SB 707 and The Politics of Personal Destruction

March 16, 2010 | 12 comments | Posted in Politics | Tags: , , ,

The “tolerant” folks who support “same-sex marriage” seem more than willing to publicly threaten legislators who won’t vote their way. This week, a blogger at the PA Progressive website posted the following, referring to SB 707, the Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment:

“I spend a fair amount of time in Harrisburg. I know who is closeted. Any closeted Senator who votes for Eichelberger’s bill will be outed. I also know a State Senator who is wildly homophobic and is also an alcoholic. One of her rants will also be made public depending on her vote. This is fair warning.”

[UPDATED: to correct number of senators]
Who this woman Senator they threaten is we don’t know; there are four female Senators on the Judiciary Committee; three voted to kill SB 707 by tabling it. Whatever the case, it is “exhibit A” in the politics of personal destruction engaged in by many “same sex marriage” supporters.

12 Comments

Nathan Benefield

There are 4 women on the committee, and one (Sen. Orie) voted against tabling it.

Of course, it is quite possible none of them are either homophobic or alcoholic and this is just a good threat – like Elliot Ness claiming the judges name was in Al Capone’s ledger at the end of The Untouchables, when it wasn’t.

Reply
Tom Shaheen

I think it shows that if some folks on the opposing side cannot win on the merits, they quickly stoop to the personal threats and character assassination. Nothing “tolerant” or “inclusive” about that!

Reply
Michael Geer

Nate– thanks for the correction. Sen. Orie voted against tabling by proxy; I was counting the three female senators present at the vote.

Reply
Nathan Benefield

There are 4 women on the committee, and one (Sen. Orie) voted against tabling it.

Of course, it is quite possible none of them are either homophobic or alcoholic and this is just a good threat – like Elliot Ness claiming the judges name was in Al Capone’s ledger at the end of The Untouchables, when it wasn’t.

Reply
Tom Shaheen

I think it shows that if some folks on the opposing side cannot win on the merits, they quickly stoop to the personal threats and character assassination. Nothing “tolerant” or “inclusive” about that!

Reply
jonolan

You expect better from these people? Why? Why be shocked when they behave badly?

We are at war! Of course America’s enemies will use any and all tactics against us that they think will serve their cause.

Reply
jonolan

You expect better from these people? Why? Why be shocked when they behave badly?

We are at war! Of course America’s enemies will use any and all tactics against us that they think will serve their cause.

Reply
Eleanor

How sad that there are those who are ready to “bury” anyone opposed to their position rather than allow “the people” to decide what’s best for their families?

Let’s at least fight fair. A ballot referendum is the only way to know what the people want. Of course, intimidation, rhetoric and slander work much quicker.

Reply
Eleanor

How sad that there are those who are ready to “bury” anyone opposed to their position rather than allow “the people” to decide what’s best for their families?

Let’s at least fight fair. A ballot referendum is the only way to know what the people want. Of course, intimidation, rhetoric and slander work much quicker.

Reply
Thomas Waters

Interestingly, SB 707 would not have allowed anyone to decide “what is best for their family.” It merely attempts to force one’s definition of family on to other people, which is equally unfair and damaging.

Reply
Thomas Waters

Interestingly, SB 707 would not have allowed anyone to decide “what is best for their family.” It merely attempts to force one’s definition of family on to other people, which is equally unfair and damaging.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *