« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


Bye, gay-free Bunning

by Jeremy Hooper

Sen Jim Bunning (R-KY), 7/9/2004:

Picture 3-231"Throughout civilized history marriage has always been defined as being between one man and one woman. We cannot let a few activist judges in Massachusetts, San Francisco, and Oregon change an institution that has been around for thousands of years and which the vast majority of us in Kentucky do not want changed. Allowing for same-sex marriages could send a confusing message to our next generation and threaten our cultural institutions. Throughout history a family consisted of a husband a wife and their children. Children need the guidance of a mother and a father in a traditional family. The debate in the U.S. Senate is likely only the beginning of the struggle to protect families and our traditional way of life. But it is a struggle we must win."

Sen. Jim Bunning, 7/27/2009:

Picture 3-230"Over the past year, some of the leaders of the Republican Party in the Senate have done everything in their power to dry up my fundraising. The simple fact is that I have not raised the funds necessary to run an effective campaign for the U.S. Senate. For this reason, I will not be a candidate for re-election in 2010."

Peace out, Jimmy. And in saying that, we don't mean it in the way that you worked to take peace out of our civil lives. We mean it as in, "Don't let the Hart Office Building door smack your boot-ay on the way out."

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

"Throughout civilized history marriage has always been defined as being between one man and one woman."


Posted by: Dale | Jul 27, 2009 7:09:44 PM

That whole statement is so ignorant. For much of "civilized history," marriage has been defined as between one man and as many women as he could support--in fact, in most civilizations for these past thousands of years, polygamy has been widely accepted. The idea of "redefining" marriage to include gay couples is a far less dramatic change than the redefinition that occurred when society decided marriage could only be between two individuals, and no more. Not that I'm advocating a return to polygamy, but the argument used so often by opponents of equality that we would be changing an institution that's been set for thousands of years is absurd.

Posted by: Rachel Snyder | Jul 27, 2009 7:17:26 PM

Yes, lets just look at the Roman custom which roughly translated comes out as "If it's under my roof, it's mine."

Posted by: Tony P | Jul 27, 2009 8:00:45 PM

These guys can get away with making false statements like that because the inbred yokels that they are communicating with lack the education, knowledge or sanity necessary to know that the liar was lying to them.

Sally Kern's brilliant statement, "Marriage between one man and one woman has been the cornerstone of this great country for thousands of years," is another one. And that the country hasn't been around for thousands of years isn't the biggest lie that she told there. She should have said that "shotgun marriages between thirteen to fifteen year old girls and the pedophile that knocked her up were the familial unit common when this great country was founded." But even more than that, "slavery was the cornerstone on which this great country was built," would have been more appropriate.

They get away with those lies because no one challenges them. That's why we appreciate the fact, JH, that you have the internal fortitude necessary to keep an eye on these bastards.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Jul 27, 2009 8:07:02 PM

The Senator is a bit confused, modern Marriage has been around at best for about 500 years.

Posted by: Rob | Jul 27, 2009 8:07:14 PM

Well let's not lose the lede: That he's going, not coming.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Jul 27, 2009 8:09:27 PM

Is it because another homophobe is in the wings to replace him. It would be nice to see a progressive and less homo-hostile replacement, but let's be realistic here... this is Kentucky we're talking about.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Jul 27, 2009 8:16:29 PM

Yea, but even if gay-unfriendly, there's a chance his replacement won't have the Bush baggage or some of the past politics as usual. The way I see it, we are moving into a forever changed political world, and, hopefully, a forever changed Republican party. I think we have to get out all of the ones (from any party) who fought so hard for things like an FMA, or who fought against hate crimes leg, ENDA, etc. These are past battles that are on the cusp of going in our favor. Even if incoming regimes fail to support us, I think we will slowly get away from those who so vocally played politics with our lives, and with that will come somewhat more peace.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Jul 27, 2009 9:10:57 PM

How is Mitch McConnell's fundraising going? Maybe we will be rid of the other one of them soon as well. Kentucky was pretty solidly McCain/Caribou-Barbie in '08, so change isn't likely to be radical, but sometimes the "devil you know" is just so unbearable that anything is likely to be an improvement.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Jul 27, 2009 9:40:36 PM

G-A-Y: "The way I see it, we are moving into a forever changed political world, and, hopefully, a forever changed Republican party."

You can't be serious. Hopefully it will remain the same, so it dies the inevitable death before my own. Just sayin' - it'll be one more wonderful event I can celebrate to see these fat, illiterate christian pigs go under.

Did I just write that?

Posted by: Dale | Jul 28, 2009 12:30:58 AM

Right, marriage has NEVER changed in a thousand years, until us gay activists came along. Except for that little bit about polygamy, and black and white people not being allowed to marry, and royalty marrying their nieces, and women being fired when they got married, and women being forced to marry the man that raped them, and a bunch of other fun little details I've forgotten.

Posted by: Callie | Jul 28, 2009 11:05:22 AM

Here's the issue with Jim Bunning retiring. Democrats had a good chance of winning against him in the 2010 midterm elections because of all of his baggage. We may not have that chance against a less smeared politician.

And btw Dick, many of us live in states like Kentucky and for that matter I live in Tennessee. We have quite a few problems here, and GLBT issues are not always decided in favorable manner, but it is my belief that Tennesseans, and Kentuckians for that matter, are good people, maybe confused, but good people.

I get sick of the South bashing.


BTW you might be interested in this Jeremy...http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/dean-supports-nondiscrimination-ordinance

Posted by: Zak | Jul 29, 2009 4:01:12 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails