INTERVIEW: Pennsylvania Rep. Brian Sims Talks DOMA, Gay Marriage, And Why Republicans Tried to Silence Him

This image is from: INTERVIEW: Pennsylvania Rep. Brian Sims Talks DOMA, Gay Marriage, And Why Republicans Tried to Silence Him · «Back to article

8 Comments

Homophile
woof

Jul 3, 2013 at 6:26 pm · @Reply ·
1EqualityUSA
We will find our place in the sun. The “uglies” are out in force because they know the gig is up. Hate is so yesterday.

Jul 3, 2013 at 9:28 pm · @Reply ·
fredo777
A. If Mr. Sims is to be taken at his word, Rep. Metcalfe is an asshole.

B. I wish Rep. Sims every success in his efforts to bring marriage equality to the state of PA.

C. Gotdayum! He is fine. Reminds me of Chris Salvatore, also. Another very handsome man.

Jul 3, 2013 at 10:05 pm · @Reply ·
queerbec
I grew up in Butler PA and I can tell you that it is filled with people like Rep. Metcalfe who believe that their religion and their Christ gives thematic free pass to spout the most hateful sentiments in the name of The Lord. Their religion is so deeply ingrained that any attempt to get them to see things differently is viewed with suspicion and fear. They believe they must evangelize the Word of The Lord under penalty of hellfire and damnation. It is their duty and obligation. This affords them with a self-righteousness and a superiority that is not only repugnant to the rest of us, but prevents them from bring open to new theological discussions, new translations of the Bible, and having to think for themselves. I am frankly shocked that more gay kids from Butler aren’t overdosing on the plethora of drugs that seem to permeate my old hometown or blowing their brains out with the thousands of huntin’ rifles present in nearly 2 out of every three homes. But I made it out and hope and pray that my LGBT sisters and brothers can continue to do so!

Jul 4, 2013 at 2:26 am · @Reply ·
Teleny
Rep. Brian Sims is very handsome. I am always proud of lbgt folks in public roles. Way to go Brian!

Queerbeck is right. PA has been described as Pittsburgh and Philly on the ends and Alabama in the middle.

Jul 4, 2013 at 5:40 am · @Reply ·
manjoguy
Well, let’s say “…SOME Republicans.” We had a Republican (Richard Tisei) gay, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage candidate here in Massachusetts running for a House seat in 2012. He probably would have won had not our awful democrat state machine put up a third(straw) candidate in the race. And, talking about “silencing” people, I am still appalled at how Obamacare was rammed down our throats at the last minute with an attitude of “you have to vote it before you know what’s in it.” Thank you Nancy Pelosi, a despicable politician. Many politicians are vile (and it’s not a partisan characteristic).

Jul 4, 2013 at 4:53 pm · @Reply ·
#1SouthAfrican
Brian is simply gorgeous and a college football player at that, yummo! Hard to believe he’s single.

Jul 7, 2013 at 5:00 am · @Reply ·
David
“The ‘Right’ of the People to discriminate based on ‘Religious Liberty’ and ‘States’ Rights’ vs. ‘Constitutional Law’ by D. N. Flint”

Sen. Marco Rubio, Former Gov. Jeb Bush and Rep. Daryl Metcalfe (R-Butler) all ask me to respect their ‘religious liberty’ because their civil rights matter more than my civil rights AND MY religious liberty. Now Jeb does admit that being able to marry the guy I love IS a civil right. Back in the day, some would say “That’s real white of ya Jeb.”

I’m beginning to understand the entitlement issues Republicans really have. But as for ‘religious liberty’ and ‘civil rights’ let’s start with what we chose as the ‘Supreme Law of the Land’. Then we will look at how States and the People chose on their own to join a FEDERAL REPUBLIC and relinquish certain personal rights in order to benefit from that Republic.

‘Supreme Law of the Land’: “….This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but NO RELIGIOUS TEST SHALL EVER BE REQUIRED as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” – Article VI.

Religious views are not to be used as a qualification for picking who we vote for. Religious views get no special rights to ignore Federal Laws. When people of a certain area decided to ASK to become a State they agreed to certain conditions and procedures. They gave up a certain amount of personal ‘sovereignty’ in order to enjoy the blessings of a ‘more perfect Union’.

“Religious Liberty”: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” – Amendment 1.

This does not give you a religious excuse to violate civil law. “States’ Rights” do not give States the right to show religious preference any more than they can deny a citizen to publicly express his religious views. Just remember the difference between the guys who stone children because of their religious beliefs and the bakers, photographers or cops who claim to follow scripture (See Rom. 13:1-5).

“States’ Rights”: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” – Amendment IX and “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” – Amendment X.
Note that the 9th talks of Rights whereas the 10th uses the word “POWERS” of the State and the people. There is no “States Rights” in the U.S. Constitution. Nor is there a ‘religious right’ for the people to deny Federal Rights to other citizens.
Look for “States’ Rights” in Article IV [The States]
Section 1 [Full Faith and Credit]
”Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.”
Section 2 [Privileges and Immunities…]”The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states….”
Section 3 [Admission of States]”New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress….”
Section 4 [Guarantees to States]”The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

(Wow, no religious exemption from civil rights) I hope certain ‘religious libertarians’ took notes. There will be a test later (Lev. 19:18 and Matt. 25:31-46).

Jan 8, 2015 at 12:40 pm · @Reply ·