Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Pab Sungenis

Pab Sungenis's Journal
Pab Sungenis's Journal
May 11, 2012

Fallout on marriage amendment hits local tourism Sam Walker | May 10, 2012

http://outerbanksvoice.com/2012/05/10/fallout-on-marriage-amendment-hits-local-tourism/

Almost immediately after the results were announced of Tuesday’s statewide referendum on a Constitutional amendment that defines marriage, threats started to emerge that out-of-state visitors were going to start heading elsewhere.


“After a tough fall and winter of dealing with the aftermath of Hurricane Irene, discussions over ferry taxes, beach closures, beach driving permits, game fish regulations, state budget cuts to our local attractions, and even challenges with building the bridges and road structures we need, this is just another challenge at a difficult time for one of the few remaining strong industries in our state,” Brady-Daniels said.


• “We just wanted to let you know that we have stopped planning our family reunion for next fall in Duck…our family had a teleconference this afternoon (including 99-year-old grandma/great and great-great grandma who grew up in Manteo)…we came together as a family and decided to spend our hard-earned (money) on Cape Cod, MA for obvious reasons.”


More at the link. Avoid the comments.
May 11, 2012

Individual rights trump states' rights.

Just sayin'....

May 10, 2012

Repeating a statement made elsewhere, so it doesn't get lost.

If you don't support LGBT rights, then you don't deserve to be a Democrat.

Period. I said it and I will not back down from it.
May 10, 2012

Please consider for a moment, what if these had been the remarks made.

At a certain point, I've just concluded that-- for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that-- I think women should be able to control their own bodies. Now-- I have to tell you that part of my hesitation on this has also been I didn't want to nationalize the issue. There's a tendency when I weigh in to think suddenly it becomes political and it becomes polarized.

And what you're seeing is, I think, states working through this issue-- in fits and starts, all across the country. Different communities are arriving at different conclusions, at different times. And I think that's a healthy process and a healthy debate. And I continue to believe that this is an issue that is gonna be worked out at the local level.


If it had been that women should be able to terminate a pregnancy, but it should be left up to the states to decide the issue, then would celebration be warranted?
May 9, 2012

Calling queers names? Still okay on DU.

Wonder how many of these jurors would have voted to "LEAVE" Amendement One "ALONE."

At Wed May 9, 2012, 01:48 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

Obama is on our side. He knows he has to WIN REELECTION first.

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

YOUR COMMENTS:

"powdered, puffed, pampered, pooed, pottied, wooed, and flattered" - if this isn't blatant homophobia nothing is. And if this isn't hidden there is no justice on DU.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Wed May 9, 2012, 02:09 PM, and voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The paranoia of the word police around here is getting absurd and disheartening and I wish people would settle the fuck down and grow up. Leave this post alone.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: I don't know whether the poster meant the post to sound anti-gay. But the wording does sound homophobic, intentially or not. I would suggest reposting the sentiment without the slurs.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: well, that was fucked up. hide it.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: There is no way to know from the post whether the author is him or herself gay, and if he or she is, then the post would be self-identifying group admonition. If this post is "blatent homophobia," then virtually every act and word from Rupaul is as well.

Thank you.
May 9, 2012

Let's call it what it is.

Gaypartheid.

May 9, 2012

It's just so incredibly frustrating.

What? The defeat in North Carolina? That's part of it.

The real frustration is how many people in the Democratic Party (a) don't care, (b) are staying silent, or (c) agree with the vote.

After sharing the latest outrage in "you're not really married" land, my nerves were on edge to begin with. Today I'm floored.


May 9, 2012

Mr. President: move the convention.

Do not force members of the party that actually believes in equality for all to patronize the state that has gone further beyond the pale than any other to date in enshrining bigotry into law.

Don't force us to patronize the state that passed a law written specifically to "preserve the Caucasian race."

Don't force us to acknowledge, accept, and silently condone their hatred.

There is no teachable moment here. There is no cheek left to turn. You say you're evolving? Well, North Carolina is devolving even faster than you are evolving.

Don't give us one more reason to be angry and frustrated with you. Make a solid statement now. Let us vote with our feet and our wallets.

Move the convention out of Charlotte.

May 7, 2012

Tell me again that civil unions are the equivalent to marriage.

My husband, Bryan, lost his job in early April. He filed for unemployment and was granted it. Since then he's been jumping through all of the necessary hurdles to not only look for another job, but to be able to prove that he's looking for another job.

Today he was on the phone with a lady from the State Department of Unemployment, filing for the past two weeks. We developed static on the phone he was speaking on, so he switched to the extension in the basement and had me hang up the upstairs phone. When the click of my hanging up the other phone was heard, she must have asked if he was still there. His response? "I'm still here, I just had my husband hang up the phone with the bad wiring."

Well, that started a whole shitstorm. He had to repeat all of his identification information over again. Then I heard "no, I am a man." A pause. "Yes, I am married to another man. We live in New Jersey and have a civil union." Another pause. "No, I am NOT Bryan I---'s wife, I am Bryan I---." Pause. "I do not have a wife. I have a husband."

Mind you, this is not some large corporation he's talking to, or some little mom and pop store in Oklahoma. This is a state government office, which should have some concept of State laws.

Finally, he hung up and stormed upstairs. He informed me that the woman had cancelled his entire unemployment claim, and he was being forced to drive into town to file a new one on purpose. Why? It was "obvious" that the claim was fraudulent, filed by a woman and her husband using identity theft.

So now we have no money for the six weeks it's going to take to file, verify, and reassert his claim. Plus we're probably going to have to fend off a state police investigation of the "theft" of Bryan's identity by him since no one with a high pitched voice referring to "her" husband could be a 44 year old man.

So tell me again how civil unions are the equivalent to marriage.

Profile Information

Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 9,612
Latest Discussions»Pab Sungenis's Journal