Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
 

A Message to the Haters: Gay Boycotts & Protests Are Not ‘Intolerant’

It’s not just gays who read Queerty. We’ve been noticing that many many Prop. 8 supporters have been commenting on the site this week about how horrible and viscious it is that gay people are protesting and boycotting them. We’re not alone, The Mercury News notes that you’re calling this week’s actions “mob justice” and “McCarthyism”. First off, thanks for your comments– it shows you’re willing to engage in a discussion, even if sometimes “discussion” seems more like “angry rant”.

Anyway, this post is for you.

Here’s why your “Gays are the intolerant ones!” rant is totally misguided and wrong. Rod Dreher, a conservative columnist over at Belief Net, does a pretty good job of condensing all the Yes on 8 talking points, so let’s take a look at what he says:

What if traditional Christians, Jews and Muslims got the list of Californians who donated to the anti-Prop 8 campaign, and began to boycott businesses where they worked on the grounds that these people gave money to a cause that would take away a substantial part of their freedom of religion?

Would that be okay? If not, why not?


First off, gay marriage doesn’t infringe on your “freedom of religion” at all. You’re welcome to define marriage any way you like at the altar. If your church says marriage should only be between two blond-haired, blue-eyed virgins, we’re totally cool with that. What we have a problem with is when you try enforcing your religious beliefs on everyone’s legal rights. Not too long ago, God was telling you that marriage between races was wrong and for long before that, marriage was something one-half of the party had no say in and was essentially a property transaction. So, when you talk about preserving “traditional marriage”, you come off as really, really annoying.

My question remains: if the gay boycott of businesses that employ or are run by people who gave money to Prop 8 to take away the right of gays to marry is okay, why is it not okay for pro-Prop 8 people to similarly threaten or ruin the livelihoods of anti-Prop 8 donors?

Threaten to ruin our livelihoods? Religious bigots have been doing that for ages. If you didn’t know, gay people get beaten and murdered at an alarming rate in this country simply because of who they are. Gays and lesbians can still lose their jobs simply for being gay in many states. You’ll have to forgive us if we don’t think that refusing to patronize your homophobic place of business is one of the world’s great injustices. We’re too familiar with the real thing to be duped.

Oh, and by the way, when the gay rights protesters move from the Mormon churches down to black or Latino churches or institutions, let me know. They’re going after the Mormons because the Mormons white and middle class, therefore safe to attack.

Actually, the focus on the Mormon church is based on its long-planned, well organized effort to destroy marriage equality. Other churches and institutions also helped pass Prop. 8 and they also are the target of protests. The protest is not against all Mormons, but the Church of LDS and supporters of the Proposition.  Drop the “burden of the white man” act. Nobody’s buying it.

By protesting, we are making ourselves and our cause visible. By boycotting, we are holding our neighbors to an equal standard. I personally understand that for many Prop. 8 supporters, their beliefs are the most important thing in the world to them, that the idea of living without those beliefs would be too much to bear. Well, that’s how we feel about our equal rights. We are not asking you to abandon your faith, just stop making the rest of the country bow before your altar. What of the faiths which bless same-sex unions? Are you not denying them their freedom? Freedom from religion means freedom for all religions (even the absence of it), not just freedom for your religion.

Keep your beliefs, but leave our rights alone.

By:           Japhy Grant
On:           Nov 14, 2008
Tagged: , , , ,

  • 295 Comments
    • Wolf
      Wolf

      Bravo Japh.

      My hat is off to you on this one.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Justin Allen
      Justin Allen

      More list need to be made so we can all know who to boycott. How dare they try to make money off of us. Fools.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Akula
      Akula

      They are ones to talk about boycotting (SURPRISE SURPRISE!!!) the thumpers routinely boycott businesses like Ford, Mcdonalds, Disney, and any other company that supports LBGT rights. Like some one said before cry me a river.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • michael
      michael

      Good boy Japh. If these people had of given to the kkk or a neo-nazi organization we would not be getting most of these comments. It just shows the depth of bigotry out there. As I have said before, if we don’t do something this will keep going, haters don’t stop, today its marriage tomorrow adoption, next they will take our natural born children away from us. Sounds extreme? Not really,we humans easily forget the past and go on to repeat it. I think a lot of these posts are attempts by bigots to confuse us and make us feel bad, as well as justify their own hatred and moving past their “political correctness”. “See, I don’t hate gay people. but look at what they are doing to us now”. Its manipulative crap is what it is. Remember, blacks boycotted companies and organizations in the 60’s, they were persecuted for it, let me hear from all you haters about how bad their actions were.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • richagram
      richagram

      Thanks for posting this. I am still wary of everybody directing their anger towards LDS. I worry about the way it is being spun by the opposition, and the anger towards organized religion it seems to be spurring among our community.

      However, this post has helped to explain some of the logic behind that effort. I hope we can open some dialogue with LDS and other less tolerant groups in the future and direct our energies towards more healing rather than fostering a potentially dangerous and angry feud.

      And I really hope Saturday is the multi-ethnic/racial/age/everything demonstration of unity that it should be, for our own sake.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charles Merrill
      Charles Merrill

      Excellent. Thanks

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eugene
      Eugene

      Thank you. I thought I was the only one saying it: what about those faiths that bless same-sex unions? I am a Christian who has made an effort to read beyond what appears on the surface (after an extremely superficial reading) to be a condemnation of gay men. I won’t get into it, but it irks me that I, together with many GLBT and heterosexual Christians, are persecuted because we dare to draw the conclusion, based on rational, critical thinking, that the God we worship abhors the bigotry the Religious Right preaches.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Woof
      Woof

      Japhy my boy, you are going to work splendidly.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RichardR
      RichardR

      Excellent, Japhy.

      I’d refine a couple of points:

      1)Mr. Dreher, if you folks in favor of prop. 8 want to boycott those who opposed it, go ahead! It’s a free country. Oh, but except for …

      2) And Mr.Dreher, we’re focussing on LDS because it/they were HUGE, monolithic and very public in their influence on the voting. Your other scapegoatees (blacks, Latinos, and even the actual ones, the elderly) didn’t act as a group, but as individuals. Not so easy to picket, ya know?

      Now then, I’d love it if there were some serious screaming being done at Focus on the Family and the Catholic Bishops, was it? That’d really get the “gays are anti-religious” juices flowing.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • michael
      michael

      I have also heard from some gay people that this would also hurt
      other gay people who work for these places. Yes, it very well could. Nothing is perfect and there are prices to pay. But remember their are those who have given their lives for standing up for what is good and what is right, just as the Kennedy’s, Dr. King, Gandhi and the big guy Jesus the prices people have paid. Loss of a job and income, while difficult, is nothing compared to the prices others have paid. There is a saying, “sometimes one must be willing to die in order to live”. This does not necessarily mean physical death but it refers to sacrifices of all sorts. But we can be there to help those of us who do suffer for the cause,
      just as people came through for Mark Oshiro to help with bail money. We must keep the faith and not allow those who wish to tear us apart to succeed.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChlorineX
      ChlorineX

      Nicely done. I’m going local and asking the businesses I frequent where they stand, even though I’m not in California. You want my business and my hard-earned cash – you better not be trying to hold me down.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CondeNasty
      CondeNasty

      Love the religion, hate the religious.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Austin
      Austin

      This does raise an interesting issue, though. Geo- and demographically speaking, it has been noted that a lot of minority (for sake of argument: black, latino, asian) groups voted for Prop 8, and some of those minority groups live in what most of us can agree to be less safe neighborhoods than those where Mormon temples reside. Even in San Francisco, where the Bayview and Hunter’s Point districts voted for Prop 8. Why not take a protest out there? Could it be because you could easily get shot?

      I understand that the Mormon involvement is much more deeply-rooted, so I’m not disagreeing with this course of action. Just something I thought about, though. Are we so eager to stand up physically against Mormons because in essence, we don’t expect them to fight back physically?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike
      Mike

      Really well done!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Raposo
      Paul Raposo

      @Austin:

      Just something I thought about, though. Are we so eager to stand up physically against Mormons because in essence, we don’t expect them to fight back physically?

      Exactly, Austin. And unfortunately this makes us look weak and hypocritical. I think a march through a racial minority neighborhood, or church would do more than marching on an LDS church.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Wolfgang Schmitt
      Wolfgang Schmitt

      Easily among the top 5 of best Queerty posts ever.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike
      Mike

      Paul, I would agree if it were possible to determin that a particular church was organized in supporting Prop 8, or that an entire neighborhood had turned out in favor of it.

      But to just pick a black neighborhood and assume that everyone there MUST have supported Prop 8 is simple prejudice, I would think.

      The LDS church made itself a target a gay ire by openly working against the rights of gay citizens. If, say, the NAACP had done the same thing, I do believe there would be protests.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike
      Mike

      One more thought: I think our energy would be better spent reaching out to educate minority communities rather than picketing them.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 12:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tim in SF
      Tim in SF

      @Austin: “I understand that the Mormon involvement is much more deeply-rooted, so I’m not disagreeing with this course of action. ”

      Do you really not understand the difference between voting and funding?

      Black people are free to vote however they want. It’s their right that they fought for. But they aren’t the ones who gave $20 million out of the $36 million the Pro-8 campaign had at their disposal. That was the Mormons.

      Do you understand now?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ksu499
      ksu499

      I don’t believe it’s ever been a requirement that you must tolerate those who seek to destroy you.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • denise
      denise

      @Austin:
      I’m black and a lesbian and I agree that we should march in black neighborhoods. I also think that some kind of outreach should’ve been made to these neighborhoods prior to the election. We can’t just simply assume one minority will vote for another minority’s cause.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mark
      mark

      I saw some ignoramous saying it’s time to bankrupt gay businesses. I pointed out to him that someone who has never been a patron of any gay business would have NO EFFECT.
      Whereas gays/lesbians shop at tons of straight businesses, and if we select a few of them to punish and a few to reward we have CLOUT.
      The nastiness the YES on Prop 8 supporters accuse us of, pales in comparrison to BLACKMAIL letters sent to No voters demanding $10,000.00, and those four letter senders face FELONY charges of 4 year prison sentences for EACH letter, and thousands in fines. One sender was an LDS lawyer.
      These buffoons will serve every day of the sentences and every dime of their FINES.

      some of the alleged attacks by gays/lesbians SMACK of self inflicted VICTIMHOOD which parralels scratching a backwards B on their cheecks. The burnt Book of Mormon is such a stunt,
      How likely would No prop 8 voters have a Book of Mormon to set a fire, which did absolutely no damage to the building, and a gray car they didn’t see a license plate drove away…OH PLEEEZE!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bob
      Bob

      Unless I’m mistaken, the effort to protest isn’t targeting those who VOTED for prop 8, but those who funded the hate-filled campaign to get it passed. We’re following the money trail, not the voters, and demanding that gay dollars no longer be used to fund discrimination against us.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mark
      mark

      btw…MORMONS are HUGE VICTIM DIVAS, they have done the SAME act for 150 years…boo f*CKIN hoo you OWN your own state and monopolise two more and get international funds from Mormons globally..how G*D DAMN tragic for ya.

      LDS maybe it’s time to update you ACT…just saying

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      What’s more, I find it a little annoying that people keep making these insinuations that somehow it’s more dangerous to face off against the “big, scary Latinos + blacks” as if they will necessarily be more violent than the white Mormon population. That’s a load of crap, quite frankly.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mark
      mark

      btw. Sundance Film Festival is requesting UTAH state funds….I think all the letters to Sundance SPONSORS who are very progressive companies, who AIN’T gonna get a COORS beer boycott on their product lasting decades.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PJ
      PJ

      My great-grandmother used to say, “Watch out for people who are condemning you because the chances are that they are doing it too.”

      These people are so busy using their Bibles as weapons, they forget to look inside it.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      christers and islamists have always had a martyr complex. It’s one of the symptoms of their self-imposed irrational lifestyles.

      The problem is that today’s milquetoast christers don’t embrace it. Here’s how the boy raping catholic cult describes the impulse to martyrdom: “a martyr, or witness of Christ, is a person who, though he has never seen nor heard the Divine Founder of the Church, is yet so firmly convinced of the truths of the Christian religion, that he gladly suffers death.”

      I blame it all on Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus. I know that 24/7/365 debauchery can be costly, but after all he was emperor of the known world and etc. How much trouble would it have been to set aside enough sesterces to import a few more lions and tigers? It would’ve spared us the necessity of putting up with the wimpy kind of jezuz jumpers who infest our culture.

      And wouldn’t that be nice.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      I agree that protests and boycotts in and of themselves are not intolerant, but the attitudes being advocated by most of the people participating in these events is explicitly intolerant, as is the proclivity of this blog and its posters to couch the situation in hate speech. Why is voting according to your beliefs “hate,” while an aggressive assault on that belief is “not intolerant”? This is a blatant double standard.

      Let’s be honest and define some terms before we start advocating false presuppositions. Did Prop. 8 take away rights? No, it took away one single right, and an exclusively semantic one at that.

      Where did that right come from? It was extrapolated from a specific reading of the Constitution by four California Supreme Court judges.

      Who do they answer to? The Constitution, which is answers to the people. The people have disagreed with those four judges regarding the fundamental right to have a gay relationship recognized by the state as indistinguishable from a heterosexual relationship. It’s as simple as that.

      While hate is no doubt a factor some people’s opposition to gay marriage, that opposition does not unilaterally equal hate, and it’s quite hypocritical to argue that it does and at the same time argue that people who say “love the religion, hate the religious” are not intolerant. I’m more than willing to enter into a discussion with anyone about gay marriage, and unfortunately it does often retrogress into an angry rant, but almost exclusively on the part of the gay community. See my attempts to enter into intelligent and respectful discourse here:

      http://www.haloscan.com/comments/joemygod/5474388963597526607/?src=hsn#1118806

      Here are some of the many responses to my attempt at civility:

      “No, Dan, I won’t give you any respect whatsoever. There is no discussion to be had. I don’t care about your journey through the land of Self-Loathing, nor your flip-flopping homophobia.

      You are a dildo with legs for the LDS. Fuck off.”

      “And as a fellow (used to be) Mormon I would ask that you kindly fuck off. You and the church positively nauseate me. You are a bigot, plain and simple.

      Again….FUCK YOU and your church.
      Can I make it any clearer?”

      “Surely there are some truckstop washrooms for you to hang around if you’re so eager to be in the company of cocksuckers.”

      “Why don’t you just get the fuck outta here?”

      “Dan, you and your magic underwear and wood submarines can fuck off…”

      “Daniel has entered the lion’s den so he can return to Mormonland and get some brownie shirt points for ethnographic evangelism, trying to convert heathen savages by being near them in their own sin-squalid territory — just like the overseas Mormons do in developing countries where they prey like vampire bats on the weakest of humanity simply for their own self-aggrandization with their Grand Poobah Fetish Underwear Latter Day Saint Cult Leaders.

      You ventured into the third world of gay. Go back to Mormonville now, Dan. You got away lucky. No one bit you — just a lot of hissing and spitting. Go now and make lugubrious white worm love to your many underaged girl-wives (aka your cousins). Buh-bye, now, Dan. Don’t forget not to write.

      Your mission is over.”

      “Dan, you are a big, fat liar…”

      “Don’t tell anyone….But Dan is a power bottom and pain pig. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but his wife would NEVER understand.

      Dan again I implore you politely….FUCK OFF!”

      “Dan…you sir are a brainwashed member of a cult. I therefore know that engaging you in anything is a waste of time and effort.

      So once again I will say…FUCK YOU, JOSEPH,BRIGHAM, and all the multitudes of bastard children they brought forth.”

      Is this what so much tolerance and righteous indignation spawns? One person on that entire blog (which, by the way, is apparently the best LGBT blog in the world) refrained from verbally assaulting me for attempting to engage in respectful and adult dialogue. Flat refusing to condemn that kind of attitude is tacit approval of those tactics. Do you support them, or are you truly tolerant?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • butterpantz
      butterpantz

      I think all of this stems from the general public finally being able to access the donation records via the web. Now I can easily look up who voted in favor of 8 and choose to not do business with them. Up until now most of these donations were difficult to track for the regular folks.

      Transparency does work!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DC Dude
      DC Dude

      Way to go! Points well made!

      Look, the Mormons organized and donated a MAJORITY of the money to pass Prop 8 … so the majority of the attention and pickets are directed at them.

      It’s pretty much going unsaid, but perhaps we all agree in our hearts that picketing blacks, latinos, black churches or even old folks is (a) not really possible, (b) counterproductive. And that education and outreach is more of long-term goal in those areas.

      Back to the Mormons: Maybe the gays around the country, like me, were shocked to learn that the Mormons reached out of Utah into California. I knew the Catholics disliked us. And I know the gays have picketed them for years. But this whole Mormon thing came out of nowhere and was a surprise … at least to me.

      And kind of like when you get gang-attacked in the school yard, it’s very jarring and makes you want to fight back — in non-violent ways like picketing.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mark
      mark

      LDS can be as thuggish as the CIA, Labor bosses, and drug cartels…one of the BIG NAACP law suits which made Mormons MAGICLY accept Blacks as full members in the priesthood.
      It involved an elder who got excommunicated for ordaining a Black man, LDS had goons following this rogue elder, and somehow they murdered the rogue elder’s body guard.

      these guys can fight dirty, but not as dirty as we can, they can’t invisibly be any color, ethnicity, age, gender….like queers can.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Austin
      Austin

      @Tim in SF:

      Did you understand what I wrote? I know why we are protesting against Mormons, and I do know the difference between funding and voting (as well as discourse and condescension).

      What I’m wondering isn’t the depth of “wrongness” that each group has committed, but rather our approach to addressing the very nature of what is wrong: the elimination of equal rights. I am fully in support of protesting the Mormon church, as well as the Catholic church, who also played a role, as well as many Protestant churches, who I suspect participated as well. But something that has been identified as a weak link in the anti-Prop 8 campaign has been its target audience. We failed to included the aforementioned minority groups, groups that are a large part of the gay community in the first place. And yet here we are again, focusing our anger (and rightly so, to some degree) and protesting against what is a largely white community.

      This isn’t about the difference between voting and funding. This is about how we might want to consider acting differently in the aftermath of what is obviously a less than successful campaign to fight Prop. 8.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChicagoJimmy
      ChicagoJimmy

      @fredo777: Have you ever seen a cornered LDS member? They’re like a badger mixed with really angry swarm of wasps. Man, they’ll go nuts on you! LOL.

      In fact, I agree with you. We’re falling into stereotypes if we’re “afraid” to reach out to people of color. Especially when the GLBT population of color needs our support so much.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert
      Robert

      I have a couple of things to say… first of, Christian Right Wings have been boycotting sponsors for shows with gay story lines, or companies that support gay/lesbian rights for years (sometimes it works sometimes not).

      However, I believe that unless a specific company/organization sponsored/donated to yes on prop 8 then boycotting them is not right.

      The fact that an employee made a donation doesn’t make the company at fault. I am sure there are plenty of Starbucks employees across the nation that gave money to yes on 8, should we all stop having Starbucks coffee?

      In addition, I applaud those who put their money where their mouth is (even if I completely disagree with what they believe in). Many gay/lesbian/trans etc. people didn’t do a damn thing to promote the cause (let me repeat that they didn’t do a thing to promote the cause). Yet they are yelling and screaming and boycotting. Its a little late now.

      Now if a company/corporation is continually advancing a hateful agenda (toward any minority) then I’ll be the first person to spend my dollars somewhere else.

      Again, just because an employee chose to give to yes on 8 doesn’t mean the company should be punished… it was a personal choice by an individual.

      Just my .02

      Nov 14, 2008 at 1:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      A note to racists.

      Other minorities, women, the civilian and GI antiwar movements, students and unions are far and way the best and most reliable allies of the GLBT communities.

      We know that for a fact so give it a rest. No one falls for your divide and rule crap. As Ben Franklin said

      “if we don’t hang together, we shall hang separately.”

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @Dan:

      The constitution does not answer to the people + we are not living in a pure democracy. That said, those judges’ job is to make sure that we don’t have tyranny of the majority versus the minority (LGBT folks).

      The passing of Prop 8 did take away a right that was already granted. And it isn’t a “semantic” issue, at all. These relationships are marriages, in name + in legal benefits.

      It’s as simple as that.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tim Kelleher
      Tim Kelleher

      Japhy.. cause no-one else has said it….

      work bitch!!!

      Keep up the good work

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      “if we don’t hang together, we shall hang separately.”

      is a message that the racists who post at queerty ought to keep in mind. Unions, other minorities, women, immigrant workers and the GI and civilian antiwar movements are our best and most natural allies. Nothing can change that.

      Comments that exploit the divide and rule tactics of the bigots are themselves the comments of bigots.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @fredo777:

      The civil unions/civil partnerships which Obama and the bigots in the Democratic (sic) Party endorses are designed to keep us as second class citizens. They favor that measure so they can continue to pander to christer bigots. y

      When everyone has the same rights then it’ll become a semantic question. For now it’s a question of fighting bigotry.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 36 · Bill Perdue said
      A note to racists.

      Other minorities, women, the civilian and GI antiwar movements, students and unions are far and way the best and most reliable allies of the GLBT communities.
      ____________________________________________

      That is interesting, because the women’s movement specifically pushed out the lesbians because they thought that feminists were already thought of as “Wanting to be men” and that advocating with lesbians would be bad for the movement. The Anti-war movement has never once gone after Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and as for minorities, the majority in CA. voted AGAINST us…so if THEY are all our best friends, then I would say…with friends like them, who needs enemies?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MichaelK
      MichaelK

      way to kick ass with words. now, if only logic worked on bigots.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Webster
      Webster

      Injustice reminds us of the words of Victor Hugo:

      “There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come.”

      Equal rights for ALL citizens of the U.S.–a nation founded on the principle of separation of church and state. This ideal is being focussed now in California–but will resonate throughout the nation.

      The time has arrived and justice WILL prevail.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Cam:

      Cam, I have a question.

      Are your lies and cynicism about movement building and alliance building just a way so saying you don’t want to be an activist. Remember, no one is pushing you. I’d say the movement could do very well if you stayed as far away from us as possible.

      There has always been lesbian baiting by rightwing Democrats in the women’s movement. What’s you point? And don’t stupidly confuse a movement with its organizations. Next thing you know you’ll be telling us that the Barney Frank stoneheads are part of the movement.

      The statement that the ‘minorities’ voted against us is so out of touch with reality that it’s as simple minded and racist. What did you expect? The Democrats who ran No on 8 simply abandoned the filed to bigots because they couldn’t handle the question of Obama’s bigoted opposition to same sex marriage. Instead of denouncing his ‘god’s in the mix bigotry’ they insert their thumbs, twirled and keep their mouths shut.

      The GI and civilian anti-war movement opposes bigotry by the war department as much as they oppose the mass murder of Iraqis and the idea of GLBT youth becoming and others being cannon fodder for Obama’s wars.

      Your cynicism is just an excuse for your contempt for our struggles and those of our allies.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul
      Paul

      As someone who will be peacefully protesting in Chicago this weekend (and as an attorney who is keenly aware that the WAY in which you present yourself can make all the difference in the world), let me kindly suggest to all Prop 8 protestors this weekend that you be respectful and thoughtful.

      That doesn’t mean you can’t be angry, but remember your image might be beamed into the living room of someone who doesn’t know a gay person. Let’s remind them that for every one angry protestor who defaces a Mormon Church, there’s tens of thousands who just peacefully want to demonstrate for our rights.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChristopherM
      ChristopherM

      @Dan:

      Dan, if you woke up one day and were no longer married thanks to the orders of funding by a church that doesn’t “approve” of you, what exactly do you think your reaction would be to members of that church who are defending its actions? I don’t get why all of a sudden we’re supposed to play nice…if Prop 8 had failed, you would have lost nothing. Because of the LDS, it succeeded, and gay folks in California lost a basic civil right. So no, I’m not going to be civil or tolerant. Anyone who defends the actions of the LDS can suck it as far as I’m concerned. Come crying to me when you lose a basic civil right by the tyranny of the majority.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 2:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @Bill Perdue:

      Give it a rest, dude.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 3:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sparkle obama
      sparkle obama

      @Justin Allen:

      you guys sound re-tahded.
      ain’t nothing wrong w/protesting
      but get a clue!
      quit bothering individuals and take it to the fucking supreme court.
      i’m not too sure about the new generation of gays that “doesn’t read”.
      get smart, ladies!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 3:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sparkle obama
      sparkle obama

      @Austin:
      Are we so eager to stand up physically against Mormons because in essence, we don’t expect them to fight back physically?<<

      thank you.
      no more attacks against individuals, please.
      undisciplined, entitled b*tches need to sit down with this mess.
      making old ladies cry and taping it on their camera phones!
      fight the real enemy, assholes!
      take it back to the supreme court.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 3:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gayvirgo
      gayvirgo

      I was so glad to read someone bring up the “Why do your religious beliefs trump my religious beliefs?” point. I attend a traditional protestant church (nearly 400…yes…400 years of one continuous congregation) that blesses same sex unions and would be first in line for performing them with legal sanctification. My God tells me that love is holy in all it’s forms. My God tells me that to celebrate and uphold that love is blessed. My God tells me that I am His creation-just as I am. My God tells me that I am worthy of His incredible Grace and Never-ending, Unconditional Love.

      Can ANYONE tell me why their God is better than my God and, therefore, the laws of this great country should follow the teachings of their God over all other teachings??

      Nov 14, 2008 at 3:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @fredo777:

      I know we don’t live in a pure democracy. Everyone learned in high school that Madison loathed democracies. The California state constitution does indeed, however, answer to the people insofar as the people don’t infringe upon the statutes found therein. That’s why the people can amend the constitution. Ultimately, the constitution must be the supreme authority, but it derives its authority and its very existence from the people. If they are powerless to influence it, America will have failed. And this is in no way the tyranny of the majority. The gay community is requesting a radically altered definition of marriage be legally recognized by the state.

      Secondly, the right that was revoked is not explicit in the CA constitution, and the court that decided it was implicit was as split as a supreme court can be. That’s not a solid foundation for the fundamental right of gays to the designation “marriage.” You’ll be hard pressed to find many people who agree that the constitution should have these kinds of details hammered out at the sole discretion of four individuals. In addition, there was no difference in legal benefits. From the California Family Code section 297.5:

      “Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.”

      That’s pretty clear.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 3:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gayvirgo
      gayvirgo

      And since when are boycotts “intollerant”? How much longer should Rosa Parks have been “tolerant”

      Yes, the Christian right has LONG boycotted and NEVER were they considered intolerant (I am sure that a perusal of Focus on the Family’s site would yield some instructions about who is to be targeted these days).

      And we aren’t taking away your right to live or work. If you are SO secure in your beliefs then our little gay minority won’t be able to put a dent in your business because you have SO many allies, right?

      Could it be you fear retaliation because, in your heart of hearts, you know you are wrong?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @fredo777: Dude, not a chance. I am not, after all, the one chewing puppy uppers so they can spew obamadolatry 24/7.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Paul: I wear straight drag for funerals, marriages and would in court too.

      But in general the question of how much of our anger and disruptiveness we display is a very minor tactical question. If the airhead cowardly Democrats who ran No on 8 and the efforts in Arizona and Florida had the guts to expose and denounce Obama’s bigotry and if they’d had led a campaign of angry, disruptive demonstrations that threatened much more of the same we would wouldn’t be in this mess.

      Today’s movement will have to be built nationally, with a democratic internal life and around a program of cutting edge demands. I think the net will prove one of our most valuable tools to coalesce a GLBT left.

      Just as important is the program we fight for and the alliances we build.

      1. We need inclusive laws to make it easy to sue and win claims against employers, service providers and landlords who discriminate.

      2. We need tough laws that harshly punish hate crimes and hate speech.

      3. We need equal rights and privileges for our partnering.

      4. With the recession threatening to become a depression we need a crash program to fund housing, medical and counseling services and job training/educational assistance for the tens of thousands of LGBT children and teens who are throw away by their patents.

      5. We need funding for HIV/AIDS services and research on an unrestricted ‘as necessary’ basis, overseen by activists from the GLBT communities, GLBT doctors and nurses and the AFL-CIO’s medical service unions

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @ChristopherM:

      Perhaps you’re unaware, but our church has been through that process already. Polygamy was upheld as illegal by the US Supreme Court in Reynolds V. Supreme Court in 1881 because it was “odious,” and better suited to “Asiatic and African countries.” What did our church do? It submitted to the rule of law. As far as my own marriage being suddenly made null and void: I didn’t get married with the clear understanding that the opinions of four judges was all that was holding the legality of my marriage together. Nor was I keenly aware that a vote would shortly take place that would decide whether my marriage would remain legal. Now, if those conditions had described my marriage, I would be upset, but I wouldn’t attempt to undermine the principles of our constitution and rely on the sympathies of activist judges to enforce a paradigm that was established as clearly against the will of the people. I also wouldn’t attempt to pin the entirety of the blame on one religious group, just because they happen to make a convenient target and just because I knew there would be no real social or legal consequences, as would be the case if I went after the more established groups that played a much larger role in getting the proposition passed.

      Everyone keeps saying we bankrolled it, but everyone seems to ignore the fact that the opposition to Prop. 8 raised far more money and had the support of just about every celebrity alive, almost every newspaper in the country, and California’s teachers union. Prop. 8 passed because your constituents weren’t able to convince the people they weren’t going to see negative consequences to gay marriage, not because Latter-day Saints donated money.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PJR
      PJR

      @Cam: You’re right – the women’s movement DID specifically push out Lesbians – *40 YEARS AGO*! And individual members of racial minority groups did vote against Prop 8 at a higher percentage than caucasian individuals. That, however was due to the lack of outreach to individuals in minority communities. No amount of outreach would have made a difference to the LDS leadership in Salt Lake – they launched a coordinated campaign to fund this proposition. “Minorities” did not. And not, the LDS church is talking to the media and asking why we’re not protesting black and latino churches – that’s what they want us to do, to take the pressure off them. Because they funded Prop 8!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gayvirgo
      gayvirgo

      Dan,

      I would like you to do a little research project:

      Read/view the 15 most-run ads from both sides of this issue and then fact check each ad.

      I think you’ll find that what your church actually bankrolled was a very clear attempt to use misinformation and fear to sway the hearts and minds of God’s people.

      When you are more informed about the way this issue was presented, I’d like to hear what you have to say.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @PJR: I agree with much of what you said but the highest numbers of any cohort voting yes on 8 was Euroamerican Republicans at 82%. I haven’t researched what went on in Florida or Arizona but if anyone has please post it.

      This whole brouhaha about the African American vote is, as far as I know, based on one flawed CNN exit poll done in one (unknow) county instead of being state wide.

      If you know more let us all know. Facts, citations, whatever you’ve got.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChristopherM
      ChristopherM

      @Dan:

      Will of the people? You must be kidding me with this Dan! It was the will of the people that women were chattel. It was the will of the people that Native Americans get kicked off their land. It was the will of the people that races not intermingle. The people do not get to decide the basic rights of the minority in this country, Dan. You are in desperate need of a constitutional history class.

      Yes, it is true that our side raised a bit more money. Apparently is costs less to stir up bigotry via robo-calls lying about Obama’s support of the amendment, and of scaring bigots into thinking we are after their children. The fact is, Dan, that your church produced most of the money that promoted this hateful amendment. But for your church, this amendment would not have had a chance. $20 million+ How can you even justify that kind of money when there is the hunger and suffering in the world that Christ talked about eradicating? It is repugnant.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @gayvirgo: The efforts of the irrational cults, including the mormons, don’t amount to a hill beans besides the freight train that smashed into our chances of winning. That was the Obama Special and it derailed us with “god’s in the mix.”

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rjb
      rjb

      I believe PJR was highlighting the differences between the black community and the LDS church- reiterating that pointing the finger at black churches is basically a smoke screen.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChristopherM
      ChristopherM

      @Dan:

      Also Dan, I don’t believe for a second you would be merely “upset” if your marriage were ruled invalid by a simple majority vote. You would take to the streets in outrage, and frankly, you would be entirely justified in doing so.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Raposo
      Paul Raposo

      @Dan:

      Dan, the opinion of an ex-gay on gay marriage doesn’t really matter.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @ChristopherM:

      “Apparently is costs less to stir up bigotry via robo-calls lying about Obama’s support of the amendment…

      Bullshit. Obama had a minor tactical opposition to Prop 8 and only then because it’s a constitutional amendment. In all other respects his prejudiced opposition to same sex partnering rights is the same as that of most ‘leaders’ of the twin parties of bigotry, war and economic failure.

      And no less disgusting.

      BTW, Christopher did you notice the ‘progressive’ flag pin that your ‘antiwar’ President-designate is sporting these days? Do you think warcriminal and superbigot Colin Powell will get NSA, State or the war department? And where does Nunn fit in now that High Colonic Powell’s on boards.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ritorna Vincitor
      Ritorna Vincitor

      Mormons took it upon themselves to sponsor a ballot initiative that allows perfectly legal and valid marriages to be subjected to a popular vote. As a result millions of Californians, the vast majority of them not Mormons, are denied the right to marry the person they love. And the valid marriages of 18,000 couples face nullification. Mormons went to the polls and in the privacy of the voting booth checked the box to strike down thousands of existing marriages. And they somehow now feel that they are victims?? I’m not buying it. Not for one second.

      Instead of trying to portray themselves as the victims of bigotry, let them ponder how much attention they have drawn to their church’s history of polygamy. Let them consider the hypocrisy of Mormons trying to portray themselves as the champions of traditional marriage. Let them consider how they can continue to portray themselves as a persecuted minority when they have become the persecutors. Let them ponder the impact on traditional marriage of their ballot initiative that has subjected perfectly legal marriages to the vote of total strangers. Let them consider how much they would appreciate being forced to abide by the tenants and beliefs of another religion. Mormons are the victims here? Hogwash!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thumper
      Thumper

      Japh,

      Ya tricky little bastard. All your readers patting you on the back must be blind to the deception in your article.

      “First off, gay marriage doesn’t infringe on your ‘freedom of religion’ at all.”

      No, the right to same-sex marriage in and of itself has nothing to do with education, speech or religion, but it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to see where this slippery slope leads. We all know that your long term agenda is to silence all dissent. We have to fight you at every turn, because we know WE WILL LOSE OUR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOMS if we let you have your way, and for what? So you guys don’t have to wrestle with your demons? No.

      “If you didn’t know, gay people get beaten and murdered at an alarming rate in this country simply because of who they are. Gays and lesbians can still lose their jobs simply for being gay in many states.”

      OK. “Any” is an alarming rate, but Matthew Sheppard was like 15 bazillion years ago, and the only subsequent gay-murder I know of is Lawrence King. I wouldn’t say it’s an epidemic. The employment laws are being fixed. Things are getting better for you guys all the time. My point: you won’t be able to use this as an excuse much longer – you can barely use it now.

      I see right through you, pal. I don’t expect the lemmings congratulating you on your “work” to see it or even care, but there are a lot of us who will not allow you to steal OUR freedoms in the name of “equality.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jack E. Jett
      Jack E. Jett

      Sadly, Dallas is full of homophobic journalist like this. This bearded dude is the head honcho at the Dallas Morning News. You would not believe the shit these gay bashing douchebags get away with here.
      I host a show on Rational Radio and the Dallas paper will not even list us as a station.
      Dallas is really the ass crack of the bible belt.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 4:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thumper
      Thumper

      BTW, great arguments all, Dan.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 5:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @rjb: I agree but I still think the basis for all this bull saying we were “betrayed” is based on non-facts expolited by skinhead race baiters.

      It’s all very much like the Hitlerite theory that Jews “stabbed Germany in the back”. It’s manufactured and dangerous.

      And yes, it can happen here. And has.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 5:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Evah21
      Evah21

      @Dan: Dan, two things. Thanks for trying to be civil, it is very difficult with such a personal and volatile issue. Second, I personally do not view it as just a semantic issue. They took the word “marriage” away from us, but that little word “marriage” means a heck of a lot more in the majority of our states. Like hospital visitation rights. Like adoption rights, if you’re living in the state of Arkansas. Health insurance. Benefits. True, we still have our civil unions and with those civil unions, we have one some of those benefits…but what benefits we receive vary from state to state. Some states don’t even allow civil unions; in fact, I can think of 18 states that do not recognize any sort of gay union legally (i.e. no benefits for being in an equivalent monogamous relationship of two heterosexuals)

      So when you can look me in the eye and say this is just a “semantic” issue, I would like to see proof of my civil union or marriage benefits in your hand.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 5:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jim
      Jim

      @Thumper: If you haven’t heard of any “gay-murder” between Matthew Sheppard and Lawrence King, perhaps you should’ve started trolling gay blogs LONG before now. That way you’d be more well versed, and more up-to-date, on a subject of which you assume to know so much.

      As for the line “…but there are a lot of us who will not allow you to steal OUR fredoms in the name of ‘equality,'” who exactly determined that whatever group you align yourself with is any better than any OTHER group in this country, you pompous ass?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 5:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChristopherM
      ChristopherM

      @Bill Perdue:

      He said he wouldn’t vote for the amendment. The Yes on 8 ran robocalls saying he supported the amendment. You can call that bullshit all you want, then go back to being one of six voters for some wackjob fringe candidate.

      And the last time I checked, warmongers don’t have a monopoly on the flag. Progressives can be just as patriotic. The fact that the flag seems to stir up such vitriol in you says more about you than it does me or Obama.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 6:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thumper
      Thumper

      @Jim: OURS means all of ours, jackass, including you.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 6:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thumper
      Thumper

      @Jack E. Jett:
      “Dallas is really the ass crack of the bible belt.”

      That must mean that you REALLY like living there!

      HA! Get it? COMEDY!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 6:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @Bill Perdue:

      Earlier polls done by SurveyUSA & Field showed more like 60% of African-Americans were in favor of banning gay marriage. You can search for these results at http://www.surveyusa.com and http://www.field.com.

      But I find polling on this matter to be rather suspect…findings in different polls would vary wildly among all age, gender, ethnicity, & geographical groups.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 6:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bob
      Bob

      Poor Thumper and Dan. They like to discriminate against us, but don’t like it when we have had enough and fight back. Boo fuckin’ hoo, honeys.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 6:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bob
      Bob

      And Dan, dear, isn’t lying a sin? You write: Opposition to Prop. 8 raised far more money. Nope. It did not. Check your facts and quit lying.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 6:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      I always say that it’s your right in America to do what you want, but it’s always my right to respond. The Yes on 8 apparently thought this was a one sided discussion. I hope they learn in the coming years that this was just the first paragraph.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 7:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charles J. Mueller
      Charles J. Mueller

      @Thumper: Who left the hen-house door open for this homophobic opossum to slip in?

      You wrote: >OK. “Any” is an alarming rate, but Matthew Sheppard was like 15 bazillion years ago, and the only subsequent gay-murder I know of is Lawrence King. I wouldn’t say it’s an epidemic.

      I’ll just bet that you’d also say that the systematic murder of some six-million Jews during the Holocaust wasn’t an “epidemic” either and that it too, happened over 60 “bazillion” years ago.

      Had you done even the most rudimentary of searches on the Internet, before plowing your shit onto our plates, you would be aware that some 55,000 homosexuals also perished during Holocaust and that many more thousands of homosexuals were used as guinea pigs in heinous medical experiements carried out by the Nazis, not that these revalations should disturb you, however.

      I can just hear you thinking to yourself, “Serves those cocksuckers right. That’s all they are good for.”

      You ignorant fuck, you! If you read the fucking newspapers, did an Internet search or looked up at the TV once in awhile between swigs on your can of Budweiser now and then, you would have a pretty good idea of how many gays have been murdered in the USA since the Sheppard boy got hung out on a fence to dry like shoe-leather.

      People like you, aren’t bothered by the injustice of such horrendous acts of hatred, so it’s highly unlikely that you would have heard the news being screamed at you from your TV screen or jumping out at you from your newspaper. Dumb fucks like you just tune it out and yell for the old lady to bring them another can ‘o beer on the way back from washing and drying the supper dishes in the kitchen while you sit on your fat ass that’s glued to the recliner.

      I could quote figures and name names, but they would only fall on deaf ears who have no desire to hear the truth but only lies and misrepresen-tations of the truth.

      You, Sir, are a homophobe, a bigot and a horrible excuse for a human being, gay or straight, since you failed to define yourself before spitting out your venomous bile.

      By-the-bye, exactly what is your motivation for coming onto a gay site? Looking for a little surreptitious cock-action in between rug munching sessions, are ya? Or, ain’t the old lady giving you any these days since you turned into an old, fat swine?

      Oh…and BTW,

      Nov 14, 2008 at 7:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charles J. Mueller
      Charles J. Mueller

      BTW, why am I not surprised that you would agree with all the comments Dan made, Thumper?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 7:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      Dan, stop playing the victim here.

      If you’re willing to have the LDS Church legally redefined as a “cult” that has all the traditional protections and rights as a “religion,” but called “not a religion, but a cult,” then we’ll be happy to accept your cult’s efforts to force us into a separate and unequal category under the law.

      Of course, you’re not willing to accept such second class status — but you’re willing to foist it on others and turn into a teary-eyed bitch when those would-be segregated individuals call your cult to account.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 7:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sarah R.
      Sarah R.

      This is for sure one of the dumber complaints I’ve heard levied from the Nutso Right. Last I checked, we still were covered by the Bill of Rights, and it’s my right and everyone else’s to speak out in this way.

      Suggested slogan for signs tomorrow?

      NO GAY DOLLARS TO CALIFORNIA

      Hit ‘em where it hurts.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 7:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charles J. Mueller
      Charles J. Mueller

      Cock-Thumper wrote: >I see right through you, pal. I don’t expect the lemmings congratulating you on your “work” to see it or even care, but there are a lot of us who will not allow you to steal OUR freedoms in the name of “equality.

      I can’t help but wonder how this asshole feels about woman getting the right to vote, blacks getting their civil rights and black being allowed to marry white women?

      Perhaps he’d like to see a Proposition putting these issues up to a popular vote, like they just did with gay civil-rights?

      The truly scary part is, with so many racist, hateful and bigoted dumb-fucks out there just like Thumper, those Propositions might just get passed as well.

      And, I truly hope by saying this, that I am not giving anyone any ideas. I’m sure that they probably already have a pot full of them on the back burner of the stove just waiting for the heat to be turned up.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @gayvirgo:

      I’ve seen the commercials that were run, and I know exactly which ones were funded by the coalition of which my church was a part. Not a one of them was at all misleading. The most popular one to criticize is the one about teaching about gay marriage in schools, but there’s nothing misleading about it. California’s state code of education states that children should be taught about marriage, and in Massachusetts once gay marriage was legalized the school boards added gay marriage to the curriculum. It’s perfectly logical to conclude that the same would be the case in California.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @ChristopherM:

      No, I’m not in need of a history class. I’m well acquainted with history. It took the will of the people to bring about equality for women. Native Americans were mainly the victims of zealous government officials, and anti-miscegenation laws were enacted and enforced by government officials, not by the people.

      A bit more? That “bit more” is more than most Americans will earn in their entire lives. And my church did not provide “most of the money.” You guys didn’t have a more difficult time because it’s easier to spread bigotry, you had a more difficult time because your advertising, for the most part, labeled everyone who supported Prop. 8 a bigot. They did the same thing you’re doing now. You promote divisiveness and attempt to vilify your opponents. That’s why you failed to defeat Prop. 8 and that’s why you’re only further increasing support for it now.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @ChristopherM:

      You’re just projecting yourself on me now, which seems to be a widespread proclivity in the gay community. Everyone who disagrees with you must ultimately be just like you, only in self-loathing denial. You make yourself feel like the better person to protect your self-esteem.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Paul Raposo:

      I’m afraid I don’t follow.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      Dan, please take the prescriptive rhetoric of your cult elsewhere.

      We don’t want multiple spouses, magic underwear, or to become gods over our own planets in the afterlife. Please go to the next door to preach your cult-schlock. Thanks!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Evah21:

      I appreciate the sentiment.

      On civil unions, Arkansas is clearly in the wrong. I was surprised and quite saddened when I heard about that. Civil unions in California afford all the same rights, and that should be the standard country-wide. I initially supported gay marriage and would have voted against Prop. 8 had I lived in California. Upon seeing the reaction of the gay community (in general) since then, however, I grew concerned about the consequences that Prop. 8 supporters warned about. I’m in the middle at this point, but I’m trying to appeal to both sides to present rational and objective arguments. On some LDS message boards I’ve been harassed by other Mormons because I don’t agree with their objections to gay marriage. At this point I want a good discussion, but the yelling and cursing and the religious bigotry are certainly not winning my vote. I’m an objective person and I’m a Mormon. Those aren’t mutually exclusive terms, and if I can’t find a single member of the gay community that recognizes that what reason do I have to accept the propaganda? I’m not spewing any hate, but I’m sure getting a lot thrown in my direction.

      I see the word marriage as carrying with it the implicit potential for self-sustained procreation. At the same time, I recognize that any attempt to apply a comprehensive definition to the word at this point cannot but be influenced by ones personal feelings toward gay marriage. People are going to compose that definition with the inclusion or exclusion of gay marriage predetermined. I deal with the same thing as a Latter-day Saint with other churches attempting to define fully what it means to be a Christian, while clearly crafting that definition with the sole intent of excluding Mormonism. I know how that works, and I don’t think it can have anything to do with the legal process. I think in the end it’s going to come down to whether you think the courts get to decide if gay marriage is a fundamental right, or if the people get to decide.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Bob:

      I’m not getting hurt in this fight, but I’m not enjoying the hypocrisy and the bigotry being spewed by both sides of this discussion. I’m just appealing for objectivity. I hope that’s not really that objectionable for you.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Raposo
      Paul Raposo

      @Dan:

      I’m afraid I don’t follow.

      Dan, in the Joe My God comments section you linked here, you wrote in comment 11.12.08 – 12:59 am:

      “To answer question number 2, I have agreed to what I believe to be serious covenants between God and me, and part of that is a promise to remain chaste, which includes refraining from homosexual relationships. I believe it to be a sin for me to break those covenants.

      Clearly, as an ex-gay who is neither fish nor foul–not married to a woman and not in a gay relationship, you really have no opinion on equal marriage for LGBTQ’s; or not one worth noting.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Raposo
      Paul Raposo

      @Dan:

      I initially supported gay marriage and would have voted against Prop. 8 had I lived in California. Upon seeing the reaction of the gay community (in general) since then, however, I grew concerned about the consequences that Prop. 8 supporters warned about.

      Then clearly, you were never an ally to begin with, if you’re so easily swayed.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      I couldn’t care less what you call my faith, but the hypocrisy and the infantile attempts to goad others is an affront to human decency. I’m trying to put an end to that. You want to submit a proposition to the Constitution? Be my guest.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      I initially supported gay marriage and would have voted against Prop. 8 had I lived in California. Upon seeing the reaction of the gay community (in general) since then, however, I grew concerned about the consequences that Prop. 8 supporters warned about.

      Yep. I’m sure that’s accurate.

      I’m not enjoying the hypocrisy and the bigotry being spewed by both sides of this discussion

      Your concern is touching, but it’s unwarranted.

      I’m happy without a religion. Please take your cult propaganda over to someone who is willing to buy (and pay the mandatory 10% tithe).

      Thanks!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      the hypocrisy and the infantile attempts to goad others is an affront to human decency

      I agree — so please ask your cult to stop doing both. Thanks!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Webster
      Webster

      It’s breathtaking to see the lengths that bigots will go to to justify their bigotry — in the name of their Invisible-Sky-Thingy-in-Charge, no less! It would be amusing, if it weren’t so sad.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      Way to validate the stereotypes.

      What problem do you have with multiple spouses? Am I supposed to be ashamed? Would you support an amendment to the constitution that would recognize polygamous marriages, or are you an intolerant bigot that hates polygamists and their rights?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 8:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Raposo
      Paul Raposo

      @Dan:

      Civil unions in California afford all the same rights…

      This is not true, Dan:

      According to a report given by the Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. General Accounting Office, there are 1,138 benefits the United States government provides to legally married couples, including:

      * Access to Military Stores
      * Assumption of Spouse’s Pension
      * Bereavement Leave
      * Immigration
      * Insurance Breaks
      * Medical Decisions on Behalf of Partner
      * Sick Leave to Care for Partner
      * Social Security Survivor Benefits

      Question: Why Gay Marriage and Not Civil Unions?

      The right to marry is not just about the actual legal ceremony, but an equal right to the extensive list of legal protections awarded to married couples. These benefits given to legally married couples range from tax relief to medical decision making. Civil unions and domestic partnerships may seem like equal unions, but the protections they give to registered couples is often far less than that of marriage.

      Answer: So, why do we need gay marriage and not just civil unions? Here are a few reasons:

      Number of Legal Benefits:

      * Marriage: Over 1,049 federal and state level benefits (see list)
      * Civil Unions: Over 300 state level benefits. *No federal protection (see benefit example)

      Tax Relief:

      * Marriage: Couples can file both federal and state tax returns jointly.
      * Civil Unions: Couples can only file jointly in the state of civil registration.

      Medical Decisions:

      * Marriage: Partners can make emergency medical decisions.
      * Civil Unions: Partners can only make medical decisions in the registered state. Partners may not be able to make decisions out of state.

      Gifts:

      * Marriage: Partners can transfer gifts to each other without tax penalty.
      * Civil Unions: Partners do not pay state taxes, but are required to report federal taxes.

      Death Benefits:

      * Marriage: In the case of a partner’s death, the spouse receives any earned Social Security or veteran benefits.
      * Civil Unions: Partners do not receive Social Security or any other government benefits in case of death. In the case of the death of former Congressman Gerry Studds, his partner of 15 years was denied the government pension that would have gone to a legally recognized spouse.

      Child/Spousal Support:

      * Marriage: In case of divorce, individuals may have a legally-binding financial obligation to spouses and children.
      * Civil Unions: In the case of dissolution , no such spousal or child benefits are guaranteed or required out of state.

      Immigration Rights:

      * Marriage: U.S. citizens and legal residents can sponsor their spouses and family members for immigration.
      * Civil Unions: U.S. citizens and legal residents cannot sponsor non-legal spouses or family members. (more on gay immigration rights)

      From:

      http://tinyurl.com/5v96p7

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Paul Raposo:

      I have no idea how on earth one could extrapolate from that that I’m an ex-gay, but to set the record straight, I’ve never been gay.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Webster:

      Isn’t it hilarious, Webster?

      They believe that Elohim will make them gods over new planets, that magic underwear protects them from harm, and various other stuff that would make even Scientologists blush with shame… and if you even mock it in private, you’re a “bigot.”

      But they can spend millions to lobby against your equal protection rights under the Constitution, and that’s just a political opinion — and if you disagree with them, you’re… wait for it… a “bigot.”

      And of course, their bizarre cultic beliefs are to be afforded absolute respect and fealty, even though they are slamming your family and using the law to disrupt your domestic tranquility — which is a fact rather than some delusion from the likely schizophrenic con-man who founded their cult.

      Bizarre shit. More Americans need to understand where this stuff is coming from — and really think about it.

      People who believe in magic underwear are citing those “beliefs” as basis for actual real-world policy — and slamming anyone who objects to that (and the con-game “tithing” used to fund their illegal political activity) as a “bigot.”

      Think about it. And get frightened. These are the sorts of people who open up gas chambers and start wars based on “deeply held beliefs.”

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Paul Raposo:

      I already cited the section of the California Family Code that clearly states that all rights and responsibilities of married couples, no matter whence they derive, are afforded to domestic partnerships. Citing all the rights that married people have doesn’t do anything to negate that. You didn’t even explain which of those rights you think are included or excluded in domestic partnerships.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      I’m not selling. I don’t know how you got that impression.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Paul Raposo:

      Clearly you’re omniscient, since you were able to determine exactly how much time and consideration I put into this without even knowing who I am or anything about me. You’re truly a sight to behold.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      What problem do you have with multiple spouses?

      None, really. Consenting adults, etc., etc., etc. And unlike you and your cult, I don’t view the law as a club to use against others to support my point of view.

      You see, I even support your right to believe whatever silliness you choose to believe, without using government power to advance it.

      Am I supposed to be ashamed?

      Of course. You’re a bigot, and your cult’s position on this issue is no different than its position on black people was.

      Ten or twenty years from now, your cult will revise its “deeply held beliefs” to continue the con game and stay in the “mainstream” enough to find more gullible adherents willing to donate 10% of their income so your “leaders” can live in wealth and comfort.

      And that will be your right, and the right of your cult.

      Unlike you, I’ll never use government to force you to adhere to my views — even though I recognize the danger that your cult represents to a free thinking free society.

      Ultimately, I guess I just have confidence in the ability of logic to prevail.

      You offer magic underwear and godhood over another planet in the afterlife. I have nothing to offer but facts — but only my case is provable.

      That’s why your cult was forced to lie so often about its intentions, and why it’s in full-bore retreat now. Reality is a mighty, roaring tidal wave bearing down on it, and the cult’s efforts to cope with this are equal to its efforts to avoid admitting black people.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      This is an example of just goading someone to vent your anger. This isn’t going to do anything but show people who disagree with you that you’re really not intelligent enough to have a say in an adult conversation.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      I’m not selling. I don’t know how you got that impression.

      Sure you’re selling. You’re here to apologize for the cult and make all the homos feel bad that they have a belief in the constitution of the USA and its 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.

      We’re supposed to feel like bad nasty bigots because we’re not willing to accept your cult’s efforts to impose its religious beliefs on our lives and separate us into a segregated class of citizens.

      You’re selling PC bullshit, but you’re not particularly good at it.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      This is an example of just goading someone to vent your anger.

      I’m not “goading” anyone, and though I’m angry, it’s not really directed at you.

      I’m just pointing out the basis of this discussion here. The facts and constitution are on my side — on your side is “deeply held beliefs” in magic underwear and posthumous planetary godhood.

      As a fan of science fiction who understands the “fiction” part of the proposition, I find that ultimately the fallacy is your own. You can continue to stammer that you and your cult are the victim here, but it’s not going to end well.

      Just like your cult played victim when its racism and sexism were pointed out in prior decades, this present act is going to end badly for you, with you changing your “deeply held beliefs” once again.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      Another childish hissy fit. Clearly you’re doing nothing but ejaculating your anger all over the internet. If you’re looking to make me feel bad you might as well just give up.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Raposo
      Paul Raposo

      @Dan:

      I have no idea how on earth one could extrapolate from that that I’m an ex-gay, but to set the record straight, I’ve never been gay.

      So why did you write:

      I have agreed to what I believe to be serious covenants between God and me, and part of that is a promise to remain chaste, which includes refraining from homosexual relationships.

      Why would you be refraining from homosexual relationships, if you are not a homosexual? Unless of course you are trying to dictate what others do with their personal lives. Which is it, Dan?

      I already cited the section of the California Family Code that clearly states that all rights and responsibilities of married couples, no matter whence they derive, are afforded to domestic partnerships.

      You stated Civil Unions were the same as marriage, now you are saying Domestic Partnerships are trhe same. Which one is it, Dan?

      Secondly, you provided one paragraph to back up your claim the DP’s and marriage are the same. Why don’t you tell us what rights are equal in marriage and DP’s? If they are the same, why do you insist they be called different things for straights and gays, Dan?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      @Dan: Dan- the issue is whether or not private sector applies it as you describe. If they definitionally say marriage, then although the rights are afforded as per some state benefits, they are not afford to the private sector company that requires marriage.

      The better example , I believe, is to look at the differences between civil unions and marriage as discussed both in the Connecticut case and in the commision report of NJ about the real world impact of civil unions.

      Similar to separate but equal with Brown v Board of Ed the chief problem is among others not just the dignity issue, but also the issue of the associated raised cost for the civil unioned couple versus the married couple. The wording in the statute may say one thing,b ut the application when addressing other areas of law- such as ERISA, benefits by employers who are subject to state and federal law, etc. may differe widely.

      Again the data and information is out there if you are interested.

      The Equality website in NJ also includes video testimonies of various situations where civil unions, including in Vermont, have caused couples legal and financial problems not experienced by straight counter parts.

      Finally, I don’t like lazy people Dan. I hope you do not respond back without having looked up the material I suggest you read and see. That would be a waste of both our time.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @Dan:

      Yeah, right. Separate but equal.

      That always works out well.

      Gay marriage is coming back to Cali. We suffered a loss, but a fairly close one considering the total number of votes. Times change + so do societal rules + norms.

      Either stand with us or gtfo of our way.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @ChicagoJimmy:

      haha

      I’ve never had the pleasure of seeing such a thing, but I’ll take your word for it + never corner a person of the Mormon faith.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      I’m trying to engage in an objective discussion, but you’re doing nothing more than sprinkling naked assertion with petty insults. As I said before, the blog post is correct that these discussions often retrogress to hissy fits, but it’s almost exclusively on the part of the gay community. Case in point.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      Clearly you’re doing nothing but ejaculating

      Man, if I was ejaculating, you’d be enjoying it. But I have standards.

      It is funny to watch how quickly you run away from your cult when its actual beliefs, and the basis of your “principles,” is exposed. Even you have to understand, at whatever rational core you have, that it’s all fiction.

      Hence your need to embrace a patina of faux-rationality to dress up implausible con-man mythology sold to you by a schizo dude who convinced you that God was a man who magically became a God, and if you give 10% of your income to the con-man, you can become a god yourself.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      I’m trying to engage in an objective discussion

      Your objective is actually the diametric opposite. The evidence is the fact that you haven’t addressed a single one of my factually objective points, and have described each of my factually-accurate posts as a “hissy fit” merely because they prove the tenuous basis of your so-called “faith” — and how irrational and deluded one would have to be in order to believe it, let alone use the power of government to impose those fantasies upon others.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @fredo777:

      No, separate but equal is not at all what I’m advocating, and using civil rights-era vernacular just to promulgate a false sense of correlation is not at all accurate.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      separate but equal is not at all what I’m advocating

      True, you’re advocating separate and less-than-equal, given the DOMA law that your cult was also an instrumental supporter of.

      Darn, those pesky facts strike again! ;)

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      Dan, I am curious — how many spirit-children are you planning to have? And which planet are you hoping to be god over, to populate with spirit-children?

      I hear Mercury is too small, and Jupiter is too cold.

      Has your tithing granted you immortal God-powers yet?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      Nice pedantic and patronizing attempt at civility, but the frequent repetition of the word “cult,” and “magic underwear,” combined with absolutely nothing beyond naked assertion and reassertion doesn’t at all constitute “factually objective” points.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      No, you know very well that’s not at all what I’m doing. Shoving words in my mouth doesn’t change anything that’s been said here.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      I’m not going to participate in this discussion if you can’t act like an adult.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      I am simply pointing out two well-known facts:

      1) Most mainstream religious denominations identify the Mormon cult as a cult;

      2) The Mormons believe in magic underwear.

      I recognize that it’s un-PC to point out embarrassing facts, but both of those facts are part of the “deeply held beliefs” you are using as a basis to justify overturning the equal protection clause of the Constitution as applied to LGBT Americans.

      “Civility” has nothing to do with it. You and your cult have already abandoned that, and did so the moment you took up efforts to revoke the equal protection rights of an identifiable group of American citizens.

      So please, answer the questions, or go away. Thanks!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Raposo
      Paul Raposo

      Still waiting for a response, Dan. Are you straight, gay, or ex-gay? We know you’re celibate; but we don’t know why you’re abstaining from homosexual activity, if you’re not gay.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      I’m not going to participate in this discussion if you can’t act like an adult.

      Ah, but I am acting like an adult. You’re the child-like one, refusing to explain the basis of your beliefs.

      You’ve put your beliefs out there, you’ve declared them as the basis for your opposition to constitutional rights for homosexual Americans, and you’ve demanded respect for them.

      Now, I’m asking you about them and you’re suddenly acting all defensive and embarrassed.

      That would suggest that you’re embarrassed by your beliefs, and recognize that rational individuals would reject them in a heartbeat as the ravings of a madman.

      Which begs the question — why should we overrule the constitutional basis of equal protection under the law to satisfy such “beliefs?”

      But then again, you don’t answer questions or think much — you just respond with angry one-liners, don’t you?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      Dan

      I note that you ignore my post that factually gives you real world examples disproving your claim. But continue argue with others who just discuss the issues in general terms. This reinforces my view that the right only wins when we play their game of vague culture wars. You can not respond to my post. So you argue about things you can respond to.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @The Gay Numbers:

      I don’t like lazy people either, which is why I always read whatever’s given to me. As this is a rather long report, please give me some time to read it over thoroughly.

      In the interim, on the discussion of federal rights, wouldn’t a federal recognition of domestic partnerships solve a number of these problems? Wouldn’t that also be a much more realistic short-term goal?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      Another question to Dan that will, of course, go unanswered:

      Isn’t it interesting how every single individual in this debate with you would defend your right to practice your religion, despite the fact that every single one of them recognizes the cult aspects of it — yet you don’t recognize the right of those people to equal protection under the law (subjecting them to permanent second-class citizenship) YET insist that all disagreement with you in the public square is oppression?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hojo
      Hojo

      It’s not semantics. There are 1049 rights included in marriage. There are only 300 in civil unions and domestic partnerships, none of which cross state lines. So if your partner is hospitalized in another state you have no rights. That’s 749 rights we lost with the passage of H8

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Hojo:

      But Hojo, if you get married, the magic underwear will stop working and I might not become god of my own planet.

      You have to respect that!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 9:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hojo
      Hojo

      It takes 1 million signitures to get something on the ballot. Easy now days with the internet.

      Let’s legislate right back at them!

      First lets amend the constitution to make it illegal to proselytize door to door.

      Let’s make second and third marriages illegal.

      How about 2/3 vote to amend the constitution. Our founding fathers were smart enough to do this with the federal one cause they knew the masses couldn’t be trusted.

      Religious institutions which give money to political anything, legislation or candidates lose their tax exemption.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 10:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hojo
      Hojo

      If the magic underwear can’t overpower gay marriage, you might try replacing the batteries?

      Nov 14, 2008 at 10:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      I simply favor a return to Traditional Religion.

      Mormons and Scientologists have redefined religion and taken it from its traditional meaning.

      Religions have been established for millenia and include Christianity (Catholicism and Protestant European Christianity), Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Jainism, Islam, and any other religion that existed for at least 100 years at the founding of the Republic.

      Any “religion” founded afterwards will be legally designated not a religion, but a cult.

      Cults will have all the rights and responsibilities of religions, and will be treated equally in every way. However, we cannot have cults that have existed for under 200 years confuse the children by calling themselves religions, when they aren’t.

      Mormons, Scientologists, and others should be happy to be designated as “cults” and leave “religion” to the established majority of religions. They are less than 2% of the population anyway, and they’re getting the same treatment under the law.

      We shouldn’t let them force the rest of us to redefine religion!

      Nov 14, 2008 at 10:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      More examples of the irritating passive/aggressiveness that every unenlightened Mormon seems to excel at, this time from Dan.

      Dan, go back to your cult…just because a few here are willing to engage you doesn’t mean your opinions mean more than the dirt under your fingernails. Go be with your “adults” who believe in a fallacious God and who excommunicate members of their dwindling coven nilly willy.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 10:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      Gay people concerned about Mormon funding of discrimination should take heart. We’re not the only group they’ve targeted over the last several decades.

      Their founder, Joseph Smith, had this to say of African Americans:

      “Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization.”

      Thus, civil-union style segregation advocated by the cult should not be a surprise. The cult’s founder advocated absolute segregation of black Americans as well.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 10:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      Dan

      No, it would not. The chief problem is that you are creating two entities, and thus, you would have to address with each law- federal and state- various issues as well as in the private sector.

      You also have to continually address comforming the case law that would arise from creating two entities rather than one. Nevermind the complications that arise when children are involved, rights of inheritancy across state lines, etc.

      The reason why marriage is simpler is that it already has the case law and other kinks worked out. This is where this is leading because “its the entity the law already knows.”

      The law is ill equipped to handle new concepts, especially if they affect multiple rights and multiple parties (the couple, their companies, the benefits programs offered by third parties, etc) , and can involve multiple jurisdictions.

      Much of this is lost on people who get married now because the law is settled.

      Nevermind discussions of international law. When people say this is about dignity, I alway say that’s cute, but no its about the hard reality of what I know the law is.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 10:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      The practical result of all of this Dan is that despite the rhectoric the impact on gay couples is to have to address far more issues of first impressions with the new entities than the straight couple getting married. Does the company recognize marriage and civil unions? If the company doesn’t recognize civil unions, but marriage, what kind of legal costs are involved in conforming them to the law, if any on the subject? What happens if the couple is low income? Who pays for that? I can go on and most of this is just instictive off top my head.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 10:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • anokie
      anokie

      @Brian Miller: Thank you for that. I’m now intrigued about this “magic underwear” you speak of. lol… ;-)

      Nov 14, 2008 at 11:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @anokie:

      Oh Anokie, you haven’t heard of the world-famous Mormon Magic Underwear?

      It has great and mighty powers. The initiates wear sacred underwear (known as “temple garments”) at all times to ward off evil and protect them from bodily harm.

      It is said that a Mormon wearing the magic underwear may not be attacked, deceived or harmed in any way.

      Many Mormons take the Magic Underwear very seriously. Often, Latter Day men and women cut holes in the crotches of the underwear so that they can even evacuate without fear of Evil attacking them.

      You can learn more about magic underwear (including one ex-Mormon’s experience with being beaten for allowing his magic underwear to drag on the floor as a child) here:

      http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon013.htm

      And yes, these are the “deeply held beliefs” that make up the “thinking” of this group and its assault on everyone’s equal protection rights.

      Nov 14, 2008 at 11:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      From the LA Times:

      But backers of Proposition 8 said the online activism is, in the words of Schubert, “a wildfire of hate going out of control.”

      Proposition 8 opponents have the right to protest and file lawsuits, “but what they don’t have the right to do is harass and intimidate people. They don’t have a right to blacklist and boycott our supporters,” he added.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 12:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      LOL, they’re a little frightened aren’t they?

      I think they assumed that we were going to run and hide and cry, not fight back and confront them directly in the media, online, and in the public square.

      They’re running scared because they know they’re about to lose big.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 12:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      I think this person is confused. Why exactly aren’t we allowed to spend our money the way we want again?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 12:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @The Gay Numbers:

      Because they’re not used to gay people fighting back. They’re used to being the bullies, and having us run away and hide and have HRC talk about “time to heal.”

      Now they’ve punched us, and not only are we getting back up and dusting off, we’re rolling up our sleeves, flexing our muscles (which are bigger than they thought) and walking towards them with a purposeful look in our eyes.

      And they’re holding up their hands and saying “whoa buddy, I sucker punched you but no need to get all upset!” LOL!

      Nov 15, 2008 at 12:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      By the way, that spokesperson would be Frank Schubert, the mastermind behind Prop 8. I can’t help but feel we need to be paying a little more attention to those who actually spearheaded the H8 campaign. Frank Schubert, Jeff Flint, Ron Prentice, Sonja Eddings Brown…

      Nov 15, 2008 at 12:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      Sonja Eddings Brown

      What a surprise…

      Apparently, Ms. Brown took leave from her employment with the LDS Church to head up the H8 Campaign.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 12:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      @Brian Miller: I just watched the Larry King show, and I was struck by how much they seem to get that this is just the opening salvo. The black preacher (and I wish there was a black clergy on our side on the show because I do knwo they exist) was trying to equate the very real issue with marriage in the black community to his opposition on gay marriage. I kept thinking “you don’t get it. You just opened a hornet’s nest, and you think you are going to have time to address the real issue of marriage in our community of color?” He will waste years, and we will still win because we are morally right.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      Isn’t Barak Obama and Joe Biden against gay marriage also?

      Hmmm….maybe start making demands with the President elect rather than the Mormons.

      Im just saying, kind of bass-ackwards.

      Im still waiting for the black community to catch wind of the whole “gays are the new blacks” catch phrase… oh and the protests in south central…those are beginning when?

      Stay brave folks, ya got them Mormons runnin scared.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      I kept thinking “you don’t get it. You just opened a hornet’s nest, and you think you are going to have time to address the real issue of marriage in our community of color?”

      There’s a large African American population in my neighborhood, and one of the men recently got ZINGED by one of my black lesbian friends.

      He was yammering on about “protecting marriage and the family” when she walked up and said “you want to protect family? Pay your fuckin’ child support!”

      Apparently he has fathered two children by two different mothers, neither of whom he’s paid a large balance to — and was full of excuses about it.

      Religious groups keep insisting that gay people are to blame for this family breakdown. Yet this church-going-daddy-of-two doesn’t visit his children, pay for their upkeep, or have any real family relationship at all — yet wants to pry apart the relationships of other people (including millions of black Americans) who ARE responsible parents and spouses.

      A number of local leaders have noted this fact, and I suspect you’re going to see a HUGE uptick in the number of black leaders standing up to homophobia and pointing out the absurdity of the traditional anti-gay argument.

      My friend certainly did — and she got him running in record time. ;)

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @G:

      Apparently, you’re scared enough that you’re not posting under your real name, nor with a valid e-mail address.

      It’s easy to be a swaggering moron when you don’t have to stand behind your words, eh?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      Go ahead, keep it up with your veiled threats. We’re not scared of you or anyone.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      And as for the black community, black Americans are turning out in huge numbers to support equal treatment under the law — as witnessed in the SLC, Los Angeles and NYC demonstrations… and as you will see again nationwide tomorrow.

      Give up on your hateful efforts to divide people — many African Americans are queer or have queer friends and family, and they are powerful allies in the fight against the hatred that anonymous pukes like you are spewing behind your pseudonyms and your formerly anonymous donations.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      I’ve answered every sincere question I’ve seen. You’ve ignored every question I’ve asked you. Don’t start pretending you’re suddenly taking the moral high ground here.

      But what you’ve chucked in my direction isn’t a question. You’ve just couched another petty insult in interrogative syntax. To respond to your insult, though, my right to the free exercise of my religion is the very first amendment to the constitution, and it’s an explicitly stated right. The right to have a gay marriage recognized by the state as indistinguishable from a heterosexual marriage is not explicitly (or implicitly, if you believe 3/7 of the CA Supreme Court) stated anywhere, and the idea that a domestic partnership reduces you to second class citizenship is just a ludicrous red herring. Second class citizenship means you have less rights, but you have all the same rights, you just want an additional right because you’re different. If everyone has the right to marry whomever they want unconditionally then this country turns to chaos. Conditions must exist. For centuries our country has been comfortable with those conditions. Now you want to rewrite them, but you want exclusive access to that rewriting, and you don’t want anyone else to have a say. What about the 50 year old gay man who wants to marry his 25 year old gay son? Incest is only illegal because procreation is genetically dangerous. What conditions prevent this from happening, and who gets to define them? Is that an affront to common sense or human decency to suggest that those relationships exist or are comparable? Since when is your morality more important than theirs? What about the polygamists? Do you truly want everyone to be equal, or do you just want your side to win?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @The Gay Numbers:

      California seemed to handle it pretty well by simply saying, “All the rights are the same.” Of course there’s going to be an adjustment period, but that would be the case with marriage as well.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      @G: What they believe personally is irrelevant. What matters is that Biden would have voted no on 8. This is actually the chief difference between you theocrats and the Democrats. We get that we can hold personal views that need not be the same as what public policy should be. For example, you may not know this, but I m not in favor of abortion. I do think life begins at some point before birth. BUT, that does not mean I think we can legislate that or tell a woman to do with her body. That’s the boundary for me. I understand that what I feel personally on the subject based on faith is not necessary what the law should be. I base my views on the principles upon which this country stands- equality, due proces, etc. Faith- as far as this counry is concerned is about not establishgin a state religion (which you are trying to do) and my not blocking your personal free exercise (which my getting married does not do). Your lack of intellectual understanding of your society is not shocking. It’s sad. But not shocking.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @The Gay Numbers:

      But the standardization of civil unions would put an end to all the confusion and delay rather quickly. So far most of the case studies I’m finding in this NJ report are simply the result of confusion because civil unions aren’t standardized. This text seems to me (up to this point) to argue that because children have misconceptions about it and because government forms don’t have spaces for it, the whole idea needs to be abandoned. I’ll keep reading, but at this point I’m not convinced.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      @Dan: Dan- California can not handle it well because of the things I provided you as citation. Saying its the same does not respond to the private sector concern, intrastate concern or multiple other issues. it also is no all the same. Its actually even in CAL different in some ways. Its okay to have your beliefs, but its not okay to be ignorant. Look this stuff other rather than tell me what you feel based on your faith. The reality is different for gay couples. Their costs are more. They have more to address than a Britney Spears who can just go to Vegas. You can keep saying its the same untlyou are blue. the fact is that the case law and real world evidence of the application of civil union laws are starting to come in. Not surprisingly, given they are being set up as two different entities, the results are that civil unions are facing a lot of problems. Many of them not easily solveable. Many requiring money that not all gays have. The assumption that all gay people are the same is part of the problem. Some are low income. What would you suggest they do?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      Who are the haters? Who are the dividers? Sure their are gays fom all walks of life, including african americans, latinos, etc, but why wont you protest the 70% of blacks that voted YESSS and the over 50% of latinos?

      Bruno, where was the vieled threat in my post?

      Brian, I guess its also easy to be a “swaggering moron” when you target mormons at their places of worship (2% of CA’s pop).

      You’re the one talking about how much courage you have, so…when are you going to south central and Harlem?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      Dan, there is no right to practice cult activities, just a right to religion.

      Since a majority of voters would easily vote to designate the LDS church as a cult — since it’s not a traditional religion — the first amendment doesn’t apply to you.

      Just like you keep trying to claim that the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause doesn’t apply to me. :)

      See, that’s the irony of this whole thing — every effort your cult takes to ratfuck me and other groups the LDS cult doesn’t like, you’re just digging your own graves that much more. I have little doubt that in places as diverse as Atlanta, Boston, Philadelphia and Portland, initiatives defining Mormonism as a cult would have far greater majority support than any anti-gay initiative you could come up with.

      And the worst part for you is that by embracing majoritarianism and ignoring the parts of the Constitution you don’t like, you create a precedent for someone to do the same thing to you that you’re doing to others.

      The irony, of course, is that I’ll be there to defend your constitutional rights and fight to the death for them — even when you’re working hard to violate mine. The reason?

      I believe you’re an equal citizen, even if you voluntarily subscribe to a cult.

      And that, in a nutshell, is why I am better than you. And it’s also why your cult’s initiative against gay people is doomed to failure — the principals of equal treatment under the law as enshrined in our constitution have far more enduring appeal and power than magical underwear.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      “It is said that a Mormon wearing the magic underwear may not be attacked, deceived or harmed in any way.”

      That’s not true at all. Our garments are reminders of the covenants we’ve made and there’s absolutely nothing inherently powerful about them. They protect us from evil only insofar as wearing them reminds us of our duty to God and thus compels us to adhere to it. I don’t appreciate these asinine wives tales being spread around about this. If you don’t even have enough respect to find out the truth about something as banal as what kind of underwear I wear why on earth should I care what you have to say about marriage?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @G:

      Keep trying the division.

      If you think that everyday black Americans have time for your hatred, you’re wrong.

      We’re going to prove you wrong.

      You know it.

      You’re going to lose.

      You know it.

      It frightens you.

      So you post from behind a pseudonym in a desperate effort to avoid the inevitable.

      It’s understandable.

      You’re going to lose.

      Which makes you a loser.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      @Dan: Your being convinced is not the point. The segregationalists weren’t convinced either during Jim Crow. You also, I might add, do not understand the nature of transaction cost or what that means in terms of say going to a doctor with a health issue , but having to face a situation where you are unsure whether your spouses healthcare covered will or will not coveryou. Despite you being on the record as civil partnered, but this being untested. Maybe they will. Maybe they wont. Then that needs to be litigated. What happens? Is this treated the same? Maybe it is. Maybe not. Part of the problem here is that you do not probably posses a legal background. I do. I know how these things can be tied up.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Dan:

      LOL — I love the efforts to dismiss the magical underwear.

      I encourage people to check out the ex-Mormon sites to learn the truth about the magic underwear, the magical symbols stitched in them, and the “true meaning” of the “garments.”

      On the site I linked to earlier, there’s a hilarious story about a woman who accidentally wore what she thought was a cool tee shirt that ended up being magic underwear during a trip to a Utah mall. Hilarity, chaos and threats of damnation ensued.

      Those are the “values” underpinning Mormon homophobia. Priceless!

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      Every time you propose to send us to south Central, you’re assuming we’re scared. We don’t march on neighborhoods, we march on institutions.

      In any case, we don’t care about the racial make-up of who voted for prop 8, we care about how bankrolled it and who lied about it. Churches, churches, churches, 70% Mormon. If that isn’t clear enough for ya, I don’t know what mind-improving surgery would suit you best.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Bruno:

      The other thing that is funny is that I bet G and his buddies wouldn’t be caught dead in South Central themselves. They talk a tough game, but at the end of the day, they’re all running back to their suburban lives where they can avoid “the colored folk” (as they call them).

      All the racial stereotypes and racist assumptions “G” is making sorta underscores what haters his team is filled with.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      @Brian Miller: a) Its worse than that. In my community, because of the fucked up priorities, people will make excuses for these deadbeat dads. Its a lot of bullshit machismo about a man’s got to do what a man’s got to do. The irony of these preachers behavior is that it reinforces this very fake masculinity not based on responsibility, but based on the appearance of it.

      b) The thing is there is no consensus or necessarily religious elemnt to my communities views on sexuality. This is at the heart of the issue with regard to homosexuality. You will get everything from “render under caesar that which is caesar” types who are in favor of letting gays have their rights to deadbeat dads who have 5 babies with 5 different women saying they are gainst gay marriage because of the Bible.

      This is not an easy discussion. Its going to take a lot of work. A lot of it is not really about the gay issue. It’s about black male faux masculinity as created by the present hip hop movemnet (present not always inthe past) which is mysoginistic anti gay , hedonistic and anti take responsibility for your own shit. Som eof it is old time Christian bible thumpin. Some of it, a bit chunk, is that the gay community itself checked out of the AMerican landscape a few decades ago focusing on things like being hedonistic and telling itself that it didn’t need to be like straights (as if denial of rights is about being like straights). There are so many variables. None of it easy.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      You obviously don’t know what the word “cult” means. It refers to any liturgical process or ordinance of absolutely any kind. Communion is a cultic practice. Passover is a cultic practice. Technically, Christmas is a cultic practice. What you’re naively referring to is a contemporary colloquialism that’s been appropriated by religious extremists to attempt to group together a rather specific eschatological religious phenomenon. Heaven’s Gate and David Koresh’s group are a part of this collective, and the term cult was applied in a way that inadvertently vilified the title for other religions. Now nobody wants to touch it, which is why the layperson (that would be you) doesn’t know that there’s nothing bad about the word. The problem is, this new definition has never really been established, which is why you have ten different specific definitions from ten different people, and the root of them all is really “religious people we don’t like.” The dictionaries try to be diplomatic by defining it as something “outside the mainstream,” but that’s about as subjective as you can get. You’ll do best to just avoid trying to wax religious or philosophical with me, especially if you’re going to barf up ignorance like this.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @Dan:

      That’s kind of interesting, because you basically presented the consensus definition of “cult” in your post. “Religious people we don’t like.” There, we have a definition.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @The Gay Numbers:

      Brilliantly stated, TGN.

      These things will work out. A great deal of progress will be made in a short time, I believe, as the views of bigots like “Dan” get excised from polite company.

      His Mormon views on gay people today will be as popular in ten years’ time as the old-fashioned Mormon views on black Americans were 30 years ago.

      With the elimination of a lot of that divisiveness will come clarity — those who are truly responsible for their own poor condition will stick out like sore thumbs.

      Given the resilience and energy of the black community, I am very confident that the cultural apologia of faux-machismo popular in some segments of the community will be driven out. Although I did not vote for Obama (I voted Libertarian), I do hope that his election — and message of accountability for fathers — also aids this process.

      And I *know* that efforts to divide our communities along lines of race and sexual orientation will fail. I know this because after the bigots finish their campaigns and return to their lily-white suburbs and gated communities (and trailer parks), the rest of us have to live together — and that knowledge makes us more common than different.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @The Gay Numbers:

      I don’t think something as important as this should come down to “Maybe it won’t work.” Is it a worthy transition, or is the uncertainty really grounds to toss up your hands and just demand complete surrender from those who disagree with you?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @Bruno:

      Cult? It’s an exploitative group that operates to the detriment of its members, for the personal enrichment of its leaders.

      Scientology, LDS, and other groups that require payment for “advancement” are great examples.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      “For example, you may not know this, but I m not in favor of abortion. I do think life begins at some point before birth. BUT, that does not mean I think we can legislate that or tell a woman to do with her body. That’s the boundary for me.”

      Im not in favor of abortion either or telling a woman what to do with her body, but if life begins at inception, then that life is not HERS, it has its own life and that means abortion… is the taking away of that life.

      Im not not in favor of telling a man what to do with his body either, but when he takes a life, its murder.

      Im not in favor of telling a man and a man what they can and cant do with each others bodies, but when it comes to marriage, I have every right to say that marriage is between one mand and one woman.

      As far as law, due process, being American and all that…um , I believe it was 52% of Californians that took part in the democratic process through voting their conscience.

      Mormons are not creating a state religion by voting on a moral issue any more than black Protestants and latino Catholics are trying to create a state religion. That is absurd.

      If there were any state religion being formed it would come from leftists, as happened in Cuba, Russia, and China.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @G:

      Why do you keep showing up here?

      Maybe you should go to South Central + Harlem + pick a fight with them instead of constantly goading us to do so.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Bruno:

      Then you recognize the complete and total subjectivity of the word, and thus its absolute uselessness. You’re in cult too, and since it just means beliefs I don’t like, you can’t tell me I’m wrong! See how ridiculous it is to base an entire argument off of that? How much more ludicrous is it to insist that the Constitution doesn’t guarantee my right to “practice cult activities”? Is this infantile and petty ridiculing really boosting this dude’s self-esteem that much? Do you really have to encourage this kind of ignorance?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      @Dan: Dan, you are tipping the scales based on your own bigotry on the issues. I have given you the benefit of the doubt that is slowly about to end. The fact you choose to parse words on rights- we do not approach rights from the position that maybe things will not be screwed up. The thing hou are talking about that’s “important’ is your theocratic view of marriage. I am discussing the legal ramification of civil mrriage, not legal ones.

      If you want to discuss religion, I would be happy to do so. I can certainly make you wish you hadn’t gone that route with me either because I am versed in the mangling of the Bible that is necessary to find one man, one woman required as many prechers are lying that the Bible says. In fact, the Bible says nothing of marriage. It’s a doctrine later adopted by the church after they saw the power that it gave the state over propery.

      But that’s a separate argument about what’s at stake here. Right now addressing the legal- the burden is on you to prove that it is equal since your Church has claimed it to be the case that civil unions in fact will be equal to marriage. I have given your proof that it is not. Its not up to me to convince you to accept the argument anymore than its up to me to convince Sherri from the View that the earth isn’t flat. I can’t make you believe anything that you want to ignore in evidence. Willful disregard by you is always your choice. Not mine.

      As religios man I would assume God requires you to not lie. If this information does not giveyou pause then you should question whther you really want to live in a liberal democracy or not. The reality is I suspect you do not. You want a theocracy. You feel homosexuality is wrong. But the cognitive dissonance of being an American creates a problem for legislating this religoous belief. So you came to what you thought was a “compromise.” The problem is that that compromise is still a lie because we are still unequal under it.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @Brian Miller:

      And how does the fact that no LDS leaders receive a paycheck play into this increasingly bizarre worldview taking shape inside your head?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      @G: You don’t understand our system of government. I blame the education system and your own prejudice for that. I see to many of you out there in this society. Not just on this issue, but others. We are one step from a dictatorship because you really have no idea how and why our system was set up as a series of checks and balances. I won’t repeat how it works. it’s just sad you don’t know. Really sad.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @The Gay Numbers:

      I was under the impression that we were going to engage in civil discourse, and up till now I thought we were. Suddenly you erupt with these silly insults and challenges. What happened to discourse? I was under the impression I was speaking with someone who was capable of disagreeing with another adult without getting upset about it. Was I mistaken?

      PS – If you want to talk about the Bible I’d be happy to take you to school.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      Bruno

      “Every time you propose to send us to south Central, you’re assuming we’re scared. We don’t march on neighborhoods, we march on institutions.”

      OK, go find some black “religious institutions” to march on, based on results…scared. Consistancey? Scared.

      “In any case, we don’t care about the racial make-up of who voted for prop 8,”

      I know, because you are the new black, I get it. But you better care. What’s with this “we” talk though. Go up a few and check out the self proclaimed black lesbian saying on this thread that the blacks need to be proteseted against as well. Is she being devisive? No, cuz she’s gay and she can be as devisive as she wants? ok.

      “we care about how bankrolled it and who lied about it.”

      Bruno, really? I doubt it.

      “Churches, churches, churches, 70% Mormon.”

      nice chant. Albeit menos eficaz.

      “If that isn’t clear enough for ya, I don’t know what mind-improving surgery would suit you best.”

      Bruno, what makes you think an “instituion” such as the LDS church is going to cave in to protests outside of their temples?

      …and all the anger and frustration, no matter how good it makes you feel wont make the Mormons budge.

      Seriously, and once again….2% of the population. Im just saying…think about it. The selective rage and anger…not having its effect on Mormons.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      D@Dan: a) If you want to pretend you are the victim here, you are confused. We are not having a civil discussion in which you tell me that evidence that clearly counters your claims of “exactly the same” isn’t convincing because you put the word “maybe” into the mix.

      b) In the law there is this concept, if you want equity, you got to do equity. You want me to treat you civilly? Don’t be okay with even “maybe’ scrwing me out of my rights. There is no civility in a society that denies its citizens of equl rights. Ask the founders. They were some of the most incivil men you could ever meet. There are somethings more important than civility Dan- those things are my freedom to life liberty and happiness. You get in the way of that. Civility ends.

      c) What we had here Dan- was my giving you the benefit of the doubt. I always give that. That every person earns as one humanb eing to another You lost it when you show disregard for my rights and knew that you were doing so by putting “maybe” , even the “maybe” of it is wrong, in quotes.

      d) I am on the moral edges of history. You aren’t. I am headed to bed. You aren’t worth it.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      Why does this discussion even need to go on for this long?

      Shorthand: civil union does not equal marriage, no matter how cleverly you spin the words. That has been proven, time + again.

      Also, slippery slope arguments are not valid reasons to deny same-sex marriage rights, based on the coulda-shoulda-woulda scenarios that might never come to pass, up to + including man-dog marriage, brother-sister marriage, or woman-chair marriage.

      Q. “Well, if we let the gays get married…what if people want to marry their cousins?”

      A. “That’s not my problem + we’ll have to cross that bridge when/if we ever come to it.”

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @The Gay Numbers:

      Yes we are one step from dictatorship, they start with the left,that’s why conservatives are buying guns, they’re scared of the mandatory Civilian Security Force that Rahm Emmanuel and Barack Obama want to create. Very 1930’s Germany.

      I dont want the country ran like San Francisco and I dont want the country and its schools to look like the Folsom Street Fair. Butt plugs representing Jesus and Mary? How very tolerant?Please, like Im supposed to think that lifestyle is peachy and ok? Dont tell me any of this has do do with love, or civil rights. It doesnt have anything to do with either.

      China and Russia are watching and laughing.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @G:

      Like hell you don’t want the country to look like Folsom.

      You’ve probably already got a pair of assless chaps at the ready.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      Whatever, you’re a tool. You didn’t understand a word I wrote, because you’re idiocy disallows that.

      By the way, this is how scared we are:

      http://www.ktvu.com/news/17986914/detail.html?rss=fran&psp=news

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      @The Gay Numbers:

      1) I’m not at all pretending I’m the victim, I just expect you to keep your cool and respond to my points rather than gets upset because I still don’t agree with you.

      2)You losing the right to marry in California (which I had nothing to do with) hardly justifies you refusing to maintain civility with me. Every day I deal with people who disagree with me to one degree or another, and respecting that is a part being an adult. I expect you to act like an adult and not hurl petty insults at me because I don’t agree with you.

      3) My quote was referencing the tentativeness of experimenting with a federal civil union plan, since we have no idea how it will work. I have no idea how you derive disregard for your rights from that. With marriage or civil unions you have the same rights. I was arguing that abandoning civil unions because the government doesn’t have the right paperwork is hasty. I didn’t say a word about your rights.

      4) Marginalization. Why does it always come down to that with the gay community?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @Bruno:

      My idiocy, eh?

      I believe that’s supposed to be “your”, not “you’re”.

      Mwahahahaha

      Goodnight, sweetcheeks.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @fredo777:

      You too, honeylamb. Have fun with whatever “instituion” you prefer.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @fredo777:

      You did realize I was talking to “G,” right?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Bruno:

      Wow, that WAS brave Bruno. Bra-vo. Irony…so brave..in a crowd.

      And the Mormons…Bruno…have got into a fisticuffs with them?

      Was it bravery Bruno that led the gays in Palm Springs to take an old lady’s cross, stomp on it, and spit on her?

      Your soooo brave Bruno. So brave.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @Bruno: Touche’.

      My bad, I’m tired. I saw a G + thought that was his reply to me.

      lol

      – wipes egg of face –

      Sorry, yo.

      – changes subject –

      Oh, look, a bird!

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      You’re seriously calling me chicken. So…12 years old? 13 at most?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      * off

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Bruno:

      If you think mob mentality, intimidation, and harrassment is brave, at any age…then yes, I am calling you a chicken.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      In my defense, though, G did neglect to deny my accusation that he owns black leather assless chaps. Curiouser + curiouser…

      Also, G said “your” when it should have been “you’re” in comment #187 + I fucked up on “off” in my last comment. So, all’s even.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thumper
      Thumper

      @Charles J. Mueller wrote: “Who left the hen-house door open for this homophobic opossum to slip in?”

      As far as I can tell there is no moderation here You guys have been nice about letting me present an alternate viewpoint but I can see there will be no changing of minds here – in either direction. And I appreciate that you guys don’t take any shit from anyone.

      @Charles J. Mueller wrote:”I’ll just bet that you’d also say that the systematic murder of some six-million Jews during the Holocaust wasn’t an “epidemic” either and that it too, happened over 60 “bazillion” years ago.”

      No. And I’ve taken issue (OK I was using another name – I don’t want a bunch of fancy boys with baseball bats showing up at my front door Mormon Church style…) with you guys comparing yourselves to the Jews in Nazi Germany – that’s laughable, man.

      @Charles J. Mueller wrote:”Had you done even the most rudimentary of searches on the Internet, before plowing your shit onto our plates, you would be aware that some 55,000 homosexuals also perished during Holocaust and that many more thousands of homosexuals were used as guinea pigs in heinous medical experiements carried out by the Nazis, not that these revalations should disturb you, however.”

      That’s horrible, man. You know what else is horrible? Millions of gay babies are aborted every year and I get the feeling I will never hear a peep from the gay community about it. Hypocrisy? You bet your ass.

      @Charles J. Mueller wrote:”I can just hear you thinking to yourself, ‘Serves those cocksuckers right. That’s all they are good for.'”

      No. That’s not me, Jack.

      @Charles J. Mueller wrote:”You ignorant fuck, you! If you read the fucking newspapers, did an Internet search…”

      1.) Cool it, hothead.
      2.) I did an internet search.
      3.) My assertion was that the frequency of these horrible crimes is going in the right direction – down.

      @Charles J. Mueller wrote:”People like you, aren’t bothered by the injustice of such horrendous acts of hatred, so it’s highly unlikely that you would have heard the news being screamed at you from your TV screen or jumping out at you from your newspaper. Dumb fucks like you just tune it out and yell for the old lady to bring them another can ‘o beer on the way back from washing and drying the supper dishes in the kitchen while you sit on your fat ass that’s glued to the recliner.”

      Wow, where did you get your powers? How did you know I was fat?

      @Charles J. Mueller wrote:”I could quote figures and name names, but they would only fall on deaf ears who have no desire to hear the truth but only lies and misrepresen-tations of the truth.”

      Or maybe there just aren’t any more. Maybe you should kill your boyfriend and blame it on a straight guy. There’s number 3!

      @Charles J. Mueller wrote:”You, Sir, are a homophobe, a bigot and a horrible excuse for a human being, gay or straight, since you failed to define yourself before spitting out your venomous bile.”

      Well, at least you called me “Sir”.

      @Charles J. Mueller wrote:”By-the-bye, exactly what is your motivation for coming onto a gay site? Looking for a little surreptitious cock-action…”

      HA! Yeah, everyone else is “secretly gay”. Because it’s just SO GREAT TO BE GAY. We all want our lives to be punctuated by anonymous sex in bathhouses and yell and scream about “persecution” for about 4 hours every day. I’m especially looking forward to bleeding from my ass. What a fantastic quality of life you must have. HA! I love this shit. You’re hilarious!

      But seriously, I really just wanted to gauge the feeling after prop 8 passed. And I’m frankly very surprised how pissed off you guys are. Just so you know, I have it on fairly good authority that the other side (Yes on 8) was antcipating this and will fully exploit the negative public feeling you are generating and use it against you. There’s the inside scoop. See? I’m not all bad.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      When did I use the word brave, asshat?

      Reading comprehension. Perhaps you’ll get to it when you turn 14.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @Thumper:

      You do realize, of course, that anonymous/casual sex isn’t an exclusively gay practice…right?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      P.S. Goddamn you, Thumper. That long-ass comment of yours distracted from mine, #194, which posted at the exact same time.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @Thumper:

      Just a note on that last comment about using it against us. We don’t care. What do we have to lose? Gay marriage? Oops.

      Try a different threat, and please, try not to mention bleeding asses. It doesn’t become you.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      * #192

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @G:

      You heard it here first, folks… G and his buds are buying guns to deal with the “homosexual menace.”

      It’s all so “Deliverance” isn’t it?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sparkle obama
      sparkle obama

      @Bruno:
      By the way, this is how scared we are:
      http://www.ktvu.com/news/17986…..p;psp=news<<

      don’t be stupid.
      you kids are too “proud” by half.
      it’s a shame for the gays!

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      I have it on fairly good authority that the other side (Yes on 8) was antcipating this and will fully exploit the negative public feeling you are generating

      Oooh, I’m shaking in my boots.

      Good thing there are brave, named souls like “Thumper,” “G” and “Dan” to stand up and bravely anonymously confront The Homosexuals. :)

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Bruno:

      So you do think that mob mentality, harrassment, and intimidation is not equal to bravery.

      I mean, you were showing me an example of “how scared” you were right? The video showed a mob shouting down and intimidating a hanful of people right, so…what is your point?

      You arent scared? Or you are, which is it?

      I mean, protesting mormons, mobbing street preachers, spitting on old ladies…oh Bruno, your just silly.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @sparkle obama:

      By the way, this is how scared we are

      So scared that you cannot post a working link?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @G:

      Let’s wait until Sunday and we’ll see just what you corkers have uncorked — nationally.

      Big demonstrations.

      Tick tock.

      Public opinion shifting our way.

      Tick tock.

      Marriage equality in Massachusetts for years, no ill effects (other than pissing you boys off).

      Tick tock.

      Connecticut gay marriage — and your amendment effort there failed.

      Tick tock.

      Tick tock.

      Tick tock… :)

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      Who’s harassing who, G?

      Those people came into a gay neighborhood to try to convert gay people. They indeed were brave, because that is HARASSMENT. Telling young, impressionable LGBT’s they encounter on the street that God doesn’t approve of them unless they change their sexuality is INTIMIDATION.

      And what kind of mentality were you intimating would meet “our crowd” in south central? Not the MOB MENTALITY for sure. Perhaps the little old ladies there wouldn’t welcome us with open arms? What exactly were you referring to there, then?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @Brian Miller:

      Don’t forget another one: the continued usurpation of organized religion. All brought on by the intolerance of clowns like G.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Brian Miller:

      Not hardly silly. Conservatives are thinking of protecting themselves and their families safety from rioters and crazies that do craziness when crisis occur.

      far left president + econmic collapse = crisis = craziness = death.

      People are buying guns to protect themselves from the crazies.

      Please…no one is scared of you nor would anyone point a gun on you…

      however…you might want to call your boys back a little dont you think?

      What would happen if by some chance no police were on sight to protect proponants of prop 8 or say…some strreet preachers, or missionaries…

      If a death or injury were to occur as a result of a raging gay mob…

      that would serioulsy damge anything you were trying to achieve…

      that’s why all the crap going on is not too brite.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mark
      mark

      I had no animous towards Robert redford or the Sundance organizers, I only wanted the sponsors to use their influence to move the festival outside Utah this season.
      Tonight I learned even KNOWING Cinemark put major funds against Prop 8, they are STILL a major venue to show the films….OH HELL NO!
      Now Redford has become a collaborator, and I won’t patronize ANY film featured at the festival.

      I read Mormons in having a hissy fit about the angry response from gays, called on all people of GOODWILL to deplore these tactics.

      Seems I misplaced my GOODWILL, maybe it’s in the same place my G*D DAMN Constitutional Rights to equal protection under the law…went.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Bruno:

      “Perhaps the little old ladies there wouldn’t welcome us with open arms? What exactly were you referring to there, then?”

      Very brave gays indeed.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mark
      mark

      above it should have said, Cinemark funded YES on Prop 8

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      We’ll see what happens G, but my read on you is that you WANT that to happen. That way, gays can continue to be vilified and you’ll have something to back it up with.

      My money’s on no physical harm coming to anyone, and I’d also bet that those white powdery envelopes sent to the temples came more from someone like you than someone like me.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      You didn’t answer my question. What should we expect if we go down to south central?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Bruno:

      “We’ll see what happens G, but my read on you is that you WANT that to happen.”

      Ah..no, I dont, my read is that it WILL happen to someone who is innocent, then you will be up a creek with no paddle. Im asking you to have some class and let civics take its course…

      “That way, gays can continue to be vilified and you’ll have something to back it up with.”

      Well thats my point Bruno, that’s why mob mentality doesnt work. Im trying to show you that…if you understand what you just wrote than you’d be the first one to point out that a mob mentality isn’t working…and if someone does get hurt…your fight goes bye bye.

      “My money’s on no physical harm coming to anyone,”

      Well lets hope so Bruno…lets hope that there will always be some police to protect people from the mob.

      “and I’d also bet that those white powdery envelopes sent to the temples came more from someone like you than someone like me.”

      White powdery envelopes dont come from people like me…they come from crazies no matter the sexual preference.

      “You didn’t answer my question. What should we expect if we go down to south central?”

      Well how would I know, Im just calling you out on your inconsistancy and lack of bravery. One can only speculate what would happen…Im not saying it would be smart or effective, Im saying that youre selective outrage is hilarious.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 3:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      What’s hilarious is you won’t say what you know you can’t, in response to my question. Gays aren’t “brave” because they fear black people. Mormons are an easy target, but black people would run us right out of south Central. This is what I’ve been hearing from gun-&-religion-clinging types all week. I don’t think we’re living in fear right now, so whatever you want to think of our level of bravery is irrelevant.

      I agree with you about a mob mentality, by the way, but there’s no way you or I can control that mob. So you can’t assign it to any of us and “tell our boys to back off” any more than I can. Get off your high horse, please.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @G:

      LOL! Paranoid delusions of end-time apochrypha are a conservative’s last comfort, I guess.

      I suppose the conservatives will give us another Timothy McVeigh over the next few years hmm?

      As for all the rhetoric about Southcentral Los Angeles, what do “conservatives” know about that place, other than it’s where the “colored folk” live?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      I also find it hysterical that conservatives…the people who live far away from any inner cities, cling to their guns, and accept no differences in anyone, talk about the mentality of the mob. They ARE the lynch mob, and have been since this country was founded.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      “What’s hilarious is you won’t say what you know you can’t, in response to my question. Gays aren’t “brave” because they fear black people. Mormons are an easy target, but black people would run us right out of south Central. This is what I’ve been hearing from gun-&-religion-clinging types all week.”

      If you think “gun-&-religion-clinging types” are the only ones thinking that and the gay activists arent…you have your head in the sand.

      Mormons ARE the easy target, you know this, EVERYONE knows this,the gay activists know this.

      Seriously, do you think going to black “institutions”, as you refer to them, and carrying on the same way while claiming to be the new black would seriously get you anywhere?

      Well duh, and you and I, the world, and the gay activists know this.

      “I don’t think we’re living in fear right now, so whatever you want to think of our level of bravery is irrelevant.”

      I know there is anger, you have selective anger, that is the flaw. You are not consistant and the mob approach will not lend any support to your cause. I can understand if the demostrations were peaceful…then maybe…but as it stands, you only have the media, Hollywood, and activists judges on your side.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Brian Miller:
      Well, this conservative can tell you that 70% of the black population in CA voted YESSS on prop 8.

      Can I get an Amen brother? Hollaaaaa!

      What do you know about anti gay senitment or anti gay bigotry in the black community or how the black community feels about homosexuals and marriage and how are you dealing with it?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Brian Miller:

      “colored folk” ???

      That’s funny since that is how anti Prop 8 supporter Lindsey Lohan recently referred to President elect Obama.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Bruno:

      “I also find it hysterical that conservatives…the people who live far away from any inner cities, cling to their guns, and accept no differences in anyone, talk about the mentality of the mob.”

      Hey Bruno, are there guns in the inner cities? I find it hilarious that you are saying that you know anything about the inner city. Maybe you should take Treach of Naughty By Nature’s advice… Oh my Bruno.

      “They ARE the lynch mob, and have been since this country was founded.”

      Welcome to the club. Nice Youtube videos.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      What, exactly, is G’s argument? It’s all over the place, really.

      Wherever our “anger” is directed + however we prioritize the targets of these protests is none of your concern + they are certainly having the intended effect of drawing more + more attention to the issue, garnering support from thousands + thousands more daily. Sure, some individuals are making bad examples of themselves. Shit happens.

      As for this silliness about why we don’t target the “blacks” who voted for Prop 8, you’re comparing apples to mangoes. The LDS organization supported Prop 8 + is a specific entity, whereas the black voters are individuals + completely random. Not a monolith. If “black” were an organization which orchestrated donations of millions of dollars + hours of volunteer time for Yes on 8, they’d also be the target of boycotts.

      At any rate, black + gay are not mutually exclusive. That said, focusing on race as a criterion for being confronted by anti-8 protesters would only be divisive + counter-productive.

      The protests + demonstrations are very much productive. They are producing the results of increased attention to the inequality of civil unions vs. marriage, + furthering dialogue.

      Not everyone will be pleased with our methods, but then not everyone was pleased when voters were allowed to strip the marriage rights from thousands of gay couples in Cali. So, as the song goes, you can’t always get what ya want.

      With more time, more demonstrations, + more support being shored up, we just might find…we’ll get what we need.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @fredo777: “As for this silliness about why we don’t target the “blacks” who voted for Prop 8, you’re comparing apples to mangoes. The LDS organization supported Prop 8 + is a specific entity, whereas the black voters are individuals + completely random. Not a monolith. If “black” were an organization which orchestrated donations of millions of dollars + hours of volunteer time for Yes on 8, they’d also be the target of boycotts.”

      Mormons voted as individuals.

      Uh, black “institutions”(churches) as Bruno refers to them, didnt raise money, but to say they didnt get the vote out and preach about homosexual marriage from the pulpit is a bit inconsistant with the 70% number of blacks that voted YEESSS on prop 8.

      No one is saying that color has anything to do with it, it doesnt… the fact that the black community is religious and 70% of the black community voted YEESS on prop 8 and your claiming that somehow taling to blacks would be to racist is a copout.

      You are scared of confronting “black instituions” on this issue…its obvious.

      To say that you are the new black and dont confront the 70% of blacks who voted YEESS on prop 8 on the basis of it being “too devisive” is a copout.

      Even the black lesbian who commented on this thread many comments ago agrees with me.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @fredo777:
      No. 21 · denise
      @Austin:
      “I’m black and a lesbian and I agree that we should march in black neighborhoods. I also think that some kind of outreach should’ve been made to these neighborhoods prior to the election. We can’t just simply assume one minority will vote for another minority’s cause.”

      Is she being to devisive and racist? Or is she being consistant?

      Pretty sure your scared.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      “Hey Bruno, are there guns in the inner cities? I find it hilarious that you are saying that you know anything about the inner city. Maybe you should take Treach of Naughty By Nature’s advice… Oh my Bruno.”

      And what do you know about me anyway? Do you know where I live? Did your parents raise you to be a smug, narcissistic shit-for-brains, or was that something you were born with?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @G:

      Mormons voted as individuals, per the instructions of a larger entity, the LDS church. It is the LDS organization, not every single Mormon voter, that we are targeting. Some Mormons, in fact, are gay + some supported our cause. The purpose of protesting at Mormon facilities is to bring attention to LDS financial backing of Prop 8 + support of the initiative in the first place. They, by their actions, made themselves the primary target. Pretty obvious, isn’t it?

      As for black voters, that 70% figure is shaky, at best. Random exit polling sample to accurately represent the entire black voting population in Cali? No. Next…

      Also, you keep throwing out that whole “scared” bit as relates to confronting black institutions + it is just as flimsy an argument + as much thinly-veiled racism as ever. Aside from that, that has been addressed + moved beyond. Stop back-pedaling.

      As for the one black lesbian who “agreed” with you, what she pretty obviously meant was that we do need to address the issue of homophobia in the black community. Meaning, we need to bring our message to them. Not that we need to “confront” them in an accusatory fashion, which you seem to be suggesting.

      That could be done in an informal manner, with LGBT persons of color reaching out to non-LGBT persons of color within their own friends + family. Randomly attacking black persons on the street with picket signs wouldn’t make much sense.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      Btw, I wouldn’t exactly put it past you to post as a “black lesbian” yourself + try to lend some sort of validity to your statements.

      Though “her” statement still doesn’t really do much for your argument.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Bruno:

      “And what do you know about me anyway? Do you know where I live? Did your parents raise you to be a smug, narcissistic shit-for-brains, or was that something you were born with?”

      Im sorry, wasnt it you telling me where the guns were and how no conservative lives, has lived, or has no knowledge of the ghetto. Werent you ASSuming where I live, and have lived, and where I have been? A bit ironic eh Bruno? Dont get angry and start calling others names for calling you on your crap. Please, people will star wondering about how your parents raised you and wonder unpleasantries about you.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      “far left president + econmic collapse = crisis = craziness = death.

      People are buying guns to protect themselves from the crazies.” Those statements were how I knew you don’t live in the inner city.

      I live in Oakland by the way, and not in the “nice parts.”

      “ASSuming”…you can’t be serious with that shit LOL.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @fredo777: “As for the one black lesbian who “agreed” with you, what she pretty obviously meant was that we do need to address the issue of homophobia in the black community. Meaning, we need to bring our message to them. Not that we need to “confront” them in an accusatory fashion, which you seem to be suggesting.”

      Well gee wizz, so you are saying that there should be some kind of diologue and not some kind of confrontation? Hmmm, ya think?

      Oh my goodness! The Irony! Happy protest day today by the way! Let me know how that goes and if the hateful mormons will learn something construcitve from your “peaceful” demonstrations.

      Buenos Dias!

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      “me know how that goes and if the hateful mormons will learn something construcitve from your “peaceful” demonstrations.”

      Further proof that G seriously *wants* these demonstrations to be unpeaceful.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thumper
      Thumper

      I just watched the video of you idiots harrassing that old lady, and the only thing I can think to say is that… you… well, the men in the video are like animals – they should be rounded up and put in a cage. Shame… just shame. You don’t have any interest in any free speech other than your own. Those cowards wouldn’t have dared rip the sign out of her hands if she had been a man. I guess there is an upside – these retards did it on live TV… Man, I’m just – I can’t believe adults are behaving that way.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @fredo777:

      “Btw, I wouldn’t exactly put it past you to post as a “black lesbian” yourself + try to lend some sort of validity to your statements.”

      Ha Ha!

      “Though “her” statement still doesn’t really do much for your argument.”

      Ha Ha!

      That is quite simply thee best comment ever. Its like you were talking to yourself and inadvertently typed your thoughts. Classic!

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @G:

      Irony? You probably think that’s the thing that burnt a hole in your favorite shirt.

      Like I said, we are protesting for a greater cause. Greater than a single Mormon voter. Or a single Black one. Whomever/whatever we decided to target in our protest primarily is really none of your concern + we have valid reasons for targeting the LDS organization first + foremost. If not for their millions + efforts, the Prop might not have reached as many people, including (but not limited to) the persons of color, in the first place.

      You fail at things. We will have a happy protest, thanks. We expect thousands + thousands to show up. Which they will.

      Sayonara + don’t let the doorknob hit ya where the good Lord split ya.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Bruno: “far left president + econmic collapse = crisis = craziness = death.

      “Those statements were how I knew you don’t live in the inner city.”

      You saying that only conservatives had guns was how I knew you dont live in the inner city.

      “I live in Oakland by the way, and not in the “nice parts.”

      But not in the inner city, I know, you’re trying to be down.

      “ASSuming”…you can’t be serious with that shit LOL.”

      Ha Ha, I wont go any further with that goldmine of comebacks.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @G:

      Wtf are you talking about? The comment was pretty cut-and-dry.

      Go to bed, dude.

      Btw, I’m a black gay guy. So, even if that “black lesbian” were legit, I don’t agree with you. So, you’re back at square one.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @Thumper:

      I just read about you idiots–well, maybe one or a couple of you–that killed Matthew Shepard. Disgusting.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      * the Yes on Prop 8 message might not have

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      Well G, you know everything so I can’t fight with you. I’d give you my exact address to let you decide for me whether or not I live in the “inner city” or I’m “down” or maybe what clothes I wear, but frankly you’re not worth the time. I know you’ve gotten a kick out of your perception that you’ve pissed off a few fags, but we’ll be OK nonetheless.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Thumper: I thought it was rather peaceful the way the old lady was shouted down, spit upon, had her cross ripped from her. Very brave.

      Freddy was just telling me that going to the black community would be just to gosh darn devisive and racist to go after them just because they are black, sure 70% of blacks voted for prop H8 but we dont want to be devisive.

      Nah, theyd rather go after Mormons and little old ladies, they fight back ya know.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @Bruno:

      lmao

      Oh, does he think he’s genuinely pissed us off?

      hahahaha

      – wastes time before bed -

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      Yeah, I’ve decided that this “G” is none other than Cunt-hilly. Or at least as brain-dead as that one.

      I’ll waste no more of my time on him.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @G:

      I guess when Thumper & G come after us we’ll be cowering on our knees. But since we’ve been so ornery, that’ll be an excuse for them to do some good ol’ fashion fagbashing. Then go home and hump their respective cousins.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @fredo777:

      “Btw, I’m a black gay guy. So, even if that “black lesbian” were legit, I don’t agree with you. So, you’re back at square one.”

      Wait a minute, you could be a white gay guy, how do I know youre a black gay guy? How do I know youre legit?

      70% of black voters in CA agree with me so you’re still back at…you lost… wont go talk to hateful homophobes in the black community.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      Btw, I spelt “divisive” properly when I used it.

      If you’re going to quote me, do it right.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      Dumbass, everyone here knows I’m a black gay guy.

      The link directs them to my Ytube vids.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @G:

      Your spelling is atrocious.

      Perhaps you should be spending more time @ hookedonphonics.com + less time here with the good folks @ Queerty?

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @Bruno: “I guess when Thumper & G come after us we’ll be cowering on our knees. But since we’ve been so ornery, that’ll be an excuse for them to do some good ol’ fashion fagbashing”

      I guess when Fredo, Bruno, and the other gay activists will be ready for some good ole fashion mormonbashing today.
      breederbashing

      But shh, dont go talk to the media about the hateful way the homophobe black community voted. No, dont do it, thats racist and divisive, after all you are the new blacks afterall.

      Ok

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      What’s racist is your assumption that somehow talking to the black community about homophobia should be “scary” in the first place, douchebag.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      By Fred,

      ni-nite, Bruno,
      sleep safe knowing there’s no guns in Oakland…that they’re way off on a land where evil whitey conservatives live thats far from you.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      Let the bed bugs bite, asshole.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • G
      G

      @fredo777: “What’s racist is your assumption that somehow talking to the black community about homophobia should be “scary” in the first place, douchebag.”

      Thats my point Fred, why not say something?

      No one has addressed it. It is fear.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      lol

      Where did Thumper go? Off with Bambi, I assume.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @G:

      It’s been addressed + it’s still being addressed.

      You’re ranting about it right now, aren’t you? What’s the likelihood that you’re the only one?

      Exactly. Bored with you now.

      Off you go.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 5:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @Dan:

      Civil-rights era vernacular be damned. What you’re discussing, “domestic partnerships”, are separate but (not) equal at its finest. “We’ll give you something just like what they have, only we’ll call it something else…+ it isn’t quite what they have at all.”

      No thanks.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 6:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      @fredo777:

      He and his cult are also lying about their willingness to support “domestic partnerships.”

      In their state of Utah, the Mormon-sponsored anti-gay-marriage law there bans not only same-sex marriage, but also DPs, civil unions, and any other arrangement.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 10:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Howard Kaplan
      Howard Kaplan

      As for Mormon bigotry and hypocrisy
      How many of their familires include:
      Murderers
      Rapists
      Child beaters
      Wife abusers
      Unfaithful: who go to strip clubs, prostitutes,
      have extramaritial affairs divorces, etc.
      convited felons
      dui arrests
      druggie kids
      pregnant unmarried teenagers
      just plain crooks
      etc etc etc
      Don’t tell me “none” unless you want to be labeled a liar also.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 10:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Howard Kaplan
      Howard Kaplan

      As for Mormon bigotry and hypocrisy
      How many of their familires include:
      Murderers
      Rapists
      Child beaters
      Wife abusers
      Unfaithful: who go to strip clubs, prostitutes,
      have extramaritial affairs divorces, etc.
      convited felons
      dui arrests
      druggie kids
      pregnant unmarried teenagers
      just plain crooks
      etc etc etc
      Don’t tell me “none” unless you want to be labeled a liar also.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 10:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Howard Kaplan
      Howard Kaplan

      As for Mormon bigotry and hypocrisy
      How many of their familires include:
      Murderers
      Rapists
      Child beaters
      Wife abusers
      Unfaithful: who go to strip clubs, prostitutes,
      have extramaritial affairs divorces, etc.
      convited felons
      dui arrests
      druggie kids
      pregnant unmarried teenagers
      just plain crooks
      etc etc etc
      Don’t tell me “none” unless you want to be labeled a liar also.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 10:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      @Brian Miller:

      !

      That’s how I show shock/dismay/disbelief/etc. when I have no words for a particular situation.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 10:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ask ena
      ask ena

      Hi Dan,

      What makes you think your historic definition of traditional marriage hasn’t changed over time, and won’t continue to do so? History implies change and growth. This country was founded, in part, on the separation of church and state, and yet your marriage values continue to be religiously based. You think yours is the only religion to benefit from full freedom from the government in this country? What hypocrisy.

      I don’t care how you define marriage, and I don’t care who your church will or will not marry. I want my government to do what it is supposed to do, and not let religion or a religious majority tell it how to govern its constituents.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 11:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Webster
      Webster

      From a friend (just to give you some idea of who you are dealing with when you try to take rationally to one of the trolling Mormons who show up here):

      “The Mormon church didn’t eschew polygamy (really polygyny: one man, many wives) until the U.S. government threatened to seize its assets. Then their leaders had a vision from God they should ban it on the books (while still tacitly approving it, of course).

      And they only ended discrimination against African Americans in the late 70s when they were threatened with loss of their tax exempt status. And, yes, their leaders then had another vision from God that they should change their ways.

      http://www.religioustolerance.org/lds_race.htm

      This religion has a reprehensible history. What do you expect when their founder was an 1800s con man who “translated” the Book of Mormon by looking at special rocks inside a stovepipe hat?

      I’m sorry, but anyone who buys into this stuff lock, stock and barrel is just not rational. They’re just a tub of Kool-Aid and a poison puddin’ pop away from Jim Jones and Heaven’s Gate.

      And anyone who gives them 10 percent of all their earnings is just a chump in a huge pyramid scheme.”

      Nov 15, 2008 at 1:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Webster
      Webster

      And the good news:

      “Civil rights groups filed a petition with the California Supreme Court to stop the enactment of Proposition 8 because it would mandate discrimination against a minority group and did not follow the process required for fundamental revisions to the California Constitution.

      In the petition, the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Equal Justice Society, California NAACP and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. argue that in order to protect the fundamental rights of all Californians, a higher standard is required to overturn the right to marry. Minority communities cannot be stripped of their fundamental rights by a simple majority vote.

      “We would be making a grave mistake to view Proposition 8 as just affecting the LGBT community,” said Eva Paterson, president of the Equal Justice Society. “If the Supreme Court allows Proposition 8 to take effect, it would represent a threat to the rights of people of color and all minorities.”

      So much for how other minorities don’t support us.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 2:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bob
      Bob

      All the Prop 8 voted proved is that half of this state is either extremely bigoted, mindlessly follows hate-filled religions, or both. Can’t wait for propositions that target their communities and we’ll watch how unfair they suddenly decide it is to take away rights through mob mentality.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Phoenix (The One Who's Read The Constitution As Opposed To Some Of The Commenters On Queerty)
      Phoenix (The One Who's Read The Constitution As Opposed To Some Of The Commenters On Queerty)

      “…Boycotts & Protests Are Not ‘Intolerant'”.

      First Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution

      “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances”

      The right of a citizen to peacefully 1) parade and gather or 2) demonstrate support or opposition of public policy or 3) express one’s views is guaranteed by the freedom of speech and the right to peaceably assemble.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 4:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • richardmirwin
      richardmirwin

      Though we don’t need to be intolerant, we don’t need to be pushovers either. Putting a little fear into our adversaries will make them think twice. Would the black civil rights movement have succeeded as well if it weren’t for the black panthers? Would the Mormons have been so quick to jump on the bandwagon if it were African Americans on the other side?
      The least we can do is shine a bright light on everyone involved. I for one will want my congressperson to at least take a stand. Diane Watson is the representative for the Silver Lake neighborhood in Los Angeles; second only to West Hollywood as the gayest neighborhood in the city. Here’s what I emailed her:

      Honorable Congresswoman Watson,
      Please speak out on behalf of those who lost their civil rights due to Proposition 8. Why haven’t you joined the governor and 40 other members of congress who have already done so. Though I have always supported you and voted for you in the past, if you don’t do this, I will work diligently to support whoever runs against you in the next election. I understand that the southern part of our district voted solidly for Proposition 8, but this is wrong, and you know it. You need to lead on this issue. I would be sorry to turn against you, but I would have no choice: my conscience dictates it.
      Respectfully,
      Richard Mark Irwin

      I suggest others do the same.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 6:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MikoNoNyte
      MikoNoNyte

      Found you via Wild Hunt. So glad I came to read. You have, in a few sentences, summed up brilliantly what I’ve been trying to say for weeks, since the passage of that horrible law.

      I’ll be quoting you a lot!

      Nov 15, 2008 at 7:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • angelfire1712
      angelfire1712

      I am not gay but I believe that gays have an absolute right to protest thru boycot … during the Vietnam war and beyond…people have boycotted companies who had military contracts, were making arms, etc…in order to promote peace. But boy…have gay people boycott places that discriminated against them by voting against their inalienable rights is seen as some kind of crime…that’s just bullshit. I’ve been reading about the racists in this country..I think we should start a web site identifying every white supremacist and minority hater who has been involved with racial slurs, marched against minority rights (David Duke comes to mind..I’m sure that guy wasn’t born with two ores in the water) … I digress, well, put their names up on a web site and boycot where they work, live and go to school…carry signs saying…’racist ass works inside this building’…you know…stuff like that because homophobia and racism have no place in this country and I have to commend these people for having the balls and management skills to do what they have so far for gay rights. As a breeder…I’m very in awe of you guys…go get ‘em.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 8:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sparkle obama
      sparkle obama

      @Bruno:

      you will get your ass beat.
      don’t try it, mary.
      ps
      individuals can vote the way they please.
      it’s their “right”.
      you children are ridiculous.
      take it to the supreme court.
      we will win our equal rights, trust.
      quit acting foolish.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 8:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sparkle obama
      sparkle obama

      @angelfire1712: @angelfire1712:

      your attitude is un-american.
      you bitches are like the self-righteous housewives who look up their sex-offender neighbors on megan’s list and then deface their lawns-
      – but less cool.
      you need to eave individuals alone.
      stop scapegoating.
      do the right thing, rise above & take it to the supreme court.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 8:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @sparkle obama:

      Poor child, threatening me over the internet. Someone find him his pacifier before he blows a gasket on the carpet.

      Nov 15, 2008 at 9:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mark
      mark

      When the heat of our intial anger towards the LDS elders fades, replace it with an ICE COLD INDIFFERENCE to tourism in Utah or b uying any product they make.

      We LGBTs, can do cold indifference….to death

      Nov 15, 2008 at 9:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • horus
      horus

      @dan
      i found the responses given to your attempts at civil discord delightful.

      the mormon church is evil manifested.
      remember, any money spent in utah eventually gets to into LDS hands.
      you have the way of satan, make nice, then stab in the back.
      it is clear to us.
      all options are on the table for the LDS and the catholic church, and their minions.

      Nov 16, 2008 at 12:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charles J. Mueller
      Charles J. Mueller

      Angelfire1712, you sound like one cool dude. Thanks, from the bottoms of our hearts, for your support. With fine folks like you behind us, we will eventually see equal rights for all in this country.

      Hat’s off to you!

      Nov 16, 2008 at 2:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Falc
      Falc

      I have a knee-jerk Republican friend who said the same thing of me, accused me of spewing hatred, when I stood opposed to Prop 8 (CA) and Prop 2 (FL). I blinked (several times,) reread his email to be sure I hadn’t misread something, and asked him to explain exactly how it is that *I* am the one spewing hate when other people were the ones who would deny me equality, and the right to commit to the spouse I choose for myself.

      Oddly enough, though not surprising, he never did answer the original question. My response was elaborate, as usual (read: longwinded) and within it I’d explained how these legislations sought to make ours a lesser union, with lesser rights, that it wasn’t just about the word “Marriage.” Then he said that if he’d known that he’d have been opposed to it.

      What content-filtering device do these people have planted in their heads? How the HELL do they manage to miss that, even if it DID include the M-word, we’re still entitled to marry whomever we please? WE live with our choice 365 days a year. They don’t live with our choices at all. What Adam & Steve do has NO bearing on you, Mr. Homophobe, and your wife, whether next door or three thousand miles away. What damages marriage is other people trying to chip away at a committed relationship. What threatens marriage are divorce, adultery, and those who would try to temp a committed spouse from another person. But the M-word, (which, by the way, never was owned by you, Mr. & Mrs. Homophobe,) has NO bearing. It is what we DO that defines us. Your marriage, just like ours, will rise and flourish or fall based on the actions of the people within that committed relationship. Ignorant hate can tear at our relationships, no matter what the orientation, but even that does not make us love or stop being loving.

      So somebody tell me where WE are “hateful” for wanting the same chance at love as you enjoy, Mr. & Mrs. Hetro? Explain to me how it is that we’re Hateful for fighting back when a very small handful of people would deny us basic civil rights. I’m waiting. I really want to hear this one.

      Nov 16, 2008 at 10:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Falc
      Falc

      RE: LDS. First off, I know many hispanics here in New Mexico and Utah who are LDS, so put the race card away. It’s about the church. Most of us are still pretty fond of Donny & Marie, so give the White thing a rest. Now, on to the substance:

      As to the LDS, I’ve had three partners who were raised LDS. I was with the first for a bit less than six years. The second and third were a matter of months. The first was traumatized by the very notion of coming out, the second had blown off most of it, but his rebellion against that church’s rules pushed him far into sexual rebellion, and the last, the youngest of the bunch, is so conflicted that he’s a walking mess.

      Let’s talk about this last one for a bit. A very loving, very supportive family, as most LDS families are. Nurtured, given every reason to succeed in life. Just one small flaw: They’ve had the heterosexual thing beaten into their heads SO hard, so many times, that they’re certain God will hate them, their families will hate them, and that they will lose all of that love, if anyone ever finds out… that they have brown eyes. Yep, just brown eyes. Their Quirk is just as insignificant, just as much beyond their control as the color of their eyes. But the fear is crippling. The fear instilled in them causes them to be torn apart inside. Just TRY to imagine being afraid of losing the love of your families, being outcast, for something you can’t change, and have no control over. Imagine the raw terror they feel at the prospect that they MIGHT find out. And so they lie, because lying is a lesser sin than loving someone of the same gender. And they hide, and they even drag unwitting women into the frey, in attempts to be found worthy of their family’s love, to do as you say God commands… and this fear ruins lives, but it doesn’t make your sons or daughters straight. Far too often, they even commit suicide, because even THAT is a lesser evil than being gay.

      Over the years, your intolerant, unrealistic beliefs, (which were only ever meant to be a standard to aspire towards, not an inflexible rule,) have killed untold thousands of your children. They have tortured hundreds of thousands, millions more of your children. Is this why you raised them up in such love? Is this what your God commands of you?

      God does not want insincere hearts singing his praises, just going through the motions, without meaning it. Nor does God want insincere heterosexuals, married to a woman, but not being in love with her (and that is bound to leave her hurting and crying herself to sleep at night as well.) God does not want any of this. I am certain that God is greatly offended by these results — far more greatly than He may EVER be about two people of the same gender being in a committed, loving relationship, treating each other well, being nurturing and supportive of each other.

      What a terrible shame that the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints is so very good at raising children who know how to be loving and committed… but forbids that they do so with the person they love, over something so slight as a XY chromosome.

      If you believe that God wants you to hate your children over this, or to torture them, that’s your religion. I may find you despicable for it, (and I have, as I watched someone I love anguish over the beliefs you claim came from God). But I don’t begin to consider keeping you from those beliefs, or forbidding your religion in this land of ours.

      I leave you to your ways, and I wouldn’t ever try to use force of law to take that right away from you. Do unto your brother as you would have him do unto you. Stop trying to control us, impose your concept of God upon us, and stop trying to use force of law to keep us from our happy, loving relationships which are equal under the law.

      Nov 16, 2008 at 11:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Falc
      Falc

      P.S. And if you are unwilling to allow us to love each other in peace and equality under the laws of this land, it is only reasonable that we will oppose you by whatever legal means possible, including not giving you more profits to turn against us. Is this war? In a way… but remember who it was who shot first, and continues to try to impose upon us, and torture us and those we love.

      If you want peaceful coexistence, that’s simply done. Stop actively trying to control other people.

      Nov 16, 2008 at 11:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David
      David

      OMG so many posts. Church doctrine should by all rights and laws of this country, stop at church walls, and not be let out onto state and fedrally funded streets. In other words, these right wingers when it comes to sex lova and relasitonships, and marriage, when outdoors, and in the voting booth need to remember, they are voting in a different country than churchville and need to “keep it in their pants”.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 12:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charles J. Mueller
      Charles J. Mueller

      Thank you, Falc, for a thoughtful, concise and well articulated commentary. Your up-close and personal experience has obviously given you a deep insight into the workings of the mind of a Mormon.

      It is said also, that there are no poor Mormons. They are excellent money managers and are taught from a very early age to save as well as tithe to the Church.

      Consequently, it came as no great surprise to me that the Mormon Church members were able to raise such a vast sum of money in support of Prop.8 in California.

      Who knew, however, that they would choose to use it to support such a horrible cause when so much good could have done with it instead.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 12:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Falc
      Falc

      @G:
      Actually, Barack Obama is in favor of a Civil Union which confers EXACTLY the same rights that a “Marriage” does. You’ll note during his speech on the evening of November 4th, he specifically included us “Black or white, gay or straight…” when speaking of equality. He recognizes that the word Marriage is a big deal to the churches/cults, and offers a sane solution. IMO, the ONLY thing the government should recognize is a Civil Union, (or Domestic Partnership, whichever term is used,) and this should be a legal status granted equally to those Married by a church and to those who choose to file their civil contract with the Court or Clerk. It is not for the government OR the Church to decide who may or may not enter into such an agreement.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 12:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Falc
      Falc

      @Dan:
      In this, Dan scribbled:

      “If everyone has the right to marry whomever they want unconditionally then this country turns to chaos.”

      And there we have the sum of all your fears. How laughable! How entirely worthy of ridicule! This country’s turning to chaos will not be caused by people taking whom they want as a spouse, nor by civil contracts to similar extent. You even went so far as to propose the horrors of a 50 year old gay man marrying his 25 year old son. If you truly believe that happening would bring the nation to chaos, you’re deluded, and your cerebral faculties are clearly impaired.

      It’s far more than unlikely. The only reason a 50 year old man would “Marry” his son would be to allow him to inherit because bigots have somehow precluded him from doing so otherwise. Stevie Nicks “Married” a man so that she could legally adopt that man’s child, so that she could pass along some of her wealth to that child, and ensure the child’s financial well-being. This is the same sort of thing.

      That you’d present the arguement of the 50 year old gay father is further proof of your homophobia and ignorance. When we have children, we see them as most decent heterosexual parents see them. They are our CHILDREN. They are not sexual to us. We’ve known them since they were infants, changed their diapers, held them when they were frightened, tended to them when they were sick, taken them to their first day of school, watched proudly as they developed and grew and graduated… and only a sick SOB would dare to presume that the relationship between parent and child is any different because of our orientation. How about I propose that 50 year old hetero men want to marry their 25 year old daughters? That’d be offensive, and rightly so… because it would never happen, because fathers don’t see their daughters that way. Neither do we see our sons that way. Oddly enough, it’s HETERO men who break that inherent rule and have sex with their minor daughters — at alarming rates. How about you look to the log in your own eye? Where are the millions of dollars to spend on fighting against THAT, which truly is wrong and has a victim?

      Your fears are unfounded. The world will not end, and there will be no chaos when people marry whom they choose. Go home, love your spouse and children, whatever their orientation. The mass is ended. Go in peace.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 1:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      Gosh, I wish the people who had worried about society “degenerating into chaos” has spent more time monitoring and regulating the Bush administration before it lied us into a trillion dollar war. It would have helped a hell of a lot more than taking away the rights of gay people.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 1:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Falc
      Falc

      @Thumper: Harassing the old lady, huh, Thumper?

      Uhm, get a clue. She went out of her way to go to a Gay Marriage rally, to make and take out her big cross and to decry our right to Equal Protection under the U.S. Constitution.

      Who was it who harassed whom?

      I’m about done with this entire subject. The religious homophobes don’t care to see reason, or recognize that they attacked us, our relationships, the validity of our love, AND our civil rights. Now they want to claim that we hate, when we just want to be left alone to love and have our relationships as equal citizens, in peace.

      To say that gay people are haters is laughable. To suggest that we’re inherently violent is even more funny, because it was just a few days before that you were swearing we’re all limp-wristed and impotent.

      It has been a long while since you pressed us hard and we fought back at Stonewall. That was the beginning of the Gay Rights Movement. Now you’ve done it again, gone out of your way to attack us and deny us peaceful co-existence. If you thought Stonewall was fighting back, you haven’t seen anything yet. If you think we’ve flexed our muscle, you haven’t seen anything yet.

      No one will tolerate oppression forever. The homophobes amongst you have begun a war. Pray that the U.S. Supreme Court rescues you from your fate. If you force us to this war, you will find we’re far stronger than you ever imagined — stronger than some of us even realize.

      A pacifist isn’t someone who CANNOT fight. It’s someone who prefers and chooses not to do so. We are pacifists; We prefer peace. But we also carry the adviso: Don’t corner us, don’t attack us or those we love. A wise one would heed that warning. Take your invasions on our liberties back. Go back home, love your families as best as you’re able, and leave us to do the same.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 1:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SuperCat
      SuperCat

      Post to increase epic comment count.
      Also religion ruined America.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 8:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David
      David

      I think Ivana has it right, “Don’t get mad, get everything”. Amen to that.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 11:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thumper
      Thumper

      @Falc: “The homophobes amongst you have begun a war. Pray that the U.S. Supreme Court rescues you from your fate. If you force us to this war, you will find we’re far stronger than you ever imagined — stronger than some of us even realize.”

      I love it when you guys make threats. It’s SO cute!

      Nov 17, 2008 at 12:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Falc
      Falc

      @Thumper:
      Carry on. You’re too cowardly to even stand behind your BS by registering.

      That wasn’t a threat. It was a reality check, if only you had the sense to realize it.

      Consider what happens when 10% of the taxes go away. If we all stopped paying taxes, there wouldn’t be enough IRS agents to even attempt to get pushy about it. Just one possibility.

      Fact is, while we are 5-10% of the population, there are many more who are our parents, sibblings, friends and children, who love us and support us. Whenever we have boycotted a business, things have changed. Beer manufacturers know better. Wendy’s, Cracker Barrel, and others may still be Right-Wing, but you don’t see them up in our faces anymore.

      You’d like to brand us Impotent and get us to believe it. We are far from impotent. In the same way that some of us are amongst the best soldiers, the best pilots, the best boxers, martial artists, etc., and that doesn’t fit into your stereotypes, some of us are wealthy. Melissa Etheridge pays about half a million a year in taxes. David Geffen’s tax bill is in the millions. The biggest GNP of this nation is full of gay people, and our friends… and others who simply recognize that it is wrong to deny us equality. Do you think that’s impotence? You think that’s Cute?

      I realize you were just trying to bait me, to piss me off. It didn’t work, just gave me another reason to show you up for the silly tart that you are.

      Have a nice da-ay.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 1:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thumper
      Thumper

      @Falc: “I realize you were just trying to bait me, to piss me off. It didn’t work…”

      Seems kinda like it did. I got what I wanted, hothead.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 3:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Falc
      Falc

      @Thumper:
      You think that was Hotheaded? You’ve no clue… but then, we knew that already. You lost credibility long ago. Bye, troll. No more attention for you.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 3:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @Thumper:

      “Seems kinda like it did. I got what I wanted, hothead.”

      A date with Mark Foley? Congrats!

      Nov 17, 2008 at 5:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rob Moore
      Rob Moore

      I don’t really care that much about individual businesses. I do care about the various cults that seek to control our lives. I want to go after the fabric of their economy. Since 5 November, I have looked at every apple, orange, bunch of grapes, canned tomatoes, basically any food I buy. If it is produced in California, I put it down. In one market, there was a bin with California oranges and another with oranges from Texas. Texas is about as homophobic as you can get outside of Iran and Saudi Arabia, but I have low expectations of Texas. California on the other hand has always seemed a beacon in the west where people could live without fear of having their lives overthrown. It allowed all of us, not just those of us who lived there, the right to marry while inside its borders. Then in one fell swoop, it ripped away a right we had and turned off the beacon. So who did this? Clearly not all Californians supported it as not all Mormons and Christians supported it, but the parts of California that thrive on agriculture voted for it overwhelmingly. Until our rights are restored and safely so, I will do my very best not to buy any food produced or distributed by Californians. Any other product I can identify as coming from regions that supportd this travesty, I also will forego.

      That’s just the way I am responding. Respond however you see fit. I only wish I was a chef or owner of a large food outlet who could control where my company obtains foodstuffs. I will buy Chilean, French, Italian, Australian, German wines or wines produced in other states. If I ate avocadoes, I would buy Mexican. I will buy no fruit, no vegetables, no meat produced in California, and definitely no dairy from their happy cows. I will not buy Californian if it comes from a region that went for Prop 8.

      I will not stay in a Marriott property nor watch a movie in a Cinemark cinema. I will do my best to see that as little of my money goes to those myth believing folks in Utah, or California as possible. I will continue to oppose any effort by religious nuts to ass rape me with their phony beliefs. I will continue to only donate to charities not affiliated with a religion. There are hundreds available such as Doctors Without Borders, Amfar, Amnesty International, my local rugby club. I will give to Toys for Tots and the local food bank, but I will not give to the Salvation Army. It is time, to stop acting like a bunch of sissies and show them what towering bitches we can be when our own are threatened by those with most of the power.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 7:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Falc
      Falc

      Thank you, Rob Moore.

      Something that I’m wondering about… wondering if y’all have figured it out yet.

      The question: Why now, why at this juncture, is the Mormon Church getting involved? Why the sudden concern, when they’re usually busy worrying about polygamy.

      First, a brief history lesson: The LDS had a strong prohibition against caffeine… right til the very day that they purchased Pepsi, after which caffeine was decreed to be good.

      Still wondering? Okay, here it is, spelled out: LDS is nothing, if not very capable, shrewd busienssmen. Gay MARRIAGE was going to cost them a sheer fortune in truly equal benefits. Marriage would bestow the homosexual portion of the married world with millions of dollars in benefits PER YEAR that they didn’t want to pay for. Better to fight this thing now, while it was still small and weak, (so they thought) than be paying all those millions year after year. It’s pure dollars and cents. And now it will make sense. Now you’ll see how they can be so cold-hearted, how supposed Conservatives can toss out the Constitution so readily. Comes down to money, and lots of it.

      How much does El Coyote stand to lose if they have to start paying for equal rights on their employees? Or maybe she was just obeying her Elders.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 7:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      @Falc:

      If your assertions are correct, it’ll be interesting to see if Equality Utah can get the LDS to back up their stance on civil unions for LGBT folks in Utah.

      Nov 17, 2008 at 7:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TheSnitch
      TheSnitch

      ********* ATTENTION GAYS / HATE SITE ALERT **************
      This Website
      http://americansfortruth.com/membership.php

      spreads HATE about gay people and has nudity on their site from the Folsom Street fair as “examples” of how “prerverse” we are.

      They are asking for Donations through PAYPAL.

      ** Complain and report them to PAYPAL at aupviolations@paypal.com and compliance@paypal.com let’s have their PAYPAL ACCOUNT taken away from them for “TERMS OF SERVICE” violations.

      Paypal TOS clearly state there is to be no pornography /nudity , or Hate involved in the use of their service *see* http://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=p/gen/ua/use/index_frame-outside

      Nov 17, 2008 at 10:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Otto
      Otto

      Shame on us gay folk! How dare we decide not to spend our money in businesses that turn our dollars over to those who fight to make us second class citizens?! How dare we examine the public record to see who our friends and enemies are?! How dare we fight back when attacked?! We are being intolerant! If people want us to pay full taxes without having equal rights, we should comply. That is what this great nation is founded upon! Oh, wait. I forgot. We rebelled against England. Never mind.

      Nov 18, 2008 at 5:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • lyssa
      lyssa

      Untrue.
      Gays are notoriously hateful and intolerant.

      Barney Frank is quoted on the AFT website speaking hate about transfolk.

      Lesbian hate of trans women is a decades old phenomenon.

      Gay and lesbian racism is as common as air.

      And what the religious types say? Total disagreement. They are simply wrong.

      Nov 18, 2008 at 8:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    !-- Sailthru Horizon -->
    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.