Tweet
Bless his Palmetto Queen heart – he can’t even get his history straight. Think Progress:
Despite his newfound respect for the right of gay couples to pass on property and “live a free and open life,” Graham also compared gay marriage to polygamy. He asked Morgan, “Is it possible for three people to genuinely love each other and want to share their lives together? Is it OK to have three people marry each other?”
When Morgan pointed out that the debate was about couples, not threesomes, Graham then stated that if “the people” wanted same-sex marriage, they would pass a constitutional amendment legalizing it, just as “the people decided” to pass an amendment to ban slavery:
GRAHAM: Can — can I suggest this? Slavery was outlawed by a Constitutional amendment. Go watch “Lincoln,” a great movie. The people decided. The question for us is who should decide these things? Should it be a handful of judges or should it be the people themselves? And I come out on the side of the people themselves. Different people will look at it differently. But slavery was outlawed by a Constitutional amendment. If you want to propose a Constitutional amendment legalizing same-sex marriage and it passes, that’s the law of the land.
Can the man just take the triple-bonded padlock off the closet door already?
18 Comments
My great-great-grandfather didn’t fight in the Civil War to give people like them states rights!
That guy just breaks me up.:-)
Saw a picture earlier today of the Three Amigos sitting together and that’s when Ms. Lindsay asked about the threesome. Almost destroyed my keyboard.
My gaydar is going ping! ping! ping!
Wot? You didn’t see this quote?
Lindsey: “And I come out.”
Done. He’s out, and we applaud him for it, no? Can He help Mitch?
If everything is a states rights issue, why do we even have a federal government? well, besides attacking other countries and stealing their oil.
Something that he misses, and it seems to many do, is that he is assuming that the Constitution is an affirmative document.
In reality it is a negative document. The Constitution does not say that the people have the right of Free speech but rather that the Government does NOT have the right to to limit Speech. The same goes for the original Bill of Rights.
Also by his logic since their is No amendment mentioning marraige in the Constitution that means it does not exist in the country in any manner.
Inconsistency, logical failings, irrational arguements, and general intellectual bankruptcy seems to be the only consistent factors in republican positions.
In that same interview Lindsey said it was a Southern tradition and basically some of his best memories in life were of him going out and shooting things.
You notice how the anti-marriage side always wants to change the subject? You bring up same-sex marriage and they start wanting to talk about polygamy, incest, bestiality, etc., etc., etc.
Frankly, I’d be embarrassed to discuss my sexual fantasies in public like that.
I’n convinced the LGBT want this guy in their clubhouse.
The answer for us is that neither one should decide these things EXCEPT if some law is passed curtailing human rights THEN a judge should knock it down.
Exactly. The purpose of the Constitution was to constitute a governmet that would be limited to “form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”
The US Constitution was never intended to be a compendium of rights “that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
Neither Hamilton nor Madison originally wanted the Constitution to include a Bill of Rights, because they were concerned that any specific enumeration of rights might open the door to legal sophistries that could override an intuitive appeal to natural rights, and reduce the guarantee of rights to a set of narrow technicalities, meaningless in practice and understood only by lawyers. When Madison saw that the sentiment in favor of a Bill of Rights had become so overwhelming that it could not be forestalled, he insisted on writing it himself, and incorporating the Ninth and Tenth Amendments as a precaution against the adoption of narrow technical interpretations.
Amendment IX – Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X – Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Clearly the right to love, live with and marry anyone is a natural right reserved to the people. What could be more natural than that?
“. . .they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” They are unalienable. Untouchable.
What’s the point of being a citizen of the country when every state treats you differently and can do whatever the fuck it wants?
That’s one reason why a million Americans live in Mexico. It’s not that far away, either.
If I recall my history right, the reason a constitutional amendment was REQUIRED to get rid of slavery is because slavery was written into the constitution in the first place. There isn’t anything in the constitution about marriage pro or con, straight or gay. So, no constitutional action is necessary to get us to marriage equality.
Good stuff. It boils down to people being free to do whatever they want as long as they are not infringing on the rights of others. That’s a point that Antonin Scalia doesn’t get when he adopts the theocratic view that same-sex marriage can be outlawed based on “moral feelings.”
Also, the Ninth Amendment should give me the right to smoke marijuana in my own home if I choose. Agree?
Love the way Lindsay leaves out that one part of the story about the people deciding to outlaw slavery. I mean the part about how a huge number of people got killed shortly before the people decided to outlaw slavery.
And when you consider that lots of still-alive pro-slavery people were still barred from voting when the people decided to outlaw slavery, I’m suspectin’ ol’ Lindsay might like a do-over on the vote to outlaw slavery.