Palin and the Federal Marriage Amendment: Dobson First

[furrbear]

From David Neiwert at Crooks and Liars:

[Error: unknown template 'video']

Sarah Palin breaks with John McCain, telling CBN's David Brody that she would support a "Federal Marriage Amendment" effectively banning gay marriage:

I am, in my own, state, I have voted along with the vast majority of Alaskans who had the opportunity to vote to amend our Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I wish on a federal level that that's where we would go because I don't support gay marriage. I'm not going to be out there judging individuals, sitting in a seat of judgment telling what they can and can't do, should and should not do, but I certainly can express my own opinion here and take actions that I believe would be best for traditional marriage and that's casting my votes and speaking up for traditional marriage that, that instrument that it's the foundation of our society is that strong family and that's based on that traditional definition of marriage, so I do support that.

This is how the McCain campaign is using Palin to keep the religious right on board even as he stages a supposedly "moderate" agenda in pursuit of suburban votes. Palin's sending a signal to the Dobson faction that was responsible for her ascension that their agenda is in play.

Comments

[codecattx.livejournal.com]

*twitch*

[furr-a-bruin.livejournal.com]

There's just no other way to say this but: bigoted c*nt.

[strongaxe.livejournal.com]

"I'm not going to be out there judging individuals, sitting in a seat of judgment telling what they can and can't do..."

Yet "telling people what they can and can't do" is EXACTLY what she does by voting for such amendments!

[pdsexton.livejournal.com]

That woman is one giant run-on sentence (of crap).

[major7.livejournal.com]

I discussed this on my LJ and gave the following answer after your LJ was linked, and this was the answer I gave to the person who commented on my journal:

Sadly, Sarah, my girlfriend, (as it was put) is with the majority of Americans when it comes to whether or not gays should be able to "marry". Too bad it is not written as a Civil Union issue, instead of Marriage, then I think that more Americans would go for it.

The way I see it, when Americans think of marriage, they think of it in terms of primarily a religious institution. Most Christian mainstream religions are quite clear about their stand on homosexuality and the Bible. While we all know that Jesus said in The New Testament that the greatest commandment was to Love One Another. (Jesus says, "I give you a new commandment: Love one another as I have loved you" (John 13:34). most Christians choose to focus on Old Testament laws, all of which we are quite familiar with and need not dwell on.

As I have said repeatedly, I personally do not like the idea of marriage and my partner and I can protect ourselves and our interests through other legal wranglings. If you, or anyone else on my friends list wants to get "married" then I say go for it! I would vote in favor of that right, (if I lived in California or a state that had this as an issue) but I personally do not need it to protect nor validate my relationship. Just like I am personally against abortion, but if anyone I know wants to "terminate" the unborn baby inside of them, then it is their choice.

BTW, what has (edited) Obama said about Prop 8? I must have missed it. Please direct me in that direction so I can see if for myself if I believe what he has had to say about the issue y'all in California are facing.

The way I see it, at least Palin and McCain have the balls to come out of the closet outright and voice their opposition to this particular issue (Palin moreso than McCain).

"Don't ask, don't tell" is another issue I would like clarified.

It's like I asked scmtpls the other day:
What have the Dems done for us gays recently? There are more states in the Union than just California.

[furr-a-bruin.livejournal.com]

The way I see it, when Americans think of marriage, they think of it in terms of primarily a religious institution.

Well, whhen it comes to the laws - they're entirely wrong. The only point of intersection is where the law recognizes clergy as officiants for performing legally-recognized marriages.

I'm all for giving up the word for the benefit of the mentally deficient; we'll strike the word "marriage" from ALL the laws, and replace it with the term "civil union." This state will apply to any couple of whatever gender makeup wish to enter into it. they will get a "civil union" license from the appropriate government office - and if they have their ceremony in the religious context of choice, then they can call it a "marriage" all they want. How's that?

Of course, that means gay couples that get their relationships solemnized by "liberal" congregations will still be calling themselves "married." Oopsie.

What have the Dems done for us gays recently?

I'll take benign neglect over active malevolence, thank you.

[major7.livejournal.com]

Yes, when it comes to the laws.... don't even get me started on the unequal application of laws from state to state, race to race and gender to gender.

I never said the Joe and Josie American were smart or fair. I am just merely voicing what will probably prove to be correct. The majority of Americans do not want to give us gay people/couple the same rights they get. Is it fair? No. Is it majority rules? Yes. Does that make it right? No. Is that why we have appeals process? Yes.

[garebear.livejournal.com]

I'm glad that she stated from the beginning that she has gay friends. It only goes to show everyone that she's not only an idiot, but a backstabber as well.

Correction... she'll shoot you from a helicopter.

[cantorum.livejournal.com]

Ever since Salon did that article on 'Palin Poetry', I can't read quotes like this without casting them as poetry. Here's the latest:


THAT
----

I am,
in my own,
state,

I have voted along
with the vast majority of Alaskans
who had the opportunity
to vote
to amend
our Constitution
defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

I wish on a federal level
that that's where we would go
because I don't support gay marriage.

I'm not going to be out there
judging individuals,
sitting in a seat of judgment

telling what they can and can't do,
should and should not do,

but I certainly can express my own opinion here
and take actions
that I believe would be best
for traditional marriage

and that's casting my votes
and speaking up for traditional marriage

that,

that instrument

that it's the foundation of our society
is that strong family
and that's based on
that traditional definition of marriage,

so I do support that.