Senate Blocks Gay Marriage Ban

The issue that the American Taliban was hoping to use as a “get-out-the-vote” wedge issue in November’s elections has been smacked down.

Proponents failed to get the 60 votes required to end debate and move to a vote on the actual amendment.

Of course, the House will still take their whacks at it….but for right now, we can say “Har har! Fuck you, American Taliban”, and enjoy a brief moment of Schadenfreude.

Gotta love this, though: Republican Sen. David Vitter (Louisiana) said: “I don’t believe there’s any issue that’s more important than this one.” Somehow, I think your constituents in New Orleans (who are still living in Houston, Atlanta, Dallas, etc. etc. etc.) might see things just a bit differently, Bubba.

Oh, and Home-state scumbag Sam Brownback (R-KS) vowed that “people are going to be responsible for this vote.” Oooooh. Scaaaaaaaary.

17 Replies to “Senate Blocks Gay Marriage Ban”

  1. I’m still just amazed that people don’t view this as some sort of discrimination based on a religious stance. It’s like this bizarre elephant in the room that people refuse to accept.

    A lot of people decades ago were against inter-racial marriage and now if you’re against that, you’re a racist whackjob. But, apparently this issue is so much different… but I can’t see it.

    I guess I’m a liberal nutcase, except that I’ll coldcock the bastard who tries to stick a label on my forehead.

  2. Oh, and Home-state scumbag Sam Brownback (R-KS) vowed that “people are going to be responsible for this vote.” Oooooh. Scaaaaaaaary.

    …after which he transformed into a chaotic cloud of crows and scattered.

  3. It failed 49-48. They couldn’t even get a simple majority vote. What a pathetic waste of time. John Aravosis at Americablog summed it up best by calling it Terry Schiavo all over again. They’re desparate to get some sort of ban in place because if they don’t now, they never will. The upcoming generation largely does not see gay marriage as a problem. In fact, one poll on the subject went from 68 or 69% oppossed in 2000 to just 51% oppossed in 2005 or 2006. I can’t remember the exact poll or numbers, but I’m sure I could find it if you’re interested.

    And please excuse the spelling and atrocious grammar. It’s exam week, I’m running on three hours sleep and still have a full work day ahead of me after I go and fail my Java exam. Also please excuse the fact that this is most likely entirely way more information about my personal life than you probably care to know about at this time.

  4. Having written my thesis on the subject (the one that didn’t get approved you know), I can tell you it’s because MOST people who are against it think of it as being against CULTURE itself, not against religion at all. Only the nut-jobs quote Leviticus. Every one else pretends that marriage has always been between a man and a woman, through out every culture ever. You can give them examples and they’re like, well that’s just those crazy indigenous, uncivilized people. They meant “civilized culture” of course, not people in New Guinea (sp?) or even the frickin CELTS.

    Times will change, just like they did for interracial stuff. It *will* happen. We can only hope sooner rather than later.

    And anyway, it’s all about rhetoric anyway. Most people have no idea why gay people want to get married anyway. But the rhetoric insists they be against it.

  5. A lot of people decades ago were against inter-racial marriage

    It wasn’t that long ago. I read somewhere that polls showed the majority of Americans did not find inter-racial marriage acceptable until 1990. Even then, it was just over the 50% mark.

  6. Honestly, how much of it is, “I was raised to believe it was wrong, so I know it’s wrong!” ? Because I know so many people that would rather just follow what their parents taught them than, dare I say it, THINK for themselves! It’s too HARD! Darn self replicating rhetoric…

  7. I read somewhere that polls showed the majority of Americans did not find inter-racial marriage acceptable until 1990.

    My favorite defense of the stance is “But the children won’t know what they are!” Ha. Oh man, that makes me laugh.

  8. I love the following snippet from the AP writeup about it:

    [quote]”The Republican leadership is asking us to spend time writing bigotry into the Constitution,” said Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, which legalized gay marriage in 2003. “A vote for it is a vote against civil unions, against domestic partnership, against all other efforts for states to treat gays and lesbians fairly under the law.”

    In response, Hatch fumed: “Does he really want to suggest that over half of the United States Senate is a crew of bigots?”[/quote]

    Yes, Senator Hatch. Yes, he does, and rightly so.

  9. Well, and my defense against the dorks who quote Leviticus is to ask them if they’ve stoned their children for disobeying them and if they’re washing their pots and pans in the God prescribed manner.

  10. The usual Christian conservative response when I point out all of the other wacky shit in Leviticus is to hand-wave it away and say “Two different Covenants.”

    To which I say bullshit — the New Testament (the Covenant of Christ) does not mention homosexuality at all…so it all comes from the SAME FUCKING COVENANT (the Old Testament, specifically Leviticus).

    The Bible-Thumpers HATE it when “the enemy” has actually studied the Bible. (Catholic schools until part-way through High School, and was considered for the Seminary, in fact…. Yes, you may laugh now.)

  11. I think Princess Leia said something about this…

    “The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.