Im STILL not done talking about Bachmann

[Guest EvenClose]

Here is a nice little snippet of some of the kind things she has said that is not so radical in the past.

(ok seriously I need help breathing, I can't stop laughing at this point.)

People who only know Bachmann from her campaign ads and material might mistake her for a mainstream politician, a GOP conservative in the tradition of Ronald Reagan. Bachmann does not make her most “extreme” statements and charges when appearing before influential popular media. Her statements before other types of audiences are very different from the ones made before television cameras and newspaper reporters. These quotes will give the reader insight into Bachmann’s true political base, her worldview, and her powers of judgment.

This issue brief is divided into different sections:

General • • Bachmann on Same-Sex Marriage and Gay Americans • • Bachmann on her Career As A Tax Attorney • • Bachmann Charges that U.S. and Minnesota Are Imposing A New Order Opposed To Free Enterprise and Representative Government.

General.

“We’re in a state of crisis where our nation is literally ripping apart at the seams right now, and lawlessness is occurring from one ocean to the other. And we’re seeing the fulfillment of the Book of Judges here in our own time, where every man doing that which is right in his own eyes—in other words, anarchy.” – Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 6, 2004.

On her 2004 state capitol rally for a same-sex marriage ban amendment: “Listeners should rejoice right now, because there are believers all across your listening area that are praying now. And I would say that if you can’t attend the rally, you can pray. And God calls us to fall on our faces and our knees and cry out to Him and confess our sins. And I would just ask your listeners to do that now. Cry out to a Holy God. He wants to hear us, He will hear us if we will confess our sins and cry out to Him. Our children are worth it and obedience to God demands it.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 6, 2004.

“Spending comes just as natural to liberals in Minnesota and the Minnesota legislature as bashing decency comes to the editorial board of our major metropolitan newspapers.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, EdWatch conference, October 10-11, 2003

Bachmann on Same-Sex Marriage and Gay Americans.

On gay marriage: “This is probably the biggest issue that will impact our state and our nation in the last, at least, thirty years. I am not understating that.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

On public education: “That’s my number one issue.” — Senator Michele Bachmann quoted in Stillwater Gazette, July 24, 2006. K. Janisch, “Rove stumps for Bachmann in Stillwater ”

“This really is the number one issue for our country right now, how are we going to deal with this threat of radical Islam.”—Senator Michele Bachmann, Northern Alliance Radio Network, September 9, 2006.

On her March 2004 rally against same-sex marriage: “It will be an awesome day. We are going to be beseeching the Lord.” —Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

On what will happen if her same-sex marriage ban amendment fails to pass in 2004: “It isn’t that some gay will get some rights. It’s that everyone else in our state will lose rights. For instance, parents will lose the right to protect and direct the upbringing of their children. Because our K-12 public school system, of which ninety per cent of all youth are in the public school system, they will be required to learn that homosexuality is normal, equal and perhaps you should try it. And that will occur immediately, that all schools will begin teaching homosexuality.” -- Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 6, 2004.

On the gay community and same-sex marriage: “This is a very serious matter, because it is our children who are the prize for this community, they are specifically targeting our children.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

If her same-sex marriage ban amendment does not pass in 2004: “The sex curriculum will be essentially by taught by the local gay community.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

“And what a bizarre time we’re in, Jan, when a judge will say to little children that you can’t say the pledge of allegiance, but you must learn that homosexuality is normal and you should try it.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 6, 2004.

“And so people have to make this call now. They have to go to mn.voter.com, they need to contact in particular their Senator, and they need to demand that the people be allowed to vote on this in November (of 2004). Because otherwise, our children will be forced to learn that homosexuality is normal and natural and that perhaps they should try it, and that’ll be very soon in our public schools all across the state, beginning in kindergarten.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 6, 2004.

On same-sex marriage: “… This is an earthquake issue. This will change our state forever. Because the immediate consequence, if gay marriage goes through, is that K-12 little children will be forced to learn that homosexuality is normal, natural and perhaps they should try it.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

On her March 2004 rally against same-sex marriage: “We need to have the phone lines melted this week. We need people to melt the phone lines. Not to the House members, you don’t need to call them, and you don’t need to call the Republican Senators. It’s the Democrat Senators that we need to melt their phone lines. Even more important, if anyone can come to the rally on Monday, they need to come, and we will give them maps with the offices of where the Democrat Senators are.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

“We are wide open and vulnerable and in all likelihood an activist judge will strike down our Defense of Marriage Act, our state law against gay marriage, this year. And in all likelihood, we will have gay marriage in 2004 in Minnesota , if we don’t get this amendment on the ballot for November.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

“We can only bring a constitutional amendment up (to ban same-sex marriage) in election years. That means we’d have to wait two more years. By that time, Jan, thousands of gays would legally be married in Minnesota .” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

On her same-sex marriage ban amendment: “We only have until May 17 (2004) at the latest. But really, it is this next week that the DFL is going to try to kill this bill. It’s within the Christian community’s hands to get face to face, in front of these Democrats.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004. This is important because it's a State Senator organizing religious demonstrators to go down to the Capitol, into the Rotunda, into the very offices of elected officials and intimidate the elected officials until they do their bidding. This quote is likely to upset other elected officials and people who believe in representative government. It's okay for you or me or some pastor to call for demonstrators to come down and get into the faces of legislators, but it's NOT okay for an elected official to organize a group of demonstrators to come down to the capitol, enter the capitol building and disrupt the business of the Senate and House.

Host: Now Michele, my understanding, I also got an email very early this morning, correct me if this is not true, that, let’s see here, your phone number has been given to members of the gay community and that they are to blitz you and harass you, is that correct? MB: That’s correct. We got a call yesterday, that at the Capitol brochures were being handed out with my photo on it, and I believe the photo of Representative Mary Liz Holberg. Our names, and the word “Shame” was written across my face, and my home phone number was put on that brochure, and people were instructed to call and make threatening calls to my personal home phone. Host: Alright, has that happened? MB: Uh, well, I have called Capitol Security, and I have called Washington County Sheriff, which is where we live, and they are on alert, and I can just tell you that precautions are being taken. I probably can’t tell your listeners any more than that, but precautions are being taken.” —Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

“It’s part of Satan I think to say that this is “gay.” It’s anything but gay.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

“If you’re involved in the gay and lesbian lifestyle, it’s bondage. It is personal bondage, personal despair and personal enslavement.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

On her March 2004 rally against same-sex marriage: “And I want to tell you, that was probably the most loving, warm-spirited, most beautiful rally that I have ever seen at the Capitol.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

“They aren’t just kind of gay-friendly, they are gay advocates at Proctor and Gamble… Here’s just a few other companies that support the pro-homosexual agenda. They include Levi-Strauss, American Airlines, Sarah Lee Bakery, Jaguar and LandRover.” —Senator Michele Bachmann, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

“You have a teacher talking about his gayness. (The elementary school student) goes home then and says “Mom! What’s gayness? We had a teacher talking about this today.” The mother says “Well, that’s when a man likes other men, and they don’t like girls.” The boy’s eight. He’s thinking, “Hmm. I don’t like girls. I like boys. Maybe I’m gay.” And you think, “Oh, that’s, that’s way out there. The kid isn’t gonna think that.” Are you kidding? That happens all the time. You don’t think that this is intentional, the message that’s being given to these kids? That’s child abuse.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

On a leader of a teacher training workshop who cites discrimination as a cause of suicide among homosexual youth: “(He) also fails to acknowledge other psychological factors that could contribute to homosexual youth committing suicide, like family problems or abuse or maybe the fact of what they’re doing.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

“Normalization (of gayness) through desensitization. Very effective way to do this with a bunch of second graders, is take a picture of “The Lion King” for instance, and a teacher might say, “Do you know that the music for this movie was written by a gay man?” The message is: I’m better at what I do, because I’m gay.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

On homosexuality as a mental disorder: “Don’t misunderstand. I am not here bashing people who are homosexuals, who are lesbians, who are bisexual, who are transgender. We need to have profound compassion for people who are dealing with the very real issue of sexual dysfunction in their life and sexual identity disorders.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, speaking at EdWatch National Education Conference, November 6, 2004.

“Two homosexuals that were holding up my picture this week at the Capitol and shouting that I want to hate people, I walked up to them and said: “I don’t hate you. I love you and the Savior who created you. He loves you, too, can I tell you why? This is not about hating them, this is about loving them into the Kingdom.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

“This is not about hating homosexuals. I don’t. I love homosexuals.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The News”, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 20, 2004.

Interviewer: “Answer the question, do you hate homos?” MB: “No, but ask my kids! (laughter)” — Senator Michele Bachmann, Tom Barnard Morning Show, KQRS, broadcast May 12, 2005.

Bachmann On Her Career As Tax Attorney.

“I am a tax attorney. I have to warn you, this is not a pretty sight. You have a tax attorney who’s also a politician. So if there’s anyone who needs sanctification, it is me.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, EdWatch conference, October 10-11, 2003 (This is a self-deprecating joke by Bachmann which an audience of Evangelical Christians would understand. The most common use of the term “sanctification” within Christian theology is in reference to the change brought about by God in a believer, begun at the point of salvation or justification and continuing throughout the life of the believer. Bachmann’s joke lies in the notion that tax attorneys and politicians are so suspect that they would need sanctification more than people in other professions.)

“I’m a federal tax lawyer, that’s what I do for a living. And I litigate tax cases in the Federal Tax Court here in St. Paul, criminal cases, civil cases, that’s what I do…” — Senator Michele Bachmann, Tom Barnard Morning Show, KQRS, broadcast May 12, 2005. (Note the date of this statement.)

Bachmann Charges that U.S. and Minnesota Are Imposing A New Order Opposed To Free Enterprise and Representative Government.

On education reforms laws passed by the GOP-controlled US Congress: “Federal law forms a new governance structure that opposes both free enterprise and representative government…A new national curriculum is used that embraces a socialist, globalist worldview; loyalty to all government and not America.”. — Michael J. Chapman and Senator Michele Bachmann, “How New U.S. Policy Embraces a State-Planned Economy” © 2001.

“Goals 2000, of which we’ve heard quite a bit, is a partnership between government and your local public schools to radically transform and change our public education system, as you’ve learned today, to train children to accept not freedom, but to accept and anticipate government central planning of our economy and our way of life.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, EdWatch conference, October 10-11, 2003.

On Governor Pawlenty’s “Tax-Free Zones” initiative: “Tax-free zones are meant to be the catalyst to put the final nail in this system to have a state-planned economy.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, EdWatch conference, October 10-11, 2003.

On Governor Pawlenty’s “Tax-Free Zones” initiative: “…it’s all for the planned redistribution of wealth which is also stated in this document, the redistribution of wealth which is based on a new concept called equity. And it says this: we must not lose sight of equity, or fairness based on need. Where have you heard that here, today? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, EdWatch conference, October 10-11, 2003.

“This is how the government proposes to govern and run centrally-planned economies in our state. Through an organization and entity called MELT (Minnesota Economic and Leadership Team)…Today it’s called MELT, which is exactly, by the way, exactly what will happen to our economy if we put this system into place.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, Edwatch conference, October 10-11, 2003 (Note: The Minnesota Economic Leadership Team (MELT) was an advisory board on economic and workforce policy chaired by Governor Pawlenty.)

"This has nothing to do with you the people and who you elect. We’re chumps, you see. It is MELT who’s going to control the world.” — Senator Michele Bachmann, Edwatch conference, October 10-11, 2003.

On whether GOP Governor Tim Pawlenty and Minnesota elected officials are restructuring school curriculum to replace a free market economy with a state-controlled economy: "I don’t believe for a minute our Governor wants eighth graders choosing careers, I don’t believe for a minute our elected officials want that. But you know what? Everything that I read, all the documents, point otherwise." — Senator Michele Bachmann, Edwatch conference, October 10-11, 2003.

[Guest]

You're preaching to the choir here.

What scares me more than anything else is that her ignorance, like Sarah Palin's is inexcuseable. How can they be considered to be legitimate canditates for any office, let alone president (OMG perish the thought!)

I suppose that these two people could be the liberal media's darlings in order to make a laughing-stock of the conservative movement. How come I'm not laughing?

Love, Meg

[MackenzieB]

Maybe they (The Wicked Beotch from the Frozen Tundra, and the Wicked Beotch from the Land of a Thousand Lakes) can get together on a platform? Someplace like penis Chaney's place perhaps. Discuss a few issues and then Good Ol' penis can take them out a hunting? I'll step up to the plate to buy his rounds and hold his glasses...

[Guest chngnwnd]

That pair is an embarrassment to women everywhere. They make us ALL look bad...

Bobbi

[MackenzieB]

I guess that the "dirty word filter" prefers to call Mr. Chaney a body part instead of D!ck...

[Carolyn Marie]

For us fans of Jon Stewart, it will be a rich and rewarding campaign season. Poor Jon has been overwhelmed of late with ripe material for his show. The fun never stops.

Carolyn Marie

[Guest Emily Ray]

While I don't agree with her position on marriage I would like to remind everyone that while she was a full-time tax lawer and politician she has had 23 foster children. She believes in smaller government and I happen to agree with her on most issues. It is also not fair to charachterise a person by taking one or two sentences out of a speech or interview and then demonize her. I wouldn't want it done to me.

Huggs

Emily

[Guest Aries]

The more I find out about Bachman the scarier she is. I will continue to support Ron Paul.

[Carolyn Marie]

It is also not fair to charachterise a person by taking one or two sentences out of a speech or interview and then demonize her. I wouldn't want it done to me.

Emily, I agree that she is probably a nice person, and has done some good things in her life that are deserving of praise. However, she has made a great many well documented statements that are indicative of someone who is prejudiced against the entire LGBT Community, and would be in favor of turning the clock back on what little rights the Community has won over the years. If you ever want to see the VA lift its prohibition on SRS, you had better hope that she is not elected President.

HUGS

Carolyn Marie

[Guest Vixen Amber]

While I don't agree with her position on marriage I would like to remind everyone that while she was a full-time tax lawer and politician she has had 23 foster children. She believes in smaller government and I happen to agree with her on most issues. It is also not fair to charachterise a person by taking one or two sentences out of a speech or interview and then demonize her. I wouldn't want it done to me.

Huggs

Emily

I greatly disagree. One aspect of kindness does not forgive the continued hate spewing from her very presence.

[Drea]

I imagine not all trans folk are single issue people and don't use someone's public stance about trans as a litmus test for candidates they may favor.

Given the level of bashing within the trans community directed at conservatives and Christians many in the community are too afraid to speak their own opinions for fear of getting dumped on by others in the community.

While some boldly speak their political views as all obviously agree others end up getting dumped on for expressing a different opinion. Rather than listen to what is said, respect the different point of view, instead the result is the sort of intolerance directed at those folks that the community so often complains about being directed at it.

I have known many folks who found their "conservative" area was very accepting yet such is talked about as it is such a terrible thing. Others who have found great acceptance within their church.

It seems to me that trans folk could get much better political support by supporting both sides rather than aligning itself to just one.

[Guest Donna Jean]

It seems to me that trans folk could get much better political support by supporting both sides rather than aligning itself to just one.

Well, it seems that both sides would get more support if more than one side thought of us as human beings!

Donna Jean

[Guest Julie T]

All

Politics? No matter what is said, its going to alienate someone. That is okay in a traditional way I suppose. Wasn't Alexander Hamilton shot and killed by Aaron Burr in a duel over political issues? So people of Laura's Playground? Certainly everyone here will be courteous and kind to each other, regardless of political opinions. If not? I have flintlocks for rent.

Julie

[Guest Vixen Amber]

I imagine not all trans folk are single issue people and don't use someone's public stance about trans as a litmus test for candidates they may favor.

Given the level of bashing within the trans community directed at conservatives and Christians many in the community are too afraid to speak their own opinions for fear of getting dumped on by others in the community.

While some boldly speak their political views as all obviously agree others end up getting dumped on for expressing a different opinion. Rather than listen to what is said, respect the different point of view, instead the result is the sort of intolerance directed at those folks that the community so often complains about being directed at it.

I have known many folks who found their "conservative" area was very accepting yet such is talked about as it is such a terrible thing. Others who have found great acceptance within their church.

It seems to me that trans folk could get much better political support by supporting both sides rather than aligning itself to just one.

Well given that she wants to abolish any chance we have at a decent life, you would have to be pretty dopey to believe she can make it all better. 2 dollar gas? Yeah and I am the queen of England. GOProud is a disgrace. Lying down with the enemy, yes I said it, enemy. If you self loath that's fine, I don't and I will proudly show my political stance even if makes the others more bashful. I am pro gun, I am christian, I am not stupid and I can see how they might possibly have a few ways to help out the fiscal system but lately it really has become a "us vs them" field with all the extreme antigay rhetoric spewing out. Devil's advocate has no place for those who wish us gone. I have friends who are christian and accept me and I have a friend who takes every chance to berate me for being bi/trans/furry whatever our debate is that is the only reason I am still friends with him.

The bashing towards conservatives and christians is imo very well deserved. You see there is a key diff between our bashing, ours is in defence against faith based hatred. When you have a larger percentage who tell us we are going to go to hell and many of them forget the hate the sin not the sinner bit yeah I am going bash em. When the politicians fold and appeal to the blind faith crowd rather than using logic and explaining how they will better the world rather than saying "all gays will has their rights taken away yipppeeee!" I am going to bash.

Yeah the self loathing get dumped on. Maybe they should dump back, this is a forum, and this is a debate board (I hope) If they can't stand up for their views they obviously weren't worth standing up for to begin with.

Yeah and I have 2 skin head people in this trailer park who accept me because I am white and could careless I am trans. Does that make an exception to the rule?

Devils advocate is a tricky road..

[Guest Vixen Amber]

Why it seems my quote skills needs work.

[Guest Alexandra89]

Given the level of bashing within the trans community directed at conservatives and Christians many in the community are too afraid to speak their own opinions for fear of getting dumped on by others in the community.

Not to take away from your point about trans people not being single issue (which is a good point), I would like to point out that voicing a political view tends to get you bashed and dumped on even in a setting where the political spectrum is almost evenly represented. Especially on the internet. Go to any debate or politics forum and mention unions, business, religious groups, LGBT issues, gun rights, or taxes and prepare to be childishly dumped on.

I think it's just a fundamental and irreconcilable difference in perception that informs political beliefs, which in turn leads to a perception of opposing beliefs as irrational or even laughable. For instance, property rights are sacrosanct to some people, but the way I see it everyone's right to decent shelter, adequate nutrition, and health care in an advanced and civilized society where enough of these services would be available if not for differential access far outweighs anyone's right to collect and keep all the money and stuff that they've hitched to their name (that doesn't mean I'm okay with how tax money is being used - I'm not -, but that's another issue not relevant to this discussion). I will never see eye to eye with these people.

In spite of the bashing (which happens everywhere to every political point of view), the best way for people with conservative political views in the trans community is to voice these views, argue for them, and dismiss childish responses for what they are. Emily has voiced her opinions. I totally don't agree but I don't expect her to come around to my way of thinking by harping on the one issue that she thinks is outweighed by the others.

[Drea]

Why it seems my quote skills needs work.

For some reason, after the recent problems, the quote function is no longer putting quotes in a box. It just says "quote" and makes the text look like the others. I been applying a different color in addiiton to specifying it as a quote to make it clearer. Hopefully when the problem is fixed, the color I am using will still be readable.

Well, it seems that both sides would get more support if more than one side thought of us as human beings!

Sounds like a very broad brush mixed with a bit of hyperbole there.

The bashing towards conservatives and christians is imo very well deserved.

I seems to me that such broad brushes of a whole category of people is basic prejudice. That it is no different than the prejudice that trans folk accuse others of directing at them.

In spite of the bashing (which happens everywhere to every political point of view), the best way for people with conservative political views in the trans community is to voice these views, argue for them, and dismiss childish responses for what they are.

When some on one side are already painting with such broad brushes and have no inhibition to resorting to ad hominem characterizations and attacks such as "If you self loath that's fine", can there be a discussion? Why wowuld one even try to talk about the various merits of different positions? It doesnt' suprise me that those with a different point of view are going to be reluctant to bother to state their opinion.

[Sally]

I try to stay away from politics but I will make one very general statement here - it does not apply to all politicians but it does for the most part to the most successful.

What politicians say is for the most part not their own opinion or even their own beliefs, it is what they feel will give them the greatest chance of getting elected - the electronic media is very good at pointing out contradictions from one location to another in the candidates that they do not support and never acknowledging it in the ones that they do = politics is a game and unfortunately for the people telling the truth was crossed out of the rule book long ago.

I do not listen to the debates or really pay much attention to what anyone says while running for office because once they get in they will do whatever they need to do to get reelected - that campaign begins the day after the inauguration - running the country is way down the list.

Cynically yours,

Sally

[Guest Vixen Amber]

"I seems to me that such broad brushes of a whole category of people is basic prejudice. That it is no different than the prejudice that trans folk accuse others of directing at them. "

We are living in a time where this peaceful look at both sides equally nonsense no longer works. If you wanna play devil's advocate for those who hate us, that's perfectly fine but I won't. AND

"When some on one side are already painting with such broad brushes and have no inhibition to resorting to ad hominem characterizations and attacks such as "If you self loath that's fine", can there be a discussion? Why wowuld one even try to talk about the various merits of different positions? It doesnt' suprise me that those with a different point of view are going to be reluctant to bother to state their opinion. "

It's only ad hominem to those who can't counter it. Your calling my post that is no different than mine calling out the GOProud. I just happen to be a little bit more livid about the current hatred spewed at us. More so from those in the GLBT crowd that push us aside and/or side with the ones who would seek to destroy our rights. This is a debate folks, politics have never been nice, I myself am very outspoken on my politics. I do not like people who fit the self loathing group. I do not like the people who would tear down the rights and try to put in a constitutional ban on marriage for gays. I can't see past that with Bachmann. I would rather have another Obama than a hatemonger like Bachmann, Santorum, or any of the other tea baggers. Sorry, I am sweet and kind everywhere else just not politics. I won't call people names specifically and I won't rip on anyone in particular, think of that brush you see me painting with as a nice way not to rip on people.

Sorry :/ I just don't see how one can be so firmly self hating in politics. You don't have to be a tea party member or a repub to agree with fiscal ideas. You don't have to be a democrat in order to like change. I am somewhere in between. As the time/thread comes one will learn more about me. For now I am very anti hate rhetoric and that's what these people have built their campaign around.

[Guest Emily Ray]

I don't think that Michelle Bachman is filled with such "hate" It is my opinion that marriage should not be a place for government. But I don't hate those who feel differently. Why should I assume that someone else hates me because of my position. We can have differences of opinion without hating each other. I do all the time with my friends.

Huggs

Emily

[Guest Donna Jean]

.

Quote

Well, it seems that both sides would get more support if more than one side thought of us as human beings!

I said that....

Quote:Drea said...

Sounds like a very broad brush mixed with a bit of hyperbole there.

Well, I didn't say which side....that's entirely your assumption.....

Donna Jean

[Guest EvenClose]

I gotta kind of agree with Emily a little here. I stayed quite cause I wanted to see what all would be said. Not that I see I figure Ill chime in with my 2 cents.

Yeah Bachmann probably ain't a bad person...As long as you believe all that she does.

As far as the whole marriage thing goes..Well, to me this is so simple that I just can't get it through my head of what the problem is.

See I don't have a problem with marriage being between a man and a woman...Know why? Because marriage is faith based. People of different religions are allowed here in the states to believe whatever they want. So different religions could have different meanings of what marriage should be.

Im a christian and I only like women...So they tell me im bad. Thats ok. Not all christians are like that. So does that mean some christians shouldn't have a say so?

See this is where the government needs to step in..Separation between church and state. Thats been the rule since day one.

But since day one, they adopted the belief of the church. Seems to me like that is not much separation. So it should not be a debate, an argument etc. etc. In the eyes of the government "marriage" is a benefit package. A judge can "marry" people. Does that mean that the judge was screened and he is not a radical and wants everyone on the planet to die? Of course not. He is not bound by faith. He is doing his job.

So then...If the church only wants to marry men and women together..SO BE IT. The state and or "government" can "partner" whoever the heck they want. Cause its not "faith" based. Im not gonna get into the debate about taking god out of the government. schools, etc.

Its just dumb that our government even gets caught up on terminology. "Marriage"...Now they wanna define it...ITS BEEN DEFINED.

Civil union, domestic partnership, whatever. Its the way to go. Leave religion to religion. Noone is saying same sex couples can't have a "ceremony"...Seperate church and state. ITS THE LAW!

[Guest Julie T]

Marriage is a binding legal document that has ramifications in law and entitlements, so it is actually a civil affair.

Only marriage vows are a religious concern. And vows and ceremonies vary greatly in various sects and religious practices.

My understanding is the interpretation of the United States First Amendment requires a separation of church and state.

Any politician advocating for a religious interpretation of marriage is not practicing the necessary support of constitutional guarantees, but is rather seeking to gain a voting block of like-minded people for the express purpose of getting elected.

Therefore, to argue if Michele Bachmann is wrong or right is only to argue about her technique for getting elected, and especially to judge her on her ethics in doing so.

It is still important, but really secondary at this point to argue the right or wrongness of civil marriage based on religious beliefs. What everyone really needs to know, is she may have an innate propensity for deception and double dealing, that she tends to backpedal when confronted, and is apparently fatally flawed in character, as she allows her bigotry toward the GLBT to prevail over her common sense.

It is my opinion, and the main reason I posted the earlier topic, the one showing her true colors in the interview, that she is totally unsuited for consideration as presidential candidate.

She may be a saint, she may be a sinner, but she is not presidential caliber.

Julie

Edited August 23, 2011 by Donna Jean
is to correct the bold part

[Guest Julie T]

Wikipedia

The phrase "separation of church and state" (sometimes "wall of separation between church and state"), attributed to Thomas Jefferson and others, and since quoted by the Supreme Court of the United States expresses an understanding of the intent and function of the establishment clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The First Amendment reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ....", while Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." The modern concept of a wholly secular government is sometimes credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke, but the phrase "separation of church and state" in this context is generally traced to an 1 January 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Connecticut Baptist Church and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams - who had written in 1644 of "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world"— Jefferson wrote, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State".

Jefferson's metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court. In its 1879 Reynolds vs the United States decision, the court allowed that Jefferson's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment." In the 1947 Everson vs the Board of Education, Justice Hugo Black wrote, "In the words of Thomas Jefferson , the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to construct a wall of separation between church and state." However, the Court has not always interpreted the constitutional principle as meaning absolute separation of government from all things religious.

[some Texas people disagree, apparently]

Public debates about the proper extent of church/state separation in the U.S. remain vigorous and impassioned. Politically active evangelical Christians such as David Barton a former co-chair of the Texas Republican party, emphasize the religiosity of the nation's founders and assert that "separation of church and state," as widely understood by modern historians and jurists, is a "myth" and that the U.S. was founded as a religious, Christian nation.

.................................

So it goes - this is what we face and it is apparently coming out of the State of Texas, where I was born and raised. Many people there consider the Fundamental Christian Church more important than anything outside it, including the rest of the United States and the world. I have heard my sisters rant on the mistaken views of Catholics and Jews, and surprisingly on many non-aligned Christian Charity and Support organizations, Promise Keepers and the Boy Scouts as an example . They rave harshly on Islam and Buddhism, and especially on non-believers in general. I am 'an abomination in God's eyes" and homosexuality does not exist. Therapists and psychiatrists do the devil's work. The Harry Potter Series, Lord of the Rings and even that old movie "Willow," all were devil worship. They will most certainly vote for Rick Perry or in his absence, Michele Bachmann, and so will their five grown children and their wives.

This really distresses me.

Julie

[Drea]

It seems to me that trans folk could get much better political support by supporting both sides rather than aligning itself to just one.

Well, it seems that both sides would get more support if more than one side thought of us as human beings!

Sounds like a very broad brush mixed with a bit of hyperbole there.

Well, I didn't say which side....that's entirely your assumption.....

And exactly where is the statement in my response (second line in red) where I am assuming one specific side or the other?