Nov 07 2008

People who voted YES on California’s proposition 8!

Published by at 3:00 am under I Don't Get It,Jerks

I am going to force myself to keep this brief because when I start talking about the subject of gay marriage my fucking blood beings to boil. I can LITERALLY feel my chest tighten right now as I type this. So this will be short or I will die.

If you don’t know, a vote YES on prop 8 means you are voting for a ban on gay marriage. This ridiculous legislation just passed in California with 52.5% in favor of the ban and 47.5% in favor of gay marriage. While the rest of the country took a gigantic step forward with Tuesday’s election these fucking assholes took California back to the stone age. It sickens me.

I will NEVER understand why a person would give two shits about who marries who. It can not possibly affect anyone if two men or women who are in love get married. Simple as that. Oh, but you know right wingers operate solely on fear. Fear of gays, fear of a black president, fear of science, fear of immigrants, and most of all fear of their own sexual desires. I am not saying everyone who is against gay marriage is a closeted homosexual but those right wing, conservative, religious nuts have the most fucked up sexual fantasies on the planet.

The Mormon church spent MILLIONS working towards this ban. Can you imagine that? Think of all the people in need who they could have helped with that money but they decided it was more important that two people in a loving, committed relationship are not given the same basic freedom all Americans deserve. I’m sorry, but why is it OK for Moroms to marry like 10 women at a time?

This is not what America is all about. After Obama’s historic win Tuesday it is kind of easy to relax and think we fixed America. Now that the dust has cleared it’s time for all freedom loving people to do what they can to support your fellow Americans whether or not you agree with their lifestyle. We do not get to pick and choose who is free in this country, we all are.

    49 comments so far

    49 comments to “People who voted YES on California’s proposition 8!”

    1. Willon 07 Nov 2008 at 8:06 am

      Has anyone else noticed the guy on the right (in the black suit) has an huge! right arm and a tiny head, possibly the reason why he voted yes to this bill, perhaps it was due to his narrow mind….sorry that was terrible!

    2. rxon 07 Nov 2008 at 8:37 am

      as obama said in his speech — if our children could see the next century, what progress should we make for them? i think this is top of the list right now.

      our asshole republican-wannabe prime minister was just re-elected in canada and he keeps threatening to reverse the law allowing gay marriage here. it fucking sends me into a rage spiral when people are hell bent on taking steps away from change, away from equality, towards hatred and segregation and hierarchy.

      oh, and on top of california reversing the law, florida and arizona just flat out BANNED gay marriage. ugh.

    3. saraon 07 Nov 2008 at 8:45 am

      if you take away their civil right to marry, then gays should not pay taxes.Since the state obviously doesn’t give fuck about them, why should they give a fuck about the state?
      who is it that said taxation without representation…one of the great American founders(in his own right).

    4. SanFranon 07 Nov 2008 at 11:18 am

      Oy… Honestly, YES on Prop 8 was a total fucking buzzkill for me. I’m not gay, but married to the woman beyond my wildest dreams, and what two other people do, be they two guys, two gals, or two transgendered folks want to get married and enjoy the same rights as my wife and I do, has absolutely NO BEARING on my relationship.

      OK, so I live in San Francisco – which is the epicenter of this movement, so my intensity on the subject is high… I just find the conservative brain to be suffering from a severe case of atrophy, having not been allowed to think for itself because of the dogmatic nature of its upbringing.

      I’ve asked, pointedly, numerous times to some republican/conservative friends of mine, how gay marriage would change their own heterosexual relationship. All they ever do is CITE someone else’s thoughts – they have not ONCE indicated how they feel – it’s because they haven’t thought about it. This makes me sick to my stomach. How laden must be the conservative’s mind, with all of these rules and regulations and stipulations and and and and… AGGGGHHHHHH. I feel sad for them, too.

      I do find it curious that the Mormon Church (who contributed over 20 million dollars to the cause) and the Catholic Church were so actively in favor of passing the ban – when both of these churches have questionable views on marriage – the FLDS (fundamental) church allows polygamy, while the Catholics make their priests vow to celibacy – I think neither has any G*d-Damned right to decide what marriage is. Celibacy is NOT natural , and to think that being gay is some frivolous decision is short-minded.

      One of my friends (again) cited that one of the key issues was “protecting religious liberties”. Whaaaaaa? How about fucking CIVIL liberties – we ALL deserve those. Let’s leave the religious liberties up to those who choose that path, and the doctrines of the church can also be their own. The other citation was that a population is only as healthy as its marriages.. Ummm, where’s the argument here? The gay unions I have known are very happy, thank you very much. Lastly, he pointed to a forum that revolved around “giving children the opportunity to have a relationship with a mother and a father…” – my counter point to that was this:

      Most ‘traditional’ marriages yield and rear their own offspring. Most gay couples who want children in their lives adopt – and bring love and a life to a child who was DISCARDED by their parents…

      Its no wonder Christian-based marriages have a 50% divorce rate… They are sick in the head.

      OK, I’m going to work now.

    5. You Just Made My List!on 07 Nov 2008 at 11:51 am

      Great points everyone.

      SanFran, I appreciate you taking the time to write that. Everything you said is exactly correct.

      I guess I thought we were moving forward faster than we were. We still have a lot of work to do in this country.

    6. Creature of Habiton 07 Nov 2008 at 2:06 pm

      We just have to keep fighting. Keep talking to people. Keep questioning statements…. it’s all so frustrating.

      When people say they want to “protect their marriage”, I always point to my state: MA had the lowest divorce rate in this country BEFORE gay marriage and it still has the lowest divorce rate after gay marriage. Happy marriages for ALL! I mean, in this country we are granted freedom of religion and freedom from religion. If my religion is atheism, then those catholics and mormons are infringing on my religious freedom. Nuf said.

      I also can’t seem to understand why the people that are so “Pro Family Values” want to take away the rights of others that share those values: marriage and kids. Most gay couples I know are a parent’s dream come true: church goers, kids, successful, committed. Why should they be denied? Most heteros make a mockery of marriage on their own….who the hell are we to judge?

      Sigh.

    7. Creature of Habiton 07 Nov 2008 at 2:07 pm

      We do still have a lot of work to do…. maybe we can get these people to channel their energy:

      http://www.theonion.com/content/video/obama_win_causes_obsessive

    8. Solomon808on 07 Nov 2008 at 4:28 pm

      It makes me so sad to see those people cheer while others are crying. And those tears make them happy? All men are created equal, but some are more equal than others apparently.

    9. SanFranon 07 Nov 2008 at 6:32 pm

      Yeah, they don’t even know what they’re celebrating, I bet… It’s the very nature of their lynch-mob mentality.

    10. Joeon 08 Nov 2008 at 5:43 pm

      Tolerance is the last virtue of a dying civilization… Plato
      Maybe you should re-evaluate your little exposition before you attempt to write in a manner which is obviously meant to express your own aarogant belif in your non-existent wisdom?

    11. You Just Made My List!on 08 Nov 2008 at 6:02 pm

      Joe, Here’s an idea, rather than just throw odd insults around maybe you should tell me why I’m wrong. Maybe you should use this as an opportunity to make people understand your position.

      That isn’t possible though is it Joe? You can’t defend the indefensible. I welcome open discussion and comments form people who disagree with me but I have no use for your lame attempt at “wisdom.”

      I would encourage people to google Joe’s quote (which is actually credited to Aristotle but who knows if that is even true) and take a look at the kind of hate-filled, racist websites pop up. Oh, I should mention he got the quote wrong too, it’s usually written as “Tolerance And Apathy Are The Last Virtues Of A Dying Society.”

      Just another right-winger using that copy and paste feature rather than his brain.

      There is NOTHING more American than tolerance.

    12. Joeon 08 Nov 2008 at 6:04 pm

      San Fran before you accuse conservative values as the problem, do make sure that you realize you are speaking from no other field other than the one created for you through the socilaizing process, of living in the epicenter of the movement that you are ardently supporting. (Suprise suprise….) What all you seem to be missing, at least to me (other than a proper education) is that the problem to conservatives is not gay marriage, it is the paradoxical terminology, that gay marriage has brought on. I have no problem with legal partnerships or civil unions, my problem is that you all keep adressing the term of marriage as a word with wide ranging implications. The definition is actually not that difficult. The first three from the first internet source I came across (and though it may not be accurate to the T- it still shows social oppinions to what the term “Marriage” means) also explicitly mention man and women… Know your semantics gentlemen and ladies… All I am really saying, is not everyone who votes against gay marriage is quote unquote “in the stone age”. That in itself is closeminded as hell, and it shows your bias even louder than this picture shows theirs…

    13. Joeon 08 Nov 2008 at 6:06 pm

      nice wikipedia. and ur right it was aristotle, im sure Wikipedia told you that. Sorry my author was incorrect, i was too busy actually reading it…

    14. You Just Made My List!on 08 Nov 2008 at 6:13 pm

      Joe,

      Explain to me why you care if two people who are in love get married. How does that affect you? What happened to freedom of religion, separation of church and state and basic civil rights?

      Why do you care if other people get married? It’s no more business of yours than it is mine who you marry.

      Why do you care?

      p.s. I did “actually” read it and no it wasn’t wikipedia it was google, just as I said.

    15. Joeon 08 Nov 2008 at 6:28 pm

      Alright. I will play devil’s advocate, for You just made my list’s sake. We tolerate an individuals decison to the utmost, sounds good. Usually civil liberties applies to everyone (but not everyone makes a choice to be gay, so some will just have to accept be restricted and unhappily straight) to bad for them, as long as our agenda of toleration maintains… If someone doesn’t like this, too bad right? I mean obviously their opinion doesn’t matter because they are firmly opposed to this herd mentality pertaining to toleration. My question is when does the inquistion start for those who refuse to accept this doctrine which is fundamentally true to some, but not objectively fundamentally true??? Answer this please? Because the syntax that List originally used, does not sound like he is going to be to accepting of those who do not share his views…

    16. Joeon 08 Nov 2008 at 6:34 pm

      Why do you scorn those who disagree with you… You chose this picture, this blog and your attitude. Dont you dare now attempt to subdue me with your qualms of seperation. Everything is connected in this country. You aren’t to blind to realize this of course…Or are you too idealistic to see the realistic facts that a major part of the republican party support is based solely because of religion- but as you said they aren’t connected. The fact is that they are connected, and that this system is messed up. I respond to your little catch phrases as ideas that have unfortunately never existed, but atleast i realize that believing these do, can be far detrimental, than 52.5 majority decision that will most likely be overturned within the next 4 to 6 years…

    17. Joeon 08 Nov 2008 at 6:35 pm

      We will continue this at another time, bout to leave work- enjoyed the discussion. Catcha later.

    18. You Just Made My List!on 08 Nov 2008 at 6:39 pm

      Joe, First of all. nobody “chooses” to be gay, they are born that way.

      I am not tolerant of those who choose to limit basic civil rights of others. I am tolerant of their opinions but do not have to tolerate people having their basic rights taken from them. I may despise everything the KKK stands for but I support their right to have their beliefs. I would never vote to limit their ability to assemble and share ideas but that doesn’t mean I can’t be utterly disgusted by them.

      You refuse to tell me how gay marriage is going to negatively affect you.

    19. Creature of Habiton 08 Nov 2008 at 7:02 pm

      From Joe:
      “Why do you scorn those who disagree with you… ”

      Joe – you tell us? You are the one having a mental breakdown here.

      I fully support the opinion of someone who says they “do not believe in gay marriage”. I disagree with that opinion, and I even think it’s lame, be it based on religion or cooties. What I strongly oppose is the rampant rewriting of definitions in state constitutions to blatantly discriminate against fellow citizens. History shows that discrimination at a constitutional level is illegal and cruel, as most constitutions offer equal protection to all citizens. It’s 2008, so why are people funneling millions and millions of dollars into segregating fellow American citizens?

      If you want to gather in a little group and hate, hate, hate – keep it you Sunday services. Keep the discrimination out of my life, my state and my country. It’s shameful.

    20. Joeon 08 Nov 2008 at 7:47 pm

      Here is what is shameful, a guy demanding toleration when this nation doesn’t owe him a thing. Dude I am not racist, and that lil disciminatory notion will not save you from me. Here are the facts toleration leads to intoleration. See if you can follow me: heterosexuals push for toleration….. Not ACCEPTANCE… toleration. So we tolerate homosexuality….. We allow those who wish to pursue what their heart leads them too, but they of course are intelligent enough to understand that going after what they wish must have a sacrifice….. If they were intelligent they would understand this basic concept…. However, they want to pursue their dreams, and sacrifice nothing…. Hmmmm…. Seems a lil one sided. So we give them what they want and continue our “outdated” methods of society until they become comfortable…. All the while not understanding that we have not truly accepted them, but we have atleast made an attempt by TOLERATING them. But to them, by not giving them every single right (such as the concept of marriage, which is hardly an issue to label me as a homophobe for anyways) we are intolerant. At what point are you the intolerant ones??? You deem what we believe to be true as wrong and terrible. By you telling me to stay out of your state you are effectively a hypocrit. This world is not ideal it is real- now get over yourselves and petty issues and start addressing the real problems in America such as a crumbling infrastructure, an ever increasing police state, and an ever increasing deficit.

    21. Bennon 08 Nov 2008 at 11:54 pm

      That’s a great problem with the US. Now that we have one problem fixed, there’s another one looming right over the hill and we haven’t truly fixed anything.
      There’s always another problem to complain about. Another subject not worth mentioning. Always something different somebody has a problem with. No problem is ever solved. Nobody is ever happy.
      Now I’ll get to my point.
      We’ve changed one thing, now we’ve just got to give the idiots their time to adjust to the change.

    22. Munchieson 09 Nov 2008 at 3:45 am

      *sigh*

      So this is what Joe six-pack is really like.

      Sarah Palin can keep him.

    23. MalaSuerteon 09 Nov 2008 at 11:02 am

      Tolerance. Blech. That’s a crappy, double-edged word.
      Sounds neat, but Tolerance is the bare minimum acceptance of someone’s existence. The civil union vs. marriage issue is separate but equal all over again.
      People used to defend the treatment of blacks and natives with biblical definitions, too. Now we don’t. Progress is an uphill battle, with a few valleys here and there.
      Personally, I think that this is a big issue of the separation of church and state. Marriage shouldn’t be legislated, they should all be civil unions in my book. I don’t care if the old-school Mormons want herds of wives- if they are all consenting adults, let ‘em do whatever. Same with homosexual people.
      Prop 8 supporters marginally won a battle, but they’re losing the war.

    24. SanFranon 09 Nov 2008 at 2:52 pm

      I’ve not much time here – about to head out for a mountain bike ride on this beautiful day in the Bay Area..

      I will reply in more depth soon, but in the meantime, Joe…

      It was difficult to navigate through your many posts, especially after you disqualified yourself by attacking my education. For one, it’s irrelevant, secondly, you are wrong to assert this because you have no idea what my scholarly accomplishments were, and continue to be. I have more than one degree – I’ll just leave it at that. Third, you further disqualified yourself with an apparent failure to grasp the difference between “to” and “too”, a handful of grammatical errors, and frequent use of “lil” and “u r” and the likes thereof. If you wish to come across as intelligent, which you may well be, I don’t know, please do us all a favor and at least pay some heed to detail.

      More later on the topics covered above, I promise. And Joe; one other thing: please answer the question posed by a few of us before taking another step:

      How does the marriage or union of two gay individuals affect your relationship? Please don’t cite or regurgitate any information here. We want to know what YOU think.

    25. Joeon 09 Nov 2008 at 3:05 pm

      So what do you mean when you say Joe six pack is really this way? I want to know how you view someone who chooses to disagree with you. Because so far, I have yet to see anyone say that there must obvoiusly be two sides to every debate, guess the difference is that anyone who disagrees with you gets labled anti-progressive and in the perverbial stone age…… Tolerance is a bare minimum acceptance, but who said i had to embrace a lifestyle that differs from my own instead of respectfully distancing myself from it while tolerating it? Isn’t that the true identity of America anyways? These guys aren’t doing anything other than celebrating, a victory in something that they beleive to be right, and you criticize them for them incompetence, I am confused….. They aren’t holding banners with extremely offensive material on it, so why are you all taking it like a personal attack. The most important question I have, is, do you understand that progress is not always a measure that may be to your liking. Progress is one of the biggest double edged swords I know.

    26. Munchieson 09 Nov 2008 at 4:19 pm

      Joe – it’s not about the fact that you disagree with me, it’s about the fact that you’re wrong.

      I astounds me that there are still people who argue against equality for EVERYONE.

      And honestly, I don’t have anything to say to you really. You aren’t going to change your mind. You want to maintain your ignorant, bigoted point of view. Nothing I can say will change it.

    27. Munchieson 09 Nov 2008 at 4:20 pm

      And also, Joe, hard returns are your friends. Don’t be afraid of them.

    28. Joeon 09 Nov 2008 at 6:06 pm

      Sanfran, your attack on my keyboarding English shows how disqualified you are at the ability of debate. When all else fails attack the grammar…? Instead of the ideas of those who disagree with you. Peace out, now Munchies nothing will ever be good enough for you. I am coming to accept that… Even if gay marriage were legalized tomorrow- it still would not be enough- because then there would be something about benefits, and you would have your new rallying cry the day after… You say I am bigoted- yet I continously say that the issue isnt the problem- its how you guys keep approaching it, but I am the bigot- you are the guys unwilling to even hear my ideas before labeling me… Fuck it I have had enough of this feel good PC bullshit discussion- but know this I atleast attempted to find a middle ground whereas you guys just bitched me out- whose really close minded?

    29. You Just Made My List!on 09 Nov 2008 at 6:19 pm

      I’m sorry Joe but you are utterly ridiculous and your ramblings barely make sense. I’m not just trying to insult you, you literally are nonsensical. You talk in circles and say nothing.

      You absolutely REFUSE to answer one simple question: How does the LEGAL MARRIAGE of two same sex individuals affect YOU personally?

      You won’t answer because you know there is no answer that will not sound ridiculous.

      You let your true colors shine bright by referring to civil rights for ALL Americans as “Feel good PC bullshit.” You will never be taken seriously by intelligent people and deep down you know this. You know “middle ground” was never your goal. If it was you would have answered that simple, direct question.

      Sit alone and be filled with fear and hate while the rest of the country moves forward towards a better America. I’m sad you will not be able to join in the celebration.

    30. SanFranon 09 Nov 2008 at 8:22 pm

      Hey Joe, it’s me again.. I attacked your grammar only to reinforce my first point – that you attacked my intellect.

      I also said that I’d reply in more depth when I had more time… I know you’re through with this PC Bullshit Discussion, but I also know you’re checking in to see what kind of responses have trickled in…

      Before you type another word, you need to answer the one question we’re all dying to know… I don’t need to state the question again.

      The bottom line here is that Prop 8, and the issue it represents, should NEVER have been on a ballot as a measure or otherwise. It is a violation of the California Constitution. This has become a religious-based issue – I don’t think any of us deny that fact. The separation of church and state is no longer in play, nor has it been for many years. This is also a big problem. One can still have their own religious ideals, and adhere to them or not. If, for example, something such as Gay Marriage becomes legal, it doesn’t mean one’s faith needs to recognize it in their own doctrines. This is how it’s been for centuries upon centuries. The church has always had it’s own set of rules, and in part afforded this right, and it is a right, by the aforementioned separation from the states in which it exists.

      I think to impress upon the State (be it a country or a township) one’s religious beliefs as law, is a serious violation of civil liberties. We all need and deserve civil liberty, only some of us need religious liberties. I, for one, do not. There is nothing anyone can do to change that fact, because it is a position I’ve come to on my own.

      Now, I’m not saying you are some religious zealot trying to impart your view upon me. I speculate however, that your conservative values (to which you are entitled) are likely steeped in faith, somewhere along the line – be them from your parents, grandparents, or community at large. This is fine by me.

      As a liberal, I truly believe that I am less tethered, far less dogmatic, and even more so, unconstrained in thought when it comes to the beliefs of others. Nothing is worse to the liberal mind than having another assert their beliefs upon it. It’s not that we’re not open-minded, it’s that we’re so open-minded that we don’t need prescribed rules to live by. Speaking for others, I feel it’s safe to say that we liberals, and moderates too, just wish that everybody would simply respect another’s opinions and way of life – irregardless of what they are.

      We are reacting, quite simply, to your lack of respect of other ways of life.

      I realize that you’ll disagree here, but trust me when I say that it’s a lot easier for some of us to accept your opinions and lifestyle than it is for you to return the favor.

      Scenario: IF you decided that you prefer relations with men, most of us would react this way: ——————————–

      That’s right, virtually no reaction. So long as you’re happy and not hurting anybody, we’re happy.

      IF I decided that I liked dudes and wanted to enjoy unification, legally and/or spiritually, you’d probably shake your head in disapproval and probably speak up, but not to my face.

      Not sure, Joe, if this makes any sense. I think it’s easier for us liberal-minded folks to live with conservatives than the other way around. You have made that perfectly clear.

    31. Bennon 10 Nov 2008 at 12:45 am

      The terrible part about Joe…he’s the reason. The “Joe Six Pack” that is making this country unbarable.

    32. jon 10 Nov 2008 at 4:19 am

      It’s so sad and frustrating that people choose to h8. I was part of the 47.5% and shake my head in disbelief that it passed. Thank you for eloquently stating our case on your site.

    33. SanFranon 10 Nov 2008 at 12:55 pm

      Addendum: I might have inferred that I think being gay is a choice in my last comment – I don’t believe it is in most cases. My point was that if I, or Joe, were gay and decided to unify, not if I, or Joe, decided to be gay…

      anyhow, that’s that.

    34. Liamon 14 Nov 2008 at 1:37 am

      Well, as with all political “fires”, there are many opinions and emotions. Let’s just back up and consider all the issues before you “attack” people with “f” bombs and other derogatory terms. The freedom of our country allows people of all backgrounds to express their opinions, but you have to admit, the real confusion involves raw emotions (both warranted and unwarranted). The gay issue involves confusion because the cause is not a typical minority status, it is a sexual orientation. This has caused, and will continue to cause confusion. How do you demand rights, acceptance equality for a sexual orientation/preference? It’s just a difficult set of circumstances. What happens if/when polygamists, pedophiles, etc. demand acceptance? Are you going to tell them “no”? How can you? What right do you have to say to these people that they are wrong? You can’t. I think you should leave traditional marriage between a man and a woman alone since there is historical and traditional significance (and it is the “norm”). What’s the significance of making sweeping changes for a sexual orientation that only represents 4% of the population? Why not give the gay community their own union? Call it “Gayiage” or something similar and just relax and not try to cram this issue down the conservative’s throats. It’s just not going to work. The gay community would be best served if it just relaxes a bit, understands their lifestyle is a deviation from the norm and narrow minded people will have to get use to this orientation over time. To “force it” (as the mayor of SF tried to do), will only result in resistance and potential attack.

    35. You Just Made My List!on 14 Nov 2008 at 9:30 am

      Liam, I was more than willing to hear you out until you had the nerve to ask “what if pedophiles demand acceptance.” ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

      If you are too ignorant to understand the difference I will explain it. Molesting children is ILLEGAL. It is illegal because there is a victim. There is no victim if two men get married. PERIOD! It does not affect you or anyone else.

      Get over yourself and your “Traditions.” It used to be a “tradition” to not let women or black people vote. It’s a “tradition” in Afghanistan to publicly behead women accused of infidelity. Should we stick to those traditions too.

      This is America, homosexuals deserve the right to marry without calling it “gayiage.”

      WHY DO YOU CARE?

      You know what, you are seriously just an idiot.

    36. Munchieson 14 Nov 2008 at 11:01 pm

      Ugh.

      You know who needs to make your list?

      The morons at Focus On The Family

      I’ll abstain from the predictable joke about needing to focus on their own families.

    37. Liamon 15 Nov 2008 at 6:50 pm

      Dear “Y.J.M.M.L.”
      I am glad you answered “one” of my questions. And I compliment you in that your answer was a good one. I agree, homosexuality is not the same as pediphilia, but why didn’t you answer the other questions? Why did you have to resort to attacking me? You don’t even know who I am and you already made some assumptions that I was a conservative/traditionalist. This kind of thinking is not going to help you and you are acting just like the people you are attacking. I am sorry to use a
      simple debate technique on you, but I couldn’t resist. You took the bate. OK, let’s try it this way. Can you at least provide me with some answers to these questions? If you can address these issues, you may actually succeed in

      Point #1 – The term Marriage:
      I realize you want to change the definition of marriage to include gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer, etc., but why do you care (other than gaining some sort of political or legal advantage)?
      What’s the big deal if church groups don’t accept you? By nature, you don’t accept them, so why would your group want to use the word “marriage” anyway. This term that was created by Western Cultures thousands of years ago to indicate the union of a straight man and straight woman? It just doesn’t make any logical sense to me. Why don’t you come up with your own term, like “gayiage” or something similar to mean the union of two people that have alternative sexual preferences/orientations? Doesn’t that make more sense than rather trying to change something that has been in place (and referred to as an institution for thousands of years)? Again, please educate me so I can solve this confusion. Wouldn’t that be like a heterosexual group wanting to use the term “coming out”? Isn’t that something that the gay community has coined and uses? Is this something you feel strongly about, or should any and all terms just be changed whenever anyone feels like it. Of course, we all have the freedom to say anything we want, so I guess I have answered this question for myself.

      Point #2 – Gay Rights:
      Don’t homosexuals have the right to be with anyone they want? Has anyone (in the past 20 years) denied anyone basic fundamental rights (voting, owning property, purchasing goods & services, travel, etc.) because of being gay? Probably not. So again, I ask you, what’s the big deal? I don’t discriminate against anyone’s sexual activities, orientation, preference, etc. There are gay and lesbian people in our community that get along just fine and they don’t require that I “change” anything about my lifestyle to suit their needs, and in turn, I don’t discriminate against them to suit my needs. Please educate me here so I can understand this great persecution. I just don’t see it. Now if you don’t have some legal rights because you are gay, then why don’t you work on establishing laws that are geared more towards your particular preference, rather than “attacking” (which is what this appears to be) an established, age old practice. Wouldn’t that make more sense? Again, please educate me, but since G/L/B/T/Q interests run counter to conservative practices, why not come up with your own legislation geared towards helping your group? Is your requirement to change this definition for financial gain or tax break? Well, if a straight person is single, they don’t receive anywhere near the same kind of tax breaks that married people do. Is this right? Probably not, but I learned long ago that “life isn’t fair”. Grow up and face the facts. Not everything is fair and if you do the best you can and work hard, chances are pretty good you will succeed in this country. This is probably a better approach than getting mad. Nothing is “perfect” in this world, but you have to admit it is better here than in 90% of the alternative (living somewhere else). If you had been born in an Muslim Society, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

      Point #3 – The Gay Agenda:
      It is a Constitutional right in this country to practice your religious freedoms. It is also a Constitutional right to vote. Whether you like it or not, a vote was cast and that is now the law.

      Point #4 – What next?
      A openly gay judge in Texas recently ruled that a polygamist group was illegal and ordered that the children of this religious sect be “broken up” due to her legal interpretation of the law. While I do not support polygamy and feel this is both immoral and wrong, I am curious how we can now make this judgment if the gay community succeeds in changing the entire societal view on marriage and its definition. What next? Who’s then to say what sexual orientation is right and/or wrong? Can you? I don’t think so. Once you have changed the definition of the “norm” of a society to suit your needs, the Pandora’s Box is open for almost anything. Polygamists would then all be able to stake a claim on legal grounds for marriage and there will be absolutely nothing that can be done to stop it. Is this worth it? Is it worth tearing down our culture to suit your selfish, self-serving needs? I certainly don’t think so. But, I am open to your answers. Maybe there is a strong chance that I am not seeing something or know all the facts.

      Please educate me so I can make a rational judgment and see you reasoning. I just haven’t heard anything that sounds logical to me. Just a bunch of ranting and raving about how discriminated the gay community is. So what? Get over it.

    38. You Just Made My List!on 16 Nov 2008 at 12:17 am

      Liam, I attacked you for comparing two people in love getting married to people who molest children. Don’t try to act like that is not what you were implying.

      I’m not even going to read this last rant of yours because you said enough the first time to show me it’s not worth it.

      Bottom line… there is absolutely no reason for you or anyone else to care if a gay couple gets married. It’s their right and it’s America. Go worry about something that ACTUALLY matters.

    39. Liamon 16 Nov 2008 at 9:53 pm

      Wow, YJMML:
      I am very surprised with you. You backed down so easily and didn’t even put up a fight for your cause. I am very surprised. What happen to your “chest tightening” passion against the right winging “fear mongers” or whatever you referred to them as. Well, you’d better bring your “A” Game if you’re going to beat back the “traditionalists” . . . as you term them. You’re throwing in the towell on me and I not one of “them”. Dude, you’re a wimp. Come on. Fight back or be contained. Don’t think for one minute you won’t get worse from the people who oppose you. If you represent the “argument” for Gay Marriage, you will never get ahead. I am surprised.

    40. You Just Made My List!on 16 Nov 2008 at 11:13 pm

      Liam, I realize in your sad, fearful, pathetic way you think you have “won” and if that makes you feel better then great. I’m simply not going to debate this with a person who has the nerve to compare homosexuality to paedophilia. I have already presented my argument Liam. For some reason you are unable to understand the simplicity of this issue. It’s not as complex as you want it to be.

    41. Liamon 17 Nov 2008 at 5:57 pm

      Dude, you are so missing the point here! OK, you want to keep referring to Homosexuals as Pedophiles, keep going there. You have completely twisted the entire point to the level of irrantional. I will stop picking on you because it is obvious you don’t want to engage in a healthy debate. I really just wanted to try and understand your point of view, but you have decided to “turtle” on the issues . . . good luck in that shell.

    42. Fionaon 25 Nov 2008 at 8:50 pm

      I am in Australia, where we do not have legalised Gay Marriage either. We hear the same old argument – it damages the traditional sense of marriage, the bible says it is man and women, etc, etc. This is what I don’t understand: where does separation of religion and state come into this issue? I completely respect each church’s right to disagree with same-sex people being married within their walls, however I cannot understand when that view became the benchmark for our legal guidelines. If the argument against same-sex marriage is looked into more closely, it stands to reason to suggest that only religious people have a ‘marriage’ (ie: man and woman in the presence of God, etc). Everyone else would have a legal union, which should be defined by government, and that union would provide certain rights and recognitions accordingly. That then means that the Government is enforcing prejudice on the very people whom they are elected to represent (all members of the society). No-one is suggesting for a second that someone who does not agree with same-sex unions must have one, but it is also illegal (by my definition of anti-discrimination laws) to infringe on the rights of anyone, base solely around their sexual orientation. I do not believe in God per say, but I have no right to force the government to persecute those who do.
      Just as it would be inappropriate for government to interfere with the running of any religious organisation, it is inappropriate for any religious belief to taint the laws of a democracy.

    43. Fuck you, queeron 12 Nov 2009 at 3:40 pm

      What consenting sexual deviants do in the privacy of their bedrooms is, I would agree, none of anyone’s business, but how society defines marriage is very much a public issue.

    44. Fuck you, queeron 12 Nov 2009 at 3:50 pm

      I’ll also add that what sexual deviants do in private can become everyone’s business when their behavior becomes a threat to public health due to the spread of contagious diseases. Just as an example, fags accounted for 65% of the syphilis cases in the U.S. in 2007, and that’s far from being an isolated statistic. The New York Times reported a couple of years ago that fags are spreading a flesh-eating bacterium called MRSA USA300.

    45. Fuck you, queeron 12 Nov 2009 at 3:51 pm

      BTW, the syphilis stat comes from the CDC, if anyone cares to check it.

    46. You Just Made My List!on 12 Nov 2009 at 4:18 pm

      “Fuck you, queer” – When you decided to begin the “debate” with a user name like that, you pretty much make my point for me. People who are against homosexuals and their right to marry are dumb. Plain and simple, you are not smart and your choice of words exposes that. Luckily, as time goes on, there are less and less people like you. You will become marginalized, just like people who fought against civil rights in the 50s and 60s or people who fought the right of women to vote in the early 1900s. You are just as silly and unintelligent.

    47. Fuck you, queeron 15 Nov 2009 at 3:03 am

      Hey, thanks for deleting the link I posted. You think what I have to say is “dumb,” yet apparently, you don’t want people following the link I posted. Why is that? Are you afraid that maybe others won’t find the material at the other end of that link as nonsensical as you do?

      Guys like you couldn’t debate your way out of paper bag (you don’t even attempt to refute my arguments, since you can’t), which is why you resort to deleting links, and your little agenda to normalize queer sex wouldn’t have gotten anywhere if you weren’t using government coercion to accomplish it, just like the “civil rights” movement wouldn’t have gotten anywhere if it hadn’t been imposed on whites at the point of gun. Hope for your sake the fedgov doesn’t collapse any time soon because it’s game over for you and your fudgepacking pals when that happens.

      BTW, you should consider that as much as I dislike queers, blacks and mestizos dislike them even more. Perhaps you should consider the ramifications of that for the “gay rights” movement as America continues to darken, Mr. Civil Rights Movement.

    48. Fuck you, queeron 15 Nov 2009 at 3:12 am

      “There is NOTHING more American than tolerance.”

      Yeah, I’m sure Thomas Jefferson was a huge advocate of queer marriage. Moron.

    49. You Just Made My List!on 15 Nov 2009 at 9:45 am

      Fuck you, queer – You act like a child so you will be treated like one. I’m not going to “debate” someone who is so ridiculous as to open the debate by saying “fuck you queer.” I don’t have the time for fearful, unintelligent, backwards, hate-filled people like you. Stop obsessing about my blog and go live your sad little life.