Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

So, do people elected to congress sign a pledge of straightness and marital fidelity?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:23 PM
Original message
So, do people elected to congress sign a pledge of straightness and marital fidelity?
Because my congressperson is an openly gay lesbian, and one of my senators is an in the closet gay man and the other one is straight but twice divorced. Maybe nobody gave them the pledge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. They should if they want to legislate it on the rest of us.
Now knock it off. You KNOW it's the hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
More Than A Feeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
2. I did not know that about Senator Kohl.
Edited on Sat Sep-01-07 01:28 PM by Heaven and Earth
I hope he gets to a place where he feels comfortable about being open, if indeed its true that he's in the closet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Wisconsin is pretty progressive.
Edited on Sat Sep-01-07 01:42 PM by undeterred
People know and they leave it alone. He's from a different generation, in his 70s. He is well liked in this state for the things he has done as a Senator, although the far left gets frustrated with him (mostly because we want him to be more like Feingold).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
More Than A Feeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. I'm glad you added that last part.
Edited on Sat Sep-01-07 01:58 PM by Heaven and Earth
When I hear far left, I tend to imagine the speaker is a centrist trying to demean liberals/progressives by verbally pushing them to the fringe. Obviously, inaccurate in this case, and I apologize for jumping to conclusions about you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Well, I think we have the best Senator in the country in Feingold
By contrast, Kohl looks pretty moderate, and he has taken a lot of criticism for not being against the war soon enough. In a state where the other Senator was a Republican he would have had an easier time of it. But since there is absolutely nothing not to love about Feingold (or the Congresspersons from Madison and Milwaukee, where many of the activists are!) Kohl takes a lot of heat from people. His voting record isn't terribly different than Feingold's except for a few notable things like the bankruptcy bill, and he was much slower to come around on being against the war.

He's not a bad senator, he's just next to the most Progressive Senator in the country. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
3. You do know that Craig censored Barney FranK?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. I never heard of Craig before this week
I just knew that Idaho was an extremely conservative state, so it doesn't really surprise me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
4. No but
Edited on Sat Sep-01-07 01:27 PM by Gman
it kinda goes without saying that you don't be rabidly anti-gay and then get busted for cruising for gay sex in a public bathroom lest you take so flak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. It seems rather odd that the airport is the place for policing such things.
Edited on Sat Sep-01-07 01:47 PM by undeterred
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
6. it's the hypocrisy and horrible misuse of power
wow -- can't believe this thread is meant to be serious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. The poster was probably not aware that Craig was a hateful anti-gay christian guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. I really never heard of him
but I don't think he committed a crime that is worthy of a week of front page attention. I think its very odd to assign police to airport bathrooms, unless thats where the terrorists are hanging out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. If you read any of the press, it says the police were there because of numbers of
complaints.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Left Is Write Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. He's a creep.
He's a hatemonger, period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. hmmmm
I wasn't really being serious, more like ironic/sarcastic. Should have used an icon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-03-07 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #14
30. sorry -- didn't sense your intention.
peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
9. They Should Sign A Pledge Not To Watch People Do Their Business Through The Cracks In Bathroom
Edited on Sat Sep-01-07 01:34 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
Stalls Regardless Of Their Orientation Or Gender...

It means they respect the right to privacy...

Somebody that isn't willing to peer at you after you go in the bathroom and close the door is probably less likely to allow the government to peer at your e-mail or listen to your overseas phonecalls...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Amen.
I really don't care to hear about this stuff and I don't see what it has to do with how somebody votes. It could be a Democrat or a Republican or a Libertarian doing it. I'd be appalled if they started sending undercover female cops into the womens room to spy on me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Yeah
I don't distinguish between large assaults and small assaults on my privacy and who's doing the assaulting...As Long as I am obeying the laws I have a right to be left alone...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
11. Big shots don't have to sign anything...
...and will duck and weave to avoid explicit promises. They just mouth empty phrases about how great family values are, ignore them privately, then tearfully admit to as little as possible when caught.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
18. That's The Tenet of Marriage Between Man and Woman
as commonly understood by the culture. Whether one runs for Congress, or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. Never been there,
didn't know it was mandatory for Congress or anything else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. ???? You Lost Me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Never been married.
I find it really strange that being in public office requires people to be heterosexual and married and show proof of their faithfulness in marriage. What does ones sexual orientation/marital status have to do with political leadership? Why should it even be a factor at all? Why are we even talking about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Not So.
What about Barney Frank and Father Drinan? It's the infidelity to one's public vow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. Now you've lost me.
Edited on Sat Sep-01-07 05:59 PM by undeterred
Priests take oaths of celibacy; Congressmen/women and Senators do not. I think the latter should have some privacy. Not to break the law, but they shouldn't be scrutinized or held to a higher standard than anyone else. This is why we can't get good people to run for office- nobody wants the world peering into their bedroom or bathroom stall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
19. it would be funny if a Democrat proposed this. Send Michael Moore to all the repubs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
27. Actually, I think the marital fidelity one would be a good idea...
If I elect someone who is married, whether they are in a heterosexual or homosexual marriage, and they are caught running around, well, they broke ONE vow, to someone they supposedly loved so much that they decided to spend their life with them, why would I trust them with keeping the oath of office? Oaths are apparently meaningless to them.

This is outside of divorce, people can decide to get married, and then later realize its a mistake and get out of the contract, this isn't a moral or ethical issue, its a private issue. My problem would be with those who are oath breakers, regardless of what the oath was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. By that criterion, no one would hold office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-01-07 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. And we all know how strongly chimpy feels about his oath to uphold the constitution
I mean, he writes a signing statement about it every chance he gets... :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 04:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC