E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Courtesy Ashley Broadway
Ashley Broadway, left, is pictured with her wife, Lt. Col. Heather Mack and their 2-year-old son.
Hours after same-sex Army wife Ashley Broadway was named Fort Bragg's 2013 “spouse of the year,” the on-base spouses club — that has for two months rebuffed Broadway's bid to join — fully reversed course and invited her "to become a full member," according to emails sent to NBC News and Broadway.
The decision comes one week after the Association of Bragg Officers' Spouses (ABOS) extended Broadway — who is married to Army Lt. Col. Heather Mack — a "special guest membership," an invitation she declined and called "extremely demeaning."
"After further reviewing the (club's) constitution, by-laws and internal procedures, the ABOS Board felt that in order to immediately support all military Officer spouses who are eligible for ABOS membership a more inclusive definition of spouse was needed. Therefore, any Spouse of an active duty commissioned or warrant Officer with a valid marriage certificate from any state or district in the United States is eligible for ABOS membership," the club's board said in a statement.
"ABOS does not discriminate based on race, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, creed, or sexual orientation. ABOS would like to publicly invite Ms. Broadway to apply for full membership to ABOS. It is and always has been our mission to support all military families."
In an email to Broadway — shared with NBC News — the club said, "We would like to offer you to become a full member of ABOS."
"I will go ahead and submit my application," Broadway said in response to the invitation. "I need to educate some of the naysayers that are in that group and show them my family is just like their family."
In the online election held Tuesday, Broadway captured the Fort Bragg vote “by a country mile,” said Babette Maxwell, founder of Military Spouse magazine and the Military Spouse of the Year award. Ballot totals were not revealed.
As one of the 154 base-level winners, Broadway now is eligible to be nominated for Army “spouse of the year.”
“A lot of people who voted never me met or talked to me or knew me from Adam. I know it was a statement to the Obama Administration, to Secretary (of Defense Leon) Panetta, to Senator (Chuck) Hagel — if he is confirmed (as defense secretary) — to the Pentagon and, really, to America that, yes, she is a military spouse and she needs to be recognized,” Broadway told NBC News.
“There are things the government can do right now to make life a hell of a lot easier than what it is currently for those who are in same-sex marriages in the military,” she added. “It was a lot of people saying, ‘Enough’s enough.’ ”
Broadway’s rejection from the Fort Bragg officers’ spouses club sparked the U.S. Marine Corps to issue on Jan. 9 a pro-gay, branch-wide directive. On Jan. 16, her bid drew the Pentagon’s attention. The next day, the on-base spouses club offered Broadway a "special guest membership" – an invitation she declined, calling it “extremely demeaning.”
Broadway married Mack, her 15-year companion, in November — their first chance to hold a formal ceremony after the 2011 repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” the policy that kept gays from openly serving in the military. The couple has a 2-year-old son and Mack gave birth to their second child, a daughter, on Tuesday.
“People got one vote per email address — one ballot for the person you wanted to represent you. I think people would be unwilling to, quote-unquote, throw their vote away on simply doing what was popular,” Maxwell said. “There was a significant amount of meaning in what they were doing when they voted for Ashley.
“Removing her a bit from the press and recognition she’s received the last few months, Ashley — more importantly — has a platform to benefit a large number of spouses, and that’s what people want to see happen,” Maxwell added. “The winners are chosen based on their merits, their accomplishments and what they intend to do for the community in the year to come.”
Broadway has volunteered to tutor soldiers’ children in reading, briefed inbound Army families on local school districts, and helped transferring soldiers with housing-location decisions.
“When I was denied membership, I asked to speak to the club’s board. I was convinced that if they’d just sit down with me for half an hour, if I could talk to them about what I’ve been doing, what I’ll be doing in the future, they would see what an asset I would be to the group,” Broadway said.
The meeting was not granted.
“That was the most frustrating thing,” she said.
Before its decision late Friday to relent and offer Broadway full membership, the ABOS board had maintained Broadway was never rejected because “a formal application was never filed,” and that she simply had inquired about the eligibility of a same-sex spouse and was told the club would need “time to look at the issue.”
Online voting for the next round of the 2013 Armed Forces Insurance Military Spouse of the Year — the branch level — will take place Feb. 5. The overall winner, elected from the branch finalists, will be revealed May 9.
"I never thought in a million years I would be the one to advance the cause. If that’s what it’s going to take to get attention for all the military same-sex spouses, then so be it," Broadway said. "But I do take this (Bragg 'spouse of the year' award) very seriously. And we'll see where it goes from here."
Related stories:
Leave a Comment:
So if I read the article correctly, she was voted in as the FT. Bragg Spouse of the Year by thousands of voters nationwide who don't even know her. NOT because of merit, but simply because she is lesbian spouse.
More likely the voters recognized the injustice of the situation and also saw how much she contributed to the community.
The vote is a credit to the high ethics of our military, and the fact that dumb bigots are a dying breed.
Just because we don't agree with you doesn't make us a bigot anymore than you not agreeing with us.
How hard is it to understand...
And he's right, she was voted on by people who don't know her, only read what was on-line and not because of any special merit, etc. Anonymous voters which I would bet my last dollar were organized votes by the LGBT and other groups.
Now, is that really fair to the other spouses? NOPE!! But we don't care about fair right - we care about putting the spotlight on "their" agenda. Now - this isn't equal rights is it? Where are the articles about all the other spouses representing the other "bases" - we have lots of them. Don't see that mentioned.
Yeah...right...we get it...
You got that right. Chances are the gay community overloaded the voter servers. There is not one mentin of any of the "merits" or "accomplishments" that she supposedly has for voters to vote about.
So if I read the article correctly, she was voted in as the FT. Bragg Spouse of the Year by thousands of voters nationwide who don't even know her.
I'm pretty sure most people didn't know any of the other nominees either.
And he's right, she was voted on by people who don't know her, only read what was on-line and not because of any special merit, etc. Anonymous voters which I would bet my last dollar were organized votes by the LGBT and other groups.
And I'm willing to bet my last dollar that everyones merits and info was included on line with the names on the forms for voting.
What do you know about her that says she doesn't merit this award? All you know is she is a lesbian so that must be the reason she got it right?
What your really saying is, she is a lesbian so that should have disqualified her because their is no way she could deserve it more than a heterosexual spouse.
we care about putting the spotlight on "their" agenda. Now - this isn't equal rights is it?
What don't you understand about the fact that their agenda is equal right? The spotlight is there because it is an inequality that people are trying to rectify. Anytime their is a cause for any reason people strive to bring attention to it. That's the way things work.
Why don't you put in writing what you post really seemed to say, which is
You don't care about them or if they are treated equally so they should just go away so you dn't have to hear about it.
That is precisely why she won the vote. It is no surprise. People in this country vote for reasons with all logic set aside. How many Votes did Obama get in the last election where the people who cast that vote, cast it for him because he was part African American? Or because they were given vouchers for free Cellular Telephones that said "compliments of the Obama Administration"? Voting for anything has become a joke anymore. People vote out of sympathy, racial bias, economic bias, for the better looking candidate, gender bias and the list goes on and on. Not many people vote on the issues or records of those who run. Sad, but true.
twisted,
There is not one mentin of any of the "merits" or "accomplishments" that she supposedly has for voters to vote about.
Did you miss reading this in the article above?
Broadway has volunteered to tutor soldiers’ children in reading, briefed inbound Army families on local school districts, and helped transferring soldiers with housing-location decisions.
Johnny, the woman admitted that she received so many votes because people wanted to send a message. She is basically saying she probably didn't deserve it, but if it sheds light on an issue she feels strongly about, then the means justifies the end. Or, a wrong can make a right.
Citizen,
She is not basically saying she didn't deserve it, that's your interpretation of what she said and I'm guessing it's because deep down you don't think she deserves it even though you kinow less about her then those that voted for her did.
I searched into this further than what the article said and from what I can gather, only military people connected to each installation had a vote in their own installation. So a group of her peers so to speak voted her in.
You want to second guess their motives or whether she deserved it or not...go right ahead.
She definitely received a lot of votes from the main LGBT community because "vote for Ashley" was plastered all over their websites.
This is NO way is a vote of confidence from Ft. Bragg.
It should also be noted that you can self nominate - which is how she got on the voting panel to begin with.
As for the Spouses Club, I doubt they really care. I doubt any of them really care about an award that is awarded by a magazine (started by this Babette lady) and has NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE MILITARY except for using its name. And I doubt any of them had an "agenda" to push that they would nominate themselves and plaster their profile all over every interest groups facebook page and website.
Do any of you truly understand how this Military Spouse of the Year works--because I do, I work on a military base.
Anyone can be nominated. A person can nominate themselves--not necessary to have any special accomplishments, meet a board and be selected to be considered - nothing--you can write in your own name. Then your name goes on a website and anonymous voters vote for you - people who know nothing about you, etc.
THAT is how the process works - for every base and every military entity.
I could have been nominated and done it myself.
So it's not what it appears to be and if the writers of the article had done their research they would have realized that.
Social engineers at work again to shape our opinions-pro or con- about gay marriage, gays in the military and women in combat. With the recent shout out to gays by Obama in his inaugaral, doesn't this sound just a little too coincidential? Wouldn't be surprised if the service member "spouse" is deployed to Afghanistan in a forward area and immediately is awarded a Bronze or Silver Star for combat related action. With one fell swoop the the arguements against gay "marriage", gays in the military and women in combat would be shut down and the social engineers can move on to the next topic, say, maybe eliminating 2nd amendment rights, or convincing us that illegal immigration is good for the country.
Hell, why not give the servicemember a Medal of Honor, just because ?
It's because they don't want EQUAL rights, they want to be special and singled out.
Hence the reason there wasn't an article about every other spouse that won for their military branch.
And anyone could have voted for her, even those who don't reside at Fort Bragg...so what is that really telling you?
Really? What special rights are gays seeking?
From one ARMY wife to another, Congratulations!
Kudos both to her and to the people who voted for her. It seems the military really has evolved.
Not really. Try being gay in an infantry unit on Ft Bragg. You run a serious risk of death.
You know when I meet someone I don't tell them I'm heterosexual.
So how come homosexuals feels the need to tell me they are?
Is this really anything anyone NEEDS TO KNOW--isn't this a private matter?
Apparently not.
@Kimbo
Imagine growing up and in your adulthood people of the same sex assumed you were gay and thus possibly interested in dating them. Imagine people of the opposite sex assuming you were homosexual and therefore not making advances toward you. Imagine your family and friends asking if you fancy someone of the same sex or why you aren't with someone of the same sex.
I'm guessing you never thought to put yourself in the shoes of a homosexual who grows up in that exact situation except where you would replace "same sex" with "opposite sex" and vice versa. THAT is why homosexuals have to correct people often because they are assumed to be heterosexual.
btw, how does that privilege feel? Must be nice.
Why is is that when someone states the truth they are referred to as hate mongers or hemophobic. The truth is that homosexuality is a sin that has a damning (literally) response to thier souls. Sodom and Gomorah were destroyed for their sexual perversions, among which was homosexuality. Many churches refuse to speak out against homosexuality for fear that they will offend their congregation (and thefore decrease the amont of money they take in), and cause others to look upon them as hate mongers. While at the same time preaching a false, all inclusive salvation because "God is love". God is also just, righteous, and His Word is clear - homosexuals will not inherit The Kingdom of God. I am not a hate monger, nor am I hompphobic. But neither will I stand by silently while the media does everything it can in an attempt to make the homosexual lifestyle be clasified as a legitimate, alternate lifestyle because it is neither and will be the death of the moral fiber of our country.
I know, right? Just because you think you deserve special rights and privileges which should be denied to those you want to treat as 2nd-class citizens, everyone calls you a greedy bigot and a "hemophobic"! It's just not fair!
And just because you think the government should enforce the sharia laws of your bronze-age cult in direct violation of the 1st Amendment, everyone calls you a Christofascist!
In other words: "I don't hate fags, it's my imaginary friend who hates fags."
You falsely equate your fairy-tale beliefs to truth. Your rantings are ridiculous and, whether you like it or not, cannot be forced on others. The people who serve us with great honor clearly know that, as evidenced by their support of this soldiers wife.
From a Fort Bragg army brat and military spouse, Way to go!
Who did the voting? How did she go from unaccepted to spouse of the year? Abviously a ploy to shift the focus from their original stance due to the bad press they received; politically correct lip service because they got caught. How will it be an honor for those spouses who know that actually being a great spouse has nothing to do with getting this award?
The voting is not done by the spouses club and it's based on more than just the prejudices of a few.
My bet is the 18th ABN Corp Commander's wife stepped in and gave a few orders of her own...
And this is news, why?
If people want equal rights for homosexuality, then you get treated equally like everyone else.
I expect to see an article on ALL the other spouses that are representing the other branches of the military.
Wonder how long I'll have to wait? Oh wait, they probably aren't gay, so it isn't important...sorry, I forgot--equal status doesn't really mean equal status - it means I'm "special."
Political correctness run amok. Next thing you know a Nobel Peace Prize will be awarded to a guy who had none nothing in his past( and now has a KILL LIST and ordered hundreds of assassinations ) OH YEAH, already happened..
The cry of "Politicaly Correct"- the last defense of the bigot. Newsflash; calling a bigot a bigot is not politically correct, it's morally correct.
Please explain what I said that would make me a bigot?
This is a story about a homosexual being voted Spouse of the Year, as a retort against people who discriminated against her, and you came down on the side of the people who discriminated against her. Your called this vote in support of the lesbian spouse "politically correct". As I was saying, The cry of "Politicaly Correct"- the last defense of the bigot. Newsflash; calling a bigot a bigot is not politically correct, it's morally correct.
Now, you have your explanation. Please bother me no more.
He speaks the truth.
And I speak the truth when I say if I'm a bigot because I don't endorse homsexuality, then you're a bigot because you don't endorse heterosexuality.
There - tit for tat - how does that work for you.
It's like kindergarten on here - people only want to call people names instead of addressing the real issue - that in her quest for equality, she has disenfranchised everyone else because she wants to be special.
Equal my butt.
Kimba, your logic is flawed. I don't "endorse" homosexuality. I don't "endorse" heterosexuality. I just would never discriminate aaginst people of either persuasion and I don't believe it's any of my concern who anyone else loves. It is not my place to judge who someone is because of who they love. And I don't view myself as superior to someone based on who they love. When you feel that someone should be excluded from any organization because of their sexual preference, you are a bigot. And if you don't understand that, it is only the start of what's wrong with you.
Nobody ever said she was excluded based on her sexual preference.
The Spouse's Club at Ft Bragg has come out and said the opposite. The only PEOPLE saying it was her sexual orientation is herself and her partner.
By definition, the military does not recognize her as a "spouse." Hence the reason she was denied and SHE MADE IT INTO SOMETHING ELSE.
Because this is exactly what "special interest groups" do. We see it time and time again. I didn't get the job, must be because I'm black, purple or yellow - it couldn't have anything to do with my lousy interview or the fact that I'm not qualified. I can't join the Spouse's Club - well, it must be because I'm gay, not because I have no ID card and a "special" pass to get on base because I'm not a legally recognized spouse for military purposes - that couldn't be it, now way.
Catch my drift...sometimes it has absolutely nothing to do with the color or your skin or your orientation, gender, age, disability, etc., - sometimes you're really not qualified or you don't meet the definition of membership.
And THAT is what aggravates the crap out of me. I am of the nature that I do "understand" completely people's motives and they are not always as pure as they make them out to be with all the bells and whistles.
The Lesbian in this case is the one who made the case. No one ever turned her down due to sexual orientation...she didn't like the fact that the military DOES NOT recognize her marriage as legal because the military works on the federal level and FEDERAL LAW (the DOMA) dictates that her marriage cannot legally be recognized by the military service - and THIS is what pissed her off - she used Ft Bragg's Spouse's Club as the weapon.
And for that--disgusting.
My logic is right on target - why - because my logic is with the LAW.
And I think you're a bigot - so how do you like that?
Sticks and stones sweetie - name calling is juvenile - grow up!
Well, I'm am prejudiced against bigots that rattle off as many lies as you did in your post, if that's what you mean when you call me a bigot. Just to point out a few, everyone who read the story knows that she was excluded because she was gay and the law does not allow discrimination against homosexuals in the military.
Well, isn't that special?
Ok so someone answer this for me, did the Lt Col birth the child or was the child adopted? What I am getting at in case of a divorce who gets the maternal custody and who then has only visitation every other weekend? Who pays child support? If the child is adopted, who is the mother in the eyes of the court? Our current laws were not written for same sex marriages and unless these same sex couples who marry or go into a relationship with or without children and do not have a prenuptial agreement we as a society will have more children to support that were part of these same sex relationships. Now think about male same sex marriages and when children are adopted or one male has a child from a heterosexual relationship........................................????
MikeEBoy,
The voting was open to ANYONE that had internet access as the voting was done on-line.
So it could have been a 12 year-old from California or a grandmother from Turkey.
Good For her..
I don't understand why she wants to join a group that does want her? I know it is most likely their loss but let it go lady.. You can do good deeds and be a good a person with out the approval of everybody..
wives clubs provide support and camaraderie when your spouse is deployed. They also get communication from the deployed command on things like return dates and how the group is doing. Its more than just a social club.
Thank you Genenut. That explains this a lot for me. I would certainly want in that group too.
Maybe she could make a "spouses" club for anyone who wants to join. Gay straight or for people who do not like the women in the other groups..
Or maybe the DoD should simply deny the use of base facilities to any bigoted group?
That would work too Skrekk..
The group is not bigoted.
They are following the law - period.
You don't get to choose which laws to follow and which ones you don't - or wait you do and then get to spend time in prison.
DOMA states marriage between a man and a woman. Military services are not required to recognize state marriage as they operate on the federal level.
So they are well within their rights to deny a non-spouse membership - and to the military and federal government she is a non-spouse. This isn't about her sexual orientation - there is NO OTHER non-spouse (non ID card) member of the group.
She just wants to further some type of agenda and is using that for an excuse.
They are NOT VIOLATING THE LAW - you don't have to like it, but it is what it is.
So until the law changes, they and I don't care what you think - we are upholding the law and within the law as it stands today. If it changes, then so be it, but until then...sorry.
Private clubs aren't in the business of providing federal benefits or enforcing federal law.
And yes, they are most definitely bigoted. The Marine Corps said as much in their policy order.
Thanks - you just made my point.
A PO doesn't have to allow members they don't wish to have in their group.
The Marine Corps DID NOT use the word bigot - you are more than welcome to interpret as you wish, but show me where the word BIGOT was used.
What is it with you guys and that word? You don't like it if we were to use the word FAG or any other nasty word, but you think it's quite alright to use yours.
Come up with another line of defense - that one is old, broken and no longer works.
Yours truly,
The Bigot
They didn't need to use the word "bigot", they simply said as much by stating that all such private clubs on base must conform to the Marine Corps' non-discrimination policy. And they also said that the bigots in the spouse's club were making the army look bad, and they didn't want that kind of crap in their back yard:
Also just a side note about your erroneous comments about DOMA......................funny how subsequent facts proved you 100% wrong, eh?
Our military has stooped to the level of pandering to be politically correct. What a shame. And that woman darn sure can't pass a PT test. What is she even doing there?
Do you really expect us to believe that their are no straight, overweight senior officers in the military? Stormin Norman was no Barney Fife.
The officer was 9 months pregnant until Tuesday when she gave birth.
Reading comprehension never goes out of style... try learning for a change unless your brain is too weak from listening to Fox to stand the shock of enlightenment.
I have found that people that are homophobic have homosexual tendencies. They were just taught hate by parents or are worried what buddies will say. Grow up and get a pair!! It is a Modern Family world.
No, it isn't. Only in TV land and that liberal Hollywood Mecca. Homosexuality is still deviant behavior and is not natural. Not that there is anything wrong with that...
Just because we don't agree with you doesn't make us homophobic anymore than you not agreeing with us makes you heterophobic.
You need to grow up - the most hate filled mongers in this whole thing is the homosexual community that damn anyone that doesn't agree with them.
They don't want equal rights - they want what THEY WANT and they don't give a damn about who they step on that gets in their way.
And THAT is why us "heterosexuals" have an issue. They are acting like bullies and want to be recognized as "special" just because their gay. Well guess what - they are not anymore special than anyone else.
Get over it - do what you want, but I don't want to read about it in the news. My sex life or sexual orientation isn't front page - why does yours need to be.
Sick of this crap....
No kimbo they want you homophobes to stop dictating how they live their lives.
They arent telling you who you can marry or who you can love but you sure are trying too. they dont want special rights, they want equal rights. You are the one who wants special rights, the right to remove thier rights.
No they want special rights, if she didn't, then there would have been an article on every single spouse that was elected from every base and there's not, is there?
Is that not "special" treatment.
Nobody is trying to remove their rights. They can be gay or lesbian all they want - I certainly don't care. They don't have the RIGHT to have a marriage recognized at the Federal level because DOMA prohibits it.
So they don't have the right. If they get it, then it will be recognized whether anyone agrees with it or not. If they don't, then quit trying to shove it down everyone's throat.
Which has nothing whatsoever to do with a private group like a military spouses club.
And I never said it did - perhaps you need me to write in another language you understand.
Oh, they don't make a language for a______s, do they?
Sorry Kimbo we dont speak stupid well enough for you to understand.
politically correct to have a furburger eater named spouse of the year...we sure have made lots of important strides in this county. these are such important issues for our nation...forget the homeless, hungry, all the problems with the economy, etc...lets honor the dike of the year!
Tony, Tony, just made my day!
They look like attractive twins.........how does the child know who is "Mom" and who is "Dad"?
Two women who are married/other and share a child are both mom. Two men who are married/other with a child are dads. They appear to be a happy family and I'm glad for them.
Here's the thing. The LTC is clearly overweight and presents that appearance. She will probably not get booted because she is gay and an officer and this is a new part of the double standard in the military. Still, when someone is not normal, that is deviant in their sexuality, there are probably other areas of her personality that are screwed up as well. All through her career, there will be respect to her face and none behind her back because Soldiers will be second guessing and analyzing her decisions. This is because if a leader has some screwed up part of their personality, there are probably more. Those parts get Soldiers killed.
Most women who are 8-1/2 months pregnant do tend to look a little chubby.
I agree! Dumb bigots are pretty screwed up, and have a negative impact on the team.
So I guess you're a SMART BIGOT then huh?
OH....GOOD.....LORD
Is it me or do they look like sisters? Green all the way around? Wheres the diversity? No rainbow of colors....just plain green.
Well NBC and the other news outlets must be begging for another school shooting if this all they can drag up for a "headline" story.
They look like the spitting image of each other.....(shudder)
People need to shut up and let her enjoy being voted by her peers as spouse of the year.
If you or someone you cared about won an award, would you enjoy hearing criticisms about it when it was announced? Seriously, just shut the f-u-c-k up and let her enjoy it. How would you like someone crapping all over whatever you do in your own life?
I'm sure she's used to the hate from homophobes (especially at Ft Bragg), and both spouses are likely enjoying sweet justice right now as well as being very proud of their fellow service members who voted for them.
There simply isn't a better repudiation of the dumb bigots who run the spouses club.
Totally agree, my son is receiving an award as we speak here in San Diego but I couldnt miss work so I had to miss that ceremony. But F-U-C-K yeah that would bother me if a negative comment were made, he is a normal kid thankfully!!!
You guys love the word bigot - your vocabularly must be extremely limited.
The shoe fits. We'd be using the same word if the group denied membership to black people.
I'm sure your shoe fits the word a______— just fine too!
Kimbo, you are not clever. You are not covert. Quit violating the CoH.
Amazing story I honestly hope that the news keeps reporting on this couple and how they are doing. They are an inspiration to couples all over the world. They have faced obstacles that no heterosexual couple will ever know. A spouse is a spouse regardless of age, sex, race or sexual preference. We have larger issues in this country then limiting who someone can love, marry and have a family with. We need to worry about jobs, poverty, homelessness, education and our Constitutional Rights. Congrats to them both. They are a beautiful couple
Nice! Who was last year's winner again? No story for that winner? Not that there's anything worng with that...
At first I also thought they looked similar!!!! But that aside, YEAH ASHLEY!!! Congrats to the both of you!!!!!
Politics as usual. Has nothing to do at all with merit. She said herself that this is a message to the Obama administration. Glad to see see seems to be a person of integrity, but that alone does not make her spouse of he year. Yes, this country was founded by and has succeeded on Christian principles, and propagation of the homosexual lifestyle perfectly illustrates our current race to the bottom. It is only part of our undoing, right along consumerism, materialism, and redistribution of wealth to those who do not work for it. The worst of it though is displayed in our moral decline and acceptance of the above moral aberrations.
Amen...
whine whine whine. lol.
this country was founded and has succeeded based on, oh, FREEDOM. lol. Something you seem to be opposed to. how lame. :)
So are we to assume you have a problem with banning AR-15 rifles? After all, owning one is a guaranteed FREEDOM.
this country was founded and has succeeded based on CHRISTIANITY!!! Not freedom do do what ever you want...
no this country was not founded on Christianity. Apparently you missed US history class.
And the constitution states gun ownership is allowed within a WELL REGULATED MILITIA. Gun laws are regulation and allowed under the constitution.
Actually, the First Amendment- the VERY First- was installed to prevent the religious persecution that your statement would precipitate.
lol, this country was not "founded on christianity". read the constitution someday, you might learn something..it looks nothing like the bible.
the constitution talks about freedom. I know that's a difficult concept for you. :)
clue for the clueless: of course its not the "freedom to do whatever you want"..you can't rob, rape, murder, steal..because those interfere with the rights of others. Unlike being gay or gay marriage. duh. lol.
vermontguy you clearly are not as bright as you would like to think.
This nation was founded by christians, and for christianity.
The very 1st act of President George Washington was to dedicate the USA to God.
He and the Senate went to the chapel, Prayed, worshiped God and dedicated the United States to God.
The Bible was approved by the government as appropriate teaching material for the schools back then.
They even said that our form of democratic republic will not work with out christianity. And I think recent history is proving them right.
tether, read the bill of rights. the first amendment makes it VERY clear what the founding fathers thought of others forcing their religious views on others.
Genenut -- clearly the constitution prohibits laws respecting the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof. That establishes the freedom to worship as we please free of government interference, and the free speech clause establishes our right to speak freely about our views. That is the protection we are afforded, which cowardly people want to inhibit out of some apparent fear that people cannot think for themselves and need protection from free thinking Christians. If you think differently feel free to express those views respectfully, and have the balls to not hide behind your own fantasy about what the founding fathers thought about people forcing their views on others. Christianity and Christian ideals have held this country in good stead for hundreds of years, and people's current attempts to revise history to fit their own agenda are contributing to our downfall, and that of the world around us. Not to worry though, this was predicted in scripture thousands of years ago and thoughtful Christians have been very aware that our days of freedom are numbered, and that those who oppose truth will replace it with their own distortion. Christ and his Church will prevail in the end without a doubt.
Yeah, if you ignore all the Christofascism, witch burning, slavery, racism, misogyny and homophobia, Christianity has been totally great!
And you are less so, Tether.
WRONG. Like it or not, we were not founded on any Judeo-Christian beliefs. Our nation was founded on the basis of, among other things, freedom OF and FROM religion.
WRONG AGAIN. George Washington dedicated this country to "Providence," or an "Almighty Being," NOT "God," since he was a Deist who did not believe in "God," but rather in a "supreme being" who was not divine.
Put in perspective: At that time, the primary method for teaching reading and writing was to use the bible. Public school did not exist as we know it today. In fact, the blackboard didn't exist, so the bible was a text that was appropriate for such use at the time.
John Adams said it himself:
Treaty of Tripoli, 1797
Stop spreading lies and misinformation, Tether. You need to look up Lemon v. Kurtzman; religion has to stay out of our laws.