The insane rage of the same-sex marriage mob
My first syndicated column of the week today chronicles the insane rage of the anti-Prop. 8 mob that’s not on your newspaper front pages or nightly news. The lawsuits are piling up: “Four Bay Area counties are the latest to join the legal fight to try to stop state Proposition 8, a ban on same-sex marriage in California that voters approved Nov. 4. The Board of Supervisors for Alameda, Marin, San Mateo and Santa Cruz counties have approved joining a lawsuit filed in the California Supreme Court by the cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles and Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties. The lawsuit is one of six cases filed directly in the state high court in San Francisco to challenge the Proposition 8.” California AG Jerry Brown wants fast action. The buzz over potential judicial recalls is building. Meantime, the anti-Prop. 8 mob is plotting its next action: “Day Without a Gay.” And the latest on the witch hunt against the Mormon Church is here.
***
The insane rage of the same-sex marriage mob
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2008
Before election day, national media hand-wringers forged a wildly popular narrative: The Right was, in the words of New York Times’ columnist Paul Krugman, gripped by “insane rage.” Outbreaks of incivility (some real, but mostly imagined) were proof positive of the extremist takeover of the Republican Party. The cluck-cluckers and tut-tutters shook in fear.
But when the GOP took a beating on Nov. 4, no mass protests ensued. No nationwide boycotts erupted. Conservatives took their lumps and began the peaceful post-defeat process of self-flagellation, self-analysis, and self-autopsy. In fact, there’s only one angry mob gripped by “insane rage” in the wake of campaign 2008: The mob of left-wing, same-sex marriage activists incensed at their defeat in California. Voters there approved a traditional marriage initiative, Proposition 8, by 52-48.
Instead of introspection and self-criticism, however, the sore losers who opposed Prop. 8 have responded with threats, fists, and blacklists.
That’s right. Activists have published an “Anti-Gay Black List” of Prop. 8 donors on the Internet. If the tables had been turned and Prop. 8 proponents created such an enemies’ list, everyone in Hollywood would be screaming “McCarthyism” faster than you can count to eight. A Los Angeles restaurant whose manager made a small donation to the Prop. 8 campaign has been besieged nightly by hordes of protesters who have disrupted the business, intimidated patrons, and brought employees there to tears. In fear for their jobs and their lives, workers at El Coyote Mexican Café pooled together $500 to pay off the bullies.
Scott Eckern, a beleaguered artistic director at the California Musical Theatre, was forced to resign over his $1,000 donation to the Prop. 8 campaign. The director of the Los Angeles Film Festival, Rich Raddon, is next on the chopping block after the anti-Prop. 8 mob discovered that he had also contributed to the Yes on 8 campaign. Calls have been pouring in for his firing.
Over the past two weeks, anti-Prop. 8 organizers have targeted Mormon, Catholic, and evangelical churches. Sentiments like this one, found on the anti-Prop.8 website “JoeMyGod,” are common across the left-wing blogosphere: “Burn their f—ing churches to the ground, and then tax the charred timbers.” Thousands of gay-rights demonstrators stood in front of the Mormon temple in Los Angeles shouting “Mormon scum.” The Mormon headquarters in Salt Lake City received threatening letters containing an unidentified powder. Religious-bashing protesters filled with hate decried the “hate” at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church in Orange County, Calif. Vandals defaced the Calvary Chapel in Chino Hills, Calif., because church members had collected Prop. 8 petitions. One worshiper’s car was keyed with the slogans “Gay sex is love” and “SEX;” another car’s antenna and windshield wipers were broken.
In Carlsbad, Calif., a man was charged with punching his elderly neighbors over their pro-Prop. 8 signs. In Palm Springs, a videographer filmed unhinged anti-Prop. 8 marchers who yanked a large cross from the hands of 69-year-old Phyllis Burgess and stomped on it.
In San Francisco, Christians evangelizing in the Castro district needed police protection after the same-sex marriage mob got physical and hounded them off the streets.
Enthusiastically shooting themselves in the foot, anti-Prop. 8 boycotters are now going after the left-wing Sundance Film Festival because it does business in Mormon-friendly Utah. Also targeted: Cinemark Theaters across the country. The company’s CEO, Alan Stock, donated just under $1,000 to the traditional marriage measure. Never mind that Cinemark theaters are hosting the new biopic about gay icon Harvey Milk. They must pay for the sins of the company head who dared to exercise his political free speech!
Corporate honchos, church leaders, and small donors alike are in the same-sex marriage mob’s crosshairs, all unfairly demonized as hate-filled bigots by bona fite hate-filled bigots who have abandoned decency in pursuit of “equal rights.” One wonders where Barack Obama (himself an opponent of Proposition 8 and an opponent of gay marriage) is as this insane rage rages on. Soul-Fixer, Nation-Healer, where art thou?
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.
Trackbacks
- Obama, White Guilt, Pay Back Time! « Riggword Weblog
- Gay Marriage? | Nicholas Fitzgerald
- Traditional Values Still Fighting On Even Under an Obama Presidency « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT
- Arrested for “erotic driving”? « Mark Epstein
- Take Our Country Back
- Democracy speaks… « Welcome to Lindy’s Blog: Where Mom is Always Right
- Homosexuals in California Scapegoat Mormons for Prop 8 Loss « The Sisyphus Files
- Jesus is Lord, A Worshipping Christian’s Blog » Blog Archive » “The Insane Rage of the Same-Sex Marriage Mob” by Michelle Malkin
- Why Can’t We Accept The "Will of The People"? | Pirates! Man Your Women!
- Militant homosexuality and anti-Prop 8 efforts « Northern Thoughts And Reflections
- Michelle Malkin » Gagging pro-lifers in New York City
- What About the Right to Choose Where You Protest? | BipolarNation.com
- Prop 8 should not have happened — The Opposite of Jim Bunning
- What I’m reading instead of working… : Pursuing Holiness
- If McCain Had Won - « Kerfuffles and Flourishes
- Angry Gay Crowds/Gangs Reject Laws - Attack And Intimidate | BigMouthFrog
- Todays Links | The Second Opinion Today
- Moderate Blogger » To Prop. 8 Opponents: Your Not Doing It Right
- GayPatriot » Will the Juvenilia of the Prop 8 Sore Losers Ever Cease?
- Random Jottings
- Wizbang
- WO’s Daily Roundup | Without Objection
- BelchSpeak » Post Topic » EHarmony Settles With Gays; Makes Website for Gay Hookups
- Michelle Malkin » eHarmony forced to offer same-sex dating services
- GayPatriot » Michelle takes on the insane rage of the anti-Prop 8 Rallies
- Sierra Faith
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Michelle on the “insane rage” of the anti-Prop 8 mobs
- Jesus is Lord, A Worshipping Christian’s Blog » Blog Archive » eHarmony Forced to Offer Same-Sex Dating Services
- Prop 8 Goes to Court! Voting; why bother? « Riggword Weblog
- BizzyBlog » Couldn’t Help But Comment ….. (112008, Morning)
- Political Opinion « Capitalist View
- KEEPING THEM HONEST - by Katy Grimes » Blog Archive » Coming Soon to eHarmony: Adam & Steve
- GayPatriot » Gay Activists Need to Learn from Conservatives
- Separation of Church and Hate « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT
- Enough Already | America Needs Me
- Culture War Continues in California « The Right Knight
- Michelle Malkin » Anti-Prop. 8 mob watch: L.A. Film Festival director resigns over donations
- Tolerance in action — San Francisco style! : Stop The ACLU
- Jon Swift
- Let Us Remember the True Meaning of Thanksgiving Before It’s Abolished - The Political Hotwire
- Part of the job description « Datechguy’s Blog
- Michelle Malkin » Who will make the other Prop. 8 musical?
- Liberal Elites to People of Faith: “Please ignore your religion.” | Without Objection
- Prop 8 Protests Still Ineffective When Set to Music : Jenn Q. Public
- The New Civil Rights Movement » Dear Michelle Malkin: Stop Calling Gays Insane and We’ll Stop Calling You A Bigot. Well, If You Stop Calling Everyone Else A Bigot Too.
- Above the Hate: Below the Propaganda | Maine Gay Bars
- Once is an Event. Twice is a Coincidence. Three or more times is a pattern. « Teh Resistance Blog
- New York Times: Thumbs Up to Prop 8 Protesters Strategy! « Jane Q. Republican
- Skewering the Religious Right: Not Another Word on Gay Marriage Until They Execute an Adulterer » A Couple Things » A couple things about politics, sports, travel, and other stuff.
- My Pledge « Sockpuppet Politic
- Militant Homosexual KGB “Sleeper” Agents Described Over 25 Years Ago « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)
- GayPatriot » Left-wing Logic Justifies Gay-baiting
- Michelle Malkin » This is what mob rule looks like
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Proposition 8
Riehl World View
» What Obama Should Have Done For Thanksgiving
Legal Insurrection
» Thanks, Global WarmingStop The ACLU
» Oops! Now New Zealand NIWA Accused Of Faking DataRiehl World View
» Some Thanks From Around The BlogsRiehl World View
» Climate Change: BBC Didn't Hide The Story?Riehl World View
» BBC, KGB, Oh My: More On Climate Change Fraud
Californians against Hate. A euphemism for, “We hate everything that doesn’t agree with our demands”.
Homosexuals are among the most hateful, bitter, and angry people, and they thrive in gangs, witness the current news.
It’s because they know within themselves that they are forcefully living against the natural order of things and therefore against our Creator God’s revealed will. And because they are torn apart so deep within themselves, they turn on those who confront them with their sin.
If Jesus were walking among us today in the flesh they would rip Him asunder all over again. It’s Him they truly hate for what He says, but He is not here so they turn their hatred on those who follow His teachings.
Speaking of bigotry, Omu. Have you come to terms with yours? You should be ashamed of yourself. Or are you still in denial?
Omu just got slapped down when he forgot that Prop 8 passed by the same percentage as Obama won.
Chance are, he won’t be back on this thread, but will spout his stupidity elsewhere.
If Liberals didn’t have double standards, they’d have no standards at all!
Stand corrected, thank you. I’m half brain-dead in the morning myself!
Also see this video
Yep
very true…the way things are going though, He’ll be coming back soon, and they can give it their best shot..but I doubt they’ll get vey far
Patrick McIlheran of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel writes a great analysis of this topic. Some highlights:
Starbucks opens really early in the morning and they all have the opening shift. I’m pretty sure they all have some kind of meeting every morning and try to figure out their line of attack for the day. Its funny how they all kind of troll on the same topics every day.
I think watershed recruited a bunch of flunkies to hit on this blog. He’ll be back soon enough under another handle.
“Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of congress; but I repeat myself.” …Mark Twain
This is the Montgomery Bus Boycott on steroids. It’s going to be in your face until the discrimination ends. This is a civil rights issue, pure and simple. You’re going to lose. Deal with it.
@96 I don’t mean to stire up a hornets nest, but this is why I don’t go to church or fallow christianity, alot of Christians seem to have this…
“Oh well let it get worse so we can go be with JESUS!” I can’t understand that logic. I have faith there is a god and we are judged in death for our actions. But I’m in no praticular hurry to die, or be “taken up” I don’t see the logic in this. Oh yes you get to see Jesus and what not, but what about all the others who will die, what of Children who won’t get to see life or the fact the human race will not exsist anymore?
I’m sorry but I can’t back such thinking, we have free will so insted of ho humming get out there and fix things! I would like to see the human race in the starts and a legacy that lasts for tens of thousands of years. Just letting things go to hell in a hand basket so I can go to a gold city just doesn’t appeal to me.
omu said:”because people are evenly divided on the issue.”
Kalifornicators are nearly divided on the issue. Evenly divided would be 50/50. But of course, your liberal math means: More than your share of anything you feel deserving of is your equal share.
I lost track of what you were tryng to say. Who is going to lose?
And what is the Montgomery Bus Boycott? Did they compete against Greyhound and went out of business? I dont know who they are.
California appears to have less and less rule of law within it’s borders. Angry mobs seem to be able to do whatever they like and no one does anything. I’m recalling the Marine recruitment intimidation that was not intercepted or controlled either. The golden state has become a prominent example of how NOT to run a state. Hey Arnold, are you paying attention?
silly f—–t, d–ks are for ch–ks.
This is the Montgomery Bus Boycott on steroids.
You’re going to lose. Deal with it.
no, it’s not. These, er, people, have exactly the same rights as everyone else….
Ah-nold is too busy cheerin’ ‘em on to chastise them the way they deserve to be. Where are all those freakin’ hate crimes laws when you need ‘em?
Those Christians in the Castro may have been forgiving, but I am not. That attack cemented for me the idea that they really are willing to take it as far as murder. Michelle is right, they are the bona fide hate-filled bigots and they have long since abandoned decency, though I question whether it’s for special rights as opposed to equality.
Hate crime laws are special rights, folks. Equality means these guys who committed the assaults we’re reading about should be charged under the same laws for assaulting a group of people solely based on their religious beliefs. Equality!
first, children under the age of accountability, whatever age that is, are His.
Christians aren’t in a particular hurry to die either. the rapture would be a wondeful thing, and it will happen, sooner or later. christians try to live as though they could die the next minute, or be raptured at any minute…and try to be ready for either occurance. you never when you’re going to die.
the human race will not end. the world itself will not end, it will be a passing of one age to another. people, as we are today, will survive the tribulation, the apocalypse. true many will die, and many will suffer a terrible fate, but that is their choice.
and you have to remember, we don’t ‘let’ things happen…He is in charge of all this…He has a plan, and He places whom He wishes upon the thrones of the nations. we are enjoined to be salt, do our best, this is why the gay marriage ban passed for instance…but *we* have little control oer world events…and the nations are aligning as Ezekiel foretold. there is nothing anyone can do to stop this, or hurry it along.
I’m in no hurry to die, and certainly not a pacifism-at-any-cost Christian. There is no rule about blind pacifism. We have a God-given right to defend ourselves, others, and our nation against unjust aggressors – even if we have to use lethal force.
Yeah that whole democracy and peoples will thing is soooo 20th centry.
I know and work with many gays. Having started my career in San Francisco is was fairly normal even back in the ’70s. Civil unions should be enough. Marriage has a biblical connotation which is as others have said, not a democracy. What is happening here, somewhat unwittingly even by the perpetrators, is the left is tearing down traditions and institutions while they have nothing to take their place. Where does that leave us? Marriage is a stake in the ground. Where do we draw the line once that door is opened? Polygamy? Man-boy? Where? A gay business associate of mine I first met 30 years ago in San Francisco has lived in an “open” menage a trois for the last 20 years. I can tell you what he anticipates: A gay, poligamous marriage. How does a state or federal government deal with the legal complexities. Who gets the kids?
If it wasn’t so damaging to our core culture, it would be riotous.
If you start changing the meaning of marriage, there is no good reason to stop changing it because the same arguments apply to all the different types.
Those who do not believe in our GOD in the first place just love to tell us what we need to believe. They miss Joshua and the Judges along with Abraham, Moses and King David Big Time.
Yes we do forgive the repentant sinner and rejoice at does the Host of Heaven itself. In the mean time we plan on not giving up either Life or Faith. Sorry sweeties. Enjoy eternity.
Joshua fell the Wall of Jericho.
AJ et al – Who said anything about sugarcoating or whitewashing homosexual behavior? I simply don’t not think it appropriate to speak in graphic terms because most of us here are adults and we know what it is, thank you. You know as well as I that some people get too carried away on this site. Don’t you think the trolls monitor this site because Michelle has influence? Go ahead and give the other side ammunition for dismissing us if you want, I can’t stop you, wouldn’t try. I’m just saying that a good argument, well crafted and well written does more to deliver a crushing blow to the other side than talking about poop.
Dead on iowavette…
If the government wants to say I have a civil union with my wife, which is secularly no different than two same sex partners, FINE. The state can call it whatever they darn well please. I DON’T CARE.
My faith and church say I am married. A man and woman who in a religious setting make their vows to their God are in a marriage. I reject the premise that the secular exercise performed by the government is a marriage. It’s more like a legal contract. So be it.
Render to Caesar…..but ignore him whenever you can.
Also, I am cooking turkey as well for the relatives that eat it, because my loved ones are more important than my nutritional preferences. For the rest of us, I make a pastry-encrusted stuffing and seitan roll. I refuse to cook that Tofurkey stuff, its disgusting.
with a little help..
the man (?) with the sword…the Captain of the Lord’s hosts
In what way?
There is no civil right to change the definition of words. There is no civil right to “marry” a person of one’s own gender, and it is in fact not possible to do so because marriage, both by traditional and by truly legal definition, can only occur between people of opposite gender.
Same-sex couples already have the right to enter into domestic partnerships in Kalifornia and enjoy the exact same legal benefits that married people have. They’re just pissed off that it isn’t referred to as ‘marriage.’ The civil rights argument is specious.
In New Zealand, all marriages are now “partnerships” to include gay partnerships. They simply let the churches decide what they consider a valid marriage in the religous sense. I think thats a great solution.
Why do we even have mens’ and women’s restrooms? Isn’t this discriminatory? How about one for all? Women are protected from the presence of males while in the powder room. Why shouldn’t we all be protected in the powder room and open a third “restroom” for OTHERS. Should anyone really have to use the powder room while some participant from the Folsom Street Fair lusts and acts out? This 2% of the population is clearly more deranged and dangerous than anyone suspected.
How about GLAT City, USA, somewhere in the wilderness so they can do what they want. Let’s form the QIA, like the BIA, and move them to a reservation.
The more of this egregious behavior we see, the tougher the future is for “them”.
that will not work…as we have seen you cannot give these people an inch, else they will take a mile…and all our freedom of religion with it.
CA had civil unions…its never enough…why? because the goal is to silence all who disagree, especially christians.
A religious disagreement is not the only reason for preventing gay marriage. There are historical and sociological reasons as well. Nations have declined when the sexual license associated with the gay lifestyle is rampant. Children are damaged by the lack of heterosexual parenting regardless of how loving the homosexual parents portend to be. Sure, the religious reasons are important, but those reasons stemmed from historical and sociological experiments. Supposedly, human beings learn from history, but when the liberals suppress history or distort its meaning, we all lose.
Please forgive me guys… this is soooo off topic…
Have you ever tried a Quorn roast (they sell them at Whole Foods)? I was a vegetarian for three years, and you’re right… Tofurky is revolting, but Quorn is a pretty good product, unless you’re vegan.
And now back to our regularly scheduled program….
So, by that logic, if there was a cure for autism, cystic fibrosis, etc., parents shouldn’t use it because “God put it there and wants it to be there for whatever reason.” ??
yeah…riiight!
Just try to tell me that you’d say that if we were talking about YOUR child?
This really is bizarre. It seems like social conservatives are equating social conservatism with homosexuality. You are all basically saying “Look at us neocons, we lost and we’re dealing with it. The gays lost and they’re going nuclear. We’re so much better than them”. Eh, reality check: conservatism is a set of opinions, homosexuality is an immutable orientation. You may have lost an election, but that doesn’t change your life in any massive way. You haven’t lost any rights. Gay people have just had the right to marry stripped from them – OF COURSE THEY’RE ANGRY. What do you expect? How would you react if one of your rights was taken away? How about we put the right to bear arms on a ballot in New England and see how gun totin’ conservatives react when they’re right is revoked (I should note that gun ownership is trivial in comparision to the right to marry the person you love, but my example will have to do).
Thank God the ERA never passed! If it had then the law would NOT be able to distinguish gender so any language concerning a requirement for one of each gender then WOULD BE the same as the ban on inter-racial marriage.
Gay marriage is not a right. It is not in the Bill of Rights. It never will be. Because it is not a crucial right. It is a convenient privelege. Repealing the 2nd Amendment will take a lot more than casting a ballot. The fact that someone mentions that as an example shows how little they know about how and why this country was founded.
The people have spoken with their vote.
Marriage has been a traditional bond between a man and a woman for thousands of years.
Gay people are looking for a reason to be discriminated against. Attacking someone else because they are upset is anarchy and if they do it to the wrong person there will be payback. Unfortunately all they seem to be targeting is elderly people who have a hard time physically defending themselves. Real tough. A mark of true honor.
If we change the traditional meaning of marriage for less than 3 percent of the population then we might as well let pedophiles marry kids, polygamists be accepted and anything of the kind. Sounds logical to some people here…
There is no right to marry in the U.S. Constitution (unlike the right to bear arms, which is explicitly defined), and there is certainly no right (explicit or otherwise) to marry a person of one’s own gender!!
You want to lay blame?? It belongs squarely at the door of the Kalifornia Supreme Court, which gave the Kalifornia electorate the finger and made up a non-existent right out of whole cloth.
On November 19th, 2008 at 12:02 pm, Omu said:
You have a subconscious ability to describe your comments with great accuracy.
What a collectivist bubble you live in.
The first is arguable (one could argue it is a philosophy), the latter even more so (a tiresome debate that has played out ad infinitum in science, philosophical, and religious circles).
To which neocons do you refer? I don’t see Rummy Rumsfeld around here, do you?
Debating for Dummies Tip: At least comprehend the other side before you attempt to engage them in debate. You come across as a petulant teenager screaming nonsense at their parents.
AniMEL, even setting aside possible murder, political issues, “gay marriage” and whatever, I think the one of most wrong things about the Castro district incident is the idea that people can chase other citizens away, like they got some kind of gang “turf” they own.
Likewise, setting aside the civil right for folks to go where they want on public land, it’s just an incredible lack of basic human civility. Even if it weren’t against the law you just don’t do that to people.
It is a shame that the civil rights movement has come to the point where a behavior, no matter how perverse, is some type of right.
If you carry the logic of the homosexual community to its limits, then there is no such thing as morality, decency, loyalty or any of the other characteristics of the best of humanity. The gay movement is pushing anarchy, and, unfortunately, if they achieve anarchy, then anarchy will eventually be replaced by a dictatorship of some type. If that dictatorship has an Islamic influence, then the gays will find the gallows waiting.
The 2nd amendment ins in the constitution, marriage of any kind is not. Leaving it to the states to decide. Usualy through the legislature or some kind of vote.
Gays lost this vote and are now using nazi tactics to try to FORCE thier views on the rest of the state.
YET. Wait a year. A marxist like Obama will show his hand quickly. I would also note that the gays are trying to shut down dissent using violence, intimidation, and a huge propoganda machine in the MSM. Sorta like, you know, the nazis did.
How many times do we have to slap you with this before you get it through your head. Gay people lost nothing in this vote. There is no right to marry, nor is there a right for an insignificant minority of people to be able to change the definition of marriage.
Gay people have the same rights and same restrictions as I do on marriage. They lost nothing.
On November 19th, 2008 at 1:39 am, Send_Me said:
Is their attributing shame on others nothing more than a shield from their own conscience at work?
—————————————
I’m thinking “yes”.
Personally, I didn’t care one way or the other about gays being able to “marry” We have a ton of bigger issues to deal with here in CA and the nation.
But now I’m really ticked off. What happened to the will of the people. I haven’t felt represented by any of our public servants in years. Now I want to go out of my way to stomp this “uprising” into the ground. I have officially become a “hateful homophobe” because of the criminal reactions to the will of the people.
I paid six figures in Fed and State taxes last year and that number is going up considerably, while my property values and income are going in the opposite direction.
I’m getting to the breaking point but there is no where to turn. Things are going to turn very ugly before they get better. Those of us who have stood by silently while the minority is burning and looting will rise up and when we do it will be huge.
There is absolutely no evidence that homosexuality is an immutable orientation or a genetic trait (If it were so then the gay community would at some point cease to exist because no responsible set of parents wants a gay child). It is more likely that something went wrong in the behavioral patterning in early childhood.
Also, there are groups, similar to alcoholics anonymous, that are there to help people caught up in the gay lifestyle get out of that lifestyle. Sure, as with the case with alcoholics anonymous, some will fail to free themselves from their addiction, but some will also succeed. (When the American Psychiatric Association decided to change homosexual orientation from a form of disease to a normal state, they did the gays no favors as they have no requirement to seek help.)
Omu, as others here have also stated, there is NO constitutional right to marry exspressed or infered. As such, it ia a state matter.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
The people voted NO!
What about the rights of the “gay-gay”? …those who are born gay but have an attraction to the other-gendered? Like the Lesbian trapped inside a man’s body? Who is championing their rights???
and if they had voted yes, I would have shook my head and done, nothing. Because thats what the people would have decided. Under the 10th amendment.
Can someone answer this for me?
If CA’s constitution is being amended because the people of CA just voted to amend it, then Prop. 8 is, by its very definition, constitutional…
…so exactly how can a constitution be unconstitutional??
This is a symptom of our schools where nobody is a “loser”
“Everybody gets a trophy or a medal in the sports contest”
“Everybody gets and A on the test”
“We don’t want to hurt anybody’s feeling or self esteem”
Nobody learns to be a good loser or good winner. Life would be very boring without the highs and the lows experienced in winning and defeat.
Sad
there are a lot of people that have left the homosexual lifestyle, and would call you a liar. there is nothing ‘immutable’ about homosexuality…
again you spout BS, but you cannot back it up
You’re missing the point of my example. I was not making a legal point, I was making a point about rights. If you want to dance around my example because you have no way to refute it, then that’s your choice, but I want to just correct the record while I have the chance.
What’s interesting, Pub, is that the Dr. (Robert Spitzer) who led the movement to have it declassified as a mental illness in 1973 conducted a 2001 study which determined that homosexulaity is not a fixed condition. It was found that, through therapy, those who wanted to leave the lifestyle could do so.
As you can well imagine, the findings sent those who did not want to change into the usual unhinged rage at Dr. Spitzer and those who did choose to change.
Yup, this was documented in the 2001 study (that I’ve noted in my prev comment) by the leading expert in homosexuality.
You’re really stretching the truth there. “A lot” of people? What are you talking about? The horrific reparation therapy doesn’t work most of the time, with people either “lapsing” back into being gay or just becoming celibate (which isn’t changing your orientation). As a matter of fact, even the Catholic Church acknowledges it is immeutable (and the Catholic Church is a homophobic institution).
I was also talking about rights. I directly quoted your example. You did not refute my rebuttal.
Silly, sily poor confused Emu.
First, your example was moronic, in that you are comparing a Constitutional Right to nothing.
Second, for somoene who continues to insist that gays have lost some right here, when you know that is not the case, the the height of idiocy.
Get off your juvinile kick about lost rights and we can have a debate. unil then, you are nothing more than a mindless idiot, repeating discredited talking points.
Black Lists are racist.
You’re just distracting the issue. I never made a legal point. You guys are all in a huff, claiming that all gay people are violent terrorists harrassing old women (ONE example of this poor behaviour, and there were multiple marches in every singe state that were entirely peaceful. Funny that these assassination pieces are so selective with their info, right?) and that us conservatives are oh-so-great because we’re not protesting even though our politicians lost. My point is that losing an election and losing your rights are two different things. Just try to take away gun rights and, even if it’s by public vote (and you know gun rights would be revoked by New England states if they had the chance) and see how people react.
No, you are an idiot!
The states have the right to impose restrictions on marriage, such as age requirements, laws against poligamy, laws against cousins marrying…ect.
The voters said No, twice.
Is there something physically wrong with you that will not allow you to see when you have lost an arguement? Do you have to keep bringing up the same discredited points?
Omu, you debate like a child.
Eh, gay marriage was legal in California. Did you miss that? The supreme court ruled it unconstitutional to deny gays the right to get married. They had that right and the voters in California stripped it from them. Stop pretending this right didn’t exist, it did. 18,000 same sex couples were married under it.
Gay marriage was voted down. The will of the people was overturned TEMPORARILY by judicial fiat. It was then voted down AGAIN.
Gays marriage was never a right in Califirnia, although it was legal for a short period of time.
No rights were taken away. None.
Get it now???
Really? How can you claim that something is a ‘right,’ yet also claim that you’re not a legal point? Rights are legally defined, and cannot legally be taken away. Calling marriage a right, therefore, is making a legal point.
Lad, you have no sense of logic or consistency at all; it used to be legal to own slaves in many states, now it isn’t. Your argument is moot.
oh, re-he-heallly?
You accuse me of illogic and then make such a disconnected point like this?
Everyone keeps saying that no one “lost” any rights in California. I was merely reminding these people that the right for same sex couples to get married had existed in California before it was overturned by the people. Ergo: A right was taken from people.
Even more problematic for him: bringing up a court order and saying it doesn’t involve a “legal point”. Absolutely totally inconsistent.
OMU: Okay then, exactly what part of the constitution ensures gays can marry??? Remember YOU compared it directrly to the rights under the 2nd amendment.
And it was once illegal for Blacks and Women to vote, or for Blacks to use the same restrooms.
And traditions generally suck.
You are going to lose. Someday people will look back on Prop 8 the same way they do school segregation and Jim Crow.
Your time is over.
So what? That has no relation to this issue. You argument seems to be “because I say so”
blockquote>You are going to lose. Someday people will look back on Prop 8 the same way they do school segregation and Jim Crow.
Your time is over.
actually your time is over…you’re just too stupid to know it.
we’ve been winning on this issue, whenever its tried…oh and christianity has survived 2,000 years of morons like you
Not an accusation, it’s a statement of fact. If you’re going to use the rationale that “well, it was legal for awhile” there’s a long, long, long list of things that fall under that rationale. If you accept them all, then you are being logical and consistent. Otherwise, you’ve just painted yourself into a corner.
So, you’re defending the denial of marriage rights to gays … by saying that traditions generally suck?
Yes, they will.
Omu: the only thing the CA supreme idiots court stripped was the right of CA voters to decide what they viewed as appropriate and what was not. Prop 22 passed at almost a 2-1 clip.
What happened in the interim (2000-2008) is the erosion of support because of the relentless loudmouthiness of the gay mob. Give it five years and put it to a vote again in CA and gay “marriage” will pass 52-48.
That is the endgayme of the gay mob. It’s somewhat akin to the practice of repeating a lie long enough and often enough and eventually people believe it’s true.
The activist judges in California who continue to create legislation from the judicial bench are simply hastening the slouch into Gomorrah.
no I’m not. you have put up nothing to back up your position, as usual. you think because you say it, its gospel
you’re a pathetic moron.
post your proof about the catholic position.
link
blah … blah … blah …
NEWS FLASH: The debate is over.
The people have spoken.
This is not the place to repeat the same arguments over and over and over and over
Scoreboard, stupid. Your party is dwindling as old white guys die out. You’re being regionalized (backwards-ass South) and marginalized everywhere else.
I’m a Christian too, dumbass.
Correct, R4L, America has rejected the demand to make marriage meaningless every time. It would be nice if we could have a national referedum and settle it once and for all.
sexual orientation is not immutable:
link
yeah thats why we won the gay marriage amendment in CA
right, a liberal christian…ie an oxymoron…so tell me ‘christian’
how could a good ‘christian’ like you vote for the most pro-abortion president in history? is it ‘christian’ to cut a hole in a babie’s head and suck the brains out??? 
And desisions like this contune to divide america. Forcing a liberal “paradise” will do nothing but create more division and end in a liberal dictatorship where only approved views are allowed. Even Omu can not provide a logical arguement for the reason why any marriage is a right. If it were a right, then under those same civil rights arguments, ANY type of marriage is a right. With no restrictions at all.
A question I often ask when somebody states they are a Christian, Eagle. It’s asked in a purely curious tone and not a snotty one at all: What makes you think you are a Christian?
Let me guess, you are one of those christians who think that you need to ignore all sins.
I try not to argue the semantics of the words, but marriage is a privilege, not a right. The word ‘right’ gets abused way too often by groups wishing to force their own initiative and opinions onto the majority. Trying to define a right as anything other than a legal point would be valid in a philosophy classroom, but not a court of law.
If marriage has become a right, the state owes me the fee I had to pay for the license.
If civil unions provided all the same privileges as marriage, would that satisfy these protesters? I doubt it.
Also, any “arguments” to the fact that their anger is justifiable and therefore an excuse for this behavior is no argument at all. A civilized society still holds an unruly mob accountable for their crimes regardless of the underlying passion they may feel.
I could really care less about their “anger”. What I want to see is the Californian government to wake up to the increasing threat these protests represent to many innocent civilians. The role of a governor is to enforce the law, not encourage delinquents into further displays of anarchy.
Self correction.
Certainly quite a few – if not most – people who got involved in homosexuality left normal sexual backgrounds. Married, had kids and got bored, then looked elsewhere for new & different sexual experiences.
You have been asked repeatedly to offer us proof that gay marriage is a right, Omu.
Either provide the proof or shut up!
OMU: Okay then, exactly what part of the constitution ensures gays can marry??? Remember YOU compared it directrly to the rights under the 2nd amendment. HELLOOOOOOOOOOO
Going to the gun show this weekend, going to buy a pistol just to p!ss of omu.
When it comes to civil rights, what the majority of Americans think is irrelevant. I’m sure if we had a referendum on Blacks getting equal rights before 1965 it would have lost, too.
These things should not even be put to a vote. And the courts will no doubt go about fixing this. In the meantime, it’s time to punish the bigots.
Slightly off-topic, but this is driving me NUTS!
PLEASE TAKE NOTE!
it’s = it is (a conjunction of two separate words.
its = belonging to it, which is one word.
PLEASE stop with the its/it’s abuse, it drives me CRAZY!
I can understand being upset about the violence and vandalism, which is never acceptable, but boycotts? How can you possibly be outraged by people refusing to support businesses that supported Prop 8? That is the most rational, sensible, effective form of protest there is.
Wait, I forgot who I’m dealing with. Boycotts for me, but not for thee!
What kind, I am looking to add to my arsenal as well?
We should give Omu a few more minutes since it takes time to go back to kos and ask about the constitutionality of gay marriage. Or he might actualy be reading the constitution for the first time.
By the way, R4L, you did know that link is a prank story, correct? It’s not a real news article.