Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

joether -> Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/13/2012 4:17:36 PM)

quote:

SOURCE
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus on Sunday said the Republican Party stands by dignity and respect for gay Americans, but that those sentiments do not change his opposition to same-sex marriage.

"People in this country, no matter straight or gay, deserve dignity and respect. However, that doesn't mean it carries on to marriage," Priebus said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Although Priebus said he supports equal rights for gay Americans, including fair treatment in the workplace and hospital visitations, he pushed back against the suggestion that same-sex marriage falls in the same "civil rights" category.

"I don't think it's a matter of civil rights. I think it's just a matter of whether or not we're going to adhere to something that's been historical and religious and legal in this country for many, many years," Priebus said. "I mean, marriage has to have a definition, and we just happen to believe it's between a man and woman."

He also sought to contrast Jim Crow laws, which enforced segregation, with bans on same-sex marriage, a comparison some have made following the president's announcement Wednesday that he now supports such unions.

"I think there's a big difference between people that have been murdered and everything else that has come with Jim Crow, than marriage between a man and man and a woman and a woman," he said.


One thing I've known about America: We buck traditions of anywhere else as a part of our tradition. But one of the first posters on the site explained it another way: Replace "straight and gay" with "white and black" and try to state its not a civil rights issue.

Sooner or later, this sort of blatant bigotry will be overturned as laws go with time. Curious how much money conservatives spend creating and defending these laws; couldnt the money have been spent on better things liked education, health care, roads/bridges, cutting down on debt, etc? Or gosh, a 'tax cut' for Americans? No, no, the Republicans are all to happy to raise your taxes defending marriage while the divorce rate remains the same.



Hillwilliam -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/13/2012 4:23:59 PM)

Someone needs to tell Reince Priebus."IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID!!!"



vincentML -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/13/2012 4:47:16 PM)

quote:

"I don't think it's a matter of civil rights. I think it's just a matter of whether or not we're going to adhere to something that's been historical and religious and legal in this country for many, many years," Priebus said. "I mean, marriage has to have a definition, and we just happen to believe it's between a man and woman."


Race slavery was "historical, and religious and legal in this country for many, many years." [8|] ~FR~



dcnovice -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/13/2012 5:03:36 PM)

FR

Coretta Scott King, who was not unfamiliar with the struggle for civil rights, made a 2004 statement that she saw gay marriage as a civil rights issue.

"Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union," she said. "A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriages."

Source: USA Today



vincentML -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/13/2012 5:32:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

FR

Coretta Scott King, who was not unfamiliar with the struggle for civil rights, made a 2004 statement that she saw gay marriage as a civil rights issue.

"Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union," she said. "A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriages."

Source: USA Today



Heard it said that the only time we have ever Amended the Constitution to restrict individual liberties was for the Prohibition of alcohol. The 18th? How did that work out? All this while we thought the purpose of the Constitution was to limit government infringement on individual liberty. The small govt GOP is showing us a new but distastful aspect of the role of government, as they did in North Carolina. Quite an amazing time we inhabit [8|]




DaNewAgeViking -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/13/2012 5:59:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Someone needs to tell Reince Priebus."IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID!!!"

No! Don't do that! They might get wise and start campaigning on relevant issues which will make it harder to run them out of office.
[sm=beatdeadhorse.gif]



Baroana -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/13/2012 6:10:38 PM)

Would a person opposed to "Issue X" acknowledge that it is a civil rights issue? Of course not. Who admits to being against civil rights?



Moonhead -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 3:40:11 AM)

Excellent point.



Mupainurpleasure -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 3:52:33 AM)

Well, it's important to remember when it comes to conservative evangelicals they didnt think civil rights was a civil rights issue 40 yrs ago either




Born and raised in America's segregated South, Falwell preached that racial segregation was the Lord's will, but dropped such overt racism from his perspective when it became unpopular to say such things aloud. Still, from his pulpit Falwell supported South African apartheid, and opposed Nelson Mandela's release from prison. In one of his earliest appearances in the national media, Falwell made headlines by criticizing Rev Martin Luther King for his political activism. "Preachers are not called to be politicians", said the young Falwell, "but to be soul winners".



Moonhead -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 4:25:03 AM)

Another fine point.



DarkSteven -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 5:19:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Baroana

Would a person opposed to "Issue X" acknowledge that it is a civil rights issue? Of course not. Who admits to being against civil rights?


Exactly. if the Democrats had any wit about them (always doubtful), they'd be claiming that the GOP was trying to deprive gays of their civil rights and pushing them on the defensive. Priebus is showing that he already expects this to be a sensitive issue.



DesideriScuri -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 6:13:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

"I don't think it's a matter of civil rights. I think it's just a matter of whether or not we're going to adhere to something that's been historical and religious and legal in this country for many, many years," Priebus said. "I mean, marriage has to have a definition, and we just happen to believe it's between a man and woman."

Race slavery was "historical, and religious and legal in this country for many, many years." [8|] ~FR~


Are you seriously equating slavery to not allowing same sex marriage?!?

Ripped from a 'nilla site:

    Did anyone ever "come out" as being Black, to the surprise of their friends? Did anyone ever spend years as a white man, only to discover later that he had an "inner Latino?" Did anyone ever leave being Italian, and decide to be Asian instead? ---I have nothing against gay people. I have gay friends. But the modern insistence that they are an ethnicity, and that their issues are "civil rights" issues is absurd. Whatever these issues are or are not, they are NOT civil rights issues.


What "rights" are being infringed? If you want to state that it's a civil benefits issue, we'd agree.

What is marriage, if not a religious thing? Guys aren't asked if they are going to marry their gal to make an honest woman out of them because of some civil thing. It's all about some religious thinking. Fornication isn't against secular law. Imagine the uproar on college campuses everywhere if it was. It's a sin in the Bible, though.

What is to be gained by allowing homosexual marriage?



farglebargle -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 6:20:23 AM)

quote:

What "rights" are being infringed?


The right to sign a contract.

Recently, New York cleared up just such an ambiguity in the Domestic Relations Law which EXPLICITLY states that marriage is, and always has been a civil contract. The UCC states that contracts are to be constructed without regard to gender.

Us Jews call the marriage contract a "Ketubah".

So, tell me how telling two people, who wish to enter into a contract, that they cannot enter into that contract isn't denying them the right to enter into contracts...



Moonhead -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 7:00:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Did anyone ever "come out" as being Black, to the surprise of their friends?

No, but a few half castes (or less castes) were outed as black back in the day, with pretty bad consequences for them in most cases.
Try googling "passing complexion".



subspaceseven -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 7:35:39 AM)

Marriage????? Slow down just a bit.....There are still people in the GOP like Rep Lankford who think if you're gay you should be fired from your job.........

Not trying to thread jump....but jeeezzz the GOP is way on the wrong side on this issue and I hope they keep it up because people will just forget about them and they will lose what ever moderate supporters they had and then just become the countries bigoted party

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/05/14/482200/lankford-fired-gay/


Rep. James Lankford (R-OK) told ThinkProgress last week that he believes someone should be able to be fired for his or her sexual orientation.



kalikshama -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 7:43:36 AM)

That conclusion is a spin. Not protected /= should be fired.

(Lankford's position on choice is of course absurd.)

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/05/14/482200/lankford-fired-gay/

Rep. James Lankford (R-OK) told ThinkProgress last week that he believes someone should be able to be fired for his or her sexual orientation.

In a conversation on Capitol Hill, Lankford expressed his strong belief that being gay is a choice, and that LGBT workers should not be protected from workplace discrimination because it’s something they can change. “You don’t walk up to someone on the street and look at them and say, ‘gay or straight?’” Lankford said:

STRASSER: Would you support a law that says you can’t fire someone for their sexual orientation –

KEYES: Similar to protections for people on race or gender?

LANKFORD: Well, you’re now dealing with behavior and I’m trying to figure out exactly what you’re trying to mean by that. Because you’re dealing with — race and sexual preferences are two different things. One is a behavior-related and preference-related and one is something inherently — skin color, something obvious, that kind of stuff. You don’t walk up to someone on the street and look at them and say, “Gay or straight?”

KEYES: But you think that even if you can’t see they’re that way, you don’t think someone is born gay necessarily?

LANKFORD: Do I personally? No. I don’t. I think it’s a choice issue. Are tendencies and such? Yes. But I think it’s a choice issue.



DaddySatyr -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 8:15:07 AM)

Rep. Lankford being an incredible cretin to the side, I do think there's a difference between a civil rights issue and a religious rights issue or even a human rights issue.

There's also a difference between tolerance and being forced to abdicate one's own beliefs.

Let me try to do this:

Marriage is (or was, until government decided they could make a buck) a religious rite. Checking the first amendment, the government can't tell religions what to teach. So, the right of homosexuals to marry rests solely in the purview of the churches.

I could be wrong but, I believe there are only three, recognized, long-established (non Jim Jones) religions that sanction gay marriage. That means that the road isn't completely road-blocked (although, it would be nice if some more churches would get their heads out of their asses).

The government has already partially weasled their way into this religious ritual (as well as extreme unction and baptism). So, the only way to "fix" this, civilly is to either kick government's ass back out of religion and have no marriages "endorsed" (tax breaks, insurance, survivor rules) by the government. Since fornication and cohabitation aren't against the law, this is reasonable.

Of course, we know the government isn't about to give up control, once they have it. So, what's more likely is that we petition for government to enforce the 14th amendment. It's already there. Let's use it.

It's really not a "civil rights" issue. If you were to tell me that gay people were getting paid less than straight people because they're gay, I'd say it was a civil rights issue. If they were forced to use a different bathroom because they're gay (You know they're bathroom predators. Right?), I would say it's a civil rights issue.

No, so far, I think it's a religious rights issue.

Now, here's the piece de la résistance: it's a human rights issue at the very heart of the matter. By what fucking authority does any government think they have the power to regulate who or how we love? Let's make it really simple and say: "First amendment; freedom of association".

But, here's another side to the coin. I mentioned "tolerance"?

Somewhere along the line the meaning of the word has become bastardized. "Tolerating" something doesn't mean I need to embrace it. It means I need to "allow" it to exist without trying to eradicate it.

You see, in this country, if we so choose, we have the right to hate any individual or any group that we want to. I don't recommend hate as a way of life but we have the right to indulge ourselves if we choose. You can't mandate how people think. I don't have to be "maid of honor" at a gay wedding to be "tolerant"; I have to walk by the church and not toss Malotov cocktails, as I pass. I can shake my head and mumble under my breath about how wrong I think it is. That's my right.

So, if you're saying you want equal treatment, I am all for it. If you're saying you want to regulate a love for the issue in the hearts of all Americans, call me when you wake up.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



mnottertail -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 8:20:40 AM)

Marriage (as provided for in the bible) was show yourselves before god and the community.

The idea of anything after that was so the church could skin a buck off you.


Hardly a religious issue, the granting of a civil license.



farglebargle -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 8:23:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

Marriage is (or was, until government decided they could make a buck) a religious rite.




REALLY?

Explain what a Ketubah is and why it's so important then, and explain how a CIVIL DOCUMENT is a "religious rite" of some sort.

NOW please explain "Common Law Marriage", and additionally how those throughout history could be married absent any 'religious rites'.

Thank you.

Marriage is, and always has been a Civil Contract. Back to the days when women were chattel property.




subspaceseven -> RE: Republican says Same Sex Marriage Isnt Civil Rights Issue (5/14/2012 8:56:59 AM)

If it is a solely "religious" ideal, then fine, churches have the right to not preform the ceremony, however that does not give the government to right to say "civil unions" ie a marriage performed in a court room, or by a judge is not just as legally binding and allows for all the benefits attached to it.

What gives anyone the right to say who can and cannot have a civil union or honor a marriage performed by a church which does not hold the belief that gays can't get married.

What part of "all men are created equal" don't you get....it does not say all men as long as they think the way a church or elected official thinks are created equal until we change our minds about them



Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125