The Dems' Modern-Day Three-Fifths Compromise: Gay Rights

[CorpGovActivist]

Please pick the three-fifths of these Federal marriage rights you'd give loving gay and lesbian couples:

http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/GAOBenefits.pdf

The Democratic Party elders seem intent on fobbing off a modern-day Three-Fifths Compromise on gays and lesbians:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_compromise

So, just tell us which three-fifths of these rights we can count on; then we'll tell you that you can count on three-fifths of our prior support in funding, time, sweat equity, creativity, and energy.

The NJ court ruling brought some really distressing memes out of the closet - pseudoDEMS, ready to scapegoat gays and lesbians for Menendez's lackluster campaign.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell allowed gays and lesbians to serve three-fifths as honorably as their counterparts in other modern democracies' armed forces. Thank you, Democratic Senator Sam Nunn.

Defense of Marriage Act? Bill Clinton turned three-fifths of a Republican when he signed that one.

We'll only need our 40 acres when this mis-guided modern Three-Fifths Compromise is finally confined to the trash heap of history.

The DNC has already played the jackass.

- Dave

[David Dunham]

1. We live in a democracy, and sadly the majority is anti-gay marriage

No pro-gay marriage Dem could be elected president. It would be suicide for national Dems to come out for gay marriage. The fight has to be on a state by state basis. Spitzer will be the first pro-gay marriage candidate ever elected to statewide office in the US from any party.

[CorpGovActivist]

2. Some Alumni Groups...

... began withholding funding from their alma maters during apartheid. Instead, they re-directed these funds into escrow accounts, to be turned over if - and only if - the colleges and universities in question divested of their South African investments.

If this notion ever catches on with HRC, or some rival GLBT group, the Democratic Party may find its funding curtailed.

"Dear DNC Chairman Howard Dean:

Since you've only given three-fifths' support to my community, enclosed is three-fifths of the amount I intended to donate. The other 40% has been sent to: (fill in the name of the escrow fund), and will be released to the DNC and/or worthy Democratic nominees, once the conditions set forth by (that organization) have been met.

While I remain dedicated to seeing progressive candidates elected, I can no longer abide being treated as a second-class citizen by the party, or by my fellow citizens.

Do 100% of the work necessary to end this modern Three-Fifths Compromise - and the DNC will get 100% of the money I planned to give.

Keep giving three-fifths' effort, and you'll get the pro-rated amount.

Sincerely,

(name)"

- Dave

[readmoreoften]

8. That's a great idea. /nt

[CorpGovActivist]

9. It Would Allow Us to Make the Point...

... that "we still support you, but only at the level that you support us."

- Dave

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

4. Well in NJ, the consitutency supports it. nt

[CorpGovActivist]

6. Thank Goodness...

... my biggest fear now is that Corzine strong-arms some kind of a concession out of the legislature, barring out-of-state couples from coming to NJ.

The question becomes: Is Corzine a Lynne Cheney Democrat?

- Dave

[Spider Jerusalem]

19. A rather apropos quote (from a conservative, no less):

We are so concerned to flatter the majority that we lose sight of how very often it is necessary, in order to preserve freedom for the minority, let alone for the individual, to face that majority down. - William F. Buckley, Jr.

[IdesOfOctober]

3. Spousal immunity

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22spousal+immunity%22+testify

If Bush loyalists at the DOJ were to go after a gay couple...

Ides

[CorpGovActivist]

5. At Least One Guy Argued It...

... I'm not sure where that case stands in the courts now.

- Dave

[CorpGovActivist]

7. Another "Wait Your Turn" Thread...

... has popped up:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2511082&mesg_id=2511082

- Dave

[IdesOfOctober]

10. I see it got locked by a moderator...

... as being inconsistent with the progressive purposes of the board.

Ides

[brentspeak]

11. As should this "concern" thread

[CorpGovActivist]

14. I'm Gay, I'm Progressive...

... and instead of yelling for a thread to be locked, why not engage?

- Dave

[Donald Ian Rankin]

12. You show me a way to get the other two fifths, and then you'll have a case.

The long term objective of the American left should certainly be constitutionally-protected full equality; there is no hope whatsoever of achieving anything even remotely approximating that any time in the forseeable future.

Also, campaigning for it vociferously would make gay rights a more important issue. Their opponents would be able to capitalise on this much more effectively than their supporters to win votes, and so doing so would jeopardise what little progress has been made.

The best approach, I think, is to try and make gay rights a states'-rights issue, because very little indeed is achievable at a federal level, and some states will go a lot further than that while very few will go much less far.

[CorpGovActivist]

13. That Allows for Gay Jim Crow...

... it really does.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

15. I wouldn't go that far, but it's far from a good outcome.

If you can show me a strategy that will achieve a better one, I'd be very interested, but I have yet to see one.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

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

[magellan]

17. Closet progressives are just as bad

[LostinVA]

18. The OP is not a Freeper , and you're breaking DU rules by suggesting it

[ShaneGR]

20. I really feel this should be a states issue....

Each state should decide. Each state party should fight there own battles. It's the Republicans who wanted to nationalize the issue. If the citizens of florida want to ban gay marriage so be it. If the citizens of massachusetts want it to be legal so be it. And so on and so forth.

[Lars39]

21. Same argument for slavery.

[SoCalDem]

22. republicans always nationalize the bloody shirt issues

The never actually plan to DO anything about them.. they always need them up there on the shelf..just waiting to be trottted out every two years..

There are just some things that should be a given..and the federal gopvernment has no business even legislating them..

There are as many opinions as there are people, and we will never get everyone to agree. Whomever is on the "losing side", will always continue to fight.. It's in our nature to continue the struggle..BUT when government gets into the fight, it cannot help but get ugly.

Who lives with/sleeps with whom should be of NO interest except those two people..

The archaic mix of religion/government is what's led us here. We need to undo that debacle in one fell swoop. All it takes is to make marriage a LEGAL declaration of partnership between TWO unrelated adults, conferring all marriage rights.
IF people feel the need for consecration/blessing/whatever, the churches would always be free to do that.

The same goes for abortion. I don;t recall reading about "abortion squads" breaking down doors and yanking embryos from women's "girly bits". If a pregnant woman wants to "not be pregnant" , it should be between her/the doctor/and her conscience. If the doctor's conscience says "no", then another doctor could do the procedure. It's just that simple.