Maine votes down gay marriage
Socially liberal Maine rejects a gay marriage initiative — making it the 31st time (out of 31 tries) that voters have torpedoed such proposals.
How long until gay marriage proponents start decrying America’s “climate of hate?”
Maine voters have torpedoed a state law that would have allowed gay couples to marry.
With 84 percent of the precincts reporting, gay-marriage foes had 53 percent of the vote Tuesday.
The outcome amounts to a heartbreaking defeat for the gay rights movement — particularly since it occurred in New England, the corner of the country most supportive of gay marriage.
At issue was a law passed by the Maine Legislature last spring that would have legalized same-sex marriage. The law was put on hold after conservatives launched a petition drive to repeal it in a referendum.
Gay marriage has now lost in every single state — 31 in all — in which it has been put to a popular vote. Gay-rights activists had hoped to buck that trend in Maine.
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 Comments
Categories: Proposition 8
Weekly Standard
» White House Economic Adviser: 'We Need a Global Minimum Tax'Pundit & Pundette
» Bishop Jenky, Nicki Minaj, and the "98%"Sister Toldjah
» Obama’s new budget is a bad jokeJustOneMinute
» We Hear From The Department Of Good Ideas And False Choices
jsmidddleton4:
Unless he was just dreaming, as I said, which is completely possible.
Neither can 10 year old Catholic choir boys.
“that they don’t want to be on even terms with gays.”
Yes I know. Folks who have pro-rated sin and have made sexual sin, especially homosexual sin, “worse” than any other sin and therefore homosexuals worse than us regular sinners. Folks who have forgotten we are all sinners, ALL, and ALL have fallen short of the glory of God and one person no better and no worse than the other. Folks who are more like the Pharisee who stepped over the injured man than the Good Samaritan who helped him.
Yes, I am fully aware of “many” people’s perspective of homosexuality and how those folks have made themselves feel superior to others simply because they practice heterosexual sex.
jsmiddleton:
Do you know that for several years a hospital has had an experiment where they put some words above the hospital bed out of view of the patient? The idea is that if they float above thier body they should be able to read the words.
No one (not even those reporting near death experiences) have ever been able to read the words.
Must I find the link?
“Unless he was just dreaming”
Nope, He was dead. Dead for three days. Quite sure of it. The folks who killed him made absolutely sure of His being dead. And having come back to life, He continues to be alive. Quite sure of that as well. It is amazing. But true none-the-less.
Danceswithdachshunds:
Yes, I agree, the Catholic church has a poor record here. Trying to pin this on all homosexuals is like trying to pin teachers having heterosexual sex with their underage students on all heteros.
jsmiddleton:
Oh, you are talking about Jesus, I’m sorry but the account could be “embelished.”
Links?
Sure.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+16:6&version=NIV
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+14:2&version=NIV
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2020:26-28&version=NIV
jsmiddleton:
If you haven’t had this conversation with me before, let’s just stop. I am an atheist and I believe the Bible is every bit as fictional as the Illiad. Sorry. I am just happy you agree ref. gay marriage.
First of all the bulk of the student/teacher cases are male students well past purberty pursuing their female teachers, (and yes I think there should be two standards under the law that recognizes the GENDER difference just as it does with marriage and motherhood). And in the Catholic priest abuse cases the HUGE majority were homosexual priests preying on boys UNDER the age of puberty.
“let’s just stop.”
So you should be able to keep posting matters that reflect or are an extension of your belief system and I should not? Because as an atheist somehow your belief system has more merit?
Your atheism is a belief system and what you post, your criticism, snide comments, all the “outside” stuff are a reflection of your “inside” stuff, your belief system.
But I should not respond in kind?
Why?
Actually when you use the tools the “experts” use to determine the Illiad’s manuscripts accuracy, use those same tools and standards to test the manuscripts we have for the Bible, the Bible kicks the Illiad’s butt.
The preservation of His Word is quite an amazing demonstration of God’s hand in our world.
So, by your theory, we should probably ban Catholicism since it increases your risk of getting raped by a priest.
Danceswithdachshunds:
WTF is your point? Are you seriously trying to say homosexuals as a whole are responsible and therefore should not be allowed to marry? Isn’t it the tiniest bit possible that the fact that the Catholic church doesn’t let it’s priests marry a large part of the problem? Could it be that the requirement attracts strange people or perhaps causes them great psychological strain?
And I present the perfection of the universe, the absolute precision of unexplainable natural forces like gravity or nuclear attraction; the dimension of time; the existence of exact natural values for which no exact value can be described, (e.g. ‘pi’), within our limited universe of only 4 out of perhaps 11 dimensions, etc.
Those who do not believe in God are those who choose to remain blind to His magnificence.
jsmiddleton:
I was saying lets stop because it won’t go anywhere. Anyhow, since you insist:
Atheism is not a belief system. It is no more a belief system than bald is a hair color or not collecting stamps is a hobby.
My snide comments about mythology are a reflection on my inner self? Yes, they reflect the fact that I am grounded on planet Earth.
Anyhow, both the Bible and the Iliad might be based in part on historical fact. It doesn’t mean the Cyclops was real or that Jesus was the creator of the universe (you would think he have would at least left us some obvious clues, like telling us about the germ theory of disease).
Danceswithdachshunds:
You really don’t have a clue what you are talking about. How is the universe “perfect?” It simply is. It is “perfect” from our point of view in the same way a hole in the ground might be “perfect” for a puddle.
Why does the fact that Pi irrational mean that it has no “exact value?” It certainly does have an exact value. That value is Pi.
The point was within the confines of your remark concerning the horse buggergy news report I linked which I think does support the slippery slope argument stemming from the standpoint of my statement of the infallible UNIQUENESS of a complimentary one man-woman relationship. In a round about way I was implying that we really don’t know what the horse thought of it, (and frankly I doubt that any actual harm is done to the horse), and, devoid of any means to know that, down the road, it would permit for arguments from HFFSWAA, (Humans for Fun Sex with Animals Association), that ‘marriage should be be extended to beastiality I.E. I’m erecting a ‘wall of uniqueness’ around one-man-woman and saying any breach to that wall opens the flood gates.
Danceswithdachshunds:
It’s stupid argument. You are comparing two consenting adults with something that can’t communicate consent.
Exactly, and that’s why it’s not even in the same ballpark.
It simply is – but CANNOT be by chance. How much could the gravity constant have been different and still have worked to form the ‘universe’, (the one we live within)? How many decimal places out? 20? 1000? I submit that if gravity varied by more than one part in 10^10^6 that none of ‘this’ would exist and we would not be here to talk about it.
Gravity is exactly what it is and things of such precison NEVER HAPPEN BY THEMSELVES! God created gravity and determined the EXACT value it had to be to get us where we are – along with the rest of it, electrons, quarks, all of it.
None of it was by ‘chance’.
Danceswithdachshunds:
*yawn* Do you ever read an opinion that isn’t consistant with your own? First off, again, look at the puddle analogy. Had the constant been off by the slightest bit we wouldn’t be here to talk about it OR life could have evolved drastically different (and of course they would be saying how perfect it all is).
Second, it’s entirely possible these universal constants couldn’t have been any other way, kind of like a bubble forming in to a sphere.
Third, even if it’s true, none of that means your particular religion is right. The ancient Egyptians could be right and we should be worshipping Ra.
That’s simple, after redefining ‘marriage’ we next redefine the word ‘consent’. It used to mean that both affirmed a contract but now it means that neither party expressed any dissent. (Did I mention Babble?)
OH MY GOSH! That’s right! If gays are allowed to marry then we will all be raping one another to include children and animals!
Are you really this insane?
I didn’t mention any particular religion/dogma. As long as it doesn’t involve human sacrifices or buggering children I remain open to many possibilities, (probably not that one in particular though).
3.14159… = Pi = Proof of Yahweh.
Gay marriage = widespread rape
Jesus H. Christ walking across my pool wearing floaties and a speedo.
Danceswithdachshunds :
So, you are an agnostic? Are you a Deist?
How do you know for a fact these aren’t the right religions? The Bible is full of some equally horrid stuff.
(~12th century papal meeting) Oh my Gosh! Are you saying that if we deny property rights to the heirs of our priests by disallowing them to marry it will lead to an overrepresentation of homosexuals in the preisthood who rape young boys 800 years from now? Why that’s just insane thinking!
Certainly not agnostic but, otherwise, I don’t know what label to use to I always instruct others to call me whatever they want to – they will anyway!
(I’m outta here for a while…ta ta)
Danceswithdachshunds:
The very obvious difference there is that denying someone the right to marry or to indulge in thier natural desires will obviously cuase some serious psychological stress. Who is caused psychological stress by allowing gays to marry? You and another fundies? Are you saying you are going to start raping people after gays get married?
Zero should have added his standard *twinkle* to the object of his desire. Or a picture of a glass of urine with a cross in it.
Do you think your god cares what people do with thier sex organs? Does he have a problem with what hmosexuals do?
Dave:
Honestly, I don’t like that kind of modern art. Not so much because it is offensive, (and I can see why people think so) but because it is stupid. Furthermore, I really wish we would see more mockery of Muslims and others. The far-left does tend to have a double standard.
A little red meat to toss into the pool of piranhas.
Yeah, you are so brave with your keyboard. Why not move to Dearborn, Michigan and try it?
Chap:
Yup, effin coward. The fact that we have let it become this bad is even worse than the fact that it is this bad. F Muslims, honestly. Harris is right when he says that tolerance of the moderates have led us where we are. Coulter is also right (yes, holy sh|t I said it) but only partially. We should be invading their countries and converting them away from their religion alright, but not toward Christianity or any other one in particular. We should just be educating them and dragging them out of the 7th century, period.
Dave Turson:
I did a tour in Iraq you a$$. Anyhow, see above point from Sam Harris I paraphrased.
What makes it extremely offensive so much is should even offend non-Christians is when it is government funded. That is when it becomes a truly Big Deal.
Especially when the same artists are too cowardly to treat Islam the same way. Those ‘artists’ are not some kind of noble people speaking truth to power. They are cowardly bullies picking on someone they know won’t fight back.
Which, in a perverse kind of way, does make the ‘art’ kind of interesting, since it speaks so loudly and clearly not about Christianity, but about the utter worthlessness and decadence of the artist and his era.
Roland:
I agree. I agree in an even broader sense. I do think there is cultural merit to artists breaking down taboos. However, I just certainly don’t think they need my tax dollars to do so, this goes for all forms of art.
“Atheism is not a belief system.”
Ha. Funny. And that declaration is what, a “belief”? That is like when people say there are no absolutes. Which in and of itself is of course and absolute.
Atheism not a belief system….. one of the funniest things I’ve heard all day.
“I did a tour in Iraq”
Thank you for your service. Many of us here are vets. Me 1972-1976 Hospital Corpsman assigned to the Marines.
So while in Iraq did you attempt to use art to break down Moslem’s taboos?
Us atheists have entire holidays and rituals dedicated to our lack of acknowledgment of a deity. We just don’t want you non-atheists to know about all of them because then you might end up stealing our ideas, corrupting them, and then calling us pagans for celebrating our rich, non-religious non-culture, while blatantly ripping us off and touting yourselfs as righteous for your bastardized emulations of what was once ours.
=]
jsmiddleton:
The declaration “I do not collect stamps” is also a belief (I am pretty sure I don’t). Nevertheless I don’t have any stamps or beliefs about methods of stamp collecting.
Atheism has no dogma, no rules, no structure, no leaders, no nothing. The only thing atheists share is a lack of belief in deities.
You are being absurd.
No I used my M4, among other things. However, if I were an artist I’d be sure and exercise my 2nd Amendment rights to protect myself from people that don’t appreciate art.
Jeddite again, with the win.
Actually chap you can destroy the Temple in Jerusalem or any of the other Christian “landmarks” and its not a problem. People with a Christian heritage visit the Holy Land of course. But we are not tied to physical representations of our faith as are many of Islam. Even the Bible. If you want to use pages of the Bible to wipe your dog’s behind I could care less. Its not the pages, the words nor the ink on the pages that is Holy. It is the One to whom those words point. It does not offend me one bit if you want to use the Bible’s pages for rolling cheap tobacco smokes and lighting those pages on fire.
I’m just fine with blowing up a church if terrorist who are trying to kill me and others are hiding inside. Actually I think that is a good economical hardware saving plan. Get them all inside one building and let one bomb do its work. Its just a building.
Try that with the Koran or a Mosque.
I’m about to go on my morning walk. While I’m out, I intend to give thanks to the concepts of time, math, and random luck for the beautiful, crisp, autumn morning here on the southeast edge of the Puget Sound.
“Atheism has no dogma, no rules, no structure, no leaders, no nothing. The only thing atheists share is a lack of belief in deities.”
You are deceiving yourself zero.
Jeddite:
Don’t forget Pi and the natural log.
PS. Those aren’t sexual references!
“No I used my M4″
Good for you. However I believe the challenge to go to Dearborn is in regards to confronting people who hold Islamic views with art, etc., in a way that you are at personal risk when doing so.
In other words going to Iraq with an M4 while commendable is way out of context in regards to the challenge.
jsmiddleton:
What is your point? That since I am currently not going to Dearborn to purposely offend Muslims that I am being a coward and therefore my points are invalid? (This is aside from the fact that I am openly atheistic in real life as well).
WTF are you talking about?
If you atheist want to believe you don’t have a belief system please feel free to do so. Doesn’t bother me a bit.
Does not mean that you are correct to believe that. I’m sure you can take it on faith that you do not.
However atheism is totally a belief system complete with external values and behavior that demonstrate your “inside” belief system.
Just cause you leave God, or any deity figure, out does not then mean it isn’t a belief system.
jsmiddleton:
Are you and Dave making excuses for the far-left treating Islam with kids gloves?
jsmiddleton:
This ought to be good. What is the atheist belief system that all atheists share?
“What is your point?”
That your answer about serving in Iraq had nothing to do with what you were being challenged to do.
No, he is correct. What he is wrong about is in thinking each atheist doesn’t end up with their own versions of such things, with many of them defaulting to doing the equivalent of worshipping the most powerful bully on the block, usually the State.
A young male child without a strong male figure in the home (usually their father) will generally default to following and imitating the values and behaviors of the strongest bully in his surroundings.
Either that, or he will wander in misery.
Most adults work the same way. They all ‘worship’ power. It is the real original sin.
“What is the atheist belief system that all atheists share?”
Do you not read what you type zero? You already have provided several answers to your own question in your own posts.
Here’s one: That atheism is not a belief system.
Here’s another: That God or any deity do or does not exist as the case maybe regarding singular or plural or masculine or feminine.
But please feel free to Google or Yahoo and let me know what more you find about your own belief system.
You lost me there Roland. Is he correct or is he wrong and which judgment applies to what?
jsmiddleton:
Dave was trying to call me a coward, that much was obvious. Do either you or him think the far-left deserves a pass for tiptoeing around Muslims? If not, why are you nit-picking on me when I agree!?
Roland:
Right. Atheism leads to being a statist. What utter tosh. counter examples: Ayn Rand. Me. You have evidence to back up your claim or are you just going on feeling? Note: it’s rather likely right-wing atheists shut up about it (for obvious reasons).
jsmiddleton:
I already said that all atheists don’t believe in deities and that is about as far as it goes. To try and compare that to the long, long lists of beliefs that theists have is absurd.
Junior is asleep. I am going to watch South Park and play some video games. I will check back later to read all the sterotypes about gays and now atheists.
He is right in that there is no formal set of rules, but he is wrong if he is saying most atheists don’t adopt something to substitute for religion.
He may be right about himself. That would make him unusual.
However, he does seem to embrace the All Knowing One World Government May It Come Soon And Bring Us Peace lunacy, so I’m not so sure about him. It may be he just hasn’t yet thought it through, but it is a bad sign.
“Dave was trying to call me a coward”
That is only part of the sentence zero. He wasn’t calling you a coward in general.
“To try and compare that to the long, long lists of beliefs that theists have is absurd.”
So if your belief system isn’t as long as the Westminster Catechism you don’t have a belief system?
Here’s another one: As a human being you believe you have the ability and that ability is both credible and reliable enough so that you can determine because of that ability if there is or is not something greater than yourself something outside yourself something other than yourself generally referred to as God.
So Zero’s determination that there is no “God” is true or at least true enough to be reality.
Or do you not have that as a belief?
Ayn Rand worshipped Ayn Rand.
There’s a joke here, but I’m not going to touch it.
Zero, are you guys working on another Monster Thread here? Careful, last time we made the blog explode.
Clearly Ayn Rand had a belief system. There seems to be some atheistic snobbery going on here. IF they don’t believe in God, they don’t have a belief system? What they can’t have a belief system because they have a clearer grasp of reality and don’t need one like the rest of us poor saps who need God and therefore we have a belief system?
Interesting that folks who are atheist do tend to get offended when it is pointed out that atheism is a belief system.
You don’t need “God” or a deity to have a way of thinking and perceiving that is meets the criteria to be defined as a belief system.
Roland:
PLEASE! My belief that the US system of government is the best there is and I’d like to see it extended over the whole of the globe is hardly a “replacement” for god. The thing is here, you don’t have any evidence to back up your claim. It is just a preconception about atheists you are holding onto and you will cite any alligence of any kind any atheist has as proof of your claim.
The point in bringing her up was she was not a statist. In any case, you prove my point. Any atheist must have worshipped something in your mind, even if it’s themselves. How convienant for your argument.
jsmiddleton4:
Rewording “I don’t believe in god” to make it a much longer sentence doesn’t make it a system of beliefs.
Clearly, but her belief system isn’t common to all atheists! That is the point! There is no atheist dogma.
Again, you are just rewording the lack of belief in god. Honestly comparing atheism to other belief systems is exactly like saying someone who doesn’t follow basketball at all has a favorite team.
Hey wasn’t this about teh gays?!
But zero, you are doing so well…
It’s possible to acknowledge that stealing is wrong, murder is reprehensible, and being faithful to one’s significant other is a noble cause without being religious. It doesn’t require a steadfast commitment to a major religion to have morals, and despite what some devout people like to claim, morality can exist without religion. That I know that stealing is wrong, and that the Bible states that stealing is wrong doesn’t mean that the Bible or religion invented all notion of right and wrong. I acknowledge that it’s a very good source for conventional social norms, but it’s not the sole source, nor is it the final authority on right and wrong (to everyone, I should append).
To use a somewhat flimsy analogy: our numerical system is based on Arabic. What? Does that make us all Muslims now?
Or, to put it another way, not all atheists are Michael Newdow.
Jeddite:
Well said, again, and this time without sarcasm *smile*.
Kingfish:
Hi there and thank you.
ALCON:
Name one belief that doesn’t involve the idea that god doesn’t exist that Chap, Jeddite, myself and all other atheists share.
Hell, you can’t even say all atheists believe you can live a meaningful life without god because you have nihilists!
Nihilists, humanists, communist, capitalist, statist, libertarian, gay, straight… and on and on… it’s all there.
I grew up atheist. My family was and is all atheists (well, one sibling exception). My extended family are pretty much all atheists. Most of my friends for the first ….. wait, most of my friends now are atheists. I grew up politically aware and involved.
I speak from personal observation and experience. Also from watching the world through the news.
Can I prove my views on the matter? Of course not. Neither can you.
“Honestly comparing atheism to other belief systems”
What does comparing one belief system to another have to do with whether or not atheism is a belief system? It may be an argument in favor of atheism being a belief system as you can’t compare it to another if it isn’t one in the first place?
“Can I prove my views on the matter? Of course not. Neither can you.”
So it IS a belief system?
Roland:
You will also find religious folks that believe in a one world government and / or worship themselves. So they have 2 gods now?
Roland:
As you must know, the onus of proof is on the person making the (preconcieved) claim.
jsmiddleton:
If I don’t watch baseball, do I have a favorite team?
…and just so everyone remembers:
Gay marriage will not hurt anyone.
“There is no atheist dogma.”
Sorry but there is. Is it the same as Martin Luther’s edicts in response to the Catholic’s church attempt to quiet him? No, probably not. That does not mean atheist have no belief system.
The foundational belief as I stated and you have illustrated begins and ends with Zero. As did Ayn Rand’s.
Zero, not touching your ALCON.
By their very definition, norms and mores are functions of the society as a whole.
Jeddite has made numerous points toward his/her arguement without a direct appeal to authority. Unfortunately not many others over the past 500+ comments have as well.
While American society is a heretogeneous conglomerate of ethnic societies only made worse by multiculturism, should it not be investigated by each individual for themselves for this intercultural competence?
jsmiddleton:
He wasn’t talking about atheism. He was talking about the nonsensical idea that atheists find a substitute for god. Oh wait, we do, it’s rational thinking that involves using our 5 senses.
“So they have 2 gods now?”
They sure try. Nothing new about the problem either. Even Jesus acknowledged one can not have two masters. His warning would not have been necessary if the problem did not already exist.
But can the nonreligion morality be maintained through multiple generations? Or does it decay?
It seems to be clear it decays (multigenerational observation of the West). But that could be just the decaying of our society. Rising atheism may not be driving the decay at all. It could be correlative, and not causal at all.
But you can’t blame the religious moralists for thinking it’s causal.
“it’s rational thinking that involves using our 5 senses.”
Actually the “belief” in your belief system is that your 5 senses are able to accurately credibly and reliably decide that there is or is not God.
Your belief is the trustworthiness of what your 5 senses tell you. Not your 5 senses.
Kingfish:
I understand what you are saying. The problem is that, our society accepts what two consenting adults do behind closed doors, it just refuses to acknowledge it openly. Real people are hurt by this, the couples, and the children that may exist in those couples.
The hypocrisy is glaringly obvious.
Point of faith. You have no proof.
jsmiddleton:
Right, so I am just being silly because I trust my 5 senses. This actually makes sense to you?
In any case, still no answer. What do all atheists have in common that doesn’t involve a lack of belief in the supernatural?
No. It is a judgment call. There is a difference.
Roland:
Real people are actually being hurt here. The aforemention gay families. The onus of proof is on you to show that the stress on society will outweight thier concerns.
Roland:
You are basically asking if people are so selfish or immature collectively that they need an imaginary deity and the threat of hellfire to keep them in check. Maybe, but it says nothing about the truth of religious claims. Just because religion maybe useful doenst make it true.
“If I don’t watch baseball, do I have a favorite team?”
Huh?
You are trying to say that because your baseball team doesn’t have as many rules as the New York Yankees therefore your team is not playing baseball.
Its not baseball unless you have as many rules as “organized” baseball.
Sorry but having a “smaller” dogma does not then mean you have no dogma nor that atheism is not a belief system.
Your belief system just happens to not believe in God. Its still a belief system and as a system requires faith. Starting with your faith in “reason” in general and your own ability to reason in particular.
“Real people are actually being hurt here.”
Please tell me how it hurts people to not be married?
On November 5th, 2009 at 11:58 am, zeroangel said:
Phenomenology anyone? Heidegger would be so proud of you.
Those who want to make a serious change to the laws of the culture have the burden to prove the change will improve the society.
I thought you were a conservative, Zero. Now here we find you are into social experimentation on a grand scale.
jsmiddleton:
Name one thing that doesn’t involve non-belief that atheists share. It’s not a baseball team if the only thing you have in common is you all don’t like sports.
Are you serious? Do I have to list the legal protections and benefits not afforded to the couple and any adopted children. Get real.
Kingfish:
I’m willing to bet there are some atheists (probably strange ones) that think the Matrix is real.
Roland:
Or, just make the claim that the laws are incredibly unjust.
Please just get rid of your labels.
“No. It is a judgment call. There is a difference.”
Acting as if something that can’t be proved 100% is actually true and real despite the lack of “proof” is a judgment call?
Funny, sounds like faith to me.
Faith is having some of the facts but not all and having to trust that what I know to be true about the facts I do have means I can trust that what I don’t know is also true.
Best example I can give is getting on the Golden Gate Bridge sometime in the morning say in March. The exit of the bridge is obliterated from my view by fog. But I can see the entrance. The entrance is knowable by my senses. The exit is not. I drive onto the bridge in full confidence that I will also exit it despite not seeing the exit. Why? Because I can conclude confidently that what I can’t see is as real as what I do see because of the reliability and credibility of what I do see.
So you not being able to prove 100% that you are correct yet you act as if you are, you want to define that as a “judgment call” zero?
Sorry sir but what you describe is faith pure and simple.
I agree. On that note, I must depart for a few hours.
jsmiddleton:
Oh for god’s sake. The “faith” that I have that a bridge hasn’t fallen down is a hell of a lot different then a faith in a deity.
It’s about evidence. Why can’t you understand this?
Roland:
Take care bro.
I need to feed Junior. BBL.
“Are you serious?”
Yep. I see no one who is hurt by not being able to get married.
It is precisely at that point that folks who are pushing for gay marriage lose folks. Acting as if they are as “hurt” as blacks who fought for civil rights, etc.
My niece is gay. Been in long term relationship with a great person for some time. My niece just had their baby and did so with her partner’s egg. All very cool. Baby sit as often as I can. They are not hurt in any way because they can’t get married. They don’t walk around all day in pain because they can’t be legally married.
Not ever. And we’ve talked openly about it I can assure you as I care for both of them deeply as does my whole family.
At our last weekend together she actually started to understand why conservativism is their best shot at being able to have legal standing and get the State out of their personal affairs. She started to unwind the liberal propaganda about conservatives and listen. And she got it.
However they are not hurt in any way.
jsmiddleton:
Look, you support gay marriage right?
Can we please not play the semantics game? When I said hurt I don’t mean nessecarily in physical or emotional pain. I mean losing out on benefits and treated differently. That’s enough.
Junior is hungry… later all.