Republican politician's moving speech in favor of gay marriage.

**MrFun** · February 10, 2012, 15:57

Hopefully more Republicans will come to realize that gay people are human beings.

**Imran Siddiqui** · February 10, 2012, 16:01

Booooring... videos without discussion is not worth listening to or responding to. You are the worst poster ever

.

**Aeson** · February 10, 2012, 16:07

It's a good video, and a good speech. Thanks for sharing MrFun.

**Elok** · February 10, 2012, 16:14

Gee, this video ought to convince all the stridently anti-gay people on the OT to change their minds. Just as soon as "they" get back in April.

**MrFun** · February 10, 2012, 16:25

Originally Posted by Aeson

It's a good video, and a good speech. Thanks for sharing MrFun.

**Hauldren Collider** · February 10, 2012, 16:40

Originally Posted by Elok

Gee, this video ought to convince all the stridently anti-gay people on the OT to change their minds. Just as soon as "they" get back in April.

^^^^^

**Oncle Boris** · February 10, 2012, 17:33

Originally Posted by Imran Siddiqui

Booooring... videos without discussion is not worth listening to or responding to. You are the worst poster ever

.

Video only threads without transcript or commentary should be banned.

**-Jrabbit** · February 10, 2012, 17:48

Lazy sods...

Transcript of Rep. Maureen Walsh’s (R-WA) speech in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage

“I don’t wax as eloquently as most of the people on the floor here, but I’ve allowed my heart and my mind guide me in decisions that I’ve made on a lot of different issues that have been before us in the legislature. And I think sometimes that’s what we have to do.

I too don’t want to wag my finger at anybody about which way you should vote on this. It’s certainly an issue of conscience to me, and certainly one that I have been weighing very heavily for the last few weeks.

I was married for 23 years to the love of my life. He died 6 years ago, and you know, I’m a lonely old widow right now. I’m 51 yeas old, looking for a boyfriend. Not having much luck with that.

And yet, when I think of my husband, and I think of all the wonderful years we had, and the wonderful fringe benefit of having three beautiful children, I don’t miss the sex. You know? And to me that’s kind of what this boils down to. I don’t miss that. I mean I certainly miss it, but it is certainly not the aspect of that relationship — that incredible bond I had with that human being — that I really, really genuinely wish I still had.

So I think to myself, how could I deny the right to have that incredible bond with another individual in life? To me it seems almost cruel.

You know, years ago my daughter was in elementary school. Many of you have met my daughter, she’s a fabulous girl. She’s wonderful. My boys are great too, but my daughter is just something special. She was the light of her fathers eyes.

And she went to school and there was a whole group of kids just picking on another kid. And you know, my daughter stood up for that kid. Even though it wasn’t the popular thing to do, she knew it was the right thing to do.

I was never more proud of my kid, knowing that she was speaking against the vocal majority on behalf of the rights of the minority. To me, it is incumbent upon us as legislators in this state to do that. That is why we are here.

I shudder to think that if folks who have preceded us in history did not do that, frankly I’m not sure I would be here, as a woman. I’m not sure other people would be here due to their race or their creed.

To me that is what’s disconcerting. Someone made the comment that this is not about equality. Well yes, it is about equality. Why in the world would we not allow those equal rights for those individuals who truly were committed to one another in life? To be able to show that by way of a marriage?

My daughter came out of the closet a couple of years ago. And you know what, I thought I was just going to agonize about that. Nothin’s different. She’s still a fabulous human being, and she’s met a person that she loves very much, and some day, by God, I wanna throw a wedding for that kid.

I hope that is exactly what I can do. I hope she will not feel like a second-class citizen involved in something called a “domestic partnership” that frankly sounds like a Merry Maids franchise to me.

Thank you Mr. Speaker, that’s all I want to say. Thank you for the civil, wonderful debate today. It’s been great.”

**Guynemer** · February 10, 2012, 17:48

I saw this clip yesterday; it is, indeed, terrific.

Kudos.

**Dinner** · February 10, 2012, 18:49

In an attempt to make this thread worth something I will post a picture of an ironically named young lady. Oh, I did like the speech in the OP though.

**Hauldren Collider** · February 10, 2012, 18:58

I thought that was from an episode of Louis C.K.?

**Dinner** · February 10, 2012, 20:35

Don't know, just ran across it on the internet.

**Hauldren Collider** · February 10, 2012, 20:58

Dude, it's fake, from a comedy TV show on FX.

**Dinner** · February 10, 2012, 21:00

Still funny.

**DaShi** · February 10, 2012, 22:19

At HC getting worked up about it.

**MrFun** · February 11, 2012, 04:31

Originally Posted by Guynemer

I saw this clip yesterday; it is, indeed, terrific.

Kudos.

**Tuberski** · February 11, 2012, 06:06

She's a mother with a gay child, why the surprise?

ACK!

**Zevico** · February 11, 2012, 06:37

I too don’t want to wag my finger at anybody about which way you should vote on this. It’s certainly an issue of conscience to me, and certainly one that I have been weighing very heavily for the last few weeks.

Finger-wagging sure is a terrible thing.

Hopefully more Republicans will come to realize that gay people are human beings.

Oh dear. One of those finger-waggers has come to lecture us. Whatever shall we do with this example of intolerance?
Haven't enough Christians you told that they hold to the "love the sinner, condemn the sin" doctrine? I've seen it upheld in these forums. I personally disagree with it but it's fairly obvious what it means-that those Christians think you're a human being. You're projecting a fantasy--a necessary lie--so you can tell yourself how persecuted you are. That way lies madness.

**Boris Godunov** · February 11, 2012, 15:19

Originally Posted by Tuberski

She's a mother with a gay child, why the surprise?

ACK!

Lots of parents of gay children still disown them and treat them like garbage.

**Boris Godunov** · February 11, 2012, 15:21

Originally Posted by Zevico

You're projecting a fantasy--a necessary lie--so you can tell yourself how persecuted you are. That way lies madness.

Uh, no. There is a sizeable number of Christians and other religious folks (and I'd guess a few non-religious, I guess, although I've never encountered such) who don't "love the sinner." Physical violence against homosexuals in the U.S. is still inordinately high.

**Hauldren Collider** · February 11, 2012, 15:23

I think you'll find that most, however, simply disapprove of the behavior, which is substantially more benign.

**Elok** · February 11, 2012, 15:23

What counts as an non-inordinately (ordinately?) high level of anti-gay violence?

**Hauldren Collider** · February 11, 2012, 15:25

I presume he's going to say "any at all", but if he's holding out for universal tolerance, I think we're gonna have to reduce our expectations a tad.

**Boris Godunov** · February 11, 2012, 15:41

Originally Posted by Hauldren Collider

I think you'll find that most, however, simply disapprove of the behavior, which is substantially more benign.

A not-inconsiderable number of religious conservatives objected to the striking down of anti-sodomy laws or want to ban gay behavior entirely. That's not in any way "benign."

**Boris Godunov** · February 11, 2012, 15:45

Originally Posted by Elok

What counts as an non-inordinately (ordinately?) high level of anti-gay violence?

A bad word choice, to be sure. But anti-gay attack rates significantly exceed those of other minority groups.

And non-violent expressions of hate that exceed "mere" disapproval aren't exactly hard to find. Take the recent flap over Ellen DeGeneres being selected as the JC Penny spokesperson. Despite the fact that the job will have NOTHING to do with her sexuality, religious conservatives got up and arms and demanded she be fired. Insisting that a company fire someone just because she's gay is far more significant than "disapproval," I believe.

**MrFun** · February 11, 2012, 15:46

Originally Posted by Zevico

Haven't enough Christians you told that they hold to the "love the sinner, condemn the sin" doctrine? I've seen it upheld in these forums. I personally disagree with it but it's fairly obvious what it means-that those Christians think you're a human being. You're projecting a fantasy--a necessary lie--so you can tell yourself how persecuted you are. That way lies madness.

"Loving the sinner, hating the sin" is just a politically correct code for, "I hate faggots."

Using your "logic," the "Christian" goons who picket funerals of veterans to protest gay people do not necessarily hate gay people - they just hate the behavior of gay people.

And by the way, to say that one is opposed to the behavior of gay people is to demand that gay people deny themselves their own conscience and to have gay people deny themselves a chance to have a meaningful, romantic, loving relationship with a soul mate. So really, to say you're opposed to the behavior of gay people is just as bad as simply to say that you hate gay people.

**DinoDoc** · February 11, 2012, 15:48

Originally Posted by Boris Godunov

A bad word choice, to be sure. But anti-gay attack rates significantly exceed those of other minority groups.

Of the 6,624 single bias incidents, 47.3 percent were motivated by a racial bias, 20.0 percent were motivated by a religious bias, 19.3 percent were motivated by a sexual orientation bias, and 12.8 percent were motivated by an ethnicity/national origin bias. Bias against a disability accounted for 0.6 percent of single-bias incidents. - FBI Releases 2010 Hate Crime Statistics

I would be interested in seeing your support.

**Boris Godunov** · February 11, 2012, 15:53

Originally Posted by DinoDoc

Of the 6,624 single bias incidents, 47.3 percent were motivated by a racial bias, 20.0 percent were motivated by a religious bias, 19.3 percent were motivated by a sexual orientation bias, and 12.8 percent were motivated by an ethnicity/national origin bias. Bias against a disability accounted for 0.6 percent of single-bias incidents. - FBI Releases 2010 Hate Crime Statistics

I would be interested in seeing your support.

Apparently you can't do math.

Racial minorities = ~40% of the population, and account for 47.3% of the incidents
Gay people = ~5% of the population, and account for 19.3% of the incidents.

What does that tell you about the rate at which anti-gay incidents take place relative to their size of the population as opposed to racially-motivated attacks (and that's assuming no significant number of those were anti-white attacks, of course)? Or is it that you didn't understand the difference between "rate" and actual numbers of attacks?

**Elok** · February 11, 2012, 16:23

Originally Posted by MrFun

Using your "logic," the "Christian" goons who picket funerals of veterans to protest gay people do not necessarily hate gay people - they just hate the behavior of gay people.

This isn't the best example you could have picked, as those people explicitly say they hate homosexuals (as does God, supposedly), not homosexual conduct. They're just about the only major group who DON'T say "love the sinner, hate the sin."

**Elok** · February 11, 2012, 16:28

I like how I'm not actually contributing to the discussion, just pointing out minor flaws in various arguments. This is an excellent use of my time. I think I'll go play SMAC now.