Proposition 8 Supporters Can #SuckIt

I’m really tired of dancing around this and trying to be nice.

I’ve seen your really cute church ads. I’ve heard you talk about how, in your whacky world of crazy, letting a gay couple marry would somehow infringe on your religious rights. How you’re doing it for the protection of ‘our children’ and how it’s really not about tolerance of ‘lifestyles’ but how it’s about you being ‘forced’ to accept same-sex unions.

Can I just say…YOU EVIL BASTARDS.

And I mean that with all the love in my heart.

This isn’t about religion or what you believe. This is about civil rights and your bigotry. Yes, your religion has made you a bigot. An evil, hating, horrible, bigot.

If you would like your children to not hear about anyone different from them, feel free to keep them the hell out of public schools and for that matter, public places. Because we here in the ‘public’ are not all like you and we allow our citizens, ALL OUR CITIZENS, the same rights.

I’m seeing YES ON PROP 8 signs in my neighborhood and I have half a mind to knock on their doors and ask them why they think bigotry is ok. Why they think denying rights to others is ok. Why they think their family is better than any other family.  Why, exactly, they have SUCH EVIL IN THEIR HEARTS. And where the FUCK they get off with the smiling happy stick-figure family representing them on those fucked up signs.

If your religion does not allow you to marry someone of the same sex..then don’t. If your religion allows for bigotry, perhaps you should find another religion.

Seriously. I am disgusted. Absolutely disgusted by supporters of Prop 8.

I can see absolutely NO justification for this legislation other than you implementing your evil across California.

As my husband just said, Orthodox Jews can’t work on Saturdays…do we come up with legislation making it illegal for everyone to work on Saturdays?

It’s the same thing. You get that, right?

No. You don’t. Because you’re evil, and you some how think gays being allowed the same rights as you is bad.

Perhaps you need to live somewhere that doesn’t allow rights to all it’s citizens. Somewhere where everyone is just like you and thinks like you and lives like you.

Now, many of you will be very quick to point  out the Obama-Biden take on gay marriage. And let us BE CLEAR about that record, shall we? I am not naive enough to think every candidate is perfect, and I am disappointed my candidates won’t go that extra mile for gay marriage. But let’s face it…it’s your fault.

You make up a large electorate and they can’t alienate half the country.  I get that. They want to make sure all voices are heard in American, even the evil ones.

It’s WRONG, but I get it. I’m also proud that they’ve supported equal rights for the LGBT community and will not support any constitutional amendments defining marriage.

Now you, on the other hand…what’s your excuse? Your religion says gay is wrong? Your religion also says you should stone wicked kids, but…I digress.

Get your bigotry out of my state. Get it out of my schools and get it out of my country. ALL are welcome, and that means you too, if you can stay and play nice.

Forced toleration can suck sometimes. But hey, I have to tolerate you, so it works both ways.

Oh, and by the way…years from now, when this is looked back upon like the civil rights movement in the 60′s, and people ask you what side you were on…have fun explaining that one.

*updated 10/20/2008
I keep re-reading and re-reading this post because it’s gnawing at me and won’t seem to let me go. Yes, I am angry. I am very angry over this issue, and writing this was cathartic and let me push all my anger onto a blank page. But as the debate and venom continues over same-sex marriage, I’m worried my hitting ‘publish’ did more harm than good. That I just threw out something into the world that spewed just as much hate as the what I perceive to be coming at me from those who support this measure. To be clear, and as I said in comments, I do not believe all religions and all faiths are evil or bigoted. I found more love in some Christian friends and family than can be expressed. I’ve also seen entire Jewish communities condemn this measure and other faiths rally against discrimination and bigotry. But perhaps, what I keep getting as I re-read this…is a microcosm of what’s gotten so out of hand on this issue and in this entire election: we’re all just name calling and screaming at each other. I regret adding to that, I truly do…but it’s so hard when you feel pushed there. Pushed by whatever entities are at work. So I’m letting this post stand because it’s a fair representation of how I felt when I wrote it, it does-if you can get past the venom-convey all the things I find wrong about this measure and why it should be defeated. But it occurs to me that this entire fight…this battle…is over love. Who can love. How they can love. Why they can or can not love. And the last thing it needs is more hate thrown in. So before you add to the hundreds of comments here or continue to scream and yell, please take that into consideration. Love. -ekv

Comments

  1. First of all, Mike… ur an idiot. People who really feel threatened by gay marriage have no place in our current society. The reality of the issue is that nothing is going to change for you just because gay couples get married. All supporters of prop 8 are whiny bitches! Get over yourselves you fucking selfish pieces of shit! Stop being afraid of change, it’s what keeps this thing we call civilization in progress instead of stagnation. You know what progress is… a movement in a positive direction…how could you deny so many people of that?

  2. Cathy,

    Thanks for the thoughtful response.

    First, I agree with you that allowing gay marriage is the quickest way to obtain equality. However, I would prefer to do things the right way than the quickest way. With regard to equal rights, I claimed that the rights are equal “to the extent that California can provide it.” All of the things you mention are federal ramifications. I think that if gay marriage passes in enough states, you’ll end up getting into pretty hot water and might see a terrible backlash at the federal level. This would undo all of the hard work getting gay marriage to pass at the state level, and you’d be back at square one with an equivalent situation to domestic partnerships.

    A better strategy is to take it to the federal level, and try to make domestic partnerships equal to marriage under federal law.

    In any case, everyone does have equal rights with regard to marriage. Everyone has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex :). That’s a bit tongue-in-cheek but has some real implications. In many people’s minds, the right to marry someone of the same sex should be treated differently under the law… not to the extent that things are unfair, but to properly handle situations that may be unique to each type of union. Hundreds of years of “marriage law” have been written under the assumption that a man marries a woman, and some of these laws would have difficulty in a same-sex situation, making things inherently unfair to begin with until they can be changed.

    Fundamentally, I think that gays deserve equal rights and priveleges. But it’s a question of getting the support that is needed in our democratic society, and solving some of the problems I mentioned. I believe the heterosexual majority will support this cause if and only if traditional marriage emerges unharmed. The fact is, the ramifications of gay marriage on traditional marriage under the law has not been properly thought through, and there’s a lot of work to do. Of course it’s easiest to just “make it so” and fix any problems later, but I think many voters who would otherwise support gay marriage see too many problems and not enough solutions yet. I’m one of them, and would actually prefer marriage law to be removed completely in favor of individual contract unions which could be provided in a standardized format.

  3. How can you use such vile, nasty language — certainly not civil or educated. Judging by your sick, angry pronouncements, I am not surprised that you have no respect for one of the most sacred ordinances between a man and a woman. You should be aware that Proposition 8 is only characterized as a form of bigotry by those, like you, who would do all they can to gag the more decent, God-fearing individuals in our society.

    I have just as much right to express my opinions and support ballot measures that will protect marriage from being manipulated by homosexuals who have no real ability to procreate and truly mentor and raise a child. A child must have a man role model and a woman role model to continue the ever-so-important process established by our creator.

    I am disgusted with anyone, Gay or straight, who seeks to violate the rights of anyone, but I am so against the notion that Gay marriage is a right or that Gays are subject to protection under civil rights or human rights provisions. Gay people have a difficult lot in life, but they are humans with freedom of choosing their direction in life just the same as heterosexuals. There is no logical or illogical reason for surrendering to the demands of one radical, self-serving segment of society when they threaten the moral fiber // foundational institutions of our society. This is not the same as civil rights! It is a morality issue and is threatening our children’s rights to have a father and a mother.

    God Bless those who support marriage and for the proposition 8 measure geared toward preserving the family and marriage.

  4. Wow Clint. I can certainly tell that you are upset about the way the country has exercised its right to vote on issues. I can also tell that you have a very limited vocabulary. I certainly hope that you are more intelligent in real life than you appear on this blog. Guess it’s just another piece of evidence that our public school system isn’t perfect.

    Look, gays had their chance. California gave homosexuals far more of a chance than they deserved, but that is what this country is all about. DEMOCRACY. Homosexuals kept pushing for more rights, kept pushing for exceptions to be made for their sorry way of life. Well, guess what? It was; and it lost. Even though anti-proposition 8 viewpoints were backed more by the media, people still voted for it. Now homosexuals are upset because they were voted against, still claiming that they have been treated unfairly. That seems like a sore loser mentality to me, & it has no place in this country or society.

    Oh, and one more thing. If you can’t argue your point without swearing, you probably shouldn’t be arguing at all. You just end up making yourself look like an even bigger fool.

  5. Cathy in Miami F-L-A says:

    For Mr. BK, I promise you I will prepare a retort shortly. I have been spending the past two days fighting a virus attack on my computer, going to doctors and getting some troubling news, and going to class.

    Instead, I want to add this clip that a friend of my girlfriends (Alderon from AARM) sent over just for me. Thank you Alderon, I will roll a D20 in your honour!

    After this clip ask yourself, How would gay marriage affect you? Your family? Will you be lesser because two people want to express their deep, deep love with each other?

    If I get a worst case scenario answer from my doctor, there is a possibility that my girlfriend will not be at my side when I go to the operating room. I can only have a brother who hates me because I am gay, or a sister that is too far away to travel, or my oldest brother who is never around. Wow. I better by some magazines.
    Good Luck

  6. Your blog is written by a bigot for bigots full of hate speech warpped in a self righteous single view of several complex issues… Believe it or not, not all gays were against prop 8… SHOCK! And not all Christians voted for prop 8… SHOCK AGAIN…

    State the issues and facts the pros and cons and get your emotions out of the way so that people can see more clearly the issues at hand. And for God sakes stop making a fool of yourself in a public forum and hurting your own cause…

    You need to take a anti hate class from Ghandi and Martin Luther King about having tolerence of another view and expressing your own views without putting down another point of view… Clearly you have a hard time understanding what is going on in your own mind let alone trying to get in the minds of those that oppose your own thinking….

    You fight what you think is hate with hate, you fight those who you think are bigots by being one. And finally you should less class than those you condem…

    Oh by the way Ghandi and King were killed first by hate speech that turned into action…

  7. Cathy in Miami F-L-A says:

    Alright I’m an idiot… here is a link to Keith Olberman’s commentary.
    Maybe this time it’ll work. Blech, maybe they can’t teach an old dog new tricks…… :)
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27652443#27652443

  8. Cathy in Miami F-L-A says:

    Okay, I try this again. Here is the link to the video clip.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27652443#27652443
    Have fun!

  9. Hey Cathy thanks for the video. I didn’t like it on several levels.

    First, it’s inciteful. Speaking on MSNBC, this guy is first of all preaching to the choir. He uses only emotional arguments to support gay marriage, and makes stereotypical assumptions about those who don’t, going so far as to insinuate that they are cold, stupid, emotionless people who are obviously blinded by something and filled with hate. This only serves to solidify and encourage hatred toward those who would want to protect the tradition of marriage. He’s not speaking to people like me… he’s speaking to people like you… and it’s not a very clever charade either.

    Second, he is primarily arguing for allowing gay people a chance to love each other. This is the problem… gay people shouldn’t need to adopt a heterosexual tradition like marriage in order to do this. His arguments don’t apply to me because I wouldn’t want to deny gay people anything with regard to equal rights or the opportunity to love each other. Ask yourself this: Is it possible to have equal rights for all, and equal opportunity to love, yet keep marriage between a man and a woman only? I think it is possible, but I don’t see enough effort in that direction. That is the solution that I think the country can live with. Emotional arguments about love etc. do nothing but stir emotion and solidify hatred… it does nothing to advance the issue.

    Third, he talked about how marriage laws used to prevent blacks from marrying whites. I think this is a much more clear issue, but has much less to do with marriage and has a lot more to do with equal rights for blacks overall. The reason why I think it is a fallacious comparison is because in our society, there is nowhere that gays have to sit in the back of the bus, and there are no signs saying gays need to use the back entrance… the fact that slaves couldn’t marry, or blacks couldn’t marry whites, was more a function of this overall civil rights issue than marriage in particular. Furthermore along these lines, any fight for gay rights should definitely not draw parallels to the black civil rights movement, ever. I’m fairly certain such fautly comparisons led in part to the overwhelming support for Prop 8 by the black community. Sure, bigotry remains in our society, against gays, against blacks, and even against whites at times. But overt discrimination is not tolerated anymore. Things are not as they were in the early 60′s, and gay activists need to come to their senses and realize that.

    I’d be proud of the gay community if they could come together with a more forward-looking approach to equal rights. Why look backward at heterosexual tradition and try to reshape it and mold it? Why not look forward and define new traditions, and make them equal under the law? I ask again, can we keep marriage between a man and a woman and still achieve equal rights and priveleges for gays?

    I’m only arguing for this because I think it’s the most feasible approach. I actually think marriage is a religious tradition at it’s root, and should not have a place in our country’s legal system. I would prefer to leave it up to the churches to marry people as they wish, and if the people want to enter into legally binding arrangements as part of that, they can enter into a standard contract or draft one of their own… but from a legal perspective would not be called “marriage.” As part of this, the parties can make certain designations such as “I am allowed to visit this person in the emergency room” or “I am allowed to put this person on my health insurance” or “We will file federal taxes jointly” among other things… although I would even go so far as to say it’s unfair for the tax laws to encourage or discourage any sort of contractual arragement between people to form a legal unit.

  10. Hello again everyone. I’m happy to see people generally being civil and discussing the issues here. As for Clint, you’re obviously angry, which is very understandable, but you’re doing absolutely nothing for your case by cursing and insulting me. I didn’t do anything like that. Are you trying to create another ‘bigot’? Such behaviour and hate (yes, hate speech goes both ways, something many gay activists don’t seem to understand) hurts your stance and does nothing to promote it.

    To Clint and anyone else who is mystified by the idea that gay marriage could possibly have any effect on schools or conservative families, I give you some evidence. I did a very quick search and this was what I found. Though admittedly these news posts are by conservative websites (except for the final one), they’re still things that are happening in the world (specifically in places where gay marriage has been completely accepted) and show perfectly what I’ve been talking about.

    The parents in the story above didn’t agree with their children being taught about certain liberal sex and especially didn’t agree with their kids being continually taught that gay is perfectly common and mainstream. Thanks to gay marriage laws, homosexual activists in Germany have taken on many people and groups who disagree with them and pushed the courts to persecute those families, individuals and organizations. That’s not a matter of simply letting gays marry, that’s a matter of an institutionalized homosexual agenda targeted at children. When parents don’t like it, the law fines and/or jails them until they see things the state’s way. That breaks so many parent rights, children’s right, religious rights, freedom of speech rights, and on and on. Some gays even preach about their right not to be offended. Well I don’t know about you, but jailing parents for not teaching their children all about gay sex is pretty offensive to me, and should be offensive to everyone.

    In this case, a kindergarten teacher had all of her students sign pledge cards declaring themselves allies in the homosexual fight for freedom and tolerance. Quoted from the article, “‘First of all, why is homosexuality as an issue being raised at all in kindergarten? These are students who don’t even know what sex is yet, and this teacher is talking to them about homosexuality,’ he contends. ‘This is an abuse of these students’ minds, and it’s just wrong.’” The teacher would have been teaching tolerance of course, that gays and transgender people should not be hated, insulted or treated badly. That part of the lesson is good, because no one should be treated badly. But right along with such lessons comes, “They’re just like everyone else. There’s no difference between a gay relationship and a heterosexual relationship. There’s no difference between a boy who thinks he’s a girl and a girl who is born a girl.” Ummm, yes, there is. You see these two body parts? These ones fit, and these ones don’t. It doesn’t have to mean its bad at all, but it does mean its different. There’s a line that’s consistently being crossed more and more. Teaching respect and love for all people is very good, but teaching complete acceptance of every person’s actions is not. There’s nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone, but schools are hammering the exact opposite idea into children beginning in kindergarten. I disagree with politicians lying all the time, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to say, “Go right ahead and lie. That’s perfectly fine by me. I won’t call you out on it.” If homosexuals want to be themselves, great! But don’t force your thinking on young impressionable minds. I swear, it’s like they’re recruiting in kindergarten or something! In the above story, the school said (paraphrased), “The teacher probably went a little far.” You think? These kids can barely spell their name, and they’re signing homosexual pledge cards… Of course, no reprimand against the teacher.

    This is actually directly related to the commercials that so outraged gays in California. They said, “It won’t be taught in schools! Christians are all lying bigots!” And there it is, being taught in elementary school in one of the few states that allows gay marriage. Interesting how annoying the truth is. In fact, many of the activists in California in opposition to prop 8 were the same people pushing these sorts of teachings and court interventions when parents spoke up in opposition to them in Massachusetts. Not only is it directly effecting children in schools, it’s also directly effecting the families because parents are being told to get lost, having no legal right to have a say in the education of their children. That sets an unbelievably scary president, never mind the whole homosexual issue. When did the public education system turn into an unaccountable parent blocking organization fully intent on re-writing a child’s values despite what their parents think? And again, it’s not so much that these kids are being taught respect and love. Simply put, homosexuality goes from being accepted to being promoted. “You think kissing a girl is yucky? Maybe you’re gay just like the kings in the story we read!” Or maybe the kid just has no romantic, physical, or sexual interest in his fellow grade one students of the opposite gender yet. What all this teaching and promoting does is take tolerance into the realm of “anything goes” despite what your parents say (since your parents are bigots). If this becomes the normal platform of schools, within twenty years, most of the children will be completely bisexual and the homosexual population will have ballooned incredibly, because there will be absolutely no barrier there. And with no barrier there (a barrier that nature has had in place for millions and millions of years), the barriers of all kinds of other sexuality also come crumbling down. Maybe that’s what gay activists have in mind, who knows. It’s incredible that we’re pushing the total eradication of the natural order in our own schools, the very same schools that so strongly defend evolution (over other more religious alternatives). Is that evolution? Sexual free-for-all taught to children (of course, in an ‘age appropriate manner’)?

    There’s a line that is being very forcefully pushed here by the same activists that pushed for gay marriage, and the courts are siding with them because hey, the law allows gay marriage so everyone has to treat it the same as heterosexual relationships. It doesn’t matter what a person’s opinions are, what their religious beliefs are, what their upbringing was, or what their parents say. You have to agree, you have to like it, and you’re going to hear about it for twelve straight years of public education until you do. I’m sorry, but school is supposed to educate, not indoctrinate. I thought that was the whole reason church was kicked out of school in the first place. Homosexuals say churches brainwash kids against them, well church is one day a week, public school is five days a week.

    Also note that in other similar stories all across one of the few states that now accept gay marriage, schools held gay celebration assemblies. All students went, no parents were informed (in case they might want to pull their child out of that assembly), gay and transgender speakers were brought in to teach their testimony (I mean, speak), gay teachers announced their marriages and undying love for each other in front of the school, pamphlets and books filled with examples of how homosexuality is great and everywhere were handed out to students, and on and on the promotion went. I’m sorry, but that’s not teaching tolerance, that’s teaching, “join us.” I didn’t realize just how “evangelical” homosexuals were until I actually looked it up… Now middle schools explicitly teach about how exactly a person goes about participating in homosexual sex (toys, oral, anal, etc.). This is being taught to middle school students, because its legal now. Another instance had a parent insist that he be notified whenever the class his child was in would be specifically dealing with homosexual and transgender issues so that he would at least know about it. The school refused, he insisted and threatened to pull his kid out of school, and he was promptly arrested for trying to hurt his child’s education… Because he wanted to know when the class was focusing on homosexuality and transgender issues… Elementary school kids get picture books of gay and lesbian couples and homosexual families. The number of such books and the frequency of the topic is astoundingly disproportional to the homosexual population. You’d think society was 50/50. Tax payers now pay for the production and distribution of educational books that are completely focused on teaching and promoting homosexuality. Speakers are invited in to tell students how wonderful it is to be gay. Quite simply, the moment the gay marriage barrier comes down, anything goes.

  11. Sorry, I seem to have messed up the HTML tags for the hyper links. Now the entire paragraphs link to the news stories. Hopefully I’ve fixed it with this newer post.

    And finally, to end this off, a perfect example of the militant hate filled activists (who no doubt are a small part of the gay community) doing what they do best. And thanks to homosexuality being such an extremely sensitive topic, the media almost entirely ignored this story, police did nothing, city officials did nothing, and at best there is currently a quiet “on going investigation.” How about a little finger wagging or scolding, to start with? Do you have ANY idea how shredded a group of Christian activists would have been if they’d pulled this kind of stunt at a homosexual gathering!? The massive outrage would shake the world. But since it was the other way around, it hardly gets noticed.

    Bash Back! Raises Hell at Anti-Queer Mega-Church

    This is from their very own website, not some conservative blog or news website. These people protested out front of the church to distract the security while a large group of plainly dressed activists walked into church and waited to strike. After the prayer, which prayed that God would help President-elect Obama to be a good president able to deal with the current problems facing the world and the nation, the activists launched from their seats and pretty much exploded into riot. They pulled the fire alarm (illegal action all on its own). They shouted curses and hate speech, “Bigot, homophobes, nazis, etc.” They shouted “Jesus was a fag”. They ran to the front of the church and onto the stage passionately kissing each other at the pulpit as people either sat in wide-eyed shock or made their way out of the building. Confetti was tossed everywhere, condoms were flung through the air, signs were hoisted high and hung off a balcony. These people went all out, completely destroying the Sunday morning service of the church. And laughably, how does the church respond? “We’ll pray for you, and we’ll be glad to help you if you want.” When people gathered back inside after the police had arrived, the pastor led the church in prayer asking God to heal the angry people that would so gladly break laws and interrupt a peaceful church service in such a way. They prayed in sadness, that their attackers would be cured of their anger and hate. Unbelievable! If I went to church and anyone did this while I was there, I’d be furious. And these people just prayed, “Father, forgive them, and please help them.” Wow. What’s funny too is that the entire show did absolutely nothing to promote the gay cause. In fact, it probably made everyone at the church all the more certain that homosexuality was something very wrong, if “those types” of people are willing to do all that. To the congregation, the war against them has now hit home, and they see just how badly they need to stand up against gay rights. Are these activists trying to create enemies?

    In closing, all of that type of thing is one major reason why so many people voted Yes on Prop 8, even in this modern day where homosexuals are very prevalent on television. While gays try to convince people that they’re just like everyone else and want freedom and tolerance for everyone, some of them are working very hard to completely undermine the freedoms, religions, beliefs, opinions and parenting of anyone who doesn’t agree with them. Stop that, and you’ll have a shot at really convincing people. It really is quite sad that these people have proven that they’re not willing to stop until the whole world is forcefully converted to their way of thinking. Forget democracy, forget freedom of speech, forget freedom of thought, forget parents, forget religion, forget debate, forget respect and forget love (which all of this is supposed to be about).

    I know (or would hope) that a lot of homosexuals don’t agree with the infiltration of schools, the government splitting up of families over simple disagreement about sex education, and turning society into bisexual sexually crazed animals. Sadly, some are doing just that, and they’re destroying everything the homosexual community has worked at for so long. Be satisfied with being accepted and free to live your life outside the closet, finally. Don’t worry about anyone else and don’t force yourselves on kids or people that simply don’t agree with you. I thought this was about personal freedom and tolerance? But more and more it’s sounding like freedom to attack conservatives (in particular, Christians) and only tolerance for those that agree with you. At one time, the word “gay” meant happy. Now it’s meaning is synonymous with hate and totalitarian assault (my way or else). Think about it.

  12. All of you who corrected me in my language are right to do so… I lost my temper as I was typing, but my viewpoint comes from a young man who strives to be tolerant of all those around him. So I apologize Mike… but I simply have a hard time seeing as to how allowing gay marriage would really affect people who aren’t apart of that community. I come from a Catholic family yet was raised Christian and I have no quams with the issue, however I do understand that I have a particularly “loose” standing on such issues and simply wish others could look at it the same so that these people can get on with their lives. Sorry to all I offended.

  13. Cathy in Miami F-L-A says:

    Geez! It’s been a very busy week for me, and it’s not over yet….
    I can’t stay up too late tonight, I have a CT scan tomorrow.

    Mr. BK,
    I see that we are going to be perpetually “agreeing to disagree.”
    I should be doing my reasearch paper, but instead I am compelled to research this issue in depth to provide you and others that may not see my point of view, a rational and accurate challenge to your logic.

    First, I see that you have a somewhat emotional attachment to the “M” word. We can have a civil union, but we cannot marry, right?

    Well, I ask you, what about people of other faiths? They marry too. Hindus have been marrying since before the christian religion was started. Is it wrong for them to do so?

    What about Shinto, or Judaism?
    Marriage, it seems, supersedes christianity.

    Now, that can take away your fear that if gays marry, then God will be upset. He can’t be. And before I realized I was gay, I came to the conclusion that if God is omnipotent, then he knows everything we are ever going to do. From worshiping him in a Sunday service, to taking a copy of the newspaper from the middle of the rack because we don’t want a bent one. He knows it! And I think that if God truly hated someone for being gay, then he would not have healed the male love object of a Roman Centurian. Nor would he be

    there for me when I truly needed him four years ago.

    In your statement of taking the marriage issue to a federal level, I believe that you are thinking that we should pass into law an amendment baring gays from marriage? Pres. George W. Bush talked about it, but quickly and quietly dropped the issue. No president would want to be the one to go down in history as “the president that allowed for
    discrimination to be written into the Constitution.”
    The main reason why Pres. Bush left this alone, is that it really is a state matter. The United States Government really doesn’t get involved with these matters, except for drug laws. those laws are “States Rights.” The States have the power and responsibility to govern on these matters.

    Now I do notice your humor in regards to being able to marry someone of the opposite sex, but do you realize that homosexuals, including me, did just that, either in an attempt to “put on a beard,”(hide their homosexuality,) or they thought that marriage would miraculously “cure” them? The results of these marriages are often tragic. It leads to divorce, suicide, murder, Adultery, Broken homes, or perhaps more painful, emotional death. So please spare me that, okay? I was lucky. Hubby was doing illegal things while I was at work. He
    got caught, and is away for a long time. And as I said earlier, when I can afford it, he’s gone. Out of my life.

    The fact that you want to have a difference in marriage between homosexuals, and heterosexuals means that they are in fact, “being treated differently under the law.”

    The only uniqueness that I can imagine from “Het Vs. Homo” marriage resides in nomenclature. Obviously there cannot be a “Man and Wife” in Same sex marriages. The solution is to let the couple volunteer which one will be the (and don’t take this the wrong way guys….) “Dominant” partner. Outside of having their name placed first on paperwork, there would be no difference.
    Everything would be the same, and in fact I asked a divorce attorney who handled my girlfriends divorce, what differences would there be if a gay couple split? She said none. Except that unscrupulous attorneys might charge more for a same sex divorce, claiming that they are harder to do.

    Now going on to the video.

    I wonder who would you accept as a neutral voice. Ann Coulter? Bill O’Reilly? Should we raise Walter Cronkite from the dead? This whole issue, by default, is inflammatory.

    And I seriously doubt that you will find someone who can present an argument, – either way – that would not anger the other side.

    You continuously state that you want gays to have “equal rights, but not marriage.” yet you fail to realize that the only way that can happen is by marriage.

    As I stated to Kim from PA, we are not trying to piggy back onto the black civil rights movement. And your argument that because we don’t have “assigned” seating on public transportation, then well, our issue is minor. Makes me want to invite you into my house, my neighborhood, (95% hispanic), and my life, so that you can see firsthand what I am
    talking about. Hey, hop a plane, first round of Bacalaitos and Mojitos on me.

    We cannot be under the same insurance company. When I applied for food stamps about four years ago, me and my girlfriend were treated like dogs. I don’t know if it was because we am gay or American, really. When I had to have surgery at Jackson Memorial Hospital, a county run public health facility, my partner was denied access to me until I got back to my hospital room, and then I had to call her. A mutual friend of ours called the nurses station and said she was my sister, and they put me right through to her! I hope this link works, http://www.fairnessforallfamilies.org/stories_add.aspx?id=293

    There is another story there from the same hospital, about a same sex couple that were denied being together as the one woman was dying from a brain aneurysm! I hope to God they sue, and I hope that their lawyers see our story and contact us…..

    By the way, overt discrimination is not tolerated anymore? Tell the Parents of Matthew Shepherd that, or Charles Howard, or any hundreds if not thousands of people directly affected by hate crimes.

    Oh, I know that this will come up. http://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/local/MI103711/
    The other day, a young girl in Broward County, who is a lesbian, apparently was despondent that another girl rejected her, so she shot her to death. This is a tragic situation for all families involved. I feel for the Collette Family as well as the gay girl, Ms. Wimberly.
    I also feel that Ms. Wimberly should be tried by a court of law, and whatever fate she gets, she gets. I do not feel that she should be treated any differently because of her sexual orientation. There are no GLBT groups at her school. Perhaps if there was one she might have learned to cope with the situation differently, and Ms. Collette would be alive today. Both of them attended a urban school, which is notorious for it’s violence. I imagine that Ms. Wimberly would have felt publicly humiliated, or suffered physically because she outed herself to her best friend, and that is why she killed her.

    Mr. Bk, I want to answer your last paragraph, and then I am done.
    Marriage takes on many various, and sometimes colorful forms. I have witnessed Hindu, Krishna, Greek, Jewish, and Christain ceremonies.
    I was personally married in a State Park. Where there were Aardvarks in attendance. :) Your idea of traditional marrage is not the only one.
    I disagree also, with your proposal to knock everything down to a civil document, like filing a quit claim deed. No, the tradition is not in the garb, or the words, or the music. It is in seeing the joy on the faces of everybody as they know that if only for an hour, the world is peaceful and calm.
    Now I may sound like Mr. Obermann and am appealing to your senses, but think back to your own marriage. Wasn’t it one of, if not the most wonderful days of your life?
    Now how can you say that it is not right that anybody else cannot share your joy?

    Peace,
    Cathy

  14. Ok for those who don’t understand how this would affect Christians. If gay marriage is legalized, it is then illegal for a Christian church to deny marrying them in the Church even though it goes against the Christian tenets. It will force Christian adoption agencies to give consideration to gay couples which will cause many to close their doors instead of placing children in what they believe to be unfit homes. It is a way for the government to stick their noses into religion. Either you are for separation of church and state or you are against it (and it is NOT in the Constitution – the phrase comes from a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Baptists). You cannot have it both ways.

    And that is why most who oppose gay marriage have no problem with civil unions of gays. It does not infringe on the religious rights of others.

    Calling Christians bigots is quite bigoted yourself. We have a thing called the 1st Amendment in this country and Christians have a right to worship God and practice their religion whether you agree with it or not.

    I am tired of the double standards. You cannot condemn someone for hating and then turn around and be just as hateful (as this article is). You cannot demand separation of church and state and then have the government force the church to comply with gay marriage.

  15. Cathy in Miami F-L-A says:

    Myrshena 11.14.08 at 9:27 am

    Ok for those who don’t understand how this would affect Christians. If gay marriage is legalized, it is then illegal for a Christian church to deny marrying them in the Church even though it goes against the Christian tenets.

    That is wrong. Does the government now force Jewish temples to marry Catholics? How about Baptists being held at gunpoint to marry satanists? If the church’s charter or Articles of Faith express a belief, then the government has to abide by it. The only time the government can get involved and have any say in a church, is if it gives them an economic benefit, like subsidized school lunches for a christain school. This same principle is also applied to religious adoption agencies as well. Now several churches may want you to believe that we will march right into their doors and demand these things, but I seriously doubt that we could if we wanted to. As stated before, there are plenty of gay friendly churches/venues that will allow us to marry there.
    It is a way for the government to stick their noses into religion.
    Are we anti-government?

    Either you are for separation of church and state or you are against it (and it is NOT in the Constitution – the phrase comes from a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Baptists). You cannot have it both ways.
    *buzzz* Wrong answer, but thanks for trying. Myrshena, you need to read the whole Wikipedia article before you choose what you want. Yes the term “Seperation of Church and State” was written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists. However, the First Amendment states: ” Amendment I
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
    IOW, the government can’t say what religion should be practiced by anyone, and the religions cannot dictate what the government does. The term “seperation of church and state,” was brought back into public record in 1878 by the U.S. Supreme Court, and subsequently by the Supreme Court in 1948.

    And that is why most who oppose gay marriage have no problem with civil unions of gays. It does not infringe on the religious rights of others.

    Actually wrong again. Look at my earlier posts. In one, I point out the differences in marriages and civil unions/Domestic Partnerships. Have you ever heard of Civil Marriage? That is what maybe Mr. BK was shooting for. “Holy Matrimony” is the church’s blessing of a marriage. A marriage is a legal joining of two people together. Again, there are several gay friendly churches out there for those that want a “holy matrimony.”

    Calling Christians bigots is quite bigoted yourself.
    Okay, I sort’ve agree with you. We should stop on both sides, the hatred and villification. People that are against gay marriage should open their minds and hear reasonable, logical debate on the issue. Those that are for it, need to hear what the other side is saying, so that we can address those fears, and make re-assurances.

    We have a thing called the 1st Amendment in this country and Christians have a right to worship God and practice their religion whether you agree with it or not.
    Uhhh… earlier you said we don’t have a seperation of church and… oh never mind. Read the Wikipedia arcticle again,

    I am tired of the double standards.
    I am too, like the fact that I cannot marry the woman I love, but my marriage to a man who turned into a nightmare sailed right through? Like the fact that a few hateful people want to impose their outdated, anti-christain, (yes, anti christain!) views on the public, and we are to just stand by meekly while that happens. Yup those same double standards?

    You cannot condemn someone for hating and then turn around and be just as hateful
    Again, you grasp the concept. We all need to be kind.
    Okay, everybody come to Miami for mojitos, or Cuba libres, and Ropa Vieja. But I can’t treat, I’m broke right now. I will take you to some pretty cool spots though :)

    Gay marriage does not interfere with church matters. If you look into all aspects, both pro and con, then you will see better how your argument stands. Lets all look at this with a clear head and heart. Research before you judge, and don’t condemn those that cannot reason. We need to find an amicable way. But only through the flow of free thought and discussion will this take place.
    Chills, thrills and spills
    Cathy

  16. Okay, morons. I never compared the act of homosexuality with the act of pedophilia, only the percentages. No one has yet to deal with anything I specifically said in my post. Why? Because it’s too honest. We like cute witty sayings, like “if you vote for proposition 8, then you are a bigot…” SAYS WHO? Just because you made a cutesy saying, doesn’t make it valid. And, its not about love. Give me a break! Love? Try perversion. Love is following the natural order of things; not dudes sticking it up each others hairy bungholes! Where is the common sense in America. When homosexuality can be compared with heterosexuality? Seriously. Where have we went wrong?

  17. Cathy,

    This is in response to your last reply. I don’t know if I mentioned my religious affiliation in any of my posts, nor have I mentioned God anywhere as far as I know. Your points about various cultures and religions doesn’t really apply to me, and I wonder why you posed them in a reply to me. I certainly hope you aren’t lumping me in with the hateful zealots, because that would take my respect for you down a notch or two. I’d rather leave God completely out of this discussion, aside from the fact that I believe taking marriage out of the law would make sense from a church/state separation point of view. Perhaps I need to expand church/state separation to include mosque/state separation, synagogue/state separation and temple/state separation… but I think it’s fairly well understood what church/state separation is, and that it is all-encompassing.

    In any case, in all of the cultures you mention, marriage is still between a man and a woman.

    With regard to taking things to the federal level, you misunderstood me again. What I was proposing was that the federal limitations you may feel as a Floridian, being limited to civil unions, can be easily resolved by passing federal legislation to equate civil unions to marriage under all circumstances. Then, why would you need “marriage” per-se, which is a heterosexual tradition?

    Furthermore, I don’t view acting to prevent expansion of the definition of marriage to include homosexuality “discrimination,” a word you used in your post.

    I also don’t believe that in today’s world, if marriage does not include homosexuals, that people will enter into heterosexual marriages because “marriage” is so important to them. In the past perhaps, when social norms were different, and homosexuality was not generally accepted. Today homosexuality is found everywhere, it’s out in the open, it IS generally accepted, and I’m fine with that. I just don’t want marriage changed, that’s all… and I honestly don’t think it needs to be for everyone to be treated equal. I dispute your claim that altering marriage to include homosexual unions is the only way to equal rights.

    And YES, overt discrimination is NOT tolerated anymore. That is a FACT. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. There are lots of things that happen which we as a society do not tolerate, including murder, theft and rape. Just because a crime or injustice is not tolerated, doesn’t mean it can’t still occur. Providing examples of hate crimes is a ridiculous, and frankly, stupid counter to that statement.

    Lastly, what I am hoping for is for everyone to be able to celebrate their love, regardless of orientation. I want every last couple on this earth to have every opportunity to celebrate their love with their friends and family, by making a public commitment to love each other for the rest of their lives. No matter who is involved, it should be a day of complete joy and happiness, and everyone should have the right to do this. But, if two men or two women are doing this, I think the general opinion is that this is not marriage, which is between a man and a woman and has been for thousands of years. It’s all about what the word means for me, and what it represents to me, and probably to countless others who supported “gay marriage bans.” If we could just call it something else (because in fact, it IS something else), this would solve EVERYTHING.

    For me, it all comes down to the stubborn refusal of the gay community to define and create their own tradition of loving commitment, and the stubborn insistence, for their own selfish expediency, upon hijacking and changing long-standing traditions many people hold dear.

  18. One more point to Cathy: regardless of your points about not trying to hijack the black civil rights movement, the video you posted clearly tried to draw these parallels. If you did not agree with that part of the video, you didn’t clearly state this when you posted it. Furthermore, regardless of your stance, you must know that it happens all the time (in the media, as you exemplified, it is quite common).

    Regarding unbiased talking heads in the media, they are few and far between. I’m very good at finding the bias and the intended audience in most media… you have to in order to avoid being brainwashed into a particular polarizing point of view nowadays. I find it on both the right and the left. However, not having strong political leanings towards Democrats or Republicans, I would definitely say that MSNBC is hands-down the worst offender of all.

  19. I think you’re throwing “evil” around a bit too freely, and it seriously detracts from any plausible message you might have.

    The fact is that you’re every bit as intolerant as those you rail against.

    Frankly I was surprised at the way the vote went–I’ve no particular issue if the state wants to issue CIVIL UNION licenses to anybody but a *marriage*, as you accurately pointed out, is a religious matter–which means that some churches will be fine with it and many won’t. That’s good by me–don’t force them to accept it, find one that does accept it and move on with your life.

    The same voters that gave Obama something like a 74% win also passed Prop 8. Are all these Obama voters bigots, or just the ones that disagree with you?

    Who then is the real bigot?

    Bring it down a notch if you want to be taken remotely seriously.

    Steve

  20. I don’t mean to sound naive, and would appreciate if someone could explain this to me. Unless I misunderstand, some of the prop. 8 supporters posting here have indicated their beliefs are premised upon separation of church and state, as they oppose the government “forcing” them to accept gay marriage in their individual churches. I’m confused. Gay couples who are refused marriage in their churches have decided to sue instead of find a more tolerant congregation? wtf? I completely agree that any religious institution has the right to refuse to marry gay couples – if that’s your church’s stance on the issue, I completely respect it. But isn’t the issue that churches who DO decide that marrying gay couples is consistent with their faith are then having the religious beliefs of others imposed upon them? Freedom to worship how you want is one of the most basic rights we have, and that ought to include the right of individual churches to both reject and accept gay marriage according to the convictions of their congregations.

    The fact of the matter is that marriage is not just a religious institution. It is also a legal contract. Perhaps what we ought to do is separate these ideas and invent a new term to refer to the legal contract uniting two individuals together. You can get married in your church, but to obtain the legal benefits from a lifetime commitment couples must then apply for a “couple’s license” or something. Marriage, if it is a religious institution as many claim, should not have any bearing on legal issues and should not be a matter of governmental concern. I’m an atheist, and can’t understand why some devout individuals would approve of me getting married in a church, but would deny that right to people of faith who are homosexual. This is obviously a very emotionally charged issue, as many gay couples would clearly love to be able to say they are “married.” I wish we could simply separate the two halves of marriage – the one involving divine blessing and the one involving the right to receive legal protection and government recognition as being in a steady lifetime partnership. As a non-religious person, I’d be willing to to have a “unity ceremony” or “lifetime love ceremony” instead of a marriage if it meant everyone could have the right to retain the integrity of their religious convictions without preventing their fellow Americans from having the integrity of their romantic relationships acknowledged.

  21. I agree with you Leigh. I would take it a step further however… why have a ceremony at all, if all you want are the legal benefits? Surely a ceremony would no longer be required, just a signed contract.

    And, as an atheist or as a homosexual, if you wanted to have a ceremony, you should be able to have any kind of ceremony you wish in this free country and call it whatever you want, including “marriage.” But from a legal perspective, call it something else to avoid all these “issues” we are seeing.

    Fact is, so long as “marriage” is in the law, someone has to have their views compromised no matter which way the chips fall.

  22. Cathy in Miami F-L-A 11.14.08 at 7:34 pm


    That is wrong. Does the government now force Jewish temples to marry Catholics? How about Baptists being held at gunpoint to marry satanists? If the church’s charter or Articles of Faith express a belief, then the government has to abide by it. The only time the government can get involved and have any say in a church, is if it gives them an economic benefit, like subsidized school lunches for a christain school. This same principle is also applied to religious adoption agencies as well. Now several churches may want you to believe that we will march right into their doors and demand these things, but I seriously doubt that we could if we wanted to. As stated before, there are plenty of gay friendly churches/venues that will allow us to marry there.

    No, not wrong. There have already been cases where homosexuals have sued because they were denied use of a church building that is leased out for heterosexuals. There have already been Christian adoption agencies close their doors because the state in which they operate now recognizes gay marriage and they were told they must give gay couples equal consideration.

    The stunt pulled a couple weeks ago by gay activists invading a church in Michigan during services and acting like utter fools does not help your cause one bit. And they were marching right into the doors and disrupting services, yelling “Jesus was gay”, shouting other obscenities and blasphemies, throwing condoms, simulating sodomy, and so on. So your claim that homosexuals won’t do that is quite mistaken.

    Once the activists left the church, the members then sat down and prayed for them. {sarcasm}What horrid Christians they are!{/sarcasm}

    Are we anti-government?
    As a conservative libertarian, I am not anti-government, I am pro small government.

    *buzzz* Wrong answer, but thanks for trying. Myrshena, you need to read the whole Wikipedia article before you choose what you want. Yes the term “Seperation of Church and State” was written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists. However, the First Amendment states: ” Amendment I
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    Wikipedia? Get a grip. Your snotty attempt at superior intelligence fails, especially since your spelling is atrocious and you have not yet mastered the Spell Check function.

    The part of the amendment that addresses religion basically means that there will not be any government established church such as the Church of England and that people may worship as they wish.

    Uhhh… earlier you said we don’t have a seperation of church and… oh never mind. Read the Wikipedia arcticle again,

    No, I said there is nothing in the Constitution about separation of church and state. Your feeble attempts at twisting my words fails as well. I think you are the one who needs to read again what I actually wrote.

    I am too, like the fact that I cannot marry the woman I love, but my marriage to a man who turned into a nightmare sailed right through? Like the fact that a few hateful people want to impose their outdated, anti-christain, (yes, anti christain!) views on the public, and we are to just stand by meekly while that happens. Yup those same double standards?

    Believing homosexuality is a sin is not anti-Christian. Treating homosexuals hatefully is. As Christians we are to hate the sin, not the sinner. And yes Yeshua would have be forgiving – for those who go forth and sin no more, not to those who continue to live a life of sin.

    Gay marriage does not interfere with church matters. If you look into all aspects, both pro and con, then you will see better how your argument stands. Lets all look at this with a clear head and heart. Research before you judge, and don’t condemn those that cannot reason. We need to find an amicable way. But only through the flow of free thought and discussion will this take place.

    I have done quite a bit of research, actually and obviously more than you. I am more aware of what is being pushed and what isn’t. Just because you do not agree with my conclusions and are unaware of what people pushing the homosexual agenda actually do does not mean I didn’t do any research.

    Since you are a homosexual, I suggest you actually research what is being done and said in your name. Any kind of extremist is counterproductive, whether they be Christian or homosexual. Condemn the extremists who make it harder for you.

  23. what a pussy. First, you dare to go ahead and say all that shit with hatred and anger with your justifications, and then go on with an apologetic voice and say “oops, this may cause more damage than good.” Rather more damage than you intended to be portrait in your mascaraing of the color of the eye you are looking at this with. Please if you are going to hate, especially on the mormons dont be an asshole and say im sorry afterwords, as though there were no reprecautions to what you said earlier. So if you can be as ignorant as to rant and post, please stand to your true feelings, or shit in your pants like the baby you seem to want to be with your contradictory views.

  24. Hi Nemo.

    I stand by my emotions. I stand by what I said. I stand by the fact that this election and the issues in this election had everyone screaming and yelling.

    I have not changed how I feel about the subject. I would change how I said it outloud. The message would remain the same.

    I think there are those truly using religion as a legitimate reason for THEIR OWN beliefs and I think there are those truly using it for evil. Bigoted, homophobic, evil.

    Oh, and next time. Feel free to leave your blog link or an email, as is common place when commenting.

    I’m sorry, who’s the pussy?

  25. http://ourheartsarewithyou.wordpress.com/

    trying to show that not all churches are bigots

  26. With all due respect, Queen of Spain, what I see here is you using religion as a legitimate reason for your own beliefs. I’m not here trying to tell you that you’re not allowed to believe as you will, but please don’t call me “bigoted, homophobic, [and] evil” for believing differently. That, to me, sounds much more bigoted than anything I’ve heard from anyone that supported (and continues to support) Proposition 8.

    Thanks for sharing your 2¢; hopefully you’ll respect mine.

  27. Just want to say I completely agree with you,Queen. I live in the deep South and it is so hard to meet women who speak their mind about things like this,unless of course they think like the majority.At least in my town.Thanks for having the cojones to think and speak.You’re an inspiration.

  28. i don’t have prejudice about gays, its just wrong.

  29. Awesome read. I understand the hesitancy associated with lashing out against theocratic right-wingers because I’m always measuring my words in this debate before I say them. I mean, in your rebuttal to all the ridiculous anti-gay marriage talking points, you can’t throw all those flimsy facts and trends into your argument. Further, you can’t get angry at them for this outrage because then they cleverly turn the tables on you and pull out the term “bigoted” and “hate monger.” But that attitude is fast fading with me. Christianity (and Middle-Eastern, monotheistic influences in general like Judaism and Islam) has been calling the shots for centuries. Millenia, even. All sorts of evils and injustices have been forced upon the world in the name of God, and this is something religious apologists always try to wiggle out of.

    “But atheist dictators have done just as much to harm humanity, if not more!” they’ll say. Yeaaaaah, that “fact” flies in Southern homeschooling families. When we look at history, it’s clear that God trumps man. So today, in what I always imagined as a kid to be an enlightened age, it ultimately amounts to enough is enough. I’m tired of Christian dogma playing any role in our laws, and I’m ready to push back. I say you hold the line and remember your own words – when we’re looking back at this period of American history in 50 years, do you want to be compared to the Christians during the Civil Rights era who said, “Not my race, not my problem?”

    I also didn’t intend to bring atheism up as any sort of panacea to religious dogma in constitutional law – I’m just of the opinion that the fewer infallible skyfathers you try to please, the more equal your law and country becomes.

  30. Also, Jeff, why would I not call you bigoted and homophobic when your position in this debate ultimately amounts to “this group of people shouldn’t get the same rights I do.” You can’t sugar coat it. I know you’ve heard people compare this to blacks being able to marry whites and other similar rulings in American law, and the analogy is apt. When you strip away all the distracting language, that’s what it boils down to. That is, unless I understood your position wrong and you’re not a Christian against gay marriage. But if you are, you’ve got to realize how problematic your position is. If they don’t have the right to marry because of God’s law, well, why are they allowed to do anything? Why don’t we just round up all the homosexuals and deport them? You say God doesn’t tell you to go that far? I’m sorry to say it, but he is. So don’t subscribe to this religious and political belief unless you’re willing to carry it to its logical conclusion. I’m amused at how few Christians I see practicing their faith truly, otherwise they’d be preventing every gay marriage they say by physical force.

  31. If you want to get married get married. You just want government recognition…in other words the “money” and the “we must like you”. The “money” is for the kids, not something gays are predisposed for generally. Sure there are exceptions, but deal with it, like everyone else. The “we must like you” is just your own insecurity.

    I live my life by my way, and I can deal with almost anyone without demanding to be liked, and without being sponsered by the fucking government.

    Grow the fuck up.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] Truth be told, I haven’t been following the various state and local propositions down South. We don’t have those things up here in Canada, which is both good and bad. Regardless I’m hearing things about Proposition 8 down in California and it doesn’t sound like a terribly good thing—Proposition 8 Supporters Can #SuckIt. [...]

  2. [...] is usually some very powerful discussion to be had. I would invite you to read through all the comments here to see what I [...]

  3. [...] we as a country took last night, let’s not forget the steps back that we were driven by the hatered and the bigotry that still owns too much of this [...]

  4. [...] the state constitution to make same-sex illegal. Erin Kotecki Vest, who blogs at QueenOfSpain.com, posted a rant expressing her frustration with the issue.  At one point, she quotes her husband: As my husband [...]

  5. [...] spin. I talk about my Weapons Grade hate for Sarah Palin, my feeling on the war in Afghanistan, my anger over Prop 8, my first person battle with our health care system. My undying love for my hometown of [...]

Speak Your Mind

*