Tolerate The Hate?


“Show some tolerance for those who currently espouse the traditional definition of marriage. In contrast to those angry activists who protested the passage of Proposition 8 by attacking Mormons, a large number of the initiative’s backers (but alas not all) have not expressed animosity toward gay people. Perhaps by showing some tolerance for their [i.e., opponents of gay marriage] concerns, gay activists might succeed in addressing them and persuading those backers to change their mind. So, let’s handle our differences of opinion peacefully, lest we learn, as did the Mormons, that angry responses serve only to shame us.” —GayPatriot bloggers Bruce Carroll and Dan Blat on how gay activists can learn from Prop 8 supporters. • We’re assuming Mssrs. Carroll and Blat don’t consider supporting Prop 8 to be the definition of “express[ing] animosity toward gay people.”

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #activism #gayactivism #mormonchurch stories and more


  • emma

    I agree with them, at least to a point. A lot of people who supported Prop 8 did so out of confusion. They were lied to by the Yes campaign, told that letting us keep our rights would infringe on their rights in some way. Voting the way you think you have to to protect your rights isn’t a sign of animosity.

    Not everyone who voted for Prop 8 is hateful or evil, and it certainly doesn’t do our cause any favors to treat them as such.

  • Brianna


    They should have done their research. No excuses.

  • emma


    Unfortunately, not everyone has had the same educational opportunities, and so not everyone is equipped to do that kind of research effectively. As easy as it might seem to us, it really is a learned skill that not everyone has.

    In no way am I trying to argue that their votes were right or that they were right to vote that way. I am just saying that they are not bad people and that they should be respected and can be reached.

  • Dyn

    These bloggers are drinking too much of the enemy’s kool-aid. “Let’s handle our differences of opinion peacefully”??? Bitch please, this implies that there has been ANY violence. There hasn’t. There has been some yelling and some childish remarks but there have been massive grass-roots protests that HAVE been entirely peaceful.

    Right-wing anti-gay types get to complain about attacks, discrimination, violence and animosity after they have experienced them. This is a rhetorical slight-of-hand trying to make us think of the bigots as the victims….I don’t remember hearing about any Mormons tied to fences. (And just to be clear, thank God.) If Mormons don’t like the heat of public protest, they shouldn’t use their church to illegally interfere with political affairs.

  • Mark

    It is difficult to respect people that don’t believe you deserve a basic civil right. Unfortunately, many people’s experience with gay people is what they see on Jerry Springer. Thankfully, there are more and more examples of less extreme people becoming more visible. I do think we do ourselves good to find peacefull methods of protest.

  • Chitown Kev

    Here inCchicago, I’ve seen that ballot enough to know that it clearly stated [ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLE TO MARRY]. It was not a vote to eliminate the possibilty of it happening in the future. It eliminated and existing right

    They go no pity for voting to eliminate someone’s rights (or subsidizing that vote aka Mullarkey). BUT such responses should be proportional. The Mormon Church can and should feel our unmitigated wrath. The elderly woman next door (for example)…that’s a different story, maybe. Though she should would get more than a few evil eyes. I would still help her across the street. Begrudgingly.

  • Chitown Kev


    Here in Chicago, I’ve seen that ballot enough to know that it clearly stated [ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY]. It was not a vote to eliminate the possibilty of it happening in the future. It eliminated an existing right.

    They get no pity for voting to eliminate someone’s rights (or subsidizing that vote aka Mullarkey). BUT such responses should be proportional. The Mormon Church can and should feel our unmitigated wrath. The elderly woman next door (for example)…that’s a different story, maybe. Though she should would get more than a few evil eyes. I would still help her across the street. Begrudgingly.

  • blake

    Have any of you ever read the rantings of the so-called “Gay Patriots”? They’re Right-wing nuts. Coo-coo for Cocoa Puffs! The day after Obama gave his state of the union speech, they decried it as terrible but heaped praise on Bobby Jindal’s response. Can you say Bizarro World? These people will twist, spin, and lie to distort reality to accomplish their political goals.

    Read their recent love fest for Rush Limbaugh:

  • Mr. Enemabag Jones

    Daniel Blatt belongs to a legal organization which filed a friend of the court brief supporting Prop 8 and Bruce Carroll has stated on his blog that he opposes equal marriage and supports Prop 8; and both have been consulted by the RNC on how to present anti-gay initiatives in a way that won’t “offend” gay voters. What do you expect from a couple of good ol’ house queers like those two? They are so wedded to the belief that the RNC will invite them into the upper levels of the Republican party, that they will spew whatever crap they think will bring them closer to their party’s leaders. Fortunately, their opinions matter not a wit because they are a tiny minority within a minority which is not tolerated by their party

  • Mr. Enemabag Jones

    And secondly, let’s not forget that both men are from religious and conservative backgrounds and have both stated a discomfort with their homosexuality. It doesn’t surprise me that they would toe the anti-gay party line, to make their religious families and anti-gay friends feel better about something they have admitted to being ashamed of.

  • Mr. Enemabag Jones

    And lastly, go to Joe My God’s blog and read the multiple slap downs he’s given these two geeks.

  • Sapphocrat

    “…gay activists might succeed in addressing them and persuading those backers to change their mind.”

    It’s not my job to educate the deliberately ignorant. Put me in the position of having to grovel for my birthright, and my reaction is going to be the same as Kevin Spacey’s when he was expected to grovel for his job in “American Beauty.”

    The only thing I’ve “learned” from Prop 8 supporters is that our enemies are even more cruel and conniving than I ever could have believed before — and that playing Ms. Nice Gay has gotten me a whole lotta nothin’.

    The only people who should be ashamed are House Dorothys Bruce Carroll and Dan Blat.

    P.S. It should be “change their minds,” not “change their mind” — unless, of course, Carroll and Blat are referring to the collective hive-mind of the Morg* and all the rest of the Prop 8 supporters.

    * Collectively, the Mormons who act as one.

  • Sapphocrat


    One: What Brianna said: “They should have done their research. No excuses.” If a person has the capacity to vote, s/he has the capacity — and more importantly, the responsibility — to do the required homework. The public library is open to everyone.

    Two: No, not everyone who voted for Prop 8 is hateful or evil — but those who stand by their vote to this day certainly are.

  • emma


    Again, I never said that people do not have the responsibility to do research before they vote. However, the ability to do this research is a learned skill. It’s not as simple as going to the library; you have to know what to do when you get there, and not everyone does. You might say that people who cannot do this research properly should not vote. To that I would say two things: 1) It is, regardless, their absolute right to vote, and 2) Not everyone who fails to do effective research knows that they have failed. One might set out sincerely to find the truth, google their question, and end up at a right-wing propaganda site without realizing it and end up with the wrong information. They don’t realize that their research has led them down the wrong path. The answer to this is improved education and outreach, not shame and disrespect.

    As for your second claim, it’s just not true. Many people who voted the wrong way out of confusion are still confused. They still don’t know the truth. That does not make them evil.

    And honestly, if you think that everyone who does not already have the correct, enlightened point of view is evil, I don’t know how you expect to win hearts and minds.

  • Mark M

    B fucking S. My grandfather was at a concentration camp, and he taught me to forget the polite civilities and tolerance. He laid blame square on the shoulders of the Jews in Austria, Poland, and Germany who kept saying “oh these people aren’t so bad.. they just got over excited… it wont go any further than this…”. Fuck that, and fuck any fag within striking distance of me who tells me to be tolerant.

  • Sapphocrat

    @emma: I don’t expect to “win hearts and minds” by soft-soaping the message. We’ve tried that — God knows that’s ALL we’ve tried up to this point — and it just doesn’t work.

    I’d also ask you to think about the point of trying to “win hearts and minds” in the first place; that suggests our rights *are* fair game for a vote. They’re not. We can treat the bigots with kid gloves for the rest of our lives and keep asking, “Pretty-please, may we have our rights now?” and where do you think that will get us? (I know where it’s *gotten* us.)

    If the folks behind the AA civil rights movement had relied on the kindness of whites to “grant” them voting rights, they’d still be playing nice — and still be unable to vote today.

    As for “hateful and evil,” I’ll partially amend my statement: Those who *do* know *exactly* what they’ve done and still stand by their support of Prop 8 are, indeed, hateful and evil.

    As for the rest… If they really don’t understand by *now* what they’ve done, then I seriously question their mental capacity altogether. No one who hasn’t been living under a rock since November 4th could not possibly have missed the backlash. The only rational, *human* thing to do is step back and ask, “Gee, why are these homos getting so pissed off?” — and then *learn* why. If a person has a television, or knows someone who has a television, or can read and comprehend sentences more complex than “See Spot run,” that person has the ability (and again, the responsibility) to understand where s/he fucked up (and how to help make things right again).

    At this point, it’s no longer a matter of ignorance, unless it’s willful ignorance.

    I’d never say that anyone who doesn’t do his/homework shouldn’t be allowed to vote — but I certainly wish they *wouldn’t* vote. I have a lot more respect (for lack of a better word) for Prop 8 supporters who knew exactly what they were doing when they checked the Yes box than I do than I do for voters who rely on the excuse of ignorance; how stupid and/or lazy and/or careless must a person be to “misunderstand” the first three words of an initiative that begins: “ELIMINATES THE RIGHT…”?

    For the record, I personally know one person who voted Yes by mistake (and is now horrified by his own vote), two more (a straight couple) I met at a No On 8 meeting who knew what a Yes vote meant but had no idea of its impact *until* LGBTs and our allies hit the streets in protest (after which this couple practically prostrated themselves while begging forgiveness and asking what they could do to help reverse the impact of their votes), and a handful of others I’ve heard about secondhand.

    These people are not hateful or evil. But they didn’t “get it” until we got *finally* angry as hell, and *finally* started to fight back.

    “Nice” just doesn’t work. A shock to the system does — the result of which is going to be one group of people who are going to experience deep regret for their actions, and another (the larger group, I am afraid) who just plain don’t give a damn.

    Shame does work — ask any organized religion.

  • Katie

    I do agree that we should always remain peaceful, and I also agree that the majority of protests thus far have been peaceful.(I’m sure you’ve all seen the vandalism at But we are never going to get people to support us at the ballot box by beating them over the head.

    Many people were brainwashed into thinking that if Prop 8 did not pass somehow their pastors would be forced to marry same-sex couples or that their children would start learning that homosexuality was acceptable in school. While my Church does recognize same-sex marriage and I wouldn’t care if my kids thought it was okay to be gay since I am pro-LGBT rights, I can see where that is disconcerting to some traditional fundamentalist Christians.

    I wish that someone could explain to them calmly and logically that their freedom of religion will not be infringed by allowing same-sex couples to marry, and it cannot be infringed since we have first amendment protections. I’ve tried this several times, but they keep pointing to international precedent or things that have happened in Massachusetts. Although I have gotten through to some people like my very devout 93 yr old Catholic neighbor who called the Sf Archbishop an “@$$.”

    People don’t listen when others shout, so let’s keep the tone dialed down and do some real out reach. Outreach not outrage.

  • Michael

    Again, the government created this problem, so the real ire should be directed towards them. Having said that, I wish people understood that the social conservatives/religious right fundamentalists are not concerned with gay marriage. That’s a drop in the bucket. They don’t want us to serve in the military, be depicted on television, and enjoy non discrimination legislation that would prevent us from being fired at our jobs and losing our homes; in fact, they want us to cease “being” period. Tandem to that, of course, they don’t want women to earn as much as men, they don’t believe in free choice, free association, personal liberty. How people like Tony Perkins differ from those who serve the Taliban, aside from attire, I simply couldn’t tell you–their goals are one and the same.

    Those who vote for and endorse limits on free association and personal liberty are fiercely undemocratic and enemies of America.

    This entire situation has literally torn our family apart, and I will never be able to excuse those who allowed the measure to appear on the ballot, those who fought for its passage, or those who voted for it. I’ve been making nice all my life, being polite in public and considerate of everyone’s feelings but my own.

    The day that I can take away the little old lady’s marriage or right to marry, the little old lady who voted to take away my marriage and my rights and shatter her family into shards of glass, will be the day that I’ll be able to find some proportional response to her vote.

  • Buffy


    Hear, hear.

  • emma


    What did I ever say about “soft-soaping the message”? That is not the same thing as merely treating people as though they are non-evil human beings deserving of respect. I never said anything about asking “Pretty please, may we have our rights?” so I’m not going to respond to any of that.

    Of course our rights are not fair game for a vote. From a practical standpoint, though, if they’re going to be put to a vote anyway, it would be cool if we won. And if they aren’t, and we’re very lucky and Prop 8 is overturned, I still think it would be nice if people supported our rights, don’t you? Winning hearts and minds doesn’t have to be a tactic to a specific political end.

    There are a lot of people who might not have heard much about the backlash, yes. They are not all willfully ignorant; some may have very little education, or be busy just trying to put food on the table for their families. But even among those who have seen stories about the protests––did it ever occur to you that maybe the arguments against Prop 8 that have been most publicly visible might not be convincing to everyone? Especially since some people still think Prop 8 is the only thing keeping public schools from teaching their kids to become gay, or whatever. Say what you will about how those people should do their research––I too wish that they would, and that everyone were able to do so––what we have to do in their case is to explain to them clearly and respectfully that that’s not the case. Branding them all as horrible, stupid homophobes is not going to cut it.

    Again, I know it said “Eliminates the right…” I’m a Californian and I voted. But it wasn’t that simple for many people. They thought they had to eliminate this right of a minority––a minority they might be relatively unfamiliar with and uninformed about––in order to protect their own rights.

    The fact that some people realized they were wrong and felt shame does not mean that shame, as a tactic, works. They came around––after seeing that Prop 8 really hurt people, for example––and then felt ashamed. That doesn’t make it a good idea to go to people who haven’t yet come around and tell them, “Shame! You are hateful and bad!”

    Look, what it comes down to for me is this. People are capable of doing wrong things, like convincing themselves it’s OK to take away someone else’s rights. They––those same people––are also capable of great good. The Yes campaign appealed to their bad side, telling them it’s their rights versus ours. We can either harp on how bad they are for succumbing to that reasoning (even though many of them lacked the education to combat such reasoning well) or we can appeal to their better angels. We can run a positive campaign, focusing on the importance of rights and tolerance (for example, the virtue of supporting the legality of same-sex marriage even if you personally think it’s wrong) and respect. Or we can vilify the very people we need to convince. It’s our choice. I think I’ve made it clear which one I think will be not only more effective, but also more humane.

  • emma

    some may have very little education, or be busy

    That should be “*are* busy,” of course. Sorry about that and any other typos.

  • Michael

    Oh, good heavens! I know plenty of educated people who voted “Yes” on 8, and I know plenty of under or uneducated people who voted “No” on 8. People voted “yes” based upon their prejudice and absolute need to oppress others. I understand the call to prudance and nuance, but the truth is that I’ve appealed to the very people you are referring to. I appealed to them on the streets, door to door, in front of stip malls and at churches, and yet even some members of my own family who have come to celebrate every single holiday here at the home of my husband and I for 10 years, who know that we are decent, respectful, hard working, altruisitic, kind hearted men of faith voted against our right to be married, and made no secret of it.

    The irony! I spend 10 years not holding my own partner’s hand infront of family members who I fear will be offended by the small public display of affection, and they show no reservation about offending me by telling me of their vote to eliminate our marriage! You know, I would have written in to take a pot shot at closetted gay Survivor competitor, Spencer, earlier in the week, but then I had to admit that I fricken got voted off the island for a similar offense on November 5th.

    I respect your position, Emma, and I am not going to go about attacking folks, but I am all done being quiet and polite. I will join every group, every rally, stand on any street that needs my presence with sign in hand, and I will hold Steve’s hand walkin’ down fricken Main Street from now on, and I won’t waste another second worry about the confused and ignorant, poor under educated folks who would never give me a second thought, except when that thought gives rise to bash me.

    Done and Done!

  • emma


    The way you put words in my mouth is a little distasteful. I never said all educated people voted no and all less-educated people voted yes, just that a lack of education is a hindrance when it comes to figuring out the facts of a situation. And I never classed joining groups, going to rallies, holding signs, or (for god’s sake!) walking down the street with your boyfriend as inappropriate, hostile, or offensive. If you want to talk about what I actually said, that would be great, but this ain’t it.

  • Charles J. Mueller

    Boy, the Jews at Auschwitz would have loved Emma *Sarcasm font on*

    I’ll just bet that she believes that she could have won the hearts and minds of Hitler and his Gestapo henchmen.

    There are none so blind, as those refuse to see.

  • Sapphocrat

    @emma: Winning hearts and minds to get people to vote in our favor seems to me a complete waste of time and resources, for the sole reason that — as long as California’s utterly insane initiative process remains in place — we are going to go through this circus every two years. Whoever loses is going to put an opposing initiative on the ballot in the next cycle, and we’ll be going back and forth (“Am I married this year? Did ‘The People’ divorce us again?”) for the rest of our lives. I don’t know about you, but I haven’t got it in me to go through this “water torture” over and over again. More than that, however, we cannot *allow* this sham of an election system to continue unabated. You just don’t vote on civil rights.

    (I wish the Courage Campaign the very best in its push to put a new initiative on the 2010 ballot, but I do not in good conscience support their efforts to do so; it plays right into the hands of the anti-gays, and further promotes — no, make that *advocates* — the practice of putting minority rights to a vote. I won’t stand in the CC’s way, and I’ll certainly vote on the prop come next year — how can I not? — but I think this is the worst idea, ever, for regaining our rights. I know we’ve been *reduced* to this, as the court has tossed us to the curb, but I didn’t want to see us succumb to this last resort.)

    Yes, of course “it would be nice if people supported our rights,” but frankly, I don’t give a damn if anyone other than my wife and our family feels warm fuzzies over my marriage. I don’t care about society’s *approval* (society sure didn’t approve of AA voting rights in ’64), although I agree it would be “nice” — but “nice” only as in “a bonus,” “gravy,” “icing on the cake.”

    See, I think you and I view change happening in entirely opposite ways. I believe you *have* to *force* civil rights down people’s throats (think suffrage, think Perez v Sharp, think Loving v Virginia, think Civil Rights Act); only then, when the enemies of minority freedom see that the sky *hasn’t* fallen just because we let those nasty old gays get married — or those black people vote, or that Mexican lady (Perez) marry that black man — *then* we can spend all the time in the world reassuring them: “See? That wasn’t so bad now, was it?”

    I’m not saying we shouldn’t spend the rest of our lives reassuring the doubters that our marriages will have no impact whatsoever on their lives (and that most of us are stunningly, boringly *normal*) — of course we should, and must. But to count on winning popular support first is putting the cart before the horse.

    I count on the courts to do the right thing, because when it comes to minority rights, the people cannot be trusted to make the right decision through a strict interpretation of the Constitution; they vote their religion, they vote their bigotry, they vote on a whim. (Everything else, let ’em vote; at least if they screw up on a school bond measure, or a highway funding measure, we ALL get screwed.)

    (Do I think the court will do the right thing in this case? No. Like everyone else, I think they will uphold 8, and probably let my marriage stand — which is patently unfair to all LGBT people, including me. I do not want my marriage to be my *privilege*.)

    Finally, as I wrote in one of my own blog posts the other day, I don’t have the luxury of time, of having my whole life ahead of me to wait until the hard cases either come around or die off. I’m nearly 48 years old — and while I’m not 88 years old, I’m not 18 years old, either. The urgency is much greater for me than it was ten years ago, and indescribably greater for me than it was twenty years ago. I’d like to think the last twenty or thirty years I may (or may not) have left of my life will be spent doing something more productive than trying to scratch out one little “right” at a time, because “The People” don’t think I’m worthy yet.

  • emma

    @Charles J. Mueller:

    Wow, dude.

    So every person who voted yes might as well be a Nazi? Those who were told lies about Prop 8 couldn’t possibly be convinced of the truth?

    OK, then. I’m sorry you have so little faith in the capacity of human beings to change and do good.

  • Michael

    @ Emma

    I didn’t address you, I didn’t quote you, I just contributed to the overall discussion on the board. Had I referenced you and I misquoted you, or (as you accuse) put words in your mouth, I could see your beef. Such as it is, I think your tone is a bit defensive, and a bit accusatory for one who advocates for a gentle approach towards understanding. How about applying that here, just to get you started?

  • Buffy


    You go ahead and “change hearts and minds”. When you’re all done with that come dig up my long-decomposed remains and tell them all about it.

    My point? If we waited until “hearts and minds” were changed before we allowed black people full rights and interracial marriage we still wouldn’t have it. Why the hell should we expect it for our rights?

  • emma


    I think you’re misunderstanding me. I really, really don’t think our rights should be up to a vote. I think the courts are completely within their rights mandating equality and even overturning discriminatory democratic initiatives. I dearly hope the court overturns Prop 8 (even though it’s unlikely) on both moral and legal grounds.

    I am not against forcing change down people’s throats. I’ve never said we should avoid that. I thought the ruling in MA was great, and I love pointing out that civilization there has not collapsed and that MA (last time I checked) has the lowest divorce rate in the nation. Forcing change on an unwilling populace is a time-tested approach that I totally understand and approve of. But I don’t think it’s always necessary.

    Prop 8 passed 52-48. That’s very close. Prop 22, if you remember, just over 8 years ago, passed 61-39. That’s overwhelming. The difference between Prop 22 and Prop 8 was not just old conservatives dying. It was society as a whole actually becoming more accepting of gay rights. That’s not hopeless, it’s incredibly heartening. So I don’t think that the ballot measures will go back and forth, each being passed forever. Maybe once or twice, but not for the rest of your life.

    So I’m not saying anything about the validity of ballot measures as a method for winning or invalidating rights. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t fight to have our rights guaranteed by the courts, or that we should wait for everyone to accept us before pushing for change. I don’t believe that at all. All I’m saying is that we shouldn’t vilify every person that voted for 8. Some, sure! Some were and are truly motivated by hate. But many weren’t. They are confused, not evil, and I think that by treating them with respect we can soon win a considerable majority. I don’t think this should be necessary to protect our rights. But I think it’s a good thing, regardless. And for those of us who do want to win these electoral fights when they are forced on us (no offense to you for not being interested) I think positive, respectful tactics will be more effective in winning the rest of the middle.

  • emma


    Sorry, I read your comment as a reply to me. I am not perfect and never claimed to be. However I don’t think my reply was particularly ungentle. If you truly think it is, I’m sincerely sorry for phrasing it the way I did.


    Again, I never said we have to wait until hearts and minds are changed before getting our rights. I just never said that. So your point does not apply.

  • strumpetwindsock

    I do agree that some people vote without thinking things through. For example, it makes no sense that people who live near the poverty line should vote Conservative, but a good many of them do.

    On the other hand… haven’t you had a string of referenda and polls on the issue?

    And like it or not, if you want to change the outcome on any future votes of this kind you have to work to change some of those minds – not just demonize them. It’s not enough to assume you will pull a victory out of the hat by working on those who did not vote.

    I am constantly maddened and frustrated by how stupid the electorate can be. The fact is though, we are stuck in the lifeboat with them, and sooner or later you have to learn to work with what you’ve got.

    Kev is right. Help the old lady across the street. I would add tell her straight and calm that her good neighbour is queer and her vote has done a lot of damage to us.
    They’re always going to outnumber us and there’s no way we can beat them all to death. The only way forward is to let them know that we are not invisible and we aren’t going anywhere either.

  • Michael


    I don’t mean to be combative or rude. Your comment was a bit smarmy, if not ungentle, and since communication is your conerstone for a better understanding among people, I thought I’d bring attention to it in an effort to better dialogue.

  • strumpetwindsock

    And re: emma’s comment. I know ultimately rights issues have to be settled by the courts. But this certainly isn’t going to to be the last time LGBT issues are on the ballot.

  • Kevin (not that one)

    It seems to me that using reason with people who’s religious belief concerning LGBTs isn’t based on reason (and I actually speak as a religious person) but rather what their pastor/priest says is a losing strategy.

    What does work with them is pointing out the evils of their ways. These people cringe whenever you call them haters and that’s the only way to get to them. It forces them to re-examine their beliefs and how strongly they are holding on to them.

    Take a chapter from the persecuted Christian handbook and speak in their language. Calmly speak to them when you can, but don’t hide your light underneath a bushel.

  • Jeffrey

    The fact that these two nimrods are self-loathing gay Republicans should dictate that we do just the opposite of what they suggest.
    According to the exit polls, the overwhelming majority of people who supported prop 8 are very religious. They all use the bible as their guidebook. I believe the bible says “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” I am sure they all know that passage. Well, they chose to use underhanded tactics, lies, and irrational fear to turn voters against me. They equated my love to beastiality, incest and pedophilia. They implied that children should not be allowed near me or to even know I exist.
    They bent the laws regulating participation of churches in political campaigns until they broke, as far as I can tell.
    That’s what they did unto me. So that’s what they want done unto them, right? I am happy to return the favor.

  • Charles J. Mueller


    Finally, as I wrote in one of my own blog posts the other day, I don’t have the luxury of time, of having my whole life ahead of me to wait until the hard cases either come around or die off. I’m nearly 48 years old — and while I’m not 88 years old, I’m not 18 years old, either.”

    I am 72 going on 73, so I can really relate to what you are saying.

    I am at the point in my life, that when Macy’s tells me that they can deliver my new piece of furniture in two weeks, I tell them “That’s not good enough. I might be dead in two weeks. You’ll have to do better.”

    I get my shit the very next day now! ;-)

    Moral of the story?

    The squeaking hinges gets the oil first.

  • Charles J. Mueller


    “So every person who voted yes might as well be a Nazi?”

    Now that you mention it, yes, as a matter of fact! What nicey-nice, warm and fuzzy name would you give them?

    “OK, then. I’m sorry you have so little faith in the capacity of human beings to change and do good.”

    OK, then. I’m sorry that I have so little time left of my life to sit around waiting for human beings to change and do good. How cavalier of you to fuck around with my rights and at my expense!

    You miss one, very important point. How I live my life and my happiness as a fellow human being, should not be left up anyone to vote upon. What part of that simple truth do you fail to see?

    How about I vote on your right to have a baby? Have an abortion? Your right to smoke cigarettes or imbibe alcohol?

    Would you be willing to wait until everyone’s hearts and minds change on those as well?

    Me thinks not.

  • Charles J. Mueller

    @tom rogers:

    You’re preaching at the choir. Why would I, as a Florida native, have donated to Equality California if I did not believe that?

  • Michael

    @Kevin (not that one):

    I completely understand your perspective, and I often felt that way as well; however, during the months leading up to the Nov. election, here in So Cal, we organized several rallies near or across from churches, places where the “Yes on 8” bus stopped and so on. I was often brought into heated arguments that broke out between our volunteer protestors and Evangelicals, because I know my scripture and could address them calmly. Between knowing the Bible and understanding our democratic system, a surprising number of Christians walked away from our discussions backing off from their positions. Now, this isn’t to say that they didn’t atttend Church the next Sunday and fall back into their mindless ranks, but one can conduct a discussion and create an element of doubt in their own argument.

    Please don’t misunderstand, I’m furious that this ever even made it onto a ballot; and I mean that I am really livid. I also agree with you in this regard, most Christians will not be moved by us. Nevertheless, a few will be, and it may not facilitate us in winning our rights, but it may, over time, branch out from a father and mother to their children, and the future may be a better one for the next generation. For instance, gays who are also people of faith may be able to be so in a more integrated way.

    One more time, I am not arguing with you…I’m just offering another side, so please do not misunderstand. Oh, and I’m just as ticked, if not more so, than anyone else posting on this board.

  • Dan

    A lot of people out there still have no idea what really happened with Proposition 8. All they know is that the pro-equality side says the anti-equality side lied and broke the law, while the anti-equality side denies it. Some probably don’t even know that.

    Most of us who post here are much better informed than the average heterosexual on LGBT issues. I, for one, read three LGBT news sites every day, in addition to commentary sites like Queerty. I know where to find information on proposed and existing laws. By contrast, a person can read heterosexual news sources like CNN or Fox all the time and never get accurate, unbiased information that would allow them to vote intelligently on a measure like Proposition 8. The public is continually fed lies by right-wing ideologues and Republican politicians, unchallenged by reporters, to the point where a statement of basic truth looks absurd in the false light of what people think they know.

    So I can’t simply fault each and every voter who didn’t, or doesn’t, understand they’ve done the wrong thing. As outraged as I am that I’m denied rights that should have been mine from the start, I will fight – and teach – because the goal of fairness and equality is that important to me.

  • Michael


    Ignorance and/or “confusion” is a lie. Nobody was confused about this. Yes on 8 meant no gay marriage. Those who voted yes on 8 weren’t knew exactly what they were doing. Even so, ignorance or confusion is no excuse. Ask any judge in any courtroom in the country.

  • emma

    @Charles J. Mueller:

    It looks like you didn’t read my posts.

    I have explicitly said, multiple times on this thread, that I DO NOT believe that it is right for our rights to be up for a vote. That I want Prop 8 to be overturned. That I support the rulings in MA, CT, and CA that have given us rights regardless of what the people think. That I DO NOT think our rights or anyone’s rights should have to wait until everyone believes in them.

    Here is what I have argued:
    1. That not every person who voted for Prop 8 is hateful and evil.
    2. That IF (IF IF IF IF IF IF!) we aim to win their hearts and minds, we will be more successful if we treat those of them who are not hateful and evil with respect.

    Your argument is very passionate, Charles, but you’re not arguing with me. You’re arguing with a straw man.


    Nevertheless, a few will be, and it may not facilitate us in winning our rights, but it may, over time, branch out from a father and mother to their children, and the future may be a better one for the next generation.

    This is one reason why I think we should work to win hearts and minds. NOT because we should have to to get our rights, but because it will make the world better for us. Thanks for helping to articulate this.



  • emma


    What’s all this about an “excuse”? I never said it was an excuse. I never said voting yes wasn’t a bad thing. What I am saying is that these are non-evil people who have done a bad thing (through, yes, ignorance and confusion), and that that does not make them evil or less deserving of respect. That and that I do not believe one must full-on hate gay people in order to be wrong on this issue. Don’t get me wrong, a lot of the yes voters hate us. But lots of others don’t and they are ripe to be brought over to the right side, if we treat them with respect.

  • vernonvanderbilt

    All this talk of “changing hearts and minds” is fuzzy, feel-good blather, and little more. If someone voted yes on 8 out of hate, they have no heart to change. If they voted against us out of ignorance, they have no mind to change. The only thing these people understand is shame, because that’s the only thing they’ve been programmed to understand. And their every waking moment should be filled with the most painful and tormenting shame a human being can feel. These subhumans deserve nothing more than that.

    At least our California peeps have a shot at getting something in the end. I live in Ohio, and our GLBT groups are doing next to nothing to get our own anti-gay bigotry amendment overturned. Equality Ohio can hardly be bothered to update their website, much less organize events that would actually serve a purpose.

    I’m only 29, but I can relate to the “running out of time” argument. I’m pretty damn tired of waiting myself. Like everyone else, I’ve been waiting my entire life to be equal to the troglodytes that populate my country. Since my lifetime consists of every moment I have ever experienced, it is everything for me. I want a goddamned victory. I deserve one. We all do.

    The people who voted against us? Evil. Period. I don’t buy this confusion bullshit because there is no way anyone could step into that voting booth, tick the yes box, and not know exactly what they were doing. Well, here’s a controversial statement that’s likely to get me lambasted by someone at some point.

    Idiots should not be permitted to vote.

    Want another one?

    I don’t think they should be permitted to breed either.

    If any organization or church supported Prop 8, they should be thoroughly annihilated, mercilessly and joyfully, by whatever methods we find effective. I happen to like the proposal going around that they have their tax-free status revoked, as I believe that would kill them slowly and painfully. No mercy for the enemy, no pity for the majority.

    Queers who choose to defend these primitives are aiding and abetting spiritual (and, perhaps eventually, physical) genocide. They’re no better than the Jews who served as informants for the Nazis.

    There is always a place for peaceful protest in the movement. I don’t deny that it is occasionally useful. But until we show that we’re willing to put more on the line, willing to fight tooth and nail for our rights, willing to throw down the gauntlet and take the fight to our oppressors, willing to sink venomous teeth into the heels of those who would tread on us…well, they’re gonna keep right on pushing us back down into the quagmire. How much more is it going to take for us to get angry? A lot of us are already pissed, but what does that lead to beyond whining and complaining? Anger creates change by virtue of its volatility.

    Have you ever seen these bumper stickers that have a picture of a male figure, a plus sign, and a picture of a female figure, with “= Marriage” tacked onto the end? I see them every so often in my neck of the woods, and that anger rises in me as if it were fresh. Maybe the next time I see one of those I’ll do more than spit on their car.

  • emma


    Fine, I’ll bite. Intelligence requirements for voting and reproduction? Really? You know that’s eugenics, right? So you’re a eugenicist calling me a Nazi. For wanting to treat people with respect while we fight for our rights.


  • vernonvanderbilt

    @emma: You’re damn right. If there were intelligence and logic requirements to earn the privilege of breeding, we’d probably see a lot less child abuse, child abandonment, and abortion, and we’d be investing in the evolution of the human race. If people were required to demonstrate a full understanding of the issues and candidates on the ballot before submitting their votes, our nation would likely be a lot less screwed up right now. Part of the problem with American society, and humanity in general, is that we don’t merely protect stupid people from themselves, but we glorify stupidity, looking at it as appealing. In the process, we feed our own destruction, as a nation, and as a people.

    Is it really so outrageous to say that people should be required to have a license to breed? You’re telling me that you have never met an ignorant couple who are pumping them out like bunnies and thought to yourself “Of all the people to have children, these folks should not be?” Why would anyone say that two idiots spawning is a good thing? It’s not like I’m talking about forced sterilization or anything. Just a simple license, with appropriate punishments for breeding without one. Pass an IQ test showing you’re average or better, take a certified parenting course and pass it, and get a license. If you ask me, it’s a beautiful thing, an investment in the future.

    Furthermore, you put words into my mouth. I did not call you a Nazi, and if you actually read what I posted instead of succumbing to a knee-jerk reaction, you will see that. I compared queers who would defend (or even side with) our oppressors to Jewish informants. I stand by that comparison, whether you choose to twist it or not.

    Personally, I think it’s telling that you choose to argue eugenics while ignoring everything else I had to say.

    You don’t think we deserve equality now? You think it should be open to debate? You think we should smile while these spiritually-retarded primitives twist the knife? You think we should let their organizations and churches escape without punishment? You think we should supplicate before our oppressors and beg them to give us our humanity when it’s convenient for them?

    Sorry, but I call bullshit. I’m no appeaser, and I’m not going to stroke the egos of mere animals to get what I and my people deserve simply because we’re outnumbered. I will demand equality, and anyone who stands in my way will be dealt with appropriately and without pity.

    If you want to kiss ass and cross your fingers, make sure you have plenty of chapstick. You’re gonna be on your knees for a while.

  • emma


    I really just wanted to point out that your views are fascistic. By the way, all the great things you hope to achieve through the destruction of reproductive rights can be achieved through improved education and access to same.

    You attack me for putting words in your mouth (OK, Jewish informants to Nazis may not technically be Nazis, but for most people there’s not much of a distinction to be made) and then you do the same to me by saying:

    You don’t think we deserve equality now? You think it should be open to debate? You think we should smile while these spiritually-retarded primitives twist the knife? You think we should let their organizations and churches escape without punishment? You think we should supplicate before our oppressors and beg them to give us our humanity when it’s convenient for them?

    It’d be great if you could point out where I said any of those things. But you can’t, because I didn’t. You’re just joining a growing list of people on this thread who have chosen to attack a straw man rather than my actual arguments.

    Here, I’ll address one of yours:

    If they voted against us out of ignorance, they have no mind to change.

    What you appear to be arguing here is that anyone who has ever done something out of ignorance has no brain. That’s plainly false. I think everyone has done, said, or thought something ignorant at least once in his or her life. Yet they are able to be reasonable at other times, and even to change their minds. I know people who voted for Prop 8 out of ignorance, and I have changed their minds. They are not evil people. While you’re ranting and raving about how they are less than human, I’m winning votes and more importantly (since we shouldn’t have to vote on this shit) allies, doing my part to make the world less homophobic one person at a time. That’s not helping the Nazis; that’s helping us. If respectfully getting more people to agree with us makes me an enemy of the cause, then so be it, I guess.

  • vernonvanderbilt

    @emma: Sorry, but your attempt at table-turning is a fail. I didn’t say you said those things. I asked if you agreed with them.

    I did not address your specific arguments because I believe they are non-arguments. To engage in dialogue with the enemy on this issue implies that we believe our rights should be debated. There is no room for debate. This isn’t about trying to reach a compromise. Do you think the subhumans who wish to see us subjugated are willing to compromise? Their eventual goal is to erase us from the planet. That cannot be denied by anyone who sees things as they are. If they thought they’d get away with it there would be concentration camps set up tomorrow, just waiting to be filled with all sorts of queers.

    I don’t believe it is at all respectful or dignified to expect the GLBT community to get on hands and knees and approach our oppressors, begging for compassion and understanding. These humanoids have no grasp of such concepts.

    So some of them have changed their minds, eh? Too little, too late. It takes more than an “oops, I guess I was wrong” to deserve forgiveness, much less embrace. It doesn’t matter how these people feel about their heinous and un-American actions unless they put in the time and energy to undo the evil they have perpetrated. I will not forgive or forget until true, complete equality is established. Then, if they have proven themselves repentant and loyal, they may just have my respect. In this, the Information Age, there is no excuse for ignorance. Anyone who is uneducated on the issues is in that position willingly, and willful ignorance is inexcusible. Period.

    You can whimper and beg and vomit sunshine all over these people if that’s what you want to do. Forgive me if I don’t believe we’re the ones who should be defending ourselves. You go right ahead and “win hearts and minds” one soul at a time if it makes you happy. Personally, I’m not content to take baby steps. If people want to ask for equality, politely and respectfully, it’s their prerogative. But without those of us who elect to demand equality, the movement wouldn’t be half as far as it is at this point in history.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll keep saying it until equality is established: Stonewall was a riot, not a group hug.

  • emma


    You’re still suggesting I believe things that I have said repeatedly that I do not believe. Look, have fun kicking the crap out of that straw man, but since I’m obviously a third party to this fight, I’ll excuse myself if you don’t mind.

  • vernonvanderbilt

    @emma: By all means, do the “peaceful” and “respectful” thing and run away when you can’t stand the heat. Come on back when you can back up your position with logical arguments.

  • emma


    I’m ready to do that for anyone who wants to address them, but you’ve proven time and again that that’s not you. :)

  • Buffy


    What you don’t get is that the majority of people who voted yes on 8 have no hearts or minds to win. They hate gay people because their minds have been so filled with propaganda against us that nothing else will get through. You could plead with them for the next century and they’d stand there with their fingers in their ears and scream, “GAY AGENDA! GAY AGENDA! SOMEBODY PROTECT ME FROM THE GAY AGENDA!” There’s no reaching a brick wall, which is what most of them are.

    You might as well try to win the “hearts and minds” of the KKK and Neo-nazis to convince them to vote for bills that give blacks and Jews equal rights.

  • emma


    I agree that that’s true of a lot of them. Really I do. But there are also a lot of them who are not like that, and they do listen to reason. I’ve seen it myself.

  • Mark M

    I don’t have the luxury of pacifism and tolerance.
    I am fighting for my husband’s rights, and there are
    very few things more important to me than his well-being.

  • emma

    @Mark M:

    I’m not a straight person coming on here and saying this. I’m fighting for my rights too. But I don’t see treating people with respect as a hindrance in that fight.

  • Buffy


    The “No on 8” campaign tried treating our opponents with respect, and attempted to reach their hearts and minds. Look where that got us.

    But you keep trying, as I said, and let my decomposed remains know about it when you succeed.

  • emma


    There are effective ways to run respectful campaigns, and there are ineffective ways. The No campaign was extremely ineffective and I have a lot of problems with it. But the mere fact that they tried to be respectful is not why they failed.

    I can tell your non-decomposed remains right now that my tactics are already succeeding. I’ve already changed people’s minds.

    You don’t have to get behind my philosophy, but I hope you can respect it as just another way some queer people are approaching the fight for their rights.

  • Charles J. Mueller


    “I agree that that’s true of a lot of them. Really I do. But there are also a lot of them who are not like that, and they do listen to reason. I’ve seen it myself.”

    Ok. Where are all these people who have “Seen the light”?

    Why are they not on this blog, or on any other source for that matter, saying, “Hey, we realize that we fucked-up, big-time by voting Yes on Prop 8 and we want to know what we can do to help make that right?” Hmmm?

    Why are they hiding all their light under a bushel basket? Where are all these mythical good people?

    Where’s the full-page retraction in the Salt Lake City Times”?

    Where is the “We’re so so sorry. I would have voted differently, if I had only known better.”?

    Where is the collection plate being passed to collect money to help in the fight to overturn Prop 8?

    Why aren’t these “good” people putting their money where their mouths are? They were quick to donate when they were protesting my civil-rights. Why aren’t they doing so now?

    I HAVEN’T seen it myself.

  • Charles J. Mueller


    You beat me to the punch in saying that. My thoughts exactly.

    You blew her out of the water and now she doesn’t want to play with you anymore.

    And that “strawman” bs. Such a convenient way to get out of coming back with a logical, well thought out response.

    Side-stepping the issue is what we called it in my day.

    And Emma seems to be a pretty good dancer, doesn’t she? LOL

  • Charles J. Mueller


    “Idiots should not be permitted to vote.

    Want another one?

    I don’t think they should be permitted to breed either.”

    I find nothing fascist in either of those comments. After all, we required that people be licensed to drive a car to protect the citizenry from reckless endangerment and we require that a physician to be licensed to take a knife to our bodies to protect the citizenry from quacks.

    So, in response to your first proposition, why should we give free license to idiots to vote away the rights of their fellow man in addition to any other damages they wreack on the citizenry at large?

    And in response to your second proposition, why should people have free license to contribute to the alarming over population of this planet, the ongoing pollution of it by our large numbers and the taxing of our social welfare programs brought about by unlimited breeding policies that the heteros view as their “inalienable right”.

    Furthermore, what makes these idiots think that they have the inalienable right to start brainwashing children with bigotry, hatred and discrimination from and otherwise disfunctional people like the Phelps Klan, from the very moment they pop out of the womb?

    So yeah. I’m with you. I think it is an idea whose time has come. Even the Chinese, with whom our western ideology collides, have made the decision to limit their numbers.

  • emma

    I never said you had seen it yourself.

    There are people around. They’re not everywhere. They’re not writing in the SLC Tribune because they don’t live there and they’re not Mormons. Many of them are older and not Internet-savvy. (Not to say that older people can’t be Internet-savvy but they’re less likely to.) If you really mean “overturn” Prop 8, there’s no collection plate for that because we’re just waiting for a court ruling and there’s not much money can do for that. And the specific people that I have seen change their minds (and whose minds I have changed by challenging them respectfully) did not donate to the Yes campaign.

    However here are just a few comments I found online after a quick google:

    “I regret I voted, ‘YES on 8’. I was lied too about how this would affect my children & I was ignorant for not doing my own research. I am very sorry for taking away rights.”

    “I voted for Prop. 8 but now deeply regret it. It didn’t affect my marriage and brought so much unhappiness to so many people. I really didn’t care about it one way or the other but just voted NO because I didn’t like a bunch of judges overuling the will of the people.”

    “Like most of the Christians I know in California, I voted yes on Proposition 8 because I want to protect marriage as it is in the Bible and I believe that is the way the Lord wants it to be. I also want to protect this country from its current moral downward spiral, but is that what Christ has called us to do? Where in the bible does it state that we are to create laws to govern what nonbelievers do with their lives? … So what did Prop 8 accomplish? In a word, hatred. … After consideration and prayer, I believe that I was wrong about Proposition 8.”

    “Although I wished to have the word ‘marriage’ preserved for man and woman, and fought hard for that—the thing which passed [Proposition 8] was not appropriate. … I voted against it [same-sex marriage]. I have no idea how to correct this error. All I can say is that I am sorry.”

    “voted yes and when i found out they want to nullify the 18,000 marriages-i regret it. they’re just viscious mean people.

    i’m sorry gays! i wish i could also take my vote back. i’m going to volunteer my time and hope that’ll make more of a difference than one vote. :(”

    I don’t think those are the words of evil people. Maybe they’re not our best friends, maybe they’re ignorant, but they’re not evil. It is possible for humans to change.

    It would be a great idea, though, if they got together and formed an organization for people who regret their votes. I will suggest this to those I know.

  • emma

    @Charles J. Mueller:

    Why should I have to come up with an argument in defense of something I never said?

    I’m sorry you can’t be polite to me and give me the thoughtful responses I’ve tried to give on this thread. If you’re just here to mock me, please consider going and doing something more productive.

    I wonder, what actions do you think we should be taking to win and protect our rights? What is your actual suggestion? What are you doing to help?

  • Sapphocrat

    @Charles J. Mueller:

    “After all, we required that people be licensed to drive a car to protect the citizenry from reckless endangerment and we require that a physician to be licensed to take a knife to our bodies to protect the citizenry from quacks.”

    Or to own a dog, for that matter. Or to style hair. Or to make tattoos.

    Beautiful post all around, Charles.

  • Sapphocrat

    Addendum: There’s a line from the film “Parenthood” that applies here:

    “You know, Mrs. Buckman, you need a license to buy a dog, to drive a car… Hell, you even need a license to catch a fish. But they’ll let any butt-reaming asshole be a father.”

    And, more to the point: “…to vote.”

  • emma


    :( I was enjoying my conversation with you. Didn’t you say before, “I’d never say that anyone who doesn’t do his/homework shouldn’t be allowed to vote”? Have you changed your mind?

  • Sapphocrat

    @emma: If you had to Google for those quotes, they aren’t people you know. Have you ever actually met anyone who has said such things? What did *they* say? What do they plan to do to rectify their offense, other than say “I’m sorry” — which is about as meaningful as “I’m so sorry for your loss” from the lips of a funeral director.

    Have you asked these “specific people that [you] have seen change their minds (and whose minds [you] have changed” what they are doing to make it right?

    Why do I get the strong feeling you are defending one or more people near and dear to your heart who voted Yes on 8? Is that why you are so adamantly defensive on behalf of the Yes on 8 people?

  • Sapphocrat

    @emma: I still would never say voting rights should be restricted from anyone otherwise eligible to vote — but I’d be a terrible hypocrite if I pretended I didn’t see the logic in the argument.

    You can disagree with a point without dismissing the message (or the messenger), you know… which, honestly, is what I thought was your whole point in the first place. Isn’t it?

    In the end, by pure logic alone, Charles and vernonvanderbilt are winning the debate. Extrapolating the idea to “eugenics” is way out of line.

  • emma


    He didn’t ask what the people I know said, he asked where people were online.

    They are not doing much, much like most gay people are not doing much. It’s hard to figure out what to do. Some want to give money but aren’t sure who to give it to yet. I never claimed respectfully challenging people would turn them into perfect activists. (Does shouting at them and calling them evil do that?)

    No one close to me voted yes.

    I’m glad you don’t believe in restricting voting rights. It’s totally fine to acknowledge the potential logic of the argument. I just couldn’t tell whether you were doing that or actually agreeing with it. That’s why I asked.

    No, the fact that vernonvanderbilt is a eugenicist (which he admitted himself when he said “we’d be investing in the evolution of the human race”) doesn’t make him wrong about anything else. I didn’t say it did. That’s why I argued separately about his claims on the main topic. I stopped when he refused to stop putting words in my mouth. Arguing with someone who insists on doing that is rarely worth it.

  • Charles J. Mueller


    “What are you doing to help?”

    Oh, spare me, Emma. Getreal tried to pull that one me too.

    Can’t win by logical argument?

    Disqualify your opponent by character assassination and moral debasement.

    Good try. But, you fail!

  • emma

    @Charles J. Mueller:

    I’m not assassinating your character. I didn’t say if you’re not helping you’re a bad person. I didn’t judge you on that in any way. But since you disagree with me, I wondered whether you had a particular counterargument to mine, some idea for what we should be doing, or whether it was just “You’re wrong.” I was actually curious (maybe foolishly).

  • Charles J. Mueller

    I’m gonna make this very simple.

    Tolerating hate is nothing more than giving it our tacit approval.

    It has absolutely no social redeeming value whatsoever.

    Nor, is there anything noble about it.

    As has often been said of politics, we the the government we deserve.

    Why should the argument for our civil-rights be any different?

  • Charles J. Mueller

    Correction: we get the government we deserve.

  • emma

    @Charles J. Mueller:

    I don’t agree with tolerating hate.

    We don’t differ on that.

    We differ on whether every single last person who voted yes on 8 is hateful and evil.

    I say that they are not, and that those who are not (as distinguished from those who are, of whom there are many!) should be treated with respect.

  • Charles J. Mueller


    “I wondered whether you had a particular counterargument to mine, some idea for what we should be doing,”

    In a word? Stop giving these people who would deny us of our basic rights a free pass. It’s time to make them accountable for their heinous speech and actions.

    Nothing less will placate those of us who truly value our worth.

  • emma

    @Charles J. Mueller:

    It’s time to make them accountable for their heinous speech and actions.

    How, specifically?

    Please do not imply that I do not value the worth of queer people. I am queer and I love myself very much.

  • Michael

    There are two Michaels on this thread, I was the first to post, just to clarify. Anyway, if you read above, you will see just how angry I am. I don’t believe that there will be a proportional response until gays have the ability to take away existing rights from straights, to deny them housing (wouldn’t that be super interesting, to have a gay landlord in a State likee TN deny housing or evict a straight person, simply for being straight? What would the courts to do then?), or to deny them employment due to being straight. Nevertheless, here in California, there is some truth to an argument that Emma is making.

    Again, read above, and you will note that I absolutely believe that this should not be an issue decided by a popular vote. I suppose, somehow, the 13th and 14th amendments are not meant to protect us, and our courts and legislators in California have not interceded as of yet to prevent this issue from being decided by a simple majority. That means that those of us in California need to bring it to the Federal Supreme Court, or we need to go back to the ballot. IT IS Infurating, indeed! But if that is what we have to do, then some of us are going to have to canvas areas, such as those in Orange County and Riverside, and we are going to need to knock on doors and actually dialogue with the very people that Emma refers to. If that is our only recourse, then that is what we would or will have to do.

    By binding marriage rights into a bundle with other civil rights, we may stand a better chance to change a few minds==I know, it is hard to believe that anyone so simple minded could shift, but they are, afterall, simple minded. Most important, we do not need to change a majority of Yes on H8ters, we just need to change 4 to 10 percent.

    No, this does not change the fact that madness may prevail, and we may go back and forth in the voting booth for election cycles to come. This does not mean that I am not disgusted with just about all those who voted Yes on 8 (I make an exception for someone who may have inadvertantly checked the wrong box without knowing it). This does not mean that I am not infuriated. This just means that Emma has a point, if the courts do not step in, we may have to convert a small percentage of people, because there would be no other game in town–at least here in California, but that doesn’t mean that I won’t be choking back disgust as I speak to them.

  • vernonvanderbilt

    @emma: Once again, if you actually read the words I wrote, and not the words you wish I wrote, you would see that there was not one instance where I put words in your mouth. However, there were several instances where you put words in my mouth. That’s one reason why I declined to continue the conversation with you. You had an agenda (to defend pro-H8ers) and thus it didn’t matter what I had to say on the subject. You took the quasi-eugenics element (a very small part of my main argument, but not one I am ashamed of in the least) and ran with it in a blatant attempt to discredit me. My only real “sin” was disagreeing with you about whether our enemies were/are actually our enemies.

    I’m not going to keep defending my “parental licensing” comment because:

    1. I don’t think it needs defending if you think about it logically and in context.

    2. People like yourself want to see something more heinous than I have recommended, and I’ve no interest in feeding your self-righteous umbrage.

    and 3. You haven’t offered anything remotely resembling a dispassionate and thoughtful counter-argument.

    As far as the main issue here goes, go ahead and write me off if I say “sorry” isn’t good enough. If someone runs me over with their car and shatters both of my femurs, I’m not going to let them off the hook just because they apologize. There must be restitution, otherwise the apology is little more than hot air. Until these people take steps to correct their hateful, un-American action, they’re still our enemies.

    Furthermore, if they don’t take steps to rectify their heinous, thoughtless action, who’s to say they’re actually sorry anyway? False apologies are not difficult to give, especially in such an impersonal setting as the internet. An apology is not an attempt to right a wrong; it’s an attempt to assuage one’s own guilt. The proof is still in the pudding, and at this moment they’ve still left me hungry.

    You can get your Pollyanna on ’til the cows come home. I’ll even grant you that maybe there is a small sliver of a percentage of pro-h8 voters who may not be evil to the bone. But I refuse to believe that anything less than an overwhelming majority of pro-h8 voters acted only out of malice. If people are truly ashamed of their votes, they will speak out and make their voices heard. I suspect most of them are simply too chickenshit to manage it. They’ll type out a halfhearted apology and post it online somewhere, nice and anonymous, and that’ll be the end of it.

    If you’re so convinced that these “apologetic h8ers” are sincere in their sudden sentiments, then you should realize they’d take no issue with having their feet held to the fire. They wounded millions of people with their vote, after all, and put many marriages in jeopardy at the same time. That’s something that a retarded hamster could recognize. If they’re genuinely sorry for the hatred they helped codify in legal terms, then they are ready to accept their share of the blame and anger, and understand that there will be a price to be paid if they are to be forgiven.

    As I have already stated, until that price is paid, I will not forgive. I think accepting them with open arms without a single show of repentance from them besides a lukewarm apology posted anonymously online somewhere is exactly what some of them may want. It saves them the trouble of undoing what they did. That is why it is foolish to offer blanket forgiveness without receiving any true reparations first. It encourages them to apologize and do nothing, effectively leaving us in the same place we’ve been these last few months.

  • strumpetwindsock

    I posted a comment earlier today on another thread that I think has some relevance here.

    You can have all the theoretical discussions and demolish people’s arguments with logic all you want, but if it doesn’t work in the real world it is nothing but mental masturbation.

    I’ve read a lot of comments about troglodytes and Nazis, what restrictions should be put on them, and how we should treat them with the same intolerance they treat us, but I have yet to read one comment in this vein that suggest how to apply this philosophy here and now to change things to our advantage.

    Of course I agree that some people should not have kids; what does that have to do with the issue? What matters is that these people DO have the right to vote, and we will never have the power to change that (nor should we, in my opinion).

    Standing up to them when they attack us? Yes, I am all for that. But for those who argue for war? Sorry to disappoint, but right or wrong, we will lose (just like the pedestrian who has the right of way, but winds up dead).
    They will always outnumber us, and they are not going away, and to ignore that fact – to simply demonize the lot of them and refuse to engage constructively – will do nothing at all.

  • emma


    I do understand your views (at least as far as you’ve stated) on reproduction and voting. And I still find them extremely heinous. That’s my opinion. Many would disagree and I get that, although it’s disappointing to me. But I think we can both agree that that’s not really the main point of this thread, so perhaps we could both let it go?

    This comment is less straw-man-y than your previous ones, so I’m glad to respond to it.

    I didn’t say “sorry” is good enough or that we should pretend these people did nothing wrong. They did do something wrong. I’ve said only that, although they’ve done something wrong, they’re not all evil and we should treat them with respect.

    I don’t claim that the posts I quoted were any kind of proof necessary for my argument. I just posted them in response to Charles’s question about where people were saying they were sorry on the Internet. That’s something he brought up, not me, and so if you think it’s meaningless your beef is with him.

    Until these people take steps to correct their hateful, un-American action, they’re still our enemies.

    I don’t really think it’s helpful to say that, but what specifically do you want them to do?

    I’ll even grant you that maybe there is a small sliver of a percentage of pro-h8 voters who may not be evil to the bone. But I refuse to believe that anything less than an overwhelming majority of pro-h8 voters acted only out of malice.

    OK, so what we disagree on here is proportion. I can’t be sure what proportion of yes voters are truly hateful and unreachable. I’d guess it could be anywhere from maybe 40-75%. But since neither of us is going to be able to back up our perceptions about that with hard evidence, my main point is “not all.”

    If you’re so convinced that these “apologetic h8ers” are sincere in their sudden sentiments, then you should realize they’d take no issue with having their feet held to the fire.

    If you want to go to the people who have changed their minds and tell them how badly they fucked up and how they need to do something to help our cause, go ahead. I’m fine with that (although I still think this can be done respectfully). They will probably agree with you and completely understand your anger.

    But I believe that there are people who voted yes, who do not now regret their votes, BUT who can still be reached. If they don’t realize yet how badly they’ve fucked up, and you go to them and tell them that angrily and disrespectfully, that’s not going to change their minds. But if you go and respectfully explain it to them, explain why the yes campaign’s claims were lies, explain on a personal level who you are and why Prop 8 has hurt you, they may change their minds and I have seen this happen. What they do after that will vary but it’s not really germane to my main point, which is that respectful education is the most effective way to change people’s minds.

    Again, I haven’t argued anything about how we shouldn’t expect repentance or how we should offer “blanket forgiveness” or anything like that. That’s another issue. My point is that if we want to change people’s minds (which I think we should regardless of whether we have to to protect our rights, as a matter of improving our society) we should treat them with respect, not yell at them and call them evil.

    I may have proven my own point in this thread. When I attacked your views on voting and reproduction as fascist, you probably saw that as more or less akin to yelling at you and calling you evil. Well… it wasn’t very convincing, was it?

  • emma


    Hey thanks, strumpetwindsock, this is a big part of what I’ve been trying to say.

    Sorry if by agreeing with your comment I make it look bad by association with me. :/

  • vernonvanderbilt

    @emma: Look, I don’t give a shit if you agree with my view that voting and breeding are privileges and not rights. They were throwaway comments that I never intended to make into the main thrust of my argument. You’re the one who chose to latch onto them in order to discredit anything else I had to say. I understand you don’t agree with anything I’ve said here. I even understand why you disagree. The bottom line is…I don’t care if you don’t agree with me. You’re not the first, and you certainly won’t be the last. Unlike our enemies, I have no problem if people “yell at me” and “call me evil.” I’ve been getting that for years as it is. If I cared what other people thought of me, I wouldn’t be out and proud here in Middle of a Cornfield, Ohio.

    I live in a region where it’s not unusual for homophobes to have fully-loaded gun racks in the backs of their Camaros, for crying out loud. I’ve been threatened with violence more times than I could even recall. The only thing I have working for me is the fact that I’m a large and intimidating-looking man, and most people prefer to mouth off and run away before I can sink my teeth into them. I have stared down the barrel of the gun, Emma. I did not flinch, and I did not grovel. I laughed, I sneered, and I dared them, and no trigger was pulled. Not only am I alive to tell the tale, but I didn’t have to sacrifice my self-respect in the process.

    That is why I believe all this talk about “respect” and “understanding” is hogwash. This is a power struggle, and showing weakness does nothing but convince people that you deserve what you get.

    What do I think they should do to make amends? First and foremost, they need to speak out, publicly and loudly, not behind the veil of safe anonymity that the internet provides them. Second, if they donated money to help remove civil rights from my California brothers and sisters, they need to donate a higher amount to the pro-LGBT cause, whichever organization they choose, and they need to back up that donation with written proof. Third, they need to continue to demonstrate that attitude in the future, when this and other civil rights issues are sure to arise again. If they meet these criteria, then I am prepared and willing to grant them “human” status once again.

    As far as the percentages you threw out there, I will say I think you severely undersell the enemy’s numbers, but I also admit that there are no hard, indisputable stats to back up either of our positions. I can only go by my own experiences with these humanoids, and in my own experience, it’s well above 90% of them who are simply hateful and evil creatures begging to be destroyed.

    If I could afford to travel to California, you can bet your sweet bippy I’d be out there every day I could. I’m not afraid of these beasts, and I’m certainly not afraid to tell them exactly how wicked I believe their actions were. As it stands, like I said, I’m in Ohio, and I have plenty of work to do here.

    Also, I suppose I should elaborate a little about my view of tactics/approach where these animals are concerned. I’ve been dealing with them all my life, and more so since I came out a decade ago. If you assume I am unable to rein in my disgust when talking to them face-to-face, you’re wrong. I’ve had theatrical training, dear. I know how to slap on a convincing smile and speak to these primitives in language they can understand. The luxury of places like Queerty, though, is that here I don’t have to put up a false front in order to be heard.

    Evil is as evil does. What these creatures did was evil, even if a tiny percentage of them may not be. If I want to tell them they’re disgusting wastes of space from the safety of my own community, I’m entitled to that. I have always said, and I stand by it, that there is a time and place for pacifism and a time and place for blunt honesty. If I can’t tell the truth here in a GLBT-friendly space, where can I?

    A handful of them aren’t evil. Is that enough of a compromise for you? Even if they were to repent enough to warrant the consideration of forgiveness, it in no way means I would ever embrace them as friends. It doesn’t even guarantee that I’d end up respecting them. In all honesty, once we get what we deserve in this war, once we win them over to our side long enough to achieve victory, I have no more use for them. Do whatever you believe will work, but think twice before telling someone they’re wrong to place their anger where it belongs: on those who inspired it in the first place.

  • emma


    They were throwaway comments that I never intended to make into the main thrust of my argument.

    … This is why I suggested we drop it.

    Again, as I have stated many times, I do not advocate tolerating hate. If someone’s literally pointing a gun at your head, of course you don’t have to treat them like good people.

    This is a power struggle, and showing weakness does nothing but convince people that you deserve what you get.

    Respect is not weakness.

    You think the vast majority of yes voters are evil and less than human based on your experience in an area where “it’s not unusual for homophobes to have fully-loaded gun racks in the backs of their Camaros.” Well, I think a substantial chunk of them are not evil based on my experience… in California. And I have lived in many different parts of California.

    I am unable to rein in my disgust when talking to them face-to-face, you’re wrong. I’ve had theatrical training, dear.

    That’s good, I suppose. And calling me “dear” is lovely. Maybe if I’d chosen a male-sounding handle I’d be getting more respect here.

    think twice before telling someone they’re wrong to place their anger where it belongs: on those who inspired it in the first place.

    Amazingly enough, I have not told anyone that. If you can show me where I said it was wrong to be angry at yes voters, this comment will be justified.

  • vernonvanderbilt


    “If someone’s literally pointing a gun at your head, of course you don’t have to treat them like good people.”

    But a figurative gun doesn’t count? It’s a documented fact that anti-LGBT hate crimes spike after anti-LGBT legislation is passed. Directly or indirectly, these troglodytes have blood on their hands.

    “Respect is not weakness.”

    Depends on how far you’re willing to take it, I suppose. If you’re so “respectful” that you’d rather kiss ass than make waves, then it is, indeed, weakness.

    “Well, I think a substantial chunk of them are not evil based on my experience… in California. And I have lived in many different parts of California.”

    And I’m so happy for you. You think they’re beautiful, wonderful, good people, and you’re entitled to believe that. From what I’ve seen of the hate movement, they’re all the same at the core: rotten and diseased. Some of them just wrap it up prettier.

    “And calling me “dear” is lovely. Maybe if I’d chosen a male-sounding handle I’d be getting more respect here.”

    Don’t even try to get huffy about that. Most people get a “dear” from me at some point. It’s part of my vocabulary. If you want to take it as disrespectful, then you’re being overly sensitive. Dear.

    “If you can show me where I said it was wrong to be angry at yes voters, this comment will be justified.”

    You didn’t say it. You’ve merely implied it. If you ask me, you don’t sound particularly angry at all, wanting to capitulate and make nice and have tea parties with the enemy.

  • vernonvanderbilt

    @emma: And I will say again that being “respectful” and trying to “discuss” the issue with them only reinforces the fallacious assumption in their own miniscule neuron-bundles that the issue should be open to debate.

  • emma


    I really, really don’t think it does.

  • Mark M

    This issue cuts to the core concern I have about my GLBT family: self esteem. Emma: you are a victim. It’s tattooed on your forehead. Whenever you take a punch, you say ‘sorry for being in the way’. You deserve better. I am probably one of the older ones here, and I have grown way past the point of wanting to make tea and sit and talk with my enemies. I have seen what their hate does to us. I have seen the suddenly broke and destitute 75 year old, whose lover’s family took everything. I have seen denials of public benefits, and even refusals for service from charities which receive government money. This isn’t just about going to palm Springs for a honeymoon and getting to change your name. This is about our existence. And you have to fight claws-out. This is about 15 year old GLBT’s who see no model and support for building a family. This is our survival. You can go tolerate the hate. I will be there with a bat with a nail in it. Cuz I would kill.. yes, KILL if I had to, to protect my husband. If any of you don’t feel that way, then your partner should do better.

  • Angelo Ventura

    Surely trying to reason with your opponents explaining your point of view and why do you think they’re wrong can’t be a bad thing. Many prop 8 voters were induced to do so by a deceitful propaganda. Obviously I’m talking about the not fanatically bigoted people.

  • strumpetwindsock

    vernon, Mark.

    Did you read my post? I can appreciate (and I share) your anger but what actual strategies and tactics would you propose?

    I absolutely agree with challenging attacks against us, but if you shut the door on trying to change some of those attitudes there is no way we can win. Likewise if you simply attack everyone whom you don’t like the look of you will turn more people against us. We do not and never will have the numbers to win by force. If your siege-war strategy has any chance of success you need to tell us how you would implement it in the real world, because frankly I think it is a non-starter.

    Frankly I think the only place we’re really going to win some of these battles is in the courts, but sooner or later you still have to deal with government and the general public.

    I don’t think anyone here is talking about capitulation, but the fact is no battle for social change was ever won without teaching people that their attitudes are unacceptable. Even after a real war, sooner or later you DO have to sit down and talk with the enemy.

    Fortunately there are many of us who are willing to do that challenging work, even if some are not.

  • Attmay

    @Mark M: A-mother-fucking-men. I will kill to protect myself, my boyfriend, and our rights that we are fucking entitled to as US citizens.

  • vernonvanderbilt

    @strumpetwindsock: Well, I spent the last hour composing my reply, laying out a variety of action plans that come from my particular side of the fence. My mistake was writing it in the on-site box rather than in my word processor. The fucking site apparently decided to log me off before I hit the submit button, and I lost the whole goddamned thing. I have errands to run now, and I’m too pissed off to attempt a rewrite at the moment, so I will get back to you later after I calm down a bit.

    Queerty, you need to try to do something about this shit, because it’s not the first time it’s happened to me, and I’m sure it happens to others as well. That’s an hour of my life that I will never get back. It would have been well-spent if my work hadn’t disappeared on me.

  • emma

    @Mark M:

    I never said we deserve discrimination, I never said tolerate hate, I never said don’t be angry, I never said don’t fight…

    @Angelo Ventura:



    I don’t think anyone here is talking about capitulation, but the fact is no battle for social change was ever won without teaching people that their attitudes are unacceptable. Even after a real war, sooner or later you DO have to sit down and talk with the enemy.

    This, a thousand times this.

    Y’all can keep accusing me of wanting to capitulate and so on and so forth, but it won’t make it true.

  • Bruno

    I’m sorry but “tolerance” of this position won’t work. First of all, espousing the legality of gay marriage does not fly in the face of “traditional” marriage. They are not mutually exclusive, and any position taken that it is is hateful at its core.

    This is a “culture war,” and we can’t win if we “tolerate” the other side, because that means those on that side get to think what they think without feeling like they’re slapping our side in the face, and that is not a recipe for victory in this case.

  • Bill Perdue

    It’s pretty clear that after California AG Brown reworded the ballot explanation of Prop 8 it was easy to understand that the question was one of “taking away rights”. We have no way of knowing how many people were asleep at the wheel when they voted but it’s not likely to have been very many.

    At any rate what’s the point of forgiving bigots. They’ll just pile into their buses again and drive around looking for GLBT folks to run over. We’d be far better off laying in and using a supply of spike strips.

    The proper response is not to forgive but to convince them that what their vote really did was to unleash a full scale permanent campaign for GLBT civil rights and same sex marriage that will affect them until we get equality. Boycotts, demonstrations and accusations of bigotry are the order of the day.

    An important question is why so many bigots came out to vote. First it was because of Yes on 8’s skillful use of Obama’s bigoted statement “gawd’s in the mix”. Enabled and emboldened by Obama’s contention that the sky pixies wanted them to vote their bigotry; mormons, catholics, and Warrens southern baptists came out from under their rocks and punched our lights out. This does nothing to excuse the bumbling idiots in the Democrat front group “No on 8” who botched everything they touched.

    The vote would have been very different if it had included massive outreach to the majority of Californians, who are not Euroamericans combined with intense picketing at cult centers, businesses and politicians who supported Prop 8.

  • strumpetwindsock

    @vernonvanderbilt: Yikes! I am sorry to hear that. I have had the same thing happen, but only when I forgot to log in.

    Sometimes if I have to write something that requires time and editing I just do it in a text program first.

    Anyway, I look forward to to reading what you have to say. I disagree with much of your position on this issue, but I do realize we are part of the same struggle, so I don’t deny that your contribution is valid and important.

    I’d like to hear how you would put your views into practice.

    I must say though, talk of weapons and killing from some posters does nothing to move toward a solution, in my opinion. I have been on the business end of a gun on one occasion too and threatened with violence, so I recognize there are circumstances when one may be forced to defend ones self, but lets not invoke that kind of mindless reaction as a show of how dedicated we are. The less we have to go to that place the better; as I said, preparing for war and nothing else is just makes us part of the problem.

  • JS

    I found that Prop 8 has brought the gay community closer and more vocal ever in recent memory. The Yes on 8’s thought that this would stop us or quiet us down, but it has done the opposite. Yeah, the amendment sucks and I was madder than hell, but it’s made me more excited to fight back and to not quit. No offense to whoever wrote this article, but I think this is a good anger that I’m happy to simmer in. I’m mad, pissed, and thats not going to stop. We can’t let keep kissing their asses when they obviously would light our houses on fire if they could. If you want to do anything helpful, boycott their businesses and tell your friends and family to do the same.

  • CaM


    “But a figurative gun doesn’t count? It’s a documented fact that anti-LGBT hate crimes spike after anti-LGBT legislation is passed.”

    This makes me recall a story from this morning’s San Jose Mercury News. Basically, Santa Clara County has found that anti-gay hate crimes have jumped from 15% of hate crimes in 2007 to more than 56% in 2008 (3 of 20 in 2007 -> 14 of 25 in 2008). The people they quote largely attribute this to the increased visibility of LGBTs in the news thanks to prop 8. I’d like to see if this is holds statewide and when these crimes were committed (i.e. around/after election time).

  • CaM

    Sorry to the math-aware, I forgot to edit out the “more than” (it is exactly 56%)

  • Bill Perdue

    The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP) does an analysis of the FBI’s very incomplete stats on violence against GLBT folks every spring. Here’s Amnesty Internationals explanation of why the federal stats are so often incomplete and untrustworthy.

    Christer attacks on our basic rights, abetted by gutless pandering politicians like Obama and McCain regularly result in a spike in violence. The latest stats are for 2007, the year liberal Dems ditched the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes bill after it passed both Houses of Congress to pander to bigots. They show the beginning of the current spike.

  • Phoenix (The Museum of Bad Art is the Foyer of the Men's room)

    “Show some tolerance for those who currently espouse the traditional definition of marriage…..angry responses serve only to shame us.”

    Fuck that noise, Bish! It’s No More Mr Nice Gay from now on out! It’s time for Malcolm X, not Martin Luther King. We need Winston Churchill, not Neville “Make Piece” Chamberlain. It’s time for the LGBT to start bashing back! Well armed fags patrolling the streets would cut down on gay bashings more than any number of candle light vigils. What you Homophobe Apologists don’t understand is no matter how much you “put yourself in their shoes” and “show compassion” to the bigots, they’re never going to show you the same consideration. It seems some of you will just keep apologizing for bigots and their hate even as they are hustling you down to the train station and into the cattle car and freighting your queer ass to the concentration camps. You’d apologize all the way into the ovens and guess what? You’d never be seen as human to them.

  • Attmay

    @Phoenix (The Museum of Bad Art is the Foyer of the Men’s room):

    We will fight them in the churches.
    We will fight them in the schools.
    We will fight them in the streets.

    We will deal with them the way the military deals with Al-Qaeda.

    I want gay vigilante groups and gay paramilitary forces armed to the teeth patrolling every gay neighborhood and every gay bar in the country, protecting innocent gays against the breeders who are looking for us to bash us. We will make The Black Panthers look like a tea party. The “police” won’t protect us, so it is up to us.

    Every word that the KKKristian churches spout against gays gives us a casus belli against them.

    These “people” are terrorists; we’re just fighting another battle in the War on Terror.

    Prop H8 was the Gay 9/11. An act of war against gay families and gay married couples. The only acceptable response is force.

    Gays bash back! Fight fire with fire and hate with hate. Drive the ChristiaNazis out of the country the way the filthy Puritans were rightfully driven out of England.

  • strumpetwindsock

    What planet are you on, man?

    You can beat your chest all you want. It sure sounds tough, but you’re not going to drive anyone out of here. First of all you will never have the power, and second of all you’d have a good number of queers (like me) opposing you. And I am sorry to day right behind us would be the rest of the general public who would be much less sympathetic – and although their cops turn a blind eye to homophobia I expect they would be right there ready to deal with you trying to torch the White House with your pocket lighter.

    Am I happy about that? No, of course not. But if you want to really change things the first thing you need to do is get your feet on the ground and realize what resources you have and what you can actually DO – not just talk about.

    The only thing I read in your and Phoenix’s post that made good sense was street partols. Getting the community organized in that way is essential. And no – they don’t need to be armed to the fucking teeth. They need to be COOL and professional.

    A bit of an aside – I was in Mexico briefly after the big earthquake (86?). Friends there told that the government pocketed a lot of the aid money and did nothing to help the people.
    People in many areas started organizing themselves – setting up sanitation, security, water supply. Only when that happened did the government feel threatened because they were becoming irrelevant – and stepped in.

    Now so long as the community didn’t STOP organizing themselves once the government took over again, this is a good story. What do you think the reaction would have been if they started throwing molotov cocktails at City Hall? Able-bodied people can run and hide, but what would have happened to their old people? their children? Their businesses?

    You can call me a quisling if you want; I really don’t give a shit. I know I have no sympathy for those discriminatory attitudes either. The difference is that I know nothing will change for the better unless sooner or later some of those people learn their behaviour is unacceptable.

  • strumpetwindsock

    Exactly… peacefully like that. A lot of these issues (like marriage) are only ultimately only going to get changed in court. IMO.
    Plus I heard a lot of vitriol, but saw no punches. It’s too bad those guys let themselves get drawn into a religious discussion though. The issue has nothing to do with religion (though anyone who knew their bible would be able to argue them passage for passage that there is no biblical foundation for the Pro-8 Side).

Comments are closed.