Joe Mirabella

Terror Babies, Mosques in Manhattan, and Gay Marriage

Filed By Joe Mirabella | August 17, 2010 11:30 AM | comments

Filed in: Marriage Equality, Politics
Tags: 9/11, marriage equality, marriage politics, marriage rights, Mosque, Newt Gingrich, President Obama

In case you missed it, Republican leadership has completely gone off the deep end. I mean, completely.

newt-gingrich.jpgFrom Texas's Congressmen Lou Gohmert (whose insanity brought us "terror babies." I swear they are real. There was one at brunch on Sunday who wouldn't stop screaming. No, I don't have evidence. Stop badgering me!) to Newt Gingrich's attack on the First Amendment. Gingrich has led some low IQ Americans into a frothy idiotic mess over a mosque in Manhattan that happens to be near the 9/11 wound on New York. Manhattan is a small Island. Everything on Manhattan is near the 9/11 memorial. (Even this NSFW link.)

President Obama, wisely and accurately, made a statement on Friday defending the First Amendment and the right for every American to practice the religion of his or her choosing.

What did Newt Gingrich do? He poured gasoline and lit a match.

Joe Scarborough was not pleased.

From Raw Story:

"Nazis don't have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington," Gingrich said on Fox News. "We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There is no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center," he said.

Reflecting on Gingrich's comments, Scarborough didn't know where to begin. "To suggest that someone trying to build a -- a tolerant center for moderate Muslims in New York is the equivalent of killing six million Jews is stunning to me," he said.

"It's stunning and it is so contrary to our country's principle and the Republican party," McKinnon agreed, then added, "I'm glad to see we're together on this and unfortunately I think we may get our membership revoked at the Pachyderm Club."

"Screw 'em," interrupted Scarborough.

"I agree," said McKinnon.

White House spokesman Bill Burton said:

"The President thinks that it's his obligation to speak out when ... issues of the Constitution arise. And so, in this case, he decided to state clearly how he feels about making sure that people are treated equally, that there is a fairness and that our bedrock principles are upheld."

I applaud the President for wanting to speak out on matters of the Constitution and am glad he hopes people are treated equally under the law. I assume that means he is abandoning his position that marriage is only between one man and one woman then. Right? I assume that he is willing to step up, even in the most politically divisive climate possible, and say without equivocation that gays and lesbians should have the right to marry.

Because, honestly, how are these two issues that different? The Muslims absolutely have the right to practice their religion. It is their fundamental right. And as Judge Walker concluded in Perry v Schwarzenegger, gays and lesbians have a fundamental right to marry the adult of their choice.

So, Mr. President, I like this version of you who is willing to weigh in on important debates to protect fundamental liberty. You are acting like the President I voted for. Now, could you please weight in on an issue that begs for your guidance? Please announce your support for marriage equality. An "issue of the Constitution" has arose.

Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.

Renee Thomas | August 17, 2010 4:55 PM

As it impacts the free exercise rights guaranteed to all citizens under the Constitution, we are ALL Muslims . . .

Al Hamdulillâh (all praise is for Allah)

So build the mosque. Build it tall and strong and beautiful - as is your right.

As-salaamu 'Alaykum (peace be upon you)

This Pagan Lesbian absolutely supports the construction of the Islamic Center site in Manhattan!(It is NOT a Mosque)

Because, my beloved Islamic sisters and brothers, when they abrogate YOUR freedoms, they abrogate ALL OF OUR freedoms.

" . . . gays and lesbians have a fundamental right to marry the adult of their choice."

And, what about bisexuals and trans people? I worked my ass off when NOM came to Atlanta and even spoke up at our rally, pointing out that marriage equality affects trans people, too. I stood in the hot sun video recording the LGBT rally and the NOM crap because I wanted to refute their words like everyone else. (By the way, you would not have seen my work here on Bilerico, yet other NOM stuff was posted, but it was not rejected at Pam's.)

I know that a lot of trans people don't think marriage equality affects them, but it does, just like DADT supposedly doesn't affect us. I hope people will remember that.

I completely agree. Yes, all adults should be able to marry the adult of their choice.

Politicians who fan the flames of religious zealotry are going to get burned by it.

Terror Babies remind me of Garbage Pail Kids. After all, the Republican seem to want to toss "anchor babies" into the trash along with their brown-skinned parents. (You don't hear complaints about kids born to British parents!)

Aubrey Haltom | August 18, 2010 10:37 AM

There is an interview with Gingrich's 2nd (?) wife in this month's edition of Esquire.
If anyone has the time to look it up, the article/interview attempts to look at what makes Gingrich, well, Gingrich.
And the answers are not very pretty (considering they come from a wife of many years, who delivers her insight in a very dispassionate manner.)
Worth the read, especially if Gingrich decides to run for president.

It would also be nice if liberals were willing to talk about the substance of this issue instead of just calling people racist and xenophobic. It's complicated and there is no simple solution, but one thing everyone agrees on is that the US's immigration system is completely broken. There is a strong argument to be made for opening up our borders to legal immigration, but the powers that be like the current system - lots of workers coming in who can't go to the police if they have trouble or get screwed over.