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

1. #101
   On February 9th, 2009 at 9:44 am, vargas said:

   Mookie:

   More important than the business/private distinction others have tried to draw is that there is no evidence so far that Prop 8 supporters have used the donor list to commit violence or intimidate opponents. There has been evidence of people opposing Prop 8 doing so.

   sonofdy:

   Once again, you have managed to be aggressively wrong. Point out anywhere in this thread where Mookie used the word bigot. Instead of reflexively labelling people who disagree with you, you really ought to try reading what people have to say and engaging them on it.

2. #102
   On February 9th, 2009 at 9:48 am, sonofdy said:

   VARGAS. Oh please. You know exactly what i mean. Stop acting stupid. He may not say it but thats exactly what he thinks and if he wants to sweaten it up, then he is just being dishonest about it.

3. #103
   On February 9th, 2009 at 10:02 am, Danceswithdachshunds said:

   Has anyone checked the Generational Theft Act to see if any taxpayer money is going to these terrorists like it will to ACORN thugs?

4. #104
   On February 9th, 2009 at 10:04 am, sonofdy said:

   Lets ask mookie,

   Mookie, do you think it is bigoted to oppose gay marriage? To think it is wrong?

5. #105
   On February 9th, 2009 at 10:53 am, Cosmo said:

   This is just a shameless ploy by the NYT to increase readership by reaching out to new markets.

   They’ll be back to fabricating stories and pushing the liberal agenda as soon as subscriptions double from the current count of 87.

6. #106
   On February 9th, 2009 at 11:50 am, Mookie said:

   On February 9th, 2009 at 10:04 am, sonofdy said:

   Lets ask mookie,

   Mookie, do you think it is bigoted to oppose gay marriage? To think it is wrong?

   It depends on the reason. If you oppose it based on religious beliefs, no. If you oppose it because you hate gays, then yes, that makes you a bigot.

7. #107
   On February 9th, 2009 at 11:55 am, sonofdy said:

   It depends on the reason. If you oppose it based on religious beliefs, no. If you oppose it because you hate gays, then yes, that makes you a bigot.

   And if you believe it is wrong for reasons that have nothing to do with religon??

   IE the people voted???

8. #108
   On February 9th, 2009 at 12:07 pm, frostrt said:

   I personally draw the line between being able to marry legally, with all the rights (and responsibilities) that entails, and churches being coerced by law into marrying same-sex couples in direct opposition to their own teachings and beliefs.

   Now, as for tactics of intimidation, a boycott of a business is one thing. Harrassment and threats is where I draw the line (stop listening to the Dixie Chicks’ music, for example, if you want to, but don’t insult/threaten them).

9. #109
   On February 9th, 2009 at 12:17 pm, englishqueen01 said:

   If you oppose it based on religious beliefs, no. If you oppose it because you hate gays, then yes, that makes you a bigot.

   It’s great you make that distinction, but lots of folks – see the Prop. 8 opponents for a PRIME example – don’t.

10. #110
    On February 9th, 2009 at 12:28 pm, Mookie said:

    And if you believe it is wrong for reasons that have nothing to do with religon??

    IE the people voted???

    I’m not sure I understand. Does that mean you would approve of it if CA had voted against Prop. 8?

11. #111
    On February 9th, 2009 at 12:31 pm, frostrt said:

    On February 9th, 2009 at 12:28 pm, Mookie said:
    And if you believe it is wrong for reasons that have nothing to do with religon??

    IE the people voted???
    I’m not sure I understand. Does that mean you would approve of it if CA had voted against Prop. 8?

    ————————————-

    My guess is that he means that, once the vote has been taken and fairly tabulated, the majority vote should not be thwarted by tactics of intimidation/violence.

    If you’re still here, Snodfy, feel free to correct if I’m wrong,

12. #112
    On February 9th, 2009 at 12:37 pm, sonofdy said:

    frostrt has it right. I would have said, well that just proves californians are dumb, and moved on. But for exactly this reason, almost every liberal in the universe called me a bigot so sorry if you get lumped in with your fellows but too bad. Once the liberal side changes it tactics, I will. I am not bound by christian religous doctrine.

13. #113
    On February 9th, 2009 at 1:33 pm, vargas said:

    I’m impressed that you’ve met almost every liberal in the universe. You must be a very sociable person.

14. #114
    On February 9th, 2009 at 1:39 pm, Mookie said:

    On February 9th, 2009 at 12:37 pm, sonofdy said:

    frostrt has it right. I would have said, well that just proves californians are dumb, and moved on. But for exactly this reason, almost every liberal in the universe called me a bigot so sorry if you get lumped in with your fellows but too bad. Once the liberal side changes it tactics, I will. I am not bound by christian religous doctrine.

    You keep saying I’m a liberal, which amuses me. Why do you automatically assume that it’s only liberals who support gay marriage?

15. #115
    On February 9th, 2009 at 2:01 pm, sonofdy said:

    You keep saying I’m a liberal, which amuses me. Why do you automatically assume that it’s only liberals who support gay marriage?

    

16. #116
    On February 9th, 2009 at 2:53 pm, englishqueen01 said:

    Why do you automatically assume that it’s only liberals who support gay marriage?

    I have yet to meet a conservative who wasn’t, in reality, a CINO who supported what Prop. 8 opponents want.

17. #117
    On February 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pm, Mookie said:

    Why are you rolling your eyes? There are conservatives on this board that support gay marriage.

18. #118
    On February 9th, 2009 at 10:35 pm, frontierguy said:

    I know this thread is getting old, but have to ask. What about the people who do not want to see constant and unending litigation against schools, businesses and every other institution in the state. I am not convinced that schools will not be bullied into providing education about homosexuality to children. If I knew that that was not going to be the case, I could vote to allow gay marriage. We all know that liberal history points otherwise, there is no way that lawsuit after lawsuit will not be filed costing me more money. I wonder, if the ACLU had to repay the costs of their lawsuits in California, the state probably could pay out tax refunds.

    If people who vote against it are bigots (thought police anyone?) then there better be some re-education camps set up in the black and hispanic neighborhoods in California. This is going to be an interesting few years, liberal democrats are made up of diverse groups, many of whom really hate each other. It will be fun to watch the democrats across the nation eat each other.

19. #119
    On February 17th, 2009 at 3:14 am, Danceswithdachshunds said:

    I hope that Michelle picks up on Los Angeles City College getting sued by a Christian student for being shut up by his professor because he had the nerve to support Prop 8 in the classroom.

    It’s the classic libtard ‘free speech for me but not for thee!’ heading for court.

20. #120
    On February 17th, 2009 at 3:32 am, Danceswithdachshunds said:

    Mookie said:
    It depends on the reason. If you oppose it based on religious beliefs, no. If you oppose it because you hate gays, then yes, that makes you a bigot.

    Don’t lose sight of the fact that, inside the extremes, there are those of us who oppose it purely on the basis of scientific logic that has nothing to do with religion. We are not bigots and we do not hate homosexuals.

    I consider homosexuality to be merely a sexual behavior dysfunction. There are two genders for a reason, etc.

21. #121
    On April 20th, 2009 at 9:52 pm, Ron said:

    The blacklisting by gay rights activists amounts to religious persecution, folks. Thought that was dead in America, did you? This persecution is directed against Mormons, Catholics and evangelicals. Religious persecution lives on here as elsewhere. If you believe the Bible’s injunctions on marriage and against homosexual behavior, you are worthy of persecution in the minds of the gay rights community and the denizens of those blogs which shall not be named.