Showing posts with label Gay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gay. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Vermont Gay Marriage

Yesterday, 7 April, 2009 the Vermont House of Representatives, by one vote, overrode Gov. Jim Douglas’s veto of a bill allowing gay couples to marry. By only one vote but that is all that was needed. Vermont is the first state to allow same-sex marriage through legislative action instead of a court ruling. This I support.

In 2000, Vermont became the first state to adopt civil unions for gay couples. It is now the fourth state to allow same-sex marriage. In addition to Iowa, Connecticut and Massachusetts.
Also yesterday, the District of Columbia gave initial approval to a plan to recognize same-sex marriages performed outside of the District. That could open this to a Federal case because of Congressional oversight of the District. In 1996 Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act. Bill Clinton signed that bill. As a result of that act the federal government may not recognize same-sex marriage, no social security survivors benefits etc.

Last week the Iowa Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriages. That is not the job of any court. Courts are not qualified to make laws. The judiciary of that state is out of line and it needs to be corrected as California voters did to its Supreme Court.

The founding fathers concept of separation of powers is more important to my mind than government recognition of gay marriage. My representative and senator speak for me and write the laws. The judiciary makes decisions based on the Constitution and those laws. The executive branch enforces those laws. Simple. (Then there are the separate states. As a Texan, I like that too.)

In California, Proposition 8 was approved by the voters. That act amended the state’s Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. This was in response to the abuse of power by the state Supreme Court which decided that a handful of lawyers dressed like Catholic Priests could change the will of a few million fellow citizens. They were wrong and the people told them so.

Now the California GLBT ‘community’ has an even greater hurdle to climb. It will take more that a few years to correct. 26 States have existing bans on same sex marriage. Some of those are constitutional bans I guess that is one critical vote to the negative if you are thinking of a U.S. Constitutional Amendment. In other words, it will not happen any time soon.

My point here is that to make a law; more specifically to change a law for same sex marriage, it must be done right. Through the law making bodies. Stop trying to back door this through the courts or executive decree. Be up front and honest.
Gays are quite literally asking straights to help. To grant recognition as equals. If they ask right, it might happen.

Californian faggots dressed in white face and French clown suits went into a Catholic Cathedral in San Francisco and took communion from the Arch-Bishop. These faggots don’t have the courage to show their real face or name. They then walked back down the isle sticking their tongue out at old ladies and young children with the communion host still on their tongue. This was clearly to help convince Christians on which way to vote for Gay rights. It worked like a charm. Prop 8 passed. Gay marriage is unconstitutional in California. Then gay people walked around with ‘H8 and Hate’ signs to show their appreciation. That pretty much secured the law for a generation or more.

As a Roman Catholic, conservative, expert marksman, disease free, father of four sons, TEXAN, I am proud to be the partner of this blogs owner. This is my first independent post here. I hope my position is clear.
Gay rights will happen. Get the idiots out of the spotlight. Maybe carry signs saying “I Love too!”, “I love You!”, stuff like that, no hate. It will happen faster. This ’in your face’ drag queen style crap will send exactly the message California voters sent back in the State Constitution. “NO.”

I applaud the Vermont House of representatives for it’s override of the governors veto. My partner, DeWayne and I look forward to this happening in more states.

Albert in Texas

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

What Is up with the GOP? The party of closeted Homo's!


UPDATE 3 September 1,2007 Sen Larry Craig resigned today under pressure form his former friends now political enemies in Boise (Bloomberg) with of course his family there for a final photo op! Slate has a great article here about why closeted men do the bafroom thang!

So Many Men's Rooms, So Little Time


Craig is Gone, Leaving GOP Bruised

By Jay Newton-Small
The only regret the GOP is likely to feel about the end of Idaho Senator Larry Craig's 27-year congressional career is that it didn't happen two days earlier. Craig's announcement, Saturday, that he intends to resign effective Sept. 30 comes amid the traditional Labor Day weekend campaign launches for the 2008 election cycle. And Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell had not envisioned starting the weekend with the news media dominated by speculation over whether Craig is gay, and why he pled guilty to disorderly conduct on Aug. 8 when accused of soliciting sex from an undercover cop in the men's bathroom of a Minneapolis Airport,,,continued at Time Link

Dewayne here; I have no intention of turning my Blog into a CrimeBlotter for
repressed Republican Homosexuals! But this story is making a splash and cannot be ignored First Marc Foley,then Taggert, The Florida Triple Murder, now Senator Craig! The Dishonorable Senator screams "I am Not Gay and I NEVER have been Gay!" Which is a Pathetic Lament in and of itself, but if the Senator were not so Homophobic and closeted he might have a chance at finding a fulfilling , loving relationship, something he will Not find in a stall in a Mens Bathroom!

I find all of these men to be pitiable and tragic figures, the closet really is stuffy and confining. Why do otherwise intelligent men find this such an acceptable existence?


By TODD DVORAK, Associated Press Writer August 28,2007

BOISE, Idaho - Under fire from leaders of his own party, Idaho Sen. Larry Craig on Tuesday the only thing he had done wrong was to plead guilty after a police complaint of lewd conduct in a men's room. He declared, "I am not gay. I never have been gay."

"I did nothing wrong at the Minneapolis airport," he said at a news conference with his wife, Suzanne, at his side.

Craig's defiant stance came as Senate Republican leaders in Washington called for an ethics committee review into his involvement in a police sting operation this summer in the airport men's room.

"In the meantime, the leadership is examining other aspects of the case to see if additional action is required," Sen. Mitch McConnell and other top GOP lawmakers said in a written statement.

A private group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, also filed a complaint with the ethics committee seeking an investigation into whether Craig violated Senate rules by engaging in disorderly conduct.

Craig entered his plea several weeks after an undercover police officer in the airport arrested him and issued a complaint that said the three-term senator had engaged in actions "often used by persons communicating a desire to engage in sexual conduct."

Craig said he has hired a lawyer and will ask him to review the case.

The airport incident occurred June 11. Craig signed his plea papers on Aug. 1, and word of the events surfaced Monday. The senator issued a statement Monday night that said, "In hindsight, I should have pled not guilty."

He repeated that assertion at the Idaho news conference. "In June, I overreacted and made a poor decision," he said. "I chose to plead guilty to a lesser charge in hopes of making it go away."

Craig was at times defiant, at others apologetic on Tuesday.

"Please let me apologize to my family, friends and staff and fellow Idahoans for the cloud placed over Idaho," he said. "I did nothing wrong at the Minneapolis airport. I did nothing wrong, and I regret the decision to plead guilty and the sadness that decision has brought on my wife, on my family, friends, staff and fellow Idahoans."

The conservative three-term senator, who has represented Idaho in Congress for more than a quarter-century, is up for re-election next year. He said he would announce next month whether he would run again and suggested he still considers himself a politician with a future.

"Over the years, I have accomplished a lot for Idaho, and I hope Idahoans will allow me to continue to do that. There are still goals I would like to accomplish. And I believe I can still be an effective leader for our state," he said.

Craig, who has voted against gay marriage, finds his political future in doubt because of the case, which has drawn national attention.

Craig, 62, has faced rumors about his sexuality since the 1980s, but allegations that he had engaged in gay sex have never been substantiated. Craig has denied the assertions.

Trying to put his actions "in context," Craig lashed out at the Idaho Statesman, which published a lengthy article Tuesday on its investigation into the senator's actions.

The scandal had already taken a political toll. On Monday, Craig resigned from a prominent role with Republican Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. He had been one of Romney's top Senate supporters, serving as a liaison for the campaign since February.

Asked about Craig, Romney said, "He's disappointed the American people."

"Yeah, I think it reminds us of Mark Foley and Bill Clinton. I think it reminds us of the fact that people who are elected to public office continue to disappoint, and they somehow think that if they vote the right way on issues of significance or they can speak a good game, that we'll just forgive and forget," Romney said on CNBC's "Kudlow & Company."

Foley is a former Republican lawmaker who resigned nearly a year ago after being confronted with the computer messages he sent to male teenage pages who had worked on Capitol Hill. Clinton is the former president accused in congressional impeachment proceedings of lying about an affair with a White House intern.

According to a Hennepin County, Minn., court docket, Craig pleaded guilty to a disorderly conduct charge on Aug. 8, with the court dismissing a charge of gross misdemeanor interference to privacy.

The court docket said Craig paid $575 in fines and fees and was put on unsupervised probation for a year. A sentence of 10 days in the county workhouse was stayed.

According to the prosecutor's complaint, obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, airport police Sgt. Dave Karsnia, who was investigating allegations of sexual conduct in airport restrooms, went into a stall shortly after noon on June 11 and closed the door.

Minutes later, the officer said he saw Craig gazing into his stall through the crack between the door and the frame.

After a man in the adjacent stall left, Craig entered it and put his roller bag against the front of the stall door, "which Sgt. Karsnia's experience has indicated is used to attempt to conceal sexual conduct by blocking the view from the front of the stall," said the complaint, which was dated June 25.

The complaint said Craig then tapped his right foot several times and moved it closer to Karsnia's stall and then moved it to where it touched Karsnia's foot. Karsnia recognized that "as a signal often used by persons communicating a desire to engage in sexual conduct," the complaint said.

Craig then passed his left hand under the stall divider into Karsnia's stall with his palms up and guided it along the divider toward the front of the stall three times, the complaint said.

The officer then showed his police identification under the divider and pointed toward the exit "at which time the defendant exclaimed `No!'" the complaint said.

The Aug. 8 police report says that Craig had handed the arresting officer a business card that identified him as a member of the Senate.

"What do you think about that?" Craig is alleged to have said, according to the report.

While Craig said he had made a mistake in not getting a lawyer before pleading guilty, a police report says he returned to where he was booked 11 days after his June 11 arrest — and more than a month before he entered a plea — and said he needed a "contact so his lawyer can speak to someone."

The officer at the booking station connected him with Karsnia who provided him with the name and phone number of the government attorney handling the case, police said.

UPDATE; Idaho Statesmen

The revealing paragraph's from todays Idaho Statesmen;

In an interview on May 14, Craig told the Idaho Statesman he'd never engaged in sex with a man or solicited sex with a man. The Craig interview was the culmination of a Statesman investigation that began after a blogger accused Craig of homosexual sex in October. Over five months, the Statesman examined rumors about Craig dating to his college days and his 1982 pre-emptive denial that he had sex with underage congressional pages.

The most serious finding by the Statesman was the report by a professional man with close ties to Republican officials. The 40-year-old man reported having oral sex with Craig at Washington's Union Station, probably in 2004. The Statesman also spoke with a man who said Craig made a sexual advance toward him at the University of Idaho in 1967 and a man who said Craig "cruised" him for sex in 1994 at the REI store in Boise. The Statesman also explored dozens of allegations that proved untrue, unclear or unverifiable.



Dewayne here Ok 2 observations, why in this day and age are Police still doing theses little Sting operations in Public bathrooms? As a Gay man I observe theses little rituals all the time and ignore them, indeed the only guys who seem to initiate or participate in Stall Sex are the guys with a Wife & kiddies at home! Who gives a Flying Fuck what happens in a Public bathroom!

Oh and Senator Craig producing his Senate card How Rich and ENTITLED can you get?
Did he think he was coming on to an Intern in the Senate Washroom? How Pathetic can you get?

Picture Note; Is this a cheap shot? I found this pic on Google News search and it seems legit and typical of the distortion common in a telephoto lens. If I get a consensus that it is in poor taste i will remove it, but for now it seems sadly illustrative. Of what? Sex in inappropriate places and circumstances brought on by sexually repressed desire!