« Richard Romero for Mayor: Events this Friday and Saturday | Main | Guest Blog: What Really Happened Today on the Domestic Partnership Bill and How Your State Senate Really Works »

Thursday, February 26, 2009

(Updated) Democrats Vote Against Equal Civil Rights to Beat Domestic Partnership in NM Senate 17-25

Final Vote in New Mexico Senate on SB 12: 25 NO, 17 YES. ALL the Repubs voted against the bill.

TEN Democrats (in name only) voting No:

Pete Campos
Tim Jennings
Lynda Lovejoy
Richard Martinez
George Munoz
John Pinto
Bernadette Sanchez
John Arthur Smith
Carlos Cisneros, who changed his vote from Yes to No at the end of the voting
David Ulibarri

I am very upset at the moment. The fake Dems above must be crowing.

Read this garbage by Pete Campos on why he voted against my civil rights. Also disgusting is this statement from a public official who has pledged to protect and uphold the U.S. Constitution -- which means the separation of church and state (quoting from Steve Terrell's blog):

Also I just spoke to Sen. Carlos Cisneros about his vote change. He said it wasn't a tactical move. He said he initially voted yes because he'd committed to the sponsor to do that. But when he saw the margin was as big as it was, he changed. He said his clergy was opposed and that had a big influence.

First off, if Cisneros sincerely believes that domestic partnerships are wrong, why did he first vote FOR the bill? Oh, wait, because he promised the sponsor? How principled.

And using the same logic he uses to explain voting no, his clergy is obviously against masturbation, sex outside of marriage and adultery -- all "sins" within the Catholic Church. I wonder when Cisneros and the others like him will be enacting measures to apply penalties for those "sins" to the general populace. He could probably start by arresting all the guys in his church who don't follow those rules. He'd have to turn himself in first, though.

Carlos Cisneros is, after all, the guy whose former wife hit him in the head with a hammer when she caught him with another woman in their cabin. You can read about that sacred and holy interaction here and here and here.

And yes, I said FORMER wife. Turns out Mr. "I listen to my Catholic clergy" guy was divorced -- which is against the Church's teachings. I guess the dissolution of his holy matrimony by adultery and hammer blows is what he's talking about when he's thinking about the implications domestic partnerships have on heterosexual marriage. Could more hypocrisy be packed into one lawmaker?

And get this one, from Campos' oh-so-serious statement on his vote:

If this legislation is not enacted into law this year, I will continue to monitor the issue over the next year with the goal of preserving the institution of marriage in New Mexico while ensuring that all New Mexicans enjoy certain basic rights in their personal relationships.

Thanks, Sen. Campos. Monitor away while GLBT families remain unprotected by the law and continue to be treated like second class citizens. Take your time. The forces of bigotry will keep smiling.

Carlos Cisneros is also the guy who killed the DP bill in 2007 by siding with Republicans. It was his one vote -- which he had said he would use to support DP -- that killed it. You can read about it here.

Also see this guest blog from an anonymous emailer who has additional ideas on why the vote happened the way it did today.

February 26, 2009 at 05:01 PM in Civil Liberties, GLBT Rights, NM Legislature 2009 | Permalink


Pretty disappointing to say the least.

Posted by: VP | Feb 26, 2009 4:54:46 PM

Those aren't Democrats. They're narrow minded bigots. Note all the Hispanic names. Shameful. Isn't it time the Hispanics who are REAL Democrats get in the faces of these pretenders?

Posted by: Barry | Feb 26, 2009 4:58:33 PM

Please excuse my ignorance but how many votes did the bill need to pass? 25 to 17 seems like it should be a win.

Posted by: linda | Feb 26, 2009 4:59:42 PM

Cisneros is a coward changing his vote to pile on. He was the one who changed his vote in 2007 to kill the bill in the Senate. He is a man without conscience

Posted by: GH | Feb 26, 2009 5:00:19 PM

Very very sad day in NM!!!!

Posted by: Charlotte | Feb 26, 2009 5:01:18 PM

Okay, let's check for understanding: The ACLU and EQNM won't ask Cisco to carry a marriage equality bill because the votes aren't there.

Yet these same experts go in, year after year, and gut a DP bill that started out strong, in the guise that they're political realists. But even the substitute bill doesn't have the votes.

Posted by: PhoenixRising | Feb 26, 2009 5:03:13 PM

Sorry, I fixed the vote tally. It was 17 FOR and 25 AGAINST to defeat the bill.

Posted by: barb | Feb 26, 2009 5:11:14 PM

I think it's time to leave the Democratic Party and focus on this issue alone. Civil disobedience is in order. Fuck this crap about trying to please the bigots. We need to start demanding our rights, not begging for them.

I think the Catholic Church should be confronted and hounded. In their churches and everywhere else. They have no right to spread their views to control my life. It is not American and it is unpatriotic.

Posted by: Leaving the Dem Party | Feb 26, 2009 5:13:58 PM

I want to know why we're always told they think they have the votes. It is too gut wrenching to go through this. They didn't have anywhere near the votes. Are these Dems who vote no lying before the vote or what? Or are the proponents of the bill just making it up about the support they supposedly have?

I think we need to go to the Supreme Court now and/or be much more assertive about our rights. These gay and civil liberties groups have to get tough and start organizing heavily on the community level and doing some real grassroots efforts, not just send out emails.

Posted by: barb | Feb 26, 2009 5:18:48 PM

What was all the BS about the substitute bill being negotiated with the Catholic Church bigwigs so it would pass? I heard it was a deal. Some deal.

I remember when John Kennedy was a candidate and he was questioned about whether he'd obey the Pope, Cardinals and Bishops or uphold the US Constitution. Of course he said the Constitution and he did that.

These supposed Democrats are obeying the dictates of the Catholic Church and fruitcake churches like the Legacy Church that had their people calling legislators to tell them they'd go to hell and worse if they voted for partnerships.

These people need to be called on this. They are supposed to defend the Constitution not Church hierarchies. They are not carrying out their oaths of office.

Posted by: Old Dem | Feb 26, 2009 5:37:05 PM

I agree with you Barb. It is gut-wrenching to go through this time and again and get exactly nowhere. I think it's time to test this issue in the courts. NM law is silent on the issue of gay marriage, excepting that one AG opinion. I'm hopping that some brave couple that got married in another state will come forward and put it to the test. We aren't going to get our rights from a legislature where even the Dems are controlled by the Archdioceses.

Posted by: kforce | Feb 26, 2009 5:47:13 PM

Carlos Cisneros said he changed his vote to possibly bring the bill back tomorrow. https://tinyurl.com/ccvx8t

Posted by: Matt | Feb 26, 2009 5:59:57 PM

Never mind on my last comment. He just voted against it, according to Steve Terrell.

Posted by: Matt | Feb 26, 2009 6:07:42 PM

kforce, we don't need to be brave, we just need to be practical.

If we want the status of same-sex couples to be addressed by NM law, two things should happen:

-We should ask our Attorney General to issue an opinion letter stating that honoring valid marriage certificates for same-sex couples follows New Mexico's laws. This part is free, other than the legal research which I have on my hard drive now, and can be done right away, defined as 'the minute the session is over'.

-We need to identify some families that are willing to sue, and who have attractive facts. Your ideal plaintiff is a woman cop with a wife and two kids who gets injured in the line of duty, but I'm willing to be flexible. Let's settle for 4 couples, two younger two older, a total of 4 kids and/or grandkids, all available races and religions. Ideally one or two male couples, but that's not a requirement.

Then we raise the funds to hire a straight male attorney--good Catholic if we can find one--to represent those families as they use their CT and MA marriage licenses to get things done.

Now, compared to what we've already sacrificed to accomplish nothing....how hard could that be?

Posted by: PhoenixRising | Feb 26, 2009 6:46:53 PM

"These gay and civil liberties groups have to get tough and start organizing heavily on the community level and doing some real grassroots efforts, not just send out emails."
Gays need to make themselves more visible in the community at large. They need to just be regular active citizen volunteers. Yes, that means gays need to volunteer to work with youth in particular but also with elderly etc. Gays need to be seen coaching sports, tutoring and mentoring the youth. This will create quite a sensation. Virtuous, righteous and industrious gay people being an important part of the community will go farther to alleviate fear than anger.
Gays can't be always cloistered with other gay people at this time. Gays should be reaching out to network in jobs, schools and churches. Eat lunch with straight people or take your partner to community events involving our Hispanic families and traditions.
Courage dear friends and like-minded liberals.

Posted by: qofdisks | Feb 26, 2009 6:47:44 PM

You don't get it gofdisks. They almost closed down the Boy Scouts to keep gays out. They don't want us there. Get a grip!

Many of us are visible as hell in the Democratic Party and many community organizations that operate with tolerance. We teach the kids. We nurse the sick. We're everywhere. We share meals and work with Hispanics all the time.

What you're saying is like telling black people to kow tow to their masters. The problem is not with gay people. We have risked our lives, been thrown out of our families, been humiliated and even killed. The problem is with heterosexuals not standing with us. Oh, they are sad we don't get our rights but they do next to nothing to work with us, to show up, to work on their friends and neighbors. They risk nothing to help us.

More progressive Hispanics need to work on their own people. You are there. Push them. You stand idly by and think you are supportive but you are not.

How many straight people were up in the galleries to support DP today? How many Hispanics who are supposedly on our side? You know the answer.

Posted by: Reality Check | Feb 26, 2009 6:58:57 PM

I'm stunned, y'all. Never speechless, but stunned.

Check out EQNM.org, where you'll be informed that HB 21 is still viable. So hurry on down to give them your volunteer time and your money!

Um, yeah, you guys just this afternoon proved that you can't count your votes. I'm totally giving up my free time to promote the delusion that you know how to get me equality! Sign me up for a shift of that...when hell freezes over.

One of my friends, who I can safely describe as 'no spring chicken' because she can no longer read type this small, got up at 6am to go to the Roundhouse today. To support the DP bill. Which apparently our brilliant advocates didn't have the votes to pass.

But instead of telling her that fact--if they even knew it--they let her sit there all damn day. Getting stiff, in those tiny chairs, with self-styled Christians lecturing her on morality. Either they didn't know that they didn't have the votes, or they just didn't care about the citizens who sat there waiting.

There are no guarantees in legislatures, but you just don't abuse your constituents that way. Not if you expect to be believed next time you say, 'It's going to be close, so we need your presence!'

Our enemies suck, but our friends are committed to earning their share of the blame.

Posted by: PhoenixRising | Feb 26, 2009 7:19:44 PM

Yeah, it's hard to believe that anyone could sincerely believe it was "close," when the TEN dems voted against it, after so little debate. It's all just a shell game. The Dems take us for granted because they know that we know that the alternative is so much worse.

Posted by: kforce | Feb 26, 2009 7:35:17 PM

These ten DINOs need to be defeated tout suite.

Posted by: lopsidedmom | Feb 26, 2009 8:01:33 PM

Who would defeat them in their districts? Most of their districts are filled with poor uneducated people who obey the Catholic Church. They don't know any better. Their representatives do but they won't lead. They are cowards and they don't really care about gay people. They care about staying on the right side of the patrons who give out the money and the power and that's it. Status quo. Money in, votes out.

The Democratic Party leaders keep their mouths shut and look the other way. They want to keep their places too.

Posted by: Insider | Feb 26, 2009 8:50:13 PM

Gofdisk - hello I am gay, and I would like you to listen to me. I am shocked at the position you take here. We are everywhere! In one breathe people are saying we have an agenda to train kids to be gay, on the other hand we have you saying we have to be more visible. We are visible, we have to be filtered, do I want to be beat up? No. Do I want my family to be more disgusted with my life? No. Do I want to have people at work afraid of me? No. Do I want people at work to treat me any differently than straights? No.
We have spent our whole lives as square objects trying to fit into a circle.
Gofdisk you have stated one of the coldest statements here and it is a good example of the problem for gays in 2009 - not the solution.
We are out as much as we can be.
I remember a famous chant in every gay march from 1982 to 2008 25 years of yearly marching:

Posted by: mary ellen | Feb 26, 2009 9:02:05 PM

My partner and I are ready to fight this legally in Conservative Southern New Mexico. My partner, an elementary school teacher has already filed a grievance through his union against the school district. Here is what happened:

My partner and I decided to adopt one of his students, after this child was abandoned by his "adoptive family". We adopted him Nov. 2008.

When my partner and I tried to add our son onto my partner's insurance policy (and add myself too), the Human Resources Dept. refused. I called the next day to inquire about my son and Human Resources actually said I have no legal rights to talk to them, as I am a Gay partner and hung up the phone on me. My partner tried to educate Human Resources that there is an anti-discrimination clause, which includes sexual orientation in the school district policy, hence why we were trying to get me added onto the policy too and HR did not believe it, even though my partner added the language a couple of years ago during collective bargaining when he was VP on the NEA-Alamogordo. This was our way of challenging the system. If they denied me coverage, we figured we might be able to fight it, since their is a clause against sexual orientation discrimination. We, as a Gay couple, feel we have been discriminated against since they denied me coverage and might have a case.

We had to bypass Human Resources all together since my partner's employer would not add our son onto my partners policy after this attempt. It took BlueCross/BLue Shield and ERISA, an agency overlooking employer rights to add our son onto the policy, but I of course was still denied.

Granted, we were not able to add myself onto my partners policy but we are going to fight this.

Starting with the next school board meeting and with help, WE HOPE from the NEA.

IT's time people stood up!

We would be willing to walk into a clerks office and try to get married. Or get married in another state and have this state recognize it.

There are so many options but not many people willing. People seem to be afraid of losing their job, or becoming outcasts, what will others think, we are shocked to hear local Gays brought up in these parts that perhaps we are being too loud, or they are too busy to, or they are afraid, WHAT! We don't get it!? You do not sit by waiting for change ....

ENOUGH, we have to stand up and take this to the courts. Any good attorneys out there willing to help us out. OR how about 10 Gay couples entering clerk's offices across the state, after we are all denied, we take up a lawsuit?! Let's not just talk about what we can do, let's do something!

We will be fighting for our rights in Southern New Mexico within the next few weeks, if anyone has any advice, please do tell and stay tuned!

Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 26, 2009 10:35:57 PM

btw, Bernadette Sanchez and others should be primaried!

Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 26, 2009 10:41:43 PM

Leo, thanks to families like yours, we're going to win this fight.

Please consider going to MA or CT (Southwest has a sale on, Hartford is cheap) and getting married.

Your NEA rep should be able to help you. If you can help her/him, with a valid marriage certificate from another US state, all the better.

Posted by: PhoenixRising | Feb 27, 2009 1:17:57 AM

I'm not a huge George Lakoff fan but this excerpt from Lakoff on https://www.fivethirtyeight.com/ which was published the night before the stimulus package gives more clues about why we're experiencing large right-wing blowback on the state level....


Tuesday, February 24, 2009
The Obama Code By George Lakoff, Berkeley, CA. February 24, 2009.

-- It’s Us, Not Just Him

The president is the best political communicator of our age. He has the bully pulpit. He gets media attention from the press. His website is running a permanent campaign, Organizing for Obama, run by his campaign manager David Plouffe. It seeks issue-by-issue support from his huge mailing list. There are plenty of progressive blogs. MoveOn.org now has over five million members. And yet that is nowhere near enough.

The conservative message machine is huge and still going. There are dozens of conservative think tanks, many with very large communications budgets. The conservative leadership institutes are continuing to turn out thousands of trained conservative spokespeople every year. The conservative apparatus for language creation is still functioning. Conservative talking points are still going out to their network of spokespeople, who still being booked on tv and radio around the country. About 80% of the talking heads on tv are conservatives. Rush Limbaugh and Fox News are as strong as ever. There are now progressive voices on MSNBC, Comedy Central, and Air America, but they are still overwhelmed by Right’s enormous megaphone. Republicans in Congress can count on overwhelming message support in their home districts and homes states. That is one reason why they were able to stonewall on the President’s stimulus package. They had no serious media competition at home pounding out the Obama vision day after day.

Such national, day-by-day media competition is necessary. Democrats need to build it. Democratic think tanks are strong on policy and programs, but weak on values and vision. Without the moral arguments based on the Obama values and vision, the policymakers most likely be unable to regularly address both independent voters and the Limbaugh-Fox News audiences in conservative Republican strongholds.

The president and his administration cannot build such a communication system, nor can the Democrats in Congress. The DNC does not have the resources. It will be up to supporters of the Obama values, not just supporters on the issues, to put such a system in place. Despite all the organizing strength of Obama supporters, no such organizing effort is now going on. If none is put together, the movement conservatives will face few challenges of fundamental values in their home constituencies and will be able to go on stonewalling with impunity. That will make the president’s vision that much harder to carry out.

The ratings for Fox News and Rush Limbaugh are rising. Without a countervailing communications system on the Democratic side, they can create a lot of trouble, not just for the president, not just for the nation, but on a global scale, for the environmental and economic future of the world.

George Lakoff is Goldman Distinguished Professor of Cognitive Science and Linguistics at the University of California at Berkeley. He is the author of The Political Mind and Don’t Think of an Elephant!

Posted by: suz | Feb 27, 2009 6:00:37 AM

One reason Sen. Carlos Cisneros keeps getting elected from Taos, one of the most progressive towns on the planet, is that his bigoted voting record never gets any coverage in the local media. Zip. Nada. Total. News. Blackout.

Most Taosenos have no idea what a reactionary neanderthal he is. Bigotry thrives in the dark. We need a real Dem to primary his ass and shed some light where the sun ain't shining.

Posted by: DN Palacios | Feb 27, 2009 6:04:35 AM

Having people leave the Dem party over single issues is probably a GOP wet dream. I saw it last week also when someone (who will remain unnamed) said she was leaving the party and would probably not run again because legislation she had helped write didn't pass. It turned out she had a bad case of Rudella-osis. After a discussion about the real changes that we made in the last two elections, she re-thought her position. But my guess is the nut jobs are hoping that everyone who loses on their special issue will drop by the wayside so the GOP can reclaim the government.

Posted by: suz | Feb 27, 2009 6:05:51 AM

excellent comment written here. thanks for sharing your plans and past with us. I am thinking about what you are challenging other us to do. Thanks

Posted by: mary ellen | Feb 27, 2009 6:57:54 AM

Why don't you all finally realize that your super liberal agenda does not reflect the agenda of the entire Democratic Party. Quit attacking these Senators for representing their constituents wishes and voting on principle. You speak of civil rights, but what about the rights of the Catholic population to protect the sanctity of what has ALWAYS been a Christian institution (marriage). One man, one woman...that's how it should be. And I am thankful that on this day, we had courageous individuals that stood up for what was right rather than caving to the ACLU, Equality NM and every other group set on the moral destruction of our country. It's always amazing to me that the people that argue for the so-called civil rights of gays and lesbians will argue that a woman should have the choice to murder her unborn baby. How hypocritical! Well, this democrat is proud today and wishes the rest of you would either get on board or start your own leftist party...

Posted by: ProudDem | Feb 27, 2009 8:29:52 AM

ProudDem .... lol .... lol ...
Thanks for the laugh, we needed something funny to read.

Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 27, 2009 8:44:53 AM

Dear Mary Ellen,
I am straight and I support gays rights. You always respond angrily to me because I can not possibly understand the gay issue without being gay. Perhaps that is so but I am trying because I am sick and tired of seeing my loved ones persecuted. I also believe to my core in human and civil rights for all human beings.
Yes, my suggestions are in context of my limited experience and I do realize the can of worms being opened by suggesting that gays be seen to work as youth volunteers. Yes, I understand that gays are under grave threat being seen in the community.
I am the CVPA for eAYSO in Socorro county. This means I do all the background checks for soccer coaches and volunteers. The CVPA has the prerogative to refuse a volunteer for just a "bad feeling" about that person. Gays with clean criminal records can bump up against things like this and make themselves visible. Yes, the gay person may come to physical harm or worse but repeated displays of injustice to the public at large, will go a long way towards changing things.
Gay role models for our youth will also instigate change in the long run. Gayness is not contagious and this must be proven beyond doubt. Gayness does not render a person worthless or unworthy of full citizenship.
The fact that I get lashed out at in this forum for my naive comments display perfectly the chasm that needs to be bridged between gays and straights. The straight people are not going to reach out to gays, the gays have to be the pro-active ones. Sorry but just hanging out with like minded people is not going to expand your cause. I recognize that suggesting that gays put their safety on the line is cold, but courage and tragedy are required for social change.

Posted by: qofdisks | Feb 27, 2009 9:15:56 AM

The democratic party has done absolutely nothing for GLBT people. Zero. Nada. The state central committee has passed resolutions and a platform that support equal rights and domestic partnerships but then does nothing to pressure people running as Democrats to stand up for the platform. They keep it as secret as they can.

We are told to be quiet, to not push, to not question the people who run as Democrats to stand up for our issues. They take our money, our time, our votes and our support and do nothing in return.

I'm sick of hearing that we have to walk on eggs because Hispanics in the north and elsewhere are against us. Isn't it time someone pointed out that these conservative Hispanics and their Catholic Church might better use their time and energy to confront the awful problems created by ignorance, lack of education on birth control, rampant drug addiction, a terrible drop out rate and horrible domestic violence problems? Their problems in areas of marriage and youth aren't caused by gay people. They are caused by their own doing.

We are the scapegoats for a Catholic Church that has had to pay out hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements for child abusers they hid within their priesthood. The child abuser priests aren't gay. They are sick and repressed individuals because who in their right mind would agree to celibacy in this day and age?

We are being held back by the superstitious, backwards, crazy thinking of the most ignorant among us in this state. It is shameful. The Catholic Church and other right-wing religious sects are now political actors but they still get their tax free status. They are doing what they're doing to attract new members and get the money rolling in. They appeal to the uneducated, the fearful and the hateful to gain converts and there are no shortage of those types in this state.

This isn't some "single issue" voter thing. This issue is our lives, our health, our children, our families, our legal protections. It is about who we are. Any democrat who refuses to support equal civil rights for everyone is not a democrat. If the democrats won't support us we need to withdraw from that party, stop voting for candidates who won't support us publicly and work on legal remedies like those people are talking about on this thread. We need to pool our money for OUR causes and stop funding theirs.

Posted by: Gay and Sick of Betrayals | Feb 27, 2009 9:19:57 AM

gofdisks writes:

"Sorry but just hanging out with like minded people is not going to expand your cause. "

Why do you think we do that? In reality we have few GLBT friends and colleagues. We mostly live within the straight community, in a very straight neighborhood in the NE Heights. We've been out to our neighbors - some of them Republicans - out in the Democratic Party, in our jobs, on this blog and in the rest of our lives for many years. We've worked for candidates, causes, served on boards and fought for many of the rights and programs that help minorities, the poor, education, health care. No we don't coach soccer.

I grew up in neighborhoods in Chicago where most people were very much like some of the communities here. Very Catholic, blue collar, hard working, lower middle class, not many college graduates (or even high school graduates back then). In the era of the 50s - 70s, the hot topic was race relations, minority civil rights for African-Americans. Very similar kinds of prejudices, bigotry and fears that can be seen going against the GLBT fight for civil rights were evident then, in those neighborhoods, among my neighbors, coworkers and within my own family.

I didn't expect Black people to visit the Northwest Side and convince people they were deserving of equal rights. I, myself, became an advocate for minority rights within my family and community. I, myself, worked to educate, lessen fears and use reason to convince my people that their positions on race were wrongheaded and mean.

I really believe we cannot make progress without more straight people joining our cause actively and talking frankly to their friends and families about what's wrong with the hateful attitudes towards gay people. More progressive straight people need to talk to their less progressive friends, neighbors and family members and get active in contacting legislators and showing up in the galleries of the Roundhouse.

People know the best way to talk to those they're bonded with culturally. Others are seen as outsiders, like people from other neighborhoods were viewed where I grew up in Chicago.

Think about it.

Posted by: barb | Feb 27, 2009 9:55:35 AM

ProudDem say-"You speak of civil rights, but what about the rights of the Catholic population to protect the sanctity of what has ALWAYS been a Christian institution (marriage). One man, one woman...that's how it should be."

No the first marriages were among Jews. They were polygamous not one man one woman. Potential wives were sold to the highest bidder when they were very young in their teens. If a woman's husband died she had to marry her husband's brother by law. If a woman was judged to be adulterous she was stoned to death by a male mob. Is this the "sanctity" you are talking about?

Posted by: Randy | Feb 27, 2009 10:03:38 AM

Thanks Randy for what you say here in rebuttal to proud dem. What really gets me is proud dem, I am sure knows Barb and I, they in their hatefilled way can come over here and spout this comment. Knowing it is like the modern KKK against gays talking, being anonymous and righteous.

Tell me this is not sad.

And gofdisks..."I am sick and tired of seeing my loved ones persecuted." are you talking about gay love ones? That is a sincere question.

On a not so sincere note: I think I will go ask Barb to go out with me tonight to a dinner where we will sit real close and hold hands and make that googoo gaga looking into each others eyes at the table. Then we will walk to the car together all light hearted, and laughing and loving. Then we will get hit over our head with a tire iron and go to the hospital to not be allowed to make health decisions for each other. Then we will be written about in the paper to just be placed on page 8, two lesbians beat to shit after nice dinner at xx restaurant. One is in a coma, the other is recovering.

All of this wreckage goes on all the time...ALL the time in gay life. It does not change the hate. See what proud dem says above. go away you lesbians and gays, we do not want you in our democratic party. Go form your own thing.

I am sorry but given how I interpret your comments I must respond to them, for the exact reason you are saying in your argument, yet even in this forum you get extremely defensive.

Posted by: mary ellen | Feb 27, 2009 10:38:43 AM

Gay and sick of betrayals:
"We are told to be quiet, to not push, to not question the people who run as Democrats to stand up for our issues. They take our money, our time, our votes and our support and do nothing in return."

You are so right on! My partner was told the same EXACT thing years ago. Not to stir the pot because we moved to a very Conservative town, but that is exactly what he did and made Gay rights quite the talk in Alamogordo.

People either really hate him or really like him. It worked though, he didn't let up, people knew he was going to keep at it and now it's no longer a shocker as it was initially: OMG "the Gays" are out ....

NO ONE should ever be silenced ... especially when it comes to our equal civil rights. Enough is enough, we have to make noise, we have to speak out, it's not enough for Democrats to say we support you.


Let's all speak out and put DEMS on the defensive ... do not let up! Our party is a progressive party, do not let our party be hijacked by right-wingers as the Republican Party has been.

Write, call, email, etc.... don't stop!

Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 27, 2009 10:58:19 AM

Bad news, Barb! Sorry to hear about this vote, it's a sad day in the history of New Mexico. Keep up the good fight, I hope you're doing well.

Posted by: Bryan Barash | Feb 27, 2009 12:47:02 PM

Hi Bryan, good to hear from you. How is Brooklyn? We all keep fighting the same fights and someday we are gonna win!

Posted by: barb | Feb 27, 2009 3:57:29 PM

I'm glad to see that people stood up to ProudDems ridiculous assertions that marriage is somehow a "Christian institution" and that lawmakers are protecting its sanctity by discriminating against gay and lesbian constituents.

Christianity doesn't have a patent on the institution!

Marriage is far older than Christianity and also found widely amongst those of us who aren't considered Christians.

Since marriage requires a license from civil authorities it is not a strictly religious institution and whether you go on to have a personally meaningful ceremony that includes a cathedral, temple, strip mall church, park, zoo, hot air balloon, beach, Vegas chapel, Sedona power vortex, or just city hall, it's a marriage!

Why then should any religion be allowed to define its participants??? You know, It wasn't that long ago that so-called Christians led the forces to oppose interracial marriages. Thankfully that thinking "evolved" - I would submit to Mr. ProudDem and friends that, if it was wrong to oppose marriages between racial and ethnic minorities/majorities then, then perhaps the bigoted thinking omnipresent in this situation is equally misguided?

Meantime, we've seen yet again that the Democratic party isn't synonymous with progressive politics. Those who believe in and fight for Domestic Partnerships and even Equality in Marriage may do well to remember that alternative parties do exist and the Green Party here in the US and those in nations around the world have for years firmly supported the idea that same-sex couples should enjoy all of the same rights that heterosexual couples do and that legislation like the "Defense of Marriage Act" are clear violations of civil rights.
I believe Libertarians share similar views on these issues of personal matters.

That many continue to vote for the 2-party system translates into a continuation of these situations where legislators with ulterior motives and hungry pockets control issues as poignant as the intimate and familial relationships of ordinary people and we are sucked into thinking we are powerless to stop them come election day. Nay, not so!

Posted by: Michal | Mar 1, 2009 10:59:07 AM

Post a comment