Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
Back to the post

Bill O’Reilly: The Gays Started The War On Christmas

cocacola


Back to the post
By:           Dan Avery
On:           Dec 7, 2012
Tagged:
  • 93 Comments
    • BJ McFrisky
      BJ McFrisky

      So, by your own admission, it wasn’t Bill O’Reilly’s comment, it was McGuirk’s that has so offended. So why, Mr. Avery, is O’Reilly the object of your criticism?

      Dec 7, 2012 at 1:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 2eo
      2eo

      Hahaha. O’Reilly and this Brenard McGuirk really are the lunatic fringe. This mystical and mythical war on the festivus time of giving [which as a pro choice gay atheist and a very, very active one at that] just isn’t happening.

      If anything christianity has clawed some ground back [sadly] over the past decade, on the back of “patriotism” and the anti islamic neo-conservative agenda providing a shot in the arm for the moral crusaders, who are just as toxic as the islamists to civilisation.

      If there was an actual war the intellectual and moral grounds belong absolutely to us in every conceivable dynamic and application. They would have lost already. Look at how many defeats “we inflict” on the christianisation of modern society even with them dominating every major influential position in western society. They’re getting battered everywhere education is available because they can NOT compete with us.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 1:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dez
      Dez

      These fools don’t know the first thing about Christianity! Jesus Christ was not against homosexuals, and would not be against gay rights! The misogynistic church men were/are against gay rights! They need to stop claiming Christianity for themselves when it’s for everyone- Gay’s included! Jesus befriended the prostitutes, eunuchs and outcasts for gods sake! And these guys lump gay rights with abortion to make it seem horrible… equating gay civil rights with killing fetus’s, are you kidding me?! Get a f*cking life! And really, a war on Christmas?! And it’s all because of the gays?
      CHRISTMAS IS THE GAYEST HOLIDAY OF ALL!! PUN INTENDED!

      Dec 7, 2012 at 1:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      Actually, the Santa themed toy driven Christmas used to be attacked by REAL Christians as a secularization of Christmas that was blasphemous.

      Funny how these supposed Christians on FOX are defending something that real Christians think is anti-Christian.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 1:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      and this is why the gay children of Bill O’Reilly fans either become

      1. suicide statistics
      2. kids who flee their homes and leave their bigot parents behind
      3. become cowardly self-loathing GOProud-style resentful homosexual suckups

      shame on Faux News. congrats, boys. you just got more blood on your hands this holiday season.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 2:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kieran
      Kieran

      Interesting how these media morons know its perfectly okay to accuse the gay community of being behind the ‘War on Christmas’, but know better then to even insinuate that Jews were behind the “War”. We all know all hell would break loose if they ever dared to go there.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 2:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alexoloughlin
      alexoloughlin

      What a hypocrite O’Reilly is. This is the same married guy who was caught sexually harassing a female employee and paid her off not to take it to court, the same guy who believes in the sanctity of marriage and trying to impose a religious belief on others who aren’t religious or aren’t even ‘christian’, not that I would call him a ‘christian’ since he’s always judging and condemning others. He’s not only a douche, but a hypocrite and a bigot.

      What exactly is this war he’s talking about? Last time I checked, the stores are packed, christmas songs are played on every radio station, they’re on tv, stores are decorated, people are spending and spending to buy gifts and nothing has changed. Dumb ass and a delusional one at that.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 2:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alexoloughlin
      alexoloughlin

      @Cam: Yes, and christmas trees have absolutely NOTHING to do with christmas either.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 2:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      for Christmas, O’reilly wants a falafel to rub into his female employee’s boobs.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 2:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ryanhn
      ryanhn

      @BJ McFrisky: The article clearly states that O’Reilly’s comments were following the lead of McGuirk. That O’Reilly’s comments were after the fact doesn’t make his any less ridiculous or offensive.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 3:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      McFrisky is what happens when a gay boy is raised by O’Reilly-loving bigoted parents and never grows the balls to stand up to them.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 3:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      @alexoloughlin: Not true. Their *origin* has nothing to do with Christmas, but that’s not the same thing.

      As for Coca-Cola… http://www.snopes.com/holidays/christmas/santa/cocacola.asp

      Dec 7, 2012 at 3:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AxelDC
      AxelDC

      O’Reilly knows about as much about gays as he does economics: practically nothing.

      Remember his scary “Lesbian gangs” a few years back who allegedly beat up other girls over boys? What kind of lesbians fight over a guy?

      Gays love Xmas. Who do you think does Martha Stewarts Xmas tree? The closest thing to a gay war on Xmas is the battle over who has the most festive Xmas party.

      O’Reilly is just a hatemonger who loves beating up on gays because he sees us as an easy target. People are tired of his nonsense, which is why Republicans lost on election night and gay marriage won.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 3:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gjg64
      gjg64

      Gays are against Christmas?????? PLEASE!!!!! Have you seen some queens homes at Christmas??……we keep the market in antique ornaments, Nativity Scenes,and Pink Aluminum Christmas Trees afloat! And we buy car loads of poinsettias and evergreen.

      And what’s with all this about being against Charlie Brown he was going on about? Everyone knows Linus is gay; and he has the best scene in the Charlie Brown Christmas Special.

      Bill O’Reilly needs to get out more, or at least meet some more gay guys.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 4:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joe
      Joe

      Oh My Goodness Mr. Bill
      I am a (just outed red neck gay) that has alwasy stood behind every think that you and Mr.Shawn has stood up for. I even enjoy listening to Mr.Rush as well. You all have every U.S CITIZEN in your best interest when you have your chats with other on your program.

      I will have to say, I among many gay men and women do not agree with the whole gay marriage thing. I feel that if they want to be able to live as married strait people do, then they should be willing to call it something else, not marry but united would be a word that suits me and I’m sure will not suit everyone.

      Please Mr. Bill, Let’s worry about the obamanation that is going on in DC and not so much of things that really don’t matter to a hill of beans.

      p.s
      I think Conservative’s should have their own president as well as leberals. Just saying.

      Joseph: Melbourne, Arkansas (red neck country)

      Dec 7, 2012 at 4:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jay
      Jay

      If there were such a thing as a war on Christmas, the Christians won. I mean, has any of these morons actually *been* to America between Thanksgiving and New Years?

      Dec 7, 2012 at 4:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChuckHoover1967
      ChuckHoover1967

      What is Bill O’Reilly so upset about? He’s not even a Christian himself, he’s part of a cult, invented by a false prophet. If anyone is trying to lead people astray, it’s him and it’s more subtle because he pretends to be Christian to lure people away from God.

      The other thing, all this whining about “Keep Christ in Christmas” started with retailers not using the term “Christmas” in ads. OMG!! They aren’t using the birth of the savior to promote sales (Like God is Washington or Lincoln for President’s Day Sales).

      Christians need to be a little less worried about keeping Christ in Christmas and focus on getting him in their lives the other 364 days.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 4:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BJ McFrisky
      BJ McFrisky

      @ryanhn: But you just said it: O’Reilly only responded to McGuirk’s comment—O’Reilly did not make the comment himself. Hence, targeting O’Reilly, rather than McGuirk, is misleading.
      @2eo: You’re a BRIT?!? A freaking foreigner? Holy shit, I can’t believe I’ve wasted so many ketstrokes on you regarding political issues, when you’re not even an American (which, as far as I’m concerned, means you’re not even a real person). Go back to your meat-pies and stop telling yourself that your opinions are of importance to the affairs of other nations. Is your life truly that empty that you immerse yourself in the politics of other countries? Jesus, talk about your trolls.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 6:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the other Greg
      the other Greg

      @2eo: Yes, you Brits have a lot to answer for.

      Because of that Potato Famine in Ireland, we Americans got stuck with the McFrisky family!

      Also, come to think of it, the O’Reillys and McGuirks.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 6:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 2eo
      2eo

      @the other Greg: Indeed, Shame we didn’t do a better job with the muskets and embargo a couple of hundred years ago. Imagine how much better life would be if these people were stopped 10 generations ago.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 6:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @Joe: Right,the other Greg,if only
      we’d had whiskey-tipped nuclear missiles!Would have missed Yeats
      though!

      Dec 7, 2012 at 6:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Caliban
      Caliban

      What’s this bullshit about ALL Christian opposing gay marriage and abortion? That’s one big problem with the Religious Right and Catholics like (I assume) O’Reilly. THEY don’t like abortion and gay rights and if you don’t agree with them, as many denominations and individuals don’t, you’re not “really” a Christian?

      Hell, most US Catholics support gay marriage no matter what that hateful old fuck in the Vatican says. Many Episcopalians support gay marriage and don’t care that much about abortion. Protestant denominations are all over the place about both things. They have found a theological basis to ignore the few mentions of homosexuality. Like most of the US population, many LGBT people ARE Christian. So why doesn’t Bill O’Reilly or any of the other fundie fucks ever mention that?

      There is a move afoot to tell the Religious Right to STFU and go back to their prayer closets where they belong instead of meddling in CIVIL LAW, where they don’t belong. To stop trying to get their RELIGIOUS beliefs taught in public school science classrooms. People are rightly sick of their shit.

      But what does that have to do with O’Reilly’s imaginary “War on Christmas”?

      Dec 7, 2012 at 7:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hephaestion
      hephaestion

      O’Reilly’s ignorance knows no bounds. Without us gays, there IS no fucking Christmas! Handel’s Messiah? Written by gay GF Handel. The Nutcracker Suite? Written by gay Tchaikovsky. Who sings Christmas songs better than gay Johnny Mathis? And who does sparkly decorations better than us? O’Reilly is a lecherous old pervert who wouldn’t know Christmas if it bit him in the ass!

      Dec 7, 2012 at 8:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • doug105
      doug105

      @alexoloughlin: Jeremiah 10:1-25 ESV / 166 helpful votes

      Hear the word that the Lord speaks to you, O house of Israel. Thus says the Lord: “Learn not the way of the nations, nor be dismayed at the signs of the heavens because the nations are dismayed at them, for the customs of the peoples are vanity. A tree from the forest is cut down and worked with an axe by the hands of a craftsman. They decorate it with silver and gold; they fasten it with hammer and nails so that it cannot move. Their idols are like scarecrows in a cucumber field, and they cannot speak; they have to be carried, for they cannot walk. Do not be afraid of them, for they cannot do evil, neither is it in them to do good.” …

      Sound like anything you’ve ever heard of ?

      Dec 7, 2012 at 8:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taliaferro
      Taliaferro

      Huh? What difference does it make who first said it? O’Reilly and Fox have invented this so-called war and are using it to villify minorities once again. You imply that O’Reilly deserves no censure – it is he, and Fox, who are keeping this travesty alive. I don’t understand your comment or why you take umbrage. Are you a member of the LGBT community or perhaps GOProud or the Log Cabin ilk?

      Dec 7, 2012 at 8:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • el polacko
      el polacko

      long ago, we allowed the gay rights movement to be co-opted by leftist politics and we are paying the price for it. we have become touchstones, representative of the leftist mind-set and political goals which are what these fellows are criticizing. there ARE people, on the left, who are actively seeking to diminish and demean the practice of religion and who relish in spoiling the fun of christmas for others. that those people can so easily be classified as being part and parcel of ‘the gay agenda’ is our own fault for allowing our, originally, non-partisan movement to be diverted from the fight for our own rights to worrying about every other issue on the leftist political agenda, lumping us into the laundry list of groups representing the left rather than ourselves.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 8:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • el polacko
      el polacko

      @Taliaferro: why would you attempt to vilify our fellow gay citizens who belong to groups like goproud and log cabin?? they are as much a part of the ‘LGBT community’ as you are. we should be supporting each other as gay people rather than dividing ourselves because of political beliefs or party associations.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 8:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @el polacko: Hard to resist
      playing with your tag,el polacko,but why not go back to your gulag
      in Juarez?

      Dec 7, 2012 at 8:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @el polacko: In that case,el polacko,
      perhaps you should re-read,reconsider,and delete your comment #26,
      denigrating leftists?Are you working very hard to reinforce
      ethnic stereotypes?

      Dec 7, 2012 at 9:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • el polacko
      el polacko

      @Guillermo3: no no.. you misunderstand me. i don’t care if your politics are on the left, right, middle or you belong to the purple party. what i’m bemoaning is, rather than standing on its own and being all-inclusive, the gay liberation movement allowed itself, on the ‘you scratch our back, we’ll scratch yours’ theory, to be sucked into being just another cause representative of ‘the left’. you see can see, by the frequent demonization of those whose politics lean right as being ‘not really gay’ somehow, how deeply the adherence to democrat/leftist politics trumps the gay rights agenda as it stands today.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 9:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dbmyers
      dbmyers

      @Joe: I’m inclinded to believe you are either (1.) a troll who is really stupid and even if you are gay (which I doubt), a truly bigot ignoramous or (2.) a sarcastic poster trying to portray the stupidity and ignorance of the typical “red-neck” homophobic followers of Fox News. Can’t say as I can really tell which is the reality, nor do I care.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 10:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • el polacko
      el polacko

      so…to bring it back to this clip, o’reilly and mcguirk are not blaming gay people, as individuals, for attacking their traditions and values, they are citing gay groups as one of the branches of leftist politics…which, today, is largely true. they could have not made such associations in the 50′s and 60′s when the american homophile movements was very conservative. at that time, however, no person was turned away because of their politics…what bound us together was that we were all GAY. it wasn’t until the mid-70′s that you saw unions, socialists, communists, abortion supporters and other such groups participating in ‘gay pride’ marches. it’s hard to blame someone who sees such associations for assuming that we’re part of the problem that they are facing when it comes to defending their way of life. rather than demonizing them, we need to have much more outreach to those of other political persuasions so that they no longer see us as ‘the other’ but rather as a part of their own. gay people who “are everywhere” as the old slogan said.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 10:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sangsue
      sangsue

      @Kieran:

      Why should they when you’re doing it? I have news for you dearheart. There is such a thing as gay Jews. And lesbian Jews. And Bisexual Jews. Even Trans Jews. So take your hatred for Jews and shove it.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 10:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sangsue
      sangsue

      @el polacko:

      Another Jew hater. Lovely.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 10:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dbmyers
      dbmyers

      @el polacko: What utter clap trap! You must be a log cabin republican “gay” appologist troll. Time to change your party or your perspective.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 10:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dbmyers
      dbmyers

      @el polacko: Those of us on the left believe in the idea that an attack on one minority’s rights is an attack on all minority’s rights, therefore we do believe in and work toward establishing a rainbow coalition that protects everybodies rights. We like to learn from history! Or as Pastor Martin Niemoller so incisively put it(after the fact):

      “First they came for the communists,
      and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

      Then they came for the socialists,
      and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

      Then they came for the trade unionists,
      and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

      Then they came for me,
      and there was no one left to speak for me.” Pastor Martin Niemoller – Germany 1945.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 10:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Redpalacebulleaglesox
      Redpalacebulleaglesox

      Bill-o the Defamer lives down to his reputation established when he defamed the US Army over Malmedy. Now he’s joined by McGuirk the Jerk. Lay down with vermin, wake up with bubonic plague.

      Dec 7, 2012 at 10:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • erikwm
      erikwm

      Bill O’Reilly is dumb. The true threat to Christmas is not that people will stop celebrating it. It’s the secularization of the holiday.

      Look, I love Christmas. I will ALWAYS celebrate Christmas. But do I care about the religious origins of Christmas? Not at all!

      Bill O’Reilly — You can’t make me stop celebrating Christmas in my own secular way. LOL

      Dec 8, 2012 at 12:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @Guillermo3: Don’t often reply to
      myself,do I Guillermo3?-NO,you don’t,Guillermo3.-But my comment
      #21 was not meant to be addressed to Joe,but to the other Greg,
      and possibly to 2eo.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 1:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MK Ultra
      MK Ultra

      Fox news knows their audience.
      Justin Bieber –> teenage girls
      = Fox news —> far righters

      We all know this man isn’t paid to discuss news.
      O Reilly is paid to whip his audience up into a faux self righteous frenzy of paranoia.
      His audience aren’t the brightest dildos in the sex shop, if you hadn’t noticed.
      I don’t even know if O Reilly himself believes half the shit he says. He is an opportunist putting on a show for the consumption of a dim witted crowd. Not a bad gig.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 1:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @el polacko: No,el polacko,I’m afraid
      I DO UNDERSTAND.Yes,Everyone has the right to whatever political
      beliefs/party allegiances he chooses.However,I can’t but believe
      that Republican gays are foolish to adhere to the party backed by
      the FRC,Focus on the Family,Dom,and other fag-haters.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 1:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BJ McFrisky
      BJ McFrisky

      @el polacko: Thank you for acknowledging that being homosexual does not make us all of a singular mindset. The Left has co-opted the miltant fringe of us who disdain anyone—gay or straight—who doesn’t toe the liberal line.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 10:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      explain with specifics what “the liberal line” is.

      you mean how we have the spines and integrity to stand up for social justice, and refuse to cower before bigotry and prejudice?

      i’m always confused as to why gay republicans are so proud of their inability to stand up to their trash bigoted parents….

      Dec 8, 2012 at 11:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • wllmjunior
      wllmjunior

      @Caliban: Christians have as much right to influence “CIVIL LAW” as anybody else in this country. The notion that morality can’t be legislated is pile of crap. It’s legislated every day. It’s just a matter of who’s. You’ve got your battles to fight and so do the Christians. They’ve just got God on their side despite their glaring faults.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 12:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ste
      Ste

      Why would the networks play “The Greatest Story Ever Told” at Christmas? That’s an Easter movie. Who writes these articles?

      Dec 8, 2012 at 1:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • wllmjunior
      wllmjunior

      @Ste: People who speak of things they really know nothing about, and as usual it’s the “Christian Haters.” Being everything they claim they hate in “The Christians.” But then again, We Hate in Others Those Things We See in Ourselves. They should darken the door of a Christian church sometime and meet some real ones instead of believing bigoted stereotypes of the “Christian” characters fed to them by TV. Christians are not the problem here. Ignorance is where the problem lies. Real unadulterated ignorance.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 2:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @Ste: What’s wrong with playing a guy’s biopic on his birthday? Makes sense to me.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 2:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 2eo
      2eo

      @Little-Kiwi: Sadly this will go ignored, you should know BJ and el polaco are the same poster, the IP addresses are a match so it is conclusive.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 2:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 2eo
      2eo

      @Little-Kiwi: Also because that was clumsily constructed I was agreeing completely with you, and meant to end the sentence after ignored. :)

      Dec 8, 2012 at 2:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      @2eo: I know I’ve asked this before, but please, for once, have the basic decency to answer. How could you possibly know any user’s IP address here unless you are Queerty staff (no vague cheat of an answer here, either)?

      (Also, it’s not only possible, but quite easy for more than one person to post from the same IP address. It’s even possible for them not to know each other, though that’s hardly likely.)

      Dec 8, 2012 at 3:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @BJ McFrisky: Full of Shit,
      as usual,BJ.At least you’re consistent.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 3:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BJ McFrisky
      BJ McFrisky

      @hyhybt: 2eo doesn’t have an answer for who anyone is on this site. It has claimed I post under numerous names, but unless I’m mistaken, Queerty prevents this, so 2eo’s claims are provably unfounded. The problem with 2eo is, It thinks all gay people have only one mind, that none of us could possibly think for ourselves, and that if one of us is in fact independent-minded, then that’s an affront to It and the other zombies who all think the same way.
      So the short answer is no, 2eo won’t answer your question about knowing anyone’s IP address, because It knows nothing. All It wants to do is silence anyone who disagrees with It. I’d point out how typical this is of the Left, but I’d just sound redundant.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 4:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      understand this, fellas – if McFrisky didn’t distract himself by coming on here every day to anonymously complain about liberals he’d already have shot himself.

      so let him play. anonymously complaining about liberals the only thing that distracts him from the reality that his parents wish they’d paid for that abortion…

      Dec 8, 2012 at 4:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 2eo
      2eo

      @Little-Kiwi: You know that explains BJ and his posting, he isn’t because of his parents, his family hate him because they know as we all do that the world would have being better without him.

      @hyhybt: I won’t divulge anything to give away how it is done.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 6:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      @2eo: wait a minute. Aren’t you the same guy who sometimes rants about a supposed conspiracy on Queerty’s part because they don’t write stories about the Mormon just because it hasn’t done anything newsworthy?

      Dec 8, 2012 at 6:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @Little-Kiwi: Yes,Little Kiwi!_
      That’s why 500th trimester abortins should be legalized.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 7:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @Little-Kiwi: Yes,Little Kiwi!_
      That’s why 500th trimester abortions should be legalized.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 7:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BJ McFrisky
      BJ McFrisky

      @2eo: For a Brit, your use of the English language is maddeningly atrocious. Look at the things you type. It’s like word-murder. Your teachers would be ashamed to the point of suicide-inducing humiliation.
      And as far as your response to El Polacko goes, of COURSE you won’t divulge your mystical powers to the rest of us plebian peasants, for that would betray the mystery and power that you hold over all of us.
      As they say in your island country, “Rubbish.” Or, more appropriately, “Wanker.”

      Dec 8, 2012 at 7:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 2eo
      2eo

      @hyhybt: No, you’re thinking of Cam. I have pointed out that one of Queerty’s lead advertising sponsors is a mormon owned company named Outbrain, who have used their leverage to get articles pulled on other sites and blogs before. Seen as I don’t see mormons very often, thankfully living in the north of England so they don’t rank highly on my giveatoss-o-meter.

      I also don’t see the relevance or connection between asking about OMGLEETHAXORSKILLZ and criticising the whitewashing of mormon actions against civilisation. Quite a jump between the topics even you should admit. Not sure where you were going with that.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 7:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 2eo
      2eo

      @BJ McFrisky: Aww bless.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 7:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tidalpool
      tidalpool

      This homo is completely and totaly in love with christmas. I still Oooh and Aaah over well lite houses, I adore christmas music in the malls and in the villages, as long as the music was not recorded after 1960. I love giving and receiving dumb gifts, precious gifts and making memories for all the kids in my family. I love spending time baking and decoratinf, and lighting candles and inviting friends over for moose milk..Tell ya later..going to midnight mass, always attending the nutcracker (no puns please) and of course watching scrooge get the bejesus scared out of him by the spirits.
      To many people worry about the changing of life as we all ‘used’ to know it. I can not keep the world from going its own way, but I can keep every tradition I ever loved about Christmas alive and well as long as I am alive. To all of you, cranky goofballs who worry about the rest of the world, to sharp tongue queers who waste time in responding to those same goofballs, MERRY CHRISTMAS! may god’s light shine on you and yours, and rotect you from evil and grant you the peace and love all humans seek. MOOSE MILK, I TBLSP sweetened condensed milk, in a coffee mug, one entire cinnamonstick, 2-3 shots of your favorite bourbon, fill up the cup with boiling water, ad a dash of nutmeg, and hold under your knose and stir with cinnamon stick until it is cool enough to drink, remember, smelling it is required. Lovely drink, lovely times, lovely christmas. (btw, I always buy a bottle of White shoulders perfume, and spray all my light bulbs before the guests arrive, it goes perfectly with the simmering apples and spices in my crock pot to set the right scent for the evening….just sayin

      Dec 8, 2012 at 7:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      @2eo: No connection, except for thinking the two came from the same person. Sorry about the error.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 7:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sangsue
      sangsue

      @wllmjunior:

      Actually there’s a separation of church and state so no, Christian law is not supposed to influence civil law. Try again.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 8:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Stache1
      Stache1

      OMG legalized drugs and the elimination of christmas. Sounds good to me. Talk about mirroring yourself. Were trying to take away their fun? Palease hypriciaal lying assholes. That’s all these nutbags do is try to take away others right and of coarse fun. We need drugs to deal with these assholes. @MK Ultra:
      Best comment and really hits the nail on the head.

      Dec 8, 2012 at 11:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charles175
      Charles175

      These and those like them claim that they have the answers to the issues of society. Yet these same ones and others like them, in their actions do the opposite. These, with their big mouths, divide the people. As the saying goes, a divided house shall not stand. O’Reilly gets a yearly salary of $20 million for this purpose. Limbaugh got $100 million per year to do the same thing. These are only concerned about ratings that stuff to the gill, their already overly fleeced wallets. On the other hand, if one reads and understands the life and purpose of Jesus the Christ, then one understands the truth. A form of truth that is not in these talking heads. These already have their reward now.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 12:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pix
      Pix

      @el polacko:

      First, the War on Christmas is a hoax, a mix of urban legends and a marketing ploy (the Mississippi-based American Family Association said it would expand to Easter, which it did, after it sold more than 500,000 buttons & 125,000 bumper stickers bearing the slogan “Merry Christmas: It’s Worth Saying.”) Of course O’Reilly capitalizes on it, though I doubt he’ll ever outdo himself as his piece on so-called lesbian gangs, which would’ve been funny to me (as it was so over the top) had I not found out about it because a Christian at the shooting range who didn’t know I’m a lesbian warned me about the Pink Pistols and to shoot to kill. (And btw, more than one mass shooting was inspired by people on Fox News, stories that weren’t at all true anymore than O’Reilly’s garbage.)
      x
      And as to why go after GOProud and Log Cabin…for years I did not, and I liked the idea of making Republicans gay inclusive because that would both ease up our troubles AND politicians would have to start keeping their promises to us rather than throwing us under the bus knowing we’re not going to vote against them in the next election (as the Democrats have often done). But not anymore, because they’re not fighting for gay rights from a conservative perspective, they’re just drinking the kool aid now. They believe FOX News (which has argued openly in court it has the right to lie and was thus in their rights to fire reporters who refused to do so and won) and gave the most insane reasons that had no basis in reality, like saying Obama is after our guns despite he’s been one of the most friendly POTUS to gun owners who not only tolerated people carrying guns to where he was speaking and waving signs about watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants (contrast with Bush & Rice who had protesters jailed simply for showing up with shirts criticizing them or the war in Iraq) and even undid the ban that “guns for everyone” Ronald Reagan so that gun owners allowed to carry could carry them into national forests.

      Another one is that Obama took his so-called “Obama care” from a conservative think tank and was promoted as an alternative to Canadian UHC and “Hillarycare” and passed by such Republicans as Romney before Obama ran with it…but show them where Romney passed it first and they’re still saying “Have to vote for Romney to end Obamacare or America is doomed.” Like WTF? I’ve heard of brain scans that show people with strong political feelings (not just Republicans) actually experience pleasure ignoring inconvenient facts so that it was hard to have a rational debate with them but that’s just frightening, like seeing people under a magic spell that hijacks their free will. That’s downright cultish.

      And GOProud officially endorsed Romney despite that he not only promoted much the same thing as Obama, his only real difference of note is that he openly said he would continue is to bash gays as he did as governor…and even if Romney pulled another flip flop his VP Ryan was a Gilead-style fundie who was very clear in his effort to destroy all gains made by gays (while his economic policies were similar in many ways to Romney, and even Obama, in industrial bailouts, etc). So there’s little ACTUAL difference between them SAVE Obama is the best POTUS the gay community has ever had (much to my surprise) while the others was saying they weren’t just going to ignore gay rights they were going to actively reverse each and every gain. But despite this I MIGHT give the GOProud the benefit of a doubt IF they harped on their antigay crusade and demanded the letters condemning it to pour in (“I’m a Republican, but if you want my vote, stop bashing gays”), not to mention trying to shame the Republican candidates for accepting support of evangelicals who get “kill the gays” bills passed in Africa (showing what they ultimately want to happen here, and obviously believe the Republican Party is their best way to Gilead). But they don’t, so they lost my benefit of a doubt.

      At best, GOProud are suffering something similar as a battered woman who excuses her abuser even as he threatens to kill her (and how it’s all her fault), and at worst they’re an intentional front to get gays on their side (like getting turkeys to vote for Thanksgiving), and don’t put that past them, major Republican politicians were busted when a memo came out showing their secret support of exploiting the religious conservative backgrounds of many blacks and Latinos to vote against gays. Heck, Republican cultists (not to be confused with the sane Republicans who stopped supporting the current Party after 2010) have been found posting on this very site pretending to be gay, so the worst case scenerio really isn’t far fetched at all.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 5:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dbmyers
      dbmyers

      Pix: You have posted a great summary of why GOP Proud and the Log Cabin Republicans do a diservice to GLBTQ rights efforts. They will excuse any and all antics from the bigots in their party. I agree completely with your detailed analysis. Thanks for posting it.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 5:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 2eo
      2eo

      @hyhybt: If you must know, there is an exploit in the Apache code, which allows the reading of server transactions, in this case the comments and some of the meta data underneath if you know what to look for.

      Nothing illegal, merely using Linux, not particularly advanced, if I want that stuff done I have a few contacts.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 6:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Caliban
      Caliban

      @wllmjunior: You’re full of shit.

      They actually DON’T have the right to codify their religious beliefs and standards in secular, civil law.

      What’s the biggest objection to gay civil rights? “Well the BIBLE says…” Here’s a newsflash: The Bible says all sorts of shit and it’s been used to support slavery, segregation, the burning of “witches, pogroms against Jews, and not allowing women to vote. In fact, if the “One Million Moms” really followed Biblical rules they’d STFU and go bake a pie.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 9:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the other Greg
      the other Greg

      With some reluctance, I have to say that I actually do HATE CHRISTMAS. This is because of working in retail for some years. (I have three part-time jobs & one is in retail.) It’s been driving me batsh*t crazy since mid-October and now there’s the fucking music, which totally sucks. I have to wash out my ears with Led Zeppelin when I get home. I hated my childhood and have no happy Xmas memories there either. I hate Xmas, I hate everything about it, bah hambug!

      Besides that, Xmas trees are dangerous! They cause thousands of fires every year and kill people!

      If there really is a “war” against Xmas, I don’t necessarily want to sign up, but can I be a conscientious objector and just ignore the whole thing? I hope next year I’m prosperous enough to give up that retail job and just ignore the whole thing.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 10:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @2eo: “2eo:James 2eo.” As a
      digital retard,2eo,I have no idea what you’re talking about.However,
      if BJ and el are the same “person”}HORRORS_____Reminds me of an ancient,
      bad ethnic joke about a camel with 2 assholes.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 11:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sunnfla
      sunnfla

      BUT DAMNIT HE”S RIGHT! THEY ARE RIGHT! Why can’t we GAYS own up to our own attitudes..JUST LIKE OTHER SECTORS…and how soon we forget…HE..and the CONSERVATIVES are entitled to think differently!! WHY DO “WE” have to bash them?…just because they bash us?
      CMON MEN..TRY TO ADMIT WE”RE ‘normal’

      Dec 9, 2012 at 12:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the other Greg
      the other Greg

      I doubt that BJ and El Polacko are the same person, they have much different writing styles. But even if they are the same person, so what? Before we all had to register as “members” here, it was probably a lot easier to do the sock-puppet thing. Now they would need to log in, log out, log in again, log out again, all pretty time-consuming. But I encountered this situation on a recent thread – three posters were ganging up on me, all with about a 25 comment history, all with the exact same writing style, saying the same nonsense, ignoring what I was actually saying. I figured “they” were the same (mentally ill) person, but so what, it still was up to me to come up with cogent retorts. Or not – I could go hiking in the woods or something.

      I don’t agree with BJ’s politics, but he’s never offensive (IMO) and he’s occasionally amusing. If any of us doesn’t agree with some ridiculous thing he writes – and I often don’t – we are all free to attempt sensible replies.

      I’m always mystified by certain pearl-clutching commenters on Queerty who piously decry all the “anonymity” here. Who gives a fuck? Ironically, they are always hypocritically anonymous themselves!

      I’ve never seen anyone b*tch about this so-called problem on any other site, hypocritically or otherwise. (Maybe it’s a “gay” thing, like always being late, or smoking?) Have they really never noticed all the grownup sites that allow pseudonymous comments such as The New York Times, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Telegraph, the Atlantic, Salon, Reason, Politico, Slate, HuffPo etc. etc. etc.?

      It’s Queerty’s already-stated policy that anonymity in comments is fine with them.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 1:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      @2eo: Thanks; that’s plenty close enough. It’s still possible, though, for two different people to post from the same address.

      @the other Greg: You don’t, then, see any difference between not having to use your own name, but still having only one identity per site, and pretending to be multiple people? I’m not taking any position about whether anyone’s actually doing that here, but it seems to me to be totally unlike in purpose and effect.

      (As for logging in and out, that’s probably not necessary. You could use two different devices, say a computer and a phone, or you could use separate browsers and just click between them.)

      Dec 9, 2012 at 2:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the other Greg
      the other Greg

      @hyhybt: Obviously there’s a “difference.” They are similar non-problems though, in that worrying about them seems pretty pointless.

      What can a Queerty editor do about someone pretending to be multiple people? Maybe nothing if, as in your example, the offender is using a computer & phone at the same time.

      What can a Queerty reader do about it? Again the short answer is, nothing really. You can call him on it (as I did in the case I mentioned), and of course he’ll deny it. (Do they ever admit it?) So, (1) maybe it’s true and the shame chases him away, (2) maybe it’s true and he doesn’t give a sh*t about the charge, (3) maybe it’s not true. The sock-puppet charge doesn’t affect the opinions expressed. You still have to respond to the opinions (or ignore them).

      To be general about it, as a liberal I usually don’t find it THAT hard to believe that there might be two or more gay conservatives posting here on some hot topic. It seems odd to me that the automatic assumption of so many posters here is… EEK, they must be the same person!

      Dec 9, 2012 at 3:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      it’s just the reality – there are some people who can only make their comments whilst using the internet as a burqa.

      such big manly tough empowered gay men….commenting anonymously. oh well.

      life in the closet does drive people crazy, so it’s to be expected.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 4:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dbmyers
      dbmyers

      Using the internet as a burqa – hilarious! What color is your burqa Little-Kiwi? I use my true name and I am not big, nor manly, nor effeminate, nor in the closet (not since 1971). In my experience, bigots and haters are the most likely to wear the burqa, but there still are gays and lesbians who could lose their jobs or suffer discrimination and hatred (especially in the US), so it is understandable. Less understandable for bigots and homophobes!

      Dec 9, 2012 at 7:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the other Greg
      the other Greg

      @dbmyers: Great comment! My boyfriend has two theories about “Kiwi”: (1) he wants everyone to post pix so he can make fun of how they look, or how old they are, etc. (& he’s too dumb to realize the pix might not be real anyway) & (2) he can’t tell us his real name – he’s been asked point blank several times – because he doesn’t have a green card and would be deported (he’s a Canadian living in NYC, or says so anyway).

      He professes to care soooo much about the plight of bullied gay kids, and then he makes an astonishingly vile self-hating homophobic comment like “big manly tough empowered gay men”! – ya, that’s real helpful to those poor bullied gay kids. Oh, and if you’re gay and don’t live in New York City you live in “bumfuck nowhere” (quote!) so he doesn’t give a sh*t about your petty little worries about people getting fired, etc. Nice!

      @Little-Kiwi: Uh, “Little Kiwi”… YOU’RE ANONYMOUS. You’re using a pseudonym. Is there something about this concept you don’t get?

      Queerty doesn’t require commenters to post pictures, or link to fabulous YouTube videos, etc. If someone is unhappy about this policy, maybe they can stop being a busybody telling Queerty how to run their site, and get their own site. Oh right, you already did that and you’re still whining.

      Queerty doesn’t care if posters use screen names. That is their stated policy. If someone is unhappy with the policy they can go over to the Advocate which allows only Facebook comments and is dull as your endless yammering about parents. Queerty is in good company since The New York Times, the Globe and Mail in Toronto, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Telegraph, the Atlantic, Salon, Reason, Politico, Slate, HuffPo etc etc etc all seem never to have noticed that screen name comments are supposedly a problem. Guess what – Little Kiwi’s Word Museum of Terror and Hypocrisy is in this august company, it allows pseudonymous comments too! I’m sure “Choklit Daddy” (for instance) is a nice guy, but I’m guessing that’s probably not the name on his driver’s license, nor is the picture on it a cartoon drawing.

      So why are screen name comments a problem here on Queerty, and only here? And why do you write about all kinds of interesting things on your OWN site, but when you come here you only say the same boring stuff over & over about parents? And what does any of this have to do with the “War on Xmas”?

      Dec 9, 2012 at 8:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      it’s a nom-de-plume. a gay literary reference. feel free to google, sugarpie. ;-)

      it’s flattering to know that you, greg, and your imaginary boyfriend talk about me.

      http://www.queerty.com/plan-for-lgbt-school-in-toronto-meets-with-opposition-from-gay-community-20120928/
      a story on queerty featuring me. :-)

      moi. ;-)

      so, no. i’m not anonymous. but if you need to pretend that i am to keep up your own charade, go right ahead.

      *elegant curtsy*

      Dec 9, 2012 at 9:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      oh, i just realized that some of you may not be tech-savvy.

      click my name, see who i am.

      clearly, this is a concept greg doesn’t get. ask your imaginary boyfriend to help you with that ;-)

      Dec 9, 2012 at 9:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the other Greg
      the other Greg

      @Little-Kiwi: I was aware LK was a literary reference to Ethan Mordden, & said so to you once. Queerty is fine with that, they don’t care who you are, and few Queerty readers care either. That’s a concept you don’t get. But I’m sorry I missed the interesting article – I was on vacation 9/28 which for us involves an internet-free week & a half (must be your idea of hell!).

      So… if some recently-out, recently-bullied young person were to post here with a screen name and no pix, and nothing to justify his existence (in your busybody kibbutzing opinion, not Queerty’s), does he get a pass? At what point does he have to start making videos – 25, 27? What if he’s f*g-bashed at 27, do you give him a break then? And what if he lives in “bumfuck nowhere” and has to deal with the possibility of being harassed, fired, or assaulted if he’s openly gay all over the internet? That’s another concept you don’t get, but I can’t figure out why, considering your childhood experience being bullied.

      It’s funny that Queerty thought you and your mother were not related! Maybe they were making a sly, inside joke about your parent obsession?

      Dec 9, 2012 at 10:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      i understand that your obsession with me takes precedence over your reading comprehension skills.

      i’ve never said “all queerty members need to not be anonymous” – merely pointed out that the biggest complainers always are. the trolls who slander liberal gays, effeminate gays, all those other gays. always boastful posts from cowards whose bravado can only exist whilst commenting anonymously.

      ;-)

      yet another point you choose to ignore in order to fixate on me. how’s the meth-addiction recovery going?

      Dec 9, 2012 at 10:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the other Greg
      the other Greg

      @Little-Kiwi: ??? – I’m a liberal whose politics you’ve never disagreed with, that I’ve noticed, and I’ve never disagreed with yours particularly either.

      Really, you don’t want anyone to be “obsessed” with you? After you put videos of yourself all over the place? :) Even if I think you’re a bit hypocritical, am I still allowed to be a fan? Of your own site, anyway, if not your oddly monomaniacal parent comments here.

      In real life I’m mostly concerned with HIV issues. I’ve written a lot here about it to counter the appalling ignorance in Queerty comments about it. (which however, seem to be getting a little better, I think.) I’ve written often here about being in a sero-discordant relationship. Coming out as HIV+ is often even tougher for people than coming out as gay. (Well it didn’t seem to bother Andrew Sullivan much, but he’s an attention hound like you! – even if he is a self-described conservative.)

      My point in THIS thread (which was originally about 2eo not you, sorry oh narcissus) was, so what if the gay conservatives are “anonymous”? OK I suppose it’s vaguely interesting that they tend to be that way, but THAT hardly seems the salient problem with them! I’ve never seen anyone else, on any site, complain about that. And that parent thing, it’s probably true, as I’ve said to you, but on the list of things to object to about them, that seems to me down around #47 on the list.

      It’s up to us to come up with cogent, sensible responses to the gay conservatives’ gibberish. When we’re HERE we are just typing and hopefully, making a sensible counter-argument. Why not just counter their arguments?

      Dec 9, 2012 at 11:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the other Greg
      the other Greg

      @Little-Kiwi: The problem with gay conservatives isn’t their “anonymity.” The problem with gay conservatives is their arguments. So we need to counter their arguments.

      Dec 9, 2012 at 11:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @dbmyers: dbmyers,I applaud you on
      your courage!I,of course,have no idea how old you are[I'm 65],but
      I didn’t even know that I’m gay until a couple of years after you
      came out,didn’t begin outing myself until 15,or so,years later.
      However,I think little Kiwi’s hilarious burka comment has some
      validity.From the small number of comments it is reported that
      you’ve made,I gather that you are a fairly recent addition to
      QUEERTY readership.My point is that little Kiwi,myself,and many
      others have witnessed lots of “burka-ed” self-hating homos
      [many probably deep in denial]make viciously hateful homophobic
      harangues.My guess[and that of some other commenter s]is that
      most of them are deeply closeted/angry with themselves/guilty and
      that displacing their anger onto others gives them momentary relief.
      Perhaps this activity lets them spend more time in that deep river,
      Denial.Often,after many venomous exchanges,the hateful homos are
      blocked from further commenting.Occasionally,they are simply barking
      up the wrong tree:I remember one young guy,who made equations with
      homosexual activity[in his view,a biologically unnatural thing]with
      drug addiction.After several heated exchanges,he admitted to reading
      and posting on a blog from the HRC.

      Dec 10, 2012 at 12:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MartinDK
      MartinDK

      @wllmjunior: thank you for your comment. So true! I couldnt agree more

      Dec 10, 2012 at 12:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dbmyers
      dbmyers

      @wllmjunior: Sorry, but yes, some christians are the problem. I have no problem with what I call “true christians” – those who practice the golden rule in their daily lives. But there are plenty of fundamentalist right-wing christians who do feel it is their right and their duty to impose their religious beliefs upon the rest of us. Since the US is a secular government whose Constitution has been interpreted by the US Supreme Court to guarantee “seperation of church and state”, neither christians(fundamnentalists or other-wise)nor any other religion has the right to impose their beliefs upon the rest of us.

      Dec 10, 2012 at 1:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dbmyers
      dbmyers

      @Guillermo3: Thanks for your background info as, yes, I am a relatively new poster here. I too am 65. I am a dual US/Canadian citizen living in Vancouver (voting absentee in federal elections from Minnesota) and am a retired GLTBQ rights activist for over 40 years. It is useful to know some background on members (and history) here, so thanks. I too get very frustrated with Log Cabin Republicans and the even more with the more right-wing GOProuds. They both often seem, to me, to be of the mentality of “I got mine Jack” and “I’m alright Jack!”,(which, coincidentally, is the true mantra of the 2%). I encourage all posters here to sign up for the HRC newsletter and consider being a member and or donating to them: http://www.hrc.org

      They’ve done wonders these past four years and especially during this last election cycle where they and others spent nearly a million and a half helping to defeat the Minnesota Ban gay marriage state constitutional amendment (for the future as it is not yet legal in Minnesota). The good news is that the amendment failed along with the photo voter ID amendment and the campaign to defeat it resulted in Minnesota having the highest voter turnout in the nation and throwing out the republican majorities in both Minnesota state houses to boot! It may be even possible that the democratic majorities in those two houses will pass a gay marriage act in the future that the democratic governor can sign. That would truly be “just deserts” for the homophobic right in Minnesota.

      Dec 10, 2012 at 2:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Atomicrob
      Atomicrob

      The conservative entertainment complex rears its ugly head.

      Dec 10, 2012 at 4:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ScaryRussianHeather
      ScaryRussianHeather

      You didn’t close your quote on the O’Reilly quote?

      Where’s the blog post where he said he wasn’t against marriage equality because “I want gay people to be happy.” a different night a coupla weeks ago?

      Dec 10, 2012 at 7:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ginger5010
      ginger5010

      my roomate’s mother makes $79 every hour on the internet. She has been out of a job for 5 months but last month her check was $21010 just working on the internet for a few hours. Read more on this site cloud68Dotcom

      Dec 10, 2012 at 11:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guillermo3
      Guillermo3

      @dbmyers: Thanks for your
      thanks,dbmyers,and thanks for telling a little about yourself &
      about your work.I agree about HRC,and have been a member for years
      _just wish their monthly magazine wasn’t so bland.
      The frustrating thing about these sights
      (other than,on THIS SITE, the mysteries of Queerty’s censors
      [unfathomable to me])is that we can trade so little personal
      information safely.

      Dec 11, 2012 at 12:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Little-Kiwi
      Little-Kiwi

      @the other Greg:

      their arguments, as we all know, are baseless and devoid of anything resembling intellectual honesty.

      as exacerbated by their need to say them anonymously, on sites like this.

      if gay republicans online believed a word of what they say, they’d be the Out-est fellas in the country. which they aint.

      Dec 11, 2012 at 3:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • MORE PHOTOS

    FOLLOW US
     




    GET THE DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.