Marriage and other LGBTQ Rights - Page 88

kladner · 2013-09-06, 18:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

In the voice of Robin Williams: "Ever been to sea, Billy?"

Things can get complicated in rarefied environments....

In the voice of Peter Graves: "Joey, have you ever.....
.....been in a Turkish prison?"
.....seen a grown man naked?"

Joey, do you like movies about gladiators?"

kladner · 2013-09-06, 18:34

Oh, yeah. I came here for a different reason. Damn your suggestive comments, Chris!

The pastor and the politician:

Brian-E · 2013-09-06, 20:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by kladner

The pastor and the politician:

Thanks for this. Yes, Kevin Rudd has clearly thought it through from a Christian perspective and is unafraid to have changed his tune on the issue. It's probably now a net vote-winning stance for the election, with his main opponent Tony Abbott firmly against equal marriage, given that public attitudes have changed radically during the last few years. We don't know how representative that audience is, but the pastor's questions were not received anything like as well as Rudd's answers were. Whether the issue of equal marriage can be a significant factor in swaying Australia's election is another question though, and Rudd seems to be far behind in the polls. Still, it's never over until the fat lady sings and I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised!

Brian-E · 2013-09-26, 09:39

George Bush Senior has attended, and acted as official witness for, a wedding between two women who are longstanding friends of his.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...maine/?hpid=z4

How significant is it for a former Republican president to show support for a same sex marriage in this way?

[Off topic: are his socks, one red and one blue, referred to in the article as a "style statement", a suggestion that George Bush now wavers between Republican and Democrat sympathies?]

kladner · 2013-09-26, 13:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian-E

George Bush Senior has attended, and acted as official witness for, a wedding between two women who are longstanding friends of his.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...maine/?hpid=z4

How significant is it for a former Republican president to show support for a same sex marriage in this way?

[Off topic: are his socks, one red and one blue, referred to in the article as a "style statement", a suggestion that George Bush now wavers between Republican and Democrat sympathies?]

The significance, as I see it, is that Poppy Bush is an old-time Republican. While this faction has not always been the most tolerant, gross bigotry has not been an absolute hallmark, either. There used to be more personal variation and flexibility than is seen in the "New" Republicans.

As to the socks, I first thought of absolute color-blindness. But Bush is a very wealthy old man in a wheel chair. Clearly, someone does such things for him as getting socks out of the drawer. That says that it is a choice of some sort. However, if it were to suggest a mix of political redness and blueness, I could only think of it as repudiation of the extremes to which the current "red" side of the political spectrum has gone.

It could well be that mismatched socks are just an attention-getting device. At this they are quite successful. I don't think they indicate any fundamental shift in H.W.'s aims and alignments.

It must be remembered that he has been deeply involved in the Intelligence apparatus for most, or all of his adult life. He is also the current patriarch of a multi-generational criminal enterprise. He is the Godfather of the Bush Crime Family. His interests and means of operation are much deeper than the petty bigotry of the Johnny-Come-Lately stooges of the Tea Party.

Brian-E · 2013-09-27, 08:59

Thanks for that analysis Kieren. I was only vaguely aware of the concept of "old" and "new" Republicans (the rise of the Tea Party a few years ago had registered with me a bit!), and I did not know that bigotry was particularly associated with the new variety rather than the old.

Your reference to the multi-generational criminal enterprise of the Bush family must be a controversial description, I guess, but I've heard of that before too from Michael Moore's writings and films and have no problem giving it credence.

kladner · 2013-09-27, 15:09

I have had second thoughts after posting about the Bushes, but I guess I've said other strange things here. A Google will turn up quite a lot on the subject. My father was angrily obsessed with the family, and I have friends who will talk your ear off about it.

The "old" Republicans ran a wide gamut. Some were more prejudiced than others, but not so drastically different from their contemporaneous surroundings. I knew of anti-gay liberals back in the 60's and 70's, after all.

They could variously be called the Goldwater, Rockefeller, Nixon, or even Reagan Republicans.

Goldwater was further to the right in some ways, but I don't think he was much concerned with prejudice. I came to somewhat like the crusty old bird before the end. In the years after loosing to Johnson, I've heard it that he said things to the effect that he didn't really need to have run since Lyndon did everything in Viet Nam that he would have.

Reagan came from Hollywood, and was totally opportunistic. I don't think he had much in the way of principles.

Rockefeller, as in "Nelson" would be a flaming liberal today, though he did great damage on the drug war front.

Nixon was batshit crazy: a tormented, conflicted character. He actually did some good things if you leave aside the war, and Kissinger, and a few other minutia like the China opening, which made Walmart possible.

It is often said, and is probably true, that none of the above could get anywhere in today's Republican party. Even Saint Ronny Raygun would be way too far to the left, even though he is idolized.

Xyzzy · 2013-10-08, 07:29

.

kladner · 2013-10-08, 13:19

.

chappy · 2013-10-08, 18:50

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Ne...0#.UlRTCYabPQN

Finally straights will have their own gaydar to line the cliffs of Dover and protect us from the Huns...oh, wait that's something else. This appears to be state sponsored homophobia in the form of stupidity. Nothing new to see here--move along...move along.

davar55 · 2013-10-08, 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by chappy

...

I thought spellling it G-d was a show of respect for the "entity".

As an atheist, I almost never spell it that way.

2013-10-08, 07:29	#965
Xyzzy "Mike" Aug 2002 2035₁₆ Posts	. Attached Thumbnails

2013-10-08, 18:50	#967
chappy "Jeff" Feb 2012 St. Louis, Missouri, USA 13·89 Posts	http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Ne...0#.UlRTCYabPQN Finally straights will have their own gaydar to line the cliffs of Dover and protect us from the Huns...oh, wait that's something else. This appears to be state sponsored homophobia in the form of stupidity. Nothing new to see here--move along...move along. Last fiddled with by chappy on 2013-10-08 at 18:51 Reason: like G-d and beetles, me and comma splices.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Patient Rights	R.D. Silverman	Soap Box	25	2013-04-02 08:41
Marriage and Civil Partnerships: what is the ideal situation?	Brian-E	Soap Box	53	2013-02-19 16:31
Gay Marriage: weekly alternating viewpoints	Brian-E	Soap Box	46	2008-11-09 22:21

2013-09-06, 18:34	#959
kladner "Kieren" Jul 2011 In My Own Galaxy! 23656₈ Posts	Oh, yeah. I came here for a different reason. Damn your suggestive comments, Chris! The pastor and the politician:

2013-09-26, 09:39	#961
Brian-E "Brian" Jul 2007 The Netherlands 7×467 Posts	George Bush Senior has attended, and acted as official witness for, a wedding between two women who are longstanding friends of his. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...maine/?hpid=z4 How significant is it for a former Republican president to show support for a same sex marriage in this way? [Off topic: are his socks, one red and one blue, referred to in the article as a "style statement", a suggestion that George Bush now wavers between Republican and Democrat sympathies?]

2013-09-27, 08:59	#963
Brian-E "Brian" Jul 2007 The Netherlands 3269₁₀ Posts	Thanks for that analysis Kieren. I was only vaguely aware of the concept of "old" and "new" Republicans (the rise of the Tea Party a few years ago had registered with me a bit!), and I did not know that bigotry was particularly associated with the new variety rather than the old. Your reference to the multi-generational criminal enterprise of the Bush family must be a controversial description, I guess, but I've heard of that before too from Michael Moore's writings and films and have no problem giving it credence.

2013-09-27, 15:09	#964
kladner "Kieren" Jul 2011 In My Own Galaxy! 10011110101110₂ Posts	I have had second thoughts after posting about the Bushes, but I guess I've said other strange things here. A Google will turn up quite a lot on the subject. My father was angrily obsessed with the family, and I have friends who will talk your ear off about it. The "old" Republicans ran a wide gamut. Some were more prejudiced than others, but not so drastically different from their contemporaneous surroundings. I knew of anti-gay liberals back in the 60's and 70's, after all. They could variously be called the Goldwater, Rockefeller, Nixon, or even Reagan Republicans. Goldwater was further to the right in some ways, but I don't think he was much concerned with prejudice. I came to somewhat like the crusty old bird before the end. In the years after loosing to Johnson, I've heard it that he said things to the effect that he didn't really need to have run since Lyndon did everything in Viet Nam that he would have. Reagan came from Hollywood, and was totally opportunistic. I don't think he had much in the way of principles. Rockefeller, as in "Nelson" would be a flaming liberal today, though he did great damage on the drug war front. Nixon was batshit crazy: a tormented, conflicted character. He actually did some good things if you leave aside the war, and Kissinger, and a few other minutia like the China opening, which made Walmart possible. It is often said, and is probably true, that none of the above could get anywhere in today's Republican party. Even Saint Ronny Raygun would be way too far to the left, even though he is idolized.

2013-10-08, 13:19	#966
kladner "Kieren" Jul 2011 In My Own Galaxy! 10158₁₀ Posts	.