If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Daily Beast)   Republicans are for gay marriage. They have always been for gay marriage. Move along, citizen   (andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com) divider line 199
    More: Strange  
•       •       •

4981 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 May 2012 at 3:05 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



199 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-12 05:11:47 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Chariset: You mean the people opposing gay marriage are just a very loud but very small minority?

Pretty much

/along with one Utah based cult


61% of voters in NC is a little more than a small minority, Chariset. Oh, they're quite loud, and quite in the majority here.

/done breaking things from this past Tuesday
//might break some more things if I talk about it too much
///so angry
 
2012-05-12 05:12:12 PM

brainiac-dumdum: Mrtraveler01: "As people who promote personal responsibility, family values, commitment and stability, and emphasize freedom and limited government we have to recognize that freedom means freedom for everyone. This includes the freedom to decide how you live and to enter into relationships of your choosing, the freedom to live without excessive interference of the regulatory force of government.

This is the most sensible thing I've ever heard a Republican say in quite a while.
Too bad it's being ignored by people in his own party.


Now they need to apply it to vaginas.

/heh,I said apply it to vaginas


Hooha OnTM, apply directly to the hooha!
Hooha OnTM, apply directly to the hooha!
Hooha OnTM, apply directly to the hooha!
 
2012-05-12 05:20:58 PM
OMG. Someone in the GOP said something that made sense.

Self-serving, to be sure, but still. Sane.

It's been what, over 10 years now?
 
2012-05-12 05:32:05 PM

residentgeek: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Chariset: You mean the people opposing gay marriage are just a very loud but very small minority?

Pretty much

/along with one Utah based cult

61% of voters in NC is a little more than a small minority, Chariset. Oh, they're quite loud, and quite in the majority here.

/done breaking things from this past Tuesday
//might break some more things if I talk about it too much
///so angry


Keep in mind, the purposely scheduled the vote during the GOP primary. I get the feeling things could have looked different in November.

They do this every time. Every time the marriage amendments come up, it's during some local election in a non presidential year.
 
2012-05-12 05:32:38 PM

Jackson Herring: thamike: It's a big public fart in a car. They know it. We know it. They know that we know it. They will try to make it look like everybody else is screwy. This is the way of things.

And the farkers are rolling up the windows


Look on the bright side. We get to grin maniacally.
 
2012-05-12 05:39:41 PM
tl,dr

But I'm assuming this is the event that causes the "religious right" to wake up and realize that Republicans have just been using them for the past few decades?
 
2012-05-12 05:41:30 PM

RminusQ: Why public attitudes might be changing:

"As more people have become aware of friends and family members who are gay, attitudes have begun to shift at an accelerated pace. This is not about a generational shift in attitudes, this is about people changing their thinking as they recognize their friends and family members who are gay or lesbian."

1. You're lying. This is a generational shift in attitudes.
2. Fark you. If your reason to support gay rights is "I know someone who's gay", that both does nothing to convince anyone who doesn't know gay people, and is so obnoxiously self-serving as to make you detrimental to the cause.
3. Piss off. "People who believe in equality under the law as a fundamental principle, as I do, will agree that this principle extends to gay and lesbian couples; gay and lesbian couples should not face discrimination" but we will still bow to those who insist we not call it "marriage".

I honestly think this is a Republican strategist trying to triangulate liberals into "accepting" a lesser solution (and then rejecting that solution anyway as commie atheist socialismizing).


My gut reaction was exactly this (piss off, you've never supported it and you never will), but at the same time...don't we have the ethical duty to encourage this? No matter what the reasons they're saying this, it might extend to real change that would help a lot of people.

/I never thought I would say this, but the Republicans have actually given me food for thought...
 
2012-05-12 05:41:43 PM

madden101: tl,dr

But I'm assuming this is the event that causes the "religious right" to wake up and realize that Republicans have just been using them for the past few decades?


Parking tickets must take you a weekend.
 
2012-05-12 05:44:37 PM

PsiChick: but at the same time


There is no "but at the same time." Not for those f*ckers.
 
2012-05-12 05:51:23 PM

quatchi: brainiac-dumdum: Mrtraveler01: "As people who promote personal responsibility, family values, commitment and stability, and emphasize freedom and limited government we have to recognize that freedom means freedom for everyone. This includes the freedom to decide how you live and to enter into relationships of your choosing, the freedom to live without excessive interference of the regulatory force of government.

This is the most sensible thing I've ever heard a Republican say in quite a while.
Too bad it's being ignored by people in his own party.

Now they need to apply it to vaginas.

/heh,I said apply it to vaginas

Hooha OnTM, apply directly to the hooha!
Hooha OnTM, apply directly to the hooha!
Hooha OnTM, apply directly to the hooha!


Does this "Hooha On" product you speak of vibrate or provide
sexy-time lubrication? Because that would be something I could get someone behind me.
 
2012-05-12 05:54:52 PM

thamike: PsiChick: but at the same time

There is no "but at the same time." Not for those f*ckers.


I want to have the right to marry a woman if I fall in love with one, but Steve down in Texas probably just wants the right to not be victim of a hate crime. How can we honestly deny him that?

It might give me a bad taste in my mouth, but is it ethical to choose revenge over helping people?

/Serious question. I don't know.
 
2012-05-12 05:59:44 PM

PsiChick: My gut reaction was exactly this (piss off, you've never supported it and you never will), but at the same time...don't we have the ethical duty to encourage this? No matter what the reasons they're saying this, it might extend to real change that would help a lot of people.


I kind of agree, though I'm also of the opinion that those who don't give a shiat about gay marriage (or any topic, really) until it affects them personally are deserving of a little bit of chastisement before welcoming their revelation.
 
2012-05-12 06:02:15 PM
This is not about a generational shift in attitudes, this is about people changing their thinking as they recognize their friends and family members who are gay or lesbian.

God what a bunch of assholes. I don't even currently know anyone who is definitely gay. I know a few people who probably are, but they haven't told me explicitly and I don't know them well enough to ask. Probably comes from being in a suburban area and knowing a lot of hetero married people with kids over the last 10 years. Anyway, why would you need to know people personally who are suffering from the effects of our shiatty outdated laws to wake up to the fact that they are being discriminated against? Seriously, you are a real asshole if that's what it takes. Let people do what and who they want and treat them according to the constitution, is that so farking hard?
 
2012-05-12 06:05:40 PM

PsiChick: My gut reaction was exactly this (piss off, you've never supported it and you never will), but at the same time...don't we have the ethical duty to encourage this? No matter what the reasons they're saying this, it might extend to real change that would help a lot of people.


Well, yeah. Democrats aren't going to get supermajorities everywhere, which means that we need some Republicans willing to come around on this issue.

If it weren't for four Republican state legislators willing to break ranks (and royally piss off the state Conservative Party), we wouldn't have gay marriage in New York State right now.
 
2012-05-12 06:09:23 PM

FeedTheCollapse: PsiChick: My gut reaction was exactly this (piss off, you've never supported it and you never will), but at the same time...don't we have the ethical duty to encourage this? No matter what the reasons they're saying this, it might extend to real change that would help a lot of people.

I kind of agree, though I'm also of the opinion that those who don't give a shiat about gay marriage (or any topic, really) until it affects them personally are deserving of a little bit of chastisement before welcoming their revelation.


I can see that...

Doc Daneeka: PsiChick: My gut reaction was exactly this (piss off, you've never supported it and you never will), but at the same time...don't we have the ethical duty to encourage this? No matter what the reasons they're saying this, it might extend to real change that would help a lot of people.

Well, yeah. Democrats aren't going to get supermajorities everywhere, which means that we need some Republicans willing to come around on this issue.

If it weren't for four Republican state legislators willing to break ranks (and royally piss off the state Conservative Party), we wouldn't have gay marriage in New York State right now.


And this I can definitely see.

/I hate myself for saying this, but yeah, smack 'em on the wrist and welcome 'em to the good guys' side.
 
2012-05-12 06:13:38 PM
FTFA: they need to evolve and fast, if they're not going to damage their brand for an entire generation (emphasis mine)

This is the part of the Republicans' conundrum that gets me. It's too late for Republicans to "evolve" into that position. Had they started to transition, say, pre-2004, they might have a shot at saving face here, but as it is now they'll be losing elections on this issue alone within a few election cycles.

If they attempt it at all, they're going to have a hell of a time trying to become savvy on gay issues without it coming off as a mere hat trick. "Oh, yeah, you guys are the ones with AIDS, right? Yeah, I'm against AIDS." Ain't gonna happen. Genuine familiarity with the concerns of a specific community require years of interaction both personally and institutionally, and Republicans just don't have it.

Not to mention the alliances that are going to have to be quickly redrawn with such a transition. They'll have to somehow break up with Focus on the Family and NOM without burning their bridges too badly, and get at least a few endorsements from pro-gay rights groups. That ain't gonna happen quickly either.

But overall, I'm sure the process will be hilarious, and I look forward to watching it.
 
2012-05-12 06:17:20 PM

brainiac-dumdum: quatchi: brainiac-dumdum: Mrtraveler01: "As people who promote personal responsibility, family values, commitment and stability, and emphasize freedom and limited government we have to recognize that freedom means freedom for everyone. This includes the freedom to decide how you live and to enter into relationships of your choosing, the freedom to live without excessive interference of the regulatory force of government.

This is the most sensible thing I've ever heard a Republican say in quite a while.
Too bad it's being ignored by people in his own party.

Now they need to apply it to vaginas.

/heh,I said apply it to vaginas

Hooha OnTM, apply directly to the hooha!
Hooha OnTM, apply directly to the hooha!
Hooha OnTM, apply directly to the hooha!

Does this "Hooha On" product you speak of vibrate or provide
sexy-time lubrication? Because that would be something I could get someone behind me.


It does both of these things and more.

It also intuitively sings you your favorite song as it works.

At the highest setting the voice sounds like Trent Reznor at it's lowest settings it sounds like Al Green.

There's a Barry White setting to but I don't recommend it for dabblers.

I'mma trying to get it CSA approved but they keep laughing at me and hanging up. :(

Meh, Haters gonna hate. They laughed at Galileo and that Sham Wow guy too!
 
2012-05-12 06:19:28 PM

shivashakti: Wyalt Derp: I've given this matter some thought and I've compiled a list of reasons to oppose gay rights, and a list of strategies for dealing with the issue:

List of reasons to oppose gay rights

1/. Gay sex is icky

List of strategies for dealing with the issue

1/. Don't have gay sex.

What's surprising to me is that most straight couples these days have done what gay couples generally do. Yet for some reason, we're supposed to be disgusted or appalled or something by gay sex?

Who under 40 (that's not a virgin) has never had anal sex (giving or receiving) or oral sex? Not very many people. Many straight guys have f*cked a woman in the ass or given a girl head. Many women have taken it up the ass. Or gone down on a guy. So, what's so gross about gay sex?

That's what's going to cause the change between generations. In the old days, it was easy to cast homosexuals as "perverts". People didn't talk about sex acts. But today, with people being open about sexuality, and blowjob or buttsex jokes being fairly common, what are gay people doing that straight couples aren't?


Great analysis, three thumbs way up.
 
2012-05-12 06:21:38 PM

Lenny_da_Hog: What's that?

Ron Paul has a mole in the GOP publicity machine?


Ron Paul is against gay marriage and supports federal laws discriminating against it and states completely banning it. Yeah, the confederacy I mean "libertarianism".
 
2012-05-12 06:25:14 PM

Smackledorfer: If these guys haven't damaged their brand for a generation yet, then I don't see how they possibly could.


This.

I'm glad progressives are feeling confident. But the numbers just don't support the notion that there's an anti-GOP tidal wave building. That's a shame, because the GOP has been beyond obnoxious for the past four twelve years, and really deserves to lose badly.
 
2012-05-12 06:25:40 PM

PsiChick: thamike: PsiChick: but at the same time

There is no "but at the same time." Not for those f*ckers.

I want to have the right to marry a woman if I fall in love with one, but Steve down in Texas probably just wants the right to not be victim of a hate crime. How can we honestly deny him that?

It might give me a bad taste in my mouth, but is it ethical to choose revenge over helping people?

/Serious question. I don't know.


What question?
 
2012-05-12 06:27:08 PM

bugontherug: the numbers>

Right. There are always numbers.

 
2012-05-12 06:35:46 PM

thamike: bugontherug: the numbers>

Right. There are always numbers.


Link

I guess there's some good news in the Resurgent Republic poll, but otherwise, the data seems to show the generic ballot neck and neck. The Democrats probably need a 5 point lead on election day to have any chance of retaking the House and Holding the Senate.
 
2012-05-12 06:36:59 PM

bugontherug: Smackledorfer: If these guys haven't damaged their brand for a generation yet, then I don't see how they possibly could.

This.

I'm glad progressives are feeling confident. But the numbers just don't support the notion that there's an anti-GOP tidal wave building. That's a shame, because the GOP has been beyond obnoxious for the past four twelve years, and really deserves to lose badly.


Yeah, it's sad and a little perplexing how Americans have this love affair with the GOP. I get the sense that, for some reason, people view the Republican party as the "safe bet," while voting for a Democrat would be going out on a limb. That's how the 2004 election was portrayed, anyway.
 
2012-05-12 06:38:20 PM

Antimatter: Keep in mind, the purposely scheduled the vote during the GOP primary. I get the feeling things could have looked different in November.


That's a good p

bugontherug: Smackledorfer: If these guys haven't damaged their brand for a generation yet, then I don't see how they possibly could.

This.

I'm glad progressives are feeling confident. But the numbers just don't support the notion that there's an anti-GOP tidal wave building. That's a shame, because the GOP has been beyond obnoxious for the past four twelve years, and really deserves to lose badly.


This is true, but I think a loss at all might inspire some reassessment on the Republicans' part. If they lose in 2012 against a black guy who supports gay marriage, and given the numbers in the link, do they really want to maintain their current position for four more years?
 
2012-05-12 06:39:30 PM
What happened in the 20th century that had the Democrats go from slavers and segregationists to civil rights champions, and had Republicans go from emancipation and reconstruction to the "eww gay" derpfest that they are now? It makes about as much sense as the founder of the Westboro Baptist Church having been a civil rights lawyer.
 
2012-05-12 06:42:21 PM

quatchi: brainiac-dumdum: quatchi: brainiac-dumdum: Mrtraveler01: I don't recommend it for dabblers.

I'mma trying to get it CSA approved but they keep laughing at me and hanging up. :



Confederate states of america?

Community Supported agriculture?

Crazed Sluts for America?
 
2012-05-12 06:42:26 PM

Myria: What happened in the 20th century that had the Democrats go from slavers and segregationists to civil rights champions, and had Republicans go from emancipation and reconstruction to the "eww gay" derpfest that they are now? It makes about as much sense as the founder of the Westboro Baptist Church having been a civil rights lawyer.


This. This happened.
 
2012-05-12 06:42:53 PM

Myria: What happened in the 20th century that had the Democrats go from slavers and segregationists to civil rights champions, and had Republicans go from emancipation and reconstruction to the "eww gay" derpfest that they are now? It makes about as much sense as the founder of the Westboro Baptist Church having been a civil rights lawyer.


This is what happened.
 
2012-05-12 06:43:51 PM

LordJiro: Myria: What happened in the 20th century that had the Democrats go from slavers and segregationists to civil rights champions, and had Republicans go from emancipation and reconstruction to the "eww gay" derpfest that they are now? It makes about as much sense as the founder of the Westboro Baptist Church having been a civil rights lawyer.

This. This happened.


Damn. beat me by 27 seconds.
 
2012-05-12 06:50:14 PM

The Name: LordJiro: Myria: What happened in the 20th century that had the Democrats go from slavers and segregationists to civil rights champions, and had Republicans go from emancipation and reconstruction to the "eww gay" derpfest that they are now? It makes about as much sense as the founder of the Westboro Baptist Church having been a civil rights lawyer.

This. This happened.

Damn. beat me by 27 seconds.


see, if you had typed less characters in your post ...
 
2012-05-12 06:53:31 PM
Hypothetical Republican: I didn't used to support gay rights until I got to know a few gay co-workers and neighbors and realized they're just like everybody else and I was wrong and have changed my mind

RminusQ: Fark you. If your reason to support gay rights is "I know someone who's gay", that both does nothing to convince anyone who doesn't know gay people, and is so obnoxiously self-serving as to make you detrimental to the cause.


I'm sorry, who's the obnoxious self-serving asshole again?
 
2012-05-12 06:56:06 PM

LordJiro: Myria: What happened in the 20th century that had the Democrats go from slavers and segregationists to civil rights champions, and had Republicans go from emancipation and reconstruction to the "eww gay" derpfest that they are now? It makes about as much sense as the founder of the Westboro Baptist Church having been a civil rights lawyer.

This. This happened.


<3 Thank you!
 
2012-05-12 07:01:36 PM

Myria: What happened in the 20th century that had the Democrats go from slavers and segregationists to civil rights champions, and had Republicans go from emancipation and reconstruction to the "eww gay" derpfest that they are now? It makes about as much sense as the founder of the Westboro Baptist Church having been a civil rights lawyer.


Communism.
 
2012-05-12 07:01:49 PM

Myria: LordJiro: Myria: What happened in the 20th century that had the Democrats go from slavers and segregationists to civil rights champions, and had Republicans go from emancipation and reconstruction to the "eww gay" derpfest that they are now? It makes about as much sense as the founder of the Westboro Baptist Church having been a civil rights lawyer.

This. This happened.

<3 Thank you!


And yet the GOP of today prefers to ignore all that and continues to claim that the Dems are the real racists.
 
2012-05-12 07:02:07 PM

brainiac-dumdum: quatchi: brainiac-dumdum: quatchi: brainiac-dumdum: Mrtraveler01: I don't recommend it for dabblers.

I'mma trying to get it CSA approved but they keep laughing at me and hanging up. :

Confederate states of America?

Community Supported agriculture?

Crazed Sluts for America?


www.waterfurnace.ca

"CSA International (Canadian Standards Association), a member of the CSA Group, is a provider of product testing and certification services for electrical, mechanical, plumbing, gas and a variety of other products. Recognized in the U.S., Canada and around the world, CSA's marks appear on billions of products worldwide."

Canadian Standards Association, actually but I much prefer your Crazed Sluts for America idear.

/Newsletter, jib, etc
 
2012-05-12 07:03:02 PM
I think it's perfectly reasonable to form the opinion that gay marriage is acceptable on the basis of having gay friends.
 
2012-05-12 07:06:23 PM
Hopefully most adopt this recommendation. Then again, I can see it causing a rift in the GOP, similar to the rift between Democrats and Dixiecrats that formed over civil rights for blacks. In which case, I'll make the popcorn.

/now all we need is a catchy nickname for southern Republicans
 
2012-05-12 07:07:03 PM

GAT_00: CPT Ethanolic: FlashHarry: The last paragraph is, to my mind, the most remarkable. It's advising Republican candidates to emphasize the conservative nature of gay marriage, to say how it encourages personal responsibility, commitment, stability and family values. It uses Dick Cheney's formula (which was for a couple of years, the motto of this blog) that "freedom means freedom for everyone." And it uses David Cameron's argument that you can be for gay marriage because you are a conservative.

bizarre.

Actually, it's 100% correct. The only reason it's "bizarre" is that conservatives are no longer conservative.

They are steadfastly opposing progress, innovation, and anything new. That is conservatism at its heart.


I disagree. Conservatism is to try to conserve what you have.

I'm a conservative in that I want to preserve the system of social services, regulations, and workers rights that gave us a distribution of wealth and prosperity that made us the envy of the world.

These guys who call themselves conservative what to tear all that down so they can have a new "Gilded Age". To them, I'm the libbiest lib who ever libed
 
2012-05-12 07:07:57 PM
Believe it or not, the GOP is just a glorified theater troupe. The have been doing their best to bring the Bible to life. I guess they decided 1984 is easier.
 
2012-05-12 07:08:22 PM

HeartBurnKid: /now all we need is a catchy nickname for southern Republicans


Dangerous Morons.

Catchy enough?
 
2012-05-12 07:08:50 PM
Dick Cheney supported it before Barak Obama did.

Seriously Darth farking Cheney
 
2012-05-12 07:10:52 PM

Doc Daneeka: HeartBurnKid: /now all we need is a catchy nickname for southern Republicans

Dangerous Morons.

Catchy enough?


Has a nice ring, but might be too on-the-nose.
 
2012-05-12 07:15:08 PM

Oldiron_79: Dick Cheney supported it before Barak Obama did.

Seriously Darth farking Cheney


Of course he did. Conservatives have a habit of adopting liberal ideals the very instant an issue impacts themselves and their family.

Although I suppose the fact that he suddenly became pro-gay-rights instead of disowning Mary is a positive.
 
2012-05-12 07:16:29 PM

r1chard3: GAT_00: CPT Ethanolic: FlashHarry: The last paragraph is, to my mind, the most remarkable. It's advising Republican candidates to emphasize the conservative nature of gay marriage, to say how it encourages personal responsibility, commitment, stability and family values. It uses Dick Cheney's formula (which was for a couple of years, the motto of this blog) that "freedom means freedom for everyone." And it uses David Cameron's argument that you can be for gay marriage because you are a conservative.

bizarre.

Actually, it's 100% correct. The only reason it's "bizarre" is that conservatives are no longer conservative.

They are steadfastly opposing progress, innovation, and anything new. That is conservatism at its heart.

I disagree. Conservatism is to try to conserve what you have.

I'm a conservative in that I want to preserve the system of social services, regulations, and workers rights that gave us a distribution of wealth and prosperity that made us the envy of the world.


I understand where you're coming from, but surely you can see that's not the most usual use of the word "conservative" in America.
 
2012-05-12 07:19:26 PM

Oldiron_79: Dick Cheney supported it before Barak Obama did.

Seriously Darth farking Cheney


Who gives a shiat? What did Cheney actually do, in his 8 years in office, for gay people and gay rights?

Obama has repealed DADT and dropped federal defense of DOMA. That already makes him a more pro-gay rights president than all previous presidents combined.
 
2012-05-12 07:21:57 PM

Kevin72: Wyalt Derp: I've given this matter some thought and I've compiled a list of reasons to oppose gay rights, and a list of strategies for dealing with the issue:

List of reasons to oppose gay rights

1/. Gay sex is icky.


List of strategies for dealing with the issue

1/. Don't have gay sex.

What is so icky about getting a blowjob from your trueblue gay friend who wants nothing more than you to enjoy your b.j. and to know that I enjoyed giving it to you?


It is icky because God told them it is icky. And they want to hurt people who are different.
 
2012-05-12 07:38:35 PM

red5ish: That it takes a pollster to inform the ethics of the Republican party speaks volumes about their inner nature.


That's why they get the big bucks :)
 
2012-05-12 07:41:12 PM
if the GOP keeps up its current rhetoric and positions on gays and lesbians, it is in danger of marginalizing itself to irrelevance or worse.

Good.
 
2012-05-12 07:43:31 PM

Bacontastesgood: This is not about a generational shift in attitudes, this is about people changing their thinking as they recognize their friends and family members who are gay or lesbian.

God what a bunch of assholes. I don't even currently know anyone who is definitely gay. I know a few people who probably are, but they haven't told me explicitly and I don't know them well enough to ask. Probably comes from being in a suburban area and knowing a lot of hetero married people with kids over the last 10 years. Anyway, why would you need to know people personally who are suffering from the effects of our shiatty outdated laws to wake up to the fact that they are being discriminated against? Seriously, you are a real asshole if that's what it takes. Let people do what and who they want and treat them according to the constitution, is that so farking hard?


For decades the gay stereotype was bath houses, anonymous sex, AIDS/disease, inability to commit, etc...
I think a lot of folks who do not know and observe normal gay couples still think gay is that sick perversion.

It DOES make sense that when that gay couple with their adorable daughter moved in next door and they go to work, now their lawn, pick their kid up from school, helped me that morning my tire was flat and "seem" so nice and normal, would change folks' attitude. In fact, I think this is how attitudes change in general. You meet folks who do not jibe with your stereotype.

Quite frankly, there is nothing wrong with this.
 
Displayed 50 of 199 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report