You can hemm and haww all you want about it, but voting for a candidate who wants to render gays second class citizen with a hate amendment is indefensible. Just like it would be indefensible if the FMA or something like it targeted blacks, or Jews or women.
Prioritizing issues is one thing. But there must be deal breakers – and the fundamental issue of equality for all must be one, or the entire notion of this country is nothing more than a pack of lies. “All men are created equal, unless they like to sleep with other men, in which case it’s not so important that they be treated equally, so long as we have cool wars and a nifty economy.”
If candidate A were to support, say, a Constitutional amendment that made Southern Baptists second-class citizens without full access to the rights and institutions of this nation, I would not vote for Candidate A. And I don’t particularly like Southern Baptists. If I could not in turn vote for Candidate B for other reasons, I would either cast a protest vote for a third party candidate, or just leave the presidential spot blank.
There are just simply some votes that no one can defend – and voting for a candidate who supports Constitutionally codifying discrimination is one of them. Gussy it up all you want, but it’s still anti-American and a fundamental attack against the base notions of our democracy.
And please leave my dog out of this. She is perfect and adorable, and does no one any harm.
Hem and haw? Do I fucking sound like I’m hemming and hawing? How much clearer can I get than to invite you to go fuck yourself?
My responsibility to my country is to vote for the best overall viable candidate. I find it indefensible that a person would choose to throw their vote away rather than realize that the greater good of society as a whole might dictate that he or she take a hit – this time – on one facet of their pet cause. Not to mention – though it has been mentioned, repeatedly – you’re unlikely to even take the hit on your pet cause, because the law is never gonna pass. But no, the mere thought that the better candidate does not support your pet cause would be enough for you to nobly disenfranchise yourself. And why? Because you’re a fucking moron. I reserve the right to vote for the candidate that I deem best suited for the job, without any regard to your narrow idea of what I can “decently” do or must do in order to be a “good American.” Because that – the exercise of my fundamental right of franchise – is respecting the “base notion” of our country. You may disagree with that position, but to call me unamerican for it is beneath contempt.
SOL, I am not picking a fight with you, but, in the context given, my comment regarding your first response to me stands.
I’m tired too, SOL. I seriously think I’m a voice of reason on most issues, and I’m getting more than a little sick of being implicitly or explicitly called a homophobe (and more) if I refuse to march along the far left of the Gay Party Line. I am firmly on you guys’ side, but sometimes this Board makes it hard to remember why.
And another thing – Not that I’m all that and a sack of chips, but I am an example of a moderate middle-american of generally good will and reasonably open mind. And if you young gay guys are alienating moderate people IRL the way some of you alienate me on these Boards, you are shooting yourselves in the foot, big time.
How can someone who wants to shit all over the Constitution just so he can beat up on the gay folks be suited for office?
I suppose if Bush were to propose re-instating slavery, you wouldn’t mind? ‘Cause, geepers, he sure has done a good job getting us into illegal wars, and the economy is so fuckin’ rockin’. Who really cares about the rights of others so long as we’re entertained by pretty bombs on TV and have our bellies full, right?
The greater good can never be accomplished by a monster who would destroy the lives of millions just because they don’t live in the confines of his narrow, evil religious beliefs.
Maybe you think treating the Constitution like Charmin is a-okay, but unlike you, I have higher standards.
Just proposing it is evil enough. Anyone who would pit society against an unpopular minority just to cull a few votes from religious bigots is unsuited to hold Federal office.
This is not a pet fucking cause. The “cause” is equality. If you don’t give a fuck about equality, then you’re not much of an American, because equality is something America is supposed to be the home of.
No, I’m not.
If I were a moron, I’d be persuaded by your nonsense arguments in favor of casting a vote for evil, bigotry and using the Constitution as a pawn in an election.
Would you vote for a man who does all the things you like (for whatever ignorant reason) about Dubya Bush, but would support reinstating slavery?
Of course you have a right to vote for Bush. It just makes you a gay-hater and a bad person. And, since your vote says “Fuck Equality!,” it does, in fact, make you a terrible excuse for an American.
Worthwhile Americans support equality for all under the law. They don’t vote for those who would even thinking of defiling the Constitution by inscribing bigotry into it’s sacred text.
If you haven’t already seen it, you may want to check out this thread. It gets nasty and it meanders all over the place, but IMO does more than anything else to explain:
why people get so pissed off (The Angry Young Gay Man Syndrome, as you call it),
why there’s no such thing as “you guys’ side” because all homosexuals are not a single unified homogenous group, and
how many gay people are so used to being called names like “pervert,” “pedophile,” “fudgepacker,” “cocksucker,” “faggot,” “fairy,” and “diseased,” that names like “bigot” and “homophobe” seem mild in comparison.
Hey, Jodi, for my edification, can you point out a couple of issues which you consider more important than Liberty and Justice for All and for which you believe Bush is a better choice than Kerry?
This argument has always struck me as kinda strange.
a) It usually comes from the right. It’s a standard weapon in the Pubbie arsenal.
b) It’s used in an attempt to silence people protesting against the right-wing agenda.
c) The basic premise is flawed. Right wing extremists don’t self-identify as right wing extremists, they self-identify as, for example, “a moderate middle-american of generally good will and reasonably open mind”. Kinda like the way everyone thinks they have an above average sense of humor. Not many people say “I’m a humorless bastard”, and not many people say “I’m a bigotted asshole”, regardless of whether it’s true or not.
d) It’s just basically a way of saying “Shut up, I’m not listening. My mind is made up. I have no argument, but I’m scared that if you keep talking, you’ll persuade other people. So just shut up.”
Before the pile-on gets too deep, I agree with the gist of what you’re saying, Jodi. And I’m not even a moderate (I’m way over on the left)! Gay marriage is fine with me, but I can understand why some people would have a problem with it, and frankly I find the histrionics that blossom whenever someone takes a position that not completely in line with the “Gay marriage and nothing short of Gay marriage right fucking now!” crowd repulsive.
Except that it isn’t, is it. I’m calling that one particular argument lame, not telling her that she would be better served by ceasing to argue at all.
But ultimately you’re not challening the argument but the people who make the argument–Jodi is making an argument that I believe is largely valid (e.g., the irrational histrionics that get pulled out during gay marriage debates on these message boards alienate more people then they convince). Instead of weighing in on what (s)he’s asserting, you discredit the argument by saying that it comes from the “Pubbies.” This is a fallacious line of reasoning, because it’s possible for Republicans to have valid beliefs.
What Spectrum fails to get is that Jodi is on the correct side–she’s pro-gay rights. But she’s not gay herself, and thus it’s unreasonable to expect her to embrace our cause as hers. Jodi’s a devoted Methodist–should we expect Spectrum to convert to Methodism and get involved in intra-church political struggles to support Jodi’s party? No? Then why expect the reciprocal of her?
I’m having a hard time understanding why other gay guys here have such a hard time comprehending this. Both Kerry and Bush oppose qay marriage–the only difference is that Kerry will not actively persecute us, which is enough to swing me over to his side on this issue. But I can see that Jodi and many other Americans who are not affected directly by FMA are noyt going to be single-issue voters and it’s unfair to ask them to be and vote for a candidate who otherwise embraces positions they oppose.
Mind, I think voting for Bush makes no sense, but it’s not merely because he caters to the religious right on the FMA, but because of his manifiold screw-ups, not least being his lies that so far have gotten more than 1,000 soldiers killed in his family’s vendetta against Saddam.
If we show Jodi our reasonable, compassionate sides, that might win her over much more than Spectrum’s unbalanced rants.
I want to say this to Jodi and to all folks who might vote for Bush:
To echo Lincoln’s words, I reject this “red America/blue America” BS because we are one nation who share the common values of generosity, optimism, and decency. I know you support Bush because you want what is good for our nation, but I ask you to think over this administration’s record and ask yourselves if Bush has been a conscientious steward.
And I say this to the pro-gay folks:
When we look back at the men and women who have ignited societal change, like Mohandas Gandhi, M.L. King Jr., and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, we note that they achieved their goals not through partisan sniping and vicious personal attacks, but by appealing to the innate consciences of their opponents.
You don’t win by namecalling and negativity, but by discipline, moral clarity, and compassion for the people who do not understand the justice of your cause. Remember King at Selma, and act accordingly.
gobear, that was IMHO one of the finest posts I’ve read here at the SDMB. You are to be applauded. And I hope that you will remember those bold yet kind words whenever you have to deal with the ugly and prejudicial hatred that is so often wrapped up in the hypocrisy of religion. That moral clarity you speak of is how you will change even the most sunken and perverse hearts and minds.
gobear, as someone who plans on voting for Bush this November, I appreciate your sentiment. Great fucking post.
However, at this point it’s just piling sand against the tide. For every post like yours above there are a hundred vitriolic, hate filled rants towards Bush and the right.
I’m hoping that after the election things settle down and some balance returns to the board.
Oh, and Scylla needs to come back, too. Then all will be well again.
