You do, of course, realize that you are TALKING TO YOURSELF? I think you may have found the WRONG forum for your discussion? Try marthacoakleyisasocialist.com? :) Have a great night! :)
SURE.. stop posting negative things about Scott. You got the answer you wanted, didn't you? I think some will see through your attack posts as I have. If you are such an ARDENT supporter of Scott, why do you need so much help convincing your gay friends? OR ANY of your so called friends, for that matter? Have a great life. I'm done with you.. and I hope everyone else is, too. NO ONE respond to Mark. Thanks. :)
Mark C. Nemeskal said:Elaine,
I am currently an ardent supporter of Scott Brown and am simply looking for some backup to counter the rhetoric that I am getting from DOZENS of gay friends. I am not talking to myself, but rather, posting some e-mail passages that I received over the last few hours. I am not into politics by nature and so find all of this stuff to be a bit imposing and so I was looking for some help from Brown supporters like you.
Want to take another less insensitive response to my issue here??
Elaine said:You do, of course, realize that you are TALKING TO YOURSELF? I think you may have found the WRONG forum for your discussion? Try marthacoakleyisasocialist.com? :) Have a great night! :)
Sometimes it's not worth harming your freindships by discussing political issues such as this one. My best friends are partners that have married (in Mass.) and we don't talk on this issue. They know my opinion on gay marriage and why I support Repbulican candidates (I say leave it up to the states and the will of the people, but my real opinion is if you want to get married, get married, no one is stopping you. BUT the government shouldn't be in the business of sanctioning ANY marriage - it's between you and your god/religion/belief. Yes, that is a liberatarian view, but it's already hard enough to get a moderate republican or a conservative democrat elected in this state ;)
The more important comment made in Scott's website is that it should be left up to the states and the will of the people to decide what the law should be - and that he would support the will of the people.
His personal belief is that marriage is between a man and women BUT Barack Obama AND John Kerry are both on record as saying they think marriage is between a man and a woman.
Many gay people don't support gay marriage as well. Camille Paglia (who is a lesbian) had a great article on Salon.com's website about why gay marriage is the wrong argument for equal rights for gays . You could go to their archives to search for it.
Here's a post from the Log Cabin Republicans website (Gay and Lesbian republicans) that might help your argument about the democrats and gay marriage and why if Scott supports the state's position that it is good for gay marriage:
Defense of Marriage Act (DoMA)
"The Defense of Marriage Act, enacted in 1996 by President Clinton, states that the federal government defines marriage as only between one man and one woman, and that no state or political subdivision needs to recognize same-sex marriages, even if these marriages are recognized in other states. We oppose this direct challenge to marriage equality, and are fighting to repeal this unfair law, and to hold accountable President Obama and the Democratically-controlled Congress for their broken promises to strike the law down."
I've actually met both Scott Brown and Martha Coakley. They're both nice, as you would expect. Brown was indeed very cordial, even knowing that I didn't agree with him on politics.
He may well be personally decent: A JAG, National Guardsman and good father. But his views are neither decent nor prudent. To wit:
a.) He has defended torture, using the Orwellian code words "enhanced interrogation techniques." This is not decent.
b.) He has a tortured explanation for why he would not support covering 30 million new people with health care. I submit that this displays a lack of compassion.
c.) His view on gay marriage is frankly cowardly. That's not decent. Supporting Tom's and others' right to marry is decent.
d.) He denies global warming is real. That is very definitely not prudent.
Down the line, on almost every issue, he's a continuation of the last 8 years of rule under President Bush. I respectfully submit that that is definitely not prudent.
Thanks for reading this far, if you have ...
Well.... anybody care to comment? I am getting hammered by my gay friends.