« I Luv him, he just hits me when he gets mad | Main | Even worse than the Freetards »

Right now, it wouldn't matter if Reagan came back from the dead. There are two very basic, fundamental reasons why, while I'm not a member of the Democratic Party, I can not, and will not vote Republican at any level, for the foreseeable future:

1. I have family members who fall under the LGBT umbrella


2. I'm not an atheist, but do completely reject all forms of organized religion, and I have many in my family with similar beliefs or who are atheists.

The GOP has made it abundantly clear that no one falling under those two headings should have full rights under the law, and in the case of the first, has worked overtime to deny them every legal right they can get away with.

I have, because it was at work, (Not my current job, thank $DEITY$) had to harshly bite my tongue at coworkers talking about what "should be done with the fags" in terms that would have given Hitler a no-hands orgasm.

The Republican Party wishes to exclude me and mine, they get their wish. Including my vote and my campaign contributions. Should they change their platform on such things, I'll give them serious consideration. But as long as they feel the need to demonize my family, they can go fuck themselves on the bridge to nowhere with Palin's moose gun.

Comments

They don't very much like me, either. Nor do they particularly care for my wife, a large number of my friends, or an even larger portion of my coworkers in educational publishing... for virtually every categorical reason. "Race," religion (or lack thereof), sexual orientation, or literacy level.

In fact, their hatred of difference seems to include intelligence of many varieties.

Being hated by people who don't know me has changed my life since I first learned about the consequences of such a thing. Even though the open ugliness began in earnest during Reagan's first term five years later, I've been angry since 1975. I don't enjoy it very much.

Posted by: Moeskido | September 4, 2008 10:19 PM

This thought occurred to me when I was flipping past the convention and that primeval gargoyle Thompson was blathering, but it applies to all of them: How can anybody NOT see the evil oozing out of every pore and dripping in green, slimy streaks down their faces? How blind can you be?

On another note: Man, I thought I hated Nixon...but what wouldn't you give to have had Nixon back for the last eight years?

Posted by: Gatesbasher | September 4, 2008 11:02 PM

Oh, I almost forgot Palin's support for banning books and firing anyone who disagrees with her.

Hmm...against the open spread of knowledge, and will only work with yes-men.

Yeah...GREAT temperament for a potential president.

Posted by: John Welch | September 5, 2008 12:26 AM

"On another note: Man, I thought I hated Nixon...but what wouldn't you give to have had Nixon back for the last eight years?"

We HAVE had Dick "Ratbastard" Nixon around for eight years, it's just that he goes by the handle Darth Cheney now.

Posted by: BruceJ | September 5, 2008 8:18 PM

@ BruceJ:

Good point. It was smart to run Spiro for president this time around, to run interference!

Posted by: Gatesbasher | September 5, 2008 10:24 PM

"The Republican Party wishes to exclude me and mine, they get their wish. Including my vote and my campaign contributions. Should they change their platform on such things, I'll give them serious consideration."

First, let me ask you why would you consider the Republican party if they were more open to accepting gays and atheists? I have read a lot of your posts and I don't get a sense that a complete change on those 2 issues would matter.

That said, let me ask:

1. What would you consider to be an appropriate stand on gays and lesbians?
2. How do you feel that the rights of both religious people and atheists can be better respected? You say you "reject all forms of organized religion" what does that mean exactly? How would you treat people who chose to practice organized religion if you had your way?

"How can anybody NOT see the evil oozing out of every pore and dripping in green, slimy streaks down their faces? How blind can you be?"

I have the very opposite reaction as you, I see evil and poison dripping out of liberals and Democrats, and civility and consideration from conservatives and Republicans. I could give numerous specific examples of this if you wish.

Posted by: twilightmoon | September 7, 2008 10:38 AM

First, let me ask you why would you consider the Republican party if they were more open to accepting gays and atheists? I have read a lot of your posts and I don't get a sense that a complete change on those 2 issues would matter.

Not actively hating members of my family and working to relegate them to not much above indentured servitude would help. They'd still have some work in the areas of science et al, but it would mean I'd be willing to listen to a thing they say.

1. What would you consider to be an appropriate stand on gays and lesbians?

Um...how about full citizenship? They already serve in the military, stop making them lie about it. Marriage is now a civil, legal contract. It has not been an exclusively religious ceremony for many, many years. I do not expect any religion to change their ceremonial rules. I expect the civil aspect of marriage to apply to homosexual marriage between two consenting adults to be accorded the same civil rights as heterosexual marriage between two consenting adults. (Note, considering we are more careful about who we allow to drink alcohol than we are about who we allow to enter into binding legal contracts, I don't see this as being terribly hard.)

Yes, I know, as far as your concerned, homosexuality is a choice. Well, so is religion. There's no religion gene. There's no genetic marker for christian, jew, muslim, buddhist, taoist, etc. Religion is a choice, period. Yet, we accord it not only respect, but constitutional-level protection, and we allow "recognized" religions to avoid paying many taxes, as long as they play by certain rules. If we are willing to take what is obviously a choice, such as religion, and accord it such elevated status, then I do not think it is too much to ask that we do not allow people to be deprived of the right to serve their country, work, or have a place to live solely because they are not heterosexual. Yet in many parts of the country, you can indeed actively, and openly discriminate against people because they're gay or not "straight", in ways you would never be allowed to based on religion. If homosexuality is a "choice", and that's why it should not be treated as valid, then why is religion so exalted, when it is only able to be a choice?

2. How do you feel that the rights of both religious people and atheists can be better respected? You say you "reject all forms of organized religion" what does that mean exactly? How would you treat people who chose to practice organized religion if you had your way?

The way I treat them now...as individuals. If someone's cool, they aren't cool because of their religion, or in spite of it. Similarly, if they're a douchebag, it's not because of or in spite of their religion. Religion can affect those things, but so can not getting your morning coffee. It is when you have people acting as a group that the large scale stupid begins, because they put the group ahead of what's right.

I have the very opposite reaction as you, I see evil and poison dripping out of liberals and Democrats, and civility and consideration from conservatives and Republicans. I could give numerous specific examples of this if you wish.

Neither side has any moral high ground here. Both are a douchebag collective. I can give just as many examples, including McCain's joke about Chelsea Clinton, and the fact that the right-wing religious groups ONLY got pissed at Fred Phelps when he started fucking with veterans. As long as he was only railing against those dirty fags, they were content to allow it to go on, with only mild exclamations of "well, that's not right". Oddly, they didn't see a need to sue, and pass laws when it was just the bum-punchers getting spat on.

So spare me your claims of the Republicans being the true source of gentility and civility, and the Democrats being nothing but fountains of hate and filth. Both parties suck, (which is why i am a member of no political party), but the Democratic party happens to be more closely aligned with what I want at the moment.

FWIW, if John McCain 2000 was running, instead of his evil twin, I'd be very willing to consider him. But the new and improved model? No.

Posted by: John C. Welch | September 7, 2008 1:21 PM

You know what would make me happy and make me at least consider voting for McCain? If he would just say unequivocally, "I oppose torture in all its forms. Under my administration there will never be government sanctioned torture. The last administration went too far--the ends do not justify the means. My first act will be a presidential order prohibiting torture in all its forms."

That's it. No recriminations or apologies needed. Just show me that you at least resemble the old John McCain instead of this new pandering to the right version.

Posted by: James Bailey | September 9, 2008 8:14 PM

Oh yeah, I'd almost forgotten about that. Evidently, McCain is only against torture when it's happening to Americans. Torturing muslims and furriners is okay.

Posted by: John Welch | September 9, 2008 8:21 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: