Fuck! Fucking fuck! Oh holy fuck! Fucking stop it!

[yesthattom]

Congress is about to vote on amending the U.S. Constitution to deny marriage equality to same-sex couples.

Never before has our Constitution been amended to take away anyone's rights. Yet our Senators will vote on this amendment in the next 48 hours.

It's urgent that we speak up now. This hateful divisiveness has no place in America. Please join me in saying so, at:

If you are in NJ:

http://capwiz.com/njlgc/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=6116896

Outside of NJ

http://www.moveon.org/unitednotdivided/

Equality in marriage is the civil rights issue of our generation. We can't let anyone, or any group, be singled out for discrimination based on who they are or who they love. Click on the link above and make your voice heard!

Comments

[shakal.livejournal.com]

Additional ways to make a difference on this issue, right now, are here:
http://www.saveroe.com/marriage/
http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/FMA
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRightslist.cfm?c=278

Not to be a jerk here

[mrfantasy.livejournal.com]

But I'd say prohibition was a removal of people's rights.

And we see how well that went.

Remember, anyone who thinks gay marriage is a bad idea, go back in time 70 years, substitute "interracial" for "gay" and then get back to me.

Re: Not to be a jerk here

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

I think what MoveOn.org meant to say was that the Constitution has not been amended to take away the rights of any one specific group. A quick perusal of all ratified amendments shows that, regarding specific groups of people, amendments were used to extend rights TO them rather than take rights AWAY from them. Prohibition took rights away from people, yes, but from ALL Americans, not just one class of them.

I'm surprised they allowed such sloppy terminology to get out there.

Re: Not to be a jerk here

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

Whatevah.

I think people get turned off by politics because good causes get dragged down by people getting all particular about such things.

Re: Not to be a jerk here

[qwrrty.livejournal.com]

I really hope this was intended to be ironic.

As jaded as I am about American politics, I have not yet come to think that truth is overrated. Nor do I think that knowingly misleading your base is a good political strategy. The Constitution has been amended to take away citizens' rights, and claiming that it hasn't only serves to make our own constitutents doubt us. It makes the very people who support this cause skeptical of what we have to say. I don't think that's going to help us.

I don't think this is a matter of "getting all particular" about the details. Until hammercock posted her comment I frankly had no idea what you meant by saying that the Constitution had never been amended to take away someone's rights, when it so obviously had. The distinction between "taking away rights" and "taking away rights unequally from citizens" was completely unclear to me. I think that rhetoric like this, so vague as to be inaccurate, is a terrible strategic mistake.

There was a time when you would never let someone get away with fudging the truth in order to score a political point, merely because you supported their goals. What's happened here?

Re: Not to be a jerk here

[barking-iguana.livejournal.com]

I don't think you're being a jerk here. I'm getting tired of feeling like a jerk for disagreeing with Tom, whose work I greatly admire, over this issue in one way or another so often, but I think he's got the casue and effect quite wrong below. I think people get turned off by politics because som many of those in it play fast and loose with the facts/evidence. I think it's quite wrong to then blame the disaffection on the people who stant up and say that when you say something it really ought to be, you know, true.

Amendments to take away rights

[dballing.livejournal.com]

Methinks you need to read Amendment XVIII a little more closely.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxviii.html

Amendment XXII also limits the rights of the people to elect the president they actually want.

While this latest election-year politicking by the far right (and let's be clear, that's all it is because there isn't nearly the 2/3 majority it needs to get out of the legislative brance) is disgusting, let's NOT sink to inaccurate soundbites in our attempts to get the word out.

[stitchinthyme.livejournal.com]

It's not going to pass. Everyone knows they don't have enough votes in the Senate to swing it. What this is, is an attempt by the right-wingers to slap the pro-gay, anti-family label on those who will inevitably vote against it, i.e., the Democrats.