Congresswoman and nominee for the 2012 Republican Presidential nomination; Michele Bachmann
An Iowa Group called “The Family Leader” is circulating a Pledge to the 2012 Republican Presidential Candidates, which Michele Bachmann has signed, that states that homosexuality is a choice, a sin, and a public health risk, that porn should be banned, and that Sharia Law should be rejected.
Text from the pledge;
– HOMOSEXUALITY IS A CHOICE: The preface to the pledge reads, “Social protections…have been evaporating as we have collectively ‘debased the currency’ of marriage…in complete absence of empirical proof, that non-heterosexual inclination are genetically determined, irresistible and akin to innate traits like race, gender and eye color; as well as anti-scientific bias which holds, against all empirical evidence, that homosexual behavior in particular, and sexual promiscuity in general, optimizes individual or public health.” Footnote 8 reiterates this notion.
– HOMOSEXUALITY IS LIKE POLYGAMY, ADULTERY, POLYANDRY: Vow 4 requires the candidate to pledge “Vigorous opposition to any redefinition of the Institution of Marriage…through statutory, bureaucratic, or court-imposed recognition of intimate unions which are bigamous, polygamous, polyandrous, same-sex.”
– HOMOSEXUALITY IS A PUBLIC HEALTH RISK: Footnote 4 claims that homosexuality causes shorter life expectancy and a higher probability of a long list of sexually transmitted diseases. The Leader has previously compared same-sex marriage to second-hand smoking.
– SEX IS BETTER AFTER MARRIAGE: Vow 5 requires the candidate to support the notion that “married people enjoy better health, better sex.”
– PORNOGRAPHY SHOULD BE BANNED: Vow 9 stipulates that the candidate must “support human protection of women and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy” and protect them from “seduction into promiscuity and all forms of pornography…and other types of coercion or stolen innocence.”
– REJECT SHARIA ISLAM: Vow 11 requires the candidate to reject Sharia law.
Via The Des Moines Register;
Presidential candidates who sign the pledge must agree to personal fidelity to his or her spouse, the appointment of “faithful constitutionalists” as judges, opposition to any redefinition of marriage, and prompt reform of uneconomic and anti-marriage aspects of welfare policy, tax policy and divorce law.
The Marriage Vow also outlines support for the legal advocacy for the federal Defense of Marriage Act, humane efforts to protect women and children, rejection of Sharia Islam, safeguards for all married and unmarried U.S. military service members, and commitment to downsizing government and the burden upon American families.
In addition, candidates are asked to recognize that “robust childrearing and reproduction is beneficial to U.S. demographic, economic, strategic and actuarial health and security.”
Alice Stewart, a Bachmann aide, said the congresswoman had no qualms about signing the Family Leader’s pledge. “She has been married for over 30 years and has a strong marriage and faith.”
I need some clarity. What if I ama hetrosexual, in a marrige with a person of the opposite sex, but we enjoy anal sex with each other?
Or is only anal sex with same-sex people an abomination?
Is this women for real?
I love anal sex and porn so you can go kill yourself =D
Hey Taj Bozeman.
About the homosexuals having greater risk about sexual diseases. You may be right about men but so you know homosexuals are not only men, also women. What about lesbian? you haven’t count them. So your comment still incomplete and therefore not entirely true because lesbians are also part of the gay community.
And about homosexuality being a choice, you just mentioned that most part of Americans think is a choice but that doesn’t mean it is. You just mentioned their opinion which is just an opinion not a fact. So if you are going to say that homosexuality IS a choice mention a fact not just thinking. Their opinion can be based on prejudices and therefore it can be subjective, what the hell they know about homosexuality? they can be saying something based on ignorance.
And since your comment lack of facts and is based on the opinion of other people that may or may not know about the subject. It is irrelevant.
She’s running for President and doesn’t know what powers that office holds? It sure as heck isn’t making laws or deciding if they are Constitutional.
I don’t know what bothers me more, a crazy bigot like Bachman running for office, the people who in large numbers support her or the lack of anger over her statement about African Americans and slavery. Has the American people become bigots also? My point, maybe it is what we don’t say that is the most telling.
a bit ironic, isn’t it….that this page is splashed with bachmann for president ads?
“join our team”…..NEVER!!!
a bit ironic that this page is splashed with ads for bachmann’s presidential campaign?
“join our team”….NEVER!
The health stats used to come up with homosexuality being a health risk are from Canada as well. They can’t even find US stats to back up their claims. Most gay couples that I have known are better parents than most straight couples because they know that having a child is a gift.
Everyone with half a brain knows that Michelle Bachmann is bat-shit crazy. She should be an expert on homosexuality seeing on how she’s married to a gay man. Sharia Law? I dated her back in the 80′s – that Sharia was one kinky woman!!!! The things I could tell you………
She loves to complain, moan and groan about how bad Obama is but she has never, ever told us what she would do. All she says is that she will fix it. TELL ME HOW YOU WILL FIX IT!
This woman is everything I work against and everything I hope to never become.
She can’t do that. There is no way she can ban porn.She wants to be elected but she is talking all this crazy stuff. Gays are not a health risk unprotected sex is. There are more important stuff out there that we need to be focused on other then sex between two adults or what adults look at. None of that is going to boost the economy or help with medical bills. She must really be a joke because no one in there right mind would vote for her. Some might agree with her views but they want the more important things first before they go by bible.
One’s religion is a choice, too, but the Constitution bans discrimination based on one’s religion. IF homosexuality is a choice (not saying it is), how does it differ from citizens seeking protections under the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause, which has been used to protect those of different religions?
If she did I think she broke Sharia, the next pledge will be to burn witches at the stake. Welcome to the 17th century
“Sex is better after marriage”
Does that mean Bachmann had sex before marriage? How does she know the difference? How do those that support this know the difference?
They must all be sinners.
Peace,
Tex Shelters
Being stupid and ignorant must be a choice too, for Bachmann keeps acting that way.
I am sure millions of Americans would choose to be abused, discriminated against, have their rights taken away, choose to not be able to be married to their partners. People choose to have bigots call them names in school and on the street. Who wouldn’t choose that if they could? Yes, being gay is an easy “choice” for Americans who you hate and thus make it harder to be as they were born, homosexual.
You are an ugly bigot Rep. Bachmann. Your messages of hate hurts America and Americans and life in our nation would be kinder if you would just shut up and go away.
Peace,
Tex Shelters
To quote J Taj Bozeman: “on homosexuality being a choice- a plurality of americans think it IS a choice in every major poll taken with that question.”
Um just because people THINK something is so doesn’t mean it actually is. You remember the history books about how the plurality of people thought that the world was flat? How about in the 60′s where the plurality thought blacks carried different diseases that were dangerous to whites?
And you really should stop posting about sharia until you know what you are talking about. As long as a provision in Jewish law, canon law or sharia does not offend our constitutional protections and public policy, courts will consider it. Otherwise, courts would not consider it. In other words, foreign law or religious law in American courts is considered within American constitutional strictures. Catholics are often married under Canon law and annulments issued accordingly which may be considered by civil courts as conditions for a number of things governed by state laws. Same thing goes with Jewish law. Are you with the sharia or with the U.S. Constitution? It is absurd false choice and a made-up campaign issue by fearmongering bigots like yourself.
For someone who is adamant about protecting us from Muslim theocracy, she’s pretty theocratic herself.
Whose MORALITY STANDARDS Should We Live By — AS LAWS?
While many good people demand legislation regarding “morality” and want to make it illegal to engage in any conduct or activity which they deem sinful or immoral, they rush to defend “their Rights” to Freedom of Religion, according to the First Amendment!
What would happen to our society if we adopted as LAWS some of the primary beliefs of every religion? Could we live?
Under Catholicism, nobody could be divorced and remarried. Ditto for Judaism and many other faiths. Such actions are immoral and sinful.
If the Mormons could make the laws for everyone, all alcoholic beverages would be immoral and outlawed.
Jehovah’s Witnesses would have a law against blood transfusions.
Some Baptists and other preachers would have a law against dancing – immoral – leads to sex.
Pentecostals would make it illegal for anyone to wear jewelry and it would be against the law (sinful equals illegal) to wear make-up.
The Amish would ban all TV, radios, telephones, autos, airplanes and computers – immoral – because these things make weak people out of us all. They would also make education beyond an 8th grade level illegal.
Christian Science would make medical doctors illegal – medicines, too would be against the law.
It would be a law that every male would be circumcised – and some religions would even require that of women. Some religions would require the women to cover their legs to the ankles or be branded immoral – and others would have morality laws passed requiring all women to have their faces veiled. All men would have to allow their facial hair to grow or they would be immoral.
Islam would prohibit money lending for profit and require a death penalty for an adulteress – immoral.
Nobody would be allowed to have statues of religious figures – Pork would be illegal and nobody would be allowed to kill a steer.
Of course, most would make it a morality law to smoke a cigarette, appear nude before consenting adults, have sex with someone to whom you are not married (by each religion’s doctrine). Some would make it illegal to have any sex except for the purpose of procreation – and that would have to be missionary style – and with clothes on.
Nobody could conduct any form of business on Saturday and Sunday – or even do their own chores.
Abortions? That would be considered murder, regardless of circumstance – even if it meant the mother would have to die!
Music? That, too, would be illegal – all types! Buddhists would… you get the picture?
The Islamic faith also considers use of force (jihad), including outright murder, a “moral act” when conducted for the purpose of bringing non-believers or heretics to accept their religion.
MORALITY??????? Whose Morality????? In these United States we are supposed to have laws within the limitations (limited government) written down as our Constitution. But some people, including our lawmakers and judges, seems to think “We the People…” created our government to tell us what our “Moral Standards” should be.
THIS SHOULD BE THE ONLY MORAL STANDARD – People are free to do as they please unless they cause actual harm to another. If harm is caused, the injured party (or government acting on the injured party’s behalf) should take action – make a specific charge, prove the damage to the person injured, and allow the accused to face their accuser.
If we are to take any other “Moral” attitude and pass it as law, then we must adopt the moral beliefs, dogma, doctrines and tenets of all religions.
Who would be willing to have ALL of the above mentioned “Morality Standards” passed as LAWS? Remember, you don’t get to pick and choose — ALL or NONE!
Great post man, wish I could share this on FB
slight quibble with the otherwise wonderful above: divorce is not forbidden in judaism. re the article itself: what’s this about only protesting the innocent fruits of conjugal intimacy? rape victims’ kids, adopted kids whose folks weren’t married, others who are not the product of conjugal intimacy don’t count? but then… the woman IS, as more than one person astutely noted, a moron.
g
WOW, Very good! I copied this & shared it on my facebook. I enjoyed reading this & it was very insightful& hopefully will make people THINK about what is going on & how we can not just do this to people! Everyone should have freedom to do their own thing as long as it is not doing harm to another!
Ban Porn, they can have my penis when they pry it from my cold, dead, hand.
My laugh of the day.
Thanks!
Ricky?
LMAO! too funny! But i’m sure you are being truthful!
I’m convinced. If I decide to run for any office in Iowa, I’m giving up my addiction to watch gay porn if it follows Sharia law, and I promise to personally harangue any gay Muslim porn stars into coming over to Christ, heterosexuality, and G-rated movies.
Further proof that this woman is insane!
Someone please shoot this woman!
I also love the claim made here that they’re saying same sex marriage is like polygamy. That’s not what the document says at all. It states opposition to anything but marriage between 1 man and 1 woman and lists the various types of marriage they oppose.
That’s as dishonest as taking a vegan document that says we refuse to eat any meat, including: lamb, pork, beef, rabbit, and deer. And then going crazy yelling- these vegan idiots think rabbits and cows are the same thing!!! Nutjobs!!
I find the vow to reject Sharia law interesting. Isn’t that assumed, if a person isn’t muslim- then they don’t subscribe to Sharia law? I’m an atheist and I reject Sharia law- and Biblical law.
You’d think a site whose tagline is “the knowledge you crave” would get the very basic facts straight.
nowhere in the pledge does it state they want to ban porn. that’s a flat out lie. the pledge simply states: “Humane protection of women and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy – our next generation of American children –
from human trafficking, sexual slavery, seduction into promiscuity, and all forms of pornography and prostitution,
infanticide, abortion and other types of coercion or stolen innocence.” so they want to promote an environment where women aren’t coerced or forced into porn, prostitution, etc.
HOW AWFUL!!
on homosexuality being a choice- a plurality of americans think it IS a choice in every major poll taken with that question.
homosexuals DO have a much greater risk of various diseases. according to cdc data, gay men are the group with the highest incidence of HIV in the nation, and M2M sex is also the most risky behavior for HIV including a slew of other various STIs. that’s CDC data, not some uninformed loon’s view.
as for sharia law. umm ok? pretty sure we can all agree that sharia law needs to be rejected. maybe you’ve heard of this nation called the united kingdom and the attempts there, and the success at times, to allow sharia law to trump British law? heaven forbid a vow be made to try to prevent anything like that from happening in the U.S.
Look folks, if you can’t get your basic facts straight with 5 minutes of research (as I just so easily did), why write anything at all?
To Bozeman, Are the wingnuts who sign this pledge promising that only gay pornography will be made, having ensured that no woman be filmed in the nude? Cuz otherwise the “protection” they claim to offer to women is a promise to produce “men only” pornography.
It really doesn’t matter what the general public thinks about homosexuality. We are all citizens, tax paying citizens, and all have the same rights whether or not the general public likes it. Bachmann’s positions are couched in KKKristian dominionism which is anathema to public office and the Constitution. She’s anti-American and wants to force a theocracy on this country. She is a danger to plural representative democracy and should be roundly defeated at the polls.
Oh, btw, religion is a choice, freedom of assembly is a choice, freedom …you get my point? Many of our freedoms are choices that cannot be abridged because some cult doesn’t like it.
The CDC says that African Americans are the group with the highest incidence of HIV in the nation. This study didn’t say how many of those African Americans are also gay.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#hivinfection
And while you correctly site that sex between gay men is the most risky behavior for HIV contraction, I would like to point out that W2W sex didn’t even make it on the transmission category chart. I contend that “homosexuals” is too broad a group to generalize about “greater risk of various diseases”.
It is anything but a choice to admit your homosexuality to yourself and the public. It was once found as a mental disorder, but our civilization evolved to rule it otherwise in the 60′s. She was around then-ish… is her brain back there and not in today’s world? Getting facts straight is fundamental for all and she doesn’t seem to know jack.
On point 11, rejecting Sharia law, do these morons not realize that by having a separation of church and state, the Constitution already bans theocratic institutions from meting out justice and laws? I would sincerely believe that to be the case, but since virtually no one wants sharia law in the US I guess it’s a moot point.
This is the nuttiest presidential candidate since … nope, she tops the bill. Is she serious? This is a joke, right? I mean, she can’t be serious. Did I read this wrong or Michele Bachman really going around running for president with these ideas? Why do we just elect Shirley Phelps. Or Fred Phelps, for that matter.
I’ve been a Bachmann-watcher ever since she was first elected, (I live in MN) and nothing she does or says surprises me anymore. This woman is a complete idiot, not to mention a bigot, plus she sounds suspiciously like a Christian Dominionist. I don’t believe she has a snowball’s chance in hell of being elected president, but she can certainly keep doing her share of damage in the meantime.
The same was said about Hitler’s chances of being elected – though in the end he was appointed to power. Still, never underestimate the possibility of a person powered by hate to make it to the top, by hook or crook.
Here is another article bout these pigs: Presidential Candidates, Obama Must Sign Anti-Gay Vow – Conservative Org: http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/presidential-candidates-obama-must-sign-anti-gay-vow-conservative-org/politics/2011/07/08/23304
everyone go to Bachmanns facebook page and “report” it on the bottom left for her “hate speech”
Get your history straight , hitler was not elected
Actually Hitler was elected with a majority by the German people, he then used the Enabling act to form a dictatorship.
Damn conservative’s.