Republican leaders sign pro-gay marriage brief

mysticweedmysticweed Posts: 3,710
edited February 2013 in A Moving Train
i'm am going to call satan (in whom i do not believe) and see if hell (again, do not believe) has frozen

there's more on the site

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02 ... rief?lite=

Supporters of same-sex marriage hope for a boost this week when dozens of high-profile Republicans, many no longer in office, submit their legal argument to the Supreme Court on why gays and lesbians should be allowed to wed, bucking their party's platform in a move that one who had a change of heart on the issue said would “strengthen our nation as a whole.”
More than 80 Republicans have signed the brief to be filed in the case of Proposition 8, a California law banning same-sex marriage, according to the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which is waging the legal battle against the law. The nation’s high court will hear arguments in the case in late March.

One scholar described the effort as “inconceivable” just two years ago, and one of the signers, former California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman, said in a blog that she had changed her mind on the issue, “like several others who have either sought or held public office, including President Obama.”
“As the Republican nominee for governor of California three years ago, I supported the majority of Californians who voted for Proposition 8 and against same sex marriage,” Whitman, president and chief executive officer of Hewlett-Packard Co “After careful review and reflection since then, I have come to embrace civil marriage for same sex couples.”
She noted in her blog that same-sex families “should have equal access to the benefits of marriage” and later added: “Establishing a constitutional right of marriage equality in California will strengthen our nation as a whole.”
fuck 'em if they can't take a joke

"what a long, strange trip it's been"
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • It's a bit confusing. But I honestly don't buy it.

    This is a bunch of people with nothing to lose, saying something that the majority of the country thinks. And it's all part of a larger effort to soften the image of the Republican Party away from being a bunch of classist, racist, sexist homophobes.

    But hey... if it helps (which I doubt it will), cool.
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    It's a bit confusing. But I honestly don't buy it.

    This is a bunch of people with nothing to lose, saying something that the majority of the country thinks. And it's all part of a larger effort to soften the image of the Republican Party away from being a bunch of classist, racist, sexist homophobes.

    But hey... if it helps (which I doubt it will), cool.
    Because of their party, you judge the willingness of some to finally support gay marriage as insincere.

    To me, you're coming off as close-minded as you accuse them of being.

    Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

    I find it frustrating, but not surprising.
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,459
    Just like Obama (who some here give a shit ton of credit) maybe these people were at one point too insecure and felt they needed to pander to their base for votes...but they have decided to stop that.

    I find this to be very positive. Though, for any of them that have been vocally against it for a while (like Obama) I'm not really going to give them much personal credit for stopping being douchebags.

    It's something that most people, if they have a prejudice against gays but are still good people, generally realize and change in their late teens and early 20's. why do we elect the ones that are late bloomers?
    hippiemom = goodness
  • hedonist wrote:
    Because of their party, you judge the willingness of some to finally support gay marriage as insincere.

    You don't?

    This is the party that openly bragged about how the only way George W Bush won a second term was by putting anti-gay ballot measures in all the Swing States in 2004. This is the party that pretty much votes 100% of the time against even basic rights and protections for my family.

    And you expect me to think that in a few short months since getting their asses kicked in the last election that ALL of those former-elected officials (and pretty much ZERO currently elected officials) all just... spontaneously changed their positions.

    OK.
    To me, you're coming off as close-minded as you accuse them of being.

    And when I score cheap political points by voting away their basic rights and protections, call them "anti-family" and blame them for the spread of HIV... you will have a point.

    Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

    I find it frustrating, but not surprising.

    you know what I find frustrating?

    That they all waited until they had no actual power to do anything before suddenly seeing the light. And now that they've done all that damage, you're getting on my back for not falling to my knees and thanking them for the "oh yeah... sorry about that."

    Well fuck them. And you too, if you think I'm that easy to fool.
  • Just like Obama (who some here give a shit ton of credit) maybe these people were at one point too insecure and felt they needed to pander to their base for votes...but they have decided to stop that.

    Um.. none of those people need votes because none of them are in office anymore.
  • Well... I'm not sure what to think of this. It's like they confirmed that they were playing the game while they were in office.

    So, at the very least, fuck them for that.

    And thanks for the support, I guess.... though it seems a little strange.
  • WildsWilds Posts: 4,329
    I'd call it a step in the right direction. And although they don't have real power, there is power in their action.

    It will make it easier for future Republicans to join the fight for equal rights for all people.

    So I applaud it, even if there is a lot of truth in the above posts.
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,459
    Just like Obama (who some here give a shit ton of credit) maybe these people were at one point too insecure and felt they needed to pander to their base for votes...but they have decided to stop that.

    Um.. none of those people need votes because none of them are in office anymore.


    Ummm... I didn;t say they were. I said they pandered for votes by being anti-gay.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    hedonist wrote:
    Because of their party, you judge the willingness of some to finally support gay marriage as insincere.

    You don't?

    This is the party that openly bragged about how the only way George W Bush won a second term was by putting anti-gay ballot measures in all the Swing States in 2004. This is the party that pretty much votes 100% of the time against even basic rights and protections for my family.

    And you expect me to think that in a few short months since getting their asses kicked in the last election that ALL of those former-elected officials (and pretty much ZERO currently elected officials) all just... spontaneously changed their positions.

    OK.
    To me, you're coming off as close-minded as you accuse them of being.

    And when I score cheap political points by voting away their basic rights and protections, call them "anti-family" and blame them for the spread of HIV... you will have a point.

    Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

    I find it frustrating, but not surprising.

    you know what I find frustrating?

    That they all waited until they had no actual power to do anything before suddenly seeing the light. And now that they've done all that damage, you're getting on my back for not falling to my knees and thanking them for the "oh yeah... sorry about that."

    Well fuck them. And you too, if you think I'm that easy to fool.
    No one's asked you to do anything. I was pointing out how even when someone's view shifts, it's never good enough.

    So yeah, I think people can and do change. Do you? Sometimes I like to give the benefit of the doubt.

    Fuck me indeed, I guess. Thanks for the classless comment.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    but

    but

    but

    i thought marriage is defined as man and woman. adam and eve, not adam and steve????


    wow, how long until these people are primaried and/or thrown out of the party?
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • hedonist wrote:
    No one's asked you to do anything. I was pointing out how even when someone's view shifts, it's never good enough.

    So yeah, I think people can and do change. Do you? Sometimes I like to give the benefit of the doubt.

    Fuck me indeed, I guess. Thanks for the classless comment.

    Playing mediator... I think we can understand why Prince would not be so eager to jump in with both feet and why he might harbour resentment.

    While I agree that the abrupt change in line of thinking or values is interesting, I agree with Hedonist in that the move is definitely a positive one regardless of the strength of conviction behind it.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    this is nothing more than the politically expedient thing to do. this is most likely only to try to bring some gays and lesbians back to the republican "big tent".
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,459
    hedonist wrote:
    No one's asked you to do anything. I was pointing out how even when someone's view shifts, it's never good enough.

    So yeah, I think people can and do change. Do you? Sometimes I like to give the benefit of the doubt.

    Fuck me indeed, I guess. Thanks for the classless comment.

    Playing mediator... I think we can understand why Prince would not be so eager to jump in with both feet and why he might harbour resentment.

    While I agree that the abrupt change in line of thinking or values is interesting, I agree with Hedonist in that the move is definitely a positive one regardless of the strength of conviction behind it.

    Yet he welcomed Obama in with open arms. And he was the same. None of these people deserve a pat on the back though. More like, "what took you so long" and "don't screw up again".
    hippiemom = goodness
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    Again moderation the key to common sense and compromise.
    Funny when we see the GOP bring more in touch views they still get no credit,
    that seems incredibly out of touch to me.
  • pandora wrote:
    Again moderation the key to common sense and compromise.
    Funny when we see the GOP bring more in touch views they still get no credit,
    that seems incredibly out of touch to me.

    Sure

    But you understand the hesitation, correct? After years of bashing gays, they all of a sudden come out in support? I mean, that's great.... but, wow.


    Interesting times
  • JimmyVJimmyV Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,183
    hedonist wrote:
    No one's asked you to do anything. I was pointing out how even when someone's view shifts, it's never good enough.

    So yeah, I think people can and do change. Do you? Sometimes I like to give the benefit of the doubt.

    Fuck me indeed, I guess. Thanks for the classless comment.

    Playing mediator... I think we can understand why Prince would not be so eager to jump in with both feet and why he might harbour resentment.

    While I agree that the abrupt change in line of thinking or values is interesting, I agree with Hedonist in that the move is definitely a positive one regardless of the strength of conviction behind it.

    Yet he welcomed Obama in with open arms. And he was the same. None of these people deserve a pat on the back though. More like, "what took you so long" and "don't screw up again".

    Obama still had an election to get through. These people do not. That is a big difference.

    But yes, it isn't out of line to ask anyone what took you so long to come around on this issue.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    pandora wrote:
    Again moderation the key to common sense and compromise.
    Funny when we see the GOP bring more in touch views they still get no credit,
    that seems incredibly out of touch to me.
    years of bigotry and then sudden capitulation only when it is politically advantageous deserves no credit.

    only a fool would believe that these people suddenly decided now was the time

    losing 5 of the last 6 elections must have finally gotten their attention on some social issues.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    pandora wrote:
    Again moderation the key to common sense and compromise.
    Funny when we see the GOP bring more in touch views they still get no credit,
    that seems incredibly out of touch to me.

    Sure

    But you understand the hesitation, correct? After years of bashing gays, they all of a sudden come out in support? I mean, that's great.... but, wow.


    Interesting times
    I understand the hesitation for some and it's not pretty.

    I've changed my opinion on issues with life experience, knowledge and feelings that others share.
    That's life. And we are headed into very interesting times, hopefully one of forgiveness
    and understanding.
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    pandora wrote:
    Again moderation the key to common sense and compromise.
    Funny when we see the GOP bring more in touch views they still get no credit,
    that seems incredibly out of touch to me.
    years of bigotry and then sudden capitulation only when it is politically advantageous deserves no credit.

    only a fool would believe that these people suddenly decided now was the time

    losing 5 of the last 6 elections must have finally gotten their attention on some social issues.
    Only a fool would not forgive and accept and live and let live.
    Do you think this is a good thing or would you rather they stayed the same?
    Who do you give credit to?
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    hedonist wrote:
    No one's asked you to do anything. I was pointing out how even when someone's view shifts, it's never good enough.

    So yeah, I think people can and do change. Do you? Sometimes I like to give the benefit of the doubt.

    Fuck me indeed, I guess. Thanks for the classless comment.

    Playing mediator... I think we can understand why Prince would not be so eager to jump in with both feet and why he might harbour resentment.

    While I agree that the abrupt change in line of thinking or values is interesting, I agree with Hedonist in that the move is definitely a positive one regardless of the strength of conviction behind it.

    Yet he welcomed Obama in with open arms. And he was the same. None of these people deserve a pat on the back though. More like, "what took you so long" and "don't screw up again".
    Thanks for both your thoughts, as I don't disagree. I do, however, feel that some are unwilling to shed even a bit of the chip on their shoulder. I appreciate why it's there but we all have them in various forms and weight; we have to live with them, deal with them, and maybe, MAYBE, recognize that some people do change. Motives don't always need to be assigned, and for me, the angry young man (or woman) schtik gets old after awhile, when presented with some small positive change in the works.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    this doesn't really shock me ...

    1. these are primarily out of service republicans which also means they are older school republicans ... which means that they aren't the new wave tea party republicans who share extremist viewpoints on pretty much everything.

    2. they are no longer beholden to their campaign and electoral base and i'm pretty sure they knew what they did in the past was wrong and now are trying to make amends.

    3. it's sad that so many issues have become partisan when they have no foundation in partisan divides ... it's like the 2-party system sets a condition by which there can be no consensus on anything ... this topic is a great example ...
  • dignindignin Posts: 9,336
    polaris_x wrote:
    this doesn't really shock me ...

    1. these are primarily out of service republicans which also means they are older school republicans ... which means that they aren't the new wave tea party republicans who share extremist viewpoints on pretty much everything.

    2. they are no longer beholden to their campaign and electoral base and i'm pretty sure they knew what they did in the past was wrong and now are trying to make amends.

    3. it's sad that so many issues have become partisan when they have no foundation in partisan divides ... it's like the 2-party system sets a condition by which there can be no consensus on anything ... this topic is a great example ...

    Yes.

    Either way this is good news.
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    dignin wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    this doesn't really shock me ...

    1. these are primarily out of service republicans which also means they are older school republicans ... which means that they aren't the new wave tea party republicans who share extremist viewpoints on pretty much everything.

    2. they are no longer beholden to their campaign and electoral base and i'm pretty sure they knew what they did in the past was wrong and now are trying to make amends.

    3. it's sad that so many issues have become partisan when they have no foundation in partisan divides ... it's like the 2-party system sets a condition by which there can be no consensus on anything ... this topic is a great example ...

    Yes.

    Either way this is good news.

    Yeah, it's great news. Hard to believe that it's for realz (I guess we'll see down the road if they mean it), but great to hear nonetheless.
  • Yet he welcomed Obama in with open arms. And he was the same.

    Not true.

    When the president came out in favor of Marriage Equality, he was the sitting president... the first in history to do so. AND he was just about to go into a very expensive and divisive election against a man who had said he would add marriage inequality to the US Constitution.

    President Obama has never worked against equality. He isn't like Meg Whitman who supported Prop 8. She said it would cost too much. He was always against it, and while he hadn't come out in support of full equality before he was always in favor of legal standing and recognition and never supported anti-equality measures.

    He's since continued to fight and supported the move to equality and even called us out in his inauguration speech. Another first.

    Just signing some letter to the Supreme Court, frankly, isn't the same and when taking personal history into account... just isn't enough.
  • hedonist wrote:
    No one's asked you to do anything. I was pointing out how even when someone's view shifts, it's never good enough.


    Well good for them that their "view" has changed. But the damage has still been done.

    Proposition 8 is still on the books and I'm certainly not willing to just let bygones be bygones now that the Mormon cultists have seen public opinion explode in their faces and are trying to improve their image without actually acknowledging their atrocities and fix what they broke.

    Quite honestly... no. After two decades of vicious attacks on my family... millions of dollars poured into campaigns against our rights and protections... calling us names, blaming us for the woes of society, making it illegal to co-parent our children, stopping us from having the same protections as everyone else and the same opportunities as everyone else... and getting a big thrill of kicking us when we're down... just adding your name to some ultimately meaningless legal brief and saying "oh... sorry about that" just isn't good enough. Not by a long shot.

    Would it be good enough for you?
  • hedonist wrote:
    Thanks for both your thoughts, as I don't disagree. I do, however, feel that some are unwilling to shed even a bit of the chip on their shoulder. I appreciate why it's there but we all have them in various forms and weight; we have to live with them, deal with them, and maybe, MAYBE, recognize that some people do change. Motives don't always need to be assigned, and for me, the angry young man (or woman) schtik gets old after awhile, when presented with some small positive change in the works.

    So if a group of people spent the last couple of decades attacking you and getting a big kick out of making your life miserable and marginalizing you and cheering as you had your rights and protections removed in a big ballot-box popularity contest...

    You'd just shrug that off if they signed a letter someone else wrote saying "that was bad. Oh well... I've changed... let's just move on and let bygones be bygones."

    ok.
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,459
    blaming us for the woes of society


    No kidding. Everyone knows it isn't gays, it;s the porn industry! ;)
    hippiemom = goodness
  • callencallen Posts: 6,388
    It's a bit confusing. But I honestly don't buy it.

    This is a bunch of people with nothing to lose, saying something that the majority of the country thinks. And it's all part of a larger effort to soften the image of the Republican Party away from being a bunch of classist, racist, sexist homophobes.

    But hey... if it helps (which I doubt it will), cool.
    Politicians pander for votes

    Hoping all social conservative ideals will fall by the wayside...well they will just take time.

    Forced evolution. HA :lol::lol:
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    So if a group of people spent the last couple of decades attacking you and getting a big kick out of making your life miserable and marginalizing you and cheering as you had your rights and protections removed in a big ballot-box popularity contest...

    You'd just shrug that off if they signed a letter someone else wrote saying "that was bad. Oh well... I've changed... let's just move on and let bygones be bygones."

    ok.
    Please...that's not what I was saying. While there are haters (of all kinds) out there, not everyone who opposed/opposes gay marriage does so from a place of hate. I doubt Meg Whitman was dancing a jig because of inequality.

    Some people are seeing the light and that's a good thing. Little steps, but they are steps.

    What's the point of sharing your own troubles, trying to educate others? Help them understand, open their mind? And when some finally do, it's poo-pooed and more...hate...is spewed. That was my point.
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 29,610
    I say it's about time these folks got their heads out of their asses but i agree with Prince they spewed all the hate to begin with so now people are supposed to welcome them with open arms i say keep them at arms lengh ...it seems so staged ...
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
Sign In or Register to comment.