Home > Human Rights, LGBT, Politics, Sexuality > The Obama Ear Scratch of The Week.

The Obama Ear Scratch of The Week.

Check out this exchange between Michele Bachman and Jane Schmidt, president of Waverly High School’s Gay-Straight Alliance:

JANE SCHMIDT: One of my main concerns is government support for the LGBT community. So my question is what would you do to protect GSAs in high school and support the LGBT community.

BACHMANN: Well, No. 1, all of us as Americans have the same rights. The same civil rights. And so that’s really what government’s role is, to protect our civil rights. There shouldn’t be any special rights or special set of criteria based upon people’s preferences. We all have the same civil rights.

JANE SCHMIDT: Then, why can’t same-sex couples get married?

BACHMANN: They can get married, but they abide by the same law as everyone else. They can marry a man if they’re a woman. Or they can marry a woman if they’re a man.

JANE SCHMIDT: Why can’t a man marry a man?

BACHMANN: Because that’s not the law of the land.

JANE SCHMIDT: So heterosexual couples have a privilege.

BACHMANN: No, they have the same opportunity under the law. There is no right to same-sex marriage.

JANE SCHMIDT: So you won’t support the LGBT community?

BACHMANN: No, I said that there are no special rights for people based upon your sex practices. There’s no special rights based upon what you do in your sex life. You’re an American citizen first and foremost and that’s it.

ELLA NEWELL, a junior at Waverly High School: Wouldn’t heterosexual couples, if they were given a privilege then, that gay couples aren’t, like given that privilege to get married, but heterosexual couples are given a privilege to get married?

BACHMANN: Remember every American citizen has the right to avail themselves to marriage but they have to follow what the laws are. And the laws are you marry a person of the opposite sex.

Once again, you have shown the country what a narrow minded, discriminatory ass hat you really are. For that you have earned the Obama Ear Scratch of The Week

By the way, your hubby is as gay as the day is long, and you are his beard. Accept it.

Advertisements
  1. December 2, 2011 at 9:38 pm

    She’s an asshole, period!

    Like

  2. December 3, 2011 at 9:44 pm

    Do you think she might have first hand experience with a gay man marrying a women?
    Dan

    Like

  3. January 13, 2012 at 8:57 am

    The pro-gay side just manipulates words for emotional effect. They misapply “privilege” and pretend that there is nothing significantly different between homosexual and heterosexual relationships. The only reason the gov’t is involved in heterosexual unions is because by nature and design they produce the next generation (and no, they don’t have to have kids, but that is where kids come from). So the gov’t has an interest in recognizing and monitoring the unions which produce the building blocks of society. Manipulated surveys aside, I don’t take anyone seriously who denies that the ideal for children is a mother and a father.

    Gays don’t need special clubs in schools and more than you need a club for fat kids or ugly kids or anyone else who gets picked on. Those are trojan horses to advance the agenda. You just need a simple anti-bullying policy: If you physically or verbally harass other students on or off school grounds you will have swift and serious consequences. It doesn’t matter if you are bullying because they are gay/straight/fat/thin/smart/dumb/pretty/ugly/etc., or if it is just because you are a mean jerk.

    Gays can get “married” in plenty of apostate churches and get set up house together and love each other all they like. But they crave acceptance and affirmation. Just watch their reaction when some judge or legislator grants them oxymoronic same-sex marriage rights by fiat (you still can’t get voters to approve it): They don’t talk in terms of laws and rights, but how much more accepted they feel now.

    Like

    • January 14, 2012 at 11:32 am

      Doesn’t everyone want acceptance and affirmation? Furthermore why can’t the ideal be just two loving parents for a child? I know more than a few same sex couples who have wonderful, well adjusted children, just as I know more than a few het couples who have messed up children because of the poor quality of their parenting, or lack of love in the relationship. Good parenting is not exclusive to same sex or heterosexual dynamics of the couple.

      Like

  4. January 14, 2012 at 2:18 pm

    “Doesn’t everyone want acceptance and affirmation?”

    Of course they do. But your premise is then that everyone has to accept and affirm everyone else by rule of law. That sounds quite a bit different to me. Tons of people don’t accept and affirm my Christian beliefs, and I’m fine with that. In fact, I would protest if the gov’t said that everyone has to affirm Christians. I’d be glad if they would just stop chipping away at religious freedoms.

    You can only tolerate that with which you disagree. When society tries to force tolerance then by definition it isn’t tolerance.

    Those are key points in the debate.

    “Furthermore why can’t the ideal be just two loving parents for a child?”

    Because mothers and fathers bring different things to the equation. It is symptomatic of how far society has eroded that I have to mention that. Seems like the Darwin crowd would concede that.

    “I know more than a few same sex couples who have wonderful, well adjusted children, just as I know more than a few het couples who have messed up children because of the poor quality of their parenting, or lack of love in the relationship. Good parenting is not exclusive to same sex or heterosexual dynamics of the couple.”

    Exceptions make bad rules. This is about what society affirms and promotes. We aren’t saying a lady can’t leave a marriage and become a lesbian and still parent her goods. That is horrific on multiple levels, but not the issue here. We are simply saying the gov’t has no good reasons to recognize and encourage those relationships.

    Like

    • January 14, 2012 at 3:52 pm

      Actually the government does have good reason to recognize these relationships: political equality. If one has a right to marry another of the opposite sex, then why shouldn’t one have the right to marry another of the same sex? By failing to recognize the rights of same sex partners to enter into a legal union, the government is saying that because of their sexual orientation, they are unequal. This is a violation of fundamental equality, which ostensibly, is a basic principle that our country lives by.

      Like

  5. January 14, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    “Actually the government does have good reason to recognize these relationships: political equality.”

    Gays have equality: They can have their relationship recognized by the gov’t if they marry someone of the opposite sex. They don’t want that? No problem.

    “If one has a right to marry another of the opposite sex, then why shouldn’t one have the right to marry another of the same sex?”

    Because of the definition of marriage. If you arguing that we can change “marriage” to mean whatever we like then that leaves it open to all sorts of things.

    “By failing to recognize the rights of same sex partners to enter into a legal union, the government is saying that because of their sexual orientation, they are unequal.”

    But they aren’t equal: By nature and design those couples don’t produce the next generation. Running around shouting “equality!” works for people who don’t think the issue through, but it is meaningless.

    “This is a violation of fundamental equality, which ostensibly, is a basic principle that our country lives by.”

    Again, repeating “equality” proves nothing, because when you think about why gov’t got involved in marriage the reasons are obvious. It isn’t that the gov’t just runs around looking for relationships to regulate. Seems to me that gays would want the gov’t to stay out of their relationships.

    Like

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: