Gay Marriage | News | Providence | Rhode Island

'Traditionalist' Rhode Island Gov Joins Anti-Gay Marriage Campaign

The  anti-gay National Organization for Marriage (who are behind the hideous ad I posted earlier) have gone into high gear with an arsenal of robo-calls and campaigns across New England. This morning in Providence, Rhode Island, they held a launch for its new anti-gay campaign attended by the state's governor, WPRI reports:

Carcieri "A group against gay marriage has a very prominent politician in its corner. Gov. Donald Carcieri and his wife, Sue, joined the Rhode Island Chapter of the National Organization for Marriage Wednesday morning at the State House as it launched its new media campaign. The campaign, which supports marriage between a man and a woman, will run in several states. It's being launched just as Rhode Island's General Assembly is about to consider legislation that would allow same-sex couples married in another state get divorced in Rhode Island. During the news conference, Carcieri called himself a 'traditionalist' and said the best upbringing for a child is in a home with a mother and father. He said he is not anti-gay, rather he believes the issue should be decided by voters, and not by courts or legislators."

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. When the courts decide, "traditionalists" claim that it needs to come from the legislature.

    When the legislature decides, "traditionalists" claim that it needs to come from the voters.

    If voters ever decide, who ever will the "traditionalists" claim needs to make the decision?

    Civil marriage supposedly isn't a "constitutional right," but good lord I'm sure that would change in a second if suddenly a court decided the country didn't owe it to straight people to marry them.

    So tired of disingenuous fuckery wrapped up in hateful, stupid, illogical and unreasonable rhetoric.

    Posted by: Ugh | Apr 8, 2009 12:47:19 PM


  2. What democrat is running against him in the primary? (So I know where to direct my check book.)

    Posted by: Ryan | Apr 8, 2009 12:49:52 PM


  3. BTW - this may be a case where the Republican is actually better on our issue than the Democrat, should no one challenge the asshat incumbent in the primary. It looks like Lincoln Chaffee will run against Carcieri.

    I would never have imagined in a million years a situation where I'd vote for a Republican over a Democrat, but Carcieri is a bigot and I bet Chaffee would at least support civil unions. (He's pretty socially liberal and has on more than one occasion contemplating leaving the Rethuglicans).

    Posted by: Ryan | Apr 8, 2009 12:54:38 PM


  4. @Ryan:

    Carcieri is a Republican, and is term-limited in 2010.

    Lincoln Chafee is now an independent, is exploring a run for governor, and supports marriage equality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Chafee).

    Posted by: Brian | Apr 8, 2009 1:03:50 PM


  5. Excellent points, Ugh. And don't forget the one about God ordaining marriage between a man and a woman. You would not want to argue with God, would you? Of course, they set themselves up as the authorities on what God intended.

    No matter how we win, our opponents will always grasp another straw from someplace.

    Posted by: Voet | Apr 8, 2009 1:04:37 PM


  6. 1. Carcieri is a Republican. RI (like much of New England) has a strong tradition of Republican governors to balance out the overwhelmingly Democratic legislatures. Therefore, there won't be a Democrat running against him in a primary. Plus, Carcieri is term-limited and therefore cannot run in 2010.

    2. Lincoln Chafee is no longer a Republican - he is an Independent. He supports marriage equality. He is considering a run for governor. Chafee is extremely popular in RI and really only lost because he had an "R" next to his name. My gut says if Chafee runs for governor, he is a shoe-in (RI Democratic candidates for governor have always been maddeningly pathetic). Read his wikipedia page - he is more liberal than most Democrats http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Chafee#cite_note-0

    3. The RI legislature should STFU about marriage quality until a new governor comes on board in 2011 - unless they are quite sure they can override a veto.

    Posted by: Naha | Apr 8, 2009 1:09:10 PM


  7. Uh - if it were up to voters, women's suffrage and desegregation might not have happened until much later. Get real. The majority has no right to dictate the rights of minorities. This is exactly why "activist" judges have historically come to protect the rights of minorities. These morons obviously couldn't pass a high school government exam, because they don't understand (or care) how government is supposed to work.

    Posted by: tstas | Apr 8, 2009 1:16:48 PM


  8. Utterly predictable goal-post moving, as Ugh astutely points out.

    Posted by: Glenn | Apr 8, 2009 1:30:13 PM


  9. So let's dismantle all the small-r republican and elective aspects of our government and become a pure small-d democracy. Yeah, that'll work well in a country of 300 million. Or is the procedure for this issue only?

    The combination (I almost wrote "marriage") of senselessness and hatefulness in these folks is breathtaking.

    Posted by: Bruce | Apr 8, 2009 1:30:44 PM


  10. Well said, Bruce. What this country really needs, according to this assjuice and other conservative fuck sticks like Gingrich, is a tyranny of the majority.

    Posted by: MikeMick | Apr 8, 2009 1:39:07 PM


  11. For Catholics world-wide, traditional marriage is for life and divorce is not an option. Does this mean that all these policiticans who are gung-ho for the vote of the people on traditional marriage would agree to let "the people" vote on whether or not divorce is legal? Heck - let's put everything to a vote: all in favor of a $1,000 salary cap for all elected officials raise your hand. motion carries, guv'ner.

    Posted by: bostonbeardad | Apr 8, 2009 1:48:06 PM


  12. Carcieri has been a major roadblock to gay marriage in RI for years. This despite the state having a real social libretarian streak and a gay mayor in Providence. Hopefully some good will come out of RI's dismal economic situation and the GOV will be ousted soon.

    Posted by: adamexcess | Apr 8, 2009 2:13:11 PM


  13. Narcissists and Conflict
    by Kathy Krajco

    One simple but easy-to-forget thing about narcissists is that, unlike normal people, they don't mind conflict. They enjoy it and come alive.

    Conflict makes normal people uncomfortable. We try to minimize it in our dealings with others. Oddly, we love it in fiction (Conflict is the gunpowder of fiction, and it's near relative - controversy - is the gunpowder of journalism. Maintaining constant conflict is the secret to storytelling success). But note that this is "safe" conflict. In real life we hate what we love to see characters go through in fiction.

    Narcissists have a whole different attitude toward conflict. They use it strategically to manipulate. They seek conflict. They become impossible people, flying into conflict with you over anything you think, say, do, feel, or wear. As if THEY have the right to determine what you say, think, do, feel, or wear.

    This isn't just arrogance. It's a game in which you're damned if you do and damned if you don't, because they are being deliberately impossible to please.

    When this is the motive, what happens when you try to defuse conflict, when you try to appease? The narcissist sees that as a sign of weakness, as sign of backing down. It just makes him/her bolder. This is no testing run at you anymore: now he/she is serious about running you over. He/She sees your "weakness" as REASON to come on stronger = to get madder and even more impossible. It's how he's/she’s controlling you.

    In other words, trying to smooth it over, trying to appease the narcissist just backfires, making him/her more aggressive, not less aggressive.

    So, don't do it.

    This is just one of many examples of how normal human behavior backfires in Wonderland, simply because of a narcissist's alien mentality.

    Posted by: JD | Apr 8, 2009 2:29:17 PM


  14. "Not up to the judicial or legislative branches" ?????

    What is this daft man's problem? How clueless can these old geezers get?!

    Well guess what, we elect legislators and we have an EQUAL branch called the judicial branch. Go back to middle school government class, geezer.

    Posted by: KFLO | Apr 8, 2009 2:56:50 PM


  15. The Rhode Island General Assembly is about 4/5 Democratic. The question now is how many Rhode Island Democrats would support a same-sex marriage bill? If most do, then Carcieri can go suck it. If not, we're on hold until he leaves office in two years, assuming he's not replaced by an equally troglodyte Republican.

    Posted by: Ben | Apr 8, 2009 5:54:23 PM


  16. A few things, some of which have already been pointed out:

    1) Don Carcieri is a term-limited governor.
    2) Lincoln Chaffee (former Republican senator, now independent) is considering a run for governor in 2010. He is for marriage equality.
    4) The likely potential Democratic candidates for governor (Frank Caprio, Elizabeth Roberts, Patrick Lynch) all support/will not block SSM, with Caprio being the least enthusiastic, citing his Catholic beliefs. They are all better than likely Republican candidate Joe Trillo, who is a bit of a long shot in 2010 and supports only civil unions. All of this, naturally, is better than Carcieri, who is bosom buddies with NOM.
    3) The RI Legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic, but leadership almost unanimously still opposes SSM, despite having an openly gay Speaker of the House and an openly gay mayor in the capital city. RI has a strong Catholic tradition; as a result many Democratic legislators are afraid to vote for SSM.
    4) All of RI's foot-dragging on SSM is especially ironic since the state was founded on the basis of freedom of and freedom from religion.

    Posted by: Stephen | Apr 9, 2009 2:20:13 AM


  17. A few things, some of which have already been pointed out:

    1) Don Carcieri is a term-limited governor.
    2) Lincoln Chaffee (former Republican senator, now independent) is considering a run for governor in 2010. He is for marriage equality.
    4) The likely potential Democratic candidates for governor (Frank Caprio, Elizabeth Roberts, Patrick Lynch) all support/will not block SSM, with Caprio being the least enthusiastic, citing his Catholic beliefs. They are all better than likely Republican candidate Joe Trillo, who is a bit of a long shot in 2010 and supports only civil unions. All of this, naturally, is better than Carcieri, who is bosom buddies with NOM.
    3) The RI Legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic, but leadership almost unanimously still opposes SSM, despite having an openly gay Speaker of the House and an openly gay mayor in the capital city. RI has a strong Catholic tradition; as a result many Democratic legislators are afraid to vote for SSM.
    4) All of RI's foot-dragging on SSM is especially ironic since the state was founded on the basis of freedom of and freedom from religion.

    Posted by: Stephen | Apr 9, 2009 2:20:13 AM


  18. Just a note to the pro gay marriage folk out there that stated "SSM is especially ironic since the state was founded on the basis of freedom of and freedom from religion"
    The preamble states this and I quote
    "We, the people of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing upon our endeavors to secure and to transmit the same, unimpaired, to succeeding generations, do ordain and establish this Constitution of government."
    As can be seen here God is in the forefront of this Proud State's Origins and nowhere in the Bible does it state that ssm or even ss relationships coincide with the God's plan. Look again my friends. You may WISH to gain some freedom but in fact it has no place in comparison to our States Constitution. Peace

    Posted by: Adam | Jul 7, 2009 11:00:53 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «HRC's Joe Solmonese and Iowa Rep. Steve King on Marriage Equality« «