Showing posts with label gay marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gay marriage. Show all posts

Monday, November 28, 2022

Thom Tillis Called Out as a Sinner for Supporting Marriage Equality

 


Mark Brody

Republican Rep. Mark Brody representing Union County in the NC House (Dist. 55) has published a harsh editorial condemning Sen. Thom Tillis for his support of the "Respect for Marriage Act," which is set up now to pass the Senate this week. The bill would make it more difficult impossible for the US Supremes to do away with gay marriage the way they did away with abortion rights. Tillis has already voted to overcome any filibuster of the law and has promised to vote for final passage.

Mark Brody is very concerned that Tillis is coloring outside the lines of both the NC and the National GOP platforms, which is pretty funny in itself since Trump found the national platform disposable enough to decree no rewrite or update when he ran in 2020. At that point the platform had no visible champions among GOP rank-and-file,

But Brody sez he's prepared to make a big stink at the next NC Republican convention because of Tillis's departure from "God's Law": 

The United States Congress, with the support and leadership of our own Senator Tillis, will vote to “Institutionalize” a direct and unequivocal prohibition by God, the Creator referred to in our Declaration of Independence.

Senator Tillis will vote to “institutionalize” a sin against God’s Law!

It's important to notice that GOP political doctrine lines up perfectly with Divine Instruction, and hence also with Divine Retribution.

Will Thom Tillis care? Will he quake under the glare of Mark Brody's side eye?


Friday, November 18, 2022

Burr and Tillis Vote to Advance Marriage Equality Law

 

Senator Dick Burr is retiring, so his vote was perhaps easier than Thom Tillis's, who seems determined to become a moderate bridge-builder (not that there's anything wrong with that). Joining ten other Republicans (some of them even more surprising in their choice to support gay marriage -- see list below), Burr and Tillis helped reach the total of 62 senators favoring cloture on the Respect for Marriage Act. Sixty votes are required to forestall a filibuster. The full Senate is expected to vote again on passage, immediately after Thanksgiving, at which time it goes back to the House which has to vote again because the Senate added a religious liberty amendment not in the original House version.

The Respect for Marriage Act would require that people be considered married in any state as long as the marriage was valid in the state where it was performed. That may sound like a loophole, and it does allow some backward states to cause trouble. If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns its prior same-sex marriage rulings, state governments could make the unions illegal within their borders, requiring same-sex or interracial couples to travel to a state where it is legal in order to wed. Those home states would, however, need to recognize the marriages under this bill, as would the federal government. So maybe it's a loophole with no real effect.

The bill would also repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman and allowed states to decline to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. That law has remained on the books despite being declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges.

The religious liberty amendment that the Senate added (and which the House will have to vote on) clarifies that the bill does not authorize the federal government to recognize polygamous marriages and confirms that nonprofit religious organizations would not be required to provide “any services, facilities, or goods for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage.” There are plenty of other venues besides Our Church of the Divine Retribution ("but it has a center aisle!"), so there's no need to force yourself onto religious groups that have a bad case of the yips over gay marriage.

Republican Senators Who Voted for Marriage Equality

Retirees: Sen. Roy Blunt (Missouri), Sen. Richard Burr (North Carolina), Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio)

Plus Shelley Moore Capito (West Virginia), Susan Collins (Maine), Joni Ernst (Iowa), Cynthia Lummis (Wyoming), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Mitt Romney (Utah), Dan Sullivan (Alaska), Thom Tillis (NC), and Todd Young (Indiana).


Thursday, July 21, 2022

What's Gotten Into Thom Tillis?

 

Many news outlets are reporting that NC Sen. Thom Tillis is among the four Republican senators who've already signaled their willingness to vote YES on the marriage equality bill that just passed the US House.  (And we should point out that the bill would protect both same-sex marriages and marriages between interracial couples.) The other three are Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Rob Portman of Ohio, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

This announcement puts Tillis at odds with the entire Republican congressional delegation from NC.

The hard Trumpist right in NC is going bananas over this announcement. For example:

"Seriously. How is it BETTER to have this sniveling cash-gobbling weasel in office instead of a Democrat? This guy, with his very existence in politics, is setting conservatism in North Carolina back DECADES."

Getting six more Republicans to vote for marriage equality appears not impossible, according to national sources. It'll take a total of 10 Republican senators to vote with Democrats to overcome the goddamn filibuster. Here are the other senators in play, according to The Hill:

The “I support same-sex marriage (and even have gay friends!), but don’t want to reveal my stance yet” crowd: Sens. Roy Blunt (Mo.), Joni Ernst (Iowa) and Tommy Tuberville (Ala.).

The “This bill is unnecessary at this time, but I really don’t want to reveal where I stand” group: Sens. John Thune (S.D.), Mitt Romney (Utah), and Chuck Grassley (Iowa).

The “Eh, check back tomorrow — I haven’t read the bill yet”group: Sens. Richard Burr (N.C.) and Pat Toomey (Pa.), two retiring members.

Could the marriage equality act actually make it through Congress? Yes, and it only took the overturning of Roe v. Wade for those Republican senators to feel the wrath of the voting public. But we're not yet holding our breath.


Wednesday, July 20, 2022

No Hope that NC Republicans Become Human Beings


The U.S. House just passed a bill, 267 to 157, that would formally repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 law against same-sex marriage that was overturned in the Supreme Court landmark Obergefell decision. It would require states to reciprocally recognize marriages that are legal in other states as valid, and would prohibit discrimination under state law in public acts against married couples based on their race, sex, ethnicity, or national origin.

All of the Republicans representing North Carolina voted against it. Specifically...

Dan Bishop (N.C.)

Ted Budd (N.C.)

Madison Cawthorn (N.C.)

Virginia Foxx (N.C.)

Richard Hudson (N.C.)

Patrick McHenry (N.C.)

Greg Murphy (N.C.)

David Rouzer (N.C.)

Astounding, that these "freedom-lovers" and "-defenders" are willing to sacrifice the rights of fellow citizens to satisfy -- what? -- religious fundamentalism and the dictates of an ideology that intends to punish difference. I would say these guys are going to hell, except they're already there. 


Friday, February 15, 2019

In Case You Were Wondering -- Yes, There Are Still Blockheads in the NC House


Larry Pittman
The chief blockhead among them ... Rep. Larry Pittman (Cabarrus and Rowan counties), who wears the label of "reverend" and thinks Abraham Lincoln was the worst possible president to represent the Republican Party, even if he was the first of that flavor and widely regarded as a great man. Rev. Pittman doesn't regard him that way.

Pittman is the chief sponsor of House Bill 65, along with co-sponsors and fellow blockheads Mark Brody (Anson and Union counties) and Keith Kidwell (Craven and Beaufort counties), a bill essentially intended to nullify gay marriage in the state. It's a ridiculous stunt that will go nowhere, and clearly Messrs. Pittman, Brody, and Kidwell have way too much time on their hands.

But they're master scholars of Constitutional law -- you bet! -- explaining why Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court case which legalized same-sex marriage in 2015, was just wrong:

Obergefell v. Hodges in effect has imposed the views of Secular Humanism on the People and the States of these United States in the matter of marriage law, which authority is not given to the federal government in the United States Constitution, and is, therefore, an unconstitutional establishment of religion and also an unconstitutional usurpation by the United States Supreme Court of powers reserved to the People or to the States.”

“In the wake of the Obergefell opinion, there have been increased efforts by the proponents of Secular Humanism to persecute nonobservers of the religion of Secular Humanism and to infiltrate public schools with the intent to indoctrinate minors to the Secular Humanist worldview, against the wishes of many of their parents, and to inculcate them with the Secular Humanist view on faith, morality, sex, and marriage. … It is an unsettled matter of opinion whether sexual orientation is immutable or genetic, and therefore, for a person to suggest that he/she was born homosexual or the wrong gender or that to disagree with their beliefs makes the dissenter a bigot, is nothing more than a series of unproven faith-based assumptions and naked assertions that are implicitly religious and may not be enforced by government upon anyone.”

Therefore: “Marriages between persons of the same gender not valid.”

Chalk this up to Trumpism ... the creeping sensation that you might be losing your grip on your fellow blockheaded peeps, so you need to redouble your efforts to play the sensational bigot and rile up the rubes, who you (bottomline) have utter contempt for.

Tuesday, January 23, 2018

Southern Conservatives Blink

Alan Blinder has an article in this morning's NewYorkTimes which highlights a growing nervousness across Southern states and in their Republican-dominated legislatures to pass more laws aimed at punishing LBGT citizens. In South Carolina, a "bathroom bill" similar to North Carolina's is stuck in committee and going nowhere. In Tennessee, a lawmaker who wanted another bathroom bill for public schools suddenly withdrew his proposal just eight days after introducing it. Gov. Nathan Deal of Georgia vetoed a law "to shield religious groups from repercussions if they refused to employ or serve gay people."

“There’s been a slow IV drip of common sense to legislators, and you have lots and lots of people speaking to them and saying, ‘It’s not viable to do an extreme thing,’ ” said a law professor who has been studying recent extreme things and the extreme people who enact them.

Blinder thinks -- not without good cause -- that the example of what happened to North Carolina after it passed its bathroom bill (not to mention HB2 which attempted to outlaw gay marriage for eternity) has dissuaded many Southern lawmakers in other states from attempting to punish people for their sexual orientation. North Carolina lost business, lost investment, lost tourism, lost respect.
...though the [anti-LBGT] bills have often been popular with conservative voters, they go down very poorly with another important constituency: big business. Officials in states hoping to attract major investments from out-of-state corporations — like Amazon’s second headquarters — say they drew a lesson from the boycotts and cancellations that North Carolina suffered over its bathroom bill.
Blinder curiously does not mention another big "pucker factor" at work right now: It's an election year, shaping up to be a vicious gauntlet for some Republicans, and when there are so many fired-up voters who want to throw you overboard, it might be wiser not to rock the boat.

Not that the Republican masters in the North Carolina General Assembly have ever been wary of boat-tipping, since they gerrymandered themselves into cork-filled life-preservers.

Saturday, July 09, 2016

Federal Judge Shuts Down That Shit (Republican Whining)

The title above refers to Step 9 in what follows:

Step 1

May 28, 2015: Republicans in the North Carolina General Assembly pass the "magistrate opt-out" law, S 2, "Magistrates Recusal of Civil Ceremonies,"which allows religiously motivated public servants to refuse to deal in any way with gay marriages.

Step 2

May 28, 2015: Gov. Pat McCrory announces he will veto S 2, saying he's offended by public servants who don't/won't do their jobs.

Step 3

June 11, 2015: Republicans override the governor's veto. S 2, now the law.

Step 4

June 12, 2015: NC Attorney General Roy Cooper criticizes S 2, saying "it is likely to be challenged constitutionally." Ricky Diaz, NCGOP spokesperson, immediately sandbags Cooper with the following statement: "Unfortunately for North Carolina, our attorney general has a bad habit of picking and choosing which laws he wants to defend and abdicating his responsibilities as our chief law enforcement officer."

Step 5

December 9, 2015: Three couples file a federal lawsuit, challenging the constitutionality of S 2. Roy Cooper's department automatically engaged as the state's counsel in defense of S 2.

Step 6

February 5, 2016: Cooper's office files motion for summary dismissal of the lawsuit.

Step 7

February 5, 2016: Same day, Republican leaders in House & Senate (Tim Moore & Phil Berger) announce that they plan to hire their own outside counsel to "assist" Cooper's office in the defense of S 2.

Step 8

March 2016: Private attorneys for Moore & Berger file to "intervene" in the S 2 federal lawsuit. (Without being granted intervenor status, Moore & Berger can't stick their partisan noses into the litigation.)

Step 9

July 8, 2016: U.S. Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell denies Moore & Berger's request to intervene, writing that Attorney General Cooper has "zealously" and "aggressively" fought for S 2 by seeking dismissal of plaintiffs' claims. The judge adds that he sees "no benefit" from letting others in government positions intervene in the case using outside counsel.

Wednesday, December 09, 2015

Magistrate "Opt-Out" Law Now Being Challenged in Court

The latest NC Republican law to get challenged in federal court -- Senate Bill 2, passed this past June, which allows magistrates and employees of registers of deeds offices in the state to refuse to marry same-sex couples. (Gov. Squishy vetoed it but was quickly overridden by his BFFs in the NC House & Senate.)

The law allows magistrates et al. who object to same-sex marriage to refuse to perform any marriages. The workers may decide on the spur of the moment, when a couple presents themselves for marriage, but the worker opting out would then be barred from performing all marriages for at least six months. That provision was presumably added for the appearance of non-discriminatory even-handedness.

Bottomline, though, the law allows public servants to decide which of their job duties to perform and for which taxpayers to perform them. That ain't right.

From the press release issued by Equality NC: "This morning six plaintiffs filed a federal lawsuit challenging Senate Bill 2. Ansley v. North Carolina challenges Senate Bill 2 under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs are represented by Tin Fulton Walker & Owen, a Charlotte-based law firm."

The team of lawyers representing the plaintiffs in this case (three same-sex couples) also helped guide one of the suits against NC's Amendment One, which now can be found in that big dustbin of history.

Friday, September 11, 2015

What Fresh Hell Is This, Rattling Our Synapses on a Friday?

Well, there's this: All four McDowell County magistrates are terrified of gay cooties and have opted out of performing any marriages under Senate Bill 2, passed in June by our esteemed Gay Cootie Monitors in Raleigh, so that gay-friendly magistrates are having to travel several days a week to Marion, where all The Lights are currently off, to perform the civil functions that the resident magistrates refuse to perform, all of which nonsense is Rank Unconstitutional Bullshit and will be struck down by a judge as soon as someone sues the effing magistrates of McDowell County, North Carolina.

Then there's this: The Oath Keepers, the armed, camouflage-wearing volunteer militia drunk on testosterone cocktails, say that they're ready to go automatic-weapon-to-automatic-weapon against U.S. marshals should that Republican Federal judge in Kentucky order Kim Davis back to jail for being a dick. That's no problem at all, and nothing could possibly go wrong when religious fanatics decide to defy the law.

'Murica!

Tuesday, September 01, 2015

A County Clerk in Kentucky, Our Dim Governor, and Christian Dominionism

"Dominion Theology is the idea that Christians should work toward either a nation governed by Christians or one governed by a conservative Christian understanding of biblical law."
--Wikipedia
Kim Davis, the Rowan County Kentucky Clerk in charge of marriage licenses, has now been rebuffed by the U.S. Supreme Court for her refusal to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, and commentators in the mainstream press are beside themselves at her dumbness.

It ain't dumbness, folks. It's bravery, however pretzeled by a fanatic religious belief. Kim Davis is meditating every second of every day on Matthew 5:11: "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake."

She's divinely right on gay marriage, and everyone else is wrong, everyone on up through the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court. She's now willing, I would venture, to go to the stake over this and have the flames rearrange her hairdo. Every court ruling against her, every insult broadcast on the Internet, every sidelong sneer she's now experiencing from some of her fellow Kentuckians -- all of that is just proof, according to Matthew 5:11, that she's a righteous soldier in the army of Christ.

It's the same type of faith that bolstered many a martyr to their deaths in all the centuries of stupid religious wars -- martyrs of every sect, of every warped or blessed belief. You will not shake them, shatter them, nor move them off their rigid platforms of surety.

Now comes word this morning that Governor McCrory has agreed to be a featured speaker at a Christian dominionist rally in Charlotte. His image was being used in a full-page Charlotte Observer ad to promote the event, and words were attributed to him thusly: "Come Join Me in a time of worship, prayer, fasting and repentance."

"Repentance"? For the group hosting the event, The American Renewal Project, that word implies a good deal more than some benign regret for sins of commission/omission.

David Lane, the head of the American Renewal Project, has laid out his agenda elsewhere, and it's fully within the definition of "Christian dominionism":
As to the future of America – and the collapse of this once-Christian nation – Christians must not only be allowed to have opinions, but politically, Christians must be retrained to war for the Soul of America and quit believing the fabricated whopper of the ‘Separation of Church and State,” the lie repeated ad nauseum by the left and liberals to keep Christian America – the moral majority – from imposing moral government on pagan public schools, pagan higher learning, and pagan media.
You ask, ‘What is our goal?’ To wage war to restore America to our Judeo-Christian heritage with all of our might and strength that God will give us. You ask, ‘what is our aim?’ One word only: victory, in spite of all intimidation and terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory, America will ultimately collapse. [emphasis added]
That's relatively explicit. They intend war (folks die in war). They intend to "impose" their version of holiness on the rest of us (and what ensues when one of us resists the imposition?). Resistance is futile, O my brethren, because these guys speak for God, and we assume that God is ordering them toward their vision of "victory."

Do you want to go with them there?

Evidently, Gov. McCrory either didn't read the brochure, or he's fully aware of who he's throwing in with. Curious minds want to know.


Thursday, July 09, 2015

Religion and Politics in the Age of Gay Marriage

When the president of the Southern Baptist Convention publishes an essay titled "A Country in Chaos: What Southern Baptists Should Do" in The Baptist Press, no way under God's blue sky shall I not pay heed.

"Chaos"? It's the gay marriage thing and the incipient threat that any minute now some gay couples are going to be showing up at Southern Baptist congregations all across the land and demanding a big church wedding, with gay ring-bearers and the whole works!

With the legalization of same-sex marriage, the reverend writes,
we see a country divided and teetering on a moral collapse. You see, as many of us warned, this is not the end, but the beginning of so much more. The court's overreach could now push us to more of a divide, creating chaos in many towns, cities and states. Plus, the court itself, the White House and Congress will begin to see that some people are just not going to give up their values.
Some will be willing to walk away. Southern Baptist Linda Barnette resigned her county clerk job after 24 years, refusing to issue marriage licenses for same-sex couples. I spoke with Linda and her husband Sherman of Mississippi, encouraging and thanking them for their stand. Let me make something clear: This couple and others like them are not troublemakers or radicals, but born-again Bible believers who stand on the authority of Scripture.
I'm totally cool with "Southern Baptist Linda Barnette" resigning her job because of her "values." She should do exactly that. She's in the minority, apparently, among public officials paid to do a job who subsequently refuse to do that job because doing it would offend their Christian beliefs. (There are such officials, a few of them, in certain counties of Alabama, where the clock hasn't ticked a second past 1926, and in Texas, where clocks are actually running backward now. Even in North Carolina, where the General Assembly, accompanied by much religious grandstanding, passed the magistrate recusal law, only a handful of magistrates, out of over 600, have opted out to issuing marriage licenses. They didn't want to do their jobs. They don't have to now by law.)

I wanted to push on to the end of the reverend's article, to the subhead "What We Should Do." Pray is number 1, and of course. Nothing wrong with that. Number 2 is "Raise up convictional leaders who will do what is right in the eyes of God," and that Byzantine word-choice seems designed to hide what is actually being said.

"Convictional leaders"? What does that mean? After much prayerful thought, I believe it means "leaders who will never relent on their opposition to gay marriage," and the good reverend is in very good stead with the entire 128-candidate field of Republicans running for president. Every last one of them has expressed outrage about the Supremes' gay marriage ruling.

"Raise up convictional leaders," the reverend advises. Raise up. Is that more of the call to action of # 1, i.e., pray? Probably it means something a little more, something along the lines of "make your local church a forward base for political activism, O my brethren."

In other words, do exactly what you've been doing for years.

Hardly seems like action commensurate to the destructive chaos descending on America, does it? What? No pitchforks and torches? No calling down fire from heaven on the heads of sinners?

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Huckabee Visits Hendersonville, Fails To Call Down Fire From Heaven on Asheville

Did you know that full-time Southern Baptist preacher and part-time presidential candidate Mike Huckabee was in Hendersonville yesterday? He was the guest of Congressman Mark Meadows (NC-11), a Republican member of Congress who's generally credited with the government shutdown last year and a man so right-wing that even Virginia Foxx draws her skirts a little tighter around her when in his presence.

Several hundred people crowded in and around Harry's Kitchen in Hendersonville to hear and be near Mr. Huckabee. He talks like what he is, an accomplished preacher with a sharp wit who believes he's sent by God to use that razor against the sinful.

Huckabee is possibly the most vociferous opponent of the Supreme Court currently running under the Republican banner for president (though he has several strong runners-up for that title), and he's very much into the "Christians are persecuted" Kool-Aid.

From the Asheville Citizen-Times coverage: "Asked what he would say to the large gay-friendly population of Asheville who believe the court's decision affirms equal protection under the Constitution, Huckabee said they should have joined forces to change the law through the legislative process."

Riiight. That's often happened in our history, hasn't it? A despised minority manages to get a legislature like North Carolina's to change the laws to give them equal rights?

Meanwhile, outside the precincts of Fantasyland, a cookie still crumbled in the normal way.

Monday, June 29, 2015

"Persecution" Looks A Lot Like Privilege

With conservatives taking a deep-dive into paranoia over the Supreme Court decision regarding gay marriage, we stand amazed at the right-wing willingness to drink the Kool-Aid of "persecution."

That word, not to mention the entire mental gymnastics required to use it, is being thrown around like confetti at a … well, at a gay wedding. That sort of exaggeration cheapens the word. It also does spiritual violence to real religious persecution, which this world has witnessed and still witnesses, but not because some store clerk says "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas."

Because we don't bow our heads and confess that your religion is superior to ours doesn't mean that we have oppressed you. We are preached at continuously -- lectured and hectored and warned of hell fire -- by men and women whose superior morality and access to megaphones displays privilege rather than persecution, and it is our privilege to ignore Franklin Graham and turn away to more fruitful voices.

Didn't a Republican presidential candidate recently threaten to call down fire from heaven if the Supreme Court didn't straighten up and fly right? It is my privilege to laugh at him. Is that the "persecution" you're speaking of, O my brethren?

Let's see now:

1. Religious groups enjoy complete tax exemption.

2. Unlike non-profit orgs, religious groups receive their tax exemption without having to ask for it. They get tax exemption by merely existing. "Houses of worship" are given exemption as soon as they open their doors.

3. Houses of worship are free from the mandatory reporting obligations that are imposed on secular nonprofit groups.

4. There is no way of knowing how much money a particular church raises, nor the value of its many assets, because they are not required to tell anyone (unlike a secular nonprofit). Mega-church pastors can own closets full of thousand-dollar suits, drive expensive cars, and even own their own jets without much worry that anyone "official" will ever check on his finances.

5. This is so because Congress passed a special law governing church audits that requires the IRS to show "heightened scrutiny" before initiating such procedures. Church audits must be approved by highly placed IRS officials. When's the last time you heard of a mega-church being targeted for an audit? Was it persecution? Or was it a response to conspicuous consumption?

6. The ability of religious groups to proselytize and spread their theology is limited only by the imaginations of their leaders. They own television and radio stations (tax exempt, by the way). They own publishing arms. They get a regular seat on Fox News and other cable outlets for "balance" (but really because they're entertaining).

7. Religious groups own hospitals, secondary schools, colleges, social-service agencies, and other entities. Many of these are subsidized directly with tax funds. In recent years, religious groups that sponsor charitable services get taxpayer assistance through the "faith-based initiative."

8. A house of worship or a ministry can fire employees at will if those workers violate (or are merely suspected or accused of violating) some tenet of the faith. A religious school, for example, could fire a woman who becomes pregnant out of wedlock. Most American government entities -- really, all of them -- do not allow such retaliation.

9. Most American political candidates and office-holders -- of both major political parties -- are quick to declare their Christian faith and announce their attendance at a Christian church, because not to do so would invite suspicion and rejection.



Get off your "persecution" high-horse. It all suggests that you really have no true faith at all.

Saturday, June 27, 2015

Representative Foxx Lives Up To Her Constituents' Prejudices

Virginia Foxx had her response all written and polished by 10 a.m. yesterday morning, so she was able to send it out to the world seconds after Justice Kennedy began to read his historic decision on gay marriage:
“Two years ago the Supreme Court insisted that marriage was a policy decision that properly belonged to the states, but today they have imposed a redefinition of marriage nationwide. This decision undermines the ability of states to set public policy within their borders as voters in North Carolina overwhelmingly did in 2012. I’m also extremely concerned about the threat this ruling poses to the conscience rights of people and organizations who believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. I will do everything in my power to defend these rights and protect the sacred institution of marriage.”
Knowing the representative's personal history, it makes my skin crawl uncontrollably to see her evoking "the sacred institution of marriage," not to mention her feeding her constituents the steady diet of ignorance she's known for. The Supreme Court decision yesterday did not redefine marriage. It merely made the old definition available to everyone. The only redefinition is going on in the fantastical brains of Foxx's devoted followers.

This is the woman who once upon a time checked a box on a candidate survey indicating that she was in favor of gay adoption. That was then. Her benighted Fifth District of NC needs different nourishment now.

One response to her statement on the High Country Press website deserves reprinting here:
Joseph W Dickson ·  ·  Top Commenter · Director of Kung-Fu Style Butt Whoopinsat LLoyd's Butt Whoopins and Hair Care CenterOK Rep. Foxx... we get it. You don't believe that the inalienable rights as defined in the U.S. Constitution should apply to everyone. You believe that the beliefs and rights of some should trump the rights of others. As you're an educated woman, I'll assume you're aware of world history. You should know then, that throughout world history, many rulers and countries have made efforts to carve out subsections of the general citizenry they find displeasing. These leaders and countries have then relegated these people to a status where they have fewer rights than those able to access all available rights and liberties. You will not find a single instance of this where the result has not been later seen as a willful violation of human rights. Often it has ended in horrific oppression, suffering, and genocide. Yet, as a representative of the people, elected to fight for that which will bring your constituents freedom, liberty, and prosperity, you advocate for the same oppression history has shown to be so destructive. You argue on behalf of those who would use their beliefs to relegate others to a position unequal to your own. In essence, you do not represent all of your constituents... you only represent those with whom you find yourself in agreement. You publicly advocate to strip some of your very own constituents of those rights and liberties you are sworn to defend and uphold. One day, far in the future, history may well count you alongside other leaders who sought to oppress some for the pleasure of others. 

Friday, June 26, 2015

U.S. Supremes: 14th Amendment Means Same-Sex Couples May Marry

Hot off the SCOTUS blog:

The U.S. Supreme Court, voting 5-4, holds that the Fourteenth Amendment requires a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex. And all states must recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when a marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out of state. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision upholding same-sex marriage bans in several states is reversed.

It's clear that the Court's opinion relies on the dual rationales of fundamental rights AND equal protection.

Chief Justice John Roberts is back on the conservative reservation for his dissent. Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito also wrote their own dissents.

POSTSCRIPT
Chief Justice Roberts has the principal dissent, which is 31 pages long. Toward the end of it, he says, "If you are among the many Americans -- of whatever sexual orientation -- who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today's decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it."

O-kay then.

POSTSCRIPT 2
From the majority opinion, addressing the role of history in the constitutional analysis: "The nature of injustice is that we may not always see it in our own times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions, and so they entrusted to future generations a character protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning."

POSTSCRIPT 3
"The dissents [by Scalia, Thomas, and Alito] are extremely strident." Chief Justice Roberts took a wholly different, conciliatory tone in his.

Thursday, June 11, 2015

Let the Litigation Begin!

Tim Moore, the Speaker of the NC House, suddenly found his opportunity to override Gov. McCrory's veto of the "magistrate's recusal" law, so now it's perfectly legal for government officials in our state to pick and choose which couples they'll marry, based on their "religious belief," a.k.a., personal prejudices.

This law is so blatantly unconstitutional -- guaranteeing unequal treatment for some people -- that it will be enjoined by a judge probably before the veto override ink is quite dry.

Wednesday, June 10, 2015

This Is the Ad That Made Franklin Graham Pull His Money Out of Wells Fargo


The Reverend Franklin Graham is positively outraged about a banking ad depicting two women learning sign language in order to adopt a deaf child. These two mommies love the child enough to learn her language. Who can plumb the depths of that moral depravity?

The kicker: Rev. Graham took his millions billions out of Wells Fargo and shoved it (without doing the proper research, as it turns out) into BB&T in Charlotte. Take that, you gay-loving bank!

But now it comes to light that
...BB&T has received an 80 percent score in the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index and this year is the sponsor of the Miami Beach Gay Pride Parade, along with the chief sponsor of Miami Beach Gay Pride’s “Legacy Couples” program, which celebrates same-sex couples in “committed relationships of 10 years or longer.”
A bank spokesman said the company hopes to “support the individuals and organizations that broaden our perspectives and strengthen the diverse fabric of our communities. That’s why BB&T is proud to be a part of this day of pride and celebration of the 2015 Legacy Couples.”
That would constitute a big ole oops for the Rev. Franklin, wouldn't it?

We're also waiting for the pious pastor to give up his Facebook pages, since that corporation is notoriously gay-friendly too.

Thursday, May 28, 2015

Gov. McCrory Has Decided To Lead for a Change

Perhaps because he already knows that Speaker of the NC House Tim Moore will make sure that the House will uphold his veto, Governor McCrory announced earlier this afternoon that he will in fact veto the "magistrate opt-out" law just passed by both houses of the NC General Assembly which would allow magistrates and Register of Deeds employees to refuse to marry same-sex couples.

The measure did pass the House but with only a 67-43 majority, not enough to overturn McCrory's promised veto.

McCrory's statement: "I recognize that, for many North Carolinians, including myself, opinions on same-sex marriage come from sincerely held religious beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman. However, we are a nation and a state of laws. Whether it is the president, governor, mayor, a law enforcement officer or magistrate, no public official who voluntarily swears to support and defend the Constitution and to discharge all duties of their office should be exempt from upholding that oath."

That's solid legal ground for a veto of legislation that was clearly intended to discriminate against one class of citizens, just as the now overturned Amendment One did.

Oh, there was great parading of pharisaical holiness yesterday as the NC House debated the bill. One of the holiest members of the House, Rep. Larry Pittman, R-Cabarrus, said the measure protects government officials from being forced to be "traitors against the kingdom of God" by taking part in same-sex marriage, which he described as "perverted and morally unconscionable."

"God created and defined marriage as between a man and a woman, and no country and no government, no court, no government entity, I believe, has the right to change it or to coerce anyone to disobey God in regard to it," Pittman said. "We need to stop worrying about what other nations or corporations think of us or where we stand and what our reputation is with them, and get back to caring what our reputation is in the sight of God."

One of the Republican talking points was that a "magistrate opt-out" law was analogous to conscientious objection status for soldiers. Democratic Rep. Grier Martin countered that "to qualify as a conscientious objector, a person must object to all warfare, not to a particular conflict, and that must be determined through an in-depth investigation by military officers."

"You do not get to pick and choose who you serve, you do not get to pick and choose your wars, and we should not allow our magistrates to pick and choose which citizens they are and are not going to marry," he said. "That magistrate's salary is being paid by all North Carolinians equally."

Said Rep. Larry Hall, D-Durham, "We’re creating a situation where people can discriminate against other members of our society at their discretion and not be disciplined. Certain people have full rights that they vote for and pay for, and other people don’t have those same full rights to treatment on an equal basis."

Haven't gotten a list of those Republicans in the House who voted against this travesty, but they need to be recognized for statesmanship.

Monday, April 20, 2015

The Dam Has a Big New Crack in It

Yesterday Marco Rubio, who's running for vice president on somebody's else ticket, said:
“I … don’t believe that your sexual preferences are a choice for the vast and enormous majority of people. And, in fact, the bottom line is that I believe that sexual preference is something people are born with.”
That's not conservative orthodoxy. That's conservative heresy.

Rubio will make an attractive running mate for Scott Walker, who admitted yesterday -- what was in Republican water bottles yesterday? -- that he'd attended a gay wedding reception.

That dam is breaking! (Marco Rubio is still an empty suit, IMO, which makes him perfect for a vice presidential run.)