Senate gay-marriage pool update: Democrat Tom Carper — and Republican Mark Kirk — “evolve” on SSM

posted at 12:41 pm on April 2, 2013 by Allahpundit

And so, after a solid week of me picking Carper every day in the gay-marriage pool as the next Democrat to flip, only to be disappointed every time, he finally flips … the day after I switch my pick to Bill Nelson.

Congrats to JohnGalt23 for scooping up Carper after I dropped him. See why I don’t bother filling out NCAA Tournament brackets anymore?

As our society has changed and evolved, so too has the public’s opinion on gay marriage – and so has mine. I pray every day for God to grant me the wisdom to do what is right. Through my prayers and conversations with my family and countless friends and Delawareans, I’ve been reminded of the power of one of my core values: the Golden Rule. It calls on us to treat others as we want to be treated. That means, to me, that all Americans ultimately should be free to marry the people they love and intend to share their lives with, regardless of their sexual orientation, and that’s why today, after a great deal of soul searching, I’m endorsing marriage equality.

This is the first Democratic flip that might be worth taking at face value rather than as a transparent, cynical electoral gambit to stay on the base’s good side. Carper had zero reason to hold out this long unless he was genuinely conflicted about it. The state hasn’t gone red in a presidential election since 1988; the vice president of the United States, who comes from Delaware, is already on record as supporting SSM; and Carper himself won reelection just last year by more than 35 points. He’s in less electoral danger than virtually anyone else in the Senate. He held out, presumably, because he’s part of the 65+ age demographic that’s most resistant to gay marriage, but given the political leanings of his state, he must have been getting the pro-SSM pitch from constituents for years now. They finally wore him down.

Speaking of blue-state Senators finally changing their mind, here’s Mark Kirk of Illinois becoming the second Republican in the caucus after Rob Portman to fully endorse gay marriage.

When I climbed the Capitol steps in January, I promised myself that I would return to the Senate with an open mind and greater respect for others.

Same-sex couples should have the right to civil marriage. Our time on this earth is limited, I know that better than most. Life comes down to who you love and who loves you back– government has no place in the middle.

His statement’s less explicitly religious than Carper’s but they’re similar in how they emphasize love over legalistic arguments about equality. Kirk was one of three Republicans I named in the initial post about Rob Portman as predictable flips on this issue if only because it’d cause a problem for him in his very Democratic home state in the general if he didn’t. (He’d already endorsed civil unions.) Collins and Murkowski were the other two, and although they’re still technically “evolving” they’ll be there soon enough. Kudos to alchemist19 for predicting that Kirk would be the next domino to fall among Senate Republicans.

Let’s make the new round of the pool a little harder. Name the next Democrat and Republican to flip. Collins and Murkowski don’t count; we’ve already declared them to be de facto flippers for pool purposes. I’ll stick with Bill Nelson, thereby ensuring that the next Democrat will be anybody but Bill Nelson, and I’ll take Kelly Ayotte on the GOP side. Exit question: Now that there are 50 Senators on record as supporting gay marriage, they’ll at least try to repeal DOMA next year if the Supreme Court doesn’t do it for them, no?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Together?

There must be a lobby pushing this? All of the sudden Senators are flipping?

News from Flaming Gas.

Oil Can on April 2, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Are we talking about love or sticking a man’s penis into another man’s dirty anus?

SirGawain on April 2, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Somebody mention these numbnuts that they don’t have to support SSM they just have to get government out of it, claiming a stake in the we must have validation of homosexuality on a nationwide basis is well into the danger zone for boomerang ass bite.

Speakup on April 2, 2013 at 12:46 PM

And so, after a solid week of me picking Carper every day in the gay-marriage pool as the next Democrat to flip, only to be disappointed every time, he finally flips … the day after I switch my pick to Bill Nelson.

Clearly, Carper reads Hot Air and didn’t want you to win, AP.

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Kirk? KIRK! WHOOHOO!!! Second Republican Senator for liberty. This is absolutely fantastic!

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Demopublicans.

Increasingly there is no difference between the two parties.

18-1 on April 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

As our society has changed and evolved, so too has the public’s opinion on gay marriage – and so has mine. I pray every day for God to grant me the wisdom to do what is right. Through my prayers and conversations with my family and countless friends and Delawareans, I’ve been reminded of the power of one of my core values: the Golden Rule. It calls on us to treat others as we want to be treated. That means, to me, that all Americans ultimately should be free to marry the people they love and intend to share their lives with, regardless of their sexual orientation, and that’s why today, after a great deal of soul searching, I’m endorsing marriage equality.

NAMBLA is, no doubt, taking notes.

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

The most amazing side of these sudden conversions is that voters see them as normal, and continue to reelect the creeps. “Land of the sheep and home of the slave”, indeed.

Archivarix on April 2, 2013 at 12:52 PM

This is really becoming very humorous at this point. All of this evolution based on polls not prayer. All one needs to do is read a bible or the Torah and the choice is very clear. Man and women. Be fruitful and multiply is very difficult to achieve otherwise.

DDay on April 2, 2013 at 12:52 PM

Look Ma, two more lemmings just went over the ledge.

rukiddingme on April 2, 2013 at 12:53 PM

And so, after a solid week of me picking Carper every day in the gay-marriage pool as the next Democrat to flip, only to be disappointed every time, he finally flips … the day after I switch my pick to Bill Nelson.

Boy you really must have ticked Carper off that he waited until you switched horses to come out of the evolution closet! ;0

And BTW, the Senate may try and repeal DOMA next year but I doubt it for two reasons. The constituents of these individuals may not be as evolved on the issue as we head into mid-term elections. And, secondly, it would never get out of the House so it essentially makes trouble for blue Senators in red states. Mary Landrieu could well be defeated on this issue alone (which why she is still in the closet).

Happy Nomad on April 2, 2013 at 12:54 PM

The most amazing side of these sudden conversions is that voters see them as normal, and continue to reelect the creeps. “Land of the sheep and home of the slave”, indeed.

The “evolution” is occurring under the power of the State Media so it is handled as “normal” in the media the LIVs consume.

In reality, you only normally see this sort of movement in a state that is either non-representative or is in the last stages of changing into an authoritarian state.

18-1 on April 2, 2013 at 12:54 PM

Hari Seldon has conclusively shown that trying to predict the little details of the future is a fool’s game. But the broad sweep of history is another story. I predict more control over churches, occasional slapdowns by the courts, and bigger government until it collapses.

Fenris on April 2, 2013 at 12:54 PM

The next phase

Schadenfreude on April 2, 2013 at 12:55 PM

That means, to me, that all Americans ultimately should be free to marry the people they love and intend to share their lives with

Kate Upton I marry you!

What? She doesn’t even know me? What kind of bigot are you to deny me to marry the person I think I love and want to share my life with?!?

18-1 on April 2, 2013 at 12:56 PM

Senate gay-marriage pool update: Democrat Tom Carper — and Republican Mark Kirk — “evolve” on SSM

Who the F*ck cares?

ToddPA on April 2, 2013 at 12:56 PM

I predict more control over churches

Which is most of the point of “gay marriage” anyway.

18-1 on April 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

Kirk? KIRK! WHOOHOO!!! Second Republican Senator for liberty. This is absolutely fantastic!

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Hmmm, Liberty you say??

I think phyiscal contact by members of the same sex falls
under Human Biology….but if rooting around in nether regions
is where you find your “Liberty” have at it.

ToddPA on April 2, 2013 at 12:59 PM

still going with nelson myself…for the gop, no clue at this time…

cmsinaz on April 2, 2013 at 1:00 PM

Kate Upton I marry you!

18-1 on April 2, 2013 at 12:56 PM

Over my cold, dead hot, sweaty body in the bunk.

Archivarix on April 2, 2013 at 1:00 PM

Watching the GOP slowly destroy itself on this issue is not going to be pleasant. The more Republicans in Congress and elsewhere that come out for gay marriage, the more they ensure their defeat in future elections. Social Conservatives like myself will oppose this every step of the way. If the GOP is ever dumb enough to try and make their Presidential candidate a gay marriage supporter, kiss that election goodbye. I would also say that you need to drop your opposition to ObamaCare, because the mandate in that and the mandate that will result from gay marriage are two fronts on the same war. Embrace ObamaCare folks, you are undermining the opposition to it by embracing gay marriage.

Blue Collar Todd on April 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM

*makes popcorn* Hey, our society may be destroying itself, but at least we have a front-row seat!

Othniel on April 2, 2013 at 1:02 PM

Same thing happened in California with Prop 8. Every politician and corporation opposed it, but the voters said yes.

Nexialist on April 2, 2013 at 1:02 PM

Yeah Kirk, you’re not getting a vote from me…

I named in the initial post about Rob Portman as predictable flips on this issue if only because it’d cause a problem for him in his very Democratic home state in the general if he didn’t. (He’d already endorsed civil unions.)

Illinois is a Democratic home state but it isn’t really all that socially liberal. There is no need for him to endorse gay marriage… he is a fool.

ninjapirate on April 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

There have been a number of rumors that Mark Kirk is “queerer than a $3 bill” which was a major reason for his divorce.

bw222 on April 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Watching the GOP slowly destroy itself on this issue is not going to be pleasant. The more Republicans in Congress and elsewhere that come out for gay marriage, the more they ensure their defeat in future elections. Social Conservatives like myself will oppose this every step of the way. If the GOP is ever dumb enough to try and make their Presidential candidate a gay marriage supporter, kiss that election goodbye. I would also say that you need to drop your opposition to ObamaCare, because the mandate in that and the mandate that will result from gay marriage are two fronts on the same war. Embrace ObamaCare folks, you are undermining the opposition to it by embracing gay marriage.

Blue Collar Todd on April 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Yup.

All that needs to be done is to collect and post the rantings of antireligious bigots like ZachV who openly admit they intend to use gay-sex marriage to sue and destroy churches, and Kirk is toast.

Call them what they are, which is bigots. Every single gay-sex marriage supporter endorses antireligious bigotry and opposes freedom of religious belief and speech. Every one.

northdallasthirty on April 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

When I climbed the Capitol steps in January, I promised myself that I would return to the Senate with an open mind and greater respect for others.

So, according to Kirk, those of us who haven’t “evolved” have a closed mind and less respect for others. Way to accept the premise of the Godless left who are working overtime to destroy our society! Another useful idiot exposed!

PaddyORyan on April 2, 2013 at 1:05 PM

there will be about 4 more GOP senators who will endorse SSM before the last 7 Dem senators will
-chris cilliza on msdnc
right now…

cmsinaz on April 2, 2013 at 1:05 PM

It is interesting that most of these flips don’t include the view that the Constitution requires recognition of the marriage. They say that we should recognize the marriages but they don’t say that the Constitution mandates it.

Or am I missing something?

SteveMG on April 2, 2013 at 1:05 PM

i’m thinkning mccain will fall soon

just got a hunch

cmsinaz on April 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

Gay blogger, Kevin Dujan, over at Hillbuzz has long maintained that Kirk is himself homosexual.

ahem on April 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

Kate Upton I marry you!

18-1 on April 2, 2013 at 12:56 PM

I think Tigers Pitcher Justin Verlander beat you to Kate and he just signed a $180 million deal. Can you top that?

By the Kate is the niece of Congressman Fred Upton (RINO-MI) and an heir to the Whirlpool fortune.

bw222 on April 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Kirk? KIRK! WHOOHOO!!! Second Republican Senator for liberty. This is absolutely fantastic!

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

I understand you are gay and you want to marry your partner and that it is personal for you. What I don’t understand how liberty is defined by going to the government to beg for a license and permission partner with your loved one.

Silly me, I always thought that liberty was getting the government out of my life, but that must be the conservative in me..

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

The next phase

Schadenfreude on April 2, 2013 at 12:55 PM

“Cigarette?” ROFL

Fenris on April 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Blue Collar Todd is quite right, this issue is going to do to the GOP what Civil Rights did to the Democrats for 25 years. Ironically, its many of the descendents of those southern Democrats who are now going to sacrifice the party they turned to from Nixon forward…..

libfreeordie on April 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

SSM? Fine. Just be sure the first churches sued by gay couples they turn down are either predominantly Black or Hispanic. Get lawyers now looking for nice Hispanic and Black gay couples who want to get married at Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe or MLK Street Missionary Baptist Church, and help them file.

A) Nothing sounds as sweet as whining when a coalition partner has to eat the dog food they voted for.

B) The churches the gays were hoping to target get to stand with the likes of Ebenezer Baptist Church, poisoning the whole sue-churches-into-silence tactic.

C) Oh Bla-acks and Laaa–tiiiinoooos yoo-hoo, what happened to your Lord and Savior 0bama having your backs, after all you did for him? Ain’t that a shame. Youuuuuu voted for it! Maybe y’all should re-think that bussing folks to the polls just because X candidate is darker than a paper bag, guys.

D) Oh Gaa-aays, why should the Democrats you bought and paid for fair and square pander to those Wal-Mart shopping boors who break into your cars when you park them on the street? Fair is fair, and their churches should get used to the twenty-first century, right?

Sekhmet on April 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

This is really becoming very humorous at this point. All of this evolution based on polls not prayer. All one needs to do is read a bible or the Torah and the choice is very clear. Man and women. Be fruitful and multiply is very difficult to achieve otherwise.

DDay on April 2, 2013 at 12:52 PM

There is a scene in In & Out where the community rallies around the newly out teacher (played by Kevin Kline) at a school assembly by standing up and declaring that they too are gay. First it is one student, then another, the fire department, the teacher’s parents, etc.

That’s the sense I get here. Particularly for Democrats, they have to get out in front of a camera and affirm their gay cred. It has become a thing because the sodomites were sure that their lifestyle choice would be legitimized as the same as marriage by the end of 2009 and were bitterly disappointed with the pace of the rat-eared devil’s evolution. How convenient for his re-election that it kicked in just before November. As he was walking away, you could almost here him mutter something about evolution should shut the queens up and make them vote Democrat. In other words this is all show and not much more.

Happy Nomad on April 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

I’ll take Nelson for the dems, and Rand for the reps. Rand wants to build his libertarian credentials. I see it as an inevitability. /duck

nobar on April 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

It is interesting that most of these flips don’t include the view that the Constitution requires recognition of the marriage. They say that we should recognize the marriages but they don’t say that the Constitution mandates it.

Or am I missing something?

SteveMG on April 2, 2013 at 1:05 PM

I am still waiting to hear how Obama a “supposedly” Constitutional lawyer evolved, and Hilary Clinton a lawyer did. They both had the law and the Constitution within their grasp for years.. What suddenly made them change their minds the last few months?

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

Sorry, Repubs. If you cannot explain your position, being socially liberal will not help us win. What you should do, is call Dennis Prager to help you respond to the Left. (It’s sounds funny, but a helpful tip.)
Look at how many people we all know that are fiscally conservative, but socially lib–they vote Left anyway. Especially today’s college generation.
They personally maybe wallet watchers, but that is it.

Mike from SoCal on April 2, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Could reparations to gay people for denying them 200+ years of marriage benefits be far behind?

KingGold on April 2, 2013 at 1:09 PM

libfreeordie on April 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Bull.

kingsjester on April 2, 2013 at 1:09 PM

“Our time on this earth is limited” – Kirk

Yeah…. so let’s just eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die! When did hedonism become a plank in the party?

PaddyORyan on April 2, 2013 at 1:10 PM

Start a list of gay senators and congresscritters.

Schadenfreude on April 2, 2013 at 1:10 PM

I object to the term, evolve.

It is devolution – from the natural and normal, to the unnatural and abnormal.

To embrace abomination.

They can do what they want, to whom they want – and it won’t change the truth.

Oh, many people will believe the lies, and they will embrace the demands of the homosexuals – but the truth will always remain.

OhEssYouCowboys on April 2, 2013 at 1:10 PM

Blue Collar Todd is quite right, this issue is going to do to the GOP what Civil Rights did to the Democrats for 25 years. Ironically, its many of the descendents of those southern Democrats who are now going to sacrifice the party they turned to from Nixon forward…..

libfreeordie on April 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Bwwaaahhaaa.. Wait Democrats got tarred because of the Civil Rights really?

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:10 PM

Actually there is a very good reason to doubt the genuineness of Carper’s “evolution”…he’s got the big D next to his name.

As for the pool, I’m gonna say Mark Warner and John McCain will be the next Dems-er, the next Dem and Rep-to hop on the gay bandwagon. VA is purple, at best, and Warner will have to ingratiate himself more with the Left if he has hopes for higher office. And McCain has always been more interested in currying favor with the media than actually standing for anything, and this would be another way for him to do that. Plus, I doubt he’s in much danger of losing a primary challenge in a state that is, unfortunately, trending leftward (at least demographically).

changer1701 on April 2, 2013 at 1:10 PM

Senate gay-marriage pool update: Democrat Tom Carper — and Republican Mark Kirk — “evolve” on SSM

Who the F*ck cares?

ToddPA on April 2, 2013 at 12:56 PM

Allah and Ed

bw222 on April 2, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Mark Kirk is a flaming liberal – this is absolutely no surprise. Kirk is pro-abortion (and has voted to protect taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood), he is wildly anti-2nd Amendment, he is a raging big-governemnt liberal who just happens to have an (R) next to his name – OF COURSE, like all liberals, he is anti-traditional marriage.

Pork-Chop on April 2, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Could reparations to gay people for denying them 200+ years of marriage benefits be far behind?

KingGold on April 2, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Considering you are taxed more as married…increased budget revenue?

Oil Can on April 2, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Kirk is a one termer. The State of Ill is so sick they’ll elect a Dem easily next time around. He’ll, Kirk might switch parties if the mood is right. Conventional wisdom here is that he’s a rear-ender anyway.

Jaibones on April 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

I am going with Heidi Heitkamp for the D’s and am tempted to agree with you on Kelly Ayotte for Republicans. Ayotte is often compared to Kristin Gillibrand as ideologues who successfully masquerade as moderates. If she is comfortable with SSM I would have thought she’d have made that clear by now. If she makes a statement, I would bet it is of the “evolving” type rather than a full endorsement.

I would pick Joe Manchin as a Dem who will never make a statement but I thought that about Bob Casey too so watch him beat Heidi Heitkamp in the evolutionary process.

msmveritas on April 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

changer1701 on April 2, 2013 at 1:10 PM

Mark Warner’s already “evolved”.

22044 on April 2, 2013 at 1:13 PM

I understand you are gay and you want to marry your partner and that it is personal for you. What I don’t understand how liberty is defined by going to the government to beg for a license and permission partner with your loved one.

Silly me, I always thought that liberty was getting the government out of my life, but that must be the conservative in me..

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Two things: It’s full and equal treatment under the law. Second, the government – at the urging of the social conservatives – is not giving permission or granting anything; it is trying to legislate the morality of a particular religious group.

A rough equivalent would you decrying hog farmers as anti-liberty for asking the government to allow them to sell their goods in an Islamic country. Or you scoffing at 1900s women asking the government to allow them to get legal divorce from their abusive husbands. In all three situations, the government is anti-liberty and trying to regulate the behavior of its citizens.

I would finally add that it’s not me … it’s my mother and father. My siblings, family, friends, co-workers and loved ones who wish for me to be treated the same and have the same opportunities in life that they have/had.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Tomorrow’s HA Thread:

Isabella County, MI Dog Catcher in Favor of Gay Marriage

bw222 on April 2, 2013 at 1:15 PM

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM

You want the use of the word “marriage” as a conveyance of “normalcy” to your sexual preference and lifestyle. Period.

kingsjester on April 2, 2013 at 1:15 PM

I predict more control over churches

Which is most of the point of “gay marriage” anyway.

18-1 on April 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

Yep. This is the HHS mandate in a different arena. The rat-eared devil or the gays themselves don’t care about “marriage” per se. Dudes are already playing house with other dudes. This is about vengence. The removal of tax exempt status for any church who do not embrace sodomy as normal and natural. They will be compelled to perform sodomite marriage sacraments, they will be compelled to ordain practicing gay clergy. It will not matter what the tenets of faith or the Bible says, this is all about revenge.

Happy Nomad on April 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM

Mark Warner’s already “evolved”.

22044 on April 2, 2013 at 1:13 PM

Damn, missed that.

changer1701 on April 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM

NAMBLA is, no doubt, taking notes.

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

You might wrongly believe children can consent. I should warn you though, do not act on that belief. And generally speaking don’t think about NAMBLA too much… looking in the abyss and all.

lester on April 2, 2013 at 1:17 PM

It is so sadly ironic that we elect these politicians as leaders yet they fall in line like sheep. Pathetic political whores.

KickandSwimMom on April 2, 2013 at 1:18 PM

Let the record show that I am 3 for 3 on the Republican pool. I got Collins, Murkowski, and Kirk correct, in that order. And I made those calls before others.

Cheated again by AP…

Graham will wait until after 2014. I could see Collins or Murkowski being one of the next Republicans. Possibly Mark Kirk.

steebo77 on March 25, 2013 at 6:45 PM

I want a name and a time: Among Bob Casey, Bill Nelson, Tom Carper, Kay Hagan, Mary Landrieu, and Joe Donnelly, who’s the next to “evolve” and when? I’ll take Carper at 4:47 p.m. ET.

What if Collins, Murkowski, or Kirk beat them to it?

steebo77 on March 26, 2013 at 4:08 PM

I’ll go with my gut and say it’s gonna be Leontyna Miklaszewska.

steebo77 on March 26, 2013 at 7:46 PM

Begich endorsed gay marriage today, didn’t he? More pressure on Leah Moskowitz to declare her support.

steebo77 on March 26, 2013 at 7:48 PM

I was right with Collins and right again with Murkowskowitzkowski. I guess that means there’s a virtual guarantee that Mark Kirk will be next.

steebo77 on March 28, 2013 at 2:07 PM

steebo77 on April 2, 2013 at 1:18 PM

My siblings, family, friends, co-workers and loved ones who wish for me to be treated the same and have the same opportunities in life that they have/had.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM

LOL. You can’t have kids with a gay partner and you can’t form a biological family with a gay partner. You can’t adopt kids who will be raised with reasonable facsimiles of a biological mother and father. Go blame Nature. You know you want to.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on April 2, 2013 at 1:19 PM

I’m 54, and I’ve never seen America so sick. So lost and without direction. So desirous of being controlled, told what to do and what to embrace.

So utterly vile.

OhEssYouCowboys on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

Tomorrow’s HA Thread:

Isabella County, MI Dog Catcher in Favor of Gay Marriage

bw222 on April 2, 2013 at 1:15 PM

But what about the Drain Commissioner?

Seriously, HA does seem to be more than a little light in the loafers these days. And not really advancing the discussion much.

Happy Nomad on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM

You want the use of the word “marriage” as a conveyance of “normalcy” to your sexual preference and lifestyle. Period.

kingsjester on April 2, 2013 at 1:15 PM

My mother and grandmother want to use the word “marriage” and see me walk down the aisle, like any normal loving family would. Which is why you would not want to meet these two old ladies in a dark alleyway. They’d probably F your S up.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

GOP – Gutless : Obtuse : Puerile.

Not a leader among them.

ss396 on April 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

The remaining question is how many years before we get to 60 Senators favoring SSM. My guess is after the 2018 election.

thuja on April 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Second, the government … is trying to legislate the morality of a particular religious group.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM

So then, I can expect you to come to the defense of socially conservative churches when they are sued for not allowing gay marriages?

Fenris on April 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

You might wrongly believe children can consent.

lester on April 2, 2013 at 1:17 PM

According to the left the kids can consent to abortions (which are then kept secret from their parents). Don’t tell me about any BS with leftists and issues of “consent” with children. It’s a farce, already.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on April 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Two things: It’s full and equal treatment under the law. Second, the government – at the urging of the social conservatives – is not giving permission or granting anything; it is trying to legislate the morality of a particular religious group.

Wrong.

It is pure anti-religious bigotry and hate, spoken by bigots like yourself and your family who want religion punished.

I would finally add that it’s not me … it’s my mother and father. My siblings, family, friends, co-workers and loved ones who wish for me to be treated the same and have the same opportunities in life that they have/had.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Nope. They are all bigots and hatemongers, disgusting pigs who want to silence freedom of speech and religious belief.

You have stated here, ZachV, that all you care about is punishing churches and hurting social conservatives. You clearly do not care about marriage or responsibility or relationships; you are just hiding behind bigotry and hate toward religion.

northdallasthirty on April 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

I am going with Heidi Heitkamp for the D’s and am tempted to agree with you on Kelly Ayotte for Republicans.

msmveritas on April 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Don’t count on it. Kelly Ayotte resigned as New Hampshire Attorney General in protest of Gov.Lynch signing same-sex marriage into law.

Also, from March 27, 2013:

Despite the fact it is legal for same sex couples to get married in New Hampshire, Ayotte remains the only member of the state’s Washington delegation who believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

“I respect those who have changed their minds, but I believe in traditional marriage,” Ayotte said Wednesday.”

Ayotte said she believes that marriage is an issue best left to individual states and that she respects New Hampshire’s decision to make same-sex marriage legal.

steebo77 on April 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

Stay classy – lest you start to sound like Armin!

22044 on April 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Two things: It’s full and equal treatment under the law. Second, the government – at the urging of the social conservatives – is not giving permission or granting anything; it is trying to legislate the morality of a particular religious group.

Marriage licenses do not treat everyone equal under the law or there wouldn’t be ANY EXCLUSIONS OR A NEED FOR A LICENSE. Licenses by nature are exclusionary. Futhermore government treats different groups unequal all the time- see the tax code..

rough equivalent would you decrying hog farmers as anti-liberty for asking the government to allow them to sell their goods in an Islamic country

Again, solved by the government LEAVING THE ALONE… If the government didn’t require that they asked for permission and left them alone-no issue.

Or you scoffing at 1900s women asking the government to allow them to get legal divorce from their abusive husbands

Another instance of the government LEAVING THEM ALONE.. If the government wasn’t involved in divorce then you wouldn’t have to ask the government for permission..

I would finally add that it’s not me … it’s my mother and father. My siblings, family, friends, co-workers and loved ones who wish for me to be treated the same and have the same opportunities in life that they have/had.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Nope, its for you..

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

They’d probably F your S up.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

They sound as classy as you. Did you guys go on Jerry Springer?

kingsjester on April 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

My mother and grandmother want to use the word “marriage” and see me walk down the aisle, like any normal loving family would.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

You can’t have a family with a gay partner, you blithering idiot. You can rent kids to appear as though you have a family but you can’t have actually make a natural one.

You are as selfish and self-obsessed as the day is long.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on April 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

So then, I can expect you to come to the defense of socially conservative churches when they are sued for not allowing gay marriages?

Fenris on April 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Good luck with that!

22044 on April 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

I would pick Joe Manchin as a Dem who will never make a statement but I thought that about Bob Casey too so watch him beat Heidi Heitkamp in the evolutionary process.

msmveritas on April 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

I’ll bet against Manchin. The guy is more Republican than half the GOP. Plus, he hails from a state so deeply hick that the very concept of gay is lost on them.

Archivarix on April 2, 2013 at 1:24 PM

My mother and grandmother want to use the word “marriage” and see me walk down the aisle, like any normal loving family would. Which is why you would not want to meet these two old ladies in a dark alleyway. They’d probably F your S up.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

LOL– So you need a piece of paper to do this. You can’t walk down an aisle and call your union marriage without the state telling you can do this. And you call yourself a Conservative… OMG, I have never met a conservative who needs daddy state to approve so much of their life.

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

You might wrongly believe children can consent. I should warn you though, do not act on that belief. And generally speaking don’t think about NAMBLA too much… looking in the abyss and all.

lester on April 2, 2013 at 1:17 PM

Give things 30 or 40 years and we’ll see where things stand. 30 years ago, the idea of SSM being mainstream was laughable.

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

I’ll take Kelly Ayotte on the GOP side.

AP, The hell you say!

If she does, she loses re-election IMHO. She has nothing to gain by this and everything to lose by pandering to the gays/progs/libs/dems. Let’s face it, this is not a Rep/Con issue.

D-fusit on April 2, 2013 at 1:26 PM

My mother and grandmother want to use the word “marriage” and see me walk down the aisle, like any normal loving family would. Which is why you would not want to meet these two old ladies in a dark alleyway. They’d probably F your S up.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

LOL.

Your mother and grandmother have SERIOUS problems if the only goal they have in life is to force gay marriage on a church.

Probably because they are bigots, and like you admit, they are desperate enough to turn violent and attack people if they don’t get their way.

Don’t you think that’s abnormal that your grandmother and mother are such violent antireligious bigots?

northdallasthirty on April 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

They’d probably F your S up.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

They sound as classy as you. Did you guys go on Jerry Springer?

kingsjester on April 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

Lol, no, my maternal side of the family doesn’t take kindly to people who treat other people like dirt.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

I would finally add that it’s not me … it’s my mother and father. My siblings, family, friends, co-workers and loved ones who wish for me to be treated the same and have the same opportunities in life that they have/had.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Same opportunities? No two people have the same opportunities. That’s more of the BS victimhood talk sodomites trot out just before they claim that their thong-clad participation in some “pride” parade is akin to making a stand at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma.

As to being treated “the same” that really boils down to respect and the way you are treated has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

Happy Nomad on April 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Lol, no, my maternal side of the family doesn’t take kindly to people who treat other people like dirt.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

You’re lucky that they have no problem with idiots.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on April 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

I understand you are gay and you want to marry your partner and that it is personal for you. What I don’t understand how liberty is defined by going to the government to beg for a license and permission partner with your loved one.

Silly me, I always thought that liberty was getting the government out of my life, but that must be the conservative in me..

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Last I heard, every heterosexual couple needs a marriage license from their state government…and have it recognized by all states through “full faith and credit”.

JetBoy on April 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Don’t count on it. Kelly Ayotte resigned as New Hampshire Attorney General in protest of Gov.Lynch signing same-sex marriage into law.

steebo77 on April 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Also, to run for Senate.

steebo77 on April 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

You might wrongly believe children can consent. I should warn you though, do not act on that belief. And generally speaking don’t think about NAMBLA too much… looking in the abyss and all.

lester on April 2, 2013 at 1:17 PM

Give things 30 or 40 years and we’ll see where things stand. 30 years ago, the idea of SSM being mainstream was laughable.

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Besides, Carper did say people should be able to marry whomever they love. You think you libs hold “age of consent” as a restraint? Bull. Look at your side’s push to allow girls under the age of consent the ability to get abortions without parental consent or notification.

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

I understand you are gay and you want to marry your partner and that it is personal for you. What I don’t understand how liberty is defined by going to the government to beg for a license and permission partner with your loved one.

Silly me, I always thought that liberty was getting the government out of my life, but that must be the conservative in me..

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Well, yes, you and I prefer liberty, but that’s not the issue as you know well. I’m applying for a government grant to replace the retaining wall in my front yard. I think that there is a government agency that gives such grants is ridiculous and corrupt, but I might as well get the government dough as anyone. Similarly, gays just want the privileges granted to married couples.

That paragon of humanity, Ayn Rand, Peace Be Upon Her, didn’t refuse her Social Security checks.

thuja on April 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

I’m not treating you like dirt. I’m just telling you that you and Bubba are not man and wife.

kingsjester on April 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

LOL– So you need a piece of paper to do this. You can’t walk down an aisle and call your union marriage without the state telling you can do this. And you call yourself a Conservative… OMG, I have never met a conservative who needs daddy state to approve so much of their life.

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Exactly.

Gay-sex liberal ZachV claims to “love” his sex partner and have a child, but he won’t actually take any steps to walk down the aisle and proclaim his commitment and responsibility before his “family” which is supposedly so desperate to see him do so.

No, he needs to whine and kick and scream so that government will give him a piece of paper that will then allow him and his welfare-dependent family to go beat up on churches.

Once you actually talk to these gay-sex marriage supporters like ZachV you figure out very quickly that they have no interest in commitment, responsibility, or fidelity; they’re just throwing a toddler-esque temper tantrum.

northdallasthirty on April 2, 2013 at 1:30 PM

LOL.

Your mother and grandmother have SERIOUS problems if the only goal they have in life is to force gay marriage on a church.

Probably because they are bigots, and like you admit, they are desperate enough to turn violent and attack people if they don’t get their way.

Don’t you think that’s abnormal that your grandmother and mother are such violent antireligious bigots?

northdallasthirty on April 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Well, I haven’t seen you around lately. Have you made any progress on accepting yourself?

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:30 PM

LOL– So you need a piece of paper to do this. You can’t walk down an aisle and call your union marriage without the state telling you can do this. And you call yourself a Conservative… OMG, I have never met a conservative who needs daddy state to approve so much of their life.

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

It’s amazing isn’t it. A licence is permission from authorities to do that whic

nobar on April 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Has Pryor flipped yet? If not, I’ll go Pryor-McCain for the tandem…

JohnGalt23 on April 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

*which is illegal. So technically, MARRIAGE is ILLEGAL, until you obtain a licence.

*dog attacked my laptop, so message got cut off.

nobar on April 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM

northdallasthirty on April 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

I know that you are aware of gay-friendly churches who do perform same-sex ceremonies even now…..

libfreeordie on April 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM

Well, I haven’t seen you around lately. Have you made any progress on accepting yourself?

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:30 PM

Hmm, let’s see.

You are not a complete and worthwhile person, and your family doesn’t value you or love you, unless the government hands you a piece of paper that allows you to sue churches.

I and my family consider me a complete and worthwhile person regardless of whether I can marry or not, whether I am married or not, and whether other peoples’ religious beliefs are the same as mine or not.

Seems pretty obvious who is the most self-accepting.

I put it this way; if you and your fellow bigots actually were self-accepting, you wouldn’t be so desperate to destroy anyone and anything that disagreed with you.

northdallasthirty on April 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

My mother and grandmother want to use the word “marriage” and see me walk down the aisle, like any normal loving family would. Which is why you would not want to meet these two old ladies in a dark alleyway. They’d probably F your S up.

ZachV on April 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM

I’m thinking this is BS. I highly doubt two older generations of your family are pining to see you “walk down the aisle” (a la church) with a man. I’m sure they are desirous of you being happy, and I am also sure that they would be absolutely fine with some sort of contractual civil law arrangement for gays relative to property rights and benefits and that, in fact, it is not so important to them that it be called and understood as traditional marriage. The real question is why the gays cannot be happy with that sort of arrangement??

KickandSwimMom on April 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

LOL– So you need a piece of paper to do this. You can’t walk down an aisle and call your union marriage without the state telling you can do this. And you call yourself a Conservative… OMG, I have never met a conservative who needs daddy state to approve so much of their life.

melle1228 on April 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

As I posted above, this isn’t about equality for the gays it is about vengence. They’ve decided that religious denominations must accept sodomy as normal no matter what their tenets of faith and Scripture say about the subject.

And how do the sodomites get the churches to yield? By using the state as their agent to coherce compliance by threatening tax exempt status, defunding church-run social programs, and other tactics. All I can say is that the gays need to be prepared for the backlash when their dreams of revenge come to fruition and societal institutions close rather than comply.

Happy Nomad on April 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

ZachV can go to any gay affirming “church” and they’ll give him a ceremony.
So that argument has no merit.

22044 on April 2, 2013 at 1:34 PM

You want the use of the word “marriage” as a conveyance of “normalcy” to your sexual preference and lifestyle. Period.

kingsjester on April 2, 2013 at 1:15 PM

Yeah! You tell ‘em, kj!

Just look at all those “normal” heterosexual married couples that have shown up on Jerry Springer and Maury Povitch!

JetBoy on April 2, 2013 at 1:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4