miserable too

Politics make for strange bedfellows, who would ever think Republicans would get in bed with gays on marriage? Certainly not the Right Wing Evangelical base of the GOP. Many of them now feel that the GOP has been cheating on them and feel betrayed.

It’s sort of like someone walking away from having lost their money at Three Card Monte and wondering if they were ripped off. The GOP has been playing them for decades and only now, when it’s become a choice of remaining a viable party or continuing to echo the extreme positions of the Religious Right to curry favor with them, do they start suspecting it’s all been a scam.

The Southern Strategy of the GOP began under Richard Nixon and Barry Goldwater in the late ’60’s. On the heels of Lyndon Johnson alienating Blue Dog Democrats in the South after passage of the Civil Rights Act, Republicans saw an opportunity to appeal to the racist white vote that so dominated the South. Recognizing that the Democrats were building on their strengths in cities, to bolster their strength in the South and Midwest, Republicans also went after the Fundamentalist Christian community. The plan was to pander to both, throwing racist and “anti-heathen” red meat, whipping up hatred and fear towards minorities and those of different beliefs to energize their new base. Along with this, they made insistent promises to the Fundamentalist Christians that they would make their most extreme beliefs the law of the land.

The Republican Party created this alliance in a wholly cynical and mercenary manner, they were just pandering to these groups to use them, they didn’t really believe in their causes nor did they intend to bring them to fruition. What Republicans needed was to create a never-ending battle between their pawns and Democrats over primal issues for their base, whip up outrage and division to get the higher turn out they needed to win elections over the more numerous Democrat voters.

This Southern Strategy worked well for some time and would continue to work well if the disbelief in evolution so proudly displayed by many in the GOP base…was correct. Instead, society has evolved from where it was in 1980 and it is no longer a winning hand for the GOP to mimic the homophobia and racism of their base. So what’s a political party to do? Stay on the tracks and get hit by the Evolution Express or jump out of the way?

The Republicans are jumping and the Religious Right are hopping mad. With their blinders locked on since at least the 1950’s, the Religious Right has no conception, immaculate or otherwise, that the majority of Americans support same sex marriage and only older people wear their homophobia on their sleeve like a medal of honor. So they are outraged and flabbergasted that a number of politicians in the GOP are drifting over to supporting same sex marriage.

Republicans are no more compassionate towards others now than they were when they were loudly opposing gay marriage and hating on Latinos last year. They are a facade for corporate interests that only want the tax money of the 99% to flow into their pockets, everything else they do is just to win elections. And at this point in history, it has become clear that being anti-gay and prejudiced against Latinos is not a path to winning. So, being unprincipled, it’s effortless for them to flip to an opposing viewpoint on a critical issue overnight. Overall, it is a good thing but unless one wants to be as foolish as the Fundamentalists, viewing this as a reason to trust the Republicans on this or any issue would not be the wisest decision.

Remember a guy named Mitt Romney? He was the personification of the GOP. A rich person serving only the interests of the wealthy and merely pandering to the rest of the country (“My name is Mitt Romney, y-all.”), tossing out lies like rice at a wedding and assuring his supporters that he cared about their issues…whatever they happened to be on any given day and whether or not that conflicted with an earlier position (even earlier that same day).

Fundamentalist Christians however do have strong and immutable beliefs and they thought the GOP, which assured them it was just like them…was just like them. Now, these naive, small minded people are shocked that the GOP is an organization of unprincipled opportunists who are stabbing them in the back just to win elections. Truth is, the GOP has been doing this for a while.

The GOP wants abortion to remain legal nationally because it has and will help them to rally the Fundamentalists against it and show up to vote Republican in elections. The GOP arguably won the 2004 Presidential election (putting aside their theft of Ohio’s election and electoral votes) by putting hatred of gays and gay marriage as a central issue. Nine years later, since it’s no longer a winning position, the Republicans (as they have on immigration) are flipping to the opposite position without a scintilla of remorse or apology.

So what’s a homophobic segment of a religion to do? They’ve been left standing at the altar of prejudice all by themselves, jilted by their mate in hate. Is the engagement over? Will they find another who is truly their soulless mate?

Unfortunately for them, there is no other party for them to run to on the rebound. Are they destined to be trapped in a hateless marriage?

It might be ironic if Fundamentalist Christians made the decision to divorce from Republicans over the issue of protecting marriage…the only question would be who gets to keep the silverware but no doubt the Fundies would claim that they get to keep it since, as they see it,  the Republicans have stuck it in their back.

66
Leave a Comment

Please Login to comment
8 Comment threads
58 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
10 Comment authors
BourneIDNirekkesmarnchoiceladyMurphTheSurf3 Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
SueInCa
Member

Does anyone ever wonder why it took the death of a president to spur the congress to pass the Civil Rights Bill of 1964? LBJ spurred it on by comments he made in his first Joint Session of Congress speech on November 27, 1963…..I still question why a nation of “patriots screaming freedom” would take so long to pass a bill giving all the rights they should have had all along. From the speech:

“First, no memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently honor President Kennedy’s memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he fought so long. We have talked long enough in this country about equal rights. We have talked for one hundred years or more. It is time now to write the next chapter, and to write it in the books of law.
I urge you again, as I did in 1957 and again in 1960, to enact a civil rights law so that we can move forward to eliminate from this Nation every trace of discrimination and oppression that is based upon race or color. There could be no greater source of strength to this Nation both at home and abroad.

And second, no act of ours could more fittingly continue the work of President Kennedy than the early passage of the tax bill for which he fought all this long year. This is a bill designed to increase our national income and Federal revenues, and to provide insurance against recession. That bill, if passed without delay, means more security for those now working, more jobs for those now without them, and more incentive for our economy.

As one who has long served in both Houses of the Congress, I firmly believe in the independence and the integrity of the legislative branch. And I promise you that I shall always respect this. It is deep in the marrow of my bones. With equal firmness, I believe in the capacity and I believe in the ability of the Congress, despite the divisions of opinions which characterize our Nation, to act–to act wisely, to act vigorously, to act speedily when the need arises.

The need is here. The need is now. I ask your help.
We meet in grief, but let us also meet in renewed dedication and renewed vigor. Let us meet in action, in tolerance, and in mutual understanding. John Kennedy’s death commands what his life conveyed–that America must move forward. The time has come for Americans of all races and creeds and political beliefs to understand and to respect one another. So let us put an end to the teaching and the preaching of hate and evil and violence. Let us turn away from the fanatics of the far left and the far right, from the apostles of bitterness and bigotry, from those defiant of law, and those who pour venom into our Nation’s bloodstream.

I profoundly hope that the tragedy and the torment of these terrible days will bind us together in new fellowship, making us one people in our hour of sorrow. So let us here highly resolve that John Fitzgerald Kennedy did not live–or die–in vain. And on this Thanksgiving eve, as we gather together to ask the Lord’s blessing, and give Him our thanks, let us unite in those familiar and cherished words:

America, America,
God shed His grace on thee,
And crown thy good With brotherhood
From sea to shining sea.”

http://www.pbs.org/ladybird/epicenter/epicenter_doc_speech.html

Report this comment

MurphTheSurf3
Editor

It is my opinion that our system of government works against change. How many other countries have adopted the U.S. system? One. Liberia and it has been in civil war for 100 years.

How many have adopted elements of our governmental structure? A half dozen or so.

Our system of checks and balances creates the conditions for gridlock.

Three issues are in front of the American people right now:

a) Women’s health rights
b) Gun safety
c) Gay Marriage

In all three cases public opinion is clear and yet our legislature feels free to ignore it. In a parliamentary system this would not be tolerated.

The great danger in a parliamentary structure where the executive sits in the legislature and the judiciary has a far more limited role to create law, the danger is that things can change too quickly, but given the choice between gridlock and the express lane, I know which one I would choose.

Report this comment

BourneID
Member

Thanks Murph. As expected, excellent. You lift the essentials that are on the table right now. Sadly,as you say, paralysis has overtaken the legislative branch and I wonder how long its leaders think they can continue to ignore us.

Given the news reports on an out-of-control North Korea, I wonder how long it will take them to decide if we have enough money in the bank to defend ourselves. Like most, I am disgusted with what we watch every day. Now, I am disgusted and afraid of whet we watch every day.

I wanted to rate your comment but I don’t see how, so I’ll just say well done.

Bourne

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

Murph

You might be interested in a course I am taking with Stanford Univ for free. It is on Democracy and the professor will be touching on exactly the info you brought up here. The first class is either 4/1 or 4/3 and the link is below

https://www.coursera.org/courses

Go down to Democratic Development

And here is their facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Democratic-Development-Democracy-MOOC/547867765245278

There are many courses Stanford offers for free.

Report this comment

BourneID
Member

Sue, I’m going to check out the links you’ve given Murph. I had no idea Stanford offered courses at no cost. Great information.

Thank you.

Bourne

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

Bourne
I am going to start with this class, it is 10 weeks, then I will start taking others. You do not get college credit but it sure would not look bad on a resume.

Report this comment

Nirek
Member

This issue is about equality!

Report this comment

kesmarn
Admin

Flying through this afternoon, AdLib, and I hope to be able to comment more later, but I just had to share a bit of info that is new to me (probably familiar to just about everyone else). It’s a psychological concept known as the Dunning Kruger Effect. Here’s the wiki definition:

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes.

Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. David Dunning and Justin Kruger of Cornell University conclude, “the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others”.

In other words, the less you know, the more you think you know.

Sound like any RW fundie teapartiers we’ve encountered?

Wonderful article as always!

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

kes, it’s sort of like the old “Peter Principle.” The principle basically states that people can be, and often are promoted to positions that are beyond their skill level or abilities. I used to see this all the time in the military.

Report this comment

kesmarn
Admin

I don’t doubt that in the slightest, KT. And I’m sure it had some pretty unpleasant consequences for the folks who served under “General Peter.”

Report this comment

MurphTheSurf3
Editor

WoW—- I am copying and pasting this into my archive. Four Stars ****

Report this comment

kesmarn
Admin

So glad you found it helpful, Murph.

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

Ha kes! I heard it said that true intelligence begins when we realize how much we DON’T know. Makes sense to me. 😉

Report this comment

choicelady
Member

Hmmm kes – I think you’ve just pinpointed the reason why, no matter who we are, no matter the age, sex, race, ethnicity, experience, class, or status – we are all possessed of the belief we are better than average drivers.

Report this comment

kesmarn
Admin

I think they call that the “Lake Wobegon” effect, c’lady.

(Unrelated: did you see that Frances Perkins won the Episcopalian LentMadness bracket competition for the right to be this year’s saint who wears the Golden Halo? Think b’ito might have been pulling strings from a higher place?)

Report this comment

MurphTheSurf3
Editor

Hey Ad Lib- thoughtful piece.

The GOP has struggled with its identity for much of the 20th and 21st century. Its origins are in Reform- huge, massive, radical reform. And they have struggle with that ever since the end of the Civil War. But Reconstruction tainted the Party and rendered it ineffective and shattered.

At the end of the 19th century the Party of Bob LaFollette and Teddy Roosevelt (generally a progressive reformer and part of the reforming wing of the GOP) became the Party of Taft, Harding, Coolidge and Hoover…..the party of Big Money, Small Government and Isolationism.

After the Great Depression and WWII, the Party turned to reform again with its “patriotic millionaires” embracing the war hero IKE who proved to be a real reformer with strong progressive leanings.

Goldwater was a throwback. Nixon was felled by his personal fears. Ford was a blip on the screen. But Nixon had turned his back on Ike’s reform in favor of dark politics (with Roger Ailes and Lee Atwater as poster boys)

And then came Reagan who took all of the threads you lay before us in your post and wove them into the first GOP tapestry since the days of the Big Money Boys after WWI. Bush Sr. tried to restore a bit of Eisenhower rationality but was pushed overboard by the moral maority, neocon, supply side, Reagan worshipers who eventually created the Bush presidency and its cast of regime making characters.

And now that tapestry seems to coming apart and so the weavers are busy trying to patch something else together.

And the conflict between the Party and its former allies makes it clear how ham fisted that effort seems to be.

Here are three contributions to your story featuring Gary Bauer, Michael Huckabee and Nicole Wallace.

*****

Today, the National Organization for Marriage and allied groups organized a “March for Marriage” orchestrated to coincide with arguments at the Supreme Court over the constitutionality of Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act.

The march ended with a rally on the National Mall featuring a variety of speakers, including Gary Bauer, who used it as a platform to send a message to the Republican Party that “if you bail out on this issue, I will leave the party and I will take as many people with me as I possibly can” http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/gary-bauer-threatens-leave-gop-if-it-bails-out-issue-marriage-equality

******

Mike Huckabee was asked by Newsmax if he thinks the GOP will pivot to support marriage equality:

“They might. And if they do, they’re going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk. And it’s not because there’s an anti-homosexual mood, and nobody’s homophobic that I know of, but many of us, and I consider myself included, base our standards not on the latest Washington Post poll, but on an objective standard, not a subjective såtandard. å have great sympathy and extraordinary admiration for Sen. Portman. I consider him a friend and I value his work in the Senate and think he’s a great person. The mistake is that we sometimes base our public policy decisions on how we feel, how we think, maybe even some personal experiences, and we don’t regard a lot of these issues from the standpoint of an objective standard.”

Read more: http://www.towleroad.com/2013/03/mike-huckabee-evangelicals-will-take-a-walk-if-gop-supports-marriage-equality-video.html#ixzz2Oi9xa95l

*****
On Fox News Sunday this morning, evangelical leader Gary Bauer and Republican strategist Nicolle Wallace went head-to-head over the upcoming Supreme Court hearings on overturning Proposition 8, California’s controversial law banning same-sex marriages within the state.

Former George W. Bush advisor Nicole Wallace countered that Bauer faces polling troubles in that 65% of evangelicals under the age of 33 support marriage equality; and more than 60% of Americans support some form of marriage equality.

“The argument that the public is overwhelmingly in favor of same sex marriage is ludicrous,” evangelical leader Gary Bauer later responded. “33 states have voted to keep marriage the union of one man and one woman. If it was so obvious that the American public wants to try a radical social experiment that results in children in those households, definitely, definitely, not having a mother and a father … If the opinion of the American public was so overwhelming, the gay rights movement and their allies like Nicole wouldn’t be asking the Supreme Court to say to the American people, ‘You have no say on this issue.’”

When presented with polling data that shows an upward trend in Americans supporting same-sex marriage, Bauer responded, “I’m not worried about that because the polls are skewed.” He added that the votes to legalize same-sex marriage in four states this past November still had around 45% “no” votes, outrunning Romney in many places.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/evangelical-leader-and-gop-strategist-battle-over-same-sex-marriages-radical-agenda-on-fox-news-sunday/

Report this comment

choicelady
Member

VERY helpful background information, Murph. Thank you!

Report this comment

MurphTheSurf3
Editor

Just getting back to the article- thanks for the kudo!

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

This seems like the perfect party to step up and claim defectors from the Republican party. They target especially the evangelical base with their platform on religious freedom and overall Libertarians with their entire platform. People who supported the R party, but lean libertarian, just not entirely, would be the target of this group. Ron Paul lent his support this last year.

http://www.constitutionparty.com/Home/tabid/56/Default.aspx

Report this comment

MurphTheSurf3
Editor

I have hopes of a third, fourth and fifth right wing part (libertarian, constitution, stste parties, hate parties, apartheid parties)….any chance?

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

As wacky as they are these days, I think you do have a chance.

Report this comment

audadvnc
Member
audadvnc

Great article! Those two groups really deserve each other – it’s a marriage made in heaven.

Report this comment

SallyT
Member

AdLib, it’s funny (not a good word here) but evidently the liberal view usually wins out with time. The reason it takes so long is that those against are always going to show up to vote against it. Their views against makes them determined to make sure they are right! But, they aren’t and they are bucking the tide. Evidently, they realize this and they might not agree but they fight it less. They haven’t changed their mind but by not fighting it they might get more to come to their side without those realizing it. Once they can get their people into power, then they can try to change it back. Are people smart enough to realize this, I think so, and I certainly hope so.

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

Hey Sally! If I have learned anything in this life, it is to realize that clinging to old ideas is completely futile. As the Tao has instructed me, a young sapling can bend with the changing winds and not break. The old dead tree snaps in two in a strong wind.

Report this comment

SallyT
Member

Well, Mr. KT, you just remember not to drop all your leaves….keep your fig leaf in place! 😳

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

Adlib
Interesting concept but I am not sure the Fundies will run from the GOP. They have no where else to go. I do believe as you summarized they will stay in a love hate relationship with them. Number one, their goals of someday turning this country theocratic is a powerful expectation of all of them. Number two, Democrats are heathens who actually like most people and do not look at gender, sex or try to get into your bedroom. Personally I think these people have a real issue with sex overall. People in their midst are always getting busted for doing the things they preach against but I say they cannot help themselves, it is an obsession with them.

I cannot see them going libertarian, although a derivative of libertarian would suit them, one where they change the rules completely. There is another party, the Constitution Party and it is hard to tell how many people are even aware of them, much less belong…. I do know their platform is perfect for the fundie and perhaps they have been waiting patiently for all of this to go down.

I am continually puzzled by these people. While I know a lot about their backgrounds, their beliefs and what their goals are, they are so enter-twined with different groups, it is always necessary to check the background of any person who, say for instance, is speaking on behalf of the Alliance Defense Fund. I know who they are, but most in public would not. Or Samuel Rodriguez being highlighted by Chris Hayes who obviously did nothing to check his background and portrayed him as a leader of the Latino evangelicals. I am sure most of those Latinos would be horrified to find out he “prays away the muslim” in cahoots with Jerry Boykin et al.

Report this comment

choicelady
Member

Since my organization took the lead on a faith amicus on behalf of marriage equality, I’m very proud of the work we’ve done to undermine the religious right.

I want to have two bumper stickers. One would say “God bless the world, no exceptions.” The other “I’m doing my best to piss off the religious right.”

So I had a meeting at the office of the Catholic Conference today. The Director knows we headed the amicus FOR marriage equality. Amazingly the office conference room was locked and the meeting moved elsewhere. Never happened before. Hmmmm. Should I take this personally? Well – I am, and laughing every inch of the way. But I’ve championed the Church’s right to be its own self and respected where its rights did not trample anyone else’s. I have yet to have that reciprocated. If the lockout was personal, it says waaaay more about them than it does me.

Just as a point of interest, I looked up when the Vatican pardoned Galileo. It was 1992 – 350 years AFTER he died, and about 380 from the time he first published and was censured and censored.

Saying the Vatican is behind the curve is a major understatement.

So if they want to lock out their Protestant friend, oh well. I shall survive. Not sure they will. There are signs across our area at Catholic churches, “Catholics come home.” Well it might help if first they cleaned house?

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

CL
This is kind of off topic but do you know that when Lee Harvey Oswald was killed, the Greater Dallas Council of Churches refused to have anyone perform a service for him? My my how the Council of Churches has evolved…..

Report this comment

choicelady
Member

The Council in Texas remains pretty conservative, but I’m having some trouble reconciling their even having a ROLE in this since they weren’t a denomination or church but a kind of policy/resource office for a lot of churches. I can’t fathom how they’d ever have been involved in something like a funeral. That said, Texas IMPACT, the lobbying group and separate entirely from the Council, is pretty cool. I know the Director, and she ROCKS. I actually know nothing at all about the Council, but if it turned out to STILL be to the right of Attila the Hun, I’d be sorry but not surprised. It IS Texas, after all!

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

Another nice piece Ad. The GOPers are definitely running scared. First they drag out Mark Rubio so they may look Latino friendly, now they’re going after the gay vote. Once Hillary said she backed gay marriage, that really put the fear in the GOP. I’m sure they see her as a major contender for 2016.

I also think that when Rob Portman came out in favor of it, they probably felt a little egg on their faces. Now if Mr. Speaker of Orange changes his mind, after saying he couldn’t ever imagine doing so, you know they are desperate.

Gay people, like Latinos are not stupid though and will probably see this new GOP tack for what it truly is. To catch the blowing winds of change. It will be interesting to see how the fundies react to the GOP’s new found “tolerance.”

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

KT here is a write up regarding the solidarity signs that people are using to show support for gay marriage. The writer is assuming because he did not get what he wanted, all people are doing is changing their profile. He gives no one the benefit of the doubt that we have done the things he suggests. This is the kind of whining I am referring to in my comment below.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-red-marriage-equality-sign-on-your-facebook-profile-is-completely-useless?utm_source=vicefbus

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

sue, fortunately, I think most gay people can see through these surface attempts of solidarity. Their everyday lives and the walls that they cannot escape running into are enough to solidify their stance and give them a strong indication as to who is really on their side, and who isn’t.
I mean, just look at the GOP’s stance just a few months ago and their obvious pandering now. I’m sure some will fall for it, but I am confident that those who have litterly been been the objects of GOP hatred and religious condemnation will know what a sleazy attempt this is by the GOP to broaden their base.
I never could understand why any gay man or woman would want anything to do with the GOP. It’s like an American Indian, wearing a US cavalry hat and uniform, or a Jew in SS uniform. Total sell outs.

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

Just an FYI for you on the solidarity symbol, most of the people I know who are using it, have gay family members. I cannot speak for all using it, but the ones I know have good reason to use it and their family members know it is sincere. How could they not with the support they have received over the years? I get this guy’s frustration but he makes a mistake of painting everyone with one broad brush, that is not even close to reality.

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

Sue, I misinterpreted the article you linked to. I was thinking the solidarity avatar was promoted by the now half dead GOP in an attempt to gain the gay vote.

I agree with you completely.

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

Those are the same thoughts I had KT and then 2010 hit. I was just really depressed that they would turn like that. I will get over it, but part of the continuing problem with rights to this day is the way they voted for a group they knew would not support them, out of anger to another individual or party.

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

Ah Sue, the world is constantly changing. I think those who distrusted Obama, mainly over DADT and the DOMA have seen that Obama is sincere in his reconsideration of gay rights as a whole.
There will always be gay republicans (why, I can’t fathom) but I really feel they are in the minority and not really a decisive force that would help GOPers get reelected.
They look at all the other issues as well, like financial equality, healthcare and SS and Medicare/medicaid. The majority of gay people are no different than we are. They are not single issue voters. Not the majority of them.
That’s why the skeptics from the gay community had no real impact on the reelection of Obama.

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

Sue, I wouldn’t call it a “bad attitude.” I too was pissed with those who condemned Obama for not being on their side.

Since Obama made public his support of gay marriage, and the repeal of DADT, I think that may have put to bed the major concerns about his sincerity. I have yet to actually meet a gay republican. I know from research and MSM articles, that they do exist (why I’ll never know). I do think that they are a very small segment of the gay community at large.
Every gay person I have known is really about freedom. Not just freedom to choose gender, but freedom overall. The GOP has consistently shown that they really are NOT about personal freedom.

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

KT I am working on my bad attitude but it will take time and perhaps the results of another mid term to see how the pendulum swings. I am not really pissed at all, just disappointed.

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

KT
One caution on your belief that gay people will see through the GOP, remember 2010 when they turned against Dems because this exact issue was not moving fast enough for them. They have shown how fickle they can be when things do not go as they want or as fast as they think they should. Either by not showing up to the polls or voting for the opposite party. I support gay rights but this issue has been a nagging thought for me since 2010. Please tell me I read it all wrong?

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

Hey Sue, thanks for replying. No, I don’t think your concerns are completely unfounded. I think, as with any group, especially those who have been a part of a group who have been denied equal treatment under the law, or looked upon as somewhat less than others, there will be those that might be a little more sensitive than others in their group.

I think they just weren’t sure of Obama’s sincerity. I do think they behaved a bit prematurely. Then again, I can’t realize just how frustrating such an issue is to those who are the targets of discrimination, condemnation and outright bigotry. Hopefully, they can see the difference between the obvious, sincere deliberations of the president and Hillary and other dems, as opposed to an obvious pandering by a hurting and damaged GOP attempt to widen their base.

I’m a bit sensitive to the whole issue, because my daughter is gay, and I’ve seen first hand how bigotry and religious condemnation has affected her in negative ways. She is smart, hardworking, funny and above all, has a true appreciation for love. Love without government sanctioned restrictions. She knows, more than I do about unconditional love. To see these homophobes and religious nuts and downright haters trying to keep her from equal treatment under the law angers me, a great deal.

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

KT I have a nephew and niece who are bi-racial so I know what your daughter goes through. My family has always been inclusive so sometimes I overlook what others are truly going through. I have to get better at that but I can tell you even as late as 95 I had to dress someone down for his liberal use of the N word at a party we were both attending. I was horrified at his language and his clear disregard for their rights. Unfortunately he did not realize he was talking to someone whose niece was bi-racial lol. At the end of the night I did apologize to the host(my uncle) and he told me not to sweat it the guy had been told many times before, he was family so their hands were kind of tied. It was in the south so I know their ways of thinking are not always going to mesh with mine. Still I just could not keep quiet.

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

Sue, I salute you for NOT keeping quite. Any denial of love or equal rights should be met with condemnation and disgust.

I learned a very valuable lesson when I was still in high school.

I was in the marching band that performed at high school football half times.
We occasionally had “away games,” which meant we would travel to other cities to perform. We did this by Greyhound bus and it was a popular thing to sit with a favorite gal and make out on the bus. We would shield our young romantic experiences by hanging our uniform bag just so.
One bus trip, I was with a beautiful black majorette and we were seriously making out. After that, there were white guys and black guys that wanted to kick my ass. I realized then the utter stupidity of racism. Lori was a beautiful young woman (very well developed) that any white guy or black guy would have loved to be with. Only the white guys didn’t have the courage to be out in the open about it. That’s when I first really learned about racism.

Report this comment

KillgoreTrout
Member

Sue, my mom used to make me and my brother and sisters go to church. I didn’t like it because I had to sit still and listen. At my age then, sitting still was not an easy thing to do 😉

After countless times trying to get us to go, my mom finally gave up. My dad never attended services. He just couldn’t agree with such things. It’s not that he was a bad guy, but I think he considered his relationship with god as a much more personal thing. I don’t really know, to this day, how he felt. I think he may have seen it as pretending.

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

KT wow what an experience. To tell you the truth I never thought about a difference until I was prob in the 7th grade. We moved to an area that was integrated(schools) and I learned it from other kids. My family were not racist and I had never heard the N word. I think my dad, coming from the south, went to the other extreme but I don’t remember ever hearing derogatory terms for people of other color or faiths. Except Baptists. My dad was not a religious person and he really hated baptists because that was the church his mom made them go to.

Report this comment