Buchanan Calls for Civil Disobedience

[debrand]

Pat Buchanan calls for civil disobedience if same sex marriage is allowed. I'm not certain how this would work.

Calling upon anti-LGBT Americans to resist anti-discrimination laws the way Americans resisted Prohibition, he urged them to freely break the laws, even as he compared the new laws to civil rights legislation from the 1960s.

“Imagine the situation in America today if priests and pastors were telling congregations they need not obey civil rights laws. They would be denounced as racists. Church tax exemptions would be in peril,†he said. “Something akin to this could be in the cards if the homosexual rights movement is victorious – a public rejection of the new laws by millions and a refusal by many to respect or obey them.â€

He concluded by darkly warning, “The culture war in America today may be seen as squabbles in a day-care center compared to what is coming. A new era of civil disobedience may be at hand.â€

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/16/p ... obedience/

[Guest]

So people against gay marriage aren't going to marry someone of the same sex? Brilliant. Why didn't someone think of this sooner?

[samurai_sarah]

So. . . more jaywalking?

[GodsKnickers]

So. . . more jaywalking?

Woohoo! :cracking-up: Targets! Woo!

[AnywhereButHere]

Woohoo! :cracking-up: Targets! Woo!

I'd treat it more like a slalom course. New Olympic sport maybe? :D

[MissA]

I am participating in civil disobedience against same-sex marriage RIGHT NOW as I have yet to marry a woman or solemnize a gay wedding. Guess that Pat Buchanan is more persuasive than I thought.

[GodsKnickers]

I'd treat it more like a slalom course. New Olympic sport maybe? :D

Makes more sense than ping pong.

[nelliebelle1197]

So what are they going to do in protest? Eat at Chick Fil A? Nothing will happen to churches that refuse to marry gay people because GAY PEOPLE WILL NOT GO THERE TO BE MARRIED! Just like interracial couples don't go to unwelcoming churches. The logic is just so... not there

[burntnorton]

Couple things. First , I'm not getting the parallel to Prohibition. Leaving aside whether breaking the law can really be characterized as civil disobedience when it involved directly supporting armed thugs who terrorized anyone who pissed them off, what is the banned substance in this scenario? Polyester leisure suits? Second, I'm not sure the participants in the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s would characterize their movement as pushing on an open door. Let's ask Rev. King . . . Oh. Right. Never mind that when it came to advocating for racial justice for the first few centuries of our country's existence, white Christian leaders were mostly silent or active opponents. Just ask the Southern Baptists.

How the duck did this incoherent drivel get published? It's just not up to the Pat Buchanan standards I remember from my youth. Hateful but at least internally comprehensible.

[Knight of Ni]

They might as well be saying "If you legalize gay marriage I'm going to hold my breath until my face turns blue" :disgust:

[burntnorton]

They might as well be saying "If you legalize gay marriage I'm going to hold my breath until my face turns blue" :disgust:

If only. Then at least they'd have to shut up for a good 5 minutes at a time.

[bananacat]

So, his idea of civil disobedience is to do exactly what is an always will be legal? So civil obedience then? Wow, some people have such a martyr complex.

I'm gonna go drive the speed limit and then continue not robbing banks, as civil disobedience. It's tough to just keep doing what's legal, but a statement really needs to be made.

[bananacat]

So what are they going to do in protest? Eat at Chick Fil A? Nothing will happen to churches that refuse to marry gay people because GAY PEOPLE WILL NOT GO THERE TO BE MARRIED! Just like interracial couples don't go to unwelcoming churches. The logic is just so... not there

Even if gay people did go there to get married, the church could refuse and that would be perfectly legal, just like churches don't have to marry people of different faiths or even anyone who fails their arbitrary marriage classes or counseling. It's already perfectly legal for churches to refuse to marry couples that can be legally civilly married, and it will remain that way. The difference in making gay marriage legal everywhere is that the states will have issue marriage licenses to them. No religious group has any obligation to perform a religious ceremony for any couple.

There may be cases where religious-run companies will be forced to provide healthcare for same-sex spouses of employees against their preference, but at the point that they are running companies, especially hospitals, they are no longer just a church and if they don't want to be subject to the same labor laws then they should just take their religion out of the industry in the first place.