Pennsylvania Senate committee advances same-sex marriage ban

"foundation of society go into ruin"

I hear various versions of this alarm bell all the time from various fulminators, but I have yet to hear/see anyone explain what they mean, short of the nut jobs who predict Biblical plagues, etc.  

And not one single reporter ever pursues the speaker to say, "What do you mean, can you be specific?"  Instead, the claim about marriage is left to sit there like a pool of vomit nobody cares to clean up.

"In order to maintain an untenable position, you have to be actively ignorant."  The Colbert Report

---

by: Lev Raphael @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 15:05:48 PM CDT

Protecting marriage?

Can someone please explain to me how allowing same sex couples to marry harms the traditional M-F marriage?

If Ms. Gramley really wanted to "protect marriage" she should be working to prevent, if not outlaw, divorce.

---

by: bkmn @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 15:06:21 PM CDT

So Gramley is saying that, if the Constitution guaranteeing equal protection under the law

to ALL Pennsylvanians isn't amended in order to secure special rights for "married" people only, the foundation of civilization will be destroyed.

It's rather nice to know that, for all the Right's talk about sanctity and God and principles, the only real intent for "conservatives" to support marriage is a slew of special property, material, visitation, inheritance, and funeral rights reserved exclusively and only for them.

So this is really an attack upon the equal protection clause of the state constitution by dominionists who believe that all citizens shall not be seen as equal under the law - in fact, the majority cannot access the those laws.  

---

by: kevinbgoode @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 15:06:49 PM CDT

Well, Sally Kern spilled that secret

...when she said that "all religions are not equal"" as the preface to "all lifestyles are not equal"

We need to keep those statements linked in the public mind.

Though for the life of me, I've yet to see what the gay lifestyle is characterized by.
Tasteful window treatments?

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 08:48:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Alrighty then

legislators must take proper action to protect "traditional marriage and the natural family" because those entities are under nationwide attack.

And what, pray tell, is "the natural family"?  Would that include or exclude blended families?  

Pennsylvania had better take a look at Ohio and learn the lesson of unintended consequences.

Better yet, kill this abomination completely and stop trying to legislate one group's peculiar form of social structures.

---

by: Zorya @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 15:40:17 PM CDT

Okay...

Call me a trans woman fashion maven if you must, but...

Ms. Gramley is in serious need of a makeover - and by 'makeover' I mean moving forward into at least the 1950s.

Kat

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 16:35:41 PM CDT

i hear you

that's the first thing i thought! my guess is that any form of sexual relations is repulsive to her unless it's for pro-creation.  

---

by: c-freak @ Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 11:05:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Obama??

Maybe he can give another speech about unity and political divisiveness and scapegoating across race, gender and class lines without mentioning any examples of how these tactics are used against LGBT Americans DURING ELECTION YEARS.

Hello...Senator Obama???  

Are you in Pennsylvania?  Can you make any connections?

Senator Clinton - is it too much to ask that you make a statement - one half as bold as Obamas but one that actually addresses contemporary examples of people being used and abused by the political process?

I think my new favorite quote is:  "God DAMN America"

Is it too late to write in Reverend Wright?  He is the only person that makes any sense.

---

by: Patrick @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 18:40:10 PM CDT

Clinton & Obama have a dilemma

They can support the amendment because it would preserve special marriage rights for heterosexuals that they treasure, but that would mean that the CUs they support for The Gayz would not be possible in PA.  But if they oppose the amendment so that the door remains open for CUs, they run the risk of marriage equality sneaking in.  What's a progressive bigot to do?!

Snark aside, I doubt either will mention it unless they are asked.  But if asked, they will either demure by saying they won't meddle in state-level policies, or they will oppose it because they are both on record opposing the Federal Marriage Amendment.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 18:48:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

or unless one of them accusses the other of being gay

And that's inlikely...but isn't it interesting that Obama would say something like this:  

"Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote, "The past isn't dead and buried. In fact, it isn't even past." We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.

Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven't fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today's black and white students."

How did the legacy of Jim Crow take hold and succeed?  It was a byproduct of states' rights...the same ideology that he and Senator Clinton think is just a swell way to deal with the invisible homos.

His speech was beautiful.  Will anyone point out the contradictions to him or does he get to ride the pink cloud at our expense?  This is by no means an endorsement of Clinton - unfortunately at some places criticism of one candidate connotes support for the other.  

---

by: Patrick @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 23:03:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

From the Pennsylvanians for Marriage Website:

4. Q. If you're interested in protecting marriage, why include Civil Unions, too?
A. The two are one and the same. Even those who are against same-sex marriage seem to like the sound of "civil unions", which appear to be a reasonable compromise. In the eyes of the law, however, "civil unions"; would simply preserve the name "marriage", while allowing the institution to be destroyed. Granting homosexual couples the legal rights of married couples, even if we don't call it "marriage", will result in the same social, religious, cultural and economic perils as same-sex marriage itself.


I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 01:35:40 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

My home state...

You folks all do realize that these creeps are creating a de-facto segregated nation?  Some few states where same-sex marriages are protected and legally recognized, and others where we have no rights at all...

The list of states where my partner and I cannot go grows longer each year.

---

by: Technowitch @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 22:53:53 PM CDT

I watching the same list too Techno

Florida; West Virginia; PA; AZ; and even in CA anti gays are collecting signatures for a definition only amendment (AZ is going for a definition only amendment also this year after failing the "take away" already existing rights amendment last Nov,.)

---

by: Karen in Kalifornia @ Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 23:55:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I lived and studied in Pennsylvania

until I got married to my partner. I still own prorerty there It is sad that right wing bigots who can offer no concrete example of harm done by same sex marriage despite their wild statements want to make it so that we can never live in the state.

I was proud of Senator Earll defying her party to stand up against the amendment.

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 01:12:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

it is "The House Divided" concept

and that si why they keep the push for a Federal Marriage Amendment....because the House divided did not work out so well for the haters in the 1860's...

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 08:50:49 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

They Can't Or Won't Do Anything About Real Issues

so they drum up all this false BS about how marriage is the #1 issue.  That makes their jobs easy and makes them appear to be tough against the gay terrorist threat.

Their solutions to other less serious problems such as the deteriorating highways, bridges and mass transit systems is also to take the low road... raising tolls and privatizing the turnpike.

But by God, marriage will be "protected."

---

by: konagod @ Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 08:34:42 AM CDT

Obama said it best

Except he left a few words out...lets unfortunately read between his lines and pretend we matter too:

(paraphrased from his speech)

"As such, (the actions of the PA Senate Committee as well as the words of Oklahoma Sally) were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; (demeaning toward decent and law abiding LGBT citizens) at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems - two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, (or gay or straight) but rather problems that confront us all."

---

by: Patrick @ Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 09:43:41 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Here in PA.

Maybe it's time for some action here in Pennsylvania.
Equality Advocates Pa. is encouraging an email and phone campaign to let our represenatives know how we feel about this new amendment. I have no association with the organization but it seems like a no brainer for us to get behind this effort.

---

by: lostinsepa @ Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 08:39:33 AM CDT

and if you can,

meet with your legislators.  that is THE most effective way to persuade them.  take neighbors with you, family, friends, clergy.  Take pictures showing you together with your family or neighbors.  Tell them how this amendment would affect you personally.  Let them see the human beings they will vote to discriminate against...or not.

For legislators for whom the human approach doesn't work, talk about the magnitude of embedding discrimination into the constitution.  Is there any other example of official discrimination in the PA constitution?  Probably not.  Let them see that they're playing with fire.  Intorducing the concept of state discrimination against a class of people is the slipperiest slope.

Find out who the US reps or senators from PA were that voted against the federal marriage amendment (or would have if they had been in office), and ask them to have a talk with state legislators in their district.

Follow-up any meeting or phone call with a hand-written letter thanking the legislator (even if they disagree with you), briefly summarizing your talking points.  It is importatnt to maximize your points of contact with your legislators, since the haters are much more numerous and can produce a landslide of emails.

Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper.  Get allies, especially clergy, in the district to do the same.  Guaranteed your legislator will read it - it is a tremendous method of applying public pressure.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 09:43:52 AM CDT

[ Parent ]