Frist aims to put gay-marriage ban on the floor in June

[kentuck]

Heard it mentioned on C-SPAN this morning.

If he does, are you ready to put all your chips on the table? Or is there a compromise that can be worked out?

In my opinion, the Democrats should try to protect both sides on this issue. Those that support traditional marriage between a man and a woman or the new proposal of a marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. The only solution that has come forth so far is the "civil union" proposal.

The purpose of the civil union is to offer legal protection for gays that have been in long-term relationships, as far as property and other rights that tradtional married people enjoy under protection of law. Personally, I think that would be the best solution at this time. Perhaps it is only a first step or perhaps it is the final step? Nobody knows.

However, it would offer legal protection to all our citizens and would also protect the traditonal marriage that is so divisive all across the nation, with most Republicans and many Democrats. I know this is very controversial but simply wanted to give a heads up to what to expect in a couple of months from the "new" Republican Party.

[abluelady]

1. What Has Traditional Marriage Done for You Today?

Or any day. Why can't we focus on how the marriage down the street has nothing to do with my marriage. I understand compromise but we are letting the Repukes run the conversation. That has to stop.

[Warren Stupidity]

6. My marriage has been hopelessly wrecked by them gays.

I'm sure of it. Plus civilzation crumbled soon after them gays starting marrying all over massachusettes. Well in fairness civilization started crumbling after the mean libruls took god out of gummint, but them gays were the last straw. Oh wait, actually it is them damn illegal immigrants burning the 'merican flag and making my kids speak spanish who are wrecking my marriage. Hold on hold on! It is those damn mooslims making that iranian nookulah bomb that is wrecking everything. I'm confused. Who am I supposed to hate and blame for everything?

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Here we go again.

Same stratergery as last midterm. Run the wedge issues, run the warnterra (nuke Iran, Go Team Amerika), divide and conquer baby. Divide and conquer.

[kentuck]

7. Yep...

Same-O...same-O...

[truth2power]

59. "Warnterra'". LOL!

Can I use that? Also, you're correct...wedge, divide, conquer. Repeat.

[Warren Stupidity]

67. Yeah sure but it ain't really mine to give away.

I think I got it from that british cartoonist who does the chimpster so well. Hang on a sec I'll get his book. Ah - steve bell. This guy:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/stevebell/0,,1720563,00.html

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/gallery/image/0,8543,-10405016798,00.html

[Norquist Nemesis]

64. And blame the Dems for being 'obstructionists'

Yep! SSDE! (Same Shit Different Election)

Of course, IIRC, it was at the beginning of the year that we had warnings he was going to do this.

[radwriter0555]

3. Why? What' s happening in June that needs to be distracted from?

?

[annagull]

35. Pride is in June, lots of pics of the parades

and they will be sure to show of Faux and everywhere else the most outlandish drag queens and people having a good time partying that will horrify the hords of right wing nutbags.

[stepnw1f]

4. This Guy Is Setting a Precedent for Us All

it will backfire and people will reject the right wing because of it. I have personal heard from some that already have rejected this extremism and plan to vote for a Dem because of it. Keep up the great work righties.... your bigotry is pissing America off more and more everyday.

[NanceGreggs]

32. Agreed.

If I were an out-of-work Republican voter, whose savings were gone along with health coverage etc., and I heard my Party telling me that gay marriage was the most pressing problem in my life, I would be, shall we say, a bit PISSED-OFF!

IMHO, this tack is going to backfire big time. It underscores perfectly the fact that the GOP are totally out-of-touch with the everyday problems of their traditional voters.

I would imagine there are many anti-gay marriage Republicans out there who, if they could get their jobs back, their health insurance, and be able to save for the future again, they would not only care if the gay couple down the street could get married - they'd be so happy, they'd pay for the reception.

[Old and In the Way]

5. Is it a civil union ban or a marriage ban?

The former is a loser for the Republicans. The later has no business being debated in Congress. (IMHO)

[kentuck]

8. I believe the host said "gay-marriage" ban ?

Perhaps someone else heard it mentioned?

[BlooInBloo]

9. I don't believe in separate-but-equal...

... though I know a lot of DUers do......

If that's the best we can do, then that's the best we can do...

I think we should be ashamed if that's the best we can do though...

[Telly Savalas]

48. We can do better.

Ignoring all moral and ethical issues and looking at this purely in terms of marketing our candidates:

There are quite a few Americans who disagree with same-sex marriage but would go along with civil unions. What's critical though is that only a tiny fraction of these people base their voting decision solely upon on this nuance. "I was gonna vote for Bill Frist, but that Democrat fella says he only supports civil unions so I'll vote for him!" Yeah, right.

Civil unions are cheesey. If a Republican said he was against the war but supported a "strategic military encounter" in Iraq that amounted to exactly the same thing as a war, how many anti-war votes would he win?

We need to quit pandering. It's insincere.

[Skip Intro]

10. cant the right wing fools/bigots see how they're being played/manipulated?

how many times will they fall for these blatant tricks?

[W_HAMILTON]

11. If someone is smart, they'll find a way to "out-wedge" them...

...sponsor a bill to raise the minimum wage, sponsor a bill regarding Katrina funding, bring up a bill regarding oil prices -- anything, whatever it takes. Then when these dickheads insist on debating about gay marriage, when there are already many state and federal laws that prohibit it already, have all the Democratic politicians point out how the Republicans are pushing this issue ahead of issues that actually mean something to the every day person.

I'm gonna be angry if the Democrats let another election be decided by silly sh*t like this, especially when they could be dominating the national debate on any of a number of different foul-ups from this inept administration.

Don't play the game on their terms.

[Zenlitened]

13. self delete

[ruggerson]

16. Civil rights don't mean something to the every day peson?

My family's civil rights are "silly shit" to you?

I guess we live on different planets.

Where I come from, Democrats are concerned with everyone's welfare, not just their own.

[W_HAMILTON]

29. Gimme a break...

...hi, I'm gay too.

I'm talking about how Republicans are bringing this up solely as a wedge issue for the elections in November. That's IT.

So while I want equal rights as well, I don't want to watch them "gay marriage" yet another election while they continue to screw this country over. I want accountability for what's been happening in this country, and the only way that is going to happen is if the Democrats take back either the Senate or the House in November.

This debate the Republicans are bringing up is all just for show, and you should know that. I don't want the Democrats to fight this fight on Republican terms yet again for another election, and that's exactly what they will be doing if they go through this whole dog and pony show scheduled for June.

Like it or not, whatever takes place in June will not legalize gay marriages, nor will it outlaw them. It's going to be a bunch of grandstanding for the upcoming elections, that's it. Maybe you want the Democrats to go through another situation like they did when Feingold brought up censure, and watch them all side-step the issue, with maybe a handful having the balls to stand up for what is right. Maybe you want another one of those episodes, but I don't.

So I say again, Democrats should refuse to "play politics" with this issue. Fight this fight on their own terms, which by the way they could have been doing in the last 1.5 years if they gave a damn about it to begin with. This crap that is scheduled for June is only being done to hurt the Democrats, and not bolster any real progress, and you know it. So yes, they better not fall for this "silly sh*t" again.

Democrats should be fighting for equal rights, and they should be doing it daily, not in some meaningless hearing on a gay marriage amendment scheduled by the Republicans a few months before the November elections for the simple reason of improving their standing heading into said elections.

[ruggerson]

37. The problem with your argument

is that Republicans control both houses of congress, thus they can schedule this vote if they wish to. Since, we agree this is all about politics and playing to their rightwing base, the best way for Democrats to deal with it is to confront that point head on, expose them for pandering, and then take a principled stand on the issue. John McCain, for pete's sake, as well as a number of other non-fundie Republicans are voting against this. It's not going to mean political suicide for people to vote their conscience, far from it. What *is* going to be political suicide is if the Dems try to straddle and hedge on the issue.

1) Frame it as equal access under the law for taxpaying American citizens.

2) Make clear that it's CIVIL marriage (as in the license one gets from city hall.

3) Stress that you know that good people can disagree on this issue, and you strongly support the constitutional rights of churches to marry, or ban from marriage, whomever they please.

Do that and you've defused the issue. It ain't rocket science.

[W_HAMILTON]

43. I understand that...

...but at the same time, it's debating on their terms. The Republicans would just love a couple weeks where gay marriage is back in the national debate, because it galvanizes THEIR people. Instead of playing into their hands, Democrats should switch the topic completely and deal with it on their own terms, or use their tactics against them.

Democrats just don't play dirty, and it's been their problem in recent years. There are a number of things they could do. I know they wouldn't be able to derail this issue because they don't have the power, but they can change the topic of debate.

I'd prefer they change the topic completely, and start using these wedge tactics right back at the Republicans. How about proposing a $1-for-$1 ratio of dollars spent for reconstruction in Iraq to be matched by funding for the Gulf coast areas hit by the hurricanes this past year? And I'm not talking about money earmarked for military purposes (that would play back into the Republican hands), I'm talking about all the handouts they are giving to help rebuild Iraq, while they have begun to cut off monies that would be used to help rebuild the hurricane-ravaged areas.

Or if they have no power to even talk about issues like that, and they simply have to comment on the gay marriage issue, say little to nothing. If they force a vote and make people show their hands, vote how they believe, then conveniently point out to the media which Republicans voted with them. For instance, you said McCain would most likely vote against the amendment, so every time a Democrat is pressed about the issue by the media, float his name out there, and echo his reasons (it's a states rights issues, whatever). Not only does that help to position McCain against his own base (helpful for the 2008 election), it also prevents giving the damn Republicans a neverending supply of 5-second sound bytes they can plaster all over commercials and scare all the backwards ass people that the gays are gonna take over unless you vote Republican in November.

It happened in 2004, and since their idiotic followers aren't smart enough to realize they did nothing about gay marriage on a national level since then, I don't want it to happen again in 2006. We have to realize that we aren't going to make much headway in this issue until we at least take back some of Congress, and the best way to go about that is by not playing the Republican's game when it comes to gay marriage. Even if that means pushing this issue back a year or two, if that's what it takes, then that's what it's gonna take. Time is on our side with this issue anyway.

[ruggerson]

40. Oh, and btw

The single best wedge issue with which to hit them back is stem cell research.

There should be a ballot referendum to ENSHRINE STEM CELL RESEARCH into state constitutions in every single state where we want to mobilize progressive voters. The public is with us 70-30 on this issue. They have one on the ballot in Missouri and it may very well be the factor that defeats Talent and puts McCaskill in the senate.

[kentuck]

41. Do you truly believe that ruggerson?

For some reason, I may be wrong, but I simply don't see the same emotion on stem cell as gay marriage? I could be wrong. But I do see that you want to put all the chips on the table...

[W_HAMILTON]

44. I think stem cell could be a huge "wedge" issue for the Democrats...

People don't want to die. People don't want their friends and families to die. Even though I guess it's wrong to talk about topics like these in such political terms, I think the stem cell debate could be one of the biggest "wedge" issues Democrats have going for them in the future. The Democrats should bring this issue to the forefront as soon as they regain more governmental power. Just about the only people against federal stem cell funding are the hardcore evangelical types, so we can "win" the national debate on that one. Even better so, because the Republicans have to have that evangelical vote to be successful, so what would be better than forcing a Republican Congress person to choose between losing most of their evangelical followers, or losing most of their "moderate" conservative followers?

And EVEN better, we can begin to right this country, and push thru stem cell legislation, so maybe we can start curing some of the damn diseases that have plagued us for decades. I mean really, who the hell in their right mind would let people suffer and die, just because it goes against their religious beliefs? And that's basically the stance of this administration, Jesus they are f*cked up.

[bunkerbuster1]

53. Agreed, great wedge issue for two reasons

1. it makes the Retardlickins look like the heartless scumbags that they are, for wanting to stop medical research dead in its tracks; and

2. It knocks yet another leg out from the extreme anti-abortion wing. If you can get Americans en masse to say "NO, A FERTILIZED EGG IS NOT A 'BABY', DAMMIT!" you've done major damage.

[ccpup]

27. That's just

AWESOME! You should mass email that idea to all the spineless Dems in the Senate. To have legislation pending over REAL issues that affect one's ability to put gas in the car or food on the table and then juxtapose that against Frist's "Save Amerika from the Gays" legislation would send a powerful message indeed.

[WilliamPitt]

12. ...just in time for the midterms...

[Skip Intro]

14. Dems' repsonse should be...

I think the Dems' (and all patriotic Americans') response should be about being motivated by positive ideals of tolerance and love (all that Jesus stuff, you know) rather than acting from hate and bigotry. That is the argument we should make, and is a great opportunity for Dems to gain ground on real "values" issues. We can take the values issue from them, with a little smarts, savvy, and courage of our convictions.

The majority of Americans don't hate, don't want to exclude certain segments from the rights and freedoms we go around boasting of. We can build a bigger, more powerful "values" base -

"hate is not a family value" etc

[immoderate]

15. Get the gummint out of the marriage business!

You are confusing terms. Traditional marriage precedes the establishment of this government. It precedes the establishment of any releigion practiced today. You are confusing legal marriages with traditional marriage.

I had a great aunt that lived all her adult life with a "friend." As I look back, though it was never discussed in the family, they were always treated as a married couple. Who knows how far back in history these unions took place? I'd say that was a traditional marriage. Let's call things what they are.

--IMM

[theHandpuppet]

52. Finally -- someone who gets it!!!!!

Y'know, I'm really starting to get pissed off that so many folks even here on DU keep tossing around terms like "civil unions" and "traditional marriage" without even knowing what we're really talking about here are the differences between legal marriages, "traditional" marriages and civil unions.

I'm sick and tired of too many even here on DU who think that civil unions grant the same legal protections as "legal" marriage (including civil cermonies between heterosexual couples).

FOR FUCK SAKE PEOPLE it's not like the nuts and bolts of this issue haven't been posted here time and time again, with links to GLAAD, HRC and other sites which define in great detail what is being fought for here. It's not like we don't have a GLBT forum where you can educate yourselves on the issues involved.

If you don't really know the legal difference between civil unions and legal marriage, start here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=851687#852253

If you still can't figure it out, then stop yakking on about how civil unions will give gay folks legal protections, just not the church ceremony. Anyone who does believe that obviously doesn't know what the hell they are talking about and yes, I'm sick of being nice about it!!!

:banghead:

[William769]

17. The only two sides to this issue is

The right side & the wrong side.

[sallyseven]

18. He should shove the ban up his ass.

[ruggerson]

19. I don't think we should let bigotry dictate our response to this

Stand up for what's right and the voters will have respect for you, even if they disagree.

Call it what it is: bigotry.

Too bad, the OP uses Republican-made-up fundie speech by employing the buzz phrase "traditional marriage."

Which era of "traditonial marriage" should we be preserving? When women were owned as chattel and marriages were pre arranged?

[kentuck]

20. So you vote to put all the chips on the table ?

However, you should remember that this was on the ballot in 11 or twelve states last election... and the Republicans won every one. Just a reminder.

[William769]

21. Just because they win, does that mean it's right?

Just imangine, back in the 50's & 60's if Civil rights was voted on instead of being through the court system & Presidential decrees, what like would be like today. Just some food for thought.

[W_HAMILTON]

33. I'm not buying it...

I'm gay (sad that I have to preface every argument with that to make it sound like I have a legitimate stake in all of this), and I'd rather put off gay marriage for a couple of years if it means taking back either the House or the Senate. I'm angry like every other gay person about how Republicans have used this issue, but I'm even more pissed about how they have run this country in the shitter for the past 5-6 years. If this administration gets off without one ounce of accountability during Bush's tenure, I'm going to be PISSED. And if the Republicans maintain the majority in Congress, then that's exactly what's going to happen.

I want hearings on everything, I want all the corruption exposed, and anytime President Bastard wants to go clear brush in Crawford, I want his ass called in to testify under oath about what has been going on with this country. Like I said in my other post, this is the last election where we can hold this group accountable. If we let them "gay marriage" another election away from us, and get off scott free from all this crap they've done, I'm going to be mad as all hell.

[William769]

47. Well you can't be that angry If you like being a 2nd class citizen.

:eyes:

[W_HAMILTON]

55. I don't like being a second class citizen

But that's all I'm going to be as long as the Republicans maintain power in just about every branch of government, and that's what they are going to continue to do if Democrats keep playing into their hands when it comes to these wedge issues.

NOTHING substantial will come from any of these talks that are scheduled, it is simply to hurt the Democrats in the upcoming election. So I'm sorry that I would rather put off the mere THOUGHT of short-term personal gains (because civil unions / gay marriage is never going to be allowed as long as Republicans are in power) in favor of what's best for the country (in terms of holding this administration accountable) and my long-term personal gains.

[ruggerson]

22. If they put slavery to a vote

it would have won in every southern state also, as well as a handful of midwestern ones.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't think civil rights are negotiable.

And remember, we are a country where pro choice is the majority, yet we've elected three or four anti choice Presidents in the last thirty years.

Why?

Because they stood unapologetically for what they believed in. And voters respected that, even if they disagreed with them.

The Democratic response should be roughly this: I know that good American disagree on this issue. I don't believe that enshrining discrimination into the constitution is ever the answer. I believe that equal treatment under the law is a core American principle, and so I oppose this amendment. I respect the point of view of those that disagree with me, and trust that in future years, we can resolve this issue with dignity and respect for the law.

[debbierlus]

34. Hear, Hear!

[dsc]

42. The issue was on the ballot in those states

but Republicans didn't win all of those states. MI, OR, and a few others voted for those amendments while Kerry won them.

[debbierlus]

23. No compromise - the dems should do this:

They should call a news conference, and say that they are appalled that the Republicans are using discrimination and hate as a political tool.

The democrats should make a long list of all the important legislation that Republicans won't allow to come to the floor.

Something like this:

The Republicans are in desperation mode. They have had full control of the government, deciding what legislation comes to the floor. As the majority, they have the votes to pass legislation without any democratic consent. And, they have done a atrocious job. The Republicans have a 25% approval rating. They have conducted NO oversight of Bush's pre-war intelligence lies and they refuse to look deeper into the NSA spying program, a program that is illegal and violates American's fourth amendment right.

The country is in the midst of a health care crisis. Wages are deflated. Inflation is rising. The middle class is disappearing. Our infrastructure is falling apart (D-) on our last land structure assessment (national).

All the democrats ask is that the American public watch the tactics of the Republicans as they seek to divide us instead of offering solutions for the problems the American people are confronted with on a daily basis.

America can not afford another day of Republican government control.

We are drowning in debt.

The corporations are making the laws of the land instead of the people.

The democrats are focused on solving the nations problems. Over the next few months, we will have a discussion with the American public about our ideas.

Division through hate is not one of them.

[ruggerson]

24. Another way to respond to this

is to simply say that you believe in state's rights.

Bush keeps talking about "activist judges" running roughshod over the wishes of the people.

Since majorities in New York, New Jersey and the New England states now support same sex civil marriage rights, according to the latest polling, it should be pointed out to Bush and Co. that by attempting to ban same sex marriage in the constitution, they are behaving as "activist" right wing legislators, seeking to run roughshod over the majority public opinion in states that wish to extend full rights to same sex couples.

What's good for the goose...

[Change has come]

25. Gay marriage, flag burning and abortion

More smoke and mirrors.


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/R/REPUBLICANS_CHECKLIST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-04-15-15-46-02


:banghead:

[warpigs]

49. If the majority of the people think

that flag burning has got so out-of-control that they will vote for a Repub instead of a liberal Democrat than so be it.

These are stupid issues and they should be brought to the forefront. The Repubs plans for the next year is to ban all the flag burning that has been destroying the nation over the last few years.

[MadMaddie]

26. I keep saying the Democrats need to take this to a higher

level.....Gays are tax paying law abiding AMERICAN citizens and they are due every right every other American has.....The laws should treat every American fairly.....

[annabanana]

28. the State should NOT be in the "Marriage" business... AT ALL

And Civil Unions should be available to all citizens..

(Why the F is this so HARD?)

[MadMaddie]

30. Agreed.....

[annagull]

36. Exactly--civil unions should be the same legally as marriage

you go to the courthouse, you sign the license, you celebrate however you like.

[rzemanfl]

31. Dems should say that with all that is wrong in the World, it is just

plain frivilous and stupid to be debating this issue now, they should change the subject to *'s lying whenever it comes up and refuse to cast any votes for or against until we know the truth about Plame, NSA spying, Downing Street memos, etc.

[jsamuel]

38. It is time for Dems to make a stand...

for what is right.

[AuntPatsy]

39. Which is why I continue to argue this issue, I refuse to allow them

the platform, we must continue to keep the problem highlighted that equality is not yet there in America for all Americans...

If one waits for them to bring it up, who gets the floor then?

[DemGirl7]

45. Oh Goody, Another ride on the Homophobe rollar coaster

and just in time for mid-terms too, the rethugs just gotta get the fundies vote.

[BrotherBuzz]

46. How many states will have a gay-marriage ban initative on their...

ballots for the general election in November? Damn, wedge issues really excite the pub base, and they turn out to vote!

:shrug:

[CrazyForKucinich]

50. If this passes I can only hope states will seceed.

[William769]

51. Probably the most sensible post so far.

Thanks! :hi:

[W_HAMILTON]

57. It's not going to pass...

It may not even make it to an actual vote, but it will spark debate, and give Republicans fodder to use against Democrats in the upcoming elections. That's the ONLY reason this issue is being brought back up again. Republicans do nothing about it since the '04 election, but then they trot it out just in time for the '06 election, because their followers are too stupid to realize they are just using this issue to get them out to vote. And what's funny is, when Clinton signed DOMA into law, he did more on a national-level to prevent gay marriages than anything Bush or these Republican congressmen have done. Republicans just prey on the stupidity of their followers.

[bunkerbuster1]

54. Time to roll out the Schaivo "Remote diagnosis" boondoggle

If we allow this Frist-fucker to spearhead ANYTHING without ridiculing his idiocy from just one short year ago, we're hopeless.

See also my sig quote...

[Strawman]

56. Message should be: "enough of this shit already"

It's discrimination against loving gay couples that dishonors the sanctity of the institution of marriage. That's how I feel personally.

But I know that most people who vote in this country are not tolerant and that message might not translate into success at the polls. I think a simple strategy that is likely to resonate is just pointing out the cynicism in the Republican strategy. Even people who are less tolerant are likely to think it's absurd that with all the failures of this administration and the Republicans in Congress they still think people can be won over by making them worry that some gays and lesbians might get married if they vote for the Democrats.

I don't have any illusions that the majority of people can be won over in the short term by a compelling message of tolerance. But I do think that with the amount of anxiety people are feeling over gas prices, outsourcing, and the bungling of our foreign policy, the Republicans can not go to the well of intolerance this time and come back with a victory. I think there is a mood of "enough of this shit already" out there that might make this kind of a stunt backfire on them. Alot of people are realizing that they just can't afford to indulge their intolerance this time around. Instead of us being defensive about being tolerant, we should put them on the defensive for exploiting intolerance.

In short this is what I would say to people I know I can't convince to be tolerant on this issue:
"If keeping the two gay guys down the block from having a piece of paper and certain rights is more important to you than your jobs, by all means, vote Republican. And when you're finished voting Republican would you mind training this Chinese guy to do your job? Don't worry, you can always go to the bank and deposit your bigotry into your checking account twice a month."

[mdmc]

58. finding a way, to keep America free

for the real nice folks like meeeeeee.

[truth2power]

60. I'm confused. Other than a Constitutional amendment

how does he propose to do this?? I thought marriage was an issue reserved to the states.

He should just sit down and STFU! Moron!!

A Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage would never be ratified.

[leesa]

61. Good, because this is such an idiotic thing to do it will split the GOP

once and for all. No one but the Fundie lunatics care about this issue.

[Kber]

62. Add an amendment outlawing divorce and adultery

and watch those cockroaches scatter.

[kentuck]

63. Did anyone watch The Sopranos last night ?

They dealt a bit with the homosexual issue within the "family"... Probably closer to reality than anyone would care to admit...

[ourbluenation]

65. He's a fool - nobody is going to go along with amending the

constitution to take away rights. People are sick of being wedged to death.

[yellowcanine]

66. That dog ain't gonna hunt no more, Fristy.