Ding-Dong The Bill Is Dead

Up in Pennsylvania, Republican Senator John Eichelberger once again tried to ban gay marriage, but his latest effort to amend the state constitution seemed all but dead yesterday after three senators who supported a broader measure two years ago voted 'No' this time.

"Make no mistake, they voted to kill the bill, whatever other excuse they may give," said crybaby homophobe Eichelberger, who sponsored the bill.

Senator Daylin Leach, a gay-rights proponent who sponsored the tabling motion, said it was probably an easier vote for senators than taking sides on such a passionate issue. He said, "At the end of the day, the effect is the same: This bill is dead."

All five committee Democrats and three Republicans voted to table the bill, while six Republicans voted against doing so.

While Pennsylvania law already defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, proponents of a constitutional amendment are afraid that gay-rights advocates and Americans for equality would use the courts to overturn it. Amending the constitution, they feel, would guard against that "threat".

On the equality side, a Daylin Leach-sponsored bill to legalize gay marriage has drawn just one co-sponsor and has sat without a vote for nine months in the Judiciary Committee. He believes this latest committee votes reflects a shift in public attitudes toward marriage equality. "When this does become legal in all 50 states, and it will, we're going to look back 10 years later and wonder what the fuss was all about," Leach said.

And of those senators that switched their votes Tuesday, one, Democratic Senator Lisa Boscola, said she is torn. Two years ago, she believed voters should weigh in on the issue, but now, while she does not feel that most people support marriage equality, she no longer believes the constitution should be used to outlaw it.

"That's not what the constitution is about," Boscola said.

No, the Constitution of states or nations should not be used to discriminate. Ever.

Quotes Of The Day

Pennsylvania State Senator Daylin Leach is trying to get marriage equality passed in his state. And if you listen to his words, what he says, how he says it, how he shoots down every 'No' argument, you begin to wonder....is he the new Harvey? I think he might be. This is what Daylin Leach has to say about marriage equality and the fight for it:

Concerns Over "Activist" Courts:"

A court that enacts equality doesn't have to be an activist court. It could just be following the law, which is what Massachusetts did when it legalized same-sex marriage."

Constitutional Amendments and Courts:

"If there's a court that was bent on declaring same-sex marriage legal, they could just ignore a [state's] constitutional amendment and rule under the federal constitution, and its equal protection clause, which overrules any state constitution.

The Illegitimacy of Ballot Measures:

"If you put slavery on the ballot, Jim Crow, even interracial marriage on the ballot in many parts of the country, it would have lost....We revere the legislators that voted for civil rights even though it was unpopular in some of their states, even Al Gore's father who lost his seat over [civil rights]. Our job as legislators is to do what's right, not to give voice to every whim of a majority to oppress a minority."

The Influence of the Civil Rights Movement on LGBT Rights:

"This is in line with the racial civil rights movement and the struggle for equality that women went through, and the struggle for equality that immigrants fought. [LGBT discrimination] is the last sort of acceptable discrimination in society. It's getting less and less, but it's our job [as legislators] to put the nail in the coffin and grant full equality for everyone."

On Trying to Push Through an Amendment Banning Gay Marriage Multiple Times in Pennsylvania:

"[Opponents of marriage equality] attempted to get a ban passed three years ago when there were many more legislators sympathetic [to a ballot measure] than now. And they failed then."

The Future of Marriage Equality:

"In 20 years, all 50 states, it's inevitable, will have same-sex marriage. And we'll wonder, like interracial marriage, why this was ever controversial."

The Fallacy that Gay Marriage will Harm Society:

"The idea that there are tens of thousands of studies [that show gay marriage harms society] is wrong....every study on the issue says that children of gay marriage and gay marriage itself does nothing adverse to society. You would think that if it did, we would notice it."

Dismantling the Slippery Slope Argument that Gay Marriage Could Lead to Bestiality or Polygamy:

"This is an argument not against gay marriage, but against all marriage - if you allow anyone to marry, you have to allow everyone to marry. The idea that if you allow two men to get married, you'd have to allow a man to marry an aardvark or his lawn mower is just not accurate. We draw reasonable lines all the time in society. You can drive 65mph, but not 95mph; you can keep a gun but not a truck bomb. To me the line should be drawn [on marriage] where it allows everyone to marry the one person that they most love in the world."

Asshat For All Time

I first heard about this the other day and was shocked that anyone, much less an elected official, could say such a thing. I heard the radio broadcast on another blog, and this morning found the transcripts.

from Towleroad:

Last Friday, Pennsylvania Senator John Eichelberger--up there on the left--who is sponsoring a bill to ban same-sex marriage in the state, held a radio debate with Senator Daylin Leach--there on the right--who is sponsoring a bill to legalize same-sex marriage in the state. In the interview, Eichelberger said there's no reason to allow gay couples to marry and said that they're not being punished. In fact, he lauds the fact that gay couples are allowed to exist.

LEACH: How would he [Eichelberger] want to encourage stability in gay couples?

EICHELBERGER: I wouldn’t. I mean they can practice whatever sexual activity they like to practice, but there’s no reason to give them special consideration. We don’t give them special consideration in Pennsylvania for any reason. Why in the world would we allow them to marry?

LEACH: How would you encourage gay couples to be able to provide for their families?

EICHELBERGER: Well, I wouldn't.

LEACH: What would you expect of them?

EICHELBERGER: There is no reason to encourage that type of behavior in Pennsylvania...That comes back to the definition of family and that’s where we differ. We can call all kinds of things families. I mean, we can say a 3 party marriage is a family, or 7 or 8 people or marrying younger and younger children these days.
....

LEACH: Should our only policy towards [same-sex] couples be one of punishment, to somehow prove that they’ve done something wrong?

EICHELBERGER: They’re not being punished. We’re allowing them to exist, and do what every American can do. We’re just not rewarding them with any special designation.
____________________

There are calls for Eichelberger to apologize.
Well, he can kiss my ass before he apologizes.
He can resign, now.
He's "allowing" me to exist?
He's "allowing" me to do what every America can do?
Marry? Un.....nope.
Serve openly in the military? Not happening.
Have the same rights, benefits and privileges as every American? Not for me.
I think not, asshat.
Don't apologize to me, or to anyone.

Resign.
NOW!

Quote Of The Day

Pennsylvania Senator Daylin Leach has put forward marriage equality legislation that he says is a response to addressing the inequities and injustices that gay and lesbians face because their relationships cannot be honored by the state:

"We also hear the frankly strange argument that if we legalize gay marriage we will somehow have no choice but to legalize polygamy, incest and inter-species marriage. Not so. We draw reasonable lines all the time in all areas of the law. You can drive 65, but not 95. You can keep a gun, but not a truck bomb. Similarly, you can marry one partner, but not an aardvark.

Any law involves line drawing. It seems reasonable that the line should be drawn where it allows each person the opportunity to have a life partner.

I am under no illusions that this bill will become law in the short term. However, I also have no doubt that 15 years from now same-sex marriage will be legal in all 50 states, and people will be as ashamed that we ever banned it as they are now that we ever banned inter-racial marriage. My hope is that by introducing this bill now, we will start the discussion we need to have and bring the day of equality a little closer."