FARK.com: (7817026) Republicans using the constitution to change the constitution

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.

		Republicans using the constitution to change the constitution ( washingtonpost.com)		268
		More: Interesting, Republican, Tim Huelskamp, same-sex marriages, organizations, Jerrold Nadler, Defense of Marriage Act, Lisa Murkowski

• • •

4002 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Jun 2013 at 10:30 AM (4 years ago) | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

https://fark.com/go/7817026

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

268 Comments (+0 »)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat

2013-06-27 09:28:12 AM

Ralph Reed, a leading Christian conservative and head of the Faith & Freedom Coalition, denounced the ruling as "an Orwellian act of judicial fiat" and said he will join in the effort for new legislation to replace the Defense of Marriage Act.

I hope the irony of this sentence is not lost on people. I've underlined the key words to make it a little clearer.

EvilEgg

2013-06-27 09:32:05 AM

Yeah, that'll work. They are going to get 38 states and a super-majority in both houses.

They'll just have to convince seven of the nineteen states that have already adopted some sort of marriage equality to accept a constitutional amendment.

Or they'll just keep using it like they use abortion, to fire up their base and never really deliver on their promises.

James!

2013-06-27 09:32:24 AM

Introducing the Omnibus No Homo, No Healthcare, No Abortion, No voting, No nothin' we don't like Bill.

I'm sure it will go over just as well as all their other efforts.

Dusk-You-n-Me

2013-06-27 09:48:18 AM

Wrong side of history. Again.

vpb

2013-06-27 09:53:09 AM

EvilEgg:

Or they'll just keep using it like they use abortion, to fire up their base and never really deliver on their promises.

This.

hubiestubert

2013-06-27 10:08:35 AM

Good luck with that....

Marcus Aurelius

2013-06-27 10:16:34 AM

It will distract the voters from how badly their government is hosing them down, so it's not a bad strategy. It sure beats talking about the REAL issues facing the country.

Three Crooked Squirrels

2013-06-27 10:17:30 AM

In opening remarks, Huelskamp said he was primarily concerned about how the rulings could affect American children.

Won't someone think of the children!

I wholeheartedly believe that it is his and his brethren's discomfort with explaining gay people to their own children that is the source of their opposition, not necessarily the children that live in these types of families. He's not concerned with "American children." He's concerned that he doesn't have the tools to explain things to his own children that he thinks are totally icky and against the Bible.

Decades of social-science research have "shown that every child deserves a mom and dad," he said, adding later, "I think children will be hurt."

I look forward to his anti-divorce Constitutional amendment proposition.

factoryconnection

2013-06-27 10:20:36 AM

How many times are we going to hear "just think of the children!" while this tantrum plays out over time? These religious conservatives, seeking to amend the constitution to codify THEIR religion as OUR religion have realized that they can't condemn the gays as sodomites, monsters, demons, pedophiles, and the like because, well those sales pitches fall flat when you're not preaching to the choir.

But they can appeal to emotion: "Think of poor Jimmy, with no daddy to teach him how to throw a fastball. All he's got is two mommies, and they do that UNDERHAND GARBAGE! We must AMEND THE CONSTITUTION!"

Seriously, folks: what have you lost in this fight? Your marriage and benefits are unchanged. All that is happening is, over time, people are less and less interested in hearing you railing on about "the gay agenda" and the "sodomites ruining America." How about you just write sermons on different topics... you know, New Testament stuff?

bdub77

2013-06-27 10:21:11 AM

"Marriage was created by the hand of ~~God~~ Allah. No man, not even a Supreme Court, can undo what ~~a holy God~~Allah has instituted," Bachmann said.

I'm misquoting the crazy b*tch here to make a point.

Flab

2013-06-27 10:21:24 AM

Marcus Aurelius: It will distract the voters from how badly their government is hosing them down, so it's not a bad strategy. It sure beats talking about the REAL issues facing the country.

This strategy is working well with 3rd World dictators, why can't they apply it to a 1st World superpower?

factoryconnection

2013-06-27 10:22:26 AM

Three Crooked Squirrels: Decades of social-science research have "shown that every child deserves a mom and dad," he said, adding later, "I think children will be hurt."

Exactly. Further evidence that social conservatives are willing to take data, lie about it, and then deliver an opinion projecting its impacts.

vernonFL

2013-06-27 10:26:38 AM

Please proceed, Republicans.

While you're at it, why not throw in another Obamacare repeal, or an abortion ban?

I_Am_Weasel

2013-06-27 10:27:42 AM

bdub77: "Marriage was created by the hand of God Allah. No man, not even a Supreme Court, can undo what a holy GodAllah has instituted," Bachmann said.

I'm misquoting the crazy b*tch here to make a point.

Technically speaking, it's the same.

Diogenes

2013-06-27 10:30:13 AM

vernonFL: Please proceed, Republicans.

While you're at it, why not throw in another Obamacare repeal, or an abortion ban?

But no one had better dare touch Citizens United!

whyRpeoplesostupid

2013-06-27 10:31:43 AM

Marcus Aurelius: It will distract the voters from how badly their government is hosing them down, so it's not a bad strategy. It sure beats talking about the REAL issues facing the country.

Philip Francis Queeg

2013-06-27 10:33:34 AM

Huelskamp and other tea party-backed lawmakers spoke at a monthly meeting with reporters they call "Conversations With Conservatives," which allows the reporters to quiz some of the most ardent conservatives on issues facing Congress.

Wait a second here, I though the TEA Party was only concerned with fiscal conservatism and was made up of people from all parts of the political spectrum.

coeyagi

2013-06-27 10:33:38 AM

Republicans using ~~constitution~~ Bible to change constitution.

FTFY, subs.

EyeballKid

2013-06-27 10:34:25 AM

"Stop waving the Constitution in my face! It's just a god damned piece of paper!"
--- the last president all the "libertarians" on Fark voted for

Mentat

2013-06-27 10:34:28 AM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Ralph Reed, a leading Christian conservative and head of the Faith & Freedom Coalition, denounced the ruling as "an Orwellian act of judicial fiat" and said he will join in the effort for new legislation to replace the Defense of Marriage Act.

I hope the irony of this sentence is not lost on people. I've underlined the key words to make it a little clearer.

Hey Ralph, what are your thoughts on what the court did to the Voting Rights Act?

*crickets*

Ralph Reed ladies and gentlemen.

bdub77

2013-06-27 10:34:34 AM

I_Am_Weasel: bdub77: "Marriage was created by the hand of God Allah. No man, not even a Supreme Court, can undo what a holy GodAllah has instituted," Bachmann said.

I'm misquoting the crazy b*tch here to make a point.

Technically speaking, it's the same.

True but you substitute that language and assign the quote to some Islamic fundamentalist and just watch the hatred fly from the uneducated masses in our country.

Vodka Zombie

2013-06-27 10:35:52 AM

I love how committed Republicans are at obliviously marching into their own demise.

Wyalt Derp

2013-06-27 10:36:00 AM

It's funny how anything Obama or the Democrats do that they don't like is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!! - but then when it suits the Republicans, the Constitution magically becomes a living document to be updated according to their ~~beliefs~~ prejudices.

Lord_Baull

2013-06-27 10:36:13 AM

It sounds like you're on the right track, GOP.

Witty_Retort

2013-06-27 10:36:42 AM

coeyagi: Republicans using constitution Bible to change constitution.

FTFY, subs.

Two things they've never read all the way through.

Flab

2013-06-27 10:37:33 AM

Same word, and same person, different language.

What point were you trying ot make?

Bloody William

2013-06-27 10:37:37 AM

Hypothetically if this does pass, wouldn't it be the first amendment since the 18th to codify a moral limitation into our nation's laws? And unlike prohibition, they can't even come up with any remotely plausible societal problems?

Derigiberble

2013-06-27 10:37:48 AM

factoryconnection: How many times are we going to hear "just think of the children!" while this tantrum plays out over time? These religious conservatives, seeking to amend the constitution to codify THEIR religion as OUR religion have realized that they can't condemn the gays as sodomites, monsters, demons, pedophiles, and the like because, well those sales pitches fall flat when you're not preaching to the choir.

But they can appeal to emotion: "Think of poor Jimmy, with no daddy to teach him how to throw a fastball. All he's got is two mommies, and they do that UNDERHAND GARBAGE! We must AMEND THE CONSTITUTION!"

Seriously, folks: what have you lost in this fight? Your marriage and benefits are unchanged. All that is happening is, over time, people are less and less interested in hearing you railing on about "the gay agenda" and the "sodomites ruining America." How about you just write sermons on different topics... you know, New Testament stuff?

You are going to hear it a bunch more because the DOMA decision basically body-slammed the entire idea of passing an anti-LGBT for moral reasons. Citing moral disapproval = instant overturn. Look at the most recent abortion bills which pretend to be concerned for the health of the mother as a good example.

I don't think courts will be fooled. As the fact pattern in the Prop8 trial showed there is no evidence backing up "think of the children" as a legitimate reason for bigoted laws. Indeed most of the evidence shows that if you want to help children you should actually be for SSM.

DarwiOdrade

2013-06-27 10:38:17 AM

This is sure to create a lot of jobs.

jjorsett

2013-06-27 10:38:18 AM

Republicans using the constitution to change the constitution

Short of bloody revolution, how else would one do it?

meat0918

2013-06-27 10:38:23 AM

EyeballKid

2013-06-27 10:38:51 AM

Wyalt Derp: It's funny how anything Obama or the Democrats do that they don't like is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!! - but then when it suits the Republicans, the Constitution magically becomes a living document to be updated according to their beliefs prejudices.

IOKIYAR

thurstonxhowell

2013-06-27 10:39:17 AM

I think this is will be a winner guys. Surely, this is the path to Republican victories in 2014 and beyond.

Lionel Mandrake

2013-06-27 10:39:31 AM

...because Republicans aren't wasting enough time already.

Will they try 37 times?

bluorangefyre

2013-06-27 10:39:40 AM

I cry at what the Republican Party has become. I remember when they were a fun party, even going so far as to have Chris Farley portray Newt Gingrich complete with a mystery envelope containing the next contract with America AND THEY LAUGHED BECAUSE IT WAS FUNNY! Try something like that in today's Republican Party and they'll denounce it as a mockery. Hell, Rush was even funny! Now? He's become the blowhard he used to rail against. I now see why Ron Reagan is a Democrat, because the Republican Party is not the same as it was in his father's time.

thurstonxhowell

2013-06-27 10:40:06 AM

jjorsett: Republicans using the constitution to change the constitution

Short of bloody revolution, how else would one do it?

For once, you're right. Stupid headline is stupid.

coeyagi

2013-06-27 10:40:36 AM

jjorsett: Republicans using the constitution to change the constitution

Short of bloody revolution, how else would one do it?

The point is, they shouldn't. The f*cking public doesn't want it, and they will continue in greater numbers not to want it ("it" being a consitutional amendment on marriage inequality) in the future.

Target Builder

2013-06-27 10:40:45 AM

I hope they make a big point of campaigning on this issue, that they make it a core plank in their party platform, put it into as many speeches as possible, take out adverts, go on TV interviews and talk about their views at great length, put forward as many bills in as many state and national legislatures as they possibly can and challenge every pro-gay marriage law in every state all the way to the Supreme Court.

Dr Dreidel

2013-06-27 10:40:49 AM

Lord_Baull: It sounds like you're on the right track, GOP.
[i13.photobucket.com image 400x400]

What Suh proceeding might look like:

// also what happens to the GOP if they proceed

LordJiro

2013-06-27 10:42:01 AM

Keep crying, Republican scumbags. Society will continue to move forward and leave you wastes of oxygen in the dust.

coeyagi

2013-06-27 10:42:06 AM

Lionel Mandrake: ...because Republicans aren't wasting enough time already.

Will they try 37 times?

Try not to amend the constitution on your way through the Capitol parking lot! Hey, where are you going Eric Cantor?

Philip Francis Queeg

2013-06-27 10:42:17 AM

jjorsett: Republicans using the constitution to change the constitution

Short of bloody revolution, how else would one do it?

Jesus could re-write his original.

Martian_Astronomer

2013-06-27 10:42:27 AM

This is an an extremely demographically saavy move, showing how in-touch with current trends the Republicans are. It especially sounds like a good way for the Republicans to reach out to younger voters, who have been swinging Democratic more and more. It also will do wonders to move the image of the Republican party away from being the party of paranoid religious culture warriors fighting battles that have already been lost.

Sounds like an excellent plan to me.

Tomahawk513

2013-06-27 10:42:58 AM

I know I shouldn't be surprised, but come on guys. I don't understand people who always support obviously terrible teams (Browns fans, I'm looking at you), and I don't understand what people get out of always being on the wrong side of history.

Personally, in 20 years, I don't want to have to make an awkward phone call to some person I offended begging forgiveness for my bigoted actions.

rufus-t-firefly

2013-06-27 10:43:06 AM

EvilEgg: Yeah, that'll work. They are going to get 38 states and a super-majority in both houses.

They'll just have to convince seven of the nineteen states that have already adopted some sort of marriage equality to accept a constitutional amendment.

Or they'll just keep using it like they use abortion, to fire up their base and never really deliver on their promises.

I'd bet on that...but I have a feeling I'd have to wager a million bucks to win a dollar.

Serious Black

2013-06-27 10:45:02 AM

The definition of what constitutes a traditional marriage has changed several times in recent history. People used to be arranged into marriages by their parents without their consent; some of these arranged marriages involved couples who only met at the wedding. Married women used to be legally barred from owning property and were financially dependent on their husbands. Men used to be able to rape their wives. Marriages used to be impossible to sever, even in cases where one spouse (predominantly the husband) was abusive towards the other.

If you really support traditional marriage, I think you should be supportive of all those traditions that we have tossed by the wayside.

coeyagi

2013-06-27 10:45:07 AM

Tomahawk513: I know I shouldn't be surprised, but come on guys. I don't understand people who always support obviously terrible teams (Browns fans, I'm looking at you), and I don't understand what people get out of always being on the wrong side of history.

Personally, in 20 years, I don't want to have to make an awkward phone call to some person I offended begging forgiveness for my bigoted actions.

If you were a Republican, you wouldn't have to make that call. The beauty of the conservative position is unrelenting narcissism tempered by a bubble-like imperviousness to facts and reality.

rufus-t-firefly

2013-06-27 10:46:14 AM

jjorsett: Republicans using the constitution to change the constitution

Short of bloody revolution, how else would one do it?

Constitutional Convention. But they could start from scratch.

Car_Ramrod

2013-06-27 10:47:15 AM

In opening remarks, Huelskamp said he was primarily concerned about how the rulings could affect American children. Decades of social-science research have "shown that every child deserves a mom and dad," he said, adding later, "I think children will be hurt."

Wait, is he insinuating that people will turn gay just because of this ruling? That happily married straight couples will be torn asunder with cries of "Thanks for enabling me, Kennedy!" That if same-sex marriage was illegal, then all the gay people out there will be like, "Damnit. I really love this one person, but oh well. The law is the law. I'll enter into some loveless marriage because Scalia told me so." This doesn't make any sense.

Of course, no opposition to same-sex marriage makes sense, so there's that.

Lexx

2013-06-27 10:47:29 AM

It'll never happen, this is just a freebie that'll fire their base up. Though, this does raise an interesting question: what happens when one constitutional amendment contradicts another?

Displayed 50 of 268 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Want to see behind the curtain? Try

It's how we feed the squirrel

learn more | sign up

Report

Advertise on Fark

learn more

Like Fark!

Follow @Fark On Twitter

Headlines of the Week
Fark NotNewsletter

Report

Fark.com

Top Commented

Top Commented ▼

Top Commented
Top Clicked
Top Voted
My Recent Commented
Recent Mentions

Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.