Comments on A Modest (Marriage) Proposal

Really, don't you have anything better to do?

I mean, this is not just unlikely in the first year.

Ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell - no prob.

But DOMA? Congress has to lead on that one, and you know it.

Dan must still be feeling the after affects of his alt-HempFest celebration.

Dan, this is just silly. I don't remember too many evangelical conservatives ever saying, "I think it's fine if gays get married, just not in my state!" These aren't "live and let live (elsewhere)" people. To them homosexuality is a SIN and even one gay marriage, anywhere, anytime, somehow mysteriously makes their own marriages meaningless. That sort of stuff doesn't stop at state boundaries and pragmatism doesn't enter into their calculations.

Asking "Christians" to take a reasonable view about ANY kind of equality has always seemed a bit silly to me. Ma Daddy has always voted against "special" rights for homos like me because he has to. (He's a preacher with three gay sons.) Convincing his ilk that "giving" us federal equality would cause us to move out of places like Virginia, Oklahoma and Mississippi IS NOT A BAD IDEA.


They just might buy into it.

Imagine the egg on their face when The Homos don't move to Washington State and stay put. Oh, you'll have Homo Crow laws enacted after that kinda deception

But hey, if this works, let's try to convince rabid pro-lifers not to overturn Roe v. Wade on grounds that if murdering unborn babies is legal in liberal states and illegal in conservative states, then birth rates will go down in liberal states and up in conservative states, thus they will soon outnumber us and be able to run the country however they want. Surely none of them would object to (what they consider) murdering unborn babies if it was only in other states and served their long-term pragmatic interests.

But hey, if this works, let's try to convince rabid pro-lifers not to overturn Roe v. Wade on grounds that if murdering unborn babies is legal in liberal states and illegal in conservative states, then birth rates will go down in liberal states and up in conservative states, thus they will soon outnumber us and be able to run the country however they want. Surely none of them would object to (what they consider) murdering unborn babies if it was only in other states and served their long-term pragmatic interests.

I think this may just be crazy enough to work.

And the opposition uses dirty tactics and aren't using "authentic engagement". Liberals need to stop trying to play nice with people that NEVER will play nice. It's why we keep getting our asses kicked.

We're like the little kid with glasses on the playground. We keep hoping people will realize that what their doing is wrong, when really we just need to grow a pair and use some of our own dirty tactics to 1 up them.

Simply playground rules do apply to real life, especially politics.

Yeah, but if you're going to come up with an inauthentic argument don't make it a ripoff of the Roma lifestyle.

Instead, remove all laws that give any legal, financial, gov'tmental or otherwise benefit to "marriage". Make the feds recognize civil commitments or the de jure slang word for "same thing only different" that isn't marriage.

Push it forward as a religious freedom giving marriage back to the churches! Let Jesus define marriage. And of course, the churches who discriminate will continue to not marry homos and the sanctimonious xians hung up on the marriage word can continue to be hung up on that word. That's the freedom we advertise. The flipside is that the homos can call their relationship "marriage" with the sanctity of whatever religious tradition they want, or lack of, because who cares as long as the government is out of the word defining business.

That’ll mean he’s also on the verge of having to make good on a campaign promise

"Dreamer, you silly little dreamer
So now you put your head in your hands, Oh no!"
I think maybe @2 got it right.

Interesting idea, but it'll just encourage 'em to advocate the idea of sending us all OUT of the United States. And no, it won't be to E.U. countries (not even to those E.U. countries that hate gays, like Latvia, Lithuania, or Poland). It'll be to places like Iran or Saudi Arabia, where (to quote someone I went to high school with) "they REALLY know how to 'cure' those gays." Yikes.

And honestly: everyone knows who Adlai Stevenson is (I, II, and III actually!). We all went to school.

I appreciate the effort at pragmatism, Dan, but are you insane? Would you have predicated support for the Voting Rights Act or Brown V. Board of Education so long as the African Americans migrated North? Has it occurred to you that some queers might actually like the states where they reside (aside from the bigotry of some citizens)?

Counter-proposal: We offer the DOMA-folks the exclusive use of the word "marriage" if they'll give queers all the rights but we have to call it something else? Marriage stays "defended" but they also pass federal "civil union" legislation for same-gender couples. Oh, that's right, that's Obama's position already...

First, it's not just Christians against same sex marriage. I work with Jews and Muslims who aren't in favor of it either (personally I don't care who gets married).

Second, Dan, please provide a link to where Obama has said, in public, he would repeal DOMA. Not once have I ever heard him say it. If he had we would be seeing commercials from the McCain camp about it.

From Obama's open letter to the gay community:

"I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)—a position I have held since before arriving in the U.S. Senate. While some say we should repeal only part of the law, I believe we should get rid of that statute altogether."

He also said it in the LOGO debate.

Christine cannot, by executive order, recognize out of state same sex marriages as did the governor of New York, because, unlike New York, Washington has a DOMA

@7, that would involve overturning Roe v. Wade

Dan, I know you're a fan of William Shirer, as am I. You should know then, that this idea starts us on a very dangerous slippery slope. The Nazis started exporting Jews before they started exterminating them. Once you accept the idea that a group of people is undesirable, it becomes okay to get rid of them by any means necessary.

Everyone that is taking Dan's post seriously needs to go back and read the title of this post again and then think about it for a minute.

Or we could all move to 1 empty state every 2 years and vote in new senators: Wyoming, Alaska, the Dakotas...

It would be easier to convince those Jesus morons that Christ was a raging homo.

Dan. Thanks. I hadn't read it and when I read your post the link wasn't there. I hope Obama is a man of his word. Sorry that I doubted you.

OMG, I have an idea that could work! How about if the raging homophobes who think homos should be exported each cough up the money to permit one gay person to emigrate to the EU or New Zealand or some other civilized country as an entrepreneur - usually about $100K? I would totally turn gay (I'm already bisexual) if I could emigrate to NZ.

Put your money where your big Xtian mouth is, closet cases.

The right knows that DOMA ending would open the door for challenges to gay marriage bans based on the full faith and credit clause wide. They won't let it get repealed without a damn nasty fight, and a lot of the conservative dems won't back it.

These people want to hurt gay people. If they could export them to Iran where they would be killed, they would. I don't think any of the Bible thumpers are going to buy your argument, because it isn't mean enough and they are bullies who want to be mean.

Interestingly, the reverse argument may work on fence sitters. If California, New York and Mass. attract all the intelegent, creative gays and lesbians (the ones with the means to move) the economic benifits will flow to those states and away from the hate-states. Some of the more moderate hate-states might eventually want to avoid economic loss.