2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum'God's law' cited as reason for silencing gay Pa. rep on DOMA
Openly gay state 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.
His comments to his colleagues were ended by a procedural maneuver.
In a part of the house session where members can speak on wide-ranging topics, Sims had just begun his remarks when he was shut down.
"I wasn't planning on chastising anybody. I wasn't planning on discussing how far we have to come in Pennsylvania or that we really have no civil rights in Pennsylvania," Sims said. "It was really just going to limit my comments to how important the cases were."
It takes just one legislator to end the impromptu remarks. Rep. Daryl Metcalfe was one of the House Republicans who objected.
-snip-
Full article here: http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/component/flexicontent/item/56656
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Sacrilege!
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Brian Sims, Pennsylvania Lawmaker, Silenced On DOMA By Colleagues Citing 'God's Law'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/27/brian-sims-doma_n_3513741.html
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts).
savalez
(3,517 posts)Rep. Brian Sims, D-Philadelphia, asked the chamber to reprimand Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-Butler, at the close of session because of an interview Metcalfe gave to explain why he exercised his right to prevent him from speaking on the topic during session.
His comments did not live up to the standards set by this body, Sims said on the floor.
Metcalfe told WHYY-FM that Sims comments would have been open rebellion against Gods law. He told The Associated Press late Thursday he stood by those remarks.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/openly-gay-pa-lawmaker-asks-house-to-censure-republican-who-blocked-his-remarks-on-gay-rights.php?ref=fpb
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)LiberalFighter
(50,950 posts)modrepub
(3,496 posts)The more people like Metcalfe talk the more people will become aware of what these people truly believe. What Metcalfe did was actually against the PA Constitution (preventing a citizen from exercising their freedom of speech). Given that I'm against anyone preventing someone else expressing their opinion (no matter how repulsive).
LiberalFighter
(50,950 posts)As long as they want to shut down one side then the other side needs to shut them down until they behave like adults.
At least with both sides able to talk there is 100% speech rights instead of 50%.
modrepub
(3,496 posts)The PA legislature is such a throw back. Most legislation is hashed out behind closed doors. Legislators are often far removed from reality, especially in the "safe" districts, which constitute at least 80%+ of the seats. It's a mess and things like this happen more often than they should.