Skip to main content

View Diary: Huckabee: Gay Marriage Would End Civilization (491 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  half-full glass (0+ / 0-)

    8 years ago the issue of gay marriage was absent from "serious political campaigns".  4 years ago, support of civil unions became a badge of mainstream Democrats, but initially Dean could bask in the glory.  A little explanation -- Dean was an otherwise rather conservative governor, and he was progressive on the account of ca. three issues, war, civil unions and environment (practically, two issues), and other candidates could not help but notice that it is a safe and desirable position.

    Only then "normal marriage" became a "serious political postulate", but emphatically, not on the national level.  In the meantime, Idaho of all places has an almost overt gay senator, and convervative voters in the "hearland" may ponder -- wouldn't be better to have a happily married senator rather than an unhappily married one who has to look for sex in bathrooms?  

    So every four years the public opinion shifts, but you cannot rush it too much.

    •  This is ghastly. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      irishwitch

      Many of the gays alive today will die before civil unions are in place in all the jurisdictions where straights can now marry.

      When people tell me to be patient and just take an old cold tater and wait, they never show a plan that anybody has for winning the rights gays already are entitled to.  And no one ever has the courage to make even an estimate as to how long it will take for this miracle to transpire.  Will it be four years, or forty, or even in this century?

      How long is too long?  How long will religious bigots get away with striking electoral fear into the hearts of Democrat candidates?

      If you don't have an earth-shaking idea, get one, you'll love building a better world.

      by hestal on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 01:53:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I give it 4-8 years (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        irishwitch

        I mean, New England, New York and California and then a stready trickle.

        But look.  Not so long time ago, in Colorado they tried to make it legal to discriminate against gays.  I suspect that a gay partnership can now live openly in most of the country.  I  think that partnership may become a sufficient standard that every state with a Democratic legislature and a non-troglodite governor will have one, but you really must give places like PA, OH or MO several more years.

        •  Let's see, I asked how long it would take for (0+ / 0-)

          gays to be able to have the same marriage rights in all the jurisdictions where straights can now marry, and you put up the headline of 4-8 years, but then it slows to a trickle.  How long will this trickle take until gays have the same rights as straights in all jurisdictions of the U.S.?

          You "suspect that a gay partnership can now live openly in most of the country."  Well, bfd.  Do you think that is the same as married straights in "most of the country?"

          Plus you did not respond to my point about John Edwards having the same stand as Huckabee.  What do you make of that?  Is Edwards a religious bigot as many are calling Huckabee on this site?

          If you don't have an earth-shaking idea, get one, you'll love building a better world.

          by hestal on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 03:03:36 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Change Through Attrition (0+ / 0-)

        It will take until you can prove the LGBT community is a large enough voting block to swing elections effectively the same way the religious right has proven. It's the same for any group that is not in the majority.

        When was the last time you saw anything on the news about someone winning a suit because the rights of a Hindu in America were infringed because the judge listening to his case had the 10 commandments as the only rule in the court? As a matter of fact when was the last time you saw anything about any other special interest group that's in the right on the news except for the big hot button issues?

        Many groups are discriminated against in this country because they aren't in the majority and are considered "fringe". The issue for your community is at least making the news and being given consideration - the problem is that the numbers aren't there for an effective framing of the discussion to lead in the direction you would choose. The Christian right made things this repressive by making one small step - letting that step become normal then making another small step - repeat. Sweeping change to make everything right and fair will never be applied - the masses are afraid of big changes. Small organized steps are whats needed for all discriminated groups to become legitimized and mainstreamed. But just like for racial issue the only solution is time and to keep the issue on the table so the younger generations become more tolerant and sympathetic to your cause and the older biggots die off. Large change is mainly a process of attrition. The neaderthals will go eventually. The current thing for us to wrap our heads around is we may never be able to enjoy the benefits of what we start.

        Patriotic Dissent Graphix

        Rich www.patrioticdissentgraphix.com

        by Patriotic Dissent Graphix on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 03:07:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  What the hell are you talking about? (0+ / 0-)

          You said, "The issue for your community is at least making the news and being given consideration." What community, who is "your?"

          It is so easy for people to just write off other people's lives.  

          You are living proof of the old adage, "It ain't what people don't know that makes them look silly, it is what they know that ain't so that does the trick."

          If you don't have an earth-shaking idea, get one, you'll love building a better world.

          by hestal on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 03:23:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The "Your" (0+ / 0-)

            Sorry if I mistook your comment but after reading it I made the assumption (yes I know what it means) that you were part of the LGBT community. I'm doing this at work in a call center and posting between calls so please forgive if I misread the intent of your post. Now I'm on break and after carefully re-reading the post I can see that you may not be part of the LGBT community but just sympathetic and ranting over the situation for them and what it implies about our political situation as a country/liberal progressives. My apologies again if I misinterpreted the reason you were upset about this issue by reading into your post. Several posts in the thread jumbled together in my head. No offense/slight/judgement about you was intended.

            Patriotic Dissent Graphix

            Rich www.patrioticdissentgraphix.com

            by Patriotic Dissent Graphix on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 04:02:55 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site