Your blogger

My photo
When Roger West first launched the progressive political blog "News From The Other Side" in May 2010, he could hardly have predicted the impact that his venture would have on the media and political debate. As the New Media emerged as a counterbalance to established media sources, Roger wrote his copious blogs about national politics, the tea party movement, mid-term elections, and the failings of the radical right to the vanguard of the New Media movement. Roger West's efforts as a leading blogger have tremendous reach. NFTOS has led the effort to bring accountability to mainstream media sources such as FOX NEWS, Breitbart's "Big Journalism. Roger's breadth of experience, engaging style, and cultivation of loyal readership - over 92 million visitors - give him unique insight into the past, present, and future of the New Media and political rhetoric that exists in our society today. What we are against: Radical Right Wing Agendas Incompetent Establishment Donald J. Trump Corporate Malfeasence We are for: Global and Econmoic Security Social and Economic Justice Media Accountability THE RESISTANCE

Monday, July 1, 2013


Ultra social conservatives came out in full force on NBC’s Meet The Press on the Sunday after the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act. Former Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) of the Heritage Foundation and Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) both claimed the court’s decision to recognize same-sex marriages sacrificed children’s wellbeing — only to have their arguments promptly slapped down by MSNBC hosts Rachel Maddow and David Gregory.

DeMint said the court had privileged “the desires of adults” over “the best environment for children,” arguing that heterosexual marriage is “the environment where children can thrive and succeed.” Maddow immediately pointed out that this argument ignores the Meechildren of same-sex couples, who have up till now been treated as second-class citizens under the law:

Justice Kennedy addressed that issue specifically in his ruling. He says that by denying marriage rights to same-sex couples who have kids, you’re humiliating and demeaning those kids. By denying their families equal protection under the law by the parents who are raising them and who love them and who make their family. So we can put it in the interests of children, but I think that cuts both ways. And the ruling cuts against that argument. I mean, gay people exist. There’s nothing we can do in public policy can do to make more of us exist or less of us exist. And you guys for a generation have argued that public policy ought to demean gay people as a way of expressing disapproval of the fact that we exist. But you don’t make any less of us exist, you are just arguing for more discrimination. And more discrimination doesn’t make straight people’s lives any better.

Maddow slams DeMint

Later in the program, Huelskamp tried to justify his introduction of a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage by touting debunked research that supposedly shows heterosexual parents are better for kids. Gregory challenged the congressman, insisting that he admit the research is bogus:

David Gregory debunks Huelskamp

Huelskamp ducked the debunk and again claimed that “the court decided the desires of adults should trump the needs of children.” Nevertheless, Gregory is correct that the research cited by marriage equality opponents actually has nothing to do with same-sex couples. In fact, the largest study of families with same-sex parents recently concluded these children are not only thriving, but even beat the national average for overall health and family cohesion.

That is the point that is so frequently lost in all this. All of us are citizens and are entitled to equal rights under the law. We used to set aside the group called "women" and say that they are "less-than" and could not vote. We used to set aside a group called blacks and say they could not marry outside their own race; we used to set aside a group called blacks again and say that they could not vote in spite of the fact that it was their right under our Constitution. We used to set aside a group called "gays" and say that because our own particular religion did not like them, we could refuse to let them marry. We have grown up, matured, evolved and we realize that we were wrong.

For some people, admitting that they were wrong is like tearing out their heart and they just can't do it. They go to the Old Testament, ignoring most of it, but forget the New Testament. Jesus said, "There is neither Greek nor Jew, male or female, gentile or Christian" (paraphrased here) and that we are all equal in his sight.

Talibangelicals believe in Jesus, but not what he stood for, nor for how he defied authority because it was right. They don't understand that Jesus was liberal in his practices and he broke all the old, wrong rules.

It is not the purview of the government (state or federal) to offer benefits to some citizens and not others - end of story. It doesn't matter about children, or what some think is God's will, or what anyone thinks pro or con about same-sex marriage - It does not matter, period. If there is a government benefit offered, which marriage as presently treated by government surely is, the benefit must be offered to all.

Talibangelicals want us to believe that they have a direct line to God. My thought, the more convinced you are that you know what God wants, the less you should be taken seriously.

Roger West