Press release from LPHQ posted at LP.org:
LGBT Democrats express outrage over Obama administration defense of DOMA
WASHINGTON — Representatives from America’s third-largest party greeted Democrats protesting the Obama administration’s legal arguments defending the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) outside a Thursday Democratic National Committee fundraiser aimed at gay and lesbian donors, and shared with them information on the Libertarian Party’s advocacy for marriage equality.
“The Obama administration extends their hand for donations from the LGBT community, and then slaps us in the face with the other hand with the defense of DOMA,” said Catherine Sumner, Libertarian National Committee Gay and Lesbian Policy Adviser.
“Libertarians agree that government should stay out of the marriage issue, and that DOMA should be repealed,” said Sumner. “We welcome Democrats who agree with us to join the only party that will defend their rights, the Libertarians.”
The activists voiced their disappointment over a legal brief filed by the Obama administration asking a federal court to uphold the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which allows states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages. Standing outside the Madarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, D.C., which hosted a DNC fundraiser featuring Vice-President Joe Biden aimed at collecting funds from gay and lesbian donors, the protestors voiced their displeasure.
While the Obama administration has voiced its opposition to marriage equality and support for DOMA, and the DNC refuses to call on the administration to change its policy, Libertarians have no qualms about their support for marriage equality.
“White House lawyers take over two pages of documentation, citing case law, purposely not citing Loving vs. Virginia, that in so many words, indicates that gay marriage is not natural and thereby not an inherent constitutional right,” said Sumner.
For more information on this issue, or to arrange an interview with the Libertarian Party, please call Director of Communications Donny Ferguson at 703-200-3669 or 202-333-0008, x. 225, or email Donny.Ferguson@lp.org.
The Libertarian Party is America’s third-largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party by visiting http://www.LP.org. The Libertarian Party proudly stands for smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.
80 responses so far ↓
1 Morgan Brykein // Jul 1, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Alright!
Although, I think same-sex marriage should be an issue left up to the states.
2 Third Party Revolution // Jul 1, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Have they been able to convert some LGBT peopl to the Libertarian Party?
3 Joe Mustich, Justice of the Peace // Jul 1, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Cool!
Cheers, Joe Mustich, Justice of the Peace
Washington, Connecticut
http://justicesofthepeace.blogspot.com
Kudos to New England and Iowa for supporting marriage where I’m officiating for alot of couples who are coming to CT to wed this summer.
Re: Obama, DOMA, DADT, “war” funding, national health, bail-outs for Wall St looters, Israel-Palestine, etc…
He’s looking more and more like Bush in black face this days… But he knows better.
4 Libertarians reach out to gay, lesbian Democrats picketing DNC … | Youth Political Blog // Jul 1, 2009 at 6:35 pm
[...] Excerpt from: Libertarians reach out to gay, lesbian Democrats picketing DNC … [...]
5 Eric Dondero // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:24 pm
Problem is, 99% of these LGBTers are affirmative action/special rights supporters. What happens when they learn that we Libertarians don’t wish to treat them any more specially than anyone else?
Better for Libertarians to reach out to religious folk, like the churches, who are being forced by government to perform Gay Marriage ceremonies, all over New England and other regions of the country. That’s a principled Libertarian stance, and one we can gain genuine adherents on.
6 Steven R Linnabary // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Churches are “forced” to perform ceremonies??
Most churches won’t even perform the ceremony unless BOTH people are members!
There are still churches that will not perform the ceremony if it is an interracial couple!
Can you provide some news links of churches that are “forced” to perform these ceremonies against their faith?
I’ll grant you that seemingly 99% of the LGBT crowd is democrat or republican (much like the rest of America)…like there is a difference.
PEACE
7 mdh // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Problem is, 99% of these Christians are theocracy supporters. What happens when they learn that we Libertarians don’t wish to treat their god any more specially than anyone else’s?
Better for Libertarians to reach out to the queer community, like the gay bars, who are being forced by government to not get married, all over the whole country and other regions of the world. That’s a principled Libertarian stance, and one we can gain genuine adherents on.
8 libertariangirl // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:32 pm
right , there are no churches forc3d to marry anyone. now , justice of the peace, maybe
9 mdh // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:32 pm
For the record, the government has never forced a church to perform a gay marriage. Not once. Not ever.
10 Third Party Revolution // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:32 pm
What kind of churches still refuse to perform interracial marriage?
11 libertariangirl // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:33 pm
i swear he just makes shit up to bug us
12 mdh // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:36 pm
I long for the day when I can have two wives and a husband – all of whom will be smokin’ hot.
13 Steven R Linnabary // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:40 pm
What kind of churches still refuse to perform interracial marriage?
A church that gets their Pastor from Bob Jones University.
14 libertariangirl // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:43 pm
mdh // Jul 1, 2009 at 7:36 pm
I long for the day when I can have two wives and a husband – all of whom will be smokin’ hot.
I like Heinleins veiws on sex and family, ecp. as expressed in STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND
15 little bit // Jul 1, 2009 at 9:52 pm
I wish I could have two husbands and a wife. That would be nice, lol
16 libertariangirl // Jul 1, 2009 at 10:08 pm
ditto little bit
17 Richard Winger // Jul 1, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Eric Dondero is petitioning in Maine to get the anti-same-sex referendum on the ballot. Maybe he tells people on the street to sign his petition to save churches from being forced to marry same-sex couples.
The Catholic Church won’t allow divorced people to get married in a Catholic Church, and no law can or does interfere with that church policy.
Gay people are not asking for affirmative action or privileges that anyone else doesn’t have.
18 Morgan Brykein // Jul 1, 2009 at 10:53 pm
It’s not all “gay people.”
19 Erik Geib // Jul 2, 2009 at 1:14 am
Once again, Eric Dondero shows how easy it is to abuse the self-label of ‘libertarian.’
Stick with the conservatives, you neo-con hack.
20 Richard Cooper // Jul 2, 2009 at 7:06 am
I presume mdh is being humorous. What poll did Eric Dondero conduct to come up with 99%? Even if gays and lesbians favored some sort of affirmative action, they may favor lower taxes and less government.
Libertarians are the only people I know to expect ideological consistency from the voters.
At the very least, Libertarians could target the Log Cabin Republicans. They are identifiable with actual chapters and objectively speaking, not satisfied by the party they have joined.
21 mdh // Jul 2, 2009 at 7:27 am
@20 – I’ve known some LCR folks, and they’re mostly entrenched Republicans who just happen to be gay – not good recruitment prospects, imho. The queer community in general is a very good recruitment center, however. There’re definitely the entrenched democrats, but if you target the queer community in general rather than Democratic party events, you’ll have a better chance.
The LPWV has even held executive committee meetings at gay-oriented bars.
I think that what I’ve found is that success rates in terms of outreach within the queer community have been a bit better than with outreach efforts to the general populace, and that it’s easier to target our message, so it takes somewhat less time and effort. Personally, I have perhaps a bit more success since I am openly pansexual, personally into the BDSM scene, etc. There’s definitely a market for us there.
And yes, I was just copying Dondero’s post verbatim and changing a few simple words to swap it around.
22 Steven R Linnabary // Jul 2, 2009 at 7:47 am
Eric Dondero is petitioning in Maine to get the anti-same-sex referendum on the ballot. Maybe he tells people on the street to sign his petition to save churches from being forced to marry same-sex couples.
Interesting…perhaps it would be worth somebody’s time and effort to have ED followed. This might constitute fraud in Maine, enough to keep the issue off the ballot.
PEACE
23 darla // Jul 2, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Um, I am a lesbian and a Libertarian. Don’t give up recruiting the GLBT crowd as I know a lot of them.
24 Donald Raymond Lake // Jul 2, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Libertarians have platforms [sexual orientation, smaller government, private assistance] which they spend a life time ignoring. Libs should have been, should be [even straight former Southern Baptists like my self] SOOOOOO active on THE ‘Civil Rights Issues of 21st Century’!
25 Michael Seebeck // Jul 2, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Don, the “Civil Rights Issue of the Century” is simple: restoring ALL our freedoms from the tyranny of government. GLBTQ is only one piece of all of that.
26 paulie // Jul 2, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Aryan Nations?
27 paulie // Jul 2, 2009 at 4:13 pm
BJU
28 paulie // Jul 2, 2009 at 4:15 pm
+1
29 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 4:20 pm
the ‘family ‘ makeup-s on MOON IS A HARSH MISTRISS are pretty cool too:)
yes im a dork
30 John C // Jul 2, 2009 at 4:54 pm
This is why Ayn Rand hated the LP.
31 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Ayn Rand hated the LP because sometimes even smart folks have silly meaningless conversations for entertainment and fun?
wow , how snobby of her…
lighten up John C
32 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 5:04 pm
or are you saying Rand hated the LP because some like Heinlein better ? LOL
33 Donald Raymond Lake // Jul 2, 2009 at 5:39 pm
“Michael Seebeck // Jul 2, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Don, the “Civil Rights Issue of the Century” is simple, GLBTQ is only one piece of all of that.”
First, why have Libs failed to care/ capitalize on this big tent, general issue?
Secondly, what is a higher profile in the 21st Century than GLBTQ? Why do I [a former Eagle Boy Sprout whom bad mouths the BSA; a former Southern Baptist Royal Ambassador whom does not go to church any more] never see a Lib table or float or presence at GLBTQ events? Citizens For A Better Vets Home, [Afro American] Tuskeegee Air men, Reform Party types are there. So are Greens and Socialists [the troubled Peace and Freedom Party] —– but not Libs!
Why Mike, why?
Thirdly, why so belligerent toward potential allies? [Except for a knee jerk Lib response!] You guys got enuf influence, money, cooperation, and recruitment to poop on other alternative political individuals or groups on an on going basis?
It must be wonderful!
Fourthly, I detest Democans and Republicrats and find them guilty of driving the fascist imperial global American Empire off in to the ditch of history. But alternative folks are not smart enuf to even begin to fight the anti populous Duopoly Establishment! The Reform Party is a prime example of deconstructive behavior. P1992 Perot was, even after his mid summer bail out, almost 20% of the total. Today, may be four states with ballot access!
We, and the Bible Thumpers, and the Greens, and the Libs, did it to our selves! Thx Mike for being such a tool!
34 Catholic Trotskyist // Jul 2, 2009 at 5:42 pm
I hope you libertarians can get the GLBT community. Then the Democratic Party and our holy commander Barack H. Obama, will finally be free of the gay lobby and be able to capture the Christian moderates with far left views on economics and foreign policy, thus initiating the New World Order of Catholic Trotskyism, amen. Heinlein is languishing in purgatory for his evil views on the family. Ayn Rand is rolling in her grave because of her fear of the church and state coming together in the new world order of Catholic Trotskyism.
God bless the left-right parallel center of anti-choice, homophobic, pro-family socialists.
Sincerely,
CT, the anti-Rand, the anti-Dondero.
35 Catholic Trotskyist // Jul 2, 2009 at 5:45 pm
By the way, Heinlein was married to the same woman for 40 years, albeit it was his third wife.
36 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:05 pm
thats funny given the unsual representations of sex , family and love represnted in his works
37 mdh // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Could’ve been 40 years of barnyard orgies for all we know.
38 The Man from Tennessee // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:29 pm
CT, you seriously have some issues.
39 Beer drinker // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:32 pm
I think CT is 100% correct. Good job CT, I hope you are right about the New World Order coming soon. And you attacks on Nader are great too.
40 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:33 pm
he’s performance art like Stephen Colbert . at least for me
41 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:33 pm
its a character silly
42 Third Party Revolution // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Just wondering from the libertarian POW, say that there was a case like this, how would you respond?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQp0KowG67A&feature=PlayList&p=4C1B4EF8A614D4FE&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=26
43 mdh // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:51 pm
TPR, we’d let them get married and do whatever else they want so long as they don’t impose themselves upon others.
44 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:59 pm
right and as long as they pay medical expenses for their fucked up kids , and not the taxpayer, why should i care. but i do and heres why
The lady who pained the mural in my kids room long ago married her paternal uncle , her dad walked her down the aisle ( too wierd) and they had a messed up kid too.
so i think its pretty common to have srious health problems for children with such relations
theres the force issue for me because that child they create which may have serious quality of life issues ,didnt ask to be born with so many problems , Is it fair to the kid?
45 mdh // Jul 2, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Is life fair in general? Nope
they can have abortions, use condoms or get sterilized if they so choose.
46 mdh // Jul 2, 2009 at 7:06 pm
I am exposing paulie to cultured music…
47 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 7:15 pm
like what stoner?
48 John C // Jul 2, 2009 at 7:22 pm
31 and 32,
Both. Plus she hated gays and especially gay libertarian hippies.
49 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 8:17 pm
she’d have hated my guts! lol
50 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 8:17 pm
im listening to Arrested Development , all old school
51 Third Party Revolution // Jul 2, 2009 at 8:23 pm
At least the good thing is that you guys are not hypocrites. Unlike other people who support gay rights and then look at the stuff and say things like “Ewwww! That’s just nasty and sh*t!” and I’m like “Dude, if you are going to have to support love, support them all”.
52 libertariangirl // Jul 2, 2009 at 8:31 pm
so yeah i guess it comes down to being a moral issue , i wouldn’t do it , but the government should never legislate morality
53 Catholic Trotskyist // Jul 2, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Thanks Beer Drinker. It’s good to know that I have some supporters.
54 Catholic Trotskyist // Jul 2, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Does the Green Party do much for outreach to the gay community lately, other than in San Francisco? Are there any gays in the Constitution Party?
I’m not sure where Robert Milnes is today, but I think that, with homosexuals largely being on the left, that this libertarian outreach would fit well into the Progressive Libertarian alliance strategy.
55 mdh // Jul 2, 2009 at 9:20 pm
@54 – Only closeted gays in the CP.
56 Bryan // Jul 2, 2009 at 9:31 pm
CT @54…Constitution Party…are you f^@king crazy….
Michael @25…If you want to use the “whole” thing it is LGBTIQ…
57 Donald Raymond Lake // Jul 2, 2009 at 10:36 pm
By JYOTI THOTTAM / NEW DELHI Jyoti Thottam / New Delhi – Thu Jul 2, 7:05 pm ET
With one sweeping judgment Thursday, the Indian High Court decriminalized homosexuality, shook off a stubborn piece of colonial baggage and may have added momentum to a broader regional movement for gay rights. “This is a huge step forward,” says Anjali Gopalan, director of the Naz Foundation India Trust, an advocacy group based in New Delhi that successfully brought a public interest petition to overturn India’s anti-sodomy law, Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. “We can now take the next step forward for the community in securing our rights.”
The law was enacted in 1860 by India’s British rulers, but the most stubborn opposition to repealing it in India has come from those who argue that homosexuality goes against traditional Indian sensibilities.
58 Catholic Trotskyist // Jul 3, 2009 at 12:31 am
I am perfectly awhere that it seems crazy to think there are some gays in the Constitution Party, but Trent once said that there is a buddhist and an atheist in the party, who still agrees with the whole theocratic platform.
As for what LG said about me being a character, unlik eColbert I do actually believe most of what I say, but in this time of darkness and sin, I can’t mention a lot of my ideas in my real life. This blog provides a theraputic coping mechanism until I feel ready to release the truth to the wider world. I think that Milnes actually did show up once to a libertarian state convention, so he is for real, whereas I have never appeared in public with my full Catholic Trotskyist persona.
59 Third Party Revolution // Jul 3, 2009 at 7:18 am
Well the thing is the Constitution Party does not have anything in the platform that discriminates against someone from a non-christian religion. On the other hand, there is an opposition to gay rights in the platform.
60 paulie // Jul 3, 2009 at 8:12 am
Some gay people actually do oppose gay rights – maybe out of a misplaced sense of guilt from their upbringing, or out of some desire to be put in prison (where, reportedly, there is a lot of gay sex).
61 Third Party Revolution // Jul 3, 2009 at 4:23 pm
I know who the Buddhist is, since he is a member of Third Party Revolution. He has mentioned that despite a lot of CP members being ok with his religion, he was in conflict with some others and has considered the America First Party as his alternative. However, I have never heard of an atheist in the CP. Indeed it is rare to find Secular Conservatives.
62 Michael Seebeck // Jul 4, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Bryan @56, what’s the “I” stand for? Haven’t seen that one used there before.
63 Michael Seebeck // Jul 4, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Don @33
Because most GLBTQetc are entrenched Democrats, as Matt noted, and they are also stuck on the incorrect notion that government grants rights rather than protects them. They want their place at the benefits trough. Most of them still don’t understand that Obama is not their friend, either.
I’ve seen the same thing on the opposite side of the statism aisle at gun shows with gunnies who are entrenched NRA Republicans, stuck in their incorrect notion that the GOP and NRA are their friends when they’re not. The problem isn’t so much the party associated with the mentality as it is the mentality itself. Overcoming that hurdle takes time and a lot of grassroots effort.
Try freedom from government oppression–NAIS, Pass Act, HR875, PATRIOT Acts I and II, the IRC, the Fed Reserve Act–I could go on.
If you’re not seeing LP tables at events you go to, then you’re not going to the events I go to. I’ve been doing LP outreach tables and Pride events for years, most recently LA Pride last month. BTW, the only political parties there were D, R, and L. If your local LP isn’t doing those events, then complain at them, not me, and never assume that a lack of presence at an event in one place means the same uniformly nationwide. That kindergarten logic doesn’t fly.
Who’s being belligerent? Certainly not me when I point out the truth, that it *is* only one part of the bigger puzzle. I only crap on CPers when they start to spout their religious nonsense. I consider such radical insanity a far bigger threat to freedom than simple statism.
64 Steven R Linnabary // Jul 4, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Intersex
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex
PEACE
65 Michael Seebeck // Jul 4, 2009 at 1:18 pm
It appears I forgot a format on the last part of that. Try this:
You “find them guilty of driving the fascist imperial global American Empire off in to the ditch of history”? You make that sound like it was a bad thing. I for one am glad the “fascist imperial global American Empire” is off in the ditch of history, so maybe now we can focus on rebuilding the libertarian neutral non-interventionist free-market American Republic again, as the Founders envisioned.
Frankly I could care less about the Reform Party. I predicted in 1992 in college that it was formed only as a Perot vehicle for ballot access and to feed his ego, and I was right. The four remaining states never got that memo, and Ventura was able to cash in on it prior to MN’s chapter imploding.
NOW who’s being belligerent?
66 Michael Seebeck // Jul 4, 2009 at 1:19 pm
Thanks, Steve, hadn’t heard that one before.
67 Donald Raymond Lake // Jul 4, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Mike: I come in with detailed documentation or first hand evidence. You hit and run with an unfounded snide comment.
It is you [and a small rogue's gallery of reprobates] whom are not only belligerent, but UNNECESSARILY belligerent!
[For example, I did not ask you if you were concerned about the reform move ment (RIP). I did not ask you to care 'bout any thing but LP inefficiency in the market place of ideas. AND unlike the warped personalities involved THIS IS THEIR STRONG POINT, THEIR FORTE!]
You are the insecure, defensive, beligerant one, as you behavior keeps on spot lighting! Your snide comment [general, indefensible] on GLBT profiles being people’s exhibit one!
And Minnesota? As early as 2003 I contacted them personally on cooperation , endorsements, [THEIR] news items, and was nicely told to ‘play in traffic’ [my phrase] —- “we are a one state party, and we do not even work with other Independence Party…….”
68 Michael Seebeck // Jul 4, 2009 at 11:24 pm
Snide comment? Don, you seem to lack an understanding of the simple yet true point that that movement uses the letters in multiple orders, depending on who you talk to. All I did was acknowledge that, and only in your mind was it considered “snide”. My own close friends in the movement use the letters in various orders, even changing it from sentence to sentence. It’s an anagramo-acronym.
So instead you call me names, and you call me belligerent? Don’t think so.
Detailed documentation? Where? Some blogger on DailyKos lamented that there was no other political parties at LA Pride, but I know for a fact a half-dozen party members manned the Outright Booth there, including me, several officers and staff too. IOW, people can miss booths.
You think I’m belligerent? You haven’t seen belligerent from me, but you sure dish it out in spades.
I am hardly insecure. Ask anybody who actually knows me, of which you thankfully are not and never will be. I am quite secure in who I am and what I believe. And I believe you have no clue in the slightest about me at all.
I think you look in the mirror and see yourself and project it onto me. Hence your own insecurity, bluster, and belligerence and accusing me of it.
You need to reconsider your statements, Don, as they make you look very foolish.
Me, I simply need a cold ice water. All this laughing at you has made my throat dry.
69 Michael Seebeck // Jul 4, 2009 at 11:29 pm
Don calls ME belligerent while he makes comments like this one:
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/07/party-secretary-sarah-wires-libertarian-party-of-alabama-convention-report/comment-page-1/#comment-76450
FAIL.
70 Donald Raymond Lake // Jul 5, 2009 at 7:26 am
Mike: cold water? may be a lozenge? Glad I could provide additional entertainment after the Steve Gordon/ Robert Barr P2008 follies. Happy to be of service.
How interesting that you can attempt to slam some one and try to look so innocent. You are the guy with cookie crumbs all over your face while muttering, ‘Me?’
71 paulie // Jul 5, 2009 at 10:32 am
Mike Seebeck makes a lot of sense in the exchange with Don Lake in the last series of comments.
Lake, as usual, makes no sense whatsoever.
72 paulie // Jul 5, 2009 at 10:35 am
I don’t know why Lake keeps thinking Steve Gordon ran Barr’s campaign. He worked on it as electronic (ie, internet) campaign manager, and was outside the loop of most of the decisionmaking.
The limited area that he did manage worked pretty well, considering.
Russ Verney was the campaign manager, and Shane Cory his second in command. They made the decisions on how the campaign was run.
73 paulie // Jul 5, 2009 at 10:36 am
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2009/jul/01/why-libertarians-are-courting-gays-and-lesbians/
KPBS:
Why Libertarians Are Courting Gays and Lesbians
By Maureen Cavanaugh, Natalie Walsh
74 mdh // Jul 5, 2009 at 10:52 am
I am planning to speak to the BiGLTM group at WVU next semester. I had hoped the WVU group would do it but they haven’t, and the new chair of that group is actually a guy I sort of know (he’s a friend of several of my friends, and a talented karaoke singer at Vice…)
75 VirtualGalt // Jul 5, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Liberty for Maine was indeed present at Southern Maine Pride 2 weeks ago. Indeed there is an effort afoot to put a referendum on the Nov09 or Jun10 statewide ballot to overturn the granting of marriage equality here in Maine.
We distributed many WSPQs and many of those stopping by — a surprising number — expressed general support for libertarianism in general .
Where many of my LGBT friends and visitors turn off is in discussion of health care. I find Huge majorities in my LGBT contacts in favor of socialized medicine, regardless of their positions on other issues. In many cases it becomes a deal breaker to stand in opposition to it.
76 Bryan // Jul 5, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Michael @62…Intersex…Don’t ask me…I just report ‘em. (My understanding is that they are the people who have been considered hermaphrodites.)
I guess the reason I had to chime in on this topic, is that the LGBT community is a ripe source of possible “recruits”. There are many LBGT people who are conservative in every aspect of their life EXCEPT that they are discriminated against by their government and society.
The average person self-identified as LGBT are better educated, and have a higher income than those of the average “straight” American.
They don’t care about the “government entitlements” given straight marriage, they just want equality….
They don’t want “hate crime legislation”…they just want the laws we have enforced, no matter what the orientation of the victim is.
They don’t want churches to be forced to recognize “gay marriage”…they just want the churches that will marry them to be recognized by the state. (Until the state stops being a marriage broker and performs it’s only duty…filing legal partnership contracts whether they be straight or gay….
77 Michael Seebeck // Jul 6, 2009 at 12:42 am
Bryan @76:
Yeah, it was a new one for me. Thanks for helping on that.
I agree with what you’re saying.
For a real CA marriage fix, see this: http://muddythoughts.blogspot.com/2009/06/real-equality-of-marriage-act.html
Of course, the problem with it is that a straight guy wrote it, and the PTB in the movement won’t even acknowledge a real solution because they need it to come from themselves and not some outside source (which is why they went bananas against DPI!).
78 mdh // Jul 6, 2009 at 6:45 am
@75 – Just ask them to name one thing they think the government does a really good job at – be ready to smack them down if they answer anything, but most people won’t. Then ask if they want those same bureaucrats in control of their healthcare.
Another good one is “Healthcare – brought to you by the same people who brought you the occupation of Iraq!”
79 paulie // Jul 6, 2009 at 8:32 am
The biggest problem there is that the current system, which many people believe to be free market health care…
80 paulie // Jul 6, 2009 at 10:15 am
See http://praxeology.net/aotp.htm#1. Partial quote sans links found in original:
Fascist RomneyCare seems like the most likely practical synthesis in the short term, and thus we should begin any discussion of health care by making common cause with the single payer advocates against it – even though they are being used as the antithesis to our thesis (or vice versa) to arrive at RomneyCare in practice.
Leave a Comment