The Democratic Party is worthless for gays *sigh*

[Brian_Expat]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/21/AR2006012101014.html

Hours after a Baltimore judge ruled that a Maryland law banning same-sex marriage violates the state constitution, reporters cornered the typically loquacious Sen. James Brochin near his desk on the Senate floor. Brochin, a moderate Democrat who represents a swing district in conservative Baltimore County, said he would base his position on "what my district tells me do," then cut off further questions.

. . . snip. . .

The issue of same-sex marriage arrived Friday like an unwelcome houseguest for many Maryland Democrats, who say only a quick reversal from the state's highest court can keep the divisive issue from reshaping the 2006 campaign season.

"That would end the debate, and we could get back to a normal campaign season," said Timothy Maloney, a lawyer and former Democratic state delegate. "If not, there are all kinds of possibilities for mischief. . . . The Republicans will use this to beat the hell out of moderate Democrats."

. . . snip. . .

Republicans are convinced that if it succeeds, the move would boost conservative turnout. In Maryland, where Democrats have a 2-to-1 advantage on voter rolls, a high Election Day presence among conservatives is viewed as crucial to GOP candidates.

All I can say is, if Democrats cannot be counted on to stand up for the constitution and the rights of Americans in a state where they have a 2:1 electoral advantage, they are completely and totally worthless as a political opposition and should be disbanded and replaced with a real opposition party posthaste.

[Brian_Expat]

1. Ah, this just in. . .

. . . apparently a number of "moderate Democrats" are going to support a DOMA amendment in a "bipartisan fashion."

[TechBear_Seattle]

2. Never forget who brought you DADT and DOMA

It wasn't George W. Bush who signed those two atrocities in to law.

[Meldread]

3. Bastard.

"That would end the debate, and we could get back to a normal campaign season," said Timothy Maloney, a lawyer and former Democratic state delegate. "If not, there are all kinds of possibilities for mischief. . . . The Republicans will use this to beat the hell out of moderate Democrats."

I say that any Democrat who does not support same sex marriage, and even makes moves to sanction what is being achieved through the courts should actively be campaigned AGAINST. These are enemies. They do not deserve our time, money or our vote.

[xchrom]

4. they need to meet paul hackett.

[Meldread]

5. I agree 100%

I love Hackett, and the only problem I have with him is that I feel that he needs more details on the issues so he can debate them more fully. Especially issues that aren't all that "hot" like Medicare and Medicaid, Social Security, etc. They are important but complex issues. I'd like to see Paul be able to not only stand on the right side of those issues, but to also say what he would do about them and even be able to speak in a bit of detail about it. (Although the truth of the matter is most Politicians are ignorant about a large majority of the details.)

I keep saying it, and I will keep saying it until it sinks in: Those who would not vote for a Democrat over LGBT issues aren't voting for Democrats anyway! It might piss off some of the right leaning moderates, but the fact of the matter is they are few in number. They have to weigh gay marriage based on the fact that by going AGAINST LGBT people (who are highly likely to vote for a Democrat over a Republican) that they are discouraging their own voter turn out.

The damn article says flat out that if a Constitutional Amendment gets on the ballot it's likely to energize the Conservatives to turn out and vote against gay marriage. The damn article also said that having legalized gay marriage would also energize the Conservative base. So my question to Democrats is this: WHY IN THE HELL ARE YOU KICKING YOUR OWN DAMN BASE IN THE NUTS WHEN YOU NEED LGBT PEOPLE TO TURN OUT TO VOTE FOR YOU?!

The fact of the matter is, if you are damned if you do and damned if you don't then you NEED TO ENSURE that your OWN BASE turns out to support you. I think they are also over looking the fact that if gay marriage became legalized that it is more likely to DEMORALIZE the more moderates in the Conservative base and therefore more likely to DECREASE their turn out. The more radicals will be the ones who are angry and show up at the polls, while those who are more moderate will be more likely to be demoralized.

I'll never understand this defeatist strategy Democrats keep using.

[xchrom]

6. i have faith that he will learn.

but one thing he has done -- he has moved the line.

others that are progressive/liberal heard him say it.

and they will notice the positive response.

that unequivacol language sort of lets the cat out of the proverbial bag.

[carl_pwccaman]

7. That other point., though...

...that gay people who won't vote democrat because of this, wouldn't vote democrat anyhow...

I thought the democratic party was more than one issue, and that instead of looking only at one issue, we all would do best to think of the bigger picture, while advocating our own viewpoint.

I advocate for gay rights. I argue that gay marriage is consistent in principle with equality under the law, while the current state of things is inconsistent. I argue that our country's principles are strengthened when we work out the inconsistencies. But I don't bash people who want to delay working on the gay marriage issue, nor do I bash people for being critical of the wording or timing of other laws that are supposed to support gay rights.

I think as a whole, the important thing is to keep the gains we have, to push for more dialog, to encourage more consistency with equality under the law, and to look at serious issues of harassment and police protection when gay people are bashed, and to look at instances where gay people may be denied access to hospital, to bring up unfairness of tax law if a will leaves something to a gay partner and it is taxed differently, etc., to bring up issues with adoption that may be unfair to gay people, etc., and to allow a public dialog to further a culture that is supportive, as the single most important strategy, an educated public, not just a public that brow beats people with certain controversial positions.

In many states, the success of initiatives intended to protect homosexuals or ensure equality, has resulted in backlash. Backlash is something that can be dealt with strategically, in different ways, at different times. We may disagree on specifics.

It seems to me that pushing can result in pulling/backlash. If I have to push something, I'd rather push on a case where someone was denied access to a hospital bed. Find a case, I'll push, they can pull all they want, it makes them look so bigoted, they can dig their own grave, I'll help them fall into the pit of their own making. Same with inheritance discrepancies, urge a bill to fix that problem, or the health insurance issue for partners. I can push that and deal with their pull a hell of a lot easier.

But with gay marriage, hey I'm a complete heretic. I don't 'get' marriage. I don't like the idea of the state licensing it, who needs their approval for a religious ceremony or personal arrangement like living together in commitment?... But I do 'get' the idea of equality under the law, and that the current situation is one of 'second class citizenship' similar to laws against miscegenation. I can push the view, but I can't say that a marriage law is more important than other issues like the healthcare system, war, poverty, harassment, abuse, murders rapists and pedophiles let out of prison, etc.

It's easier for me to support a law to tally police response and the justice system results when it comes to bullies who target gay people, to make sure gay people can expect the justice system to work for them too as equal citizens... it's easier for me to deal with a TANGIBLE and easily explained injustice.

I can push on other things, but it's harder.

I don't expect a politician to forget other issues, and to drop everything, to try to make everything consistent and ideal, on my timing. Especially when they aren't in a 'gay party', they have other issues, and other issues right now are very important.

[xchrom]

8. are you ''equal'' to straights on every issue?

is there any issue where they are more ''equal'' than you?

i may not be rushing out get married -- that is not the point -- marriage is the contract that we've set up as a whole for people to go through life together -- no one HAS to get married in a church -- not ALL churches would have to sanction gay marriage, only those that want to.

you may want ''marriage'' as a whole to go away -- but that's not going to happen.

what i support are full and equal rights for the lgbtqq community -- period -- nothing less. there is only one issue

[Meldread]

9. Questions for you.

What would you do if a Democrat came out, in a primarily white district, and said he didn't support interracial marriage and wanted to create a Constitutional Amendment to ban it? Would you still support that Democrat? What would you do if a Democrat, living in a primarily white district which was populated with racists, came out and said that he supported the idea of re-segregating America? Would he still have your support?

If the answer to the above is no, then why is it okay for them to do the EXACT same thing to LGBT people? Because it's popular? What if the above issues suddenly became popular? Would you support that Democrat then? Where do you draw the line and say, "No, this is a core value that we cannot compromise."?

That line for me is LGBT rights, including but not limited to marriage.

[Brian_Expat]

10. I have one life to live. . .

. . . if Democrats are going to insist I sacrifice it for some silly "bigger picture" which doesn't include me, why should I waste time supporting them?

[foreigncorrespondent]

11. This is how your entire post reads to me...

...deial, denial, denial, denial. The Democratic party will continue to give us crumbs so long as they get our votes and cash. Denial, denial, denial, denial.

Sorry dude, but you are living in dreamland.

I will start with the one issue that truly affects my parter and me, that of immigration rights for LGBTIQQ Americans.

The first time the Permanent Partners Immigration Act was introduced to Congress it was back in 1999. Only a handful of Democrats cosponsored this act. Now 7 years later, those numbers haven't climbed much. Yet there are countless couples whose lives are turned upside down by this one issue. But you would have us wait. It doesn't matter that many are being forced to live illegally in the U.S. to you. It doesn't matter that many don't spend the holidays together to you. It doesn't matter that many binational relationships break up each year because of the pressure of living in two separate countries to you. Just so long as we wait and our American partners continue to support the party which has constantly shown us they really don't give a flying fuck about us.

Let's talk Bill Clinton. The man had 8 years of power in that time what did he give us that was good? Let's see, he was the first president to even mention queers in a speech (pittance if you ask me.) On his first day he tried to get us recognized in the Military but folded under pressure and signed DADT (That's a negative.) Then what did we get? We got DoMA. Yeppers, in this mans eight year reign we got diddly squat from him. Yet, you would have us continue to support a party that has been over run by centrists who don't give a flying fuck about YOU.

Since Bush* stole the 2000 election what have we gotten from the supporters of the Democratic party? Most believe we were responsible for Gore's loss because 25% of the queer vote went to Bush*. That's right. Right here on DU we have been accused of this loss. These people don't care that the majority (75%) of the queer communities vote went to Gore, even though most had to hold their breath to vote. They don't care that again just last year we took another back seat on the bus and held our breath to vote for Kerry.

Well I am tired of straight people telling my parter to take a seat on the back of the bus come every election in the U.S. Those straight people go to sleep at night with their loved one. Those straight people wake up every morning with their loved one next to them. In the last four years my partner and I have had that pleasure for a grand total of 22 weeks. We are yet to see one another this year. Now I come here and find your denial post, well mate you have no idea what we have been forced to endure for the last four years of our life and until you know first hand how it feels, you have absolutely no right to expect any of us to conform to your life of denial.

And to think you call yourself bisexual!

On edit: typo