Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 18, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide

Star-Spangled Baggage
Science Finds New Routes to Energy




The Divide


Truthdig Bazaar
The Unknown Black Book

The Unknown Black Book

Edited by Joshua Rubenstein and Ilya Altman
$ 23.07

Kolyma Tales

Kolyma Tales

By Varlam Shalamov; John Glad (Translator)

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

GOP Retreats to Homophobia as Election Nears

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Oct 27, 2006
Gay marriage
365gay.com

Republicans across the country have seized the threat of gay marriage in a desperate attempt to hold on to Congress.  Now that the “security” issue no longer offers the boost it once did, the GOP is counting on homophobia to drive voter turnout.


New York Times:

Wednesday’s ruling, in which the New Jersey Supreme Court decided that gay couples are entitled to the same legal rights and financial benefits as heterosexual couples, had immediate ripple effects, especially in Senate races in some of the eight states where voters are considering constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage.

President Bush put a spotlight on the issue while campaigning in Iowa, which does not have a proposal on the ballot. With the Republican House candidate, Jeff Lamberti, by his side, Mr. Bush—who has not been talking about gay marriage in recent weeks—took pains to insert a reference into his stump speech warning that Democrats would raise taxes and make America less safe.

“Yesterday in New Jersey, we had another activist court issue a ruling that raises doubts about the institution of marriage,” Mr. Bush said at a luncheon at the Iowa State Fairgrounds that raised $400,000 for Mr. Lamberti.

The president drew applause when he reiterated his long-held stance that marriage was “a union between a man and a woman,” adding, “I believe it’s a sacred institution that is critical to the health of our society and the well-being of families, and it must be defended.”

Link

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By guitarsandmore, October 29, 2006 at 11:39 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

In order to win the election Democrats need to stay focused on these areas:

1.  Failed war in Iraq. Last year last throes. This year last throes. Next year…
2.  Culture of Republican Corruption with 12 representatives being investigated or already in jail.
3.  Economy that does not benefit all Americans
4.  Health Care that does not include all Americans
5.  Bushco failure to protect the U.S. Borders while spending 300 Billion in Iraq
6.  Abu Graib torture and Cheney admission that yes, we torture.
7.  Rumsfield admission that we made a mistake about WMD.  We were wrong.
8.  Republican Party that ran on family values and morality is full of corruption including attempts at illegal sex with minors.
9.  Republican alliance with Big Oil prevents the U.S. from becoming energy independent and free from foreign oil.

There are only between 1% and 10% of the population that are gay and so this is not one of the central issues.  Yes, everyone should have the same rights end of story.  Now get back to the main issues that affect everyone.

Report this

By sharon ash, October 29, 2006 at 10:55 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dredging up the issue of gay marriage is another smoke screen to hide the real problems of this administration.  It was not gay marriage that created the 9 trillion dollars in national debt.  It was not gay marriage that built a war on lies and manipulated information which has cost the lives of more than 2800 of our troops, and brought shame to America in the international community.  It was not gay marriage that has caused global warming, it was corporate greed.  It was not gay marriage that has driven 6 million more Americans into poverty.  The it was “not gay marriage” list could go on an on, but the point has been made.  The real point is that Americans must begin, sooner rather than later, recognizing manipulation and the use of hate to divide us.  As for marriage, gay or straight, it is a lovely concept which rarely works out as planned.

Report this

By Leslie, October 28, 2006 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Wow! I can’t believe that the the Republican partiers who are bringing this issue up again think that the american people will fall for such a smoke-screen again.  Or maybe the American people will fall for it….
  First, if this is a society based on freedom to worship the way we want (which is why many came to this continent in the first place) then the religious view of who can marry who isn’t even an issue.  Conservatives get over it!  You don’t make laws against person’s marrying convicted felons on death row. Why make laws that prohibit marriage between persons who live loving, productive lives?
  Second, why are we even indulging this conversation when we have a government being exposed for a huge history of lies; rampent outsourcing and unemployment; the deterioration of out public education; skyrocketing cost for higher education which limits America’s competance in the global economy; continued confusion and hundreds of thousand of deaths in the middle east; the growing wealth of the upper 10 percent of our rich and the terrifying increase in the number of American citizens on welfare; and .....need I go on?
  Tell me, does the God of the Christian scriptures worry about sexuality more than these things? Jesus said nothing about sex, but said everything about the social welfare of the people.  Why are the American people giving so much time to a topic that polarizes while a government that claims to be Christian ignores the colapsing of its own society.  That has nothing to do with the   homosexual…it has everything to do with the lack of love and concern for the people around us.
  In Christianity; in the scriptures, sexuality is an extrodinarily minor concern while feeding the hungry, caring for the poor and loving your enemy is the first command of Christ.  So, if you call yourself an American Christian, start focusing on the real issues…repentance of hatred and neglect of all people.

Report this

By Lorenzo, October 28, 2006 at 1:20 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I want to marry my Dutch boyfriend and for us to have the same civil rights as any married hetrosexual couple.  That is, those laws as they are applied to married couples by the IRS and the INS, federal laws.  We do not want to get married in Massachusetts or New Jersey.  We do not want to get married in a church or any religious institutional structure.  We want to get married in Las Vegas like thousands of other couples and while neither of us can become pregnant we may wish to adopt a child.  That’s all.  To become a legally connected couple with all of the benefits that the law provides.  The best thing that could happen would be an end to “marriage” altogether as far as the state is concerned and substitute “civil unions” for everyone.

Report this

By Otto, October 28, 2006 at 11:25 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

For those who think the ruling in New Jersey is another case of “liberal activist” justices out of step with American values,Note that the Three justices appointed by a Republican governor would recognize the full status of marriage for same-sex couples. And of the three justices appointed by a Democrat — a gay Democrat — none would go that far, and they joined in the majority opinion.

To obscure any partisan alliances even more, each contingent included Republican and Democratic justices

Report this

By Don, October 28, 2006 at 10:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Since no one is attempting to make heterosexual marriage illegal, where’s the threat?
No one is attempting to force a heterosexual to marry a homosexual, again, where’s the threat?
No one is attempting to deny marital benefits to heterosexual couples, so again, where’s the threat?
Same sex marriage doesn’t threaten anyone this is a completely phoney issue drummed up by right wing religious extremists, in an attempt to impose their religious beliefs about marriage onto all Americans.
We don’t need a right wing religious Taliban organization operating in the United States.
If any American citizen wants to live in a theocracy, they need to move to a country where religious dogmas equal civil law.
And that isn’t America.
All citizens of this country need to read John Stuart Mills: “Essay on Liberty”, to understand why our court system exists to protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
The religious right is neither.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, October 28, 2006 at 9:59 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Homophobia, Islamophobia, immigrantsphobia are all different manifestations of the fear-mongering tacticts of the corrup and hypocrite neocons!

Though I am a straight man who does not approve off or encourage homosexuality, I find gay marriages a more benign life style than priests and congressmen victimizing young boys and girls whom they are supposed to protect and others who cheat on their spouses. At least, with gay marriages, there is no abhorant hypocricy involved, since they want to be what they actually are and do it legally and openly in a free and open society that sanctifies individual freedom.

Report this

By Mark, October 28, 2006 at 7:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Marriage is about love, not gender.

Report this

By Stephen, October 28, 2006 at 5:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Definition:
Marraige is the Soulful Union of the Spirit of My Father and our Family of Man as redeemed through sacrifice of my father through my my Brother Jesus’ Lord Yeshua. 


We do not breath equality with God in the image of a Man without the spirit of God guiding us to his Unity.

Adam once stood without Eve in an easier day known to Man.

The Medical Diagnostic term “homophobia” is a vain attempt by Medical authorities and booksellers who work at credifying harmful practices in the formative stages inside the developing belief systems of the questioning soul who seeks truth and strength within a loving framework of Godly Lives. To accept the terminology will only weaken your presentation of facts where it comes to the mind of a reality based Man. There are some seeds in the garden you are better off without even planting - like poision Ivy.

Report this

By el cuervo, October 27, 2006 at 8:42 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Today an unknown woman drove all the way out to my farm, right up to my farmhouse door, to hand me a pamphlett on the ‘true religion’. There was this tawdry misleading little number about how a man should ‘love his wife as his own body’ (whoah, nelly, that would be HER body not his… could this be why so many men kill their wives? Because they think they are theirs to kill? If this is even a minor cause of such things just imagine how many murders people who preach this mindset are complicit in. And they continue to do it. Mindboggling.) and that a wife ‘should learn to deeply respect her husband’... ah, so if she doesn’t ‘respect’ her husband, this would warrant domestic violence to correct her immoral unholy and selfish nature? By all means let’s protect the traditional family as domestic violence rates soar, uh, that’s the reported domestic violence mind you, and considering the private nature of the offense it’s safe to say that’s the tip of the iceberg… Factor in the ever high rates of sexual assault (including incest which is approved of enthusiastically by the bible) and perhaps we can sensibly conclude that traditional ideas of marriage and patriachy, the subliminal and not so subliminal message that woman is a man’s chattel, are at least in part responsible for many horrific crimes against human beings who happen to be female.
Perhaps these devout homophobes would benefit from a visit to the happy home of some friends of mine, two self-declared lipstick lesbians who have been in a loving relationship for many years. Some of the best people i know are gay, and some of the very worst are ‘religious’ (i don’t mean spiritual), and unfortunately they can marry and impose their narrow unhealthy mindset on their unfortunate offspring. How about an official moratorium on empathy-deficient people telling others how to live and love?

Report this

By Lutheran Zephyr, October 27, 2006 at 7:40 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There is no compelling legal reason to limit marriage to heterosexual couples.  The unholy alliance of religion and state on the matter of marriage is in need of a divorce.  Let’s return civil marriage to its rightful place - the courts - and let’s get religious tradition out of the discussion of what is legal and not in terms of marriage. 

Religious institutions can and will bless only those relationships they deem appropriate.  Their freedom, autonomy and traditions are not affected by what the Courts determine constitutes a civil marriage.

(For a fuller discussion of my views on this issue - as a person of faith - click on my name at the end of this comment)

Report this

By Tim, October 27, 2006 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bob,
You say marriage is a holy sacrament.  You say we need to look to the “origin” of marriage.  Did Jesus Christ originate marriage when he said, “What God has brought together, let no man put asunder?”  I don’t think so.  Some people prefer civil ceremonies.  Are their marriages not valid?

Report this

By Rodney Matthews, October 27, 2006 at 1:48 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Haven’t we had enough of fear, hatred, and bigotry from the Bush adminstration. It’s the same thing every election. Yet after the election is over, they forget about it to next election. Haven’t the right-wing bigots and racists the Repubilican party caters to realized that that George Bush and Karl Rove are playing them for fools. They are not going to do anything about gay marriage or abortion because of the large number of in the closet Republicans and one of the Bush twins may need a abortion someday. However his religious redneck right-wing bigots still believes he will and their intolorance to anyone other than their kind allows them to continue to casts votes for the Decider. It’s like sitting in the pumpkin patch on halloween night waiting for the Great Pumpkin to show up and he never comes.

Report this

By Rowdy, October 27, 2006 at 12:52 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

So Bob…
When an elderly man and woman (past the age of children) want to be together, they can’t procreate so all they can do is obtain a legalized union, not a marriage?  Is that what you’re saying?

Or, if for medical reasons a young man and woman cannot have children, but wish to be together they cannot be married, but can only obtain a legalized union?  Is that what you’re saying?

Marriage has nothing to do with procreation or religion.  Heterosexuals can be legally married in any state of this union without procreating or being part of any organized religion or church, temple, or mosque.  Marriage can be performed in Las Vegas for celebrities in less time than it takes to heat Pop-Tarts (R), then divorced just as quickly!

If marriage is a ‘holy’ sacrament, why are there so many divorces, Bob?  Certainly gay people aren’t responsible for divorce.

Marriage is about commitment, Bob.  Marriage is about love and trust and the desire to share one’s life with another adult… obviously something you’ve never experienced, Bob, with a woman or a man.

Report this

By cg, October 27, 2006 at 12:45 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bob,
you are a fool.  Marriage in a church by a priest may be a sacrament, but only for those who ascribe to that particular belief system.  For all others, your point holds no water.  Also, you said “Marriage is meant so that you can procreate” and followed with the briliant obvservation that “Two gay people can not procreate”.  Wow, how insightful.  Then, by your standard, those who are infertile cannot marry.  Hmmm.  Finally your claim “But allowing gays to be married, it mocks the meaning of marriage”.  You mock commen sense.  Doesn’t a divorce rate greater that 50% mock marriage?  Or how about the rampant domestic violence in this country?  Marriage should be about love and honor, not man and woman.

Report this

By CS, October 27, 2006 at 12:42 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I think the debate on “Protecting the institute of Marriage” Is overblown. The gays are not asking to be married inside Chapels. They want state recognition of their union, that’s all! No Church should be forced by law to do something like that, and I’m sure most people aren’t asking for it. Be reasonable, it’s not a question of morality as far as the LAW is concerned. You’re interjecting your religion into this. All you have to say is God doesn’t recognize Gay marriage as a Holy Union. Come on guys, Vegas Marriage booths are not holy!

The fact is this, If gays are not allowed the same rights as straights to get married, they will always be second class citizens. Men and Women will ALWAYS get married! Nothing can stop them, and certainly not some people waving rainbow flags!

...And as far as Gays corrupting marriage to the point that people start having sex with animals and children…. WHAT?! Anyone with a centimeter of common sense can see why DOING those things is flat WRONG! No one is going to give people who have sex with children and animals’ special rights because their Victims can’t give full consent under law! So it doesn’t matter if their movement is inspired by A Marriage ammendment. No one will GIVE them rights! END OF ARGUMENT!

Report this

By Jim, October 27, 2006 at 12:33 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I do not understand why the “good” Christians are so concerned about.

What is the problem with Gay marriage in a civil ceremony?  It is a legal marriage.

It would be up to the church to recognize or not recognize the marriage.

If the church does not recognize a divorce should our laws now be changed to make a divorce illegal?

Report this

By Steve, October 27, 2006 at 11:57 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The origin of marriage is a holy sacrament?  Are you kidding me?  It’s meant for procreation?  Again, are you kidding me?  Marriage was meant to regulate the transfer of property and make inheritance easier.  I wish religious people would stop lying.  A logical conclusion to what Bob says is that infertile couples shouldn’t be allowed to marry and a barren woman shouldn’t be able to marry a man.  For the last time, marriage is NOT about a sacrament or anything…that is a late transformation of something invented for the orderly succession of property and inheritance.

Report this

By Quicksand, October 27, 2006 at 11:52 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Marriage is a holy sacrament.  Marriage is meant so that you can procreate”
Where is this in our Constitution? Your spitting out religious nonsense.
Let me ask you this…as far as hetro couple that do not have children, should they not be allowed marriage?
“But allowing gays to be married, it mocks the meaning of marriage.”
Denying people to marry is a mockery of marriage.

Report this

By Gb, October 27, 2006 at 11:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Funny. I have friends who were not married when they procriated and a couple of them that are married and haven’t procriated. I think Bob your data is faulted. Marriage and procreation don’t seem to have a good correlation. I think something else is more important. Hmmmm, what would that be?

Report this

By Bob, October 27, 2006 at 10:53 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Wow.  You guys are way off on this one.  No one is saying that gay people can’t be heroes.  First of all, you need to find out where th eorigin of marriage is.  Marriage is a holy sacrament.  Marriage is meant so that you can procreate. Two gay people can not procreate, so they can’t be married.  If gays want to have a legalized union so they can share health insurance and whatever that’s fine.  But allowing gays to be married, it mocks the meaning of marriage.

Report this

By MS, October 27, 2006 at 10:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Why don’t the Democrats ask George Bush and his Republican goons to explain Condoleezza Rice calling the mother of Mark Dybul’s male partner his “mother-in-law’? Why aren’t they asking about that over and over? Why aren’t they questioning Geprge bush and the Republican’s commitment to “protecting” marriage? The first Lady stood smiling for the cameras while Rice made her comments.

I applaaude Rice, but aren’t the Democrats relentlessly highlighting the cynical and self-serving hypocracy of the Republicans. Make Bush publically rebuke his Secretary of State for her comments if he’s so commited to his “values.”

Report this

By keith richards, October 27, 2006 at 9:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

the hair on the ” rubber soul ” cover was what made w realize he was gay, and he’s been reflexively fighting the progress the beatles brought ever since.
it’s his whole fetish-self hating gay trying to bring back the cruel crew cut macho military white supremacist, hose down the marchers 50’s.

Report this

By Robert O'Brien, October 27, 2006 at 7:05 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Funny how only SOME people were heroes on 9/11. The first NY firefighter to die was a gay chaplain, much beloved by the people he worked with. One of the group that stormed the cockpit on Flight 93 was a gay man.

But I guess they aren’t REAL heroes. They are second class citizens.  Even though they fought for their country more than Limbaugh, Cheney, and yes, Bush.

The D’s should remind the country that some of the heroes of 9/11 were gay, and that when the R’s attack gays, they dishonor American heroes.

Then again, when has that stopped the Republicans?

Report this

By PeaceAND love2ALL, October 27, 2006 at 6:55 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hmmmm - just a few years ago it was ‘mixed (i.e. black and white) marriages are not right’.  I hope these same couples are paying CLOSE attention TODAY to the gay marriage statements from the stump.  Prejudice is prejudice.

Time to accept ALL people as—loving—human beings. Love is love.

I find it hard to believe that the SAME people wearing the flowers in their hair and chanting ‘peace,love & Stop The War’ in the 70’s are on now on this same ‘conservative stump’ chanting messages of bigotry. 

I hope your ‘family value’ kids find out about your past and ask, “Mom, Dad, what made you change to hate people who have NEVER hurt you? What happened to the person who strived for Peace & Love in the World?

I only can hope these kids grow up to see the light and ‘change’ the world to be a better place where ALL people are loved and accepted.

Report this

By Rowdy, October 27, 2006 at 6:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Wasn’t it an “activist court” in 2000 that installed GWB as President?

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.