Thou shalt not (be a gay) judge in Virginia UPDATED
Tracy Thorne-Begland | AP Photo
Most if not all of you by now know that very early Tuesday morning, the Virginia House of Delegates ditched the nomination of a gay prosecutor from Richmond to be a General District Court judge — because he was gay.
Tracy Thorne-Begland would have been the state’s first openly gay jurist, but opposition to his nomination was led by Del. Bob Marshall, R-Manassas, the most openly homophobic lawmaker in the Virginia General Assembly.
Thorne-Begland is a former Navy fighter pilot who lives with a partner and with whom he has adopted two children. It’s a travesty, though not completely unsurprising in Virginia, that Virginia House of Delegates would use his sexual orientation as a reason to discriminate against him.
Thorne-Begland needed 51 votes, a simple majority of the 100-member house, for confirmation. But his nomination mustered only 33.
In the spirit of public interest I’m listing the roll-call vote on his nomination below, and each name is a hot link to the email address of the lawmaker listed (if I was able to find the email address). Click on a name and you’ll be able to send those lawmakers a message telling them what you think about their votes, or nonvotes. (If you use web-based email, such as Gmail or Yahoo, you can right-click on the name to copy the address).
Here’s a breakdown of h0w that vote went down:
Yes, to confirm Thorne-Begland:
25 Democrats, 8 Republicans
Dave Albo, R-Springfield; Kenneth Alexander, D-Norfolk; Mamye BaCote, D-Newport News; David Bulova, D-Fairfax; Betsy Carr, D-Richmond; Barbara Comstock, R-McLean; Rosalyn Dance, D-Petersburg; Peter Farrell, R-Henrico; Eileen Filler-Corn, D-Fairfax Station; Charniele Herring, D-Alexandria; Patrick Hope, D-Arlington; Algie Howell, D-Norfolk; Matthew James, D-Portsmouth; Mark Keam, D-Vienna; Terry Kilgore, R-Gate City; Kaye Kory, D-Falls Church; Jim LeMunyon, R-Oak Hill; Lynwood Lewis, D-Accomac; Alfonso Lopez, D-Arlington; Manoli Loupassi, R-Richmond; Jennifer McClellan, D-Richmond; Delores McQuinn, D-Richmond; Joe Morrissey, D-Highland Springs; Tom Rust, R-Herndon; Jim Scott, D-Merrifield; Mark Sickles, D-Alexandria; Lionell Spruill, D-Chesapeake; Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax; Luke Torian, D-Woodbridge; David Toscano, D-Charlottesville; Jeion Ward, D-Hampton; Vivan Watts, D-Annandale; and Joseph Yost, R-Blacksburg.
No, against Thorne-Begland’s nomination:
31 Republicans
Rich Anderson, R-Woodbridge; Dickie Bell, R-Staunton; Rob Bell, R-Charlottesville; Kathy Byron, R-Lynchburg; Ben Cline, R-Amherst; Mark Cole, R-Fredericksburg; John Cosgrove, R-Chesapeake; John A. Cox, R-Ashland; Mark Dudenhefer, R-Stafford; James Edmunds, R-South Boston; Matt Fariss, R-Rustbert; Scott Garrett, R-Lynchburg; Tag Greason, R-Potomac Falls; Gordon Helsel, R-Poquoson; Keith Hodges, R-Urbanna; Tim Hugo, R-Centreville; Sal Iaquinto, R-Virginia Beach; Barry Knight, R-Virginia Beach; Scott Lingamfelter, R-Woodbridge; Danny Marshall, R-Danville; Bob Marshall, R-Manassas; Jimmie Massie, R-Richmond; Don Merricks, R-Danville; Will Morefield, R-North Tazewell; Brenda Pogge, R-Williamsburg; Charles Poindexter, R-Glade Hill; David Ramadan, R-South Riding; Roxann Robinson, R-Chesterfield; Ron Villanueva, R-Virginia Beach; Mike Watson, R-Williamsburg; Tony Wilt, R-Harrisonburg.
Abstained, Rule 69 (present but ducked voting):
9 Republicans, 1 Independent
Kirk Cox, R-Colonial Heights; Anne Crockett Stark, R-Wytheville; Riley Ingram, R-Hopewell; Steve Landes, R-Weyers Cave; Israel O’Quinn, R-Bristol; Lacey Putney, I-Bedford; Nick Rush, R-Christiansburg; Ed Scott, R-Culpeper; Beverly Sherwood, R-Winchester; Chris Stolle, R-Virginia Beach.
Not Voting (some present, some not):
19 Republicans, 7 Democrats
Bob Brink, D-Arlington; David Englin, D-Alexandria; Todd Gilbert, R-Woodstock; Greg Habeeb, R-Salem; Chris Head, R-Roanoke; Bill Howell, R-Fredericksburg; Johnny Joannou, D-Portmouth; Joseph Johnson, D-Abingdon; Chris Jones, R-Suffolk; Joe May, R-Leesburg; Jackson Miller, R-Manassas; Randy Minchew, R-Leesburg; Rick Morris, R-Carrollton; John O’Bannon, R-Richmond; Bobby Orrock, R-Thornburg; Chris Peace, R-Mechanicsville; Ken Plum, D-Reston; Bob Purkey, R-Virginia Beach; Margaret Ransone, R-Kinsale; Bob Tata, R-Virginia Beach; Roslyn Tyler, D-Jarratt; Onzlee Ware, D-Roanoke; Lee Ware, R-Powhatan; Michael Webert, R-Marshall; Tommy Wright, R-Victoria; David Yancey, R-Newport News.
————————–
UPDATE: Here’s an email I receive from Del. Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, shortly after this post was published:
Dan:
For whatever it’s worth, during orientation, we were trained that if you do not support a [judge], then we were supposed to not vote. Judge votes are actually judge elections, not votes like votes on bills. Don’t ask me to explain, but that’s what the Clerk told us the protocol was.
Rule 69 Abstention are for financial or personal conflicts of interest. I don’t know what those might have been given that I do not believe anyone was a family member.
In terms of the people who were not present, at the start of session, I think we were 5 short. More people left, especially after we finished the budget around 7 PM. However, I know that about 1/2 of the “not voting” votes were people who were in the room. Again, we were told that was the appropriate way to not support a judge as opposed to actually voting no.
I’m not suggesting that the above rules were in play for everyone in the room, but that’s what I was told in orientation 2.5 years ago.
Scott S.
–
Delegate Scott A. Surovell
44th District
General Assembly of Virginia
May 15, 2012 - 8:43 PM
Kicked out of the Navy. From reading the news accounts, his only qualification for the job was that he was gay. Journalists aren’t exactly forthcoming with any information except that he was gay.
He was honorably discharged, Henry.
The New York Times article seemed pretty clear to me Henry. He was discharged after publicly (and bravely) challenging a despicable policy. The legislators who voted against him are bigots, pure and simple. As with North Carolina’s vote last week, history will look back on these people with baffled disgust.
When you’re bored, Dan, you could write quite a column on Bob Marshall’s “greatest hits”. I believe he opposed state universities offering morning-after contraception and publicly stated that children with disabilities are God’s punishment to their parents.
The article I saw said he was discharged for violating DADT.
I’m reading these articles and he is really gay. He’s probably the gayest guy in Virginia. He has literally done nothing but be in the Navy and be gay.
You journalists don’t believe in digging too deeply. This guy is incredibly gay. He’s 10 Google pages of nothing but news articles about being gay. I don’t think he ever looked at a legal case. He was too busy being gay.
Let’s see. He went into the Navy as a gay man despite the fact it was against the rules. He lied. And his ability to lie so adeptly makes him qualified to be a judge?
Every day in this nation, religious zealots hurt someone. You people who think you are so much better than Sharia Law and “those Muslims” need to think again. Yes, we no longer allow you to kill people, but you can sure do a number on people who are not like you, do not believe as you do, do not behave as you demand. You are some sick twisted Pharisees decreeing other people’s behavior and messing in other people’s lives. The Christian right is more than enough to turn people from God. It must make Him weep, it certainly makes me weep. You have no right to do such damage!
Henry,
From UR on January 25, 2010 [This article by Andy Taylor originally appeared in the summer 2009 issue of Richmond Law magazine.]
http://tinyurl.com/csjc8dq
**
Tracy Thorne-Begland, L’98
SNIP
In 1993, after noisy debate and considerable opposition from the military, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” compromise was put into place. It remains the standing order for the Armed Forces.
Over the years, the Navy honorably discharged Thorne-Begland twice, initially after his revelation on television. He was reinstated after filing suit in federal court. He was discharged again in 1995, after the U.S. Supreme Court denied his appeal.
SNIP
[Emphasis added]
**
Henry, 10 bucks says your brother thinks you’re a moron.
Henry, please invite your brother to post here and join the conversation!
And his brother is not alone, Art.
The first Google link I found:
“Richmond Commonwealth’s Attorney Michael N. Herring said today that Virginia lawmakers who scuttled the judicial nomination of openly gay Chief Deputy Commonwealth’s Attorney Tracy Thorne-Begland early this morning did so without any justification that he was unqualified for the bench.
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2012/may/15/22/house-of-delegates-rejects-thorne-begland-for-judg-ar-1914948/
That’s his boss who thinks he’s qualified.
Name ONE complaint against his being a judge BESIDES his being gay and then I’ll let you know if he “has literally done nothing but be in the Navy and be gay”.
Henry the homophobe. Could you get more despicable, Henry? Absolutely disgusting.
The man has 10 years of prosecutorial experience in the Richmond corts, having risen to the position of Chief Deputy Commonwealt’s Attorney. Even the Richmond Times Dispatch, one of the most conservative papers in the country, has editorialiozed that he was highlty qualified for the bench
and that the bigoted action of the General Assembly was unconscionable.
He was endorsed by the judiciary committees in both the House and the Senate, whose responsibility it is to examine the qualifications of candidates for judgeships. He was endorsed by the local bar associations.
There seems to be no level too low for Henry to stoop in his bogotry against gays.
I see all of our local delegates, Habeeb, Head, and Onzlee Ware all punted on this issue by not voting. Shame on them all. And shame on the Senate for not even giving him the courtesy of a vote, thereby allowing them all to duck for cover. Courage against bigotry seems not be the long suit of our state legislators.
“There seems to be no level too low for Henry to stoop in his bigotry against his own brother.”
There, fixed it for you. You’re welcome.
If he’s leftwing, he’s not qualified to be a judge on that alone. That shows a lack of intelligence, judgment, and ability to think critically.
Think about it. Could any of the lefties in here be a judge? I’d as soon nominate my little tabby.
This may be from a carry over posting I missed, but how is what Henry wrote bigoted? He brings up a good point about the media. And to Delegate Surovell, would you jump off a cliff if they told you too? Not voting is BS, cowardly and disrespectful.
My apologies to Delegate Surovell, that email looked like a defense for not voting. I can’t believe that that is protocol. Unbelievable.
Another sad and disheartening day in Virginia politics. There WILL be a backlash against all this crap in the next series of state and federal elections.
Oh you poor people. You are victims. How awful it must be for you.
Conservatives hate veterans. They prove it over and over again.
UTR, for the record, Surovell voted for Thorne-Begland’s nomination. His message was offering insight and context to t his particular vote and the various methods delegates had for taking a vote on it.
I saw that too late Dan and referenced it in post 18. Can’t believe so many didn’t vote, it’s ridiculous.
I hear tabbies are a delicacy in Zimbabwe.
SNIP
[Emphasis added]
Quite often Henry includes the term SNIP in his posts.
Please excuse my ignorance but what does this mean?
Would we even be reading this article if the ousted Judge were a Conservative ?? When the gays of this country wake up and finally realize that they are being used as pawns by the democratic party, they will be much better off.
Rob Thommins, Dave Hicks is the one who adds the term SNIP to his posts, not Henry.
Of the 22 voting delegates from Northern Virginia the vote was 16-6 in favor of confirming Thorne-Begland . . . yet another reason for serious consideration of Northern Virginia secession. Sick of watching a river of money run out of NoVA to Richmond for disbursement to the “real Virginia” cretins. Virginia now competing with the likes of AZ, NC, FL, and TX for the most ridiculous state in the nation. Disheartening to see that there are 30 cowardly Repubs willing to follow Sideshow Bob (an embarrassment to both my Church and my State) over a cliff into an abyss of hate, ignorance and stupidity.
Jeff Doto,
Wouldn’t you say the same about any group that had been demonized by RWers? Here’s the process:
The right-wing demonizes women, gays, single-moms, minorities, etc.
Elements of that group, in turn, align themselves with political progressives.
Ergo, the RWers call the group THEY demonized “pawns” of the progressives.
What do these terms mean?
“incredibly gay” – comment @5 by Henry
“severely conservative” – Romney
I know what they have in common – they are nonsensical.
It is interesting to me how the “family values” Republicans seem to have so interested in everyone’s sex lives over the course of time. Politicians from every party ever known in our nation’s history have gotten caught in all kinds of “compromising” situations it seems. Most of the time they slink away back into whatever life is left to them after their exposure. Let me make clear, such human frailties are not the sole province of either current party. The Republicans, however, seem to be obsessed with it for at least the last 30 years or so. This from the party that seems to want government out of our lives. Is there a contradiction there??
Let’s look for a moment at some of the more infamous cases since the 1990s. Of course there was Bill Clinton and his Monica Lewinsky matter. Scumbag that he was, his actions sent the Republicans into a 3 year frenzy that “delayed” any action on the real issues of the day while the Republicans sated their curiosity about the sex lives of Mr. Clinton. Prior to that we had the Sen. Bob Packwood matter of his serial sexual harassment of women. Then we had none other than Rep. Newt Gingrinch who, while he was impeaching Bill Clinton, was cheating on his SECOND wife with a women who was 20 years younger. He made an “honest” women out of her by making her his third wife later. You can still listen to Newt today ranting on about the “gay & secular fascism in this country that is dangerous to anyone who believes in traditional religion.”
Next up was Rep. Mark Foley who seemed to have a “fixation” on young male interns and pages serving congressmen and women. Foley was very fond of portraying himself as a protector/defender of children. He built his political career on legislative measures meant to halt the sexual predation of children.
Of course there was Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana who had a habit of frequenting the D.C Madam. I suppose he thought there was nothing wrong with that. He was just another “family values loving” politician. After his exposure he co-sponsored the so-called “Marriage Protection Amendment” with none other than Sen. Larry Craig from Idaho. Credit the people of Louisiana, Mr. Vitter is still a member of the Senate.
Speaking of Sen. Larry Craig, how can we forget his playing “footsey” with a cop in an airport bathroom. Of course he attributed the foot rubbing incident to his “wide stance” on the issues of the day.
I could go on, but I won’t. Let me make clear that I do not condone the extramarital sexual activities of any leader. Nor do I condone preying on children by anyone. However, the Republican party has, in my view, wasted valuable time over the last 30 years or so obsessing about such things instead of tackling the real problems of our nation. Add to that their claim to be the party that wants to get government out of our lives and you can cut the hypocrisy with a knife.
It’s time to move on.
Sound familiar?
The Steps to Genocide:
3. DEHUMANIZATION: One group denies the humanity of the other group. Members of it are equated with animals, vermin, insects or diseases. Dehumanization overcomes the normal human revulsion against murder. At this stage, hate propaganda in print and on hate radios is used to vilify the victim group. . . . Local and international leaders should condemn the use of hate speech and make it culturally unacceptable.
http://www.genocidewatch.org/genocide/8stagesofgenocide.html
If the judge had been conservative, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. And it doesn’t take the democratic party for gays to understand they’re being demonized and discriminated against by the GOP…it’s loud and obvious.
Hilary, I suppose if a straight is promiscuous, that makes them “incredibly hetero”
Ditto Jeff Doto
Oh Stop Hilary, the freakin leader of the free world has endorsed gay marriage, so your post is ridiculous. Nobody endorses murder.. good grief!
Anti Gay Marriage doesn’t mean Anti-Human.
Thou shalt not be an ACTIVIST, of any kind.
Gays and Democrats are bringing each other down.
Well Walker, I guess you and Jeff Doto will just have to consign yourself to the TP/GOP pawns who vote not only against their own self interests but are willing hypocrites. Of course you call yours constituents and supporters but they remain just as much pawns as anyone who identifies with the Dems. And considering what they give up in return for so little, not very smart ones at that.
If the candidate had been “conservative” then a different set of people would be decrying the shameful treatment. That is all.
Yes Hillary #32, it sounds VERY familiar. It is and has always been the modus operandi of the TP/GOP. Refusing to admit their humanity, dignity and rights to happiness, fulfillment and truth, makes it easier to hate and discriminate. “They” are not us, not like us, not as good as us. Only trouble is, yes they are.
Just as I took Henry to task yesterday for asking the wrong questions and framing it as a perversion. Just as Suzie insists that pedophile priests coddled by the Catholic Church were homosexuals because that alone is perversion defined for these people. It is disgusting, but it is totally typical.
I don’t consign myself to anything, Sandi, as you do… I keep all routes of escape open.
I that what you think you do Walker?
Sorry, left off the s. Is that what you think you do Walker?
“children with disabilities are God’s punishment to their parents.” — attributed to Bob Marshall (and I don’t doubt he said it)
So I wonder what Bob’s parents did.
#36 PP – Does the name Matthew Shepard ring a bell?
“…who was tortured and murdered near Laramie, Wyoming, US, in October 1998. [...] a Laramie police officer testified that the violence against Shepard was due to how the attacker “[felt] about gays,”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard
how about, Colin Ireland?
Known as the ‘gay slayer’, he reportedly posed as a homosexual to be taken to each of his victims’ homes, where he tortured and murdered them…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2104572/Serial-killer-Colin-Ireland-tortured-gay-men-death-dies-jail.html#ixzz1v3OXdagu
or
“More than 300 supporters of a former Rutgers University student rallied outside the New Jersey statehouse on Monday to urge leniency at his sentencing for hate crimes after he spied on his roommate’s gay tryst.”
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-crime-rutgersbre84d18k-20120514,0,1431437.story
or
“Three men were jailed today after becoming the first to be convicted of stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation for handing out a leaflet calling for gay people to be executed.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/three-men-jailed-over-gay-death-call-leaflets-6700175.html
Directions: remove head from ass – open eyes – see what’s around you – become human…
Thorne-Begland is an ACTIVIST.
Enough said.
@44 – yes
Dan, I nominate Ron’s post as “Post of the Day”!
Ron, very well said!!
I have a question for the bigo-err, I mean thoughtful people who have no problem with this rejection. If Thorne-Begland recused himself from any cases involving gay rights, would you be ok with him getting to the bench?
#46 Righties on the SC are activists. Nuff said.
Re: Comment by Rob Thommins — May 16, 2012 @ 9:33 am
“SNIP
[Emphasis added]”
—-
Re: Comment by Debbie — May 16, 2012 @ 9:59 am
———-
Yup. That’s me.
I also use “—–” string a good bit.
They are internet traditions that go back to the usenet days [ http://tinyurl.com/8tmtt ] over a decade before WWW and well before GUI.
“SNIP” was/is to indicate a significant amount of materiel (usually a paragraph or more) of quoted material was “snipped.” In the 7-bit ASCII [ http://tinyurl.com/68vx4ge ]( a plain text w/o HTML tags & attributes) SNIP stood out far better than just “…” — albeit “…” shows up well w/i a sentence.
The “———-” was/is a break between segments — e.g., separating what is being replied to and the reply. Or references to different earlier comments.
The “[Emphasis added]” is to indicate the bold text in a quote was made bold by me — not in a bold font in the original. [see APA & MLA style guidelines.]
———
FWIIW, On this blog, I find it hard to figure out to who / to what some folk here are responding, where quoted material ends and the comments of the author begin and a simple “text” leaves me to guess if the comment is quoting a segment or a full statement.
Who is to say that he was not approved JUST because he is gay? Perhaps there are other reasons, I, personally, would prefer to hear the REST of the story…..we know how things are spun here.
I’ll see if I can find out anything more.
Re: Comment by Hugh Boylan — May 16, 2012 @ 10:03 am
Anyone have “return to locality” for Virginia taxes — similar to http://tinyurl.com/45hvpv for Federal taxes?
I keep hearing localities complaining that some other localities are taking their money, but I can’t remember seeing any data being presented.
Oh yes, typical right wingers, change the verbiage or the parameters and declare the whole thing a non-issue. No such luck, the line is bright and stinky and fed by right wing activists. Who oddly enough are just fine with all of you.
It appears that it is common practice for Bob Mrshall not to approve Federal Judges who make any kind of stand on amy “social” issues, including being gay. Fearing that their own feelings on any social issue will cloud their judgment.
If you would like, I will write a letter to Bob Marshall, letting him know that I feel that gay marriage is a Constitutional issue, not a religious one..and explain to him why I think that Gay marriage should be approved in all States…see what he says.
I’m sure it wouldn’t change his mind about his vote on THIS..but, let’s see what he says.
Not tonight though….I’m getting ready to watch Grant’s last show on Ghost Hunters.
“If you would like, I will write a letter to Bob Marshall, letting him know that I feel that gay marriage is a Constitutional issue, not a religious one..and explain to him why I think that Gay marriage should be approved in all States…see what he says.”
Sharon N.: 1 tip: Keep the letter to a single page, 10-point type, single spaced.
Sharon N:
Bob Marshall is a whacked-out freaking DELEGATE to the Virginia General Assembly, put into office by some whacked-out nutballs he has fooled up in Manassas. He has nothing whatsoever to do with who becomes a federal judge anywhere.
Kudos to the handful of Republicans who voted for a good man without blatant discrimination tainting their minds.
Come on Dan, I think it would be a great idea for Sharon N to write that letter to Marshall. They both think he is more than he is and she is after all, “a great writer”.
Sandi, how do know Sharon is not an aspiring staff writer for Marshall’s office?
LOL Dan, I’ll TRY to take your good advice.
But, before I do…I want you all to THINK about something…let me just present the OTHER side of the coin.
Bob Marshall may very well have led the “charge” not to approve this Judge. But, in following with his basic policy against “activist” judges…he more than likely would have worked JUST as strongly to not approve a “Fire and Brimstone” Preacher.
He would prefer that the LAW be judged by someone who would rule according to the Constitution…not by their own personal feelings OR by the Bible either.
Just a thought..that I hope you will consider.
OH, another point that fits in here….with all of your complaining about my “writing errors”.
I feel a LOT better about it since reading some of Obama’s College papers…and Michelle’s..OMG!!!
Michelle is MUCH WORSE than I am…Obama may be the same or slightly better, and you all think they are both Brilliant!!
I respectfully disagree, Sharon N. I believe Bob Marshall would work as strongly as possible to approve a “Fire and Brimstone” Preacher. He would prefer to have as many people in office like himself, as possible.
Wrong again Sharon N. There were three judgeships up for a vote. ALL THREE WERE ACTIVISTS. One was a gun rights activist, and he won his judgeship. One was a labor (union) activist, and he won his judgeship. This is not about activists, as many of the people in the this kind of pool have such activism. This is about the kind of activism this man pursued.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-politics/virginia-general-assembly-rejects-openly-gay-prosecutor-for-richmond-judgeship/2012/05/15/gIQAvZKSSU_story.html
Sharon, it’s better to have poor writing skills and realize it, than to have marginal writing skills and think you’re great.
Okay, Debbie, you are certainly “allowed” to respectufully disagree and your point is considered, I still disagree, but I think you have a valid reason for thinking the way you do, AND neither of us can really PROVE it one way or the other.
And Thank you for the extra Info Sandi…I’ll read it and think about it. But, off the bat, I can see Bob Marshall thinking that a “gun rights activist” IS going to rule Consitutionally….2nd amendment and all. And Unions, well they are still legal, etc..they haven’t been ruled Unconstitutional…BUT, he wouldn’t want the opportunity for Unions to change a “right to work” State without voter approval, and he doesn’t feel that a Judge has the power to do that. However an openly gay man who broke the law as it was written at the time, (DADT), and then sued, is perhaps a differnt story in his mind. Whether it is a “correct and Constitutional law” or not, it was still the law at the time.
Just off the top of my head, those are the reasons I can think of…but will check into it further.
OUR CHALLENGE is to convince the “politicians” (law makers) that SOME laws ARE Unconstitutional and we need to CHANGE them.
Constitutionally, I don’t feel that the LGBT community has a right to ask to be a “protected minority”. According to the Constitution, no one should really be a “protected minority”, we should all be American Citizens with the SAME rights as the next one. But, I realize that not giving the LGBT community the right to marry is denying them their Consitutional rights…they are NOT being given the SAME rights as the next American citizen…we need to work to CHANGE that.
In that respect, I wish you all could realize that I am an ally here, not the enemy.
John Wilburn, I never said I thought I was great…read back, I said others asked me to write letters for them, and even then I admitted that they might need to “edit as they see fit.”. I take more time in writing letters than I do with posting on a blog..am a little more careful.
Also, it’s MUCH easier to “keep it short”, when I am writng to someone who I feel is going to consider my thoughts…and not challenge everything I say.
#62: “(Taliban Bob) would prefer that the LAW be judged by someone who would rule according to the Constitution…not by their own personal feelings OR by the Bible either.”
Sharon N., you do realize that this was for a General District Court judgeship, right? While all American jurisprudence is conducted under a constitutional paradigm, the caseload in General District Court is mostly the banal stuff of local legal affairs; even those rare civil or criminal matters that might have as their central element a constitutional interpretation will have several layers of appellate review available.
Apparently homophobes seem to think every traffic fine and boundary dispute could be distorted by some “gay agenda”. Tea party “experts” encourage the travesty by fostering the fantasy that there is grave constituional importance in each and every bit of legal business, no matter how mundane. Next time you hear about a friend getting a parking ticket, Sharon N., go ahead and tell ‘em to march into court, invoke their constitutional rights against such awful socialist statism and refuse to pay…LIBERTY!!! (And let us know how that works out with the heterosexual judge).
constitutional
My dear friends,
Please, everyone step back for a moment and consider the word of God. Those of you who oppose Mr. Thorne as a judge must be taking a biblical position. For the men and women among you, here is a shocking proposition from the biblical position: “For God in not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians, 15:33-37.)
Now, are the women here about the give over the right to speak in church and stand in ultimate obedience to a husband? Are the men here about to hold women to such rules? Good luck with that. Ask the lord for guidance. He may tell, such does not apply to you now in the this time.
The point being, these rules and prejudices come from our biblical faith. They were written for a people 2000 years ago in a different land. Consider: Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. (Luke 16:18) So, all whom have divorced and remarried, including many of the “Republican Faith” are adulterers by this measure.
The essence of Christ applies us; love God with all of your heart, and love your fellow man as you love yourself. Whom was the disciple Christ loved anyway? Why would he love one more than another? So, these passages from Corinthians about the role of women would never pass muster in this modern world. Thus, this biblical prohibition on men loving men must also be set aside. (I am certain this is not what God was prohibiting anyway, but that is another debate which I touch on a little later.)
Second, now, there is another law to be concerned with: (1 Peter 2:13) Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
In this land, that is the Constitution of the United State of America, the supreme “law of man” in these United States. God’s law rules the world, but in this land we also have:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
To be clear: The Uniform Code of Military Justice made sodomy illegal and said nothing about homosexuality. Why? Because ship captains used to have peg boys, and the men were full of buggery, spreading disease and abusing children. Yet, somehow, we allowed this prohibition of sodomy, which was apparently needed, to extend into all forms of homosexual expression based on religious tenants. So, we are now acting in opposition to God’s laws by twisting man’s law and not following the constitution. When Congress passed Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and when so many other rules where put in place, these violated the Constitution, the equal protection clause, and so many other tenants because they did not start with the UCMJ and with the Constitution in hand, but from an incorrect interpretation of the biblical position. Sodom fell because of its hatred and cruelty and distance from God, not to mention that the men where wanton to have sex with children, boys and girls, defiling themselves. It wasn’t about homosexuality: it was about the protection of innocent children.
So to conclude: Those who oppose Mr. Thorn, go home and tell your wives to sit down and shut-up and see how far you get in the bed tonight. For those of you who support him, you better forget about this gay thing and realize that the very rights of the woman you love could be next on the chopping block. Then all of you, call your republican delegates and ask if they are going to make woman stop talking in church next and make divorce illegal.
Finally, all of this is a distraction. What you all should really be asking yourselves today is why has the federal reserve been allowed to add 1.6 trillion dollars to its books out of thin air, up for 47 billion in 2008, devaluing your dollar’s purchasing power around the world by 3304.255 percent? You want to start asking all these delegates why they aren’t talking about that instead of sitting around meddling in the personal lives of honorable men and woman? That’s what’s up. The rest of this is just to keep you distracted from the real game going on behind your backs.
Many blessing to you all.
However, the Republican party has, in my view, wasted valuable time over the last 30 years or so obsessing about such things instead of tackling the real problems of our nation.
It wasn’t Republicans who obsessed about Vitter, Foley, and Craig. Liberal Ron can’t even keep straight what he’s bitching about.
Sharon, you will have to pardon me for not being able to accept your word on who is and is not a “good writer”. Just call it a failing on my part if it makes you feel better.
Yes Suzie, the TP/GOP has and continues to waste valuable time that could be spent on solving real problems on personal and private matters that should not concern any government. We are not a Theocracy and it is past time you all accepted that. Keep pushing and you will lose much more than the Commandments in a backwoods burg that does not even bother to live by them.
The fact that while you have done so the Catholic Church, and Vitter, Foley, and Craig have made it the hypocrisy it is matters only in the realm of scorekeeping.
#71: “It wasn’t Republicans who obsessed about Vitter, Foley, and Craig.”
Similarly, it wasn’t Catholic dioceses who obsessed about the numerous pedophile priests, or the PSU athletic department that obsessed about child rape on their premises. No, as the poster #71 rightly points out, it took others to reveal those outrageous hypocrises, not the Congessional GOP. And the 1997-98 marriage infedility by GOP sex persecutor Newt Gingrich was just one more example of “consevative” moral relativism that so often occurs, as poster #71 correctly notes.
Congressional
Infidelity
“conservative”…when are the people who own the internet going to finally learn how to spell?
“On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.”
“I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in “A,” “B,” “C” and “D.” Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?”
“And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of “conservatism.”
-Speech in the US Senate (16 September 1981)
That speech was given by Mr. Conservative–Barry Goldwater
My favorite Goldwater quote is below. It originally got cleansed but John Dean eventually gave the real quote as shown at the bottom. Dan may not post this one.
“I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass.”
-Said in July 1981 in response to Moral Majority founder Jerry Falwell’s opposition to the nomination of Sandra Day O’Connor to the Supreme Court, of which Falwell had said, “Every good Christian should be concerned.” as quoted in Ed Magnuson, “The Brethren’s First Sister,” Time Magazine, (20 July, 1981)
According to John Dean, Goldwater actually suggested that good Christians ought to kick Falwell in the “nuts”, but the news media “changed the anatomical reference.” “I know because I was there when he said it,” said Dean.
“I don’t have any respect for the Religious Right. There is no place in this country for practicing religion in politics. That goes for Falwell, Robertson and all the rest of these political preachers. They are a detriment to the country.”
While some Americans might find Goldwater’s stand against all interaction between religion and politics too sweeping, many would agree with his strong commitment to individual freedom of conscience on issues as diverse as religion in schools, gay rights or abortion. In 1994 he told The Los Angeles Times, “A lot of so-called conservatives don’t know what the word means. They think I’ve turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. That’s a decision that’s up to the pregnant woman, not up to the pope or some do-gooders or the Religious Right.”
Just another quote from Barry Goldwater.