Connect with us

Cuccinelli: My ‘Beliefs About The Personal Challenge Of Homosexuality Haven’t Changed’

Published

on

Usually when you think of religious anti-gay bigots, the image of an older person, say someone in their 60’s, 70’s or 80’s, comes to mind. Think, the late Jerry Falwell or octogenarian Pat Robertson, or even Maggie Gallagher, who’s 52. And given that America’s Catholics today support same-sex marriage at a higher rate than the rest of America — the majority of America, about 55 percent, already support marriage equality — you wouldn’t necessarily expect a 44-year old east coast Catholic to be as a big an anti-gay bigot as Ken Cuccinelli is. And you’d be wrong.

Ken Cuccinelli, who is running for governor of Virginia against Democrat Terry McAuliffe, on Saturday morning told voters that he is standing his ground when it comes to homosexuality and same-sex marriage. And that ground in the recent past has included comments that gay people have no souls, are self-destructive, and that “homosexual acts” are “intrinsically wrong.”

LOOK: Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli Launches New Website Claiming Sodomy Laws Must Be Reinstated To Stop Pedophiles

The radical right-wing Republican attorney general of Virginia was asked Saturday morning by PBS’ Judy Woodruff at the Virginia Bar Association gubernatorial debate if he still believes “same-sex acts are against nature and are harmful to society,” as he said a few years ago.

Cuccinelli’s response was straightforward:

“My personal beliefs about the personal challenge of homosexuality haven’t changed.”

But the married 44-year old Roman Catholic and father of seven didn’t expand on what “the personal challenge of homosexuality” actually is, leaving many, at least on Twitter, to wonder — and leaving Cuccinelli the laughing stock of the week.

Cuccinelli is so anti-gay that among his first acts upon taking office in 2010 was — literally unprovoked and out of nowhere — writing the University of Virginia Board of Governors to tell them that they did not have the constitutional authority to protect LGBT people from discrimination.

LOOK: In Virginia (Yes, Virginia) The Majority Of Voters Now Support Same-Sex Marriage

In the past, as a state senator running for AG in 2009, Cuccinelli said:

“My view is that homosexual acts, not homosexuality, but homosexual acts are wrong. They’re intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural law based country it’s appropriate to have policies that reflect that. … They don’t comport with natural law. I happen to think that it represents (to put it politely; I need my thesaurus to be polite) behavior that is not healthy to an individual and in aggregate is not healthy to society.”

And in 2008 Cuccinelli, told the Virginia Family Foundation that when “you look at the homosexual agenda, I cannot support something that I believe brings nothing but self-destruction, not only physically but of their soul.”

Watch (apologies — audio very low):

//www.youtube.com/embed/BnJ-c7MU7_Q

[View the story “”The personal challenge of homosexuality”” on Storify]

Hat tip: Blue Virginia, Think Progress

 

Related:

Watch: Lawrence O’Donnell Wants You To Ask Ken Cuccinelli If He’s Had Oral Sex

Jon Stewart Looks At Ken Cuccinelli’s Attempt To Put Sodomy Laws Back On The Books

On Our Radar – Ken Cuccinelli – The Thrust Behind Restoring Sodomy Laws

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

RIGHT WING EXTREMISM

Iowa School Board Votes Down Mask Mandate After Some Parents Threaten to ‘Defund’ Schools by Pulling Kids Out

Published

on

An Iowa school board Thursday night voted not to institute a mask mandate despite medical professionals and its legal counsel supporting protecting students and staff. Coronavirus cases across the state have skyrocketed by 44% over the past 14 days.

An anonymous Facebook group claiming to be run by local parents had demanded the Waukee Community School District (WCSD) “pay” for wanting to implement a mask mandate. The small group wrote a post on the social media site (image below) describing how parents could cause the school district – ultimately, the students – “financial troubles for disregarding our rights as parents to decide for our own children.”

“We know you are fed up with not being heard or respected by our school board and superintendent about your right to choose masks or not for your students,” the post reads.

“What can be done? MAKE WCSD PAY!”

After claiming that each child is worth $8000 to the school district’s operating budget (schools are funded by the number of days and the number of students in attendance) detailing how to unenroll children from school, the post says:

“Remember, WE WILL NOT COMPLY. Instruct your child to never mask if instructed to do so.”

The group also ran a Facebook ad uring parents to “Email the school board members if you have not yet done so, to let them know your thoughts on masking your children.”

In the subject line: We will not comply- No mask mandates. Then in the body of email tell them briefly about your children and the school they attend. Let them know how masks negatively impacted your kids.

Journalist Dave Price of NBC affiliate WHO tweeted the Facebook post:

The Des Moines Register adds that the school board said it received about 800 emails for and against masks. Superintendent Brad Buck called those that threatened to defund the school system “disturbing.”

The “motion to implement a mask mandate from pre-K to 12th grade failed, with only one board member — Alex Smith, who is a physician — voting ‘yes.'”

There are 49 studies that prove masks are effective in combatting the spread of the coronavirus.

Here’s WHO’s report:

 

Continue Reading

News

Legal Experts and Critics Slam Justice Clarence Thomas for ‘Speaking Out Against Something He Is Actively Doing’

Published

on

Critics are  observing Constitution Day by responding to remarks U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas made on Thursday, when he blasted the media for criticizing decisions from the nation’s highest court and warning federal judges to not wade in to political discussions.

“When we begin to venture into the legislative or executive branch lanes, those of us, particularly in the federal judiciary with lifetime appointments, are asking for trouble,” Justice Thomas said, CNN’s Supreme Court reporter Ariane de Vogue reports, ironically observing that Justice Thomas made those remarks “during a sweeping lecture at the University of Notre Dame that also touched on themes of equality, race and the state of the country.”

The CNN report adds:

Of all the members of the high court, Thomas has made his views on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case that legalized abortion across the US, crystal clear. In 2007, he said that he believed that Roe and the follow-up decision called Planned Parenthood v. Casey had “no basis in the Constitution.” And in 2020, he said that Roe is “grievously wrong for many reasons, but the most fundamental is that its core holding — that the Constitution protects a woman’s right to abort her unborn child — finds no support in the text of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Thomas also on Thursday “seemed to nod to the controversy” of “so-called court packing”:

“We have lost the capacity” as leaders “to not allow others to manipulate our institutions when we don’t get the outcomes that we like,” he said.

Critics, including legal experts are weighing on on Justice Thomas’s remarks, blasting him for, as Daily Beast editor-at-large Molly Jong-Fast says, “speaking out against something he is actively doing.”

Related: Justice Clarence Thomas Has Been Secretly Lobbying Senators to Get a Trump Judicial Nominee Confirmed

Keith Boykin, a CNN political commentator who earned his law degree at Harvard and served in the Clinton White House was even more pointed:

“Clarence Thomas didn’t seem too worried about ‘destroying our institutions’ when he cast the deciding vote to make Bush president in 2000 or to gut the Voting Rights Act in 2013 or when he sat silently from 2017-2021 as Trump trashed our institutions.”

Dr. Miranda Yaver, a political science professor (US law, public policy, health policy) at Oberlin blasted Justice Thomas, saying that “claiming that the Supreme Court isn’t political is nonsense and we all know it. FWIW, whenever I teach Constitutional Law and students go, ‘Who in the hell would write that opinion??’ the answer is invariably Clarence Thomas.”

Norman Ornstein, a political scientist and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), laughed:

VOX senior correspondent Ian Millhiser, author of “The Agenda: How a Republican Supreme Court is Reshaping America,” also criticizes Thomas’s apparent hypocrisy:

RELATED:

Clarence Thomas’ Wife Is Helping Trump Purge ‘Snakes’ From the White House — and Replace Them With Fox News Regulars

Clarence Thomas: Slavery Didn’t Take Away Dignity So How Can Same-Sex Marriage Bestow It?

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Sarah Palin Proudly Declares Herself a ‘White Common Sense Conservative’ – and Unvaccinated

Published

on

Sarah Palin is back on TV. At least, she was Thursday night, on Fox News’ late night political satire show “Gutfeld!” where she announced she is not vaccinated and proudly explained why – basically getting the science wrong by leaving out important scientific findings.

“I am one of those white common sense conservatives,” Palin told host Greg Gurfeld and guest Dr. Drew Pinsky. “I believe in science and I have not taken the shot.”

“One, because the waitress never came back to ask me,” she said sarcastically, “because I do believe in science. And the Fauci-ism of the day back then was if you had COVID – I’ve had COVID – well then Mother Nature was creating an immunity and, and even today they say you know you’re 27 percent more immune.”

Dr. Drew chimed in to claim it’s “27 times” more immune.

But both are getting the science wrong – by not telling the whole story.

The highly-respected journal Science last month published an article making very clear why Palin is wrong in its title: “Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine—but vaccination remains vital.”

And while it states up front that “Israelis who had an infection were more protected against the Delta coronavirus variant than those who had an already highly effective COVID-19 vaccine,” it adds this critical information: Unvaccinated COVID survivors are more likely to contract the deadly disease again than those who have had COVID and just one dose of the Pfizer vaccine.

Researchers, Science reports, “compared more than 14,000 people who had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and were still unvaccinated with an equivalent number of previously infected people who received one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The team found that the unvaccinated group was twice as likely to be reinfected as the singly vaccinated.”

Watch:

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.