Anti-Prop. 8 mob: It’s over. You lost. Move on.
I think it’s time for Democrat leaders to counsel the anti-Prop. 8 mob to stop the protests and accept the will of the people of California.
Tell them to leave the churches alone. Tell them to stop blocking traffic and impeding businesses and harassing elderly couples and targeting donors.
It’s over. You lost. Move on.
With almost 11 million ballots tallied, Prop. 8 had 52.3% of the vote, with 47.7% against. Although many ballots remain to be counted, the 500,000-vote spread is viewed as insurmountable.
You know how those Obama supporters have launched their treacly “healing” website, “from 52 to 48 | 48 to 52 with love?”
Maybe Prop. 8 supporters should do the same thing.
If you are a Californian who voted for Prop. 8 and want to send a healing message to a sore loser who voted against it, feel free to send me a photo, e-mail, or comment and I’ll create a separate “from 52 to 48″ post.
***
Previous:
Schwarzenegger pours fuel on anti-Prop. 8 fire
Unhinged losers: Prop. 8 opponents threaten Mormons and Catholics
Who supported Prop. 8?
First graders take school field trip…to teacher’s gay wedding
Public school politicking and Proposition 8
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Document drop: Lib 9th circuit panel rules Proposition 8 unconstitutional
February 7, 2012 01:09 PM by Michelle Malkin
152 CommentsStop the hate campaign against law-abiding American businesses
February 2, 2011 04:03 AM by Michelle Malkin
244 CommentsCalif. judge overturns voter-approved Prop. 8 gay marriage ban
August 4, 2010 04:51 PM by Michelle Malkin
955 Comments
Dear Cindy & Meghan: Let’s talk about who’s really being silenced over Prop. 8
January 25, 2010 11:36 AM by Michelle Malkin
126 Comments
Supreme Court blocks Prop. 8 show trial plan
January 11, 2010 11:31 AM by Michelle Malkin
34 Comments
Climate of hate: More threats from the gay marriage mob
November 10, 2009 05:24 PM by Michelle Malkin
49 Comments
Left-wing thug of the day
November 5, 2009 01:18 PM by Michelle Malkin
78 CommentsMaine votes down gay marriage
November 4, 2009 01:25 AM by Michelle Malkin
759 Comments
Categories: Proposition 8
Pundit & Pundette
» Obama's war on conscience, cont'dRedstate
» Media MattersHot Air
» National Review to Newt: Get outAmSpecBlog
» Explosion Near Israeli Embassy in IndiaNRO
» Santorum’s Turn
Hilarious.
Digshot
If your gay, don’t look for acceptance on this blog. May I suggest you go back to parents to find comfort.
If your looking for legal acceptance natural law will not validate your perversion.
I know this is hard, but gays cannot procreate. its rather obvious
its obvious you’re fine with eliminating religous liberty. which is what gay marriage is all about.
uh whats that mean? where are the metrics??
you know what they say about who laughs last, diggy!!
This is my culture and I don’t wish to have it bastardized by deviates.
Animals do on occasion attempt homosexual acts an are quickly reprimanded.
NATURAL LAW
I’m not gay, and I’m not stupid enough to seek acceptance on a conservative blog.
You are officially a caricature.
You can deny and deny and laugh and laugh but you won’t be on that day. Think before you go on and mock Him. He is patient and long suffering but not forever.
Digshot
Spiders sometimes consume their mates.
NATURAL LAW
That’s an argument?????????????????
Again, with respect, this discussion is a lot of blah, blah, blah, marriage, blah, blah, blah, rights, blah, blah, blah, animals, blah, blah, blah…; that is a distraction (on which the socialists/existentialists thrive, and without which they wither away) from the real, core, essential argument: there are two worldviews that have essentially nothing – not one thing – in common.
A better, clearer illustration of the irreconcilable difference – the unbridgable chasm – between the two worldviews, than is being provided by this discussion, could not be asked for.
– FamilyMan
Ah yes, bigotry, Jesus would be proud. I wager you’ll have some explaining to do on the big day as well.
and, right4life, how exactly is allowing gays to marry restricting your freedoms? I’m anxious to hear you explain that one.
very true!! the libs cannot deal with truth, facts, etc. they just ignore those, and move onto the next talking point.
in the last days the Lord promised to send a deluding influence…I’d be stunned if He has not already. these libs are scary obamabots…hailing their new messiah!
So…. what are you saying exactly? If we allow gay marriage, people will stop procreating, and we’ll die out?
If gays are recognized as married by the state, what does that have to do with you, your religion, and your religious liberty? You can walk around pretending like all the gay marriages are invalid if it makes you feel better, why won’t that work?
The metrics are that the world has continued to spin. For years we’ve heard from conservatives about all the inevitable problems we’d be facing with legalized gay marriage, and none of them have materialized despite the existence of thousands upon thousands of married, gay couples that have been married for years. You can no longer go with the doom and gloom scenario, because it’s not borne out.
When did I say I was a Christian?
I don’t care what your imaginary friend thinks of me.
this just shows how uninformed you are on this issue. but its typical of liberals to have not thought through an issue…you just spew talking points.
already a doctor in CA was sued by a lesbian, and lost, because he would not provide insemination for her. this will affect everything from adoption agencies, to christian schools, who can attend, who can teach, churches, who can work there, and what benefits they have to provide..
do you libs EVER think through the ramifications of ANY policy you support???
As an aside, I noted in the newspaper this morning an article about the next Califonia gubernatorial election. It listed San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsome among the candidates. Even though I think Prop 8 is wrong, I’d sooner shoot myself in the head than vote that guy into the state executive position.
– Family Man
Just a guess. If I’m wrong, my bad.
Good post. Some of us want to use the government to solve problems, others obsess over using it to keep penises from touching. Irreconcilable indeed.
again, you sir are uninformed. and its on every aspect of this issue? ever hear of stanley kurtz???
link
and when we have more babies without fathers we end up with more crime…as we’ve seen in the black community..
you continue to prove what a shallow intellect you and liberals in general have.
How the hell would gay marriage make things difficult for summer camps? Hahahaha. What?
Additionally, how many gays do you think are chomping at the bit for access to religious, conservative institutions? You think they want to be married so they can infiltrate your homeless shelters?
Hahahaha.
right4life, just curious, do all of your religious institutions listed above, community shelters and athletic programs, etc., are they okay with allowing unmarried gays to participate?
you are an idiot. seriously stupid. you cannot deal with the truth, and even liberal lawyers acknowledge the problems that it would cause.
Your wrong on all counts. Natural Law will not allow homosexual behavior as it is perverse and a deviation of nature. Check out Constitutional law.
why don’t you try posting something to back up the BS you spout diggy? something, anything?
you’re very shallow and uninformed.
Digshot
Are you avoiding Constitutional law and the natural law discussions?
– right4life
Well, spewing talking points is all you’ve been doing for 6 pages of comments too, so I guess you must be a liberal as well.
Your quote doesn’t explain to me how gay marriage restricts your freedoms. Stern even says:
“No one seriously believes that clergy will be forced, or even asked, to perform marriages that are anathema to them,”
Organizations like this had to make adjustments when blacks gained equal civil rights too. I’m left to assume that based on your logic, things like allowing blacks to adopt, etc etc, would have somehow been considered a restriction of their religious freedoms too?
Stern says allowing gay marriage would have ‘substantial impact’. But I note that he provides no detail about what form this impact might take. No specifics, just a big fear sale.
Well, don’t keep me in suspense. If you know the problems it would cause, share them. Because I don’t think there are any.
Again, what if an unmarried gay parent wants to send their kid to your summer camp? Is that allowed?
can’t you read??
comparing gay marriage to ‘civil rights’ is specious and laughable.
christian churches will have to hire gay pastors, as christian schools will have to hire gay teachers. christian schools will not be able to expell gay students. freedom of religion will end. even reading bible verses that condemn homosexuality will be a ‘hate crime’
try doing some research. I know thats asking a lot of liberals :roll”
just did moron, can’t you read?? duhhhhhhhhh
You’re talking about religion. Constitutional law doesn’t talk about marriage and establishes the principle of equality among men and women, and NATURAL LAW wouldn’t be making judgments about whether or not specific behaviors are perverse.
But you’re talking about religion.
What do the doctor and the lesbian have to do with gay marriage? That’s discrimination based on sexual orientation. Which apparently is fine with you, if you think Christian schools should be allowed to expel gays. But that doesn’t have anything to do with gay marriage. What’s the connection?
the doctor was already sued civilly because he would not inseminate the lesbian…with gay marriage he would most likely face criminal charges of discrimination.
Christianity, and most religions DO discriminate on ‘sexual orientation’…now that will be illegal with gay marriage. as I wrote..and apparently you don’t get.
obviously they should…its called freedom of association, religion…ever hear of it??? and you want that freedom to end…along with your fascist gay allies.
These trolls are truly moronic. Not a single legal issue has been argued. What a waste of my time.
Good luck right4life
Family man,
Like most points it is useless to argue this with libs. They understand our objections but will merely dismiss them as bigotry that stands in the way of somebody’s supposed rights. The irony is they are cut from the same ideological cloth as radical feminists that have insisted for 40 years that marriage is slavery and should be restricted if not outright banned. In both cases they attack traditional marriage because it stands in the way of personal freedom. I have to wonder if radical feminists that hate traditional marriage are in favor of gay marriage? I also have to wonder if those demanding the “right” to gay marriage realize it is a net loss of freedom for those committed to a long-term, successful marriage? All decisions must take into acount your spouse and children. Gratification must be delayed, scaled back or completely forgotten to provide financial security for the family unit. Buying a house, changing jobs, moving, vacations or just going out for the evening all require for more forethought, planning and discussion than if one were single. (I think the feminists might have a point in that it is a form in institutionalized slavery, but are wrong in believing it is only so for the women.) And then there is the big one: no more dating! I don’t believe for a minute this is what they are after. They only want the right to get married, and have their homosexuality recognized and accepted by the force of law. They fool nobody but themselves.
very true, they cannot deal with facts, I do enjoy making them look foolish, not that its very hard.
they have not commented upon Kurtz’ reseach for example.
they’re typical libs, uneducated, and easily led.
Why do you keep making this about polygamy? Prop 8 wasn’t about polygamy, gay marriage is not about polygamy, the people protesting in Salt Lake City, New York and up and down California are not protesting about polygamy. Can’t you just let it go? Stop telling me I can’t support gay marriage without supporting polygamy. Stop telling me I have to justify my support of polygamy when I’ve never stated an opinion on polygamy.
Just let it go for crying out loud!
Alas, I am proven correct.
When I said that all of the arguements against gay marriage (polygamy! jailed preachers! the end of civilisation!) are just thin veils for bigotry, I was right. FamilyMan has at last revealed the way ALL anti-gay bigots feel. They feel that gay people are different, and are therefore “disgusting”. Nice going, FamilyMan!
this is a taste of the gay sharia to come if gay marriage advocates get their way…
link
Republicans. You lost. Its over. Move on.
If expelling gay teenagers is your idea of “religious freedom”, then maybe restricting it with anti-discrimination laws is not such a bad thing after all …
thanks for showing what a nazi you are. why shouldn’t a PRIVATE SCHOOL be able to admit, and EXPELL whomever they want??? hmmmmmm???
explain that, and how it relates to freedom for me…
uh we won the gay marriage vote every time its tried
But, as far as existentialists/socialists/statists are concerned…so what?
These dangerous opposite-worldview-holders are essentially saying to us, to paraphrase the immortal words of Goldhat the bandit (Alfonso Bedoya) to Fred C. Dobbs (Humphrey Bogart) in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre:
The vote? We don’t want no vote (that we lost). We don’t need no vote (that we lost)! We don’t have to accept and move on from any stinkin’ vote (that we lost)!’
Here’s my letter to the Gov (for what good it will do)
Dear Govenor Schwarzenegger:
I respectfully request your immediate condemnation of the dangerous and thuggery actions of the angry prop 8 activists who are using intimidating and corruptive tactics against the citizens of California, your constituents. By failing to speak out, you are complicit and malfeasant. These activists are threatening businesses with boycotts at a critical time in this States disastrous economy, naming individuals thus making them vulnerable to retaliation and physical harm, targeting places of worship, and disrupting the peace.
It was shameful enough that you encouraged the protesters to defy the majority will of California voters. You proved yourself a lame-duck politician by reversing your principals on the issue of gay marriage (not to mention taxation). For this voter, you have lost all credibility.
However, to stand by silently, while the community is being subjected to the minority unlawful and menacing behavior being inflicted on cities statewide is reprehensible as a governor.
I sincerely hope you make a strong statement condemning these demonstrations very, very soon.
– right4life
Can’t you comprehend? I asked, how does this restrict religious freeom. Please cite the passage in the Bible where it says that artificial insemination of lesbians is a sin. I fail to see the connection between this, and religious freedom.
Right, your name-calling habit makes US look foolish.
yeah they’re so concerned with ‘freedom’ and ‘rights’ but that never extends to the rights and freedoms of those whom they disagree with!
after all I posted, I don’t know what else to say. you don’t see because you either:
a) refuse to see
or
b) don’t have the intellect to see
which is it?
why should a doctor be FORCED to provide services which he feels are immoral??? hmmmmmm??? whatever happened to freedom???
– right4life
What a triumph! Ammending discrimination into state constitutions. We ALL lose when we start down that road.
it is a great triumph!! preserving FREEDOM!! instead of having your view imposed upon us by some black-robed thgus!!!
FREEDOM won…fascist intolerance lost…get a clue.
– right4life
Because discrimination based on sexual orientation is ILLEGAL, and will continue to be so regardless of the legality of homosexual marriage. This still has nothing to do with gay marriage, and has no relevance to constitutional ammendments banning gay marriage.
I’ll throw your own words back at you, as they seem fitting:
after all I posted, I don’t know what else to say. you don’t see because you either:
a) refuse to see
or
b) don’t have the intellect to see
which is it?
How will gay marriage make it illegal? According to you, if Christians are allowed to discriminate against single, unmarried gays, why wouldn’t they still be allowed to discriminate against married gays?
That doesn’t make any sense.
so basically religious freedom is ILLEGAL, based upon what you and your gay allies want. thanks for admitting this!!
sure it does, why you refuse to see it, I don’t know. do you have anything to support your view?? I have amply documented mine…you have not, or cannot, which is it??
Omu
Six thousand years of human history validates the social disgust of the practice
I hate to resort to liberal tactics of name calling, but you are a MORON Omu.
because once the state decides that a relationship between a man and a woman is a form of irrational prejudice against homosexuals, pretty much anything the state decides is ‘discrimination’ is out the door…and religious beliefs themselves will be a form of discrimination, and therefore illegal.
how hard is this?
Omu,
As I quoted you, you’ve said that no majority has the right to deny a minority. Thus you are pro-polygamy by your own words.
Then again, you’d deny a private school/organiztion the right of free association, so I shouldn’t be surprised you can’t see the conflict.
Quadriplegics can’t procreate. Should they not be allowed to marry?
Menopausal women can’t procreate. Should they not be allowed to marry?
In my opinion the gay people are different. I never said I was disgusted, I said “validates the social disgust of the practice”. Get your head on strait sport and read more carefully.
yeah they can, sorry to tell you.
anyone with any sense could understand the context with which I was explaining this. Gay ‘marriage’ is a fraud. it cannot work, they cannot procreate, which is the primary purpose of marriage.
this is all about restricting the freedom of christians, and placing a gay sharia law on the country.
My bad – paraplegics? People paralyzed below the waist is what I was going for.
My point is that it’s clear that the ability to procreate has nothing to do with it, as previously stated. Should the church ban people who marry and don’t have children by their own choice?
Is it possible that marriage means different things to different people?
they can with artificial insemination.
the primary purpose of marriage is to raise a family. its been that way throughout history. gays cannot procreate, therefore their ‘family’ is a fraud, as is their marriage.
you want to throw out thousands of years of history for some made-up ‘right’ that has never existed anywhere else. what you want is a radical change of our culture…and you don’t care about the effects upon society or children, or anyone else.
Is this the “natural law” to which I’ve been reading about in the various comments?
Perhaps the primary purpose of YOUR marriage is to raise a family. And the primary purpose for most of us. But I have many straight friends who are only interested in companionship and not in raising a family. Is their marriage a fraud as well?
Homosexuality counters that of natural law. The constitution supports natural law.
the point is through history gay marriage is unsustainable. all they can do is recruit more children to their cause…oh and gay marriage helps the breakdown of traditional marriage, which makes children more vulnerable…convenient isn’t it??
most of them will change their mind. whereas gays cannot change their plumbing…
Extending human life through medicine counters natural law too. Are you as adamant against medical advances as you are against gay marriage?
longhorn734
Here is the definition for you. Study up on it. You may come out a wiser person.
Natural law or the law of nature is a theory that posits the existence of a law whose content is set by nature and that therefore has validity everywhere. ] The phrase natural law is sometimes opposed to the positive law of a given political community, society, or nation-state, and thus can function as a standard by which to criticize that law. In natural law jurisprudence, on the other hand, the content of positive law cannot be known without some reference to the natural law (or something like it). Used in this way, natural law can be evoked to criticize decisions about the statutes, but less so to criticize the law itself. Some use natural law synonymously with natural justice or natural right although most contemporary political and legal theorists separate the two.
The No on 8 people don’t understand that traditional Marriage supports healthy relationships for children to grow up in. There are lower rates of; crime, drug abuse, suicide, run away, and pregnancies when kids grow up in a home with a Father and a Mother in traditional gender roles. They clam that half of traditional marriages end in divorce. True some marriages fail, but most stay together to raise the children. Kids do much better when they have a female Mom and a male Dad role model. Why can’t the No on 8 people leave us church going traditional families alone? I think they are a bit upset the black and Hispanic Obama voters voted to pass prop. 8. God bless them! They value the traditional family way of life. It brings up healthy kids who will be productive and contribute to society.
Try again sport. Read the above
So being gay is not a choice anymore? Which is it?
yes they do…its one of the main reasons they want gay ‘marriage’ …destroys traditional marriage making children more vulnerable, and makes their recruitment easier!
– right4life
Nope, I said discrimination is illegal, but as usual, since you can’t address what I said, you twist my words into something you can attack.
– right4life
You have not. You have provided information that didn’t address the question I asked. If, in your mind, that is ‘ample documentation’, then you’re incapable of an honest discussion on this or any issue. It’s the sort of arguments I’d expect from someone at Daily Kos. Based on prior attempts to debate you on numerous issues, I didn’t expect any different though.
where do you get that? you were talking about your straight friends..
Homosexuality is not natural. How plain do I need to make it for you.
according to the gays, firing a gay pastor is DISCRIMINATION..quoting the bible om homosexuality is DISCRIMINATION…we get the picture
uh yeah right…and your documentation for anything is??? please. this is laughable.
Homosexual bigotry;
See my post #333…347…352…357…364
DISCRIMINATION IS NATURAL LAW.
We can not survive for one day without it.
I’m sorry, but the state isn’t deciding hetero marriage is irrational prejudice, it’s deciding that gays should be allowed to marry. Nothing is out the door, for the hundredth time, the gay marriages that have already occurred haven’t brought about the end times.
Also, I don’t care if you 4th century sensibilities are offended. Grow up, realize that gay sex has nothing to do with you, and let people enjoy the same rights and privileges that the rest of us do.
Yashmak, digshot, and Omu,
Why won’t you answer my questions?
You continue to claim that you oppose polygamy and other forms of marriage, yet you offer NO argument against them OTHER than the fact that they are currently illegal (which is earth shatteringly illogical).
I want to know why you oppose polygamy, etc? Please answer.
They are discriminatory. They are social bigots.
We are being discriminatory.
Natural law Digshot Natural law
if the butt-bandits continue to demonstrate their deviance and utterly grotesque behavior at folsom st fairs and on the beaches of cape cod, they will continue to outrage society and soon will be persecuted. they are a threat to society, bringing the world aids, and they continue to act as if this is not a homosexual disease over 20 years later. guess what, if you have unprotected gay sex, you stand a big chance of getting aids, and black men who have unprotected homosexual sex seems particularly susceptible as many are so stupid they believe if they have sex with women also, they aren’t gay and hence can’t get aids. then they pass this on to their female partners. but the absolute fact is that if you eliminate homosexual sex, introveinous drugs use, women who have sex with gay men, the aids epidemic is about as prolific as the leprosy plague. so please quit telling me to feel sorry for aids victims, only the wives of these gay morons are at all worthy of our pity
and opposing that will be considered discrimination. please.
yeah like I care what some FASCIST thug gay (or gay supporter) says. why don’t you grow sonny boy? and learn that the world doesn’t revolve around your gay sensibilities. get a clue, moron.
The insanity has spread to Colorado:
Burning Book of Mormon on church doorstep
crickets Digshot more crickets
Polygamy would be a redefinition of marriage, and would have repercussions far and wide throughout our society and economy. Marital law, family law, inheritance law, divorce law, etc., are all premised on two individuals entering into a marriage contract. Would employers and health care providers be forced to cover a man’s five wives? Will children of polygamists have multiple mothers and fathers in the eyes of the law? In a polygamist divorce, do the kids go with the departing wife, or stay with the rest of the family?
Legalizing polygamy would require a ridiculous overhaul of just about every facet of American law, which is impractical. That’s setting aside all of the social problems and crimes typically associated with polygamy like incest, pedophelia, and sexual assault.
When gays marry, they need no such exceptions or reworkings. Gay couples will fit into the marital system the exact same way that straight couples, do.
That’s why.
I’m not arguing for anything but equality under the law.
So defensive….
BS. some pigs are more equal than others.
this isn’t ‘equality’ its discrimination against christians and christianity. get a clue.
and of course you refuse to acknowledge that this ‘equality’ means that polygamy/polyandry should be legal..and so should pedophilia.
what do you think gay marriage is??? DUHHHHH
we have that same problem now with a lesbian, who is not the mother or even ‘wife’ getting visitation rights over X-partner’s child…
your stupidity is stunning.
NATURAL LAW sport
Easy with the use of “boy”…
I have the constitutional right under natural law, to discriminate against gays.
#
I don’t have to address the issue of the polygamy. It has nothing to do with my support of gay marriage. This is an entirely simple, simple concept and yet you flat out refuse to accept it because if you did, you’d lose the thin veil you hide your horrible bigotry under.
true…but turnabout is fair play
the entire homosexual movement is based upon bigotry and hatred towards christians…as we’ve seen with these riots…
What on earth are you talking about? It want to talk about nature and homosexuality – let’s do just that! You know homosexual sex has been documented in many thousands of animals and even insects. You know it’s existed for long as heterosexual sex. It’s not just a product of human “perversion”.
Damn!
You beat me to it!
Good for you!
Keep on keeping on.
You’re truly a bizarre character, right4life.
The gay movement is based upon securing equal rights for gay people. It’s about stopping the treatment of gays as second class citizens. The only thing standing in the way of this is Christianity. Christians have made gay people the enemy, it’s not the other way around. Most gays (like most Americans) are Christians and most of them don’t want to have to fight a religion. You are the one that is forcing them into this fight.