference.

People who hate gay people and think letting them marry is satanic would have continued to think that no matter how the NJ court had ruled. Anyhow, the truth is that the court basically just punted -- it said only that the state can't constitutionally discriminate against gay people, but that legislature needs to decide what kind of statutory arrangement "marriage" or "civil union" should be. It's a decision limited to a single state; it doesn't do a whole lot; and nobody is going to change their mind on account of it. Nothing to get all worked up about.

[Kire]

16. The Court will not be in session in two weeks.

nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. Bravo for the judges and to hell with the politics.

Brown vs The Board of Education helped "lose the south". So what? Institutionalized bigotry needs to be destroyed no matter how it affects voters.

“In matters of conscience, the law of majority has no place.” Gandhi

[pnwmom]

70. Yeah, who cares whether we win any elections!

It's the principle that counts! Let the Republicans run the country forever! We'll never compromise our ideals!

:sarcasm:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

84. Compromise away. It's not your civil rights at stake. Right?

Being straight, it's not mine, either. Being white it wasn't mine during the civil rights movement, either. Being a vet who had already put in his 4 years, it wasn't any skin off my teeth about the slaughter in Vietnam that LBJ "compromised" on to show his anti-Communist credentials.

Yeah, forget all that stuff. We have to win elections. It's just people we're talkin' about.

[pnwmom]

109. Actually, these issues do affect my family directly.

My father's gay. But a couple of weeks one way or another doesn't matter after 25 years of a partnership. You know what I mean?

We do think that the 2004 decision, timed as it was, set us ALL back for several years, in terms of Federal legislation, anyway. And without a change in the Federal law, gays will never have truly equal rights.

Is the trade-off worth it? Getting states' rights earlier, but waiting on Federal laws even longer (because of the Republicans that got swept into office in 2004)? We can all make up our own minds on that.

[justin899]

223. Claiming you have gay parents

does not in any way, shape or form give you any kind of special right to presume to speak for people who ARE gay.

[LostinVA]

238. Thank you very, very much for your post

I mean it. And for your support concerning our basic rights... and for sticking up for us in here.



:hug:

[justin899]

224. And what happens when you DO win elections by

pandering to bigots? We've got this black bigot running for Senate in Tennessee on a platform of writing anti-gay discrimination into the Constitution and gays are being told to go ahead and vote for him anyway simply because he has a fucking 'D' after his name. Never mind the fact that he's to the right of Lieberman. Never mind the fact the he voted for the bankruptcy bill. Never mind the fact that he voted for the anti-gay amendment in the House not once, but twice. Never mind the fact that he voted for the military commissions act.

Since you claim to favor gay rights perhaps you can name something Congressional Democrats have EVER delivered in this area? The fact is they've not passed A SINGLE...NOT ONE..gay rights bill in the past 40 years that they've enjoyed blind gay support. The two years in the early 90s when they controlled both houses and the white house they only managed to pass anti-gay legislation in the form of DADT.

So you'll excuse people who are directly affected by this decision not to be as enthused with giving up their rights so that heterosexist Democrats continue to win elections as someone whose only direct interest in this is that they happen to have gay parents.

[in_cog_ni_to]

18. It has been said and the thread was LOCKED because it was

homophobic.

[karlrschneider]

31. Shining a light on bigotry and political dirty tricks is homophobic?

I sure as hell don't get THAT...

[in_cog_ni_to]

62. How can this be a "political dirty tricK?" NJ leans Democratic.

How can this hurt Menendez? I don't get THAT...:hi:

[pnwmom]

74. Conservative Catholics comprise a large group of NJ voters.

I would prefer they all stay home because of Foley. Wouldn't you?

[in_cog_ni_to]

85. This ruling isn't going to be a factor in the NJ race.

Are all Catholics anti-gay rights? I don't think so. Just remember, NJ LEANS LEFT.

[pnwmom]

118. NJ has elected plenty of Republicans in the past,

and they will probably do so in the future.

I'm from NJ. I'm also a liberal Catholic, but I know there are plenty of conservative Catholics in NJ, too. And the Menendez race is very tight. This issue could affect the race. But I hope it will not.

[karlrschneider]

93. NOnononono....I mean what the RWers are likely to DO with it!

It would dovetail nicely into their "Do you really want Nancy Pelosi, the San Francisco Liberal running Congress?" theme...thass all I'm sayin'.

K

[in_cog_ni_to]

102. But...but....but

what about Mark Foley & Kolbe? The RW CAN'T do anything with this. They covered up a pedophile scandal involving CHILDREN. PLUS, remember, NJ LEANS LEFT! IF NJ leans LEFT...how can this hurt us?

[karlrschneider]

105. I can't speak for the whole country, obviously but here in Oklahoma

I have already heard some wingnuts (at the store this afternoon) talking about how "the queers are getting their filthy lifestyle legal in another state..."

What the OP and I are saying is that it has the very real potential to mobilize some knuckledraggers to the polls on 11/7 that might have stayed home because of the GOP scandals. I just wish this decision (and I hugely applaud it) would have been put off for 13 days, that's all.

[pnwmom]

122. Leaning left doesn't mean it can't tilt back the other way.

Are you going to tell me NJ never votes for Republicans? Hah! Tell that to former Governor Kean.

[justin899]

205. Telling someone it would be better for them to wait for their rights due to an election

isn't "shining a light" on homophobia. It's wallowing in it!

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

212. ...

:thumbsup:

[LostinVA]

239. Damn! POWERFUL WORDS!

[Mr_Spock]

89. There was another thread on this earlier?

I was pissed off when I had to listen to that dick-head Gibson salivating over this as an issue to reinvigorate the Allen campaign. I did not invent this idea of this helping the RW haters - the news media announced it on the public airwaves. So they are all bigots too then.

[MrCoffee]

19. Anyone running for national office who cannot contextualize this decision

doesn't deserve to hold national office. this is a no-brainer as to how to defuse, should it come up in VA, or TN, or MO, or anywhere else. Even NJ.

It's a great decision, and we should all be applauding the NJSCt. If we STILL don't know how to beat the everloving hell out of the pukes when they run on an anti-gay message, we're lost.

[Hamlette]

20. I am sick to death of living my life in response to what THEY will say

because it does not MATTER what I do, they will trash me. If it wasn't this, it would be something else.

No matter how far we go toward the middle in our effort to meet them half way, they move the middle which now looks slightly right of Attila the Hun!

Let them beat me up for what I believe in instead of beating me up for something as meek as civil unions.

(sorry for the rant but honestly, it doesn't matter. Look at what they did to Clelland. Hold your head up and say "its the right thing to do, if it costs us the Senate, we'll be back stronger for it."

[DemonFighterLives]

22. If the pukes want to campaign against basic human rights

let them go for it.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

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

[w13rd0]

68. Actually, according to the Bible...

...which is the book I believe you are trying to quote, WOMAN was created to be with MAN. If you are going to be a Biblical literalist, at least get your basic facts straight. You know how many white southern mysogynists you alienate implying that man was created for the benefit and use of women?

And on another note, what complete bullshit... I don't believe in your god, or your Bible, so why should I adhere to your view of what constitutes a loving relationship?

[Warren DeMontague]

200. Damn! I missed the fun!

A real live Bible literalist! Perhaps you could have found out if "science" proves the Earth is 6,010 years old... or only 5,966!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2469899&mesg_id=2469899

[EFerrari]

27. I'm sure that's what the Thugs are hoping, Mr_Spock but

I don't think that in two weeks that the bigoted base will even remember.

[razors edge]

28. As a straight male

with few gay friends, I don't think this is an issue they care about all that much. The fundies do, but they weren't voting for us anyway. I can't imagine this issue flaring up a homophobes voting intentions if they were going to to begin with. It's to late to change it now even with their vote.

[karlrschneider]

43. It's not about changing votes, it's that it may motivate the RW voters

who may have 'sat out' the election because of all the GOP scandals. There's no value judgment being handed out here (by the OP at least), it's pure pragmatic politics. Can't we all see that?

[KAZ]

69. Yes. "We all see that." . How about we take a stand?

How about, we stand up for what we believe in? Not just the things that pass the Freep-test. Tell you you what pal, if you're you shaking in your boots from these scary stances, then I'll cover your back.

I know you're above that Karl.

[karlrschneider]

83. I don't wear boots nor do I shake. I applaud the NJ decision

loudly and proudly but addressing a reality-based concern makes me a coward? How does that work, exactly?

Maybe I can find a post I made a couple weeks ago...if I do, will edit with a link.

edit: found it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2328904

[KAZ]

107. I know that about you.

But I'm so tired of "pragmatic politics" that I can puke! I tried pragmatic after 12/19/98. And we got Shrub. No more pragmatism.

[karlrschneider]

116. Well, I can't think of any legal alternatives...

But I'm totally open to suggestions! ;-)

[pnwmom]

123. The problem is that not ENOUGH people tried pragmatic.

All those idealist Nader voters put Bush in the White House.

[razors edge]

95. I'd worry more about the machines.

they can move fifty times the vote this issue will, but they may hide behind the issue as cover for a sudden swing.

[pnwmom]

80. There are lots of conservative Catholics in NJ.

I was kinda hoping they would stay home this time, with all that Foley publicity. Oh well.

[Hippo_Tron]

161. This isn't necesarilly going to turn them out

Kean is also for civil unions, remember. Republicans have been beating gay marriage to death and did a repeat of the constitutional amendment this summer just like they did in 2004. If the base wasn't going to show up because of those things, I don't think they're going to show up because of this.

[pnwmom]

169. I tend to think you're right.

I certainly hope so. I still think that the MA decision affected the 2004 election, but it doesn't have to have a similar impact on this one.

Still, that Senate race in NJ is such a squeaker. I wish the legislature would table the marriage bill until just after the election.

[Zensea]

29. Oh please

1 - It's not like gay marriage wasn't already an issue. People that this makes any difference to weren't going to vote against Allen anyway.

2 -Why couldn't "They"? As I understand it the judge was about to retire and this was the last day possible to make the decision. A judge made the decision not a "they."

3 - What does the Senate have to do with the judiciary? What does a decision in New Jersey have to do with an election in another state?

Oh, sorry, I'm not with the program.
How's this?
The sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling

[Mr_Spock]

92. This was raised as an issue on the nightly news

They were supposing that this would invigorate the Allen campaign - this is more than just me overreacting.

This was broadcast to 100,000 of people across the country on the public airwaves - and it wasn't Faux "news" (they are cable anyway).

[Zensea]

144. screw the people who base their decisions on the latest "outrage"

on the nightly news.
They're irredeemable anyway long before this issue was raised tonight.
That's basically what I wrote in my previous post.

[pnwmom]

154. It's not a question of WINNING their votes. As you say,

they're irredeemable.

It IS a question of whether disenchanted Republican voters decide to stay home. With Foley, this was looking like a strong possibility. But if they get charged up about this decision, they might decide to vote after all.

I'm hoping that the NJ decision, lacking the shock value, won't have the same impact that the MA did. Plus, the Court left the final decision (civil union or marriage) up to the legislature.

But please can't NJ wait to vote on the marriage bill until one day after the election? Would that really be so terrible?

Menendez needs every Democratic vote he can get. And he needs every disenchanted Republican to stay home.

[meganmonkey]

30. Here we go again

:popcorn:

[LeftCoast]

35. Why? Why does someone have to say it?

I don't happen to think you are correct, but so what if you are? You're not suggesting a solution. You're not even phrasing it as a call to organize a counter-strategy. If you're that worried about this then go do something about it.

:shrug:

[Mr_Spock]

99. I am doing something about it

I am discussing it here on DU as an issue that we ought to be aware of.

When Charley Gibson & George Stephanopolis are in total agreement that this may help a Republican or two, and when we are very close to winning the Senate, then I think we ought to acknowledge the possibility that this may effect the outcome and think about how we are going to react to the inevitable hate-mongering of the right. I say be prepared. I say it's OK to discuss difficult political issues on a political site 13 days before an election.

[KingFlorez]

37. A state issue won't define this election

There is too much at stake and there are real pressing issues that will lead Democrats to victory. This decision won't even be talked about anymore in a few days.

[pnwmom]

155. That state issue could bring more Republicans to the polls, if

there is a backlash, and Menendez could lose. He's already in a very tight race for the Senate.

But I hope you're right. I'm expecting a new Republican scandal any minute now will take this off the front pages.

[Zhade]

42. You are NOT getting away with blaming us queers again!

We will NOT stand for that fucking bullshit again!

[Mr_Spock]

49. Me? Don't personalize this please

I was making an informed argument based on the lead story on the nightly news seen all over the country.

[novalib]

94. You're Pissed

You say upthread that you are pissed about the timing of this decision.

So I think it is a bit insincere for you to say that you are just making an informed argument blah blah blah.

I think that what you are REALLY doing is venting your spleen.

And I think you'd be quite willing to have gay people wait until the RW hatemongers don't object to gay people having their basic human rights acknowledged.

[Mr_Spock]

101. There are some good arguments about penny-wise and pound foolish

upthread also - this to me is the crux of the issue.

Timing really IS everything when if comes to elections. Sometimes a bit of patience can pay off with tenfold dividends.

[LostinVA]

148. Yes, YOU -- you personalized it by preemptively blaming us in your OP

QUIT FUCKING ACTING COY.

I am so damned angry about these nasty threads on DU, and you're like, "Oh tehre;s been other threads... hehehehhehehe..." Jesus. You know they have been -- they are ALL OVER THE FRIGGING PLACE.

[Mr_Spock]

171. I have seen no other thread on this topic

I've been so busy responding to the accusations and other lovely comments that I haven't had much time to do anything else. I am assuming there were others based on some of the posts here, and you are now admitting that your anger at me is mostly based on "nasty threads on DU". Since this thread is not nasty I have to assume there were some yucky ones earlier. Glad I missed those - I hate it when people blame the people who have been oppressed instead of blaming the RW bigots.

[lisa58]

47. Someone already said it....

...it's not true!

[KansDem]

56. But this occurred AFTER:

1) The Foley scandal;
2) The Hastert scandal;
3) Other revelations of GOP hypocrisy regarding gay issues ("do as I say, not as I do");
4) The revelation that Karl Rove et al refer to fundie leaders as "the nuts."
5) The realization that Bush, Rove and the GOP have done nothing about their promised anti-gay agenda.

Simply stated, if I were a homophobic Repub, I wouldn't be too sure now that the GOP will "protect me" and my interests...

[Mr_Spock]

64. I hope they are smart enough to realize again how they've been duped

Some people are SO mindless on the other side that I worry when I hear of things that may motivate them :(

Let's hope I'm just being a worry-wart today :D

[jonnyblitz]

58. there will NEVER be a good time. there is ALWAYS an election

coming up. We will hear this BULLSHIT from your ilk no matter WHEN this happens and of course you and the others that agree with you will sigh and act like poor misunderstood martyrs who are "just stating the obvious". :puke: :eyes:

[Mr_Spock]

106. Two commentators on the nightly news thought it was obvious too

Can people not acknowledge that I did not invent this as a political issue?

Can we not discuss this for what it is - a possible political issue - or is this a taboo topic on DU?

[LostinVA]

149. Who fucking cares?

[pnwmom]

159. There is not ALWAYS an election coming up

in less than TWO WEEKS.

I don't blame anyone for the timing of the Court decision, and I support the couples who filed the lawsuit. But I wish the 2 NJ legislators who immediately announced their new marriage bill had waited till one day after the election.

[Bluebear]

225. heya

here we go again, eh?

[Geek_Girl]

Honestly I don't see what the fuss is about

I don't think this is going to effect the elections. It just doesn't have the punch to diminish all of the GOP scandals we've been seeing in the news. I'd be more concerned about vote tampering and voting irregularities affecting the outcome of this election.

[RetroLounge]

78. Someone has to say it, who the fuck cares?

I have an idea, lets ask blacks to give up the vote until after the election.

Don't want to piss off the right wing bigots, now do we?

RL

[LostinVA]

150. Bingo

[pnwmom]

170. Nothing has to happen for 6 more months as it is, according

to the Court's decision. It's hard to see how two weeks would make that much difference.

I guess I'm jaded, having a father with a partner for 25 years, without a civil union or a marriage. We're a lot more concerned about the Democrats taking back Congress than whether a bill gets passed now or two weeks from now.

[ruggerson]

81. The OP is hysterical bullshit

[Deja Q]

90. Some people WILL vote for one and one issue only;

it's the sad truth.

If politicians come up with fast ads whining about anti gay unions, it will sway some people who can't remember anything else because someone else's sexuality is more important to them. :eyes:

[LostinVA]

151. Flamebait

[Deja Q]

88. No argument from me.

In 2004, when the gay marriage thing was brought up, I did pipe up saying "No, not now!"

The needs of the many; gay rights can wait. Sadly, it was another reason why I'm apathetic. It's all "me, me, me!" on both sides of the aisle.

I dunno who pushed it this time, but somebody still ate the bait.

Mind you, unions also work on the philosophy of "many first, few later". The few, who still have valid gripes, are sometimes stuck with less because theirs was not the issue that affects everybody (e.g. certain privileges and rights vs health care, which is the biggie of big issues right now). If the greater battle was lost, then they'd be complaining about a lot more things...

It's inevitable people will find something to complain about.

I don't know if I have any credibility on this issue given recent events in my life, all I can do is mention how I used to believe. All I know is, I'm lost. And one day I shall find myself. And the trouble is, I know myself and just want to wall myself off from people. It's easier being single, having nobody to care for, to look forward to. It makes cynicism and the hubris of anything with the word "community" attached to it that much more obvious.

All I ever wanted was a simple life...

[SPKrazy]

97. Good To See Someone Else Recognizes Gibson For What He Is

when he started tried to say he was right wing and got slammed down

his nose is so far up the right wing well, I'll stop there

this whole gay marriage ruling is just more proof that RW'ers are bigots

the Allen campaign? God help us all

[Mr_Spock]

108. Gibson is a real RW ass hole - this proved it to me

I could not believe how excited he was about discussing this issue and stating that it could help the Allen campaign (and others).

Thanks for not calling me homophobic. I'm getting my ass kicked here!

[SPKrazy]

142. I Have No Idea If You Are Homophobic

I keyed in on the Charlie Gibson

homophobia is rampant and that is a shame as homosexuals are just like anyone else, they feel, they love, they hurt, they are human beings.

The politicization of homosexuality is a shameful thing.

It turns people into objects not people. Things.

I don't know if you are homophobic. I didn't get that from your post. I won't call you homophobic unless I think you are.

I thought you simply stated an opinion divorced from feeling regarding homosexuals, which was probably how it is being called homophobic.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

104. If races are still being determined by issues such as this, at this date, then

there is no hope anyway, the country is doomed.

Seriously.

[pnwmom]

127. Of course they are. All the real issues were being ignored by the

media. Then Foley came along and everything changed.

Hopefully this issue won't derail us. I think there are reasons that it might not (for one thing, a lot of the U.S. got over this sometime after the initial shock in MA).

But I would like to see another Republican do something scandalous, to get this off the front pages.

[Neecy]

114. This is such ridiculous boo-hooing

Look, this isn't 2004. This whole issue is just about off the radar screen amongst the independent voters who have much bigger fish to try - the war, the economy, the corruption in the Republican congress. It's a local issue in New Jersey and both NJ Senate candidates are fairly close on it.

This won't lose us a single vote nationwide that wasn't lost to us decades ago. My god, get a grip.

[Mr_Spock]

126. I sure hope so

I was simply shocked at how Gibson made this sound like the political story of the week. You have to admit that having Stephanopolis on and both agreeing it could make a difference is more than just me overreacting.

[Neecy]

129. Gibson's a wingnut and Steph is a dolt

The right-wing is of course going to try to whip up the 2004 frenzy, but I don't see it as having any traction whatsoever. People were swindled by that once, and voted in a Republican president (maybe...) and a Republican congress. What did that do as far as the gay marriage issue for them? Ah, NOTHING. This is something the courts and state legislatures are going to decide - a completely local issue.

[BootinUp]

133. Don't blame any DU'er or Democrat for that please.

The Senate was never a given, and it is beyond rude to attack your fellow party members like this.

[Mr_Spock]

135. Did someone attack someone here?

Please describe the attack - assuming you are talking to me as you have replied to my O/P.

[BootinUp]

137. I think its self explanatory

If you disagree, then lets just leave it there.

[LostinVA]

152. Yes, you attacked every gay in this country -- proud?

[Mr_Spock]

156. Seems to me I am the one being attacked in this thread. n/t

.

[pnwmom]

172. No, he didn't. You don't represent every gay person in the

country. It's not a monolithic group.

[Bluebear]

192. Well this is one gay person that is hacked off at the OP premise.

Every election we have to listen to this shit, how we lost "us" the election.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

206. Here's another queer that agrees with Lost.

[LostinVA]

140. Not another fucking homophobe thread on here about this

Am I on FR?!

[Mr_Spock]

157. No, these are national news headlines in your own bigoted country

This country sucks sometimes, doesn't it?

[Hippo_Tron]

158. I don't think it's that big of a deal

Republicans have been beating gay marriage to death for a decade now and it's getting pretty old. I honestly don't believe that this is the October surprise we've been on the lookout for.

[Mr_Spock]

163. I am hoping that this is a no-traction story this time around

There is the Foley story that I'm sure they may not want to have "linked" to this story, so it may prove to be a non-issue.

It was a disgusting display on Gibson's part though - it was like he got an early Christmas present.

[pnwmom]

173. And if it was an October surprise (cause Rove COULD have known

it was coming), I don't think it will have the effect he was hoping for.

[wiggs]

162. What's more important...gay marriage or global warming?

Or the deficit? Or 2800 dead US soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqiis? Or torture/Abu Ghraib/white phosporous? Or any number of huge, important issues that could dominate the discussion? Stem cells? The issues are there for us...

[benny05]

166. I don't know if I take it that far

but I'm guessing Rovians are rubbing their hands with glee. Horrible, but I believe that's true. If only David Kuo would get on an ad and said what he said in his book.

[Warren DeMontague]

176. Oh MY GOD. You mean we might have lost the all-important "values voter"?

:eyes: BULLSHIT.

The American Voting Public is far more socially libertarian than the conventional wisdom asshats want you to realize. That's why Terri Schiavo bit the GOP on the ass. Time for our party to get with the program, and give these folks a reason to come to the polls for us.

Civil rights (including marriage) for all.

First Amendment rights (separation of church and state, no censorship of consenting adult entertainment) for all.

Personal, medical, and reproductive self-determination rights for all. The right to end-of-life choice. End the war on drugs, end the war on pain patients. Legalize and tax marijuana.

Get government out of our bedrooms and our bloodstreams.

[pnwmom]

179. Nope. But some of the "Foley-stay-at-homes" may turn into

"Gotta vote against the f --s."

[Warren DeMontague]

199. Well, justice waits for no one.

Nothing we can do about it, is there?

Hey, look on the bright side: If we lose the election, again, at least some folks here will think they know who to blame. Again.

[Bluebear]

201. Word.

[Ms. Toad]

228. Bingo...

which is one reason this thread is generating so much anger. The blame is not even waiting until after the loss.

[Telly Savalas]

183. Can't the Democratic Party defend itself against accusations of supporting

human rights by pointing to their dismal record on this issue?

Last time I checked, it wasn't Dubya's signature on the Defence of Marriage Act.

[pnwmom]

186. That won't be much help to the people running in NJ right now.

But you do have a point, dismal as it is.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

190. *sigh*

Menendez & Kean have the same views on gay marriage. Neither support it. Both support civil unions. Majority of NJ citizens support gay marriage. Vast majority consider it a non-issue.

If anything hurts the Democrats, it will be the corruption claims (which Kean managed to insult the Italians with), not the gay marriage ruling.

[Name removed]

187. Deleted message

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

[Mr_Spock]

188. Good

Let's hope this is a one day story and that the damned news story was just tryng to give some hope to the pathetic Republicans.

[Bluebear]

191. WHY DID TENNESSEE HAVE TO RUN A *BLACK* FOR SENATOR???

Why why why??????!11111 If they would of run a white we might of got the Senate!!!!!!1111 :sarcasm:

[cboy4]

193. Excellent Point!!!!

:thumbsup:

[Bluebear]

194. I am getting damn sick of being blamed for losing every election.

Every two years it's the same shit here.

[cboy4]

204. Well guess what? Same shit, different day. You should read

what some people have been writing. (as I'm sure you have)

It's repulsive.

So much for sticking together.

[Bluebear]

207. A lot of my thread ...

reads ignored ignored ignored.

It's always nice to know you made some good board decisions :)

[cboy4]

210. LOL. That you must have. n/t

[LostinVA]

240. Mine too re: "Ignored"!

[mvd]

198. I don't think the Massachusetts decision was..

the determining factor in '04. And this decision isn't as monumental. Finally, social conservatives aren't as enthusiastic now.

What really gave Bush the election in 2004 (if he really won) was fear, fear, and more fear.

[cboy4]

209. Of course....nobody has ruled today that gay marriage is legal in

New Jersey.

I would think even the dumbest of christian conservatives (and those are some real imbeciles) can figure that out.

And the last I checked...large numbers of straight men throughout the country haven't left their wives and children to go F other guys in MASS. and get married. :eyes:

It's ridiculous.

[BlooInBloo]

203. Good, bb.

[madmusic]

195. They didn't legalize "gay marriage" and most voters...

don't have a problem with other equal rights arrangements, like civil unions.

So what's the problem?

[Bluebear]

197. Also, both NJ candidates have the same stance on this issue.

[madmusic]

217. The freepers will try to make it an issue.

They're desperate and need anything, ANYTHING. But it's a non-issue.

[Bluebear]

219. Let them. Maybe some people will actually stand for something...

...instead of bemoaning the "timing".

[alittlelark]

196. Get a grip. A minority hate gays ( and many of them ARE gay)

WHY would this matter more that 1-3% points? WHY should I run screaming into the woods?

[BlooInBloo]

202. We're doomed! DOOMED!!!!! Fucking vote-depressers.

[Blue_In_AK]

213. If you think the New Jersey decision loses us the Senate

then you'll have to lay blame with Alaska, too, because our Supreme Court made the same ruling last year, just about this same time. Get over the homophobia. This ruling is correct, and I hope the rest of the states come along.

[Vidar]

227. Bullshit.

[flyarm]

229. nonsense in NJ..we had a governor "come out.".and he was a dem and yet

Corzine another dem won overwhelmingly..and with all the pedophilia & cover up..with the rethugs..get real...

most americans worry more about their kids with a priest and a republican right now!@...

I have lots of repug friends..and thei isn't even on their radar..

but the war is..as is the economy!

people have awakened to this bullshit!

fly

[bklyncowgirl]

233. Anyone in Jersey who's vote this would change ain't voting Dem anyway

We have our gay bashing yahoos just like anyone else but they're pretty much sitting over there on the other side. Besides, I don't think there's much daylight between Kean and Menendez's position on this issue.

That could change, of course, social moderate Kean could morph into an out and out screaming homophobe but I tend to doubt it.

[donheld]

234. Recommended for Bullshit Page

Nobody had to say it, because it's pure BULLSHIT

[Mr_Spock]

246. I guess it's best to cover our eyes and pretend it's not an issue

I can't do that, though I can understand why folks would want to do that...

[terrya]

235. Someone has to say bullshit.

Sorry that our demands to be treated as first class citizens interferes with some peoples weird ideas.

The New Jersey Supreme Court decision isn't going to cost anything.

[bigtree]

241. if folks can't deal with others' basic human rights then fuck em

Deal with the humanity first, the politics will take of itself. I'll be damned if I'll tiptoe around the issue just to avoid pissing off some bigot who isn't inclined to vote for our party members anyway. The courts decided on the scheduling, anyway, not Democrats.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

243. we have been losing elections since clinton was in power..

and gays have hardly gained any rights...its not our fucking fault that the democratic party cant get its act together

screw you all with your " cant you just wait in line for your turn" attitude

supporting bigoted attitudes is just as bad as being bigoted yourself.

[CTyankee]

245. New leadership is needed in our party!

WE've got to cut the crap but that won't happen without a change in our Democratic leaders if they can't get with this simple, human rights issue. The idea that gay marriage will in any way affect my marriage is so incredibly stupid it just boggles my mind. If the new crop of Dems going to Washington can't or won't stand up for what is decent, well, the hell with them, too.

[Mr_Spock]

244. I have requested that this post be locked

I am not sure if this dialog has helped, but it sure has been contentious.

A summary of my answers to attacks is in the following post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2481247&mesg_id=2483137

I cannot access DU at work and have nothing more to say on this topic anyway.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

247. i am glad it has been contentious..no one should allow bigotry to flourish

without a fight!

[Mr_Spock]

251. There was NO bigotry in this post

The bigotry I have felt in this post was very real however - I may bring my computer to work if people are going to keep on with the ad hominem attacks all day.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

252. well i feel like you deserved what you got.

[Mr_Spock]

254. lol - thanks for piling on

The ad hominem attack sure has reared it's ugly head once again here on DU.

Not ONE person has stated a reason WHY they think it's homophobic - apparently it's just a taboo topic here on DU.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

261. its homophobic to tell people that their rights can wait

its akin to saying we lost 2001 because lieberman was jewish...you can see how thats racist right?

its homophobic because it assumes that the democratic party winning is more important that human rights

its homophobic because you are catering to the bigotry of some americans.

[Mr_Spock]

265. I NEVER said ANYTHING against someones rights

Also, delaying a decision is NOT bigoted - this is bizarre logic!

I am simply bringing up a news story that was analyzing the possible impact of this decision 13 days before an election.

Don't blame me for wanting to discuss this.

[Bluebear]

248. Have you, now?

:)

[terrya]

249. I requested that it be locked, also.

For entirely different reasons. Such as getting tired of being a punching bag around here because of expecting to get the same rights as heterosexual Americans.

[Mr_Spock]

253. I assume that is why it has not been locked

The reasons for others to want it locked are based on a false sense that this post is somehow homophobic. I am in no way homophobic and neither is the post. Perhaps that is why the many requests to lock it have been denied. My request was probably deleted as being just another disgruntled DUer - sheesh.

[Bluebear]

255. Well, on a day you could have cheered the decision, you said "THIS SUCKS"

in the OP. Maybe that's what confused people.

[Mr_Spock]

256. It does suck

Having sensitive decisions just before an election and having the media jump all over it with glee are not what I consider fortunate events - even though the decision is a great one and I applaud it.

[Bluebear]

257. Well, you asked why the post could be considered homophobic.

:hi:

[Mr_Spock]

258. I have yet to see an answer that even comes close to showing this

Clearly I was distressed at the timing of the decision and the media coverage - I had no idea I'd be torn apart by hyenas for simply bringing this up - though I wasn't sure why it wasn't being discussed. I guess now I know why - this is a forbidden topic here on DU.

[Bluebear]

259. HYENAS????

:wow:

[Mr_Spock]

262. Did I spell it wrong?

They tear their prey apart by pulling it in many directions with their strong teeth. Is that not a valid metaphor?

[Bluebear]

266. No, no, you didn't spell it wrong. nt

[La Lioness Priyanka]

263. aww did we hurt your feelings?

for gods sakes...you posted something ...people virulently disagreed (and for excellent reasons) and stated so...

it happens when you post bigoted statements of a supposed progressive board.

[Mr_Spock]

264. Please please please tell me where it's bigoted

I know there have been dozens of requests to lock this because people claim it's bigoted, but it has not been locked.

If there is bigotry here, show it to me!

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

267. Imagine being gay, finally getting a victory and then having people

who are supposedly on "your side" tell you to sit down at the back of the bus again and shut up. You should be happy that you're even on that bus.

Well, guess what? The time for equal rights is now and we're tired of sitting on the back of the bus. And we certainly don't want to be told to sit down and shut up by those who should be on my side. I've been congratulated by Republican family members and friends who were genuinely happy for me. Come to DU and I'm told "this sucks" and that "the gays" are ruining everything.

Guess what, man? That's bigotry. Take your blinders off and look around. Insert blacks, or Irish, or Jews for "gay" and see if you can say that's not bigotry then.

[Midlodemocrat]

268. You go girl. The OP's attitude is pure horseshit.

The victory in NJ is something to celebrate.

[Bluebear]

269. We went from "careful of Diebold" to "careful of homos" in one day.

>Come to DU and I'm told "this sucks" and that "the gays" are ruining everything.<

You said it. Yesterday morning at this time it was electronic voting that was the assumed culprit. Now this decision is going to wreck the election.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

271. In my opinion, if anything's going to fuck up this election...

it's going to be Diebold, not the homos.

[Midlodemocrat]

270. And it might rain tonight, too.

The attitude that the fantastic ruling in NJ yesterday *might* cost us the Senate is crap. It's pure, unadulterated homophobic crap.

Everyone deserves equal rights. Everyone.

[rasputin1952]

273. Locking

While this is a subject worthy of discussion, it has degenerated into an exceptionally warm dicussion with several flames popping up throughout the thread.

Contention aside, discussion is warranted, flaming is not.

Thank you for your understanding.