Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Dan Soucek Primary Sponsor of Anti Gay Marriage Law

Senate Bill 106 was filed yesterday, "Defense of Marriage Act," and one of three chief sponsors is Watauga County's own Dan Soucek.

Section 2 of the draft bill calls for an anti-gay amendment to the state Constitution to be put on the general election ballot on Nov. 6, 2012. Mr. Soucek and his fellow missionaries intend to use the state's Constitution to exclude, to deny, to discriminate.

Ah. With many of the state's young people kept from voting by the proposed Voter I.D. law, and with that Muslim terrorist back on the ballot for reelection, shouldn't be hard at all to bring out the paleos to save marriage from The Gay.

Because Mr. Soucek is sooo focused on bringing jobs back to North Carolina.

31 comments:

Henery said...

It took a student at the Univ. of Pennsylvania last night to pen Newt Gingrich on his high-and-mighty superior morality:

"You adamantly oppose gay rights... but you've also been married three times and admitted to having an affair with your current wife while you were still married to your second," Isabel Friedman, president of the Penn Democrats, said to Gingrich. "As a successful politician who's considering running for president, who would set the bar for moral conduct and be the voice of the American people, how do you reconcile this hypocritical interpretation of the religious values that you so vigorously defend?"

Similar probing questions will have to be asked of Dan Soucek and the other Republican bigots sponsoring this "Defense of Marriage" Act.

Anonymous said...

It's not Watauga County's own, its New Jersey's own.

Anne said...

Where is Mike D. He prises to take Soucek to task for this.

Liberal POV said...

There's always been votes and political power in bigotry. Without a vision for the future or solutions to complex problems the Republicans only have fear and bigotry left.

Soucek knows he has no solutions to any problems, no vision for the future and no plans to create jobs or improve the economy. The only thing he can do is find diversions and scapegoats.

Bigotry and fear has won Republicans elections for thirty years as the standard of living drops and the prisons population rises.

Anonymous said...

Fill a shoebox full of little ducks and hormone pills and give them away at Xmas.

Oh, and don't forget the new bible published in 'Yexas', rewritten once again with God in mind of course.

Another republican Tea bill that is F***ing stupid and a waste of good time and the state's money, too; not too mention the horrible precedent set for our children: to exclude your fellow humans because they are different.

Meet me on main street at High Noon Franklin and sons and we will see who "GOD" appreciates most.

Olevet69 said...

First, it was Virginia, and she was elected without a whimper, and now we can't get rid of her.

Now, we have Soucek, who had Art Pope and the boys buy his election. This man suffers from the "empty suit" syndrome...matter of fact, he is the poster boy for that syndrome.

We can look to the future and see that Dan is the heir apparent to Virginia seat in the House. He has plenty of money, the "look", and the "empty suit". He will not help us, ever.

amjp said...

Nice going, Quaker Dem! Another demonstration of how smart and articulate Penn students are!

BTW, Isabel expressed an idea I've been thinking about a lot lately, namely, the sheer hypocrisy of people like Gingrich.

So Drink a Highball at Nightfall, I.F.

Anonymous said...

"Meet me on main street at High Noon Franklin and sons and we will see who "GOD" appreciates most."

love it.

Moose said...

Anne, I too am eagerly awaiting Mike D.'s condemnation of this (which he chastised me for predicting a few months ago). Was there ever any doubt that they would do this? Soucek is in way over his head... one of my co-workers tried to call his office and the number listed on his web site was his HOME number. His wife answered the phone and said that he was just SO overwhelmed lately. Boo hoo. If he didn't want the pressures of the job, why did he run?

Liberal POV said...

Franklin Graham makes $1.5 million annually and lives a jet set lifestyle including two large jets and at least a home in Boone NC and one in Alaska.

Graham's power and wealth is based on publicly giving and evangalizing to the world's poor while advocating for the world's wealithiest and most powerful.

Graham supports the fear mongering, bigotry and scapegoating Republicans do so well.

Independent Mom said...

My husband suggests if they're going to add this to the state constitution that it should also provide a ban on divorce (Jesus was against that - he never said beans about homosexuality) and a provision for stoning anyone caught in adultery.

At this point, I'm inclined to agree with him.

????? said...

What did Liberal POV's last post have to do with Soucek or gay marriage?

Mike D. said...

Anne & Moose,

This is certainly disappointing news to me. I spent most of my developmental years in Miami, surrounded by diversity of color, language, and gender identity. I even bartended at two establishments which had predominately gay clientele. I have enjoyed, and continue to enjoy close friendships with numerous gay and lesbian individuals.

Now, all this said, I would like to point out that just because J.W. chooses to post a headline on his site does not necessarily mean that the issue in question is dominating the legislative agenda. Looking at this legislative calendar, it would appear that the legislature is primarily focused on budget and finance, which is precisely what I had hoped for.

However, in my opinion, prohibiting gay and lesbian couples to marry amounts to a mild form of forced religious conversion. Is it as bad as what the conquistadors did? No. Is it as bad as what is currently happening in much of the Middle East? No. But any forced religion is wrong, in my humble opinion, no matter how mild.

What I don't understand is why so much focus here is placed on the mild degree to which religion is forced on people in our country, when there is infinitely worse forced religion in other parts of the world. It's not our business to tell other countries how to treat their people, but they are people too, just like us!

So yeah, I am disappointed, and I might just write a letter expressing my disappointment.

Thanks for thinking of me, Anne and Moose. :-)

Liberal POV said...

????? said...

"What did Liberal POV's last post have to do with Soucek or gay marriage?"


Graham supports the fear mongering, bigotry and scapegoating Republicans do so well.

While he has charity for the poor he's no advocate for people without political power or wealth and opposes a social safety net.

The Gay marriage issue is to create scapegoats so low wage earners will still vote Republican despite being screwed by the Republicans at every opportunity. Graham is complicit in that.

Moose said...

We just wanted to see your reaction, Mike D., which was tepid at best. For the record, here is the other thread I referenced earlier:

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6194583&postID=2371135316819427369

And like I said at the time, it's right there in the NC GOP platform for all to see:

http://www.ncgop.org/pdfs/2010-NCGOP-PLATFORM.PDF

Not Really said...

Ugh. That pretty much sums it up. What an embarrassment and a disappointment to have this bigot as our representative.

Anne said...

Mike D. said...
"To me, it sounds like the Tea Party delivers on its own promises, not on yours." - Mike D.

"Tea Party folks who just got elected in November aren't even in office yet - NONE of them voted on the DADT repeal." - Moose

"when the Republicans in Raleigh push for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in NC." - Moose

Moose, are you and I not BOTH guilty of the same type of projection? Perhaps we should let them take office, then see what happens.

And for the record, if what you predict comes to pass, I will be very disappointed, primarily because they will not be doing what we sent them there to do.

Mike D.
12:27 AM--12/19/2010

???????? said...

Lib, Graham has no more to do with passing gay marriage legislation than you do. He can express his opinion and try to influence people. So can you. You both have that right.

Are you jealous that he is more successful than you? So you think his being successful means he shouldn't be able to express his opinion?

Soucek is representing those that elected him. That is how the political process works. If your guy had won, then Goss might be voting your way. He didn't. Get over it until the next election.

Moose said...

It's not a religious issue to me - it's a civil rights issue. Can you imagine the outcry if ANY amendment were proposed that limited or removed rights from any other group? But because it's those icky gays, apparently that's OK with our newly elected Republican representatives.

Liberal POV said...

???????? said...

"Lib, Graham has no more to do with passing gay marriage legislation than you do."

What family has had the ear of Presidents back to Eisenhower?

Graham is similar to high ranking Islamic Mullah when it comes to political influence the major difference is he's Christian and the United States is supposed to be secular. fundmentalist Christians don't alway understand the "secular" part which increases Graham power as a Christian Mullah.

Its a shame he uses his great talent, political power and donations only as charity for poor and not to empower the poor with better justice, better health care, better wages and better education.

Graham instead goes to the darker side spreading fear and bigotry giving the conservative movement scapegoats to hide their greed, lack of vision, lack of solution and lack of justice.

The issue of Gay Marriage is a perfect example of this bigotry being used for political power and Graham and his people are all over it.

Mike D. said...

"And for the record, if what you predict comes to pass, I will be very disappointed". - Mike D.

"This is certainly disappointing news to me... So yeah, I am disappointed, and I might just write a letter expressing my disappointment." - Mike D.

"We just wanted to see your reaction, Mike D., which was tepid at best." - Moose


Tepid? After reviewing the previous thread you posted, I would say that my reaction was inadvertently exactly what I promised. I am sorry if you think I should spring forward as an active gay rights activist, but the truth is that my participation in this forum is based on my love of good conversation and debate, not because I think I am going to change the world.

I am not crusading to change policy here. I am simply enjoying sparring with some interesting people, yourself included. I know that my views frequently conflict with the views of the majority in this forum, and as I have said before, I appreciate that you have allowed, even encouraged my participation. I just realized, you have been including my voice in the dialogue on WataugaWatch for 3 or 4 years now. Thanks!

brotherdoc said...

Liberal POV can speak for him/herself but in case anyone is wondering why it's relevant to bring up Franklin Graham, in case anyone has forgotten that's the outfit Soucek works for, or did, until he went into the garbage hauling business--we think. So to me it's hardly surprising that he would parrot the right-wing fundies over there at Samaritan's Purse. He needs to come forth and say what his views are on the separation of church and state, as well as tell us why the constitution of NC should be altered when there's already a law on the books providing that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Brushfire said...

Has anyone been able to explicate a reason that gay marriage poses a threat to anyone or anything?
What is the justification for this?

Mike D. said...

Brushfire,

It's perfectly obvious. As we all learned from Jurassic Park, "Life finds a way". When these gay couples find a way to reproduce, they will pass on that 'gay gene' to their kids. Then we'd have a whole population of gay people reproducing... and stuff.

Yeah, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either.

amused again said...

Mike D, I believe what you are quoting is called sarcasm as being totally homosexual does not support the continuing of the species. This is a scientific fact that has nothing to do with morals or religion.

Brushfire said...

Amused - So what? So what if homosexuals don't reproduce? (Although many do) Why should you or I care?

Mike D. said...

Amused,

Thank you for the lesson in human reproduction and sarcasm. Truth is, I did not understand the words I was writing, I don't know where babies come from, and I have no idea what sarcasm is. Truly, you have opened my mind to a whole new world of language and lovemaking.

Thanks! :-)

amused said...

Mike D, you are welcome!

Moose said...

Mike, you crack me up!

Anonymous said...

someone needs to pull a santorum on this guy.

Anonymous said...

I'm embarrassed that people are posting such ugly comments about others in our own community. If you don't agree with protecting marraige between a man and a woman, you have a right to vote for that. If you do believe that marraige is between a man and a woman, you have a right to vote for that. Why such anger and animosity towards people you disagree with? Stand for what you believe, and be confident in that, why waste your time and energy in tearing others down?