Equal Rights Fights

Iowa Supreme Court: Gay Marriage Decision TOMORROW

iowamap

Same story, different state. The Iowa Supreme Court is expected to rule tomorrow at 8:30am on Varnum vs. Brien, where six same-sex couples sued a county recorder over his refusal to issue them marriage licenses. “The case would have consequences outside the state’s borders,” adds the Des Moines Register. “Iowa would become the first Midwestern state to allow same-sex marriage and the fourth in the nation if the court sides with the gay couples. … Iowa law says marriage can only be between one man and one woman, which is the law being challenged. Some Iowa lawmakers, mostly Republicans, attempted last year to begin a constitutional amendment process to specifically prohibit same-sex marriage. Democratic leaders declined to move forward with the idea, saying they wanted to wait to see what the court decides. If the court tosses the issue back into the hands of the Iowa Legislature, there are only about two weeks or so left in this session. Openly gay state Sen. Matt McCoy, D-Des Moines, said he doubts lawmakers would take any action on gay marriage this late.”

Anyone else surprised (but not really) that the Prop 8 battle in California got so much attention, while Iowa possibly legalizing gay marriage tomorrow has not?

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #iowa #marriage stories and more

59 Comments

  • The Gay Numbers

    Not really surprised that we cover California but not Iowa because this is how our media works. Our media does not walk and chew bubblegum at the same time. It’s not a gay thing.

  • Alec

    Why would it get as much attention? CA is the largest state in the US, with a much larger gay population. Moreover, who knows what attention it will get? How much attention did CT’s court decision receive?

  • Chitown Kev

    But Iowa has no residency requirement. For those gay couples that want to get hitched in the Midwest (think Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Kansas City, maybe even as far as Detroit, Minneapolis, Indianapolis) this is HUGE!

  • Alec

    @Chitown Kev: I don’t know how huge it is for couples in MO and MI, which have very broad anti-gay marriage amendments. Even in states without them, there’s no guarantee that they will be recognized by the courts.

    Neither CA nor MA has residency requirements either, btw. Not sure about CT.

  • The Gay Numbers

    @Chitown Kev: Other states will not recognize the marriage. Most of the amendments against gay marriage block recognition and DOMA prevents full faith and credit.

  • The Gay Numbers

    CT does not have a residency requirement.

  • GayIsTheWay

    This is HUGE. Iowa is the first caucus in the presidential race. All presidential candidates visit Iowa so they would have to deal with this issue if marriage equality happens.

  • Alec

    @GayIsTheWay: All presidential candidates deal with gay marriage anyway, at least since 2004. I don’t think campaigning in Iowa will make much of a difference when it comes to their stances.

    I could be wrong, but that seems like wishful thinking. What might happen, over time, if Democrats block an amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage and Iowa remains a state that performs them, Iowans themselves will become more tolerant and flock to more moderate, tolerant candidates.

    Of course, they chose Huckabee last time. So I’d say they have a long way to go, at least in the Republican caucus.

  • Chitown Kev

    @Alec:
    Well, it will be big in Illinois. With Michigan (my home state which I will NOT be living in anytime soon) haven’t they already had to deal with a nasty lesbian custody case?

    That’s the curious thing, it may not be the marriages that bring on the recognitions, it might be the divorces (though some states have ruled that they can’t do the divorce, I believe).

  • Chitown Kev

    @GayIsTheWay:
    and New Hampshire is the second…

  • Forrest

    The practical impact of a decision in our favor would be a great victory for Iowa’s gay community. From a symbolic standpoint having an interior state away from the coast added to our column would be huge.

  • ChristopherM

    @Alec:

    Certainly there is no guarantee of immediate recognition, but I don’t think you can deny the impact of having a pro-marriage state plopped down into the middle of the country. States like Missouri can currently think of this as a liberal coast thing. Having a state that is, for all perception purposes, like them that treats us equally would make a world of difference in the long run. I hope. :)

  • The Gay Numbers

    @Chitown Kev: I am not sure your posts are legally accurate.

  • Chitown Kev

    @The Gay Numbers:

    They may not be legally accurate, I will admit, but wasn’t there a nasty custody case in Michigan recently? And wasn’t there a divorce in Texas or some state with a DOMA law?

    Uh, and Iowa has a bit of a New England flavor to it when it comes to politics. To be sure, there are plenty of corn-fed farmboys (yum when they come to Chicago) but the gay population there is larger than you think. Of all the states in the Midwest, Iowa would be the most progressive (with Minnesota not far behind).

  • Alec

    @ChristopherM: Possibly. Of course, will the voters preserve the decision if the Iowa legislature gives them an opportunity to vote on it? I strongly suspect the answer to that question is “No.” In fact, if I had to guess, the amendment would be modeled after the first amendment proposed in Massachusetts following the marriage decision there; one that would limit marriage to heterosexual couples and extend civil unions to same-sex couples. Which is consistent with polling in IA.

    Remember their back up is always “Let the people decide” when the marriage decisions come down, casting the court decisions as illegitimate. It won’t be any different tomorrow.

  • The Gay Numbers

    @Alec: What polling?

  • bigjake75

    ok typical here…repubs want to keep us down, and the dems are ‘waiting for the courts’ gee that worked well in CA didn’t it? the court rules, and the people vote it down. We have to take this battle out of the courts and into the court of public opinion and we have to make our argument on fairness and the constitution. There is NO constitutional argument as to why gay marriage should be illegal. NONE. Read it. It says nothing about making us second class citizens. It in fact, with all our ammendments, guarantees EQUAL PROTECTION. I understand what that means, and we have to make our argument here, because that is what will win long term.

  • Alec

    @The Gay Numbers: The Des Moines register did a survey in 2008 showing equal division over a proposed amendment but 62% believing marriage should be between a man and a woman, with a lower number supporting civil unions:

    DES MOINES, Iowa—Most Iowans are opposed to gay marriage but support civil unions to give gay couples benefits afforded to heterosexual couples, according to a new poll published in a copyright story in the Des Moines Sunday Register. The Iowa Poll shows that 62 percent of Iowans believe marriage should be only between a man and a woman. Just 32 percent support same-sex marriage, while 6 percent were unsure. More than half of those surveyed—about 55 percent—say Iowa should allow civil unions for same-sex couples. About 40 percent oppose civil unions and 4 percent were unsure.

    The poll shows that Iowans are divided on whether the state constitution should be changed to ban gay marriage—48 percent support changing the constitution, while 47 percent are opposed.

    The random telephone survey of 801 Iowa adults was taken Feb. 17-20. The poll has a sampling margin of error of 3.5 percentage points.

  • Alec

    @Chitown Kev: Very difficult, but not impossible. It depends on how committed the Iowa state legislature’s Democrats are to civil rights and equality for gay people.

    The earliest it could be addressed is 2012, though.

  • bigjake75

    ok great, heterosexuals want us to have almost all the rights they do…the problem with civil unions is we cannot have separate but equal!! the civil rights ammendments of the 1960s did away with that mode of discrimination.

  • Chitown Kev

    @Alec:
    didn’t say it was impossible…it has to go through the legislature twice though, none of that direct democracy shit like California, though. Still, that could make the Iowa caucuses very interesting…

  • Attmay

    @Chitown Kev: That’s what I was wondering. How big a backlash would there be?
    @Alec: The same mentality that would keep Jim Crow around. Who cares what they are “ready” for. Do they seriously believe the breeders are going to magically turn gay from some court ruling? They make these same arguments about gay EVERYTHING, not just marriage.

  • Alec

    @Attmay: I didn’t say I agreed with it, just that I think it will be more complex once the decision is handed down (assuming marriage advocates even prevail). Obviously I support marriage equality, but I’m also a realist. To date, every state that has considered the question in a popular vote has voted against same-sex marriage. Every. Last. One. Even where polling showed us ahead in CA we lost in the end.

  • Chitown Kev

    @Attmay:

    Because of the possibility that the constitutional amendment in Iowa (should Iowa get marriage equality tomorrow) coinciding with the Iowa caucuses in 2012. Potentially, this could bigger than even Proposition 8. Potentially, unless the legislature does the right thing and keeps the hetero haters at bay.

  • Chitown Kev

    @Chitown Kev:

    the amendment process coinciding with the caucuses, I mean.

  • Bruno

    I don’t think the imminency of CA’s ruling last year got all THAT much attention either, because people were expecting them to rule against SSM. But in any case, CA’s ruling had much wider implications, as it represents the law in a state with a population that of Spain’s.

  • Chitown Kev

    @Bruno:

    But if 1) The Iowa Supremes rule for marriage equality and 2) the fundies decide to go for an amendment in Iowa banning SSM, it will be an issue in the Iowa caucuses in 2012. That alone would be even bigger than Prop 8, it will be right on the fron burner and the presidential candidates will not be able to duck and hide from it.

  • Nate in SLC

    I don’t believe that the legislature would choose to overturn the court on this one. Iowa’s legislature is remarkably progressive with a democratic majority. Also, if North Carolina and Indiana won’t pass it, I don’t think Iowa will…

  • DonG90806

    The history of the case is as follows: The trial court held that the marriage laws were unconstitutional; the state then appealed to the Supreme Court. Oral arguments were last Dec. 8. I watched the oral arguments and the only arguments the state offered for upholding the statute were (1) tradition, and (2) procreation. They had no arguments when it came to equal protection or due process. In addition, the state’s attorney arguing the case was very ineffective and was unable to answer several of the questions posed by the Supreme Court justices. The attorney for the gays and lesbians (and their children) who sat in the front row was the former state attorney general. He was very effective and seemed to know the justices very well. All the questions presented by the justices seemed to support the gays, but you can never tell by oral argument how a justice will decide. Friday @ 8:30 am will be very interesting. Don

  • Chitown Kev

    @Nate in SLC:

    see, that’s my feel of it.

    No legislative approval, no voter referendum in Iowa. Which is the way a ballot initiative process should go, IMO.

  • The Gay Numbers

    @Chitown Kev: I agree with and Nate. The more difficult the process to amend, the better for gay rights. One can see similar difficulties to amendment the U.S. constitution, and that’s why it’s so rarely amended. It’s why the CA system is so fucked up. Not just on gay rights but on a multitude of things. No deliberation process really involved in it.

  • InExile

    I hope marriage passes in Iowa tomorrow. Our community needs some progress, HRC sure is not making any! We are the people our politicians forget first and we pay more in taxes and receive no rights or benefits in return! The news media seems to minimize our issues unless we are in the streets protesting, so Iowa’s lack of coverage is no surprise.

  • Iowadad

    @The Gay Numbers: Well, they’re welcome to just move here and be recognized. Let’s make Iowa a test case of how it’s a boon to a state to have a big influx of same sex families. Of course there’s already evidence of that in other places but as an Iowan, I’m really hoping the court does the right thing tomorrow.

  • Rob

    @The Gay Numbers: The flip side is that the more difficult the process to amend a state constitution, the more difficult it is to remove an anti-gay amendment.

  • Bruno

    @Nate in SLC:

    But remember that in IN and NC, gay marriage is a fairly non-issue. No court or legislature in those states are threatening to legalize it. If SSM becomes legal in Iowa, a state that may be fairly progressive in a lot of ways but has a HUGE evangelical population, you bet the legislature will be under huge pressure to address that amendment. The only thing that could save SSM there would be time…it helps that they didn’t put the amendment forth a few weeks ago.

  • Alec

    @Bruno: Time….or a Democratic legislative majority. The earliest this could appear on the ballot is 2012.

  • eg

    Court has ruled…same sex marraige ok in IOWA!!! Ruling just came!!! the corn fields are singing!!!

  • Chitown Kev

    YOO-HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

  • Brian

    Possibly because there wasn’t $73,000,000 dollars spent debating the issue over the airwaves and in the press and possibly because they did not have outside agitators manipulating the issue. It will probably be brought to the constitutional amendment level via the ballot and then we will likely hear about it ad nauseam. I was surprised to discover that Iowa has been at the forefront of Civil Rights issues. Good for them. California used to be a leader in these issues. Between the Mormon, Catholic and Christian devotees, critical thinking and action is being overrun by dogma and is being suppressed by the dominance of religious leadership in this state. So sad. As a native Californian, I’m becoming embarrassed to claim California as my home.

  • Alec

    @Brian: California was a leader only if you ignored the awful record on criminal justice and the rights of the accused and convicted. Once you take that into account, CA moves down the list.

    I wasn’t that surprised by the CA vote. They did the same thing to racial minorities in the early civil rights era.

    Even so, you guys still enjoy domestic partnerships that give you virtually all of the same rights and responsibilities. Much better than the situation in most of the states.

  • Damn you all

    I hate you homosexuals. If it weren’t for homosexuals my great uncle wouldn’t have molested his sons, who in turn molested my brother and me. None of us at the time knew we were doing anything wrong…and I hope to high hell I’m the only one who remembers any of it because it’s certainly fucked with my mentality, sexuality, and emotions.

    I don’t think you should be allowed to be married because I don’t think of you as humans. Humans are a species and as a species we grow and produce more of ourselves. How can you do that if you don’t have sexual relations with the opposite sex.

    Incubabies?

  • InExile

    @Damn you all: Sounds like child molestation not homosexuality, there is a big difference! Your ignorance is beyond belief! Maybe instead of spewing hate you should pick up a book on child molestation and educate yourself!

    All people deserve equal rights under the law. If you don’t like it, you should move to another country! People like you are the reason we have wars and so much hate in this country!

  • InExile

    @Damn you all: Child molestation is an evil act of violence like the act of rape, it has nothing to do with homosexuality. Homosexuality is all about love, not violence and hate!

  • Wow

    @InExile: So if a homosexual murders someone…that’s love? That comment makes no sense.

    Like Damn you all said, free will gave us “the law” which you’re using the defend the fact free will allows us to be a stupid species. I get what they were saying, there’s still a homosexual element to male to male child molestation. If the uncle was completely heterosexual do you really think he would have molested his sons? There are more ignorant things said than what Damn you all has said, and most of them are with regards to religion.

    Everyone has equal right. Every man has equal right to marry a woman, and every woman has equal right to marry a man. I don’t see how “the law” should be used to allow something that benefits such a counter productive action. I guess it keeps the homosexual genes out of the production pool? I’m sure there’s a silver lining somewhere.

  • JRW

    I grew up in a house with tons of lesbian influence, and knew plenty of homosexuals in school and out.

    I don’t believe in homosexual marriage because the next thing to come more easily would be adoption. I think homosexuals are a negative influence on developing children.

    I’ve heard two arguments regarding homosexuals, it’s either by choice or they’re born that way. I have a response to both.

    A. If it’s by choice than it can be influenced, and homosexuals would likely be the best to influence that lifestyle or behavior. Consider the statistics on cigarette smoking families, how frequently the children develop the habit as well. This goes for alcohol consumption as well. (not to say being homosexual is a bad thing, it just doesn’t make sense in nature)

    B. If it’s born in, or genetic (whichever verbiage you want to use) one could argue there’s something wrong with homosexuals because they’re born not attracted to the opposite sex which I would see as not being a natural thing.

    Another situation I’ve become concerned with regarding my daughter is not wanting her to associate with homosexual girls (if she happens to encounter any who are out of the closet) until she’s old enough to not be influenced by it.

    I don’t think there’s anything wrong with homosexuals, you do your own thing and just don’t do anything inappropriate to me or my family. However, a friend of mine in high school was in the closet and he had his boyfriend come over under the cover that he was just a buddy. They were having sex well before the age I agree with all under his parents noses.

    I understand times are different then how I was raised, but I don’t want my daughter having any sexual relations until she’s old enough to be responsible with it.

    That goes for hetero and homosexual relations.

    How am I to trust my daughter and a homosexual girl she knows alone together? Just because she says she isn’t homosexual, or that they’re just friends? You wouldn’t imagine the lies her mother and myself came up with to keep our parents at bay.

    It’s random I came across this site looking for something regarding an actor I heard rumors of being homosexual. It’s kind of funny now that I think of it.

  • Alexa

    So, homophobic trolls have found Queerty. What fun.

    No child should ever have to go through the horror of child abuse, but to hate gay people because of it is ridiculous. The facts show that most child abuse is by straight men on young girls, should we therefore not allow straight marriages? And we hear about many instances of Catholic priests molesting children, maybe we should ban Catholics from marrying. Most child abusers are men, perhaps we should ban men from marrying, period, and restrict marriage to lesbians.

    Don’t make excuses for your homophobia and bigotry, it’s pathetic. And, Damn you all, if your story is actually true, which I doubt, you need counseling badly, venting at innocent people here will do you no good. Get help.

  • jason

    What I find interesting is that supposedly conservative Iowa now has legal gay marriage and yet supposedly liberal New York keeps dragging its feet on the issue. Maybe New York liberals are more homophobic than Iowans.

  • scott

    @Alexa:
    You know. The more I read some of these weirdo comments like JRW, the more I just get tired of them and can’t even muster the energy to respond. I think I can have a rational discussion with the Zealots and misguided but ultimately, they are too dogmatic to hear and use their brain.

    So, I applaud you for your efforts. Nicely done.

  • Damn you all

    @Alexa: I’m certain molested women have their insecurities about men after being molested, why wouldn’t you expect the same of someone molested in a homosexual manner. My story is true, despite what you’d like to believe, and I do have a negative outlook on homosexuals because of it and other events I’ve been involved in regarding them and their life style.

    I’m not afraid of homosexuals, I just don’t agree with their lifestyle. I have a homosexual friend who’s been more friend to me than many of my closest friends, however, and ironically, he agrees they shouldn’t allow same sex marriage. He said jokingly when the conversation came up “I’m glad we can’t get married, what’s mine is mine”.

    And you’re right, I do need counseling pretty badly. My main reason for not going is it would take my age in time just to vent all the things that have happened to me in my life for any counselor to remotely understand who I am today. If I just go in there saying I was molested, and they treat what they think that has done to me…but get nothing else out of my history, how are they to fully understand what’s wrong and be certain they’re treating me correctly? It’s like misdiagnosing a disorder because you don’t have a full history on the patient. The treatment could be more damaging than the disorder.

    Reflecting on my comment I came off really ignorant, although I won’t apologize because I am who I am…I have to say one thing.

    If we’re all equal, and homosexuals are entitled to be homosexual, why then can’t I be a bigot? or a homophobe as you accused me of being, or racist or any other form of hater?

    If you’re entitled to your way of life, that someone else might not agree with, why then am I wrong for being who I am…despite you not agreeing with my way of life? That in itself is discriminatory.

    Alexa also missed what I was saying, I wasn’t saying homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed to be married because I was molested in a homosexual manner…I said I disliked homosexuals because of that event. My reasoning for not agreeing with homosexual marriage was posted later in my comment. I’ll copy/paste it below.

    ***I don’t think you should be allowed to be married because I don’t think of you as humans. Humans are a species and as a species we grow and produce more of ourselves. How can you do that if you don’t have sexual relations with the opposite sex.

    Incubabies?***

    When calling someone wrong, you should make sure you understand what they’re saying correctly to avoid looking just as foolish as you claim them to be.

    I think of myself as extremely open minded to a lot of things, and I even to this day have homosexual friends. That doesn’t mean I have to be ok with the lifestyle, nor does it mean I have to agree with homosexual marriage. I’ll reiterate: If I’m expected to accept you despite disliking your lifestyle, why are you not expected to accept me, despite you disliking my lifestyle?

    I want to avoid upsetting anyone else on this forum, as my original post here was while I was upset after thinking about those events in my life. If you’d like to contact me about this, I’m open for a conversation and will try to be as politically correct and appropriate as possible. Feel free to email me at [email protected]. This is an alias email that I don’t check often so if I don’t respond and you actually want to voice something to me, just bare with the wait.

    Bye.

  • Damn you all

    Who here doesn’t agree with the Wiccan or Pagan lifestyle? Seeing as I offended people here, I figure I could give you a topic of debate I have some positive beliefs in to hear your opinions that I may not agree with. Feel free to email me at [email protected]. This topic is off subject of this site and post so please comment to my email so not to upset or disturb anyone else here because of my posts.

  • Brian

    @Wow: & Damn you all & JRW

    Child molestation is not about sex any more than rape is. It is about power. It is how the weak empower themselves at the expense of those unable to fight back be it physical stature or emotional. Pedophiles are the weakest of the weak choosing to attack children because they are most unable to defend themselves physically and are potentially easily manipulated emotionally, especially if they come from a dysfunctional family where the child does not feel loved, feels it is responsible for the family troubles or a variety of other insecurities fostered in this type of environment. Just as pedophiles target physically weak and/or emotionally damaged children, rapists of adults often use the same criteria for choosing their targets. These acts give the perpetrators a sense of empowerment and it has little to do with sex. It is about being able to inflict pain and helplessness on another person that the perpetrator endured themselves and was unable to do anything about it at the time. The choice of the sex of the victim is more about lashing out at the sex of the perpetrators perceived enemy which predominately is in relation to molestation the perpetrator endured as a child themselves but also from emotional trauma that may be unrelated to sexual abuse. So, Damn you all, do yourself and the rest of us a favor and get some counseling so that you can truly understand what happened to you instead of blaming an entire segment of the population that you do not even know personally to label them as child molesters.

    @ Wow, you gave yourself away with this statement – “There are more ignorant things said than what Damn you all has said, and most of them are with regards to religion.”

    @ JRW, you’re just ridiculous. You say homosexuals shouldn’t be parents because they will lure unsuspecting children in to the homosexual lifestyle. They’re unnatural (because that’s the way you see it) [you mean you and your church or your parents]. But you don’t think there’s anything wrong with homosexuals. Can’t you see how hypocritical you are. You’re the neighborhood gossip smiling out of one side of your mouth and spewing nonsense and hate out of the other. Homosexuality is not a lifestyle. Living a life that is predominately based on activities in or around water (boating,surfing, skiing, swimming, etc…) is a lifestyle, living a life that is predominately based on activities in or around mountains and trees (hiking, rock climbing, camping, etc..) is a lifestyle. Sexuality is an innate part of a persons makeup, just as is a persons blood type. We don’t recruit children. Homosexuality is a part of nature and we continue to exist because of that fact, not because we lure and recruit kids to be homosexuals. You have some serious issues you are not dealing with. You could do with some counseling also.

    “How am I to trust my daughter and a homosexual girl she knows alone together? Just because she says she isn’t homosexual, or that they’re just friends? You wouldn’t imagine the lies her mother and myself came up with to keep our parents at bay.”

    Just because you and your wife were deceitful little liars who couldn’t be trusted doesn’t mean your daughter is unless of course you and your wife continue to be deceitful little liars who can’t be trusted and have thereby trained her to be also. Now see, this is behavior that can be learned and instilled. Homosexuality isn’t. You are or you aren’t unless you’re bisexual. I wouldn’t worry so much about your daughter being lured into homosexuality as much as I would be concerned about the lessons she may be learning about being an honest and truthful individual or a deceitful little liar.

    “……looking for something regarding an actor I heard rumors of being homosexual. It’s kind of funny now that I think of it.”

    Not so much funny as telling. Seems you’re unusually preoccupied with homosexuality.

  • JRW

    @Brian: I take entertainment in the fact you think I’m associated with a church. I despise religion more than I disagree with homosexuals being married or parents. My parents are dead and weren’t religious either.

    I’m speaking strictly logically as a species. Homosexuality makes no sense and last I read isn’t found in any other species. Why would I want that influence on children?

    The responses I’ve seen with regards to posts that aren’t pro homosexuals on this page are just as ridiculous as the original posts. You have no more foundation to stand on then you claim I do.

    One thing will never change, and I think we’ve all proven that, everyone is capable of being ignorant and a bigot. You claim I don’t accept homosexuals, and you don’t accept those that oppose you’re choices. It’s a vicious circle.

    No worries, I won’t “preoccupy” myself with homosexuals any longer. So take enjoyment about responded to my response when I won’t be back to read it. Just vent your anger to the other viewers.

  • rainbowlove

    does nobody see those two or three commenters are the same people…theyre probably just trying to cause hype or drama

    im surprised with how ca is working on legalizing weed for tax money but wont allow gay marriage. wouldnt gay marriages bring money too?

  • massimo

    This is from “Damn you all”, “One thing will never change, and I think we’ve all proven that, everyone is capable of being ignorant and a bigot. You claim I don’t accept homosexuals, and you don’t accept those that oppose you’re choices. It’s a vicious circle.”

    And this from “JRW”, “If we’re all equal, and homosexuals are entitled to be homosexual, why then can’t I be a bigot? or a homophobe as you accused me of being, or racist or any other form of hater?”

    It’s the same person, and he’s supposed to be molested by a man, yet grew up around lesbians.

  • massimo

    Oops! I actually mixed up these two schizophrenic personalities…..

  • rainbowlove

    if i read it correctly it said he was molested by his cousins, who were molested by their father…why couldn’t he grow up around lesbians? he didnt even refer who he was talking about, but at least you caught my observation they’re the same people just causing trouble

  • massimo

    I misread a few lines due to impatience. : /
    But I would suppose that lesbians (and GBT people) tend to be more aware of these kinds of evildoings, or may I say, more cynical. And adding in the fact that he pretended to be two different users so that he could get his points cross made me suspicious of his intention and the his personal history.

Comments are closed.