Monday, January 22, 2007

The Gay-Haters Are Giving Up

From the Pueblo, Colorado, Chieftain Online:
In past sessions, Colorado Sen. Wayne Allard and Rep. Marilyn Musgrave were conservative champions of a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in the last Congress, both sponsoring legislation to do just that.

Not this year.

The two Republicans said last week they have no plans to re-introduce their legislation in the new Congress - another sign that Democrats are now in the majority.

"At this time, I haven't discussed it with anyone," Allard said on Thursday. "If we thought there was a decent chance to bring it to the floor for debate, I would, but with the new Congress, I'm not sure we will ever have that opportunity."

Aaron Johnson, Musgrave's spokesman, said the congresswoman would not introduce the legislation this year.

The federal amendment - endorsed by President Bush - was approved on several occasions by House Republicans in recent years but consistently stalled in the Senate. With Democrats now chairing all House and Senate committees, a marriage amendment will not come forward unless a Democrat sponsors the bill and the leadership agrees to bring it out of committee, which is highly unlikely. Allard, Musgrave shelve marriage amendment in new Congress

It's just an idea that's run its course. This amendment was never going to pass, even with Republicans running things in Congress -- it was just a way for politicians to pander to the religious right. Now it's not even that, all this would do is alienate the public and lose votes for anybody associated with it.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

What about Don Dwyer here in Maryland? Does anyone know if he presented his gay-hating bill again this year?


January 23, 2007 7:34 AM  
Blogger Orin Ryssman said...

Jim writes,

The Gay-Haters Are Giving Up

It is a reliable guide that when anyone in an argument name-calls that they surely are on the losing side of an argument.

Jim, you appear to be educated...try writing an argument that reflects that fact.

January 23, 2007 7:52 AM  
Blogger JimK said...

... anyone in an argument name-calls that they surely are on the losing side of an argument.

Ah, Orin, you've said so much.

Look, not everybody agrees with me, in fact I entirely speak only for myself and nobody else, but personally I'm just a little too Irish to accept the idea that people like me should be polite when rightwing assholes are making up facts left and right and accusing people of doing things they never did and never dreamed of doing.

There's no reason in the world that the United States of America needs an amendment to prevent two people from getting married when they want to. These same idiots bring up this same thing every year, and every year it fails, but the betterthanyou hypocrites eat it up. Oooh, am I not nice about this?


January 23, 2007 9:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is a reliable guide that when anyone in an argument name-calls that they surely are on the losing side of an argument.

So sayeth the man who is so fond of "name-calling" the Angry Left:

"...does not owe a damn thing to the Angry Left..."
Orin January 07, 2007 10:25 PM

"Add to that mix the Angry Left..."
Orin December 12, 2006 7:12 AM

"...but for the most part the AL..."
Orin November 11, 2006 10:34 AM

"...(except, of course, from the Angry Left)..."
Orin November 11, 2006 10:08 AM

"...the Left is so Angry..."
Orin September 10, 2006 1:30 AM

"...a water boy for Team Angry Left."
Orin September 06, 2006 4:20 AM

"...the "Angry Left" best represented..."
Orin August 11, 2006 5:46 AM

"...being used by the Angry Left..."
Orin August 10, 2006 3:31 AM

"...the know, the Angry Left."
Orin August 02, 2006 10:03 PM

"...complaint from the Angry Left..."
Orin July 26, 2006 11:48 AM

January 23, 2007 12:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe Orin should skip the abstinence only class and attend a "No Name Calling" class instead.

January 23, 2007 12:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Orin Ryssman said:
"It is a reliable guide that when anyone in an argument name-calls that they surely are on the losing side of an argument."

BS. Instead of applying some generic guide to arguments, consider the actual facts presented in the argument; that way, you won't be able to ignore valid points just because you happen to be upset at being called a name. Reliable guide? By this twisted logic, a single insult at the very end of a completely sound deductive argument "surely" puts the argument on the losing side, while some opposing illogical invalid rubbish with no insults is actually on the winning side?

You try to appear to be educated Orin, so you can at least cut the hypocrisy.

January 24, 2007 4:38 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

...what they said. You've been told Orin.

January 24, 2007 5:17 PM  
Blogger Orin Ryssman said...

Angry Left is an accurately descriptive term for the blogger-in-chief, not to mention his "amen corner".

Thanks Aunt Bea for the URL for No Name Calling Week, which apparently runs January 22nd to the 26th.

From the FAQ's page:

#1 What is No Name-Calling Week?

No Name-Calling Week is an annual week of educational activities aimed at ending name-calling of all kinds and providing schools with the tools and inspiration to launch an on-going dialogue about ways to eliminate bullying in their communities.

#2 Who should participate?

Anyone who wants to work towards eliminating harmful name-calling, harassment and bullying in their school can be a part of No Name-Calling Week, whether you are a teacher, student, guidance counselor, coach, librarian or bus driver. The curricular materials on this web site and in the Resource Kit are primarily aimed at middle school students, specifically grades 5 – 8, but may be modified for older or younger students. Feel free to download materials off this web site, or order the Resource Kit and create your own No Name-Calling Week initiative in your community.

Jim writes,

(from his blog entry on the Cheney/Blitzer interview)

Here's the problem: cowardice.

...but wait, there is more,

From every indication, Dick "Dick" Cheney loves his daughter and fully approves of her decision. But he doesn't have the cojones to say so in public, out of cowardly fear of making Daddy Dobson unhappy.

So, he is a COWARD that lacks the COJONES to say he loves his lesbian daughter in public? Amazing and appalling...

Oh, and by way of news flash, I strongly suspect that the Vice President could care less about making James Dobson happy. Two years from now Cheney will again be a private citizen, a husband, proud father and doting grandfather to ALL of his grandchildren. And since he has no political aspirations of his own, he could care less what anyone will say about him.

K.A. writes,

You try to appear to be educated Orin, so you can at least cut the hypocrisy.

Do I write in complete sentences?

Ah, the "H" word,

Hypocrisy is a tribute that vice pays to virtue.

François, Duc de La Rochefoucauld

Ok, guilty as charged...well at least I am not alone (if in doubt, see any of Jim's entries).

Randi rites a sentence fragment,

...what they said. You've been told Orin.

Oh, that is so sweet of you...and you are trying to say exactlyy what?

January 26, 2007 3:43 AM  
Blogger Orin Ryssman said...

In the spirit of two front wars (you know, like in Afghanistan and Iraq), I make the modest proposal that we so called gay-haters also declare "war" on the sexual immorality of fellow breeders (that is, heterosexuals) by bringing back laws punishing the crime of adultery.

But isn't that legislating morality and forcing it on others??? Besides, what is a little fooling around among fellow heterosexuals?


Things got ugly after truth got out about affair

Victim’s husband admitted fathering girlfriend’s child

By Sara Burnett, Rocky Mountain News
January 26, 2007

For more than a year, Shawna Nelson carefully guarded a secret.

The boy born in early 2006 to Shawna and her husband, Ken, was actually the child of a married Greeley police officer with whom she’d had a three-year, on- again, off-again affair.

The people closest to Shawna — including her husband, a Weld County sheriff’s deputy — knew the truth. Officers on the police force, where Ignacio Garraus worked as a cop and Shawna Nelson as a dispatcher, suspected.

But it wasn’t until about three weeks ago that Ignacio’s wife, Heather Garraus, found out.

Although they struggled Thursday for an explanation, sources close to Shawna Nelson said that discovery — and its aftermath — may have led to the deadly ending Tuesday night.

Authorities have accused Nelson of waiting outside a credit union where Heather Garraus worked and opening fire as Heather walked to her car.

A sad story that should be taken as a warning to all those inclined to be unfaithful to their spouse.

I know, I know...I should not be so judgemental...should loosen up...and not be such a prude.

January 26, 2007 7:14 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Orin said "Angry Left is an accurately descriptive term for the blogger-in-chief, not to mention his "amen corner"."

And Orin, "Gay-Haters" is an accurately descriptive term for people like you that oppose equality for gays. And "hypocrite" is an accurately descriptive term for you criticizing the use of that term while you use "angry left". And the idea that your drive to keep gays second class citizens represents a virtue is laughable.

January 26, 2007 5:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you for saying that so well, Randi. I fully concur.

January 26, 2007 5:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice design of blog.

August 13, 2007 3:41 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home