Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
both ways

Obama’s Promise to Have Our Backs Disappears With Roman Catholics

obamaitalylistening

When we asked yesterday whether President Obama was playing a two-faced frenemy with The Gays, we forgot to mention the obvious: Yes, yes he is.

Meeting with the Roman Catholic media last week, Obama broached some sensitive subjects when it comes to the devout: abortion … and gay rights! He told reporters: “For the gay and lesbian community in this country, I think it’s clear that they feel victimized in fairly powerful ways and they’re often hurt by not just certain teachings of the Catholic Church, but the Christian faith generally. And as a Christian, I’m constantly wrestling with my faith and my solicitude and regard and concern for gays and lesbians.”

See what he did there? He told the Catholics what they wanted to hear — that he’s a religious type, and that he’s an imperfect man who leans on his faith — while also making sure that when his words reached America, they wouldn’t seriously offend the gays (read: he hears us!).

What Obama did not do, as it’s blatantly clear, is tell the Catholic world what he told us before and after the election: He’s our ally, our advocate, and will use his White House residency to help bring us equality.

We’re no spring chickens with politics; we’re aware that, as a world leader, he must say certain things in certain ways to certain groups of people. But what you have here is a president whose stance on gay rights is, at best, just a couple degrees greater than lip service. Given the chance to tell the Catholic world GLBTs deserve full protection, he opted to let them interpret his words however they saw fit.

Obama will tell the religious world that he’s against poverty, malnourishment, and lack of education across the board, because he and the Vatican and Jerusalem agree on those things. What he won’t do, however, is remind them he’s proclaimed himself the fierce advocate of gay Americans — because we remain too controversial. And thus, he sacrifices our visibility and right to equality in exchange for making nice foreign policy with religious conservatives abroad.

That’s not exactly “[using] the bully pulpit” to demand our rights.

By:           editor editor
On:           Jul 8, 2009
Tagged: , , ,
  • 116 Comments
    • Richard in DC
      Richard in DC

      I would look at it this way… Imagine if he looked at Catholic Leaders and said “F You”, the response would be so energizing for the opposition that it could really set us back. So, rather than offend them, he offered them a platitude. Remember that when the President talks to Catholics, he’s really talking to Hispanics, and he needs their votes to stay in power. Soooo, unless we’re really looking forward Palin-Romney 2012, I’d say let Mr. Obama play nice with the Catholics.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 10:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mr. Cox
      Mr. Cox

      The fact that he must bend over for religious leaders doesn’t say a lot about him as much as it speaks VOLUMES about our country and how we have let fascism take hold. Our candidates must have forums with Rick Warren and other kooks of the far-right in order to get elected President. This is sad in many ways as it has shown how stupid, ignorant and lazy our population has become. Americans have lived up their stereotypes to the top and its the result of poor education and forgetting history!

      Jul 8, 2009 at 10:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thom Freeheart
      Thom Freeheart

      I’m glad that all of the people who worshiped Obama prior to November are now realizing that he is duplicitous and has the amazing skill to say something that makes someone think that they are hearing what they want to hear.

      Obama, like all politicians, should be judged on his actions, not his words.

      Obama = EPIC FAIL for gay rights, the economy, and foreign policy.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 11:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mr. Cox
      Mr. Cox

      @Thom Freeheart: In 2012 I’m voting for Jesse Ventura if he runs. He’s fiscally conservative, but socially more liberal than the Netherlands. He debated Pat Buchanan on gay marriage and owned that racist prick who still isn’t dead yet. He even joked that he wished there were more gays in the military because he would have had more pickings when he got to the Philippines.

      Obama just announced another $1T stimulus possibly coming!!!!! So he has no problem forcing the gays to pay more tax money but he certainly has a problem with letting us marry in return. WELCOME TO AMERICA!

      Jul 8, 2009 at 11:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John in SF
      John in SF

      Queerty I think you aren’t giving this man enough credit for this powerful statement. Telling a victimizer that they are victimizers to their face takes a boldness I don’t believe we have ever seen before.

      Calling your audience victimizers is hardly a platitude! Victimization goes far beyond a simple policy disagreement, but suggests that the people are listening to him are intentionally harming gays and lesbians. It is calling them out on pretty bad behavior.

      For goodness sakes, give the man some breathing room!

      Jul 8, 2009 at 11:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      This comment:

      And as a Christian, I’m constantly wrestling with my faith and my solicitude and regard and concern for gays and lesbians.”

      If he truly supported our community, he would not say things like this. This statement VALIDATES the religious right’s arguments of why we should not have equality.

      This man is such a disappointment to say the least. Those of you who supported this man in the primary must see now what many of us saw 2 years ago. This man is no advocate to the LGBT community, he is more of an advocate for the religious right. Meghan McCain has done more for gay rights than this man.

      He will not get my vote again.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 12:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Topher
      Topher

      @Richard in DC: I agree wholeheartedly. When did America become a theocracy?

      Jul 8, 2009 at 12:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mr. Cox
      Mr. Cox

      The funny thing is that they EXPECT us to care for every liberal cause since we’re gay and its the law!!!

      F**K UNIONS! They turned their back on us in California when 55% of their whiny uppity members voted FOR Prop 8. This is despite the fact they ALWAYS come to gays asking for money and support and offer us empty promises.

      For some reason the Democrats want us to be part of their welfare-state agenda by becoming another minority for them to exploit the same way they have exploited blacks and hispanics over the years! Look at minority communities in the USA that have voted Democrat for 50 years… THEY’RE STILL POOR!

      Gay people are already very affluent, intelligent and better off than most groups economically even with all the poverty facing gay youth. As a result we don’t seem to buy into the DNC and their victimization agenda. That agenda in reality is subjugation, silencing, and making us another money tit for Harry Reid and his do-nothing nothingness fake bs.

      I’m voting Libertarian in 2012! There I’m done ranting!! Lol

      Jul 8, 2009 at 12:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thom Freeheart
      Thom Freeheart

      @InExile: “This man is no advocate to the LGBT community, he is more of an advocate for the religious right. ”

      No, I think Obama is an advocate for himself and his own personal ambitions and he did a masterful job of making the voters think that he was bigger than that.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 12:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tony
      Tony

      He basically said “I too have a problem with the gays.”

      What a bastard.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 12:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      Our democrats seem to think laws equivalent to gay apartheid in our country are fine. David Mixner said as much in a piece he wrote after the White House cocktail party that sums up this point quite well.

      http://www.davidmixner.com/2009/07/separate-but-unequal-means-gay-apartheid.html

      Jul 8, 2009 at 12:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • M Shane
      M Shane

      No. 5 · John in SF I agree very much with you. Queerty’s relentless unreasonable preaching against Obama is doing nothing but to help the Right wing. You demonstrate this underhanded strategyu again and again. Obama has been in office only a short time and is already making headway into many of the great problems of this nation.

      It is really stupid to think (1) that he should give a gay agenda priority over everything before it’s time. You give the impression that you have a handle on some brilliant insight.
      when you don’t.· Richard in DC is entirely right- Obama has more than a few whiney Queens to keep happy and more urgent matters to attend to first. So many gays really are narcisistic babies.

      You don’t know what ypou are talking about Mr. Cox. If you dislike Fascism, why are you so anxious to encourage it. Most gays are not rich etc., only a few ignorant queens, who like the rest of the wealthy, don’t care what happens to the country or to anyone else.

      Try being reasonable and remember that only less than a year ago we were really close to the jaws of a totolitarian state.

      I’m not sure that you know what you’re talkingabout Mr. Cox, firest complaining about Fascism and then promoting it is a little bizarre.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 12:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie
      Bertie

      Telling whomever what they want to hear —
      that’s out good ol’ “wrestling with my faith” –
      Messiah Complex-up-the ass bullshit artist extraordinaire VILE president.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thom Freeheart
      Thom Freeheart

      @M Shane: “John in SF I agree very much with you. Queerty’s relentless unreasonable preaching against Obama is doing nothing but to help the Right wing.”

      You seem to forget the slogan: Free of an agenda. Except the GAY one.

      Go Queerty.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John T.
      John T.

      M Shane and John in SF are right on track. It is high time to hold Queerty accountable for the recklessness they do with these Obama slams which will ultimately just do more good for the Right Wing than anyone else. You won’t get your wet dream of a Hillary Clinton presidency, she lost, its over already.

      There was recently an interview with Obama’s gay spokesperson, the one closest to the President where he said:
      “Barack Obama as president and commander in chief is, and will continue to go through, a process, methodically, to get the ducks in a row in order to get the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell done in a successful way that isn’t just going to happen overnight. He has to move the minds of the public, he has to move the minds of Congress and he has to move the minds of military leaders. And once that happens, and the ducks are in a row, I believe he can successfully move forward for repeal, something that he feels very strongly about and something that he spoke very passionately about.”

      WOW! You won’t see that on Queerty! Or this:

      “he is working within his administration to try and get in a position to get some meaningful things done to help the gay community achieve equality.”

      Wait…you mean this kind of change doesn’t come in SIX months? Geez queerty, sell your ads some other way, the Obama bashing is getting old real quick.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      What if he’d said,

      “I’m constantly wrestling with my faith and my solicitude and regard and concern for [the Jews who killed Christ].”

      “I’m constantly wrestling with my faith and my solicitude and regard and concern for [adulterous women who should be stoned to death].”

      Of course he wouldn’t because he knows, as black gay civil rights icon Bayard Rustin pointed out over 20 years ago, “Gays are the new ‘niggers'” about whom politicians can get away with saying anything they’d never dare say about other groups such as blacks or Jews or women.

      Obama COULD HAVE answered, “I know there are differences of opinion about how religion should apply to gay rights but as the leader of a nation which treasures separation of Church and State as much as we treasure our freedom of belief I must remind everyone that the latter must never be allowed to cancel out the former.”

      As a state legislator once noted about his own responsibility: “I put my hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution not my hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible!”

      This kind of INDEFENSIBLE BULLSHIT is what helped Prop H8TE pass after the H8TERS used a recording of Obama saying “God is in the mix” in robocalls to millions of California voters.

      He just endorsed Biblical homohatred!!! Stop treating him like a goddamn five year old who had a good reason for spilling scalding soup on his baby sister, or didnt mean to. He’s the most powerful man in the world to whom statues have been imagined built on his brilliant eloquence alone and he must be held responsible for the harm the power of his words do.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie
      Bertie

      @M Shane:

      you pathetic “apartheid aint so bad ” Obamapologist piece of shit

      Damn straight Queerty is calling out Obama on his “wrestling with faith” BS

      the pocketbooks are closed to the Dems and to Barry O

      and my votes will go ANYPLACE – even to a GOP then to willingly vote to a lying sack of shit like Obama ever again.

      Anybody that takes the oath of office and then discussed his FAITH in the following months is a DISGUSTING waste of my time and intelligence.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      I don’t get people saying Obama has other issues to deal with. LGBT civil rights is very important, in fact it is the MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      The problem with so many people like Obama is that he’s not learned to separate his religious beliefs from his secular duty. He’s allowed them to influence his view on full equality as have most politicians. He and others like him need to leave their beliefs behind in the privacy of their homes where they belong. The true christian would stick his neck out for his brother, no matter the consequences. I don’t see any “true christian” behavior in Obama or most of them for that matter. Relatively few of them really practice what they preach. Hypocrisy is what its all about.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      @Richard in DC: You said “. So, rather than offend them, he offered them a platitude. Remember that when the President talks to Catholics, he’s really talking to Hispanics, and he needs their votes to stay in power. ”
      _______________________________________________________

      I’m sorry, but there comes a point where there is no longer any differnce in trying to play politics and actually being opposed to us. If Obama, plays politics to stay in power and so to keep that power never ever moves on our rights, that is no different from a politician that runs for office as an opponent of us.

      Remembe,r for 8 years under Clinton we were told “Don’t worry, after he is elected to his second term, he’ll take care of gay issues, he just can’t upset people while he needs to win that second term.” and then remember what happened? NOTHING, he did absolutly nothing for gay rights after that. So please don’t tell me that OBama’s playing politics is good for us. The opposition freaked out when marriage cases went to the courts in Iowa, MA, etc… and we still won there even though we lost Ca. So speaking up and fighting is the way to get these things done. Not by replaying the passivity of the Clinton years.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      @Michael: Kudos to you! You hit the nail on the head, I could not agree more!

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie
      Bertie

      @Mr. Cox:

      I love it!!
      re:
      Look at minority communities in the USA that have voted Democrat for 50 years… THEY’RE STILL POOR!

      amen brother —
      and we will be RICH under a Repuglican tax-happy maniac
      and not used like apartheid atm’s

      ps — where are all the Democratic Liberal cries over our 2 wars and the unlimited use of funds to supply them? The dead soldiers have stopped coming home? and the dead civilians have disappeared under Obama’s presidency.

      The Dem liberals are so full of crap. Now they have blood on their hands too — use those bloody hands to PRAY with Obama, our FAITH-based Prez.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John in SF
      John in SF

      @Bertie: Bernie in post 13 you wrote, Messiah Complex-up-the ass bullshit artist extraordinaire VILE president.

      All I can say is WOW. Internalized homophobia and racism all rolled into one statement. A President acknowledges that religious faith and civil liberties can be in conflict, but says that that is no excuse for victimizing those who disagree with you, and you think that makes him vile? Looking at a situation from the perspective of those who disagree with you and STILL pointing out how wrong they are is a very effective way to change hearts and minds. Name calling is not. IMHO.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John T.
      John T.

      One thing people seem to be reading into this article about the meeting that the Catholics that was NEVER SAID was that his religous beliefs was causing him to DELAY HIS ACTIONS.

      That is what you hysterical reactionaries are doing. NOWHERE did the original piece from US NEWS say that. It has been spun by anti-Obama queers. He has a plan, and so what he wrestles with his faith while forging ahead for our equality. Why? Because he knows it’s what’s right.

      Robert NYC, nowhere in the source article (not the spin Queerty put on it) did Obama say he had a hard time separating his religous views from his secular duty. NOWHERE. That is how people are INTERPRETING IT.

      Bertie, you are a name calling ridiculous person. So President’s are not allowed to discuss their faith with a RELIGIOUS group??? What GOP President would you EVER get to not do that? PULEEZE.

      INEXILE, you really are INEXILE (probably in the Castro or WeHo or CHELSEA, some gay ghetto living off Disability you got when you were making 100k as a stockbroker in the 90s) but WAKE UP…there are OTHER ISSUES….or maybe you will be like the homos who had your head up someone’s ass and was shocked when the Twin Towers fell. There are OTHER things going on. It’s the ECONOMY…what bubble are you living in not affected by the recession? Iraq war? Global warming? Sheesh.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mr. Cox
      Mr. Cox

      @M Shane: Buddy I am condemning fascism and promoting libertarianism. There is a HUGE difference! I am condemning the DNC for being the party of lip service and handouts and condemning the GOP for being the party of warmongering Evangelical fascists. I state that gays need to stop putting their faith in politicians and put it into grassroots activism to win over hearts and minds and pressure politicians to keep up with the tide.

      You proved my point that being gay means you MUST subscribe to every liberal cause. I’m not a Republican!!! I’m a libertarian. Big difference!! The GOP promotes fascism and corporate welfare. Two things I am strongly against as are most REAL fiscal conservatives.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie
      Bertie

      @John in SF:

      Um…he does think he’s a Messiah
      where is the racism, you jackoff?

      he is a duplicitous VILE man based on his WORDS and ACTIONS
      where is the internalized homophobia? shitforbrains

      I don’t want to live under gay apartheid and don’t want my Prez to
      use his faith wrestling to keep me down.

      I am not so in love with the man or have my head up his ass to not see what he has actually done for GLBT community – nada.

      He acts when the money stops for his party.

      Then moves on to the next fundraiser and photo op.

      JOhn in SF, maybe you two can go have a well-publicized BURGER together or go walk that goddamn DOG of his.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • wondermann
      wondermann

      @John T.: What do you expect from Queerty? I knew they would run that statement and misuse it.

      Anyway, this is deal. Vote Repub or whatever…Obama won this without a huge chunk of the gay vote. He still has a great deal of the gay votes so these foolish rants don’t mean much.

      Remember who are Obama’s true voters, women, Hispanics, African-Americans and younger people. We put him there and he will stay there.

      And please remember, this is politics, folks! It’s not pretty and he has to work with everyone. I don’t like it, but that’s reality. So stop hating on him for no real reason. You just look foolish and uninformed.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      PS: Obama’s “faith” would not be so troublesome for him if he had not CHOSEN to disagree with the ONLY denomination he’s ever been affiliated with. The United Church of Christ does not just support EVERY OTHER gay rights issue…it supports LEGALIZED gay MARRIAGE, too.

      After he dumped the UCC congregation of retired Rev. Wright did Obama sign up with Rev.Rick “gay = pedophilia” Warren?

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John in SF
      John in SF

      @Bertie: “you jackoff”,”duplicitous VILE”, “shitforbrains”

      Bertie, you have no real arguments to back up your positions so you resort to name calling and intimidation. I’m not buying it. I AM calling out what I see which is a lot of self-loathing, homophobic, racist, hateful speach, quoted in italics and cited in my earlier comment as well. Go bully somebody else, somebody who doesn’t see through your bluster.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      @John T.:

      You’re wrong from the word Go: Robert Hildebrand is NOT “Obama’s gay spokesperson.” He is close to the President and conceded that “people will accuse me — PROBABLY RIGHTFULLY SO — that I’m a Kool-Aid drinker.”

      Well, the lab results on his interview just came back showing he’s not just a Kool Aid drinker—he has TERMINAL CANCER OF THE KOOL AID! And so do you. As for the FACTS behind his claims you quoted:

      Obama “has to move the minds of the public.”

      WRONG: As “The New Republic” just reported, public support for ending DADT is:

      “25 points higher than the percentage of Americans who endorse Obama’s handling of health care,

      19 points higher than the percentage who currently support the war in Afghanistan,

      and 18 points higher than the percentage who approve of the administration’s economic policies.”

      “Obama is not afraid to push health care reform, send more troops to Afghanistan, or stand by his stimulus program–nor should he be. But why, when it comes to the far less controversial cause of gays serving in the military” is he, as Hildebrand might say, “being so spineless”?

      HILDEBRAND: “he has to move the minds of Congress” ….when is he going to START?

      HILDEBRAND: “he has to move the minds of military leaders”….NO! He just has to ISSUE THEM ORDERS….or did I fail to notice when HE TRANSFERED HIS POWERS AS COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF to Bo the Wonder Puppy?

      He twitters that O can’t do anything about DADT overnight. WRONG….unless Obama WRITES VERY VERY VERY SLOW. He could LEGALLY freeze discharges with the stroke of pen IN SECONDS.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 1:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John T.
      John T.

      Oh God it’s you Michael. Forget it. You’ve been on the anti-Obama bandwagon for quite some time now and Obama can say something positive and you will still twist it into not being enough. You should write for Queerty. I am not even going to go there with you because you are hopeless.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      #20 – Yes, CAM. Clinton made promises that he didn’t keep. I understand your concern. It is mine too. Seems to me things were very different then, the Religious Right had a lot more power, no states had marriage, or even civil unions (maybe only Vermont, I can’t remember.) But things were definitely very different.

      Keep the pressure on, but realize (a)he’s only been in office 6 months and (b) go back and read comment #5.

      And whoever mentioned “Obama is endorsing Biblical homohatred.” Far from it. Bible thumpers believe we should be exterminated. Obama is at least “wrestling with his conscience.” That is a HUGE difference. Progress yes, everything we want, no. Obviously.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • M Shane
      M Shane

      Mr.Cox; I found your first remarks about our failing population totally right on. The population of America which is lazy and ignorant ois destroying it. I agree with you about most of what has happened with our imperialism and Corporate welfare.
      I have a great deal of difficulty separating the defacto results of what would be liberalism(which I havn’t seen in practice and Republicanism which is Fascist as far as I’m concerned. The Dems follow suit pretty much. I’m not sure that Obama is with them in heart, but that he has a really dense population to make happy (which sadly is what they want–to be taken care of.)

      The point at which we may disengage is with the way that Big Business has used the government to promote it’s interests abroad since WW2, and run out private enterprise on a small scale. I have a sense that large corporations need to be reined in to some degree-not helped.

      I’m not certain I trust that unfettered Corporate power is wise, for a number of reasons; the first being that we get a few corporations running everything, and that is Facsism of a sort.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      @John T.:You wrote:
      INEXILE, you really are INEXILE (probably in the Castro or WeHo or CHELSEA, some gay ghetto living off Disability you got when you were making 100k as a stockbroker in the 90s) but WAKE UP…there are OTHER ISSUES….or maybe you will be like the homos who had your head up someone’s ass and was shocked when the Twin Towers fell. There are OTHER things going on. It’s the ECONOMY…what bubble are you living in not affected by the recession? Iraq war? Global warming? Sheesh.

      Not in any of those areas, wish I was!

      Global warming is MORE important than civil rights? Get a grip!

      You sound like a Bush apologist, not an Obama apologist quoting the Twin Towers. The gays are not the only ones this man has turned his back on. He has continued to allow domestic spying on US citizens. He has backtracked on increasing the taxes on the top 3%. He has expanded the wars not focused on bringing home the troops. He is in full retreat for a government sponsored heath care system. These are a few examples why progressives (not the gays) are not happy with this mans performance.

      Gay families are also suffering in this recession WITHOUT THE SAME RIGHTS AND BENEFITS that heterosexuals enjoy! So quit making excuses for the great orator, most people with a brain do not but any of them. The actions speak for themselves or in this case the lack of.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @John T.:

      John, Obama most certainly cannot separate his religious beliefs from his secular duty when he supports civil unions and not full marriage for gay citizens. That IS a direct result of his religious beliefs influencing his thinking and deference to religious people and wackos he kow tow’s to to get votes, meaning that he allows religious beliefs to trump secular civil issues. He would NEVER stick his neck out as a handful of democrats have done in support of our FULL equality which he was and is not for and he made that quite clear during his campaign. He has a distorted view of what full equality means and has learned nothing of his own people’s history of segregation, instead he opts for legal segregation in the form of regressive civil unions to appease the right wingers and other religious wackos. Civil unions have nothing to do with religious marriage, two totally different models. If he can’t separate one from the other, conveniently so, then he’s not fit to utter equality since he has no concept of what it really means.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mr. Cox
      Mr. Cox

      @M Shane: Actually Shane I completely agree with you! I happen to strongly believe that the military-industrial complex has destroyed this country past the point of no return. I believe corporatism is dangerous and we should NEVER allow corporations to run the government.

      What we have seen in the past couple decades is a manifestation of corporatism and warfare whether its Vietnam, the War on Drugs, Iraq, North Korea (coming soon), and gay apartheid. If anything, I am your strongest supporter. This is why I don’t give money to HRC as they are a corporate entity not doing us any good.

      However, I believe corporations are not the problem (we need them to function as a society) but rather how the business elite of America have driven ethics out the window and have allowed society to run amuck without principles or rule of law.

      Obama is case and point! During the election he said he would get us out of Iraq in a year. Then it became 2. Now there is no sign we’ll be out even by 2013. I’m not surprised. Obama was backed by the same war profiteers who backed Bush. For all the talk he said about ethics reform he had bundlers making him millions among corporate elite while he campaigned. This is why I believe both unions and corporations should not influence our government. Government needs to remain neutral in the continual fight between organized labor and organized business.

      I say to Queerty and the rest of the gays KEEP IT UP! Gays have every right to be furious at Obama. He is spending TRILLIONS on corporate welfare that won’t do a damn thing for the Middle Class and is pushing the war machine to the edge with Bagram and his continual expansion of executive privilege brought to you by Bush and Co.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      I think Queerty did a pretty repectable job in analyzing Obama’s statement in relation to his job and the fine line a president has to walk in many areas,but when you put it to the ‘Fierce Advocate’ test, it fails (epically) Damn! I swore I’d never use epic and fail together ever again.
      InExile: By reading your previous posts, I didn’t think Obama got your vote the first time “Hate to say it but Hillary DESERVED New York and California. In fact if Obama had run an honest campaign she would now be our President and we would not be having all these conversations about lack of action from the White House!”

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dennis
      Dennis

      blah, blah, fucking screeching whining, blah…

      “I think it’s clear that they feel victimized in fairly powerful ways, and they are often hurt not just by certain teachings of the Catholic Church, but by the Christian faith generally.”

      Speaking directly to the Church, He’s telling the church they have hurt us, in many denominations, in powerful ways…before a meeting with the pope (=fucktard!). What other president has said something more direct against the harmful effects of discriminatory religious dogma? NAME IT, go ahead, name when a president has called out Christianity’s harmful effect on gays. When did it happen? When? Screech, whine, bitch, complain…

      What’s he supposed to say in the REAL WORLD? (The real world being a concept many Queerty posters are clearly challenged at engaging with) Hail Satan? Would that please you? Or, Fuck every last Christian American and your bullshit belief system? Is that what you expect the president to say to “defend” your gay honor? Would insulting Christians directly bring about our rights more quickly? Would having a ‘Bruno’ as president satisfy your constant need for gay affirmation and advocacy? Or an athiest? Good luck waiting on your first atheist president, that’ll happen real soon. (= never.) Yes, he “threw them a bone” reminding them he’s a Christian as well, AND called them out in a non-confrontational manner, reminding them that Christian teachings have caused hurt and harm to LGBT persons.

      Bunch of screeching idiotic fuctards here…done with this goddamn site today.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      @edgyguy1426: He did not get my vote the first time, you are correct. The fact is he owes his present position to Nancy Pelosi and Donna Brazile for changing the rules midway and awarding him delegates he did not earn as well as ACORN intimidating Hillary supporters at the caucuses and busing in people from outside areas for those caucuses. And why not mention the mock floor vote at the convention which assured delegates could not change their minds and vote for the best candidate.

      There was a clear difference between the two, one pandered to the religious right, the other did not. So here we are!

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Landon Bryce
      Landon Bryce

      Dennis and John in SF:

      The president did not say that gay and lesbians have been victimized by Christians or by the Catholic Church.

      Please deal with what he actually said.

      He said we feel feel victimized, not that we have been. That is a world of difference. It can be read as they are bigoted oppressors or we are impatient whiners. The ambivalence is deliberate and deadly.

      Of course, Dennis has no problem calling gay people who think we should have equality “whiners” so it works for him either way.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John in SF
      John in SF

      @Landon Bryce: You are correct when you said Obama said we “feel” victimized. There is a difference. You might want to look up the use of “I” statements when attempting to explain one’s position. Happens to be a very effective rhetorical took which Obama uses here to very great effect, again, IMHO. Had he left out the word, he would have lost all ability to influence his audience. And after all, isn’t THAT the point? The point wasn’t absolute accuracy, and his point wasn’t to make US fell better. His point was to change their hearts and minds.

      I’m not wild about the lack of progress on many issues under Obama including LGBT…but I do think he is usually rhtorically masterful, as he was here. Again, IMO. You may disagree – and I credit you with sticking to the actual topic and not resorting to name calling. Thanks for the civil discussion!

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dabq
      Dabq

      I am so sick and tired of this man and others who have had his job having to suck up to a man in a dress who is as homophobic as they come and lies about his claim that he loves all people. This meeting has nothing to do with the safety or security of this country, and, then Obama is off to Africa which has been devastated by AIDS after dealing with the man in the dress and a Nazi background of intolerance who tells people not to use condoms, vile.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 2:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dennis
      Dennis

      @Landon Bryce:
      To be civil, I find your level of expectation that the president shoud spell out in specifics all the exact ways we have been victimized by Christian dogma, in order to make this statement have value, is unrealistic.

      Any rational person can ‘read between the lines’ to ascertain that Obama’s intention is to convey that harm and hurt have occured. If one hates Obama, or believes that Obama himself is a homophobe or enemy of our community, nothing he can say is enough.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 3:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Landon Bryce
      Landon Bryce

      @John in SF:

      Thanks for the civil discussion, as well. And thanks for acknowledging the truth of what I wrote. Still, you write as though Barack Obama were gay. Since he is not, this is not a variation on an I statement. It’s a deliberately ambivalent statement, whether you want it to be or not. He IS a master of rhetoric, and that mastery is apparent here. It can legitimately be read as pro-gay or neutral.

      And Dennis, thanks for at least making a half-hearted attempt to be civil.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 3:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SM
      SM

      Obama is having problems with heath care reform and you know why? Its because of CONGRESS.

      One day you all will figure it out.

      freaking pathetic

      Jul 8, 2009 at 3:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie
      Bertie

      @John in SF:

      John in SF

      you haven’t got a clue

      You are an Apartheid sympathizer
      shame on you and all you stand for

      ps — LOVE that Massachusetts is suing of DOMA
      change will come / equality will come —
      from freethinkers and not from our vile, duplicitous – almost schizophrenic, gay pandering and bigoted President Obama

      Jul 8, 2009 at 4:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      I am beginning to wonder, is it just that he does not have his heart into the gay civil rights issues or is it a leadership problem? My point is Bush while not having a good agenda managed to ram his agenda through with whatever the policy was which, like it or not, showed true leadership. Obama on the other hand has has difficulty with everything including health care reform. Just recently he asked Moveon.org and other progressive organizations to stop pressuring democrats like Diane Feinstein to back the public option for health care. So does he have a leadership problem?

      Jul 8, 2009 at 4:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      @Dennis: Dennis, you just posted something at number #43, yet you said in Post number #38

      “Bunch of screeching idiotic fuctards here…done with this goddamn site today.
      Posted: Jul 8, 2009 at 2:36 pm

      Gee, you said one thing (done with this site today) and then did another (Stayed here and posted again)…..no wonder you seem to like Obama so much.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 4:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      I know its hard for the average gay to play religion, but what Obama actually said is that although he is a christian he is sick of the hate that the church teaches and doesn’t blame the gay/lesbians that feel like victims of religion. Please show me one politician that has ever gone as far as putting a mirror up to the church. No one ever has. I got to back Obama on this one.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 5:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      Frankly I think a few people here are overreacting to his statement.

      “I too have a problem with the gays”?: He said nothing of the sort.

      On the other hand It would have been nice to hear less about his personal faith, which has no relevance to his job (paying attention to the constitution should be a slightly higher priority) and more of a reminder that fundamentalist Christians are not the only people whom he was elected to govern, and not the only belief system he needs to pay attention to.

      After all, many of them have no problem claiming their turf, and they aren’t always polite about it:
      http://www2.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?k=3692&id=9bb6f29b-d7a8-4179-b136-1c0e0520e9c4

      It’s not just a matter of some other people feeling slighted, it’s a matter of equal access and human rights that he should feel personally responsible for resolving.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 5:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @strumpetwindsock:

      I appreciate what he did say, but it is how he framed it – gays and lesbians as a community he is not connected to, instead of saying clearly that he is responsible for representing our interests, and that some of those teaching, and religious pressure on the state are an affront to citizens and the principles of democracy generally.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 5:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @galefan2004:

      I know of quite a few politicians who have put the church in its place.

      As for AMERICAN politicians, I sure there are some, but not many of such high profile since the days of Jefferson.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 5:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BrianZ
      BrianZ

      On one hand, I have some respect for his (apparent) honesty in what he had to say. I know that many good people struggle to overcome their religion-taught homophobia.

      On the other hand, embracing the legal concept of eliminating institutionalized discrimination should have zero to do with your God. Personally I’ve had enough of the POTUS who believes his faith gives him the right to disregard the law.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 5:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie
      Bertie

      why no screaming about Obama’s Iraq exit strategy that has disappeared? Have we suddenly cut war costs (or deaths) in our 2 occupied countries?

      oh I guess WAR is so much cuter when Obama is in charge ?

      fucking hypocrites.

      You staunch Democrat Obamapologists are sickening.

      You all have blood on your hands now…

      and those gays who say ANYTHING is more important than getting your 3rd-class asses out of American homo apartheid are vile.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 7:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Bertie:

      You all have blood on your hands now…

      Well hopefully it will match my nail polish, at least.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 8:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      I knew it! STrumpet’s a post op tranny! I fuckin’ knew it!

      Why is obama kissing bill donohue’s ass?

      Jul 8, 2009 at 8:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Topher:

      I’ve been asking myself that same question for a very long time now.

      Since the election of our first Roman Catholic President, perhaps? (J.F.K.)

      I do recall a lot of people voicing their dissent based on the fear of theocracy encroaching on our government.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 8:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • M Shane
      M Shane

      Mr. Cox: Yes we do agree except that I have some doubts about logistics. I’m glad that you brought up the issue of the war. Nothing could convince me more that this country has become a war machine. It bothers me immensely that this war was created for corporate interests (not just oil, at all) and that if we don’t have the military out making war the country will produce very little on it’s own. We have a fortune
      invested in war making(approx 30 assults since WW2).
      I am really concerned that Obama is stopped in this matter as important as he seemed to think it was( he ran on that issue).

      The population is neither intelligent nor dedicated enough (lazy) to call their congressmen to task to straighten things out. People have nearly forgotten what a labor Union is.

      I have had a distinct feeling that the this “marvelous” Congress he has is that willing to go along with the priorities which he has. Too many people high up are profiting by the war.

      As far as the gay issues go, I am happy to see the activism finally; I have to say that I feel that we would end up with less opposition and faster results if we called’it’ Civil Unions. Religion is too much in government.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 8:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gorbeh
      Gorbeh

      I would laugh if he ends up alienating both groups and loses both our support. Should’ve sided with us cause at least we’re not old ass bastards that will die off in a few years.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 8:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John T.
      John T.

      @Bertie, re: IRAQ

      Again, NEVER was it promised we’d be out of Iraq in the first SIX MONTHS of his Presidency. The initial timeline was EIGHTEEN MONTHS. Let’s revisit this in another SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS, as we should be doing.

      Again, NEVER was it promised DOMA and DADT would be overturned in the first SIX MONTHS. It was promised before end of his FIRST TERM. All I say is yes, hold him accountable, but at the same time, you are appearing like impatient bitches who have no concept of what was promised. I think things will look a lot different on these matters in 2-3 years.

      Not that you care. You’ll still be carrying your “betrayed” sign and wishing for Hillary to run again.

      And to anyone who thinks Hillary would have done things differently, HA. That’s a joke. She’s a bigger war machine apologist and just as inconsistent on her gay rights as Obama “supposedly” is. She’s a Clinton for crying out loud.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 8:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @schlukitz:

      Well, there certainly were a lot of people afraid of that when Kennedy was elected, but was that anything other than bunch of racist fearmongering from orangemen, the klan and wacko protestants?

      The Reagan era and the rise of the moral majority might be a better guess for when fundamentalists really started to threaten democracy, academia and other institutions in a big way.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 8:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie
      Bertie

      @John T.:

      Democrats are NOW for the War on Terror

      The headlines that decried the war and out of control daily military spending on it have vanished from media…

      you are pigs

      Jul 8, 2009 at 9:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie
      Bertie

      @TANK:

      if it was jungle red– i would agree

      but ‘war on terror’ blood red is just tacky — and shameful

      Jul 8, 2009 at 9:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie
      Bertie

      @John T.:

      oh fuck the Hillary bashing — how 2008 of you

      with her we knew we were getting a nasty career politician
      tied to lobbyists — I passed on that! Tho she didnt coast in on a false platform of change and hope like douchebag — our new Spiritual Leader and Chief.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 9:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sfmuscular
      sfmuscular

      It gives me enormous pause to hear a former professor of constitutional law give an explanation of his support for our rights that completely omits any reference to the importance of equal protection and separation of church and state. Even President Kennedy was very clear that his governance was based on secular principals.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 9:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jjm16
      jjm16

      how many of you queens have written your senators, in b/t writing silly posts to bolster your identity as being “progressive-minded”(um, you know, like obama himself)? i live in SC and I still write the bigots here and up @ school in NC @ least once a month.

      obama has made it clear that he’s our ally and not our leader. and i’m frankly neither offended nor shocked by this, considering we live in a ridiculously religious country. i’m simply inspired that our president has pledged to be our ally.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 10:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • M Shane
      M Shane

      p.s. Mr. Cox while it may not serve us any better, Because I grew up in a family of Buziness people One Uncle an international Lawyer. I don’t really believe that business can be kept out of government at it’s current amplitude.
      My current money is on a mixed Capialist/Socialist system that will have more.
      John T. Thanks for the time line on the war!

      Jul 8, 2009 at 10:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mr. Cox
      Mr. Cox

      @M Shane: The way I see it America is in Atlas Shrugged right now. Our government has gone drunk with power and ambition to the point where it’s blind from reality. Americans say they are against Iraq but deep down most Americans LOVE the war machine because they are employed by it. The war machine, combined with wall street, and our massive debt will crush this country to pieces faster than any empire in history.

      The American Empire is going to come crashing like a meteor very very soon and we’re all going to have a rude awakening when the dollar is worthless, when our military is decimated from too many conflicts, and when our debt is unrecoverable and we are begging the world to forgive us.

      The difference? I don’t think America will learn from its mistakes. I think we are going full fledged into Nazi Germany. I believe this country is running towards Fascism and we are inevitably going to end up with some if not all the elements of Hitlerism.

      When the GOP was in power, Democrats spent tremendous time criticizing their abuses of power. Now? They are abusing those same policies and extending it even further!!! Obama pulled out of Gitmo simply because Bagram is even more convenient, secretive, and dark! He supported the Patriot Act. He supports expanding our armed forces. Obama is in some ways actually worse than Bush but since he is a Democrat NOBODY will dare call him out!

      Jul 8, 2009 at 11:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Criminal as president
      Criminal as president

      “Archive
      Obama Fomenting A Constitutional Crisis: Constitutional Lawyer Discusses Ramifications Of Controversy
      By John P. Connolly, The Bulletin
      12/01/2008
      Controversy continues to surround President-elect Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as president, and a case involving his birth certificate waits for its day before the U.S. Supreme Court. A constitutional lawyer said were it to be discovered that Mr. Obama is not a natural-born U.S. citizen, it would have grave consequences for the nation.

      According to the Constitution, a president must be a natural born citizen of the U.S. Mr. Obama’s critics have failed to force him legally to produce his original birth certificate, and Mr. Obama has resisted any attempt to make him do so. Currently, only Hawaii Department of Health officials have access to Mr. Obama’s original records.

      Some of Mr. Obama’s critics have said he was born in Kenya and have claimed he is a citizen of Kenya, Indonesia, or even a British subject.

      Edwin Vieira, a constitutional lawyer who has practiced for 30 years and holds four degrees from Harvard, said if it were to be discovered Mr. Obama were not eligible for the presidency, it would cause many problems. They would be compounded if his ineligibility were discovered after he had been in office for a period of time.

      “Let’s assume he wasn’t born in the U.S.,” Mr. Vieira told The Bulletin. “What’s the consequence? He will not be eligible. That means he cannot be elected validly. The people and the Electoral College cannot overcome this and the House of Representatives can’t make him president. So what’s the next step? He takes the oath of office, and assuming he’s aware he’s not a citizen, then it’s a perjured oath.”

      Any appointments made by an ineligible president would have to be recalled, and their decisions would be invalidated.

      “He may have nominated people to different positions; he may have nominated people to the judicial branch, who may have been confirmed, they may have gone out on xecutive duty and done various things,” said Mr. Vieira. “The people that he’s put into the judicial branch may have decided cases, and all of that needs to be unzipped.”

      Mr. Vieira said Obama supporters should be the ones concerned about the case, because Mr. Obama’s platform would be discredited it he were forced to step down from the presidency later due to his ineligibility, were it to be discovered.

      “Let’s say we go a year into this process, and it all turns out to be a flim-flam,” said Mr. Vieira. “What’s the nation’s reaction to that? What’s going to be the reaction in the next U.S. election? God knows. It has almost revolutionary consequences, if you think about it.”

      Mr. Vieira said Mr. Obama’s continued silence and avoidance in the release of his birth certificate is an ethical issue because of the dire consequences that could be caused by a possible constitutional crisis.

      “If he were my client and this question came up in civil litigation, if there was some reason that his birth status was relevant and the other side wanted him to produce the thing and he said ‘no,’ I would tell him, ‘you have about 15 minutes to produce it or sign the papers necessary to produce the document, or I’m resigning as your attorney,” said Mr. Vieira. “I don’t think any ethical attorney would go ahead on the basis that his client could produce an objective document in civil litigation [and refused to do so].”

      Further, Mr. Vieira cited a fraud ruling in a 1977 case called U.S. v. Prudden, which he feels applies in this case.

      “Silence can only be equated with fraud when there is a legal and moral duty to speak or when an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading,” the ruling reads. “We cannot condone this shocking conduct … If that is the case we hope our message is clear. This sort of deception will not be tolerated and if this is routine it should be corrected immediately.”

      Mr. Vieira said such an ethical question of representing a client who refused to produce such a basic document is important, even in a small civil case. The current question is concerning the man who potentially could have his finger next to the nuclear button.

      “[The birth certificate], in theory, should be there,” said Mr. Vieira. “What if it isn’t? Who knows, aside from Mr. Obama? Does Russian intelligence know it isn’t there? Does Chinese intelligence know it isn’t there? Does the CIA know that it isn’t there? Who is in a position to blackmail this fellow?”

      Mr. Vieira explained all laws have to be submitted to the president. In the event that there is no valid president, then no laws passed by Congress in that administration would be legally null and void. Because of that, this case will probably not go away, even after Mr. Obama takes the oath of office.

      “If you don’t produce it, you think it’s going to go away,” he said. “There are all these cases challenging Mr. Obama, and some challenging secretaries of state, and they run into this doctrine called standing.”

      Mr. Vieira explained although legal standing is difficult to get around in Federal courts, the document could be produced in any criminal cases stemming from legislation passed in the Obama administration.

      “Let’s assume that an Obama administration passes some of these controversial pieces of legislation he has been promising to go for, like the FOCA (Freedom of Choice) Act,” said Mr. Vieira. “I would assume that some of those surely will have some severe civil or criminal penalties attached to them for violation. You are now the criminal defendant under this statute, which was passed by an Obama Congress and signed by President Obama. Your defense is that is not a statute because Mr. Obama is not the president. You now have a right and I have never heard this challenged, to subpoena in a criminal case, anyone who has relevant evidence relating to your defenses. And you can subpoena them duces tecum, meaning ‘you shall bring with you the documents.’ ”

      Such a criminal defense would enable the defendant to subpoena any person to testify in court and any person to bring evidence in their possession to the court.

      Further, records could be subpoenaed directly, in the case of a birth certificate. Once the record could be subpoenaed, the birth certificate could be examined by forensic experts, who would then be able to testify to the document’s veracity as expert witnesses. Any movement by the judges to make a special exception to the president in a criminal case would hurt the legitimacy of that presidential administration.

      “I can’t believe I’m the only lawyer who would think of this,” said Mr. Vieira. “I think any criminal lawyer defending against one of these politically charged statutes is going to come up with this. That means it will never go away until that document is laid down on the table and people say, ‘yes, there it is.’ And therefore they’re caught. If people keep challenging this and the judges out of fear keep saying ‘no, go to jail, go to jail, go to jail’ then that’s the end of the Obama administration’s legitimacy. On the other hand if they open the file and it’s not there, then that’s really the end of the administration’s legitimacy.”

      Several court cases in the birth certificate controversy are waiting admission to the Supreme Court.

      A gathering of judges will meet on Dec. 5 to decide whether or not to hear a case from New Jersey, and a decision is still pending on a case from a lawyer in Pennsylvania. Should four of the judges vote to hear the case in the Dec. 5 meeting, then it will be scheduled for hearings. Court cases from Connecticut and New York have also applied for hearings at the U.S. Supreme Court.

      John P. Connolly can be reached at jconnolly@thebulletin.us

      http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=20210273

      Jul 8, 2009 at 11:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John in SF
      John in SF

      @Criminal as president: For crying outloud. The birth certificate controversy was settled in court. The result: there is no controversy.

      Now we really know there are true crazy right wingers hanging out here for kicks.

      Go somewhere else to spew your hatred and racism.

      Jul 8, 2009 at 11:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Benedikt XVI
      Benedikt XVI

      “No. 70 · John in SF

      @Criminal as president: For crying outloud. The birth certificate controversy was settled in court. The result: there is no controversy.

      Now we really know there are true crazy right wingers hanging out here for kicks.

      Go somewhere else to spew your hatred and racism.”

      You are a LIAR!

      NOTHING was settled! OBAMA is an USURPER who should (will) HANG for his crimes. So should some of his lieutenants and especially those pulling the strings in the DARK!

      The TRUTH is only called hatred, racism, right-wing etc. by those who do not want it to surface. Many of us know and care for the truth! You are not one of them.

      Go somewhere else to spew your propaganda!

      The TRUTH WILL BE KNOW!

      Jul 9, 2009 at 2:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gore Vidal Jr.
      Gore Vidal Jr.

      @Thom Freeheart:

      Epochral events have not occured under Obama.

      The most epochral event in the history of the US was the formation of its CONSTITUTION. This idea was undermined and abandoned under George W and Co. It is not my position to ask Obama for anything, as a citizen, other than the full restoration of the BILL OF RIGHTS. All social movements were aided by the benefit of this grand conceptual design whch, unfortunately has been stripped and scrapped for something else. We speak as if we have a country, a government, that would defend our basic rights when that very same government abetted the ruin of its own founding philosophy. That to me is treasonous. The whole lot of them should be imprisoned at Guantanamo for terrorism.

      Jul 9, 2009 at 2:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John in SF
      John in SF

      @Benedikt XVI: Well OK, I hope the Secret Service is monitoring this blog. We now have a death threat against the President of the United States by Benedikt XVI in post 71. I’m pretty sure it is illegal to make such threats. I’m VERY certain it has nothing to do with LGBT rights, with the things he said to the Catholic Press about us or about any other issues. And I’m pretty sure it has nothing to do with any rational response to anything in the universe.

      If when I awake, Queerty still allows post 71 to stand, I shall be the one to call the Secret Service. I’ll sleep soundly because I’m pretty certain that the possibility that a rope could get to the President between now and then is pretty minimal.

      Anyone else on this site troubled by the juxtapositioning between hanging the first African American President, and the lynching by many others who share his ethnicity? Does this make you proud to be readers and writers at Queerty? How much more blatent does racism have to become before EACH of us takes action?

      Does anyone else need to take a shower?

      I’m just saying…

      Jul 9, 2009 at 2:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gore Vidal Jr.
      Gore Vidal Jr.

      @Benedikt XVI:

      Expand your horizons instead of your big fat mouth.

      Jul 9, 2009 at 2:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dennis
      Dennis

      @John in SF:
      Take a shower? Hell no, we have a new poster child here… Welcome Benedikt XVI, you’ll find friends here. He embodies, in in an exagerated form, a perfect metaphor for the editorial agenda which Queerty stands for…

      That Obama is a blight on the nation, a fraud, a pathological liar, and a threat.

      Of course, all Queerty does is do a slight spin on some events to stoke anti-Obama sentiment…and Fox News stokes anti-Obama sentiment…and Rush Limbaugh stokes anti-Obama sentiment…and Michael Savage stokes anti-Obama sentiment. I mean, what could go wrong?…it’s not like wingnuts ever go batshit crazy and wreck havoc or anything. No worries here, we’re just engaging in Obama-hate “lite”.

      Jul 9, 2009 at 3:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BENEDICK XVI
      BENEDICK XVI

      “No. 73 · John in SF

      @Benedikt XVI: Well OK, I hope the Secret Service is monitoring this blog. We now have a death threat against the President of the United States by Benedikt XVI in post 71″

      Geeeee, what a beautiful world you are wishing for when you want the SS (of which country) to monitor poor little Queerty for any comment that might wish an USURPER president to be ‘missiled’ from behind (just a 30 cm missile would do, we’ll have to ask Larry for preferences).

      I never said Usurpers at all should be HANGED (or whatever) without due process (after all they are not ‘never-convicted’ terrorist in G-Bay).

      Also, I’m sure special rules apply for creatures who send yummy American boys to Iraq, Afghanistan etc. to kill innocent children and women. Let those special rules be taken into account when dealing with USURPERS.

      Lastly, I’m Benedick XVI who recently put a piece of paper (or was it a wafer?) into a TINY crevice!!!! (can’t put in words how much I enjoyed that!) in the ‘wailing wall’ in Jerusalem (hope I got the wall and city right, wouldn’t want MOSSAD to force-feed me with Bagels )with a secret, secret wish to my boss.

      Nevertheless, I have told my Swiss boys (guards) to lock all the windows and the big gate, just in case!

      Jul 9, 2009 at 3:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      @Criminal as president: Gay people really are not stupid enough to believe this stuff, go find some rednecks blog and post there!

      Jul 9, 2009 at 7:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      @Cam: Double SNAP!!!@John in SF: Did you flag his comments? Usually that works when you feel someone is actually threatening- I don’t imagine Queerty reads every post of every thread, and won’t take any action unless you go ahead and flag the post.
      I don’t think there’s anything wrong with anti-Obama sentiment if his actions/inaction warrants it. It looked like he was stepping up to the plate for us, but all he did was hit an infield fly. I support Obama on many other issues and I laud him for starting to restore worldwide respectability and his initiatives on the environment (though I think Gavin Newsom is much more of a forward thinker here). SM, Dennis, and others like you: why this ‘never speak ill of the King’ attitude? For one, not everyone is going to read these negative posts and agree, and secondly, I find the ability to disagree with the president on something and be able to write and publish it- well, American.

      Jul 9, 2009 at 1:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Naomi
      Naomi

      Hello there… I’m not a liberal and I’m not American

      I’m a Christian woman from a Third World African country (as hard as it is for you to believe… and neither am I poor anymore… I’m middle classed and I have this computer)

      I have heard of Obama and watched his inauguration on TV… I disagree with his views and I’m a conservative (paleo conservative like Ron Paul for example… NOT neo conservative like George W. Bush even though I don’t necessarily hate Bush that much)

      I didn’t care much for gays in the past (if you want to know my parents and all of my family converted to Christianity… some like my father, a pagan, and others either a nominal Christian agnostic like my mother… my mother is not African like my father… she is Russian and came working here…) and to shock you even I didn’t know what ”gay” meant until 17 even though I have read the Bible entirely (Sodom & Gomorrah,etc) to break your stereotype… I didn’t care for gays that much and neither did I know that some Scandinavian countries legalized ”gay marriage” (I thought it was a clown or acrobatic ceremony at first no offense…)

      I have heard of Christian extremists in USA (Wesboro Baptist church,etc) and falsehood (prosperity gospel, and seeing things on http://www.alittleleaven.com, etc)

      Then I heard of Carrie Prejean on Miss USA and the question incident… I started to research further

      I have read everything… I have chatted up with gays, straights, bissexuals, etc

      I have seen gay/lesbian pornography, gay cinema and read a few gay literature… I have talked to gays on the Internet whom have been surprised by me… to tell you the truth I was once aroused by gay/lesbian pornography but now it is nill since it has entered my mainstream and I will never seen Hentai ever again… I have tried anal sex and I dislike it greatly… I even read those accounts on Ancient Greece and Rome (I no longer believe them to be gay nor straight but without labels and touching any gender they pleased even though they had great segregation of the sexes/genders in some areas)

      I heard of Prop 8 and I was affected… I didn’t like the aftermath of some rabid gay activists hitting on their opponents afterwards but I don’t think the Mormons were completely innocent either

      Anyways I want to talk about Obama… even though I disagree with him on the Economy, abortion,etc I admire his bluntness

      He told that the Church has done damage to gays… I think he is right

      I want many here to understand that Christians worldwide, particulary young ones like me, (Africa, Asia, Latin America, etc) are not all with ”bigotry”… some are but many are not

      In your eyes ”fundamentalism” is to be against gay marriage… that I do not see

      Extremism is when one kills another person when all does not call for extremism… I read an article of a man in Europe killing a Muslim woman because of her hijab in court… though I greatly disagree with Islam and find it errorous (Koran, Hadith, etc) I saw that as barbaric

      I think that gays deserve civil unions and not to be discriminated in the workplace without a doubt… I support that

      But two things I cannot desist… I will not tolerate childishness… I’m only a young Christian woman and perhaps I’m not the one to point but no matter… why if a person is against ”gay” marriage they are against gay rights???

      ”Gay” marriage is not gay rights
      I actually see it as bad for both sides of the camp

      Gays do not need to conform to ”heterosexual standards”
      Religious people do not need to touch this tradition ordained by God himself

      I’m sorry but I find ”gay marriage” and ”gay families” to be odd

      Marriage is the ”Rainbow”… the Rainbow does not belong to gay or Christians… it belongs to God… he put it as a promise not to destroy the earth at the Ark of Noah

      Marriage is suppose to be the unity of humanity
      Of Men & Women

      To me gay marriage is segregation… gay marriage is not diverse in the least at the core… the only diversity it has is that it is different from straights/heteros

      I look at those two boxes high in this ‘Queerty’ page
      ‘Except that gay one agenda’

      Two men
      Two women

      I shudder… not because I hate gays (what kind of ”homophobic” Christian talks to gays, reads their stories, goes around dialoguing with them and has watched gay porn and gay movies and admits it???) but because this ideal is not suppose to be the ideal for society

      Some of you may start making jokes about straight men leaving women for men or straight women leaving men for women if gay marriage gets legalized but you know what? You’re the idiot… making up things for your own amusement and avoidance of this issue and seriousness

      You didn’t get it when I said that I saw segregation in gay marriage and I NEVER said that I expected straights to leave their loves if gay marriage gets legalized

      That is not the point

      My point is that ”They shall become one flesh”

      Many Christians forget that and concentrate on children… great point (offspring) but that is not marriage entirely

      Marriage is unity
      Marriage is natural gender roles
      Marriage is when two become one

      No matter how nice gays are I can and will never see them in that light… ”They shall become on flesh”

      It’s not ”Husband & Husband”
      It’s not ”Wife & Wife”
      It’s not ”Party A & Party B”
      It’s not ”Progenitor A & Progenitor B”

      It’s One man and One woman
      Man & Woman
      Husband & Wife

      Sun & Moon
      Water & Fire
      Black & White
      Ying & Yang

      If that is ”bigotry” (and not the true bigotry I see like killing gays and denying the right to work simply for being gay or getting thrown out of a hospital if somebody they like is dying) then so be it

      Gays please understand… Marriage will never be gay
      Marriage has never been straight either

      Marriage is the Rainbow
      And in the rainbow we need both men and women to come in
      Not just one gender

      Marriage is also the bedrock of society
      I know this sounds stupid… I never expect gays really to believe in (‘traditional’) Marriage

      I respect Obama’s scorning of harness toward gays
      But I don’t respect whining gays like you whom push ”gay marriage”

      It’s not because I hate you… it’s because I believe in the truth… the truth is that ”gay marriage” will never be accepted in the eyes of God (or nature/humanity if your an atheist/agnostic, etc… yes… I have seen atheism/agnosticm/pantheism/etc in the past few years… my own mother was a tad agnostic herself beforehand)

      And I’m a young Christian woman… according to surveys Christians (particulary youth like me) are becoming more liberal… I don’t see that… we are just becoming more clear eyed and sane worldwide after the travesty that hit with those extremist Christians (and eventually ruined the Republican party)

      Neither are we all hiding in our churches… Christians these days are not what you seem to think… we are seeing these blogs, have seen certain porn videos, have talked, etc… we are more ”experienced” yet traditional

      Overall this is my message:

      I support Obama on his direction toward the hurt it has done to you

      I greatly disagree that marriage has to ”turn gay” or gets you equality… I know what you desire… I have seen the rights that marriage has… instead of going after ”gay marriage” take the rights out of marriage and extend it to yourself

      And no just because of divorce, single motherhood, adultery, polyamory, feminism, single fatherhood, step families, etc does it validate ”gay marriage”

      I have read also pathetic articles like ”Gays better at relationships than straights”… made me puke… almost as bad as saying that all gays are promiscuous

      Gay marriage to me would be the last bullet to the head after long long beating to marriage because of divorce, etc (to me gay marriage is only the response to so many wrong doings done in the past… if none of divorce, single motherhood, etc was made then ‘gay marriage’ would never appear)… marriage is already in a bad condition in USA… why make it worse?

      Look at Scandinavia sadly… marriage there is dead

      Obama you go man…
      You are doing the right thing (and I don’t mean abortion…)

      Have a great time everyone
      Goodbye

      Jul 9, 2009 at 5:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BENEDICK XVI
      BENEDICK XVI [Different person #1 using similar name]

      Thanks for all the comments re my comment!

      Interesting (but not surprising) how not one single comment homed-in on the crux of the matter, Barry Soetoro’s BIRTH CERTIFICATE and being an USURPER who sends American boys to invade foreign lands to kill other boys etc.! It says a lot about the morals of the people who bothered to comment here!

      After all, if Barry, as a foreigner, could run for president of the bankrupt USA why not Arnold? The same right for all I say. What makes Barry so special? Birth certificate sealed, school records sealed, no 9/11 investigation and on and on… REAL CHANGE there!!!!

      To the dumbo who mouthed-off about the ‘first African-American president': Barry is the first AFRICAN-CAUCASIAN mixed race USURPER president! His mother was as WHITE as it gets! No African in Africa would call Barry an African (I know, I have lived in Africa for decades, with millions of mixed-race people).

      Lastly, to the person who thinks Barry has brought some sort of respectability re the US to the world: I’m laughing my head off!

      People in Europe (where I’m from) LAUGHING about the *change* he promised and are quite AWARE that he is controlled by puppeteers and cannot stand on his own two feet (even with autocue gadgets). He is a huge fraud and embarrassment to what is left of the US and if it were not for people like Dr Ron Paul etc. we Europeans might think that all your ‘Americans’ live on another planet, never mind continent. Don’t believe the ‘we love Obama’ crap you see on your propaganda TV stations. It’s FAKE!

      If the man is for real we would like to SEE his credentials! SIMPLE!

      UNMASK THE USURPER!

      “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” – George Orwell.

      The times of universal deceit are upon us!

      Jul 10, 2009 at 12:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @Naomi:

      Naomi, NO religious cult owns marriage, it never has and it NEVER will. If one of your reasons is to deny gay people marriage based on the procreation factor…then by the same token, you must deny marriage to straight couples who are childless either by choice or because they are physically incapable. CIVIL MARRIAGE has NOTHING to do with religion, NO religious ceremony, NO deity invoked. The civil ceremony does not state that “the two become one” either. The secular STATE (Government) issues marriage licenses and as such they do not mandate procreation as a reason for their issuance. You are entitled to your religious views, but don’t use them to interfere with or discriminate against us. How would you like it if gays worldwide started a movement to ban religious marriage, preventing you from having a religious ceremony using the same argument in reverse? Until you’ve walked in our shoes for a day, keep your beliefs out of politics and in your home where they belong and please stop using the bible to justify your beliefs. You would do well to consult the following website and take a moment to reflect on the other things what scripture says, things that most of you, yourself included do not live or abide by. Stop the hypocrisy and bigotry, please.

      http://www.fallwell.com

      Jul 10, 2009 at 8:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Raquel
      Raquel

      Robert NYC – You are truly PATHETIC… IDIOT
      People like you DESERVE to be SLAPPED

      Didn’t you hear Naomi??? People like you is why I moved out of S.F. and rarely communicate with the gay community anymore… hypocrites, so called ‘tolerants’, victim mentality, hatred of gays toward other gays within yourselves and most of all ASSHOLES

      ” My point is that “They shall become one flesh”

      Many Christians forget that and concentrate on children… great point (offspring) but that is not marriage entirely

      Marriage is unity
      Marriage is natural gender roles
      Marriage is when two become one ”

      How could you miss that?
      Another gay man so far down in his own ”tolerance” that he is blinded by it

      Naomi said ”Two shall become one flesh” is the main point and Christians often forget that and concentrate on the second main point (which is offspring)

      Jul 10, 2009 at 9:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Raquel
      Raquel

      Oh and Robert NYC you remind me why I am no longer an agnostic nor a secular humanist… secular humanism is so high in itself with ”scientific reasoning”, errors and ‘rationality’ (moral relativism and so much more) that it makes me sick… go take a hike

      I’m against ”gay marriage” and ”gay adoption” too… am I ‘homophobic’ now??? I don’t hate gays

      I support the right for gays to live without harassment
      To be together in public
      To work without prejudice
      To visit their loves ones in the hospital
      The right to inheret anything from partners or family in case of death

      I believe there should be two things the government should do… one keep marriage with Husband & Wife in combination with religion… second the government should take ALL of the benefits in marriage and give it to gays in another union (like a civil union except with ALL of the marriage benefits)

      Btw you forgot one HUGE thing: She agrees that the Church has been a tad harsh toward gays!

      Now now how could you miss that???
      Also I agree with n38

      ” Dennis
      blah, blah, fucking screeching whining, blah…

      “I think it’s clear that they feel victimized in fairly powerful ways, and they are often hurt not just by certain teachings of the Catholic Church, but by the Christian faith generally.”

      Speaking directly to the Church, He’s telling the church they have hurt us, in many denominations, in powerful ways…before a meeting with the pope (=fucktard!). What other president has said something more direct against the harmful effects of discriminatory religious dogma? NAME IT, go ahead, name when a president has called out Christianity’s harmful effect on gays. When did it happen? When? Screech, whine, bitch, complain…

      What’s he supposed to say in the REAL WORLD? (The real world being a concept many Queerty posters are clearly challenged at engaging with) Hail Satan? Would that please you? Or, Fuck every last Christian American and your bullshit belief system? Is that what you expect the president to say to “defend” your gay honor? Would insulting Christians directly bring about our rights more quickly? Would having a ‘Bruno’ as president satisfy your constant need for gay affirmation and advocacy? Or an athiest? Good luck waiting on your first atheist president, that’ll happen real soon. (= never.) Yes, he “threw them a bone” reminding them he’s a Christian as well, AND called them out in a non-confrontational manner, reminding them that Christian teachings have caused hurt and harm to LGBT persons.

      Bunch of screeching idiotic fuctards here…done with this goddamn site today. ”

      Perhaps the only other gay I have respect for in this page… bunch of whinners you are the rest of you… we all know you have been oppressed for a long time but this is 2009 and you have far more freedom than most older gays have had in their lifetimes… remember that, be thankful and just shut up

      Better yet grow up

      Jul 10, 2009 at 9:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Raquel:

      Fuck you for sharing!

      Jul 10, 2009 at 10:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @Raquel:

      Raquel, you stupid bitch! Fuck off

      Jul 10, 2009 at 10:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • M Shane
      M Shane

      Raquel and Naomi: The only thing , in sincerity ,that I can make of your carrying on is that “being as one” means that you had, or want an orgasm with a man an think that is special. Gay people have them too-that may come as a suprise.

      I support Civil Unions because I can’t imagine why on earth any sane gay person would want to bonkers be like you two.

      Thanks for the object lesson!

      Jul 10, 2009 at 10:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TikiHead
      TikiHead

      @Raquel: Raquel directed me here from the blind item gossip item, where she has derailed the thread to post the same shit. Thanks Raquel!

      Say, Raquel? My parents are atheists. Why were they allowed to marry?

      Oh, I remember! because it’s a CIVIL ceremony and license. No church or priest needed.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 11:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @TikiHead:

      She’s just another one of those religious diseased fucktards! Her brand of religious cultism is a disease of the mind, a chosen lifestyle. Fuck her, her religious cult and her book of magic. I threw mine out long ago along with all the other trash, it wasn’t even good enough for toilet paper.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 11:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      Religion is superstition, ignorance and silliness. It’s also humankinds greatest tragedy. It has no redeeming features.

      Many of the grotesqueries who profess christer beliefs are simply parroting the howling madness of the Dark Ages in Europe.
      Why do creatures like Naomi and Raquel imagine that they’d be able to influence sane people? It’s an example of their ignorace of the real world that they’d even try.

      The left or socialist view of marriage is that the government
      should have minimal interest in partnering except for defending the rights of women and the welfare of children. And we think
      that religious cults should be banned from any sort of interference in partnering. Tt’s up to partners to call the shots and the only other interested party is the state which has an interest in protecting women and children. Everyone, partnered or not, gay or straight, should have the same rights, tax privileges and etc.

      Partnering arrangements should be easy to get in and out of. While people should be held strictly accountable for the welfare of children in their care, society has to accept ultimate responsibly for their welfare. Part of that is mandatory training in parenting skills. Another is to encourage everyone to parent all children. Society should insure that all children have decent housing, good medical care and good nutrition.

      Sooner or later these kinds of revolutionary social goals will be the norm. In the meantime if GLBT folks want to get married most of us will continue to encourage and fight for them just as we fight for all the parts of our agenda and all the segments of our communities.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 12:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TikiHead
      TikiHead

      @Raquel: @SM: Here you are, in the same thread!

      ‘Some enchanted evening…’

      Jul 10, 2009 at 12:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @Bill Perdue:

      Bill, well said and thank you! It makes you wonder why halfwits like Naomi and Raquel, among others seek out gay blogsites. To me it seems like an act of desperation, they have nobody else they can rant and spew their venom at because they don’t have an audience in the larger society. Agitate they do, but in the end, they lose because they’re outnumbered by society at large, not just us. Their desperation is evidence that they’re fast losing the cultural war and that we’re winning, slowly but surely. Its inevitable and they know it. Its going to overwhelm them sooner, rather than later. They’re irrelevant to 21st century civilization, aberrations if you will, unfortunate accidents of nature, a dying breed, and that’s a good thing.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 12:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Bill Perdue:
      @Robert, NYC:

      A tip of the hat to you both!

      Jul 10, 2009 at 2:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Raquel
      Raquel

      Every single one of you dimwits only proved what I have come to believe about you. Fuck the entire hypocritical oh so tolerant gay community… full of assholes… with the exception of Dennis of course (and maybe a couple of others).

      Stop whining and look at the mirror
      I’m not the bigot.

      You are pathetic.

      I’m SICK of the gay community… hyper sexualization, insane politics including arrogant good for nothing rabid gay activists, victim mentality, HATRED from GAYS to GAYS (yes my dear I have SEEN the hatred you have AMIDST your own… you eat your own) and so much more.

      Now I know why I am against the oxymoron ”gay marriage”.
      Because of piece of shit like you.

      Sick most of you.
      Just sick.

      If you do NOT show tolerance and love toward those of a different opinion (like being against gay marriage) then you will perish. Stop with the stereotypes that religious people hate you. They don’t. Your portrayal of religion (and much more) is why I am no longer an agnostic secular humanist in fact.

      Mark my words… straights/heteros worldwide can only tolerate so much before they see the dogs you all are.

      I was once supportive of ”gay marriage”.
      No more.

      I’m supportive of the minority within the minority.
      The good gays.

      The rest of you? I don’t give a shit. A genocide would be even appropriate if things go really really bad. The few good hearted gays I met is why I still am not hateful of all gays and I still have hope for them… because they are nothing like you.

      Because they are kind and only want integration. Religious and non religious alike. Not segregation. They are not out of their minds like you.

      Now leave me alone to my ”crazy bigotry” and being some sort of a spy on this website like you all deem to see. I am not.

      But of course you will keep on with your retardness.
      I’m through with this page.

      Goodbye.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 2:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BrianZ
      BrianZ

      @Raquel: *giggle* Another ugly, diseased soul finds it’s way to Queerty to show us all what we aren’t missing.

      I got a 20 that she’s really just another voice in that nut-job SM’s empty head.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 2:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TikiHead
      TikiHead

      @Raquel: “A genocide would be even appropriate if things go really really bad. The few good hearted gays I met is why I still am not hateful of all gays and I still have hope for them… because they are nothing like you.”

      You’ve crossed the line, crazy-cunt.

      Queerty? Banning time has arrived.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 3:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      Raquel said: “I’m through with this page. Goodbye.”

      Allah be praised!

      Jul 10, 2009 at 3:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Raquel:

      First off, there’s nothing natural about christianity or the bible insofar as it characterizes people. So the natural gender roles you find in there call for the stoning of women who are infaithful to their husbands, and the killing of unruly children to appease the western blood good. So natural gender roles preclude gay marriage? LMAO! Natural gender roles exist? You won’t be justifying spousal abuse, nor the sexism that underpins it on natural gender roles–nor will you find them in the bible.

      SO if you can’t justify spousal abuse and sexism with natural gender roles, you can’t justify homophobia with it, either. And you certainly can’t justify denying gay marriage based on some arbitrary little fiction your fevered, insane brain cooked up in a fit of antigay rage that corresponds to your nonunderstanding of “gender roles”.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 3:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Raquel: Good riddance to bad garbage – don’t come back.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 3:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DuttyBarb
      DuttyBarb

      @Bill, @Schultz @ Raymond,

      I find it utterly, thoroughly saddens me that u compare your right to marry to the sins committed in the name of marriage. Spousal abuse, cheating, etc is not a joke. Its not something to slap your knees and say…darn, and those straights think they have a right to marriage. Look how they are messing it up..i might as well marry my dog and be done with it”.

      SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!!!!

      Marriage is a religious institution…dont twist facts to win this fight(u guys have been doing that a lot). The idea of marriage is not the same as a real, spiritual union between two souls before God. Marriage is making a formal promise before God that two people will leave together under the sanctity of His Divine love and laws. Marriage is a celebration of love…that is the way God intended it to be. GET A BIBLE. See all the spiritual blessings that await people who are really married.

      I mean look at all the signs..spousal cheating, battery, child abuse…cmon! Those are the exact outcomes of non spiritual marriage. Anyone who can do that to a spouse that you stood before God to promise to be faithful and love is a hypocrite and a liar and God will deal with such people.

      Gays want the right to something that ironically does not apply to them. It is ridiculous. The same God that says gay lifestyle is an abomination is the same one you claim wants you to enter this most sacred union. Its laughable.

      Civil marriage is also stupid. I mean is a minister or a justice of peace not present in a civil marriage union. What do you think he is there for??? To ensure you sign the document of marraige correctly???(are u kidding me). I dont presume to judge why an atheist would want to marry. That is for God to judge and deal with.

      Marriage has lost its fire thanks to people like gays that spread this nonsense around. I want you to have benefits and care from the government. But Marriage..true marriage can never be yours. That spiritual connection is never going to come to you and if it were me….i would rather be single than have a false, Godless union just to prove to straights that i could.

      OH BTW…America is waking up, the gay marriage support is actually dropping..so the “cults” really are working arent they, Bill?!

      Jul 10, 2009 at 7:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TikiHead
      TikiHead

      @DuttyBarb: “Marriage is a religious institution…dont twist facts to win this fight”

      My parents are atheists — they married with a Justice of the Peace. You are a liar, and hateful.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 8:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TikiHead
      TikiHead

      You are a twisted piece of work, duttyboob.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 8:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • No Homophobama
      No Homophobama

      Obama just reversed his position on needle exchange programs. He promised during his campaign that he would not ban these programs, now he calls for a ban in his budget. Check out the story at Americablog or Huffington Post.

      I hate this guy.

      Jul 10, 2009 at 9:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @DuttyBarb:

      Umm…the name is Schlukitz, dear, not Schultz, as in Dutch! Guess reading’s not one of your accomplished skills.

      i might as well marry my dog and be done with it”.

      If he (or she) will have you, I’d say “Go for it”. You say it like it is a bad thing. ;P

      SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!!!!

      Aw…we’ve had more of that dumped on us than we can possibly use. Keep it, hon. You need it more than us!

      Marriage is a religious institution

      Big, fat, egregious lie! Marriage existed long before you Christers came along and muscled you way into it. Y’all saw how much money could be made off it, in addition to the two collection plates at Sunday morning mass, the donations and the tything. Christianity is a business, girlfriend…a big one at that…and tax free to boot! I feel for you, but I just can’t seem to reach you.

      The same God that says gay lifestyle is an abomination is the same one you claim wants you to enter this most sacred union. Its laughable.

      Another big, fat lie! We never asked for or insisted that the church or your sky daddy should marry us. You’re the only one twisting the facts here. We’ll be very happy with being able to marry before a Justice of the Peace or any other secular person so empowered by the State. YOu can keep your religious hokus pocus. We don’t want or need it. Just the rights, Ma’am. Just the rights. Oh, and the benefits we pay for but which YOU get exclusively. Not nice at all! I wonder what your sky daddy thinks of stealing money out of the pockets of the very people that you hate and condemn and refuse to let have their equal rights?

      Marriage has lost its fire thanks to people like gays that spread this nonsense around.

      Yep. It’s the fault of the gays that your hubbys can’t keep it in their pants and the women folks can’t keep their legs closed. “The gehys made ‘em do it”. You and your sort apparently think we are the devil, because that is what you used to say about him…”The devil made me do it”. Poor, innocent victims of circumstance. The world is so cruel, isn’t it?

      Oh, and good luck with the dog thing. I hear that straights get into beastiality too. Big time.

      Jul 11, 2009 at 12:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @No Homophobama:

      Barry Obaffle done it again!

      He waffles better than a waffle iron.

      Jul 11, 2009 at 12:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Duttybarb…….if marriage is solely an religious institution, why does civil marriage exist and why do secular states issue civil marriage licenses, why aren’t your cults issuing them? Religious marriages should not be on the receiving end of federal benefits either, maybe that’s something that should be looked into aside from removing tax-exemption from the parasitical cults that you subscribe to.

      Let me educate you on something. This is a classic example of what civil marriage is and what religious marriage isn’t. In France among others….where there is NO state religion although catholicism dominates, a religious marriage is NOT recognized by the state. Couples have to have a civil marriage ceremony performed usually by the mayor or another secular person so designated by the government. If a couple wants a religious component, they are free to run to their church to have it SOLEMNIZED and its not mandatory or contingent on a state issued marriage license either. The civil marriage ceremony is the legal marriage, not the religious. Your cults don’t own marriage and they never will nor do they have any right to dictate who can and cannot marry in a secular society. Ours is not a theocracy, the sooner you accept that the better.

      Our is not a lifestyle, but yours is since you choose religion, learned behavior through indoctrination. Nobody comes into this world religious. Its nothing more, in most cases, than a mental illness if you will. You did not choose to be straight, assuming you are, nor do we choose to be gay. Get over it, get used to it. Stop judging, denigrating, dehumanizing, the most unchristian behavior if ever. Jesus Christ didn’t do any of that nor did he condemn us for who we are.

      You need to get your own house in order….read http://www.fallwell.com and maybe you’ll realize that you don’t live by scripture as you pretend to do, you fucking hypocrite!

      Jul 11, 2009 at 8:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • HankyPanky
      HankyPanky

      @ No. 104 · Robert, NYC

      Brilliant! To the point and in a nutshell.

      Jul 11, 2009 at 12:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Robert, NYC:

      you fucking hypocrite!

      Somehow, I suspect that is DuttyBarb’s problem.

      She’s NOT getting any fucking…and that can make one real bitter! HeeHee

      Ruth Westheimer, the famous sex-therapist, said it best when she stated, “People who are enjoying a healthy sex-life, could care less what other people are doing in their beds.”

      Makes perfect sense to me!

      Jul 11, 2009 at 12:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @HankyPanky:

      She’ll continue to do what she always does, ignore the obvious, none of them live by scripture, all a bunch of sick, mentally disordered, diseased (yes, religion is a mental disease),hypocrites of the worst kind. She’s joined the ranks of Sanford, Ensign, Vitter et al, the worst fucked up fucks of all time.

      Jul 11, 2009 at 12:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @schlukitz:

      She’s probably too ugly or totally incapable, or both. I pity any kids she may have, better they were aborted than to be corrupted and violated by religious cultism. Lets hope she miscarries or is infertile, there’s enough of these ignorant breeders to go around as it is without bringing more into the world.

      Jul 11, 2009 at 1:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @DuttyBarb:

      I thought about you when I came across this…it’s from your favorite source of madness, filth, sordidness, sexual depravity, debauchery, bigotry, hatred and discrimination. Umm…did I leave anything out, per chance?

      The 6 Raunchiest, Most Depraved Sex Acts (From the Bible)

      http://www.cracked.com/article_16546_6-raunchiest-most-depraved-sex-acts-from-bible.html

      Jul 11, 2009 at 4:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • OrchidIslander
      OrchidIslander

      Some of the posters herein remind me of the rabid crowds of gay people at one of the Southern California Proposition 8 protests.

      I, an African-American gay male, went with friends to vent our frustration at Proposition 8’s outcome. Upon arriving at the protest site, imagine my surprise at angry white gays hurling the “N” bomb my way.

      They were powerful angry and required targets for their angst. Never mind that I was a friend and a support to their (and my) cause. They did not recognize me as such. As far as many were concerned I was a black voter who voted for Prop 8.

      The anger is palpable in some of the posted comments.

      Though most of you do not regard him as such, I do think Barack Obama is a friend to gay people. I believe that politics and the nature of our problem juxtaposed against the backdrop of our country’s conservative religious bent makes it more difficult – not less.

      I also am willing to cut Obama some slack – he has only been in office for 7 months and has more critical issues to deal with than any other POTUS in recent memory.

      If you really don’t like Obama – vote for his Republican challenger next election. If you think you have it bad now – and you don’t – imagine the sort of support you would get from a Republican.

      Jul 12, 2009 at 5:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @schlukitz:

      I’ve always maintained that incest is ok according to the book of magic and throw it right back at them. Just look at the Adam & Eve fairy tale as one example. The religious cultists say they believe in scripture when it comes to the Leviticus mantra they used against us (never spoken by their god but by MEN); they also believe that Adam & Eve were the first parents who begat children. Well now, doesn’t that beg the question….how did the planet become populated using that creationist shit and and by the way, they also believe the world is only 6,000 years old, go figure. Science is always wrong of course. The obvious conclusion is that Adam & Eve must have had incest with their own children and their children with one another. Their god didn’t condemn it either….”and god saw that it was good”. Also, there was NO marriage ceremony peformed in the old testament either and if there were, what was the ritual, who performed it?

      Amazing how these fucktards in here deliberately avoid biblical incest when confronted, they’ll come up with some dumb excuse to justify it, but in the final analysis, they really can’t answer it, but they must accept it “because its in the scripture”. Can you believe that marrying one’s first straight cousin, a blood relative is not considered incest in many states and countries? How fucked up is that? Maybe that accounts for the mind blowing number of religious cultists and their retarded mentality….clearly signs of inbreeding and other forms of degeneracy that they are renowned for.

      Jul 12, 2009 at 8:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      @schlukitz: It is hard to believe the same people that claim to live by the scripture have the nerve to pretend gays are less than them. The link you posted was disgusting, I do not understand how these “christians” can be so selective with “their bible”! All the posters against marriage equality should read the link below.

      The link:

      http://www.cracked.com/article_16546_6-raunchiest-most-depraved-sex-acts-from-bible.html

      Jul 12, 2009 at 9:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • whatevah
      whatevah

      Naomi, Raquel and DuttyBarb have the same syntax and punctuation. Hmmm, come out, Sybil, wherever you are.

      Jul 12, 2009 at 1:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @InExile:

      The reason why they’re so selective is that its about HATE, FEAR CONTROL and MONEY. As they see more countries and states defeat them it disempowers them and they know it, they know they’re losing the battle. Why do you think they come here to vent? They have no other audience. Just look at the desperation of the rottweiler in the Vatican. It has to fly off to third world countries to try to shore up new converts because its in serious decline in Europe and elsewhere and not having any luck either. They’re all in decline, the world is on to them, they’re irrelevant, anachronistic and nothing more than a bunch of psychotic parasites that will eventually self-destruct, they all do eventually. The more hatred they spew, the more they alienate themselves. That’s why the GOP lost dismally in 2008.

      Jul 13, 2009 at 4:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @whatevah:

      That’s not surprising, part of their m.o. to create an illusion that there are many of them, another indication of their mental retardation, sick people for sure. Its called “desperation”, who else can they bash? What they don’t realize is its drawing attention to their obsession with gay sex, its so transparent. Many gay bashers are often self-hating closet cases, when they resort to religion out of insecurity, inadequacy and unhappiness with their lot in life, an act of desperation if you will. Its the first clue about who they are. What an awful way to live though feeling so miserable that they try to make others feel bad about themselves so they come here to try to dehumanize us. The sad part of it all is, they haven’t even succeeded and they never will. They are only deluding themselves, goes to show how really mentally sick they are.

      Jul 13, 2009 at 4:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

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



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     




    FROM AROUND THE WEB

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