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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Pab Sungenis

(9,612 posts)
26. Then stop attacking us.
Thu May 10, 2012, 12:25 PM
May 2012

Stop telling us to shut up and sit down. This is not "strategy," this is justice.

There is no difference, as far as gay rights are concerned, between the two nominees Obama made to the Supreme Court in his first term and those John McCain would have. I'd like there to be some real assurance that this will not be the case next time.

If Kagan were a Republican nominee and spoke about opposition to abortion or Affirmative Action in the same tone she spoke about the right to marry, do you think she would have been allowed to stay as nominee. Hint: it already happened.

LGBT rights needs to be our litmus test for nominees, just like abortion is for Republicans. If you are opposed to LGBT rights you don't deserve to be on the Court. Hell, if you don't support LGBT rights then you don't deserve to be a Democrat.

Kick and going on my FaceBook right fucking now. (nt) NYC_SKP May 2012 #1
"Ultimately?" Pab Sungenis May 2012 #2
Then I'm afraid you'll have to vote with your feet Warpy May 2012 #3
Best comment of the night. SunSeeker May 2012 #5
Even WITH a Democratic President Pab Sungenis May 2012 #7
Oh please. There's a HUGE difference between Dem & Repuke SCOTUS appointees. SunSeeker May 2012 #20
Huge difference? Pab Sungenis May 2012 #21
There is no explicit provision, but there are the "unenumerated rights" SunSeeker May 2012 #23
Then stop attacking us. Pab Sungenis May 2012 #26
All I'm saying is you're wrong to say Kagan and Sotomayor are the same as a Repuke appointee. SunSeeker May 2012 #29
On this issue, Kagan IS the same as a Repuke appointee Pab Sungenis May 2012 #31
And clarification: I didn't say YOU don't support LGBT rights Pab Sungenis May 2012 #33
Good Lord...let's focus our energy on re-electing a lukewarm president... joeybee12 May 2012 #16
Slightly flawed analogy Bruce Wayne May 2012 #9
Okay, then here's another one. Pab Sungenis May 2012 #10
So? What are you waiting for? Fix it now. Fix it RIGHT NOW! TalkingDog May 2012 #11
I did what I could. Pab Sungenis May 2012 #13
The other sad fact is that attitudes like this Pab Sungenis May 2012 #15
While the sentiment is on the right side of history, it's too flippant right now... Luminous Animal May 2012 #4
Liberalism will NEVER prevail on the back of bipartisanship. blkmusclmachine May 2012 #6
Great cartoon, but the title of your post is really cold comfort Chorophyll May 2012 #8
As somebody who just had her 12 year marriage annulled by the voters of this state, TalkingDog May 2012 #14
Good luck and stay CRK7376 May 2012 #18
Wow. Okay. I didn't know you were affected personally. Chorophyll May 2012 #19
Does it matter that TalkingDog was affected? Pab Sungenis May 2012 #22
I must have a sign on my head that says "misinterpret me." Chorophyll May 2012 #24
I said I wasn't saying that was how you felt Pab Sungenis May 2012 #25
Gotcha. After the OP's response to my first comment I guess I'm a little sensitive. Chorophyll May 2012 #27
We're all on edge this week. Pab Sungenis May 2012 #28
If we had a SCOTUS edhopper May 2012 #12
Yes, it does matter. Voters should never be allowed to MineralMan May 2012 #17
The ultimately deal is a little to close in vibe to TheKentuckian May 2012 #30
That's brilliant! nt Zorra May 2012 #32
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why NC's passage of Amend...»Reply #26