National committee resolution on gay marriage issues

"Whereas a majority of voters in the states of California, Arizona and Florida decided on November 4, 2008 that their state governments should not recognize marriages between two people of the same sex; and

"Whereas, although in a free society 'marriage' would
be of no concern to states (or government in any form), present conditions grant special privileges and immunities to those under formal marriage-contract, and

"Whereas discrimination against ANY voluntary segment of society by government entities is both abhorrent and a violation of the Bill of Rights ...

"Be it RESOLVED that the Boston Tea Party supports the rights of all people at home and abroad (including Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered (GLBT) people) to equal rights, privileges and immunities under the law and

"Be it further RESOLVED that the Boston Tea Party calls for an immediate repeal of all state and federal laws attempting or intending to restrict or define the term 'marriage.'"

Passed by consent of the national committee 6 aye, 0 nay, 1 abstaining, on 16 November 2008.

Comments

sallyfisher333:

i have no problem with gays, as long as they don't pressure younger, more impressionable gays into getting gender reassignment surgery. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m all for LGBT rights, it’s just that I think their line of thinking is a slippery slope similar to those who have impulsive urges to modify their bodies, and consequently end up ruining them. I’m all for gender reassignment operations if the person genuinely feels that they would feel more in harmony with themselves if they had a sex change, but the issue is of whether they will feel that way in a few years, or even a few months. When people get tattoos and piercings, sometimes they regret them when they’re older because they no longer have the same mindset that they did, or are simply sick of it. Unless it’s a necessary operation (implants for
breast cancer surgery, etc..), we already have seen many cases where elective surgeries lead to an addiction. I’m just afraid that LGBT people might be going down this same path by being so eager to undergo an operation. All I’m asking is that they try to do everything in their power to be comfortable and accepting of the way they were made before they decide to go get work done.

annie12:

Gay marriages have become the major issue now a days where they ask for equal justice for them.What satisfaction do they get by marrying of same sex?

online dating

http://www.spiceoflife.com.au

davegs:

I wonder how any one can save marriage these days when all you see in the news are politicians cheating and recently Tiger Woods.

hale2thenathan:

....or are people making too many of these decisions on emotion and not thought, and care? I know, I don't want to say it, I have liked some gay guys or might have I tend not to ask, prefer it be their business. None-the-less I think the lack of debate and reason has been used on an unsentimental level to even permit this lack of understanding of that sexist scientific truth there are two different but potentially equal genders.

planetaryjim:

Is it magnanimity to say that the genders are potentially equal? Or some sort of left-handed compliment?

It seems to me that the genders are as equal, and as different, as the individual members of the genders want to be. What business is it of yours, or the government's whether two or more people who love each other want to make a lifetime commitment?

Regards,

Jim
http://www.cafepress.com/bostontee

hale2thenathan:

"The constitution is for moral and religious people." in his defense of the constitution.

hale2thenathan:

In fact we should be against marriage benefits that single people are not allowed to have.
Also marriage only has relevance under religion. religion as old as Zarathustra who defined it as being between a man and a woman and so this would violate religious freedom intefearing in a old sacrament.
Granted Pagan Romans and Greeks ridiculed it as a post wrestling event, post Zoroaster.
Now I think a sacrament, given name changes, and a theology should be registered openly for examination to make sure they are not beaking with theology and are acting as a secret society-cult and are a true monotheism. Many "christian" churches marry Gays violating Matt 19, in same vain or vanity divorse. Would this make them genuine? No a fraud.
Physics, does it not govern physical reality? Does it not say opposites attract and similars detract, now this is not like friends who have common likes and dislikes, this goes to the courtship that normally ends mating (or child making).
We do not live in a jungle as a primitive animal rumping someone over turf. That is why nature does it.
So as for Libertarians for Life there are many who scientifically oppose it.

I do support over ruling all judicial activism and binding referendums that violate a state's right to a Republican Form of Government.

planetaryjim:

You seem to be ignoring the large number of Biblical marriages between one man and several women.

If six hundred wives were good enough for Solomon, who are you to complain?

Regards,

Jim
http://www.cafepress.com/bostontee

LiveFree:

“Party like it’s 1773” is the rally cry, but this decision flies in the face of appealing to historical antecedent!

Do you think the original Tea Party participants (and the Founders) would have supported gay marriage? ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Look at history: Anti-sodomy (read same-sex unions) laws were British law beginning with King Henry’s reign in the 1500’s. It was a CRIME to engage in sodomy and punishable by death. This was the framework of the Founders. The original 13 colonies adopted such laws, making sodomy illegal in the States, also. (By the mid 1900’s, all 50 of the United States had criminalized sodomy with various penalties for this ‘crime against nature’.) The Patriots would not have supported any notion that ‘same-sex marriage’ was an acceptable form of sodomy!!!!

How can you appeal to people via American tradition while supporting a modern moral stance that is completely contrary to what those same Christian Patriots would reject?

Sodomy is NOT sanctified by legitimizing it as marriage!

deepcover187:

If people back in the 1500's and so on were as informed as we are today, then maybe they would have looked at homosexuals a little differently. Or maybe not, who knows. But all I know now is that we must push for progress. The constitution allows us to make progress that is morally correct and protects peoples freedoms. So how can heterosexuals say that homosexuals cannot get married even though it has no effect on them whatsoever. It is a matter of opinions, and the opinions of many take away the liberties of a few. This is not a case of moral ethics. The majority opinion on murder is correct because murder steals another individuals liberty. So the majority should be supporting gay marriage because it is supporting freedom. Maybe not personal freedom but you are taking a bit of humility and giving up your own personal opinion to allow others to enjoy the freedoms you cherish.

planetaryjim:

It may not have come to your attention, but the year is presently 2009. British laws from the reign of King Henry - and, gosh, there were a bunch of kings with that name - aren't applicable. You may recall that we fought a war called the American Revolutionary War to kick the British crown out of our lives. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If you want a political party that tells you what you can and cannot do in the privacy of your bedroom, go from us in peace. May your chains lay heavily upon you, may they chafe and bind, and may history forget you were ever our countryman.

We're appealing to the traditions of freedom and prosperity. The American Revolution was started with anger and hatred toward the abuses and usurpations of the British crown and parliament. It continued with powerful words about all men created equal, endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, with the now provably false idea that governments are instituted to protect these rights.

Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that your Bible endorses slavery. Indeed, Leviticus, where I suspect you spend a lot of time in your bible study sessions, discusses a great many rules for keeping slaves.

Rejecting negro slavery is "a modern moral stance that is completely contrary to what those same Christian Patriots would reject..." so when you want to condemn us for validating the humanity of our brothers and sisters who have different sexual preferences, perhaps you should also condemn us for opposing slavery. Or are you wanting to bring that back, too?

You can have a political party with Southern secessionists. I think the League of the South has many fine men and women in it, not all of whom are completely crazed bigots. I've been to their events and met many of them. I recognise the injustice of the military occupation of the South.

You can have a political party with Christian extremists who think freedom of speech means censoring adult literature, banning books, and closing porno shops. Try the Constitution Party.

We're not conservatives. We're libertarians. We aren't going to tell immigrants that they aren't allowed to have freedom. We aren't going to tell blacks that they aren't allowed freedom. We aren't going to tell gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered persons, queer, or poly-amorous persons that they cannot have freedom. Mormons can marry as many people as they please, in my opinion.

Bigotry was a way of life in 1773. It is a way of death today. I suggest you choose life.

Bryan J.:

Jim,

I applaud you for what I have seen is lacking in some Tea party circles: A grounding in basic justice and common sense.

One time, I counter-protested the anti-immigration signs of a tea party group in my hometown in NY, and I was quite the target for all sorts of slurs, including the homophobic brand.

hale2thenathan:

Transgendered is a chromasomal fraud. Your born with a YX and XX or sometime with one more X and surgery does not change that. Hermaphrodytes have rights as true "born that way" and no one was a distant same sex parent of someone who got his first approval of one sexually and became black.
I find the skin color claim a matter of color ignorance, I won't call you a racist though, I know better. Mistaken.