tinfoil-hat maggie: Sabyen91: ox45tallboy: Sabyen91: Progress often takes many steps.

I don't disagree with that statement at all, especially as to how it applies to DADT. I think that Obama has taken the long view of health care, and that Obamacare will eventually lead to true single-payer in this country, state by state. It's already happening in Vermont.

My meager point was that in hindsight, it's hard to say DADT was "progress" by saying, "well, not as many soldiers were getting dishonorables for being gay" because many still were. Wasn't the exact wording of the movement of the past three years "REPEAL DADT?"

Like I said, it was a meager point.

Before DADT it was...if you are gay you are gone, even if it is just suspected. It really was progress. You can certainly say it wasn't enough but Congress was full of Republicans.

Very true, but this has to and will end at the Supreme Court it's the only way I see it happening. The baby steps are nice but will never be enough. I would like to see my married friends have the same rights and privileges as my parents have, sooner rather than later.

It has already been done. DADT is history and the military has to do what civilization wants them to.

Sabyen91: Progress often takes many steps.

1. Outspoken Vice President
2. ?
3. Progress

sendtodave: Sabyen91: Progress often takes many steps.

1. Outspoken Vice President
2. ?
3. Progress

Maybe. If you think he did it without Obama's permission...

ox45tallboy: Sabyen91: Sorry, I must not have understood your point at all. I despise companies like Wal*Mart. They cost taxpayers money because they are farking assholes.

I was attempting to give an example as to why a megacorporation like Wal-Mart would benefit from the political platform of the Democratic Party.

Oh, I see. I am not sure they care. It isn't like they have to spend a lot training. They can go through employees like Charlie Sheen goes through women.

ox45tallboy: tinfoil-hat maggie: Very true, but this has to and will end at the Supreme Court it's the only way I see it happening. The baby steps are nice but will never be enough. I would like to see my married friends have the same rights and privileges as my parents have, sooner rather than later.

And I'm thinking Roberts will be the tiebreaker again, and the Conservatives will hang him in effigy when he decides what's best for the country rather than what his appointer-in-chief put him there to decide..

I don't know. I think Roberts bought himself a proper legacy (and he could be properly pro-corporation). I don't see any plus for him caring about this. He will vote against gay marriage. It doesn't help big business.

ox45tallboy: Sabyen91: Oh, I see. I am not sure they care. It isn't like they have to spend a lot training. They can go through employees like Charlie Sheen goes through women.

Well, there really are only so many people to go through in a certain area. If they can't keep employees, they'll eventually have to start raising wages or offering benefits. When the taxpayers are essentially covering part of the employees' salaries, the only real winner is Wal-Mart.

I agree with you on this. I am not sure there is a solution to it.

rynthetyn: ox45tallboy: tinfoil-hat maggie: Very true, but this has to and will end at the Supreme Court it's the only way I see it happening. The baby steps are nice but will never be enough. I would like to see my married friends have the same rights and privileges as my parents have, sooner rather than later.

And I'm thinking Roberts will be the tiebreaker again, and the Conservatives will hang him in effigy when he decides what's best for the country rather than what his appointer-in-chief put him there to decide..

I'm going to go with 6-3 with Roberts and Kennedy crossing sides and Kennedy writing the majority opinion just like he did in Lawrence and Romer. Also, I hope Scalia lives to see the day it happens because he's going to write an absolutely lulzy dissent.

I think it will be 5-4 against.

rynthetyn: ox45tallboy: tinfoil-hat maggie: Very true, but this has to and will end at the Supreme Court it's the only way I see it happening. The baby steps are nice but will never be enough. I would like to see my married friends have the same rights and privileges as my parents have, sooner rather than later.

And I'm thinking Roberts will be the tiebreaker again, and the Conservatives will hang him in effigy when he decides what's best for the country rather than what his appointer-in-chief put him there to decide..

I'm going to go with 6-3 with Roberts and Kennedy crossing sides and Kennedy writing the majority opinion just like he did in Lawrence and Romer. Also, I hope Scalia lives to see the day it happens because he's going to write an absolutely lulzy dissent.

It COULD be 5-4 for with Kennedy being the final vote. Roberts didn't suddenly become liberal. He voted for ACA because it was good for the insurance industry. He has always been pro-business and his last vote didn't change a thing.

ox45tallboy: Sabyen91: I don't know. I think Roberts bought himself a proper legacy (and he could be properly pro-corporation). I don't see any plus for him caring about this. He will vote against gay marriage. It doesn't help big business.

Hmmm... what if he were to say that the "tax" powers of Congress are applicable because married couples technically pay a slightly higher percentage in taxes due to the fact they have to share deductions, so it would be up to Congress to decide if gay couples should be allowed to marry?

The reaction from the right wingers would be priceless.

I don't think it is enough money to sway him.

rynthetyn: Sabyen91: ox45tallboy: tinfoil-hat maggie: Very true, but this has to and will end at the Supreme Court it's the only way I see it happening. The baby steps are nice but will never be enough. I would like to see my married friends have the same rights and privileges as my parents have, sooner rather than later.

And I'm thinking Roberts will be the tiebreaker again, and the Conservatives will hang him in effigy when he decides what's best for the country rather than what his appointer-in-chief put him there to decide..

I don't know. I think Roberts bought himself a proper legacy (and he could be properly pro-corporation). I don't see any plus for him caring about this. He will vote against gay marriage. It doesn't help big business.

I think Roberts isn't going to want to go down in history as being one of the justices who voted against marriage equality. He knows as well as anyone that it's inevitable and somebody who cares as much about legacy as he does isn't going to want the history books to talk about how his legacy was mixed and that he punted on the most important civil rights case of his era.

Roberts is the most pro-business justice ever. He voted with pro-business with ACA. I don't think his legacy was a thought for him at all.

ox45tallboy: rynthetyn: I'm going to go with 6-3 with Roberts and Kennedy crossing sides and Kennedy writing the majority opinion just like he did in Lawrence and Romer. Also, I hope Scalia lives to see the day it happens because he's going to write an absolutely lulzy dissent.

What if Scalia retires before then, and Thomas is on his own?

Scalia says he will have to be dead before he retires if a Dem is in the White House.

ox45tallboy: Sabyen91: Scalia says he will have to be dead before he retires if a Dem is in the White House.

[www.esquire.com image 252x342]

Hehe, damn I hate that guy.

It's a step in the right direction and a stand for decency and equality. Thank you, Dems. At least some people still have compassion. Let's hope it's enough and we get more on our side.

/sad state indeed when someone's bigotry and outdated religion overrides others' human rights and freedoms

Gyrfalcon: Keizer_Ghidorah: It's a step in the right direction and a stand for decency and equality. Thank you, Dems. At least some people still have compassion. Let's hope it's enough and we get more on our side.

/sad state indeed when someone's bigotry and outdated religion overrides others' human rights and freedoms

Ow, stop at "rights". "FreedomS" is becoming one of those words I want to ban, like heartwarming, socialism, and "ripped from today's headlines".

FREEDOM!

tinfoil-hat maggie: Sabyen91: rynthetyn: ox45tallboy: tinfoil-hat maggie: Very true, but this has to and will end at the Supreme Court it's the only way I see it happening. The baby steps are nice but will never be enough. I would like to see my married friends have the same rights and privileges as my parents have, sooner rather than later.

And I'm thinking Roberts will be the tiebreaker again, and the Conservatives will hang him in effigy when he decides what's best for the country rather than what his appointer-in-chief put him there to decide..

I'm going to go with 6-3 with Roberts and Kennedy crossing sides and Kennedy writing the majority opinion just like he did in Lawrence and Romer. Also, I hope Scalia lives to see the day it happens because he's going to write an absolutely lulzy dissent.

It COULD be 5-4 for with Kennedy being the final vote. Roberts didn't suddenly become liberal. He voted for ACA because it was good for the insurance industry. He has always been pro-business and his last vote didn't change a thing.

I really don't know the court players well enough to say but ...well.. I would really hope they wouldn't decide against.

I was surprised when Roberts decided what he did but after some thought it wasn't shocking at all. Roberts is a whore for big business.

Gyrfalcon: You know....at the end of the day, I don't care why the Democrats are supporting gay marriage. I really don't. It's enough for me that they're doing it, openly and publicly, and they'll have to live with it. But the rest of us certainly CAN live with it. So if it's just political grandstanding, I could give a rat's ass.

I don't think it will win them any votes and I don't think they think it will. Kudos to them.

Sabyen91: Gyrfalcon: You know....at the end of the day, I don't care why the Democrats are supporting gay marriage. I really don't. It's enough for me that they're doing it, openly and publicly, and they'll have to live with it. But the rest of us certainly CAN live with it. So if it's just political grandstanding, I could give a rat's ass.

I don't think it will win them any votes and I don't think they think it will. Kudos to them.

Sometimes you just have to do the right thing.

whidbey: Sabyen91: Gyrfalcon: You know....at the end of the day, I don't care why the Democrats are supporting gay marriage. I really don't. It's enough for me that they're doing it, openly and publicly, and they'll have to live with it. But the rest of us certainly CAN live with it. So if it's just political grandstanding, I could give a rat's ass.

I don't think it will win them any votes and I don't think they think it will. Kudos to them.

Sometimes you just have to do the right thing.

Well, Dems do...

Sabyen91: Gyrfalcon: You know....at the end of the day, I don't care why the Democrats are supporting gay marriage. I really don't. It's enough for me that they're doing it, openly and publicly, and they'll have to live with it. But the rest of us certainly CAN live with it. So if it's just political grandstanding, I could give a rat's ass.

I don't think it will win them any votes and I don't think they think it will. Kudos to them.

Being decent, compassionate, and forward-thinking > votes, money, and popularity.

Keizer_Ghidorah: Sabyen91: Gyrfalcon: You know....at the end of the day, I don't care why the Democrats are supporting gay marriage. I really don't. It's enough for me that they're doing it, openly and publicly, and they'll have to live with it. But the rest of us certainly CAN live with it. So if it's just political grandstanding, I could give a rat's ass.

I don't think it will win them any votes and I don't think they think it will. Kudos to them.

Being decent, compassionate, and forward-thinking > votes, money, and popularity.

It is why I am a Democrat.

For the first time in history, Democrats will include support for gay marriage in the official party platform

w00t!

*prepares to uncork champagne*

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the platform committee's decision

So, it's not official yet?

Meh, close enough.

*pop*

*glug*

^__^

A'ight, that out of the way, a couple of things to consider.

First, for all those dismissing this move as too little, too late or a mere act of political expedience I'll re-iterate what has already been pointed out a few times on this thread, which is to say that support in polls for marriage equality has only recently flipped to over 50%.

Second, marriage for gay Americans is one of those issues that unfortunately tends to poll higher than it votes. Which is to say that in terms of getting people out to vote it has to date been a net plus win for the religion-based bigots in the GOP despite polls indicating more support for the issue.

Finally, there is a danger in trying to legislate ahead of public opinion even when your cause is just. Which is to say that the Law on Unintended Consequences can kick you square in the joybag and end up delaying the moral evolution you seek when the bigots start mobilizing as we've seen in the states that have shamefully enacted anti civil rights laws intended to prevent gay Americans from marrying.

Those caveats all cheerfully noted, I'd say it's time for another sophisticated adult beverage!

*raises glass*

Good on ya, Dems. The right side of history is a good place to be.

Cin Cin!

/Here's to hoping that Ryn's noggin is gonna be okay as well.

tinfoil-hat maggie: rynthetyn: tinfoil-hat maggie: Gyrfalcon: Keizer_Ghidorah: It's a step in the right direction and a stand for decency and equality. Thank you, Dems. At least some people still have compassion. Let's hope it's enough and we get more on our side.

/sad state indeed when someone's bigotry and outdated religion overrides others' human rights and freedoms

Ow, stop at "rights". "FreedomS" is becoming one of those words I want to ban, like heartwarming, socialism, and "ripped from today's headlines".

People have been locked up for being gay in the past.

And if certain people and groups in this country have their way, it would happen again.

Yep, scary what some people want this country to be. It's like take McCarthyism and you ain't seen nothing, yet.

I think we might have to change McCarthyism to Bachmannism.

Weaver95: I just don't see how 'gay marriage' is a conservative issue. it's not costing us any money, it's not hurting anyone, it's definitely not the job of government to get involved in anyone's lifestyle choices...it's just NOT a conservative issue.

There are no conservatives in this race.

Just obama and obama v 2.0 with extra Jebus.

rynthetyn: Sabyen91: tinfoil-hat maggie: rynthetyn: tinfoil-hat maggie: Gyrfalcon: Keizer_Ghidorah: It's a step in the right direction and a stand for decency and equality. Thank you, Dems. At least some people still have compassion. Let's hope it's enough and we get more on our side.

/sad state indeed when someone's bigotry and outdated religion overrides others' human rights and freedoms

Ow, stop at "rights". "FreedomS" is becoming one of those words I want to ban, like heartwarming, socialism, and "ripped from today's headlines".

People have been locked up for being gay in the past.

And if certain people and groups in this country have their way, it would happen again.

Yep, scary what some people want this country to be. It's like take McCarthyism and you ain't seen nothing, yet.

I think we might have to change McCarthyism to Bachmannism.

And unfortunately, one of Michele Bachmann's merry band of congressional idiots, Tom Rooney, is now my congressperson thanks to redistricting in Florida.

That sucks. There are only 5 of them and 1 of them is yours. I have been redistricted into all Republican districts so I understand you totally.

Sabyen91: rynthetyn: Sabyen91: tinfoil-hat maggie: rynthetyn: tinfoil-hat maggie: Gyrfalcon: Keizer_Ghidorah: It's a step in the right direction and a stand for decency and equality. Thank you, Dems. At least some people still have compassion. Let's hope it's enough and we get more on our side.

/sad state indeed when someone's bigotry and outdated religion overrides others' human rights and freedoms

Ow, stop at "rights". "FreedomS" is becoming one of those words I want to ban, like heartwarming, socialism, and "ripped from today's headlines".

People have been locked up for being gay in the past.

And if certain people and groups in this country have their way, it would happen again.

Yep, scary what some people want this country to be. It's like take McCarthyism and you ain't seen nothing, yet.

I think we might have to change McCarthyism to Bachmannism.

And unfortunately, one of Michele Bachmann's merry band of congressional idiots, Tom Rooney, is now my congressperson thanks to redistricting in Florida.

That sucks. There are only 5 of them and 1 of them is yours. I have been redistricted into all Republican districts so I understand you totally.

My Rep is finally winning in the polls for our Senator, though. Go Tammy Baldwin!

tinfoil-hat maggie: Sabyen91: tinfoil-hat maggie: rynthetyn: tinfoil-hat maggie: Gyrfalcon: Keizer_Ghidorah: It's a step in the right direction and a stand for decency and equality. Thank you, Dems. At least some people still have compassion. Let's hope it's enough and we get more on our side.

/sad state indeed when someone's bigotry and outdated religion overrides others' human rights and freedoms

Ow, stop at "rights". "FreedomS" is becoming one of those words I want to ban, like heartwarming, socialism, and "ripped from today's headlines".

People have been locked up for being gay in the past.

And if certain people and groups in this country have their way, it would happen again.

Yep, scary what some people want this country to be. It's like take McCarthyism and you ain't seen nothing, yet.

I think we might have to change McCarthyism to Bachmannism.

Let's not, he'd end up against the wall as well as I'm sure he has in many public bathrooms only to get shot in a different way.
I mean ask Röhm how that worked out.

I am not sure what you mean. I was speaking of Joseph McCarthy, an awful person.

rynthetyn: Sabyen91: rynthetyn: Sabyen91: tinfoil-hat maggie: rynthetyn: tinfoil-hat maggie: Gyrfalcon: Keizer_Ghidorah: It's a step in the right direction and a stand for decency and equality. Thank you, Dems. At least some people still have compassion. Let's hope it's enough and we get more on our side.

/sad state indeed when someone's bigotry and outdated religion overrides others' human rights and freedoms

Ow, stop at "rights". "FreedomS" is becoming one of those words I want to ban, like heartwarming, socialism, and "ripped from today's headlines".

People have been locked up for being gay in the past.

And if certain people and groups in this country have their way, it would happen again.

Yep, scary what some people want this country to be. It's like take McCarthyism and you ain't seen nothing, yet.

I think we might have to change McCarthyism to Bachmannism.

And unfortunately, one of Michele Bachmann's merry band of congressional idiots, Tom Rooney, is now my congressperson thanks to redistricting in Florida.

That sucks. There are only 5 of them and 1 of them is yours. I have been redistricted into all Republican districts so I understand you totally.

Yeah. I thought having Vern Buchanan as my congressperson was bad, but at least Vern, carpetbagger that he is, lives is in the same general community as I do and knows some of the same people I do. Rooney is batshiat crazy and somehow his district got redrawn to cover the other side of the state from where he lives so he's not even remotely representing my community, we don't even have anything to do with the other side of the state and they don't have anything to do with us.

I get it. I was redistricted into farking Jim Sensenbrenner's district. He is the rep for most of the suburbs of Milwaukee. That has zero to do with my town but apparently the Reps think I should be in his farking district.