You are president John Kerry; it is 2005

[CTLawGuy]

Poll question: You are president John Kerry; it is 2005

Liberal democratic forces in Congress have managed somehow (how is not important) to push a bill recognizing marriage rights for all regardless of sexual orientation. It would elevate GLBT people to equal status in society. The bill miraculously ends up on your desk.

If you sign the bill, the fundies (who don't vote for you anyway) will still not vote for you. The moderates will still be moderate, and your base will love you forever.

So what do you do? What is right, or what is expedient?

What do the moderate Dems think especially?

[jojo54]

1. It doesn't matter (or shouldn't anyway) what party you are

affiliated with. The foundation of this country is DEMOCRACY, LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL! Not the ones who the freeps and fundies choose it for. These people really freak me out. I get chills all over thinking of what this country would be like it they had their way.

[CTLawGuy]

2. I agree

good post!

[FreedomAngel82]

4. Exactly

The freeps and fundies, as mentioned in the post, would freak out but they'd never vote for John Kerry. I know there were republicans who did vote for him (my grandparents did and my mother when she still called herself a republican) but the fundies and freepers are just ignorant and wouldn't dare affiliate themselves with the democratic party. Even if it was the only party left for some reason. It would be a huge victory for the country I think and as mentioned it's JUSTICE FOR ALL. Not justice for straight rich white folks who claim to be Christians. If they're not going to live up to the pledge maybe it's time for a re-writing.

[johnaries]

3. It's a matter of indiviudal rights.

How can you deny one group of people rights, priviliges, and status under the Federal Government that is granted to anouther group of people? The Courts have no choice but to rule that any Gay marriage Ban is Unconstitutional, unless it gets to the Supremes it will be all over, anyway.

[FreedomAngel82]

5. Exactly

That's been my argument all along. Of course from the other side I always get some Biblical argument. The person says a verse here and there and makes some argument. The Bible isn't our law and these people need to get it through their heads.

[jojo54]

6. Not to argue your point, but the fundies SEE the bible

as law. It's their ONLY law. If the bible says "no gays-it's immoral" then they see it as a green light to kill the gay EVEN THOUGH public law says that's a crime against humanity.

Sorry, I don't believe in god and sometimes I get a little flustered about these bible thumpers.

[merh]

9. Well now, see that is where you are wrong.

The bible does not say what the fundies claim it says about gays.

If you would like a better explanation regarding how fundies have misinterpreted passages from the Old Testament (which by the way was amended by the New Testament and the life of Christ ), you can go read the essays on the subject at this site. http://www.religioustolerance.org
http://www.religioustolerance.org/homosexu.htm

It is a very good source of information to combat the ignorance and lies promoted by the kooky, evil right wingers.

They don't know the law, if it is the bible that they consider the law.

Their hate violates both the bible (old & new testaments) and the constitution.

:hi:

[jojo54]

10. Thx for the links

I'll look them up just so I know what I'm talking about next time.

There's a good talking point about how the fundies screw things around to fit their ideology.

[merh]

11. You are welcome! That is exactly what they do, screw things around

to fit their ideology. Don't let them distort the constitution and/or use the bible and use them as weapons against anyone.

:hi:

[liberalpress]

7. See, here's the deal..

...a President should do what's right for the country, not what's right for his re-election chances. If taking the correct stand means you lose next, so be it.

I'd like to think politicians would be able to think like that.

I just know I'm wrong, though.

[LittleClarkie]

8. Based on his refusal to sell GLBT down the river DURING the campaign

I have no reason to believe he would change his mind in office.

During the campaign, he was obviously trying to get elected, but he wouldn't take Clinton's advice about somehow coming out in favor of DOMA. He said it was something he could never do.

If trying to get elected didn't change his mind then, why would it change his mind later.

My man has integrity.