Then Let Them Be Offended.

‘God’s law’ cited as reason for silencing gay Pa. rep on DOMA

Openly gay Pa. Rep. Brian Sims, D-Philadelphia, was blocked from talking about the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act Wednesday on the floor of the Pennsylvania House.

During the House session, there is a period where legislators are allowed to speak about a number of different topics.  The catch is that it’s done under “unanimous consent”, meaning that it only takes one legislator to shut the speaker down.  In this case, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe was one of those people.  Normally stuff like this happens all the time in the world of political posturing and maneuvering, and people generally don’t pay attention to it.  This time was an exception, however, when Metcalfe explained why he prevented Sims from speaking:

“I did not believe that as a member of that body that I should allow someone to make comments such as he was preparing to make that ultimately were just open rebellion against what the word of God has said, what God has said, and just open rebellion against God’s law,” said Metcalfe, R-Butler.

Oh … well … okay.  As long as you have a legitimate, logical reason to not let the man speak about the importance of the Prop. 8 and DOMA rulings and how they would affect the state of Pennsylvania.  How this even begins to qualify as a reasonable justification for objecting is beyond me, since it has nothing to do with the law or the state or federal constitution, but a blind adherence to a God that has no business being invoked in a place where the laws are being made for a state within a secular nation.

He later elaborated on the effect it would have on the innocent citizens of the 12th legislative district:

He said the comments Sims would have made about the high court’s decisions would have been “ultimately offensive to the majority of my constituents, and myself.”

God forbid we should offend the delicate sensibilities of a handful of people in rural western Pennsylvania by having a democratically elected lawmaker briefly speak about the importance of the Supreme Court rulings that take us one step further toward allowing same sex couples to be given equal treatment under the law.

I keep thinking that if you’re the kind of person who finds such things offensive – and the first thing you do in response to hearing it is to invoke the Christian Old Testament God as an excuse, you and the people you represent are part of the problem.

Thankfully, it worked out in the end.  Despite the lost opportunity to speak, plenty of Sims’ fellow lawmakers on both sides of the aisle spoke with him afterward and showed support.

“Honestly, on the floor, it did not seem like it was that big of a deal. A lot of members went up and spoke with Representative Sims afterwards,” Miskin pointed out. “There was a lot of discourse. Between both sides of the aisle.”

Sims, one of two openly gay members of the house, said that Republicans approached him afterward to apologize. Sims said that he will remember the moment, not for being silenced, but for the support offered from his colleagues in the Legislature.

As I said earlier, this apparently happens a lot.  It’s not the parliamentary maneuvering that bothers me, since I’m sure it goes both ways.  However, for Metcalfe to remove his consent because Sims was going to make comments that were in “open rebellion to God’s law” shows the residents of the state of Pennsylvania and the rest of the country that it’s the will of his God, not the state or federal constitution, that drives his decisions as he helps make laws for all of the citizens of his state … even those who don’t believe as he does.  I guess they’re just out of luck.

This entry was posted in Freedom from Religion, Profiles in Fundamentalism, Religion in the News and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Then Let Them Be Offended.

  1. That just – I mean replace gay with anything. He didn’t let the representative on the floor because the rep: was a woman, the rep was black, the rep was handicapped. Do ANY of those work? But what am I saying? They wouldn’t allow women to speak while discussing how to take away their reproductive rights. People got outraged at a sweet commercial about freaking Cheerios because the couple was mixed race. So – I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

    But I am. Because these people, the ones people vote to represent them in making laws and upholding them – they act worse than ignorant children. Even my daughter, at 12 years old, stood up to a friend who bullied another kid for being different. And you know what she used? The Bible. She said “We are all supposed to be brothers and sisters.” Yeah, um, yeah that part. Jesus, the one they usually invoke, didn’t say, hey, go stone that prostitute. He defended her. Yet they act like the ones with the stones, and think they’re righteous for it.


    • I agree. But then, if you need to invoke God during a discussion in a governmental legislature, then you’ve pretty much already lost. Whenever I see something like what happened in Texas, I just get infuriated. I didn’t write about it when it happened but to see a state make such a devastating ruling based on scientifically inaccurate (or simply false) information and conclusions that only have “validity” because conservative Christians like the answers breaks my heart for all of the people whose lives will be adversely affected. How many women won’t be able to access birth control now? How many won’t be able to get their OB exams, or pre-natal care at a price they can manage? Do any of these republicans care? No, because as always, it’s about sending a message, not valuing life.

      … which, to emphasize the point, they just executed their 500th death row inmate around the same time. Jesus loves you!

      • It’s frightening, isn’t it? On my post about gun control, I mentioned my grandfather being murdered (by his own gun). His son, my father, is liberal, anti-gun, and against the death penalty. He simply said he didn’t see how we could punish someone for killing by killing. And that it didn’t bring his father back.

        Good point, huh? I love how they must protect a few cells, but a human? Pull the switch.

  2. creativerealms says:

    If God is agianst gays why does he allow gays? Oh wait the fall did it. Why did God allow the fall again? Oh that’s right there probably is no God.

    • The Christian argument to that would just be “why did god create murderers, adulterers, thieves, etc.” Just being created in a certain way doesn’t make those tendencies acceptable. (This ignores that homosexuality doesn’t really have a victim when all of the aforementioned do).

      On the other hand, as you suggest, it might all just happen naturally and there’s probably no God, at least of the personal, Abrahamic variety. The “Fall” is nothing more than a story from the ancient Sumerians that got passed along through the ages.

  3. Erin W says:

    Sadly, this is par for the course with Metcalfe. He’s the embodiment of James Carville’s aphorism about Pennsylvania: Philadelphia in the east, Pittsburgh in the west, Alabama in the middle. He’s about as retrograde as they come.

    The good news, as far as I’m concerned, is that Sims is my state rep. So far I’ve been very pleased with his representation, not just on LGBT issues, but on church-state separation. He’s the same guy who made the observation that he swore on the Bible to uphold the Constitution, not the other way around.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s