Slog
News & ArtsFriday, May 8, 2009
Homo We're Winning
Posted by Dan Savage on Fri, May 8, 2009 at 3:13 PM
From the Chicago Tribune:
U.S Sen. Tom Harkin said Friday he's changed his views on gay marriage and would oppose any effort to overturn an Iowa Supreme Court decision last month that legalized same-sex unions."We all grow as we get older, we learn things, we become more sensitive to people and people's lives," said Harkin. "The more I've looked at that, I've grown to think differently about how we should live. I guess I've got to the point of live and let live."
Harkin is the senior senator from Iowa—and he voted for the Defense of Marriage Act in 1998, which currently bars any federal recognition of the legal marriages of same-sex couples in Iowa. Obama promised to repeal DOMA during the campaign.
3
It saddens me to have to correct you Dan, and saddens me even more that I actually know this off the top of my head, but Harkin is in fact the Junior Senator from Iowa...
7
What a nice piece of good news.
Now if only more people can get "to the point of live and let live" Dan can finally write "We've Won" rather than "We're Winning".
(I personally interpret "we" as all people who care about equality, justice, and basic human rights.)
Now if only more people can get "to the point of live and let live" Dan can finally write "We've Won" rather than "We're Winning".
(I personally interpret "we" as all people who care about equality, justice, and basic human rights.)
8
Translation: "Oh, the political winds seem to be a'turnin' so I'm going to hop off the anti-gay bus and hop on the pro-gay bus before it's too late!"
9
"Obama promised to repeal DOMA during the campaign."
That's great that one senator has changed his mind. But DOMA is still there. Wouldn't Harkin's sentiment bear more weight if he made the appropriate actions to overturn DOMA already?
And wasn't Obama still a senator when he said he wanted to repeal DOMA? And he's waited how long to do.... well, nothing so far.
That's great that one senator has changed his mind. But DOMA is still there. Wouldn't Harkin's sentiment bear more weight if he made the appropriate actions to overturn DOMA already?
And wasn't Obama still a senator when he said he wanted to repeal DOMA? And he's waited how long to do.... well, nothing so far.
11
I've always said, time is on the side of love, acceptance and rational thinking. History is chocked full of proof. The opponents of gay marriage will either get on board, as is the rest of society, or eventually die and fade into oblivion. It's one-or-the-other.
15
Yeah, if only he meant it. This just proves that politicians have no convictions of their own, they just support what seems popular (although, since they're our representatives, isn't that a good thing?) Anyway, we'll see what happens when it comes time to vote on stuff.
Oh and Dan, when you say "we're winning", I hope you mean everyone who supports gay rights, and not just homosexuals. I've supported you guys from day one, and I'd hate to be excluded from the victory party.
Oh and Dan, when you say "we're winning", I hope you mean everyone who supports gay rights, and not just homosexuals. I've supported you guys from day one, and I'd hate to be excluded from the victory party.
16
Tom Harkin is a dick. It's his fault that Norm Coleman ever got elected in the first place. He was Wellstone's best friend in the Senate, he could have turned to eulogy away from grief-crazed partisanship, but instead he fanned the flames. Fuck 'im.
17
What a blatant coward. Politicians have no shame about having no convictions. Does he really believe that anyone is swallowing his bullshit? Shouldn't his constituents feel that their intelligence is being insulted?
And anyway what an empty statement. He is basically saying that gays are still immoral but that we should let them be. Look everyone I'm so compassionate!
And anyway what an empty statement. He is basically saying that gays are still immoral but that we should let them be. Look everyone I'm so compassionate!
19
"On this point, I wanted to tell you guys about a discussion I had with a friend a couple of days ago about ERW....
So, I met up with a friend I used to work with who was laid off by ERW [recently]. He was actually XXXXX's direct supervisor until that point, a Field Organizer. We talked for several hours and he just totally went off on ERW top-down organizing style.
Part of his job was to try and organize things with smaller groups around the state. He told me that the problem is that ERW continually fucks people over because they're only really concerned with where the money is coming from, though they put up a front that they want to help the community. As an effect, he said that he'd have people from these different community groups calling him all the time cussing him out because ERW would last minute decide that plans with a certain group weren't profitable, and would just get the order to ditch out on them. He said that it felt like 80% of the groups they would work with would be so angry at them, because they were really only worried about the most profitable 20%: the big donaters.
He also said that he felt bad for the people that worked there because they're massively overworked and underpaid, working on average 60 hours a week, and more during big events. The bosses don't listen to the suggestions of any of the volunteers, but give orders to them based upon the wants of those with the dollars.
So basically I'm saying that our assessment of ERW as a top-down, conservative organization is pretty accurate, straight from the horse's mouth itself. Should we still work with them, yes. But should we be prepared for them to fuck us over if we can't bring them money? Yes. Let's just be as careful with them as possible. This is why I personally prefer a grassroots approach in which all of our opinions are valid and help shape the outward focus of the groups' activities. We're not tied down to donations, and they are. This is also why they're not prepared to "rock the boat", and why we have a very important role to play in building this movement."
More...
So, I met up with a friend I used to work with who was laid off by ERW [recently]. He was actually XXXXX's direct supervisor until that point, a Field Organizer. We talked for several hours and he just totally went off on ERW top-down organizing style.
Part of his job was to try and organize things with smaller groups around the state. He told me that the problem is that ERW continually fucks people over because they're only really concerned with where the money is coming from, though they put up a front that they want to help the community. As an effect, he said that he'd have people from these different community groups calling him all the time cussing him out because ERW would last minute decide that plans with a certain group weren't profitable, and would just get the order to ditch out on them. He said that it felt like 80% of the groups they would work with would be so angry at them, because they were really only worried about the most profitable 20%: the big donaters.
He also said that he felt bad for the people that worked there because they're massively overworked and underpaid, working on average 60 hours a week, and more during big events. The bosses don't listen to the suggestions of any of the volunteers, but give orders to them based upon the wants of those with the dollars.
So basically I'm saying that our assessment of ERW as a top-down, conservative organization is pretty accurate, straight from the horse's mouth itself. Should we still work with them, yes. But should we be prepared for them to fuck us over if we can't bring them money? Yes. Let's just be as careful with them as possible. This is why I personally prefer a grassroots approach in which all of our opinions are valid and help shape the outward focus of the groups' activities. We're not tied down to donations, and they are. This is also why they're not prepared to "rock the boat", and why we have a very important role to play in building this movement."
20
Yikes! Disgruntled much? The Governor is signing a bill on Monday they had a hand in making happen. Where were you and your disgruntled friend?
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Putting It In by Dan Savage
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Meet the UW "Swagga Suit" by David Schmader
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (20) RSS