[A Series of really angry tweets because of prop 8 Trials]
Prop 8 Decision Threatens Core Civil Right to Vote for Marriage -This is a travesty of justice. The majority of Californians - and two-thirds of black voters in California - have just had their core civil right to vote for marriage stripped from them by an openly gay federal judge who has misread history and the Constitution to impose his San Francisco views on the American people.
The implicit comparison Judge Walker made between racism and marriage is particularly offensive to me and to all of us who remember the reality of Jim Crow.
It is not bigotry it is biology that discriminates between same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples. To make a marriage requires a husband and a wife because these unions are necessary to make new life and connect children to their mother and father.
Judge Walker’s slur will not stand the test of time and history. We demand that Congress and the Supreme Court act to protect all Americans’ right to vote for marriage.
64 comments
Please remember that you tweeted this.
It is, ergo, automatically invalid.
Wow, a travesty of justice? Really?
Now, I'm probably younger than the good reverend (oxymoron), and I wasn't around when there were still Jim Crow/anti-miscegenation laws, but wouldn't a ban on interracial marriage be equivalent to a ban on same sex? Isn't a ban a prevention of someone doing something? Wasn't the repeal of Jim Crow laws the lifting of bans?
Someone help me here....I'm confused. Or is the bishop just a fundie asshole?
"Judge Walker’s slur will not stand the test of time and history."
LMAO! Eventually, people in a post-homophobe America will look back and wonder what all the fuss was about, and bigots like Bishop Harry Jackson will be as scorned and ridiculed as the racists that tried and failed to stop the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.
I only hope I live long enough to say, "I told you so."
their core civil right to vote for marriage stripped from them
What the fuck is this shit? NOTHING was taken from you. Your life and your marriage will still go on regardless of what other people who you probably don't even know are doing.
I personally dislike the institution of marriage, yet unlike Bishop Huge Jackass I don't dream of seeking specific people out and voting to restrict their lives for no actual harmful reason. Just as there was no reason to ban interracial marriage, there isn't one to ban same-sex marriage. Your religion has fuck all to do with everyone else.
@ shykid LOL
Judge Walker’s slur will not stand the test of time and history. We demand that Congress and the Supreme Court act to protect all Americans’ right to vote for marriage.
Does that include the GLBT's right to vote as well?
Where did you get the notion the judge is gay? He is a Republican appointed by Ronald Reagan, and at the time his appointment was bitterly contested by gays since it was felt he was anti-gay.
J, in case your question was serious: the argument is usually that you can't compare the two because black people can't hide it but GLB people can. Which is the part of the conversation in which one should always ask "So you're OK with discrimination against Christians? 'Cause you could hide that too."
So by your reason, we also shouldn't allow post menopausal women to marry. That union also can not make new life.
Even if 99% of people vote for something, if it takes away an inalienable right of the other 1% it is unconstitutional.
A tyranny of the majority is still a tyranny.
That "liberal" judge is actually a libertarian. Who was eventually nominated to the bench by George H. W. Bush. And Nancy Pelosi led the defeat of his first nomination. That means she lead the fight AGAINST him. Should I mention his initial nomination was made by none other than Ronald Reagan?
So, to re-cap, Ronald Reagan nominated a judge whose nomination was defeated by Nancy Pelosi, and who later was nominated again by George H. W. Bush, and he was subsequently confirmed. Care to prattle on about the evil liberal judge?
Since when is the US a direct democracy? You do not get to vote on everything in a representative democracy, where you elect a government to make the decisions for you.
If you are offended by the Jim Crow laws, then you ought to welcome this decision to throw out another set of discriminatory laws.
Marriage is a legal contract, not a biology matter. Plus, it is not connected to making new life, or someone would have contacted me and my husband long ago, to force us to divorce, as we seem to be unable to have kids.
Protect all Americans' right to marry their loved ones instead. Who someone else marries has no impact on your life, unless it's your sibling, parent or child.
The majority of Californians - and two-thirds of black voters in California - have just had their core civil right to vote for marriage stripped from them by an openly gay federal judge who has misread history and the Constitution to impose his San Francisco views on the American people.
Democracy=/=mob rule. Otherwise we'd still have segregation. In a democracy the minority is protected from the whims of the majority.
It is not bigotry it is biology that discriminates between same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples.
Then explain bonobos. Because they have absolutely no problem getting it on with the same sex.
Part 1
Prop 8 Decision Threatens Core Civil Right to Vote for Marriage -This is a travesty of justice.
The majority of Californians - and two-thirds of black voters in California - have just had their core civil right to vote for marriage...
...stripped from them by an openly gay federal judge who has misread history and the Constitution to impose his San Francisco views on the American people.
Part 2
The implicit comparison Judge Walker made between racism and marriage is particularly offensive to me and to all of us who remember the reality of Jim Crow.
It is not bigotry it is biology that discriminates between same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples. To make a marriage requires a husband and a wife because these unions are necessary to make new life and connect children to their mother and father.
Judge Walker’s slur will not stand the test of time and history. We demand that Congress and the Supreme Court act to protect all Americans’ right to vote for marriage.
"It is not bigotry it is biology that discriminates between white people and black people. "
You completely fail to understand why the comparison of gay marriage to the African American civil rights movement is valid. There are biological differences between the two groups, and the proper response to this is "who gives a fuck?" while the popular response to it is to claim that one is inferior and undeserving of equal treatment. Get it?
have just had their core civil right to vote for marriage stripped from them
Right to vote for marriage? I didn't know any such thing existed. BTW, having civil rights doesn't mean you get to vote on what rights other people may or may not have.
To make a marriage requires a husband and a wife because these unions are necessary to make new life
No they're not. Have you ever heard of children born to unmarried couples? Or unwed mothers? The only thing necessary to make new life is a little bom-chika-wah-wah.
We demand that Congress and the Supreme Court act to protect all Americans’ right to vote for marriage.
Show me where that right is listed in the U.S. Constitution and maybe we can work on an agreement. Until then, STFU.
"Core Civil Right to Vote for Marriage"
Never heard of it but then again I ain't a USAian. Of course, you'll be able to point to the exact place in your Bill of Rights or constitution that guarantees this "Core Civil Right", right? Right?
"To make a marriage requires a husband and a wife because these unions are necessary to make new life and connect children to their mother and father."
And what about all those unions between people who can't have or don't want children? Are they not marriages? Have you even thought this through? Do you have a functioning brain?
Jackson: The majority of Californians - and two-thirds of black voters in California - have just had their core civil right to vote for marriage stripped from them by an openly gay federal judge who has misread history and the Constitution to impose his San Francisco views on the American people.
Klingon: So?
Jackson: So? You don’t care what the American people think?
Klingon: No. I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls.
We just put it to a vote, Harry. You're no longer allowed to breed. Also, stupid people can't get married from now on.
Discrimination? Not at all. It's for your own good.
The majority does not have a right to take rights they hold for themselves from a minority group. Check the constitution. You can read, right?
"The implicit comparison Judge Walker made between racism and marriage is particularly offensive to me and to all of us who remember the reality of Jim Crow."
Your support for bigotry is particularly offensive to all of us who remember the authority of god being invoked to support jim crow.
"all Americans’ right to vote for marriage"
No. You do not have a right to vote on OTHER PEOPLE'S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS. That is explicitly not how your government system works. That is why you have all these systems in place to prevent people from stripping minority groups of their rights through the tyranny of the majority; such prevention is exactly what Judge Walker in his wisdom has done.
The majority has no right to vote into law oppressive restrictions on the rights of the minority. I'm pretty sure that your constitution mentions that. It's why, despite a majority voting against it, interracial marriage is legal. So fuck off.
their core civil right to vote for marriage
Here we have it again -- the "mob rule is a core civil right" argument. It's not just Harry Jackson who's spewing this -- it's the party line of most of the GOP, and is taken for granted by the GOP Pravda , Fox News.
He's also lying about black voters in California -- the numbers were a few percent higher than for white voters, but that difference disappears when you account for rates of church attendance. (IOW: race was an exceptionally poor predictor of whether someone would vote for Prop 8; attendance or non-attendance at a fundie church like the ones run by Harry Jackson or Rick Warren was a very good predictor.)
Apparently you missed the part about checks and balances in 5th grade social studies.
And most of the protected classes are the result of biology (gender, race, color and disability)
The implicit comparison Judge Walker made between racism and marriage is particularly offensive to me and to all of us who remember the reality of Jim Crow.
So it's offensive to compare a discriminatory law imposed by popular vote that was then overturned by a court ruling to...?
To make a marriage requires a husband and a wife because these unions are necessary to make new life...
The only thing necessary to make a new life are the two gametes and a womb. Marriage plays no part in it.
*Yawn* Pretty standard hate tantrum from right-wingers over the ruling. However, to play this card and then follow it with a recollection of "the reality of Jim Crow" merits, from my view anyway, a huge GDIAF. People like this don't even begin to realize the misery they've caused gays everywhere with Prop 8 and likewise measures. FUCK YOU.
That "majority" you people keep going on about was a mere 2%. In fact, the Prop was LOSING by a good seven to eight percent before the fucking Mormons started pouring millions of dollars into false, misleading ad campaigns full of outrageous lies, including ads made specifically for black districts which falsely claimed that Barack Obama endorsed Prop 8 and wanted them to vote for it. Numerous black voters said after the election that those ads caused them to vote for Prop 8, and that if they'd known the truth behind the ads, they would not have done so.
As for the judge, why should he be disqualified because he's gay when the only alternative would be to appoint a straight person? By your logic, a straight judge would have to be just as biased as a gay one, because a ruling in favor of Prop 8 would (supposedly) benefit or be in favor of straight people. If there are two teams involved, and everyone on the planet belongs to at least one of them, then there's no such thing as a disinterested party.
Finally, we don't vote on civil rights issues. That's what the constitution is for. If we left it up to voters to grant civil rights to others, we'd still have slavery and women wouldn't be able to vote.
Where did this guy get the idea that everyone had the right to vote on other people's right to marry? That isn't consitutional, nor does it make sense - why would being legally recognised as a couple need a third party to vote on the contract's validity?
And seriously, why aren't people like this more openly against arranged or enforced marriages? Surely that sort of marriage is destroying more than same-sex marraige.
I can't believe he just implied biology had nothing to do with the Civil Rights movement. What the hell else are the differences between white and black people, if not biological? And, as Allegory for Jesus said, no rational person gives a toss about biological differences.
I'm a brunette - my husband's blonde... Argh! *runs around in panicky circles* We're biologically different!
And no, marriage does not exist in order to procreate. My hubby and I got married for security, stability, and to have our partnership legally recognised. And, shockingly, because we love each other and want to spend the rest of our lives together. In short, we wanted to be each other's next of kin. We have no intention of having children. According to you, that should make our marriage an abomination. Or is it honestly our opposite genitals that makes all the difference to you people? I can't see anything else that differentiates our marriage from the vast majority of same-sex ones (aside from the fact that many gay couples do want children...).
As soon as you see a title like 'Bishop' or 'Reverend' you know it's going to be one of the most ignorant statements you've ever heard.
Read Reverend Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech and get back to me.
(Yes, Bishop Jackson is a jerk, but that does not discount anything ever said by someone with a religious title.)
Why, exactly, is it anyone else's business if a gay couple wants to get married? Oh, that's right, it isn't.
So get over yourself, Bishop. Sane people don't give a crap what you think.
@shykid
"their core civil right to vote for marriage"
Wonderful, since you have the core civil right to infringe on my civil rights, I think I'll exercise my civil right to infringe on your right to live. Now hold still, this isn't all that sharp so I'll probably need to saw back and forth a bit.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
