Butch Femme Planet - View Single Post - Same-Sex Marriage Update

dreadgeek · 06-21-2011, 03:55 PM

The pending vote in NY on marriage equality is definitely a good sign for us queers. It is a good sign for America. It may be--at least, if I'm right it may be--a very *bad* sign for the Republican party.

Though no deal has been reached yet in the fight over the New York marriage equality bill, there's one Republican state Senator who's dropped his poker face.

James Alesi told a crowd in Albany Tuesday that he's supporting the bill, adding: "I'm a Republican -- I was born that way."

Alesi announced his support for the bill last week, the first Republican to do so. He had previously voted against marriage equality in 2009 when it failed to pass the state Senate.

"Passing marriage equality is the most important thing that I think I can do in my 20-year history as a legislator," Alesi said.

Referring to the order votes would be cast (which is alphabetical), Alesi added: "I am proud to be a Republican. I will also be proud to be the first Republican voter to vote for marriage equality in this state."

The Democratic party is 'supposed' to be the party that is on our side. If, over the next decade or two, the Republican party begins moving away from the theocratic direction they've drifted (and then rushed) toward in the last three decades and decides that, all electoral considerations notwithstanding, being in the same room with people who can barely contain their racism is just not appealing, the Democrats could be in trouble.

There are three groups in America that vote Democratic in overwhelming numbers--Blacks, queers and Latinos. The reason is pretty straightforward, looking at the GOP one would have to question whether a black, queer or Latina Republican was operating from the same 'rational self-interest' script that political scientists say that people use in their voting behavior. No matter *how* much money one makes, if you're black and queer it's very difficult to think that the GOP has your best interests at heart. But what if that no longer became the case? What if the GOP was no longer a place where theocrats and racists set the agenda? That would change the calculus quite a bit, I think.

Now, this might not come to pass and even if it does, I think that the next couple of GOP electoral majorities will drag us as close to a theocracy as the Constitution will allow. However, in doing so they will destroy that coalition and what is rebuilt will be a different, less religious, more diverse GOP. If that day ever comes, the Democratic party may be in big trouble.

Cheers
Aj

06-21-2011, 03:55 PM	#708
dreadgeek Power Femme How Do You Identify?: Cinnamon spiced, caramel colored, power-femme Preferred Pronoun?: She Relationship Status: Married to a wonderful horse girl Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Lat: 45.60 Lon: -122.60 Posts: 1,733 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 1,132 Thanked 6,845 Times in 1,493 Posts Rep Power: 21474852	A sea change? The pending vote in NY on marriage equality is definitely a good sign for us queers. It is a good sign for America. It may be--at least, if I'm right it may be--a very bad sign for the Republican party. Though no deal has been reached yet in the fight over the New York marriage equality bill, there's one Republican state Senator who's dropped his poker face. James Alesi told a crowd in Albany Tuesday that he's supporting the bill, adding: "I'm a Republican -- I was born that way." Alesi announced his support for the bill last week, the first Republican to do so. He had previously voted against marriage equality in 2009 when it failed to pass the state Senate. "Passing marriage equality is the most important thing that I think I can do in my 20-year history as a legislator," Alesi said. Referring to the order votes would be cast (which is alphabetical), Alesi added: "I am proud to be a Republican. I will also be proud to be the first Republican voter to vote for marriage equality in this state." The Democratic party is 'supposed' to be the party that is on our side. If, over the next decade or two, the Republican party begins moving away from the theocratic direction they've drifted (and then rushed) toward in the last three decades and decides that, all electoral considerations notwithstanding, being in the same room with people who can barely contain their racism is just not appealing, the Democrats could be in trouble. There are three groups in America that vote Democratic in overwhelming numbers--Blacks, queers and Latinos. The reason is pretty straightforward, looking at the GOP one would have to question whether a black, queer or Latina Republican was operating from the same 'rational self-interest' script that political scientists say that people use in their voting behavior. No matter how much money one makes, if you're black and queer it's very difficult to think that the GOP has your best interests at heart. But what if that no longer became the case? What if the GOP was no longer a place where theocrats and racists set the agenda? That would change the calculus quite a bit, I think. Now, this might not come to pass and even if it does, I think that the next couple of GOP electoral majorities will drag us as close to a theocracy as the Constitution will allow. However, in doing so they will destroy that coalition and what is rebuilt will be a different, less religious, more diverse GOP. If that day ever comes, the Democratic party may be in big trouble. Cheers Aj __________________ Proud member of the reality-based community. "People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn’t that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people. As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn’t measure up." (Terry Pratchett)