|
|
|
|
By Brody Levesque | BETHESDA, MARYLAND -- I am still incredulous that two GOP candidates running for the presidency actually had the temerity to sign a pledge that essentially codified in writing and on display for all to witness in a public way their disdain and bias towards their fellow citizens who happen to be LGBTQ.
I am of course referring to the "Pledge" signed by GOP candidates former Senator Rick Santorum and Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann on Thursday put out by The Family Leader, a prominent Iowa group that promotes Christian conservative social values.
The pledge is entitled, “The Marriage Vow – A Declaration of Dependence upon Marriage and Family.” Presidential candidates who sign the pledge must agree to personal fidelity to his or her spouse, the appointment of “faithful constitutionalists” as judges, opposition to any redefinition of marriage, and prompt reform of uneconomic and anti-marriage aspects of welfare policy, tax policy and divorce law.
The Marriage Vow also outlines support for the legal advocacy for the federal Defense of Marriage Act, humane efforts to protect women and children, rejection of Sharia Islam, safeguards for all married and unmarried U.S. military service members, and commitment to downsizing government and the burden upon American families.
For the most part, this 'pledge' espouses pretty much the party line of the so-called christian right except for this one section of the pledge's preamble touting how important the so-called model of a traditional marriage is:
Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American President.
Tasteless you say? Yeah well.... News came late yesterday that the group pushing this so-called pledge had removed it from the document. However, one would have thought that a former United States Senator and a currently serving member of the U. S. House, both of whom swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States, would have at least questioned that wording unless...
Here's a typical reaction from a member of the public:
"It doesn't matter that they took it out, the fact remains that they put it in. As an African American, I despise comments like those in this pledge. And I hear them often from the right wing; the merits of slavery! I am often amazed by conservatives because they will then act as if they are dumbfounded by blacks that are unreceptive to republicans.
Yet, here they are in 2011 still talking about how, "in some ways" slavery was better than freedom for blacks. And they wonder why we are suspicious of their motivations. The fact that they can see an upside in oppressing and treating as cattle, any group of people is disturbing. The fact that they would want to make that contrast is suspicious and despicable.
But more than anything, it's wrong!
Black slaves were barely allowed to marry, and when we were, we could be sold and separated at any time. The dissolution of our families was almost guaranteed. And by the way the sanctity of our marriages was underminded by the constant raping of black wives by their masters. I hate to bring these things up because I feel as if it rips scabs off of old wounds, but I think the right unfortunately is obsessed with softening the image of slavery.
They seem to want to see the institution as something other than vicious and savage. Which is why they are constantly making points like this one!"
Hard to argue with that line of reasoning. The most cursory investigation into slavery would show that families RARELY if ever stayed together, and the idea of a "household," two parent or not, is laughable.
Of course the pledge also asserts that homosexuality is a choice, not an innate characteristic. A footnote also indicates the belief that homosexuality is a public health risk akin to second hand smoking that decreases life expectancy.
I have to ask, when exactly will the American people put an end to these tactics and this mockery of humanity?
Here's the final word on this topic from a former New Mexico Governor, Gary Johnson, who also happens to be a moderate Republican:
“This ‘pledge’ is nothing short of a promise to discriminate against everyone who makes a personal choice that doesn’t fit into a particular definition of ‘virtue’. While the Family Leader pledge covers just about every other so-called virtue they can think of, the one that is conspicuously missing is tolerance. In one concise document, they manage to condemn gays, single parents, single individuals, divorcees, Muslims, gays in the military, unmarried couples, women who choose to have abortions, and everyone else who doesn’t fit in a Norman Rockwell painting."
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
Editorial- An Evil Truth Exposed
|
|
|
Re: Editorial- An Evil Truth Exposed
By: saben on Thu, 14 July 2011 04:48 |
|
 |
Re: Editorial- An Evil Truth Exposed
|
|
|
Re: Editorial- An Evil Truth Exposed
By: saben on Thu, 14 July 2011 17:27 |
|
|
Re: Editorial- An Evil Truth Exposed
By: saben on Thu, 14 July 2011 17:30 |
|
|
Re: Editorial- An Evil Truth Exposed
|
|
 |
I'm fine
By: saben on Thu, 14 July 2011 18:01 |
|
|
Fine, perhaps. Informed, maybe. On topic, not at all.
By: timmy on Thu, 14 July 2011 19:01 |
|
|
Re: Fine, perhaps. Informed, maybe. On topic, not at all.
By: saben on Thu, 14 July 2011 19:11 |
|
|
Re: Fine, perhaps. Informed, maybe. On topic, not at all.
By: timmy on Thu, 14 July 2011 21:13 |
|
|
Re: Fine, perhaps. Informed, maybe. On topic, not at all.
|
|
|
Re: Fine, perhaps. Informed, maybe. On topic, not at all.
By: saben on Fri, 15 July 2011 04:32 |
|
|
Bored now
By: timmy on Fri, 15 July 2011 06:55 |
|
|
Pity this candidate doesn't have a multi-million budget...
By: saben on Thu, 14 July 2011 19:12 |
Goto Forum:
[  ] |
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
