Sit Down and Shut Up

February 17, 2010 at 8:42 am 290 comments

by Brian Leubitz

Go back into your closet. Why can’t you just keep up the pretense of being “normal?” Why do you have to shove your “relationships” in our face?

ProtectMarriage and their ilk are itching to move back into the pre-Stonewall era. Where the LGBT community hid in the shadows, scared of being beaten to a pulp, or losing everything, their jobs, their families, and everything they had worked for. In a recent email they sent out to their email list, they hone their newly found victim status.

Aggressive protests like the one aimed at a 96-year-old community volunteer are, unfortunately, all too representative of the type of intimidation and harassment that has consistently been demonstrated by the homosexual marriage movement during and since the Proposition 8 campaign. In fact, the examples of harassment are so extensive and have become so well documented (they were chronicled in this report by The Heritage Foundation) that they have begun to be mentioned by various commentators, experts and courts, including the United States Supreme Court.

I documented some of the issues with the Heritage Foundation’s report yesterday, mostly that they completely excluded all evidence of threats and attacks against marriage equality activists. With respect to this 96-year-old, when Mayor Ron Dellums appointed Lorenzo Hoopes, a prominent supporter of Prop 8, to a non-profit board of directors, the appointment was bound to be scrutinized. In a democracy, the people of the community are allowed, and should be encouraged to seek out government appointees that share their values. In Oakland, Mr. Hoopes values of inequality were repugnant to the community. No matter what the appointee’s age or situation, the community is entitled to representation.

But, here’s the thing that seems to go completely unsaid by the Heritage Report, or in the traditional media, is that many of the instances of problems involve considerable provocation. Take the story of the 69-year old who was filmed getting her giant cross knocked out of her hands. (You can see the video below the fold.) She was attending a protest against the passage of Prop 8 at the Palm Springs City Hall. Emotions were raw as people had just had their rights taken away from them. Certainly, even the most vehement supporter could understand such emotions of loss.

But for this woman, she decided that they LGBT community hadn’t had quite enough. There was a dueling protest at the City Hall. The pro-Prop 8 group was across the street. A little insensitive and sore-winner-ish, but fine, free speech is important to our country. However, this lady decided that she needed to be on the TV cameras waving her cross directly in the face of the marriage equality activists. It was provocative and extremely offensive. While making physical contact is completely unacceptable, this woman was clearly trying to get on the news.

For years, the LGBT community, and the general population, has been hounded by Topeka, KS “minister” Fred Phelps. He protests the LGBT community at every possible occasion, appropriate or not. At any public funeral for a soldier, there’s Fred Phelps, telling the soldier’s family that the soldier died for the sins of the gays.

Think of it in a different situation, what would happen if a person strolled into the mega church service held in the Prop 8 campaign at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego chanting offensive messages?

In a shared community, we are expected to give some thought for others, to have some consideration. While we should maintain peaceful protests, it is hard to understand how this woman’s story should be considered any evidence of a greater conspiracy against Prop 8 supporters. Unfortunately, provocateurs often get what they desire.

In the end, ProtectMarriage just wants you to sit down and shut up. To hide in your closet. That is not acceptable any more. We must go forth and be bold. However, we must recognize that their will be provocateurs in our path. We must not fall into their traps.

Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. – Martin Luther King, Jr.

Entry filed under: Uncategorized.

Ken Starr Leaving California: Good Riddance Trial Reenactment: Day 2 Part IV and V

290 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:00 am

    I said it before…That old lady wasn’t even touched…anybody who actually has eyes could see that in the video….but all the bigots see is what they want to see…and the see her being surrounded my LGBTQQIA Americans….she’s a FOOL!!!!……<3…Ronnie

    P.S. …John Wayne Gacy's sister is going to be on Oprah today….I hope the bigots watch and see what their hate does to people who are so afraid of being Gay that they do things like that Psycho did

    Reply
    • 2. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:33 am

      OMG!!! I been saying, GAYZ WID GUNZ rallies all over the place!!

      If they are going to play the victum then we need to get in there and terrorize them (emotionally and mentally but NEVER physically)

      Get them really scared, not to fight but to sit down and shut themselves the fuck up.

      No direct threats but just the appearance and illusion of force and might and deep powerful anger!!!

      If they’s gunna be the speudo-victim in all this then lets us find ways to pseudo-(as in not real)-victimize them!!!

      Reply
    • 3. Phil L  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:22 pm

      Yeah, she very clearly tossed the thing on the ground. I’m not sure what all the fuss was really about here.

      Reply
      • 4. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:29 pm

        All these uppity LGBTQQIA Americans got P.O.ed when a bigot crossed the line into the Love zone…that’s what all the fuss is about…Well granny who told you to walk into the lions dens….FOOL!!!!….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 5. bcwill  |  February 21, 2010 at 11:03 am

        Yes she clearly let go of it.

        Reply
  • 6. Jorge  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:11 am

    Yeah, I think she just wanted more remembrance being in print so she could save the clipping carrying a cross to seem like her martyr. I mean, did she think she would be invited with open arms?

    Reply
    • 7. Marlene Bomer  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:13 pm

      Remember, Jorge.., the religious reicht revels in being the victim and advocating their martyr status.

      This from what I’ve read was a clear attempt to provoke and intimidate, and any reaction would just crank up the martyr ratings.

      This is why there should be no — and I man NO reation from our side when this type of crap happens. This was the genius of Gandhi — make the oppressors look even worse when the oppressed does nothing to provoke the bigots, and never reacts in retaliation.

      Reply
      • 8. David Kimble  |  February 18, 2010 at 5:24 pm

        Yes, I agree completely Marllene. We must learn to choose our battles. That is to say, we fight the ones worth fighting and let the other ones go. I really admired Ghandi – he could walk into a den of lions and walk-out unscathed. <3 David

        Reply
  • 9. Joe  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:12 am

    In Oakland, the people overwhelmingly voted against Prop 8 and in Oakland, the people voted against people like Mr. Hoopes. It’s just the people having their voice, right?

    Reply
  • 10. Joe  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:16 am

    As was pointed out in the trial, free speech doesn’t allow for yelling fire in a crowded theater. A lot of people were very angry and she showed up and inflamed that anger. I don’t condone their actions, but she’s pretty dumb to egg them on.

    Reply
    • 11. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:20 am

      If you watch the video the first physical attack was by an anti-marriage equality person…he attempted to rip a sign out of the hands of a man who is for marriage equality….but they don’t mention that….I wonder why….more religious reich cherry pinking…..false propaganda and what not….<3…Ronnie

      its start around 2:20 in the video

      Reply
      • 12. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:41 am

        It’s not bad when they do it, because they’re fighting for Jesus.

        Reply
      • 13. Rikaishi  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:31 am

        It’s the same guy that knocks the cross out of her hand, the sign might have been pro-prop 8, it might have been a setup or maybe he was just an idiot.

        Reply
    • 14. G.Rod  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:22 pm

      Joe – “She [just] showed up”, not likely! She “inflamed that anger”. “Dumb” or smart, the scene reinforces stereotypes. In influencing others, including the younger set, the medium is TV and the 2 to 3 second emotional bite is the message.

      Which side is more skilled in crafting and broadcasting their message.

      Reply
  • 15. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:41 am

    watching the live debate between sullivan, and maggie gallagher……..

    Reply
  • 16. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:42 am

    gonna get good

    Reply
  • 17. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:51 am

    Maggie Gallagher claiming she has gay people WORKING for her in NOM..because not all gay people want marriage..she says she just loves gay people…..

    Reply
    • 18. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:54 am

      So are they giving up the stance that gay people don’t actually exist, then?

      Reply
    • 19. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:56 am

      It is no doubt true that not all gay people want marriage; not all straight people want it either. I just happen to find it hard to believe that LGBT people would willingly work for an organization that has devoted itself to eliminating the rights of their own community.

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 20. Frijondi  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:08 am

        Fiona, it’s a great way to get a pat on the head and a cookie (if you don’t mind the fact that both are from Maggie); it also ensures that you will always be in demand in certain circles as Exhibit A, the Gay Person Who Puts [fill in the blank] Ahead of Crass Self-Interest. Very convenient if you have an exaggerated sense of your own importance, but little of substance to offer the world.

        Reply
      • 21. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:44 am

        Or they may be those self-hating people who actually believe the tripe that we should consider ourselves lucky tonot be shot on sight. Maybe they tried the “conversion therapy” and it didn’t work because they weren’t worthy. Maybe they think they’re attoning for the great sin of being born.
        If anybody needs saving, it would be one of these poor lost souls. Let’s pray for their delivery from self-loathing at the hands of those like Ms. Gallagher, the Princess of Lies.

        Reply
      • 22. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:50 am

        I wouldn’t call her the princess of lies because that would imply that she has some sense of decorum…..more like she is one of these “False Prophets” that they are suppose to beware of….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 23. Mykelb  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:17 pm

        Maggie is the duchess of demons.

        Reply
    • 24. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:58 am

      Ah…the quintessential I have gay friends and gay people working for me strategy…..Will she actually supply evidence of this?……..NO!!!…I don’t think so….I mean it would be wise for then to do so right?…It may(not) help their “cause”…..Did she ever thing that maybe if there really are gay people on their side…that maybe they are their to undermine the whole thing….you know the old Trojan Horse strategy?…..she is a FOOL!!!…….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
      • 25. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:04 am

        she actually addressed this and said she will never tell who these gay people working for her are, because if she did, they would never be able to get a date again…

        Reply
      • 26. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:07 am

        because there are none….somebody send this to Perez Hilton….He’ll debunk it……..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
    • 27. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:15 am

      We should DEMAND that Maggie bring forth her gay employees…

      Reply
      • 28. Frijondi  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:02 am

        Sadly, she has at least one; I won’t link to her blog, but a little Googling will turn it up. An instapundit manquée, one of long line of self-dramatizing young people who discover that they can sometimes make a little career for themselves by expressing contrarian views. “Look at me! I’m gay, but I’m a social conservative! That’s because I’m more principled than those dirty, selfish people who just want to have their cake and eat it!”

        Reply
    • 29. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:08 am

      I can’t get the stream to run. Will it be available somewhere afterward?

      Reply
  • 30. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:55 am

    Maggie now claiming that Most gays are conservatives…and it is only the radical FEW liberal gays that are making such a big deal about equal rights. She says if she has her way..gays will NEVER get equality in America because that would mean that the country would force religious people and conservatives to no longer exist. WTF is she smoking?

    Reply
    • 31. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:04 am

      Few?……125thou people at the march in DC counts as a few?…and why does she keep leaving out that we have Straight people who support us……..she’s a FOOL!!!!…..I’m not a conservative but I’m not a liberal either….I’m independent…..geeze the generalizations of a FOOL!!!…you’re a FOOL!!!!……<3…Ronnie

      Reply
    • 32. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:22 am

      It wouldn’t force “force religious people and conservatives to no longer exist.”

      It would force religious people to watch their fucking mouths and actions.

      Reply
    • 33. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:38 pm

      Oh there are just a FEW liberal gayz…..who somehow have LOTZ of political power!!!!

      Well she is NEVER going to get her way so I guesses she will just have to die a wimpering death along with her ‘CON-spermative religion’.

      Reply
    • 34. Linda  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:13 pm

      Why is Maggie speaking for Gays???? Is there something we should know about her?

      And who cares if she has gay people working for her? What does that have to do with marriage equality?

      Reply
      • 35. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:30 pm

        Because they always try to use the “I know gay people” strategy….when they get backed into a corner….but we know the truth….she’s talking about the person who works for the person who cuts here hair…because we no Gay Guy would cut hair that looks like that as the end result….hehehe…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
    • 36. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 8:19 pm

      Whatever Magpie is smoking, she should have brought enough for the whole class, to borrow from fiona. After all, it’s not nice to be hoggish.

      Reply
  • 37. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:56 am

    What really strikes me about the video above is how the heterosexuals are not simply content that they have just stripped THEIR VERY OWN OFFSPRING of existing civil rights, but that they felt the need to seek out those LGTB citizens who were protesting their rape by their fellow citizens to further rub salt in their wounds.

    If that does not sum up our enemy, nothing does.

    Their ability, desire and CELEBRATION of kicking human beings when they are down just says SO much about them. About their lack of morality. About their lack of humanity. About their lack of common decency. About their lack of humanity.

    And it is in witnessing moments like this firsthand that I REJOICE in my gayness. Because the thought that I could have ever been on the other side of this is simply too disgusting to consider.

    What kind of a human being, besides the heterosexual, would take such GLEE, such PRIDE and such JOY in treating their very own offspring like this?

    And what on EARTH makes them think that THEY are the kind of human being we all should aspire to be while they participate in such vile abuse?

    REJOICE IN YOUR GAYNESS, FOLKS. IT IS A GIFT FROM GOD. THE ONLY PERSON THAT HETEROSEXUALS TREATED WORSE THAN LGTB CITIZENS IS JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF.

    Reply
    • 38. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:56 am

      Amen… God made me gay; I don’t know why She did that, but they say She moves in mysterious ways. I thank Her every day for making me gay… Now if She’ll just answer my prayers to send me a fine man to call ‘husband’, that would be nice. :)

      Love, Andrew

      Reply
      • 39. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:00 pm

        what he said….lol…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
    • 40. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:14 pm

      …and remember, Fiona, Straight Ally and others, you aren’t heterosexuals, you are queer straights! ; )

      Reply
      • 41. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:16 pm

        Straight but not narrow. Because other people’s relationships can’t hurt mine unless I let them.

        Reply
      • 42. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 8:28 pm

        And John, what I have been told by several of my straight friends here in North Carolina is that they feel when I have the LEGAL right to be married, that they will actually feel MORE SECURE in their marriages because they will be able tocelbrate mine with me and my husband, just as we currently celebrate theirs with them and their husbands and wives. They feel that when you expand the right of LEGAL marriage to everyone over the age of majority, that it actually stengthens the institution and makes it more valid. And in the states where it has been legalized, the divorce rate has actually DECREASED. So, could someone please tell me again, how exactly does granting someone LEGAL recognition of their marriage, and the LEGAL recognition oftheir commitment, thereby increasing the durability of that commitment, harm the institution of marriage?

        ::That’s what I thought::

        Reply
    • 43. Polydactyl  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:07 pm

      Yes, because a gay person couldn’t possibly be a bigot. The gender you’re attracted to is completely relevant to whether you judge others on stereotypes.

      You actually think that if you were born straight, you’d be on the ProtectMarriage side? Have a little more faith in yourself, man!

      I wait with baited breath for the day when sexual orientation is as irrelevant as the color of your eyes or favorite food.

      Reply
    • 44. Doug Bearden  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:46 pm

      I agree with some previous posts that us gays should not be stereotyped but that goes both ways. I don’t feel we should be stereotyping heterosexuals. There are plenty of heterosexuals that don’t believe in prop. 8.

      Reply
      • 45. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:53 pm

        I agree….but we don’t call them heterosexuals….we call them Allies, Friends, and Family….but we should call the Bigots Haterosexuals……would that be better?……<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 46. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:34 pm

        LOL… ‘Haterosexuals’… Ilike that one Ronnie. Thanks!
        love,
        Andrew

        Reply
      • 47. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:37 pm

        You’re welcome, PDXAndrew….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 48. Polydactyl  |  February 18, 2010 at 9:25 am

        Haterosexuals? I’ll endorse that. XD

        Reply
    • 49. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:35 pm

      This is so true. Also, for those on this ste who are atheist, pagan, or just plain unaffiliated with a particular religious sect, I must say that I have found more of you who actually practice the teachings of Yeshua ben Yosef than I have in most of the Prop h8ers who claim to follow him. Think about it. He told a questioner the two greatest commandments and in both of those commandments LOVE was the important thing to remember. I have seen that deonstrated time and again here by LGBTQQIA community that I have seen here, and only Hate pouring from those who support prop 8. So which group is more like Yeshua ben Yosef? However, you will never get the other side to believe that.

      In other news–Yes, with those who have voiced their support of my entering the race for the Town Council position, I have finished my letter of intent, and will present it, as stated in the news here, at our next Town Council meeting. I feel that it is time our town finds out just how boring a middle-aged gay man can be, and hopefully, by merely going into this to actually serve the people of my town, convince them that my sexual orientation is a non-issue. Thanks for all your support. Then, once I have some time ad experience under my belt, I will run for the County Commission. I eventually want to run for Governor of North Carolina. wonder what “title” they will give my husband when I am elected?

      And to Alan E.–Mazel Tov! You earned that promotion, and you will more than likely earn many more! Keep up the good work!

      Reply
      • 50. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:39 pm

        First dude?

        Reply
      • 51. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:37 pm

        Richard, I don’t know the courtesies and appurtenances of BZ’s work. Would “First Rebbe” work if you are elected?

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 52. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:40 pm

        W00t!
        I’d vote for you in a heartbeat… Finally, we’d have an honest politician.
        Please keep us posted with how your campaign is going and what those of us on the other side of the continent cando to help!

        Love,
        Andrew

        Reply
      • 53. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:55 pm

        Probably more like First rabbi, since thre is currently no Rebbe for the Lubavitchers. The Rebbe died a number of years ago, and there has been no successor to come forward. But it would be fitting since I am known among our Jewish friends as the rebbitizen.

        Reply
    • 54. G.Rod  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:59 pm

      Bill, I appreciate your observations. In my world, motivation has more shades of gray, and a few primary colours.

      I believe whatever our orientation, there is in each of us a duality of moral/ immoral, decent/indecent, sensitive/insensitivity to the humanity of others as well as the ability /inability to see that duality in our neighbour. Attributes coexist and are dominant/submissive at moments in time. I’m often my worse self.

      The lesson, if any, in Christ’s ‘being put to death’ on the demand of the crowd, manipulated by civil and religious authorities; might be that each of us is capable of good and vile, and influencing others to act likewise.

      For me, the parallel narrative of The Man’s closest buddies is just as interesting, viewed as mini-dramas of loyalty and betrayal & denial. His and their breaking of religious conventions of their day was the percipient. Bill, why should we be surprised that religious organizations remain the driving force when a religious convention is being severely tested?

      Remember as well, the gift that the Father gave his Son was death, the same gift Abraham was planning to give his son Isaac. Wasn’t it you who suggested turning on our own wasn’t part of our nature?

      Reply
      • 55. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:16 pm

        I seem to have struck some sort of merve.

        Which was, of course MY POINT! ; )

        Reply
  • 56. Ozymandias ('cause it's cooler than 'Elbert')  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:59 am

    Yet more rhetoric and spin from the Pro-H8 side. It’s typical that they cherry-pick information to support their agenda, because after all, plenty of their following do the same using scripture – it seems to me that this is similar to the example of someone abusing their dog mercilessly, then being outraged because they were bitten, running around screaming about the ‘rabid dog’ and showing off their wound, while ignoring the dog’s condition (and all the wounds). Naturally they refuse to see (or at least admit) their own role in abusing the dog to the point he bit back..

    As Brian has written previously, this ‘victim’ mentality is pervasive on the Pro-H8 side, and it’s a well-established tactic. It also attempts to portray us as dangerous vigilantes, rabble-rousers and so on. It’s all part of a campaign to dehumanize us, making it easier for people to think of us as some faceless ‘agenda’ instead of real people.

    Now, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if this whole thing was staged in order to provoke the altercation in the video but I also agree with the title of Brian’s article on another level – I think the Pro-H8 side is trying to pull a psych job on us. Since all this happened, I’ve seen a number of LGBT folk posting that we need to have ‘restraint’ and that any sort of confrontation with haters will just end up with bad press, so we shouldn’t do it. I saw the article on the El Coyote incident on a number of blogs and websites – and in each case there was quite the argument between those who said the demonstration shouldn’t have happened at all (because of ‘bad press’) and those who said it absolutely should have. This fear of ‘bad press’ should NEVER prevent folks from demonstrating or speaking out, and defending themselves.

    If I or my boyfriend were attacked by gay bashers, I sure as hell wouldn’t pull any punches because I was afraid of ‘bad press’!

    Reply
    • 57. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:12 am

      The ‘if you want to stop getting punched, then stop punching people’ mentality is totally lost on the religious.

      Considering themselves ‘persecuted’ is better than multiple-orgasms to them.

      Reply
      • 58. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:15 am

        Well because M-O’s happen so rarely for them…you know because the only time they have sex is when they are only doing to procreate…hehehe…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 59. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:49 am

        If a bully pickes on you and cries that he is being persecuted then discussing the issue doesn’t ever work.

        the picked on person gets vilified just as much as the bully and it all cancels out.

        I say we should persecute them MORE!!! Especially in the Media. Don’t make up lies or nothing, there is no need, but persecute in other ways….have anti-bible rallies. Accuse Christians of terrorizing people by saying there will be an apocolype.

        Just totally belittle there beliefs as rediculous and outdated. Just have out and out anti religious christian rallies.

        Claim true christians know who they are in there hearts and that organizations are just trying to get money and ruin peoples lives.

        Start digging up dirt about how much money is involved!!! Nothing pisses off people more than knowing they are out of a job while x-ian bigots are driving nice cars.

        If they start getting picketed and attacked on non-gay issues they will have less support to say anything. They are allowed to be too smug and too comfortable while they attack. We need to shake them up so much (but not illegally or harmfully) that they don’t have the money or time to carry on with there shit!!!

        Does anyone out there understand what I am saying?!!!

        Reply
      • 60. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:54 am

        Yes like the how the slogan goes for Queer Rising…”No Justice! No Peace!”…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 61. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:46 pm

        Black civil rights had MLK and MX….good guy bad guy….I can’t see why we can’t do the same.

        Marriage ins

        Teabaggin’ Gayz Wid Gunz

        (Must be just me snickering everytime I hear teabaggin!)

        Do whatever it takes. Get the word out….make sense/ make a stink!!!

        I guess I am just fed up! Cant takes this chit no mores!

        Reply
    • 62. B&E  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:06 pm

      Many years ago while studying advertising and PR at the university we learned that there is no such thing as bad press. Do whatever it takes to get your message/brand out.

      I don’t think making an armed stand is a good idea. That could have some very negative side effects.

      What we need is a nationwide corordinated effort for a peaceful, well worded and consistent message against the h8rs.

      Pan to Jesus sitting in a gay bar having a drink discussing equal rights, I mean after all…..WWJD ;)

      Love the ideas, love the site. Keep it going. The more we can get our message out in the media the better.

      Much love!

      Reply
      • 63. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:09 pm

        Jesus was a liberal, after all. Or maybe I misunderstood that whole “get rid of all your stuff to help the poor” bit.

        Reply
    • 64. Ed-M  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:21 pm

      I was one of the ones suggesting some ‘restraint’ even though we have to defend our selves. Well, I’m over that now. Did Jesus show restraint when he criticized the religious establishment and the religious right of his day? NO! Did he show restraint against the marketplace that was allowed to evolve on the Temple grounds? NOT IN THE LEAST!

      Reply
      • 65. Ozymandias ('cause it's cooler than 'Elbert')  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:05 pm

        Two thumbs up Ed-M! :)

        Love,

        Ozy

        Reply
      • 66. G.Rod  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:12 pm

        Ed-M. The Man lacked cell phones and utube. B&E’s ideas of a bar scene could be work in your parody.

        Reply
  • 67. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:59 am

    Maggie now claiming that all churches are no longer allowed to help people or do adoptions because the government allowing gay marriage will force them to perform marriages and adoptions that they don’t want. FLAT OUT LIES!
    Maggie saying you cannot be a gay person and a GOOD christian.

    Reply
    • 68. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:04 am

      Maybe a TRUE Christian. But then the true Christian doesn’t exist, just like the true Scotsman.

      Reply
      • 69. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:40 pm

        John, since the term “Christian” means “Christ-like”, and since we are all aware that they refer to Yeshua ben Yosef as “Christ”, I must disagree with you that the TRUE Christian does not exist. I hav met many here who, while not affiliated with the organized religious community per se, are true Christians and show it through their support of equality and justice for ALL, regardless of who they are or who they love. And you are one of those I include in that group. The folks I have met on this site embrace the true teachings of Yeshua, wich are all based upon love, helping those around them, and pushing for equality. So never say that the TRUE Christian does not exist. THey are just overshadowed in the media by the HATEROs, as Ronnie so aptly named them.

        Reply
    • 70. Ozymandias ('cause it's cooler than 'Elbert')  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:09 pm

      Dieter, we all know it’s yet more spin! Churches are not ‘forced’ to do anything – EXCEPT when they receive government funds. It’s ridiculous to think that a church group could get funds from our tax dollars and then turn right around and discriminate against us! Obviously they haven’t heard the old saying ‘Don’t bit the hand that feeds you’…

      Love,

      Ozy

      Reply
  • 71. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:03 am

    Maggie ended by saying that by giving gay people rights, that the UK has destroyed it’s future, and that it is her ultimate cause to save america from gays.

    Reply
    • 72. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:12 am

      Hey Haggie….the last woman(Joan of Arc) who tried to save her country in the name of “God” was burned at the stake by the same people she saved….just so you know….you PSCHYO FOOL!!!!!…….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 73. Sheryl Carver  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:05 am

    Here’s the link to the Sullivan/Gallagher debate (live):

    http://www.cato.org/event.php?eventid=6987

    Reply
  • 74. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:19 am

    LOL..guy is claiming that in the US, that 30-40% of all gays voted for McCain/Palin…..

    Reply
    • 75. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:23 am

      I voted for Obama….and all Gay people think Palin is a FOOL…I mean the 100 or so I know do….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
      • 76. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:25 am

        So do most of the straight people, for that matter. I even know several Republicans who refused to vote (or voted for Obama, even) because of Palin. I remain convinced that she is the primary reason they lost that election (with Bush’s association being a close second).

        Reply
      • 77. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:08 pm

        Ronnie, I don’t think Sarah Palin is a fool! Fools are smarter than Sarah is!

        Reply
      • 78. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:16 pm

        Then what do we call her?…Sarah Failin….bwwaaa!!!…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
  • 79. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:29 am

    OMG watch this video and tell me if anybody’s know if anybody’s GayDar is going off with this Thomas Peters Kids….Mine has hit such a high note that every dog in my neighbor hood is howling……lol….I mean seriously so being pro-catholic is a prerequisite to being an elected/appointed official….no violation of free speech/religion there…oh and I love when Bigots call other people Bigots…it is very entertaining…yeah?<3…Ronnie:

    Reply
    • 80. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:35 am

      that Peters guy is Flaming!!!!

      Reply
      • 81. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:40 am

        Ok good…so I’m not the only one….lol…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 82. Ed-M  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:16 pm

        My gaydar went WAY up… and I only watched a minute or so of the clip! I’m in a very vulnerable state these days and despairing if we’ll ever be seen as equal so I have to keep their poison OUT of my brain.

        Reply
    • 83. J. Stone  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:39 am

      The kid keeps misquoting Knox as saying the pope is “killing” people in the name of Jesus. Typical tactic of our opponents.

      Reply
      • 84. J. Stone  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:45 am

        The kid’s been blogging for 5 years? What, did he get a computer for his 10th birthday? I wonder if he has a date to the prom yet.

        Reply
    • 85. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:05 am

      best hypocritical quote @7:28 “They’re not interested in debating. They’re not interested in debating that…and to dismiss people who disagree with you as bigots or crazy or acting in the service of satan ends the conversation.”

      Reply
      • 86. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:10 am

        This is after he had gone on a tirade calling Knox a bigot, among other names, in a dismissive manner…

        Reply
    • 87. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:09 pm

      Since when is a debate panel consist of two religious white guys one hte same side of the issue debating the moderator who is agreeing with them?

      All i can say is htat knox is out there shakin things up!!

      Religions are there for the money!!! Africa is poor….the Pope wants the poor blacks to die off so richer whiter more german naziesque folk like himself can come in and take africa.

      In fact the election of this pope was rigged!!! they knew he was pro nazi!! PJPII had a small group of priest gaathered to decide how to be fair to gays and bring them into the faith. The answer was to recognize that the bible didn’t really say anything against them (Helminiak-What the bible really says about homosexuality) and that ancience didn’t know about gays (what knox is saying). But when PJPII got a stroke the priests in the commitee got disbanded or fired….nothin heard about that!!!!! They pretty well are silenced!!!

      I don’t know why the CC is trying to cut its own throts but many people are leaving the church in droves.

      The catholic church is dyin,
      becuz they keep on lyin,
      But they keep on cryin,
      while God they are defyin!!!

      (Dedicated to ma peeps Ronnie!)

      Religion is dying, and you can hear there screams! The more it loses power the morethe oppressed are coming out into the light…

      Reply
      • 88. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:14 pm

        That was a pretty sweet rhyme, Tomk….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 89. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:39 pm

        The newest attempt of the Catholic Church to recruit more people was to allow the Anglicans back in, but to keep their own ways, like priests that are married.

        Reply
      • 90. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:42 pm

        Oh, and I think this is why Catholics are so adamant about birth control. It’s the only reason they’re still going.

        Reply
      • 91. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:55 pm

        It’s because “every sperm is sacred.”

        Reply
      • 92. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:58 pm

        Never mind the millions (billions?) of sperm that die even with a successful fertilization.

        If I remember correctly, that tradition (along with the rule against masturbation, and quite possibly gay sex as well) originated with the belief that semen contained the entire baby, and the woman was just a vessel for its growth, so “wasting” it was comparable to murder. Of course, now we know that’s not true, so they have no legitimate justification.

        Sorry if I repeated anything that was in that video, but I can’t watch it at work.

        Reply
      • 93. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:07 pm

        That’s true, John, and the ideology behind the Leviticus section about a man laying with another man. It was because the emissions outside of a woman was seen as an abomination. Notice that it doesn’t mention a woman with another woman there.

        Reply
      • 94. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:23 pm

        I know about the billions of spermses that die…they dont die in vane!!! They are like the heteros that cant or dont have children…they are there to cheer them on see?!!!

        (The gay sperms however cannot say they deserve the right to be called ‘semen’…as semen is reserved for sperm that actually want to reach the egg and do her. The sperm that engage in sex-linked characteristics choose to do so and while these sex-linked cromos have the right to penetrate any egg if they do then they are AN ABOMINATION UNTO THE LORD!!!….It’s in Reviculus 69:69)

        Reply
      • 95. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:27 pm

        Is that what they were doing in “Look Who’s Talking 1,2,&3″….cheering?…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 96. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:43 pm

        yup just cheering.

        hey guyz its been fun. shout out to Felix here for gettin me interested in this site. you guys are a riot…a regular riot!!! I have learned alot and will come back to read more when i can get my own computer.

        Felix says hi to all of you but specially fiona68 Ronnie richard Dave somebody straight guy? (his words) and julia. My shift is over and i gotta go cuz its late. C-Ya Peace! Tomahawk

        Reply
      • 97. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:50 pm

        Hi….and bye..ttyl TomK….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
    • 98. Doug Bearden  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:34 pm

      Have you gone to Peters blog? The pic he has posted is sooo gay…

      Reply
      • 99. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:37 pm

        I haven’t, no…I’ll check it now…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 100. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:42 pm

        OMG!!!…Is he wearing eye liner?…BEEP! BEEP!!!…. GAYDAR ALERT!!!…..the dogs in my neighborhood howling again and my dog looks like his ears are going to explode…..somebody get this boy some glitter….hehehe…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
    • 101. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 8:40 pm

      Why is Peters attacking Knox? Is he afraid that he will lose his post blogging for the Nazi pope if he reveals that he is gay? As if you couldn’t tell by watching his body English and hearing his voice!

      Reply
      • 102. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 8:44 pm

        See I told you…that boy is gayer then day is long….lol…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
  • 103. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:55 am

    I was IN South Africa last year at the same time that the Pope was there.

    And I saw and heard the Pope, with my very own eyes and ears, tell Africans that condoms were of no use in preventing HIV, and that, in fact, they caused the SPREAD of HIV. I saw and heard this myself.

    There were THOUSANDS of Africans listening to this speech. And thousands of those people are now HIV positive DIRECTLY BECAUSE OF THE POPE.

    The blood of innocent people’s lives in on HIS hands. He should be tried for murder as far as I am concerned, and is truly the epitome of evil presenting itself as good.

    Yet people still foolishly send the Pope their hard earned money so that he can continue building his city of solid gold in Rome.

    And for the life of me, I simply can not understand why.

    Reply
    • 104. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:00 am

      I truly cannot understand this either. I have religious friends (which is different from “I have gay friends,” in that I actually respect their rights) who claim that they’re not like that, that we shouldn’t blame the individuals for the faults of the system. At this point, I like to point out that they are still supporting that system, that they are still at fault. Here’s another example: http://www.daylightatheism.org/2010/02/catholic-sex-abuse-in-germany.html

      Reply
    • 105. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:00 am

      Well because they are trying to buy their way into Heaven…they would never say that directly…but it is blatantly obvious….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 106. Ed-M  |  February 17, 2010 at 10:59 am

    You are so right, Bill. And the heterosexuals went after Jesus for his own gayness as well. Has anyone else read about the scene in the Garden of Gethsemane in Mark chapter 8 where the Jewish Temple Police chased after and tried to apprehend a nearly naked young young man and all they got was his clothing? Would they have tried to grab the youth if they didn’t suspect Jesus was gay and sexually active???? I DON”T THINK SO.

    Reply
    • 107. G.Rod  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:35 pm

      Ed-M Trying to work this scene into your temple, money changer scene in your soon to be released parody is not going to go over well – whatever the viewers orientation. In 51 you said your days of restraint were over. Is posting this idea of a naked young man what you mean? I was thinking of being one of your financial backers for getting your parody up on utube. Ed-M, your crossed the line, I withdrawn my support.

      Indeed you seem to know your scripture too well. Are you a proxy for some mainline religious group like the Knights of Columbus?

      The focus must be on civil marriage – keeping religious marriage and religion as far away as is possible.

      Reply
      • 108. Ed-M  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:52 pm

        I WASN’T THE ONE SUGGESTING A PARODY! The money changer scene actually happened and Jesus himself was VIOLENT!!!! He turned over all the tables and threw all the merchants out. By throwing out restraint I mean, I shall no longer be concerned with what YOU HETEROSEXUALS WILL THINK cause y’alls will think the WORST about us no matter what. And, yes, there WAS a naked young man in the Garden of Gethsemane — entirely the fault of the Temple Police: they tried to grab him and he was able to break free by wriggling OUT of his clothing. Mark 8:50-52. Seriously, I doubt you were going to support a parody (whoever suggested it) anyway.

        I AM NOT A F***ING PROXY WITH ANY RELIGIOUS CULT ESPECIALLY THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS! The only reason I know my scripture is, I joined and followed christian fundamentalist mind-control cults for only too long! And yes, they denied me my sexuality and tried to get me to deny it, too. DIDN’T WORK.

        Yes, the focus should be on civil marriage but the other side – YOUR side – INSISTS UPON DRAGGING RELIGION INTO IT so we need to fight back there as well and FIGHT BACK HARD!

        Reply
  • 109. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:07 am

    Interesting governor candidate for California: read his plans… they don’t seem half bad!!

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. – What the world already knows of Prince Frederic von Anhalt reads like a tabloid writer’s dream: eighth husband of Zsa Zsa Gabor, lover (never confirmed) of Anna Nicole Smith, self-proclaimed member of European royalty.

    The 65-year-old flamboyant socialite says he’ll add a new title on Wednesday: California gubernatorial candidate.

    Von Anhalt and his attorney said they will file his candidate papers in late morning at the secretary of state’s office in Sacramento.

    If he follows through, von Anhalt would be the only independent in a field that includes Republicans Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner and the presumed Democratic candidate, Attorney General Jerry Brown.

    He already has a platform (titled “Return the Good Life to California”) that is sure to win favor with a certain segment of California’s electorate. He wants to lift the import ban on Cuban cigars, then tax them, and reduce vehicle-registration fees, making up the difference in part by taxing “bad drivers.”

    He also is offering what he says are realistic proposals that will have an immediate effect on California’s $20 billion budget deficit.

    One proposal is a “sin tax” on alcoholic beverages and cigarettes, as well as marijuana and prostitution, which, under his platform, would be legalized.

    “Marijuana is a big industry already,” von Anhalt said in a telephone interview from his home in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Bel Air, where he cares for his 93-year-old wife. “Let’s legalize it, tax it, make some money and put less people in jail.”

    A statewide initiative to legalize and tax marijuana is likely to appear on the November ballot.

    He also favors repealing the ban on gay marriage, which voters wrote into the state constitution in 2008.

    “I believe in marriage between men and women, but I am also a defender of the constitution, which says equal rights for all,” he said in his platform. “Let them be as miserable as the rest of us.”

    Reply
    • 110. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:12 am

      I like this guy.

      Reply
    • 111. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:15 am

      Yes!…I’m not a californian but I too want to be a miserable in the good way….lol..<3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 112. J. Stone  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:11 am

    I just submitted this to the NOM site–I wonder if they will allow it to post:

    Defining legal marriage as between one man and one woman is fine in a world in which gay people do not exist. For centuries, millennia even, gay people did not exist in the eyes of society–just wicked straight people who engaged in deviant sex with others of the same gender. As humankind has matured, though, it has become increasingly clear that gay people do exist. Society is coming to grips with this fact right now.
    People break down into 3 groups around the fact that gay people exist: some deny it; some believe it, and are afraid; and some believe it and accept it without fear.
    NOM supporters fall into the first two categories. People in the third category recognize that it is wrong for society to deny gay people full and equal access to the benefits of society and its institutions.

    Reply
  • 113. LoriH  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:18 am

    I find it laughable that they whine about people losing their jobs because of their support for Prop 8 when LGBT people loose their jobs every day and others live in fear of loosing their jobs because of their orientation.

    The time for being quiet is over. Having been around long enough to live through the civil rights movement and the women’s rights movement, being the “good” minority allows them to continue their bigotry. We need to be vocal about our presence, both LGBT folks and straight allies, and call them on every lie they make.

    We see that exposing their lies is our best defense, Rep. Elliot crumbled when exposed and I believe PM will also crumble as their lies are exposed. In fact it is my theory that they had such a flimsy defense because they did not expect a team of such caliber as Olsen and Boies to call them on their lies. They did not expect us to mount a second court case after Prop. 8 was upheld the first time.

    Reply
    • 114. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:36 am

      The ProtectMarriage folks seemed to assume that we’d be represented by the ACLU and the usual cohorts.

      They never imagined that 2 of the most powerful attorneys in the United States wouldn’t be bigots right alongside them and would stand up for justice instead of religion.

      Reply
  • 115. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:27 am

    I will NEVER retreat back into the closet. News Flash: CLOSETS ARE FOR CLOTHING, NOT PEOPLE!

    Reply
    • 116. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:33 am

      Unless you are playing 7 minutes in heaven…then by all means……lol……<3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 117. Bolt  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:40 am

    Why respond to the raging bigot’s pathetic arguments. They win when we talk about their bullshit. The facts of the Perry v. Schwarzenegger trial are where the real power, and truth exists. We should focus on that, and not the disgusting religious fascists who will say and do anything to raise a few million dollars at our expense. However, we should give them their deserved hell on earth! Picket their synagogues of Satan, other wise know as their pathetic churches, and infect their ears with the word bigot until they’re delivered from it!

    Reply
    • 118. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:08 pm

      Prop’s! Dude!!!

      Anti-Bible Rallies!

      Gayz Wid Gunz!!!

      Spread the truth that tooo many ‘christians’ are not living what they preach!!! Make huge controversial but TRUE allegations and get them in the media, on blog sites.

      Start a YouTube Anti’Christian’ that calls them out and hold Fox News like debates where the ‘X’ians’ are shouted down and ridiculed. Get Maggie and Andrew there under false pretense and rip them apart!!!

      We are trying to hard to play fair and look good but who the fuck cares anymore? They get away with it so we should follow there lead and then no one will pay any attention to them.

      When is the last time you ever walked in a church and saw blacks and whites? Very few. We need church sit ins where Blacks start going to white churches and Vice Verce. Then if anyone gets thrown out we can picket and cry foul discrimination.

      Gays should do the same. Gay men dressed in suits or bright rainbows going to Catholic churches hand and hand week after week and politely asking why all the fuss….then start picketing the church. Get some press. People will not want to go to the church, they will lose there donations…..

      Watch how fast those bitches shut the Ffff up then!!!!

      Reply
  • 119. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:41 am

    Queer Rising strikes again (This was in Dec.)…but I mean they are 100% why…is it ok that a wife beater who slashed his girlfriend with a broken bottle is allowed to get married but we can’t….and WTF is wrong with this chick for accepting his proposal……..she’s a FOOL!!!!……<3…Ronnie:

    Reply
  • 120. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:02 pm

    I wanted to share some exciting news with this community. I just found out that I am getting a promotion at work! The best part is that I can be out and don’t have to worry about repercussions at work for being gay. I only wish that many other people in the country don’t have to be in the closet for any hopes of getting a promotion, let alone keep their job.

    Reply
    • 121. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:08 pm

      Congratulations…….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
    • 122. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:19 pm

      Congratz!
      Love, Andrew

      Reply
    • 123. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:36 pm

      Congratulations, Alan E.!

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
    • 124. Ozymandias ('cause it's cooler than 'Elbert')  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:38 pm

      Congratz! :)

      Love,

      Ozy

      Reply
    • 125. Straight Grandmother  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:03 pm

      CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      I am really happy for you

      p.s. I changed my name from rpx to Straight Grandmother to better indicate who I am.

      Reply
  • 126. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:07 pm

    I will not sit down and shut up..you can keep you’re holy cup…

    Eating crackers for you means a pass into heaven is true…but crackers for me means soup and warm tea…

    A religious wedding is not my forte…so let me eat wedding cake and be Gay….

    Your God doesn’t believe in hate….when you shout that speech and bash you make sure that you will not see that pearly gate…..

    Equality now for one and fall all…Humans hear my call…

    Unless you stop segregating me and tolerate a new lease…No Justice for LGBTQQIA means you will have no PEACE!!!!

    <3…Ronnie

    Reply
  • 127. waxr  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:08 pm

    Daily Bible Passage:

    Deuteronomy 22:28-29
    Suppose a man comes across a virgin who is not engaged and overpowers and rapes her and they are discovered. The man who has raped her must pay her father fifty shekels of silver and she must become his wife because he has violated her; he may never divorce her as long as he lives.

    Reply
    • 128. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:10 pm

      Now why didn’t Mr.Palin and his anti-christ wife think of doing that to Levi….hmmmm?….Oh wait he didn’t rape her…never mind…..<3…Ronnie

      Reply
      • 129. waxr  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:25 pm

        Perhaps this passage will be more helpful.

        Leviticus 22:20-21
        But if the accusation is true and the young woman was not a virgin, the men of her city must bring the young woman to the door of her father’s house and stone her to death, for she has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by behaving like a prostitute while living in her father’s house. In this way you will purge evil from among you.

        Reply
      • 130. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:29 pm

        True but most likely it will be frozen ice snowballs….after all it is Alaska we are talking about…but I mean how many men are there in Alaska…the kids may have to join in also…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
    • 131. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 12:34 pm

      Gee, so that’s like going into a store, eating a bag of chips without paying for it, and getting caught before you put the empty wrapper back on the shelf.
      Yup, women are with as much as an empty bag of chips — the Bibli says so!
      I’d like to see a hetero marriage survive the husband saying that to his old bag (pun intended).

      But, oh THAT law doesn’t count any longer in their cherry-picked interpretation of the poor translation of a translation of a translation of an oral history.

      Reply
      • 132. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:01 pm

        That was translated from another language…lol..hehehe…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 133. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:03 pm

        And don’t forget all the revisions.

        Reply
      • 134. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:58 pm

        While it is indeed a translation of a translation, it is an accurate assessment of the culture of the time. Daughters were the property of their fathers. A rapist damaged the father’s property by his behavior and thus had to reimburse the father because he could no longer get a decent bride-price for the daughter. Since the rapist had paid for the “damaged goods,” he got to keep her.

        I suspect that a whole lot of spurned would-be lovers got the women they wanted by the simple expedient of sexual assault. :-/

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 135. waxr  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:09 pm

        fiona, you are correct. Women were looked upon as a piece of property. Once they lost their virginity, they were damaged property.

        Reply
      • 136. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:58 pm

        Fiona, that is unfortunately correct. But with their talk about wanting to return to the good old days, I dare these guys to tell their wives this is to what they want to return. They’ll be sleeping on the couch – if they’re lucky.
        But these bigots will use the “oh, but that part no longer applies… But all this other stuff still does because… Um… Because it’s the word of God.”
        Can you say “hypocrite”?

        Reply
  • 137. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:10 pm

    Right-Wing Leaders to Stage Pro-DADT Press Conference Tomorrow

    February 17, 2010 3:32PM
    Michael Cole

    Tomorrow the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) kicks off in Washington DC and some of the right-wingers involved are coming together to argue against a repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law that denies patriotic Americans the ability to openly serve their country.

    Among those participating will be:

    * Elaine Donnelly, President, Center for Military Readiness (you may remember her for a, shall we say, lackluster performance before the U.S. House last year)
    * Tom Minnery, Vice President, Public Policy, Focus on the Family (he praised Donnelly for that Congressional testimony, saying that ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was a “last gasp of sanity that keeps sexual tension away from men’s barracks and women’s barracks”)
    * Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council (he says ending the failed policy would “sacrifice real lives” in order to score political points)
    * Frank Gaffney, President, Center for Security Policy (he says repeal of DADT would “mortally damage” our armed forces)

    The organizers also promise leaders from the Eagle Forum, Let Freedom Ring, the American Family Association and the Traditional Values Coalition. Their stated topic: ”How Would the New LGBT Law for the Military Improve Military Readiness?”

    What I’m curious about is what these folks have to say about military readiness that contradicts the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Advisor, Colin Powell and Dick Cheney — not to mention the Commander in Chief?

    Add that to the new polling released today from the Center for American Progress showing widespread support for repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, it’s clear these people are not just on the opposing side of military leaders but also the American people.

    Reply
    • 138. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:49 pm

      “Cohesion.” That’s the only argument.

      My mom is dating a guy (I’ll call D) who was a Marine, and he saw some brutal stuff apparently. One day while in battle, a cohort came out to him on the battlefield because the man just needed to tell someone in case he died. My mom’s boyfriend’s response was along the lines of, “So? All I need to know if you have my back, I’ll have yours.” They both survived the fight. When the gay guy came around, nervously of course, and asked about what he said earlier and if ‘D’ would tell anyone, ‘D’ simply responded, “I don’t know what you are talking about.”

      Reply
    • 139. Ozymandias ('cause it's cooler than 'Elbert')  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:33 pm

      “What I’m curious about is what these folks have to say about military readiness that contradicts the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Advisor, Colin Powell and Dick Cheney — not to mention the Commander in Chief?”

      There have been two arguments against overturning DADT – unit cohesion and timing.

      The first argument – that unit cohesion and morale would be damaged by Gays and Lesbians serving openly, has been debunked repeatedly, using evidence from the Israeli Defense Forces (inclusive since 1993), Canada (inclusive since 1995) and the UK (inclusive since 2000), and Rand Group studies. Yet this argument (like ‘protecting the children’) doesn’t rely on fact and evidence but emotion and rhetoric.

      The second argument – timing – basically boils down to ‘Why should we change this policy now in the middle of two wars?’ That argument, however, can be debunked by the Army’s actions since the wars started. From ‘Moral waivers’ to recent policy changes concerning female soldiers getting pregnant, the Armed Forces have had to really bend itself into pretzel-shapes to keep recruitment and retention going. The LAST thing we need to do right now is repeatedly kick out soldiers who have committed no actual crime.

      In my discussions… okay, ARGUMENTS with people, those who hold the first argument are generally not gonna budge on their opinion. Those who use argument #2 will either be reasonable about it, or they’ll switch to argument #1.

      Just my two pennies!

      Love,

      Ozy

      Reply
  • 140. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    Well folks, we KNEW it was only a matter of time before this started, but alas, here it is…

    RELIGIOUS GROUPS WANT JUDGE WALKER REMOVED FROM CASE:

    http://www.watermarkonline.com/index.php/News/national-world-lgbt-news/3947-Religious-groups-want-gay-judge-removed-from-Prop-trial.html

    Reply
    • 141. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:23 pm

      I mean seriously, how stupid are these people…by doing this they are proving discrimination against LGBTQQI people….The more the do it, the more SCOTUS is going to take notice and make marriage equality legal nationally…..I Love that they are making it so easy for us….but really…they are FOOLS!!!!….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
      • 142. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:27 pm

        As much as I would love to agree with you on that, it does appear that the majority of our fellow Americans, heck, THE VERY PEOPLE THAT CREATED ALL THE LGTB PEOPLE, agree with the Brian Browns and Matt Barbers of the world.

        And if they don’t agree, they should step up and say something. 5% of the population CAN NOT DEFEND ITSELF against 95% of the population, and WE SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO DO SO IN AMERICA.

        SILENCE = CONSENT.

        SILENCE = CONSENT.

        SILENCE = CONSENT.

        SILENCE = CONSENT.

        SILENCE = CONSENT.

        Reply
    • 143. Phil L  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:33 pm

      Then we should demand that any religious judge be recused from any trial dealing in any way with anything religious. How would that be any different?

      Seriously… they’re just scared that we will win with the facts.

      Reply
      • 144. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:35 pm

        Every judge is going to have an opinion on most if not all major issues. Part of their job is ignoring their personal beliefs and doing what the law and the facts say. Unless they can actually show bias (which they can’t, because there is none), they have nothing.

        Reply
    • 145. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:57 pm

      Speaking of REMOVING judges. It seems that ALL Americans have had it with the Supreme court conservative judges!!

      Left and right united in opposition to controversial SCOTUS decision

      Much has been made of late about the hyper-partisan political environment in America. On Tuesday, Sen. Evan Bayh explained his surprising recent decision to leave the senate by lamenting a “dysfunctional” political system riddled with “brain-dead partisanship.” It seems you’d be hard-pressed to get Republicans and Democrats inside and outside of Washington to agree on anything these days, that if one party publicly stated its intention to add a “puppies are adorable” declaration to its platform, that the other party would immediately launch a series of anti-puppy advertisements.

      But it appears that one issue does unite Americans across the political spectrum.

      A new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds that the vast majority of Americans are vehemently opposed to a recent Supreme Court ruling that opens the door for foreign and domestic corporations, labor unions, and other organizations to spend money directly from their general funds to influence campaigns.

      As noted by the Post’s Dan Eggen, the poll’s findings show “remarkably strong agreement” across the board, with roughly 80% of Americans saying that they’re against the Court’s 5-4 decision. Even more remarkable may be that opposition by Republicans, Democrats, and Independents were all near the same 80% opposition range. Specifically, 85% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 76% of Republicans opposed it. In short, “everyone hates” the ruling.

      Reply
      • 146. Tigger  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:45 pm

        Can congress impeach a Supreme Court Justice? If so, I say Scalia and Thomas should go because one thinks in a mindset straight out of the 1500’s and the other one forgets to look in the mirror before he rubber stamps Scalias opinions.

        Reply
      • 147. Andrea  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:57 pm

        Yes, Congress can impeach a Justice. It’s an
        extremely dangerous precedent to set though. Better to appoint other Justices to balance them out.

        Reply
    • 148. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:07 pm

      Next Weeks Article….

      RELIGIOUS GROUPS WANT TO RENDER COMPLETELY FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JUDGEMENT AGAINST PROP 8 PLAINTIFF CRIMINALS WHO ENGAGE IN IMMORAL HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVIES

      “Hitler may have been a bad man but we still think his policies were good.”

      -The Religious Reich

      Reply
      • 149. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:38 pm

        Now that just makes me think of this quote… Sounds like something the NOMers would say, yes?
        “The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation. It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life.”
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        –Adolph Hitler (1889-1945)  My New World Order, Proclamation to the German Nation at Berlin, February 1, 1933–

        Reply
      • 150. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:51 pm

        Props! PDXAndrew Right on!

        Reply
      • 151. waxr  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:38 pm

        Read more of what Hitler has to say about the moral decay of the nation Volume one, Chapter X of his book “Mein Kampf”. Replace “prostitution” with “homosexuality”, “syphilis” with “HIV”, and “Germany” with “The United States,” and you come frightening close to today’s right wing platform.
        http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch10.html

        Start about one third down the page where it says, “A further example of the halfheartedness and weakness of the leaders of pre-War Germany . . . .”

        Reply
    • 152. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:46 pm

      Hang yourselves bitches!!! Hang yourselves!!!

      I hope they start saying some aweful things about Walker….he’s a judge, he was a lawyer….you don’t think he knows the laws on slander and libel!!!!

      I hope they get there asses so sued by so many people that they go bankrupt just trying to fight them all!!!

      The more they say bad things about Walker the more the justice system will feel insulted. scotus with feel persecuted by them and will rule against them just for spite.

      They say they are victims….well now they will be!!! HAHAhaHAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Serves the be-atches right!!! Scream loud now!! your corporate money grubbing empire called religion is falling!!! Scream so we can all hear you die!!!!

      Reply
    • 153. Andrea  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:03 pm

      RELIGIOUS GROUPS WANT JUDGE WALKER REMOVED FROM CASE
      —-
      Translation:
      RELIGIOUS GROUPS ANTICIPATE LOSS AT APPEAL

      Reply
      • 154. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:05 pm

        So now they’re hoping for a do-over, maybe?

        Reply
      • 155. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:09 pm

        NO!!…no do overs!!!! or takesee Backsees…..this is not kindergarden….although most of them are NOT smarter then a fifth grader….lol…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 156. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:10 pm

        If you oppose gay marriage, you might be a redneck (a little Foxworthy crossover there).

        Reply
      • 157. Andrea  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:42 pm

        If there was anything at all to the bias claims, they’d want to get to the Court of Appeals ASAP to present the evidence of it that they claim to have.

        If the bias was real, they’d want to go to appeal.
        If they thought they would win, they’d want to go to appeal regardless of bias.

        Only one reason to avoid going to the 9th – they think they’ll lose.

        Reply
      • 158. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:50 pm

        Lets be realistic here…this trial is about discrimination of LGBTQQI People…the only evidence they have that he could be be biased is that he may be Gay…now how is that going to fly in a case that is about discrimination against people who are Gay….they really have nothing and they keep digging themselves into a deeper whole…I mean wtf is with these lawyers…its like the blind leading the blind…eventually somebody is going to hit a wall….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 159. Andrea  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:13 pm

        They have to try anything and everything… if the “protected class” ruling happens, their entire business model goes bye-bye.

        Reply
    • 160. waxr  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:51 pm

      The only way to remove a judge is to appeal to a higher court. In this case, that would by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Naturally, they don’t do that because they have no grounds.

      Reply
  • 161. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    I’ve got one

    1(man) + 1(woman) = 2(not 3)….FOOLS!!!!!….<3…Ronnie

    Reply
    • 162. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:38 pm

      1+1=3 (for sufficiently large values of 1)

      Reply
    • 163. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:43 pm

      1+1=4 where ‘+’ means “+2+”

      Math rules are not set in stone!

      Reply
      • 164. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:45 pm

        just like marriage…….bwaaaaaa!!!….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 165. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:47 pm

        Hey, you can’t just go redefining symbols however you want! Arithmetic is sacred.. If you don’t do addition the normal way, next thing you know, people won’t know how to count, and we’ll have legalized incest and pedophilia!

        Reply
      • 166. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:51 pm

        Haha John that’s perfect.

        Reply
      • 167. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:51 pm

        But 1 & 1 is the same number so +ing them together is incest(ahhhhh)….and we ad 1 + 99 to get a dollar….OMG!….pediphs….hide your lesser thens…..hehehe…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 168. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:59 pm

        Only ‘certain’ numbers are sacred, John.

        Like 0 0, because it looks like two boobies.

        Or like 3 because it looks like sideways boobies.

        It is the heterosexual numbers which are sacred.

        The gay numbers, of course, will burn in hell with those evil vowels.

        Reply
      • 169. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:01 pm

        What about the most sacred of all symbols, (.)(.)?

        Reply
      • 170. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:09 pm

        I want you all to sing along:

        Reply
      • 171. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:21 pm

        ROFL!

        Reply
      • 172. Polydactyl  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:21 pm

        Best thread ever.

        c===3

        Reply
      • 173. Kathleen  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:24 pm

        Wow! Math nerd jokes. I’m in heaven!

        (my children used to roll their eyes and groan: Aw, mom, not another math joke)

        Reply
      • 174. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:27 pm

        Here’s another one for you, then.

        An engineer, a biologist, and a mathematician are watching a building with one entrance. After a while of seeing no activity, they conclude it’s empty. Then they see two figures enter, and three leave a while later. The engineer concludes, “Well, I guess it wasn’t empty.” The biologist replies, “Maybe not. Perhaps one of them was a woman who gave birth inside.” The mathematician pauses for a second, and then says, “If another person enters the building, it will be empty again.”

        Reply
      • 175. Kathleen  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:37 pm

        Love it John! It’s been fun watching my 4 y.o. grandson discovering the concepts of 0 and neg numbers. Also, he’s been puzzling over the question of “God” (his parents give him a very neutral “some people believe….” sort of answer), and questions like “how was the first person born?” (i gave him a simplified evolutionary answer). I also feel a bit weird about being party to lying to him about the supernatural as it pertains to Santa.

        He was recently told by one of his teacher that a googleplex wasn’t a real number. I explained that it was; it was just so large no one would ever be able to count that high in their lifetime.

        He synthesized all of this information months later when, on New Year morning when he said, “So, the only people who would be able to count to googleplex would be God and Santa?”

        Reply
      • 176. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:39 pm

        That’s certainly an interesting conclusion. I hope it wasn’t a math teacher that told him that.

        As for your point about Santa, I’ve been considering the same question. I guess I’ll have to decide if I ever end up having kids.

        Reply
      • 177. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:44 pm

        OMG!!!…….Santa isn’t real?!!!!

        Reply
      • 178. Kathleen  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:45 pm

        Oops. Sorry, Ronnie. I forgot we had a youngster in the group. :)

        Reply
      • 179. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:47 pm

        I think he’s older than I am, actually.

        Reply
      • 180. Kathleen  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:50 pm

        How old are you John? (if you don’t mind saying) If you’re younger than Ronnie, I’m likely old enough to be your g’ma :)

        Reply
      • 181. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:52 pm

        19, so quite possibly.

        Anyway, I’m off to class now. Nice talking with you all!

        Reply
      • 182. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:52 pm

        lol…I’m 25&1/2….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 183. Kathleen  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:53 pm

        Have a good one, John. And yes, not even much of a stretch on the ages.

        Reply
      • 184. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:54 pm

        OMG that is funny Kathleen!!!

        It reminds me of a completely off topic experience but one i gotta tell…

        A guy I dated took me home to his family for dinner. His kid brother has an ‘acid test’ for if you were gay or not.
        He would ask, do you perfer to eat steak and potatoes or do you perfer to eat salads?

        I thought a moment and told him I liked steak and salad.

        He stared at me all through dinner and did not say a word.

        Doh! Back to the drawing bord!

        Reply
      • 185. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:54 pm

        Oh geeze off to class…it has been 7 months since I’ve had to say that phrase….sadly I miss it….lol….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 186. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:01 pm

        Heh, Tomk.

        I worked in an office that was all women, and whenever lunch was ordered in, it was always salads. I actually inquired once about why it was that people assumed that a person with ovaries would want to eat a big pile of iceberg lettuce and nothing else.

        (I’m a straight woman who hates salads.)

        What a bizarre litmus test to apply to *anything,* LOL.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 187. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:06 pm

        Woo go 25 yo’s! *highfive’s Ronnie*

        Reply
      • 188. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:09 pm

        BiiiiiiiG…WWW…..highfives….Alan E…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 189. JonT  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:40 pm

        dieter: Nice! :) Another YT subscription, will have to listen to the many others he’s got up there. Thanks!

        Reply
      • 190. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:57 pm

        Fiona,
        The boy was ten….waddaya want from him?!

        Also, forgot to mention, he ate salad with the rest of us that night too. hehehe

        That is hte age when you can pour a full tall glass of water into a short fat one to the top and the kid will swear that there is more water in the fat glass.

        For a kid that kinda logic is aceptable……….for a kid.

        Reply
  • 191. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:13 pm

    So Oprah just finished here in NJ and I have no remorse for the sister os John Wayne Gacy….NO…the freak raped an killed over 37 teenage boys and 20 somethings….with a rosary no less….SHAME!!!…all because he was some Psycho closet case….the last picture of him taken before he was put down like the dog he is…is disgusting…hugging her with the biggest smile and happiness on his face…..SHAME…shame on him and shame on her…”I didn’t know that John”….BFD!!!….NO….I don’t forgive her because she gave his last minutes of happiness in this world….My heart goes out to families who were victimized by him….<3…Ronnie:

    Reply
    • 192. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:19 pm

      Ronnie, you know I love you.

      My biological brother is a sociopath who has spent most of his adult life incarcerated. He is a bad, bad person.

      I would not want anyone to hold me responsible for his choices in this life. I would not want anyone to think he and I are the same person, or the same type of person. And yet, some people have done just that.

      Honestly, I feel sorry for Ms. Gacy (I don’t know if that’s her name, but for references purposes I’ll use it). I know what it’s like to walk in those shoes, even though my brother hasn’t murdered anyone (yet — he did try to kill a cop, and then tried to have her killed so she couldn’t testify against him. I am sure the day will come when he is responsible for someone’s death).

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 193. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:26 pm

        I don’t hold her responsible for what he did….but after watching how nonchalantly she comforted him in his last minutes is deplorable….he died happy and that is disgusting….and she gave that to him…I do feel sorry that she was forced into a closet until now(her words) because of what he did…..Like I said at the beginning of this thread I hope the bigots see this because he is a result of their theological hate….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 194. Kathleen  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:13 pm

        Fiona,

        I just wanted to say I completely understand. I, too, have a biological half-brother (same mother, diff father) who is a sociopath. He’s currently serving a life sentence for what he did to his and other peoples’ children. He hasn’t killed anyone, but the damage he’s done to these children is very real.

        We were raised in the same family, share much of the same dna, but I would never want anyone to hold me responsible for his behavior.

        Reply
      • 195. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:33 pm

        I’m sorry if you,fiona64 or Kathleen was offended by what I said….I just can’t see how ok she was with him so compassionately…I mean she said it herself….he ruined her life as well just being his sister….I couldn’t be that forgiving….what he did…I mean…I just can’t…understand it…anyway I am sorry about your brothers…but they are not a refection of you…and he is not a refection of her…I just don’t like that he died with such a happy moment occurring just before…and that she is the one who gave that to him…It really shows how much of monster he is….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 196. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:01 pm

        Ronnie,

        She was his sister.

        Think about that.

        She was his sister.

        Think about that, and post again.

        Reply
      • 197. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:17 pm

        She was his sister?….wait what?…I’m confused…She was his sister…I mean she is still his sister..but..umm..yeah…anyway…I don’t think she’s crazy…..just a little trapped in family compassion…which could be a bad thing sometimes…Now if only the bigots could learn to have that kind of compassion the world would be better place..and they could focus on the real threats ….pediphs, rapists, and terrorists…you know?…<3..Ronnie

        Reply
    • 198. Ed-M  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:17 pm

      John Wayne Gacy Jr. was himself humiliated and physically abused by his homophobic father, who hated the fact that he was not “normal” growing up. He was also molested at a young age and I suspect the father in this as well. So it was understandable though inexcuseable for him to go out and prey on youths as well. Most if not all of the teenaged boys and twentysomething men he humiliated, molested, raped, tortured, and murdered were themselves gay or bisexual youth. It seems that he and others like him have a specialty for seeking out troubled gay and bisexual male youth, many of whom were thrown out of their own homes by religiously heterosexist parents! So every time these religious freaks point the finger at us, blaming us for Gacy, dahmer and the like, they have three fingers pointing back at them.

      Reply
      • 199. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:23 pm

        and he did it with a Rosary too….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 200. Ed-M  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:34 pm

        With a Rosary!!! Man, that is SICK.

        Reply
      • 201. Ed-M  |  February 17, 2010 at 11:24 pm

        And I’ll bet some sick religious freak sexually assaulted Gacy with a Rosary when he was a little kid, too.

        Reply
      • 202. Ronnie  |  February 18, 2010 at 6:00 am

        I would not be surprised if someone did….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
  • 203. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:18 pm

    OMG..LOL>….

    So it appears that the Ugandans are so freaked out by gay sex, they decided to all get together in church and watch gay porn together..P.S…standing room only..LOLOLOL

    KAMPALA (AFP) – A pastor seeking to bolster Uganda’s anti-gay laws which already make homosexuality punishable by life imprisonment screened gay porn in a packed Kampala church Wednesday in a bid to drum up support.

    The screening was attended by around 300 supporters crammed into an evangelical church in the Ugandan capital after plans for a “million-man march” were thwarted by police.

    Reply
    • 204. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:21 pm

      This reminds me of something Exene Cervenka said in the documentary “Decline of Western Civilization.”

      One of her main hobbies is collecting religious pamphlets. Paraphrasing, because it’s been a while since I’ve seen the documentry, she said of them “It’s fascinating to me. These pamphlets talk about perversion, degenerate behavior … all kinds of things that they claim go against God’s teaching. And if you’re not sure how to be perverse or degenerate, the instructions are all in these pamphlets.”

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 205. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:23 pm

        Maybe that’s the “gay agenda” they’ve all been talking about?

        Reply
      • 206. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:58 pm

        D’oh John! That makes so much sense; No wonder I never got my copy of the agenda!
        Love,
        Andrew

        Reply
      • 207. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:59 pm

        In one the deprogramming center they went into detail about ‘gay sex’….a (still never gunna be ex) lesbian says….”The more you talk about men the more you make me want to stay lesbian!!!)

        CUZ ALL GAY SEX IS ABOUT DICKS AND ASSES!!!! Any lezzie knows that….ask Eliot!!

        LOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        Reply
      • 208. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:03 pm

        Never thought to look in a church, PDXAndrew?

        Tomk: I actually never really thought about it before, but unless I’m remembering wrong, all the Bible passages except for the most vague ones that (ostensibly) condemn homosexuality specifically refer to men. Next time I get into a debate argument with a fundie, I should ask them specifically about lesbians and see how they try to twist it.

        Reply
      • 209. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:19 pm

        John in New Testament I think, woman make unnatural use of their bodies with other women.

        Doesn’t matter…why even bother. It is JUST A BOOK!!!! It has no magic powers and reading doesn’t make you any smarter.

        People just wrote it to impress other people so thta they could get power and money and dominate.

        You are an idiot (if you don’t mind me saying so) to argue with anyone….you would just be a Kay Kay Kay.

        If you want to do something get 50 friends and go early to a church that persecutes you and take up space. If it is white bring lots of ‘nigros’ and ‘spics’ dressed really ghetto. After several weeks the original congregation will leave and the funding will plummet. if they dont welcome you (and blacks and gays) they cannot call the police to make you leave since they are not a private club!!!! Eventually there pathetic church will fold and suffer!!!! They invade our space with insults and threats we should just go silently like a fat elefant and sit down……after all they do want us to ‘Sit down and Shut up!!!’ so lets do it!

        Reply
      • 210. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:25 pm

        Hmm, I don’t know any racist churches around where I live. Might need to go to Clovis for that.

        And I realize that arguing is pointless. It’s just something for me to do when I’m bored. Sometimes I’ll get lucky and one of them tries to fight back with logic (instead of just spamming Bible verses), which usually allows me to crush them into the ground. It’s a lot of fun.

        Reply
      • 211. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:09 pm

        I’ve always called them Jesus porn.

        Reply
      • 212. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:25 pm

        I gotta apologize John. It was wrong for me to say anyting about you being an idiot, you are so not it is translucent!

        About the church thing….you would be surprised how bigoted they are, especially gainst blacks!!!

        Not in an obvius way mind you….but it is still there. I think it is cuz of cultural differnces.

        So seriously, take a look at a local church that you know is gay unfriendly. see how many whites are there verses blacks. Most are white only!!! (Not that blacks are not also that way….I NEVER seen a white man in a black church!!!! I not saying it is not possible but in these here parts it dont happen. Hawkins county TN is where i am talking. But in Asheville NC too!)

        Anyway, in our little hamlet in Hawkins county there was a little church that did not like some local gays who had a wedding on private property. All day hunters were doing target practice just off the property lines. Trafic which never happens on our little road was swamped by an emergency prayer meeting in a church right next door ON A TUESDAY. Cars back and forth honking all day! Church prayer meeting was all day! they even went outside to sing or rather scream hymns about Amazing Grace and other ‘I such a sinner’ songs. It was reall all in very poor taste!

        So teh gayz, and some black friends and some straight allies and some atheist friends all got together and tried to decide what to do. Well no one could think of anything so several decided to just join the congregation but not tithe. Recognisence (spelling is way off but you get my meaning.) Then some more went. At this point the preacher was still happy to welcome the new people and was thinking financial matters would pick up. So the rest of us started comeing but we decided to dress very nice, Sunday finest, come early to take up seats especially in back rows but eventually the whole church and we did not sing, or stand or amen or halleluya or nothing. Just sat and stared. Regulars had to line the wall. The preachers would talk more and more about money. Some of the ‘new congregation’ started dressing street wise by then. Finally when there was a sermon against gayz one man started yelling and arguing back saying how the precher was tellin lies and lyin was sinful. The church called the police and the preacher said to take the man away but the man said I dont want no trouble and left. The cop said since he was willing to go he was not going to do nothing since it was one time and he didnt see anything ‘ilegal or untorerds’. Then the preacher who by that time saw what was really going on tried to convince the cop that it was a protest in his church. the cop said I dont see no protest? The preacher said it was a sit in. The cop said well your sign says all are welcome to come sit with the lord so I cant see how anyone is breaking the law much less holding a protest. i dont see no signs or pickiting just decent folk sitting in a church. Looks to me like it is just a regular church service.

        Well the next week the preacher tried to allow just some in but not others. Unfortunately it didnt go too well. it is hard to hold the doors closed on a church (hehehe) and one that slipped by went and opened some side doors. well the church eventually folded due to money and the preacher resigned.

        So here is the funny irony…the land for the church was leased to the church indefinitely or until it shut down by the original owners of the property the gayz lived on. So when it shut down the gay guys got a letter from the property tax people expecting taxes to be paid. So the gay guys reopened up the church to be an all inclusive church!!!

        You want to protest? They want you to ‘Sit down and shut up?’ I say lets make everyone happy and do both!!!

        It really works. They want in our bedroom well we can be in there churches BE-ATCHES!!!!!!!!

        And that’s my final answer! HHHAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

        Reply
      • 213. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:00 pm

        Oh, TomK, that is a GREAT story! I’m gonna share it with my friends. Thanks!

        Love,
        Andrew

        Reply
    • 214. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:21 pm

      Religion is such a positive force in the world, isn’t it?

      Reply
      • 215. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:22 pm

        I have reached the conclusion that religion does two things: it helps good people to do good in the world, and it helps evil people to do evil in the world.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 216. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:25 pm

        True, but people can still do good without religion (I like to think that I’m one of those people) and they have one fewer justification for doing evil. I honestly believe it’s outlived its usefulness.

        But then this really isn’t the place to discuss this.

        Reply
      • 217. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:04 pm

        “Religion is a fine thing I say, taken in moderation.” — Coleman, in Trading Places

        Reply
      • 218. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:21 pm

        Religion is a wart on the nose of humanity that needs to be blasted off.

        We will never reach our potential as human beings until we abandon this absolute nonsense. Scientifically & neurologically, it is quite difficult to abandon these beliefs because they are programmed into us during our prime learning years. The silliness of religion is quite literally programmed into our young minds. Over and over and over again until our little 7 year old minds no longer question the validity of these religious teachings. It needs to be ‘unlearned’ and your brain does, literally, need to do some re-wiring.

        I was raised in the evangelical church. Even before I knew I was gay, church was absolutely TERRIFYING. People talking in ‘tongues’ and doing exorcists on each other. The whole f’ing deal. I used to have nightmares about church when I was, like, 7 or so. But there was a clear moment when I was porbably 12 or so when I said to myself, ‘yeah, right. This is nothing but BS.’ That day began my path to spiritual freedom, which is ongoing, but acheivable.

        How many things in this world do we believe in for which no proof exists? We only indulge religion this exception because the masses are scared shitless of death and nothingness…

        Too much? Was that just too much? ; )

        Reply
      • 219. Straight Ally #3008  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:27 pm

        Nobel Prize-winning physicist Steven Weinberg said, “With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion.”

        I would argue that other political and social systems can do it too, so my point of view is that religion is simply something that can be abused.

        Reply
    • 220. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:27 pm

      I wonder what studio it was from?….Chi Chi LaRue?…..bwaaaaaa….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
      • 221. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:37 pm

        LOL..I personally KNOW chi chi. worked with her for many years at a club in weho!!!!!!

        she (Larry) started out doing drag shows at my club many years ago…..the club was bought and is now called Micky’s. I worked there for 14 years.

        Reply
      • 222. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:43 pm

        dieter do you know about Gay College Party in NYC…anyway..I use to work for them for 2&1/2 years 3 years ago…then I moved to Philly to further my edu. but now I’m back they asked me to work for them again but I’m to busy trying to start my own business….I know Owen Hawk….lol….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 223. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:23 pm

        Hey dieter.

        WeHo here, too! Do you still live here?

        Reply
      • 224. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:28 pm

        No Bill, I moved to Sacramento. don’t ask why. I have no idea. I miss weho. I miss my home.

        Reply
      • 225. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:44 pm

        West Hollywood to Sacramento?

        Oh dear God.

        Reply
      • 226. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:54 pm

        yes John..it IS frightening here.
        I AM the gay parade.
        since I live in the corner house…once a year I just open my front door and wave to the cars passing by. That’s IT..that’s the gay parade..LOL

        Reply
      • 227. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:45 pm

        Dieter, my former guy-pal about whom I’ve written would have constituted the other 50 percent of the parade, but he just moved to Palm Springs.

        Love,
        Fiona (who is in the South Bay)

        Reply
    • 228. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:35 pm

      I couldn’t help but laugh at that article. I thought it may have been an Onion post or something, but it’s apparently real.

      Warning, it is a little graphic, so it maybe NSFW.

      http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hyJex4vkO1MYbS3sVu8PBYCml2Lg

      Reply
      • 229. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:03 pm

        What I really said didn’t post but it went along the lines of ……WTF!!!!….thats all I can say….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 230. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:08 pm

        DAMMIT!!!!! Ugandans and Nashuans get all the luck…..they NEVER screen gay porn at my church….and we never got to see pictures about it in Catholic School….AND WHERE THE HELL WAS MY PEDOPHILE PRIEST!!! Seems they only go for boys that don’t want to have sex with them….of all the rotten luck!!!

        ;,P

        Reply
      • 231. Andrea  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:45 pm

        Now we know where that phone call to Rep. Elliott came from. :)

        The opposition’s MO is always to do something awful, while pointing at the victim and saying “look what he did!”

        Reply
    • 232. Straight Ally #3008  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:27 pm

      I heard they sent the tape to Nancy Elliott.

      Reply
      • 233. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:31 pm

        DAMMIT DAMMIT DAMMIT!!!!! All the straghts getting gay sex!

        What about us fags? Why don’t they send the videos to us gays!!!

        DISCRIMINATION!! DISCRIMINATION!! Religious Bigots what to keep homosexual activities all to themselves!!!

        This is pure Discrimination I tells ya!!!

        Reply
      • 234. John  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:33 pm

        http://www.google.com/
        All the gay sex videos you want. I guess Elliott hasn’t heard of the Internet, because I knew about gay sex by 5th grade anyway.

        Reply
  • 235. Rightthingtodo TX  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:34 pm

    sorry off topic

    equality continues to thrive new hampshire!

    Reply
    • 236. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:28 pm

      Their motto IS ‘Live Free or Die,’ is it not?

      Or has Nancy Elliott changed it to No Dicks In Asses?

      Reply
  • 237. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:37 pm

    Yeah….We are suppose to peaceful…come on now…while this shite happens?…<3…Ronnie:

    Eyewitness News
    NEWARK (WABC) — A transgender Newark resident has filed a lawsuit that alleges harassment by police officers.

    The American Civil Liberties Union filed the suit Wednesday on behalf of Diana Taylor, also known as Christopher Moore.

    Taylor claims two Newark police officers stopped her on the street last March and took her into custody while calling her derogatory names. She also claims she was frisked in an intrusive manner and then let go without being charged.

    The suit contends Taylor was charged with littering and disorderly conduct only after she filed a complaint against the department. The charges were dismissed.

    The lawsuit alleges harassment, false arrest and unlawful search.
    Newark police did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    (I just watched this on ABC-7 news so when I can find the video i will post it because what these cops did and said to this WOMAN is wrong)

    Reply
  • 238. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    Day 2 Chapter 5 is up! More of Prof. Chauncey.

    Reply
  • 239. Mykelb  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:11 pm

    When I go to protests, I take an air horn with me. Whenever one of those Christofascists gets in my face, I pull out the air horn and give them a good blast. So that their ears are ringing for at least the next 24 hours.

    Reply
    • 240. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:27 pm

      LOVES it!!!!!

      Reply
  • 241. robiedo  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:03 pm

    Hi all,

    As if we need further proof of the systemic discrimination queer folk are subject to…still, here’s the latest from Virgina. I do hope that Boies et al can get it into their closing argument, with the point being that any progress the LGBT communities enjoy is fragile at best –without enforcement of constitutional equal protection clauses:

    From Talking Points Memo:

    Gay and lesbian state workers in Virginia are no longer specifically protected against discrimination, thanks to a little-noticed change made by new Gov. Bob McDonnell.

    McDonnell (R) on Feb. 5 signed an executive order that prohibits discrimination “on the basis of race, sex, color, national origin, religion, age, political affiliation, or against otherwise qualified persons with disabilities,” as well as veterans.

    It rescinds the order that Gov. Tim Kaine signed Jan. 14, 2006 as one of his first actions. After promising a “fair and inclusive” administration in his inaugural address, Kaine (D) added veterans to the non-discrimination policy – and sexual orientation.

    Makes me wanna holler (etc.),
    r.

    Reply
    • 242. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:13 pm

      My brother almost voted for McDonnell until I told him about the social changes he wanted to enact. The (D) candidate wasn’t much good though for the economical state of VA.

      Reply
  • 243. Kathleen  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:11 pm

    Well, this guy was allowed to marry, and we all know even with his history, if this marriage fails, he’ll be allowed to marry again.

    http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2010/02/17/3910422-first-came-love-then-came-marriage-night-arrests

    Reply
    • 244. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:21 pm

      bwaa…Nathan Lewis of Lewis(ton)…..If your last name is the same as where you live…you might be a redneck…..hehehehe….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 245. Ray Harwick  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:33 pm

    I have the misfortune of having to suffer with Phyllis Burgess (the Cross Lady of Palm Springs) when I blog since she’s such a media whore she chimes into my blog on with her hateful, bizarre and incoherent rants). She’s a total idiot.

    Here’s her blog, at the same newspaper where I blog.

    http://www.mydesert.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=PluckPersona&plckPersonaPage=PersonaComments&plckUserId=bb3417b341a248a3a31a7c3d6a4ca00b&U=bb3417b341a248a3a31a7c3d6a4ca00b&sid=sitelife.mydesert.com

    The Desert Sun is a *conservative* newspaper and they just deleted one of my blogs on the subject of DADT.

    Reply
    • 246. Kathleen  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:43 pm

      She must not realize that medication could help control the voices in her head.

      Reply
  • 247. Ray Harwick  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:39 pm

    Phyllis Burgess (The Cross Lady from Palm Springs) recently wrote THIS on a blog comment:

    “Haiti has over 4000 zoo loo priests and priestesses….Im sure you could find more agreement there. We in America already know the value”

    That’s Phyllis Burgess. “Zoo Loo” and “priests and priestesses”??? Phyllis, darling! It’s “Zulu” and it’s not a religion. It’s the name of an African tribe!!!!!

    Reply
    • 248. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:07 pm

      Phyllis Burgess is so stupid that the light from stupid would take a million years to reach her ass.

      I don’t even know what I meant by that.

      She’s stupid. Beyond stupid.

      Reply
      • 249. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:25 pm

        Protesting the White Party with a foam cross and getting thrown out….Stupid.

        Walking into an angry mob of pissed off gays with the same foam cross….Beyond Stupid.

        Being sued for assualt on a disabled man in order to get in front of the cameras at a No on 8 rally…..Priceless!

        (Hehehe….if only! The assault part is true at least.)

        Reply
      • 250. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:24 pm

        ROFL! I don’t know what that means either, but it is just too funny… I just can’t stop laughing… People on the bus must think I’m insane.

        Love,
        Andrew

        Reply
    • 251. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:48 pm

      “Zoo Loo”? “ZOO LOO”?

      The stupid, it burns.

      I think I’m going to call the restrooms at the local animal parks the zoo loo from now on. Good god, man!

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 252. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:00 pm

        Told this to Felix, he smiled, says to tell you they are not gender frinedly…?

        Reply
      • 253. fiona64  |  February 18, 2010 at 6:53 am

        I am pretty sure the zoo restrooms are not gender-friendly.

        LOL.

        Tell Felyx I hope he feels better soon.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 254. JQ  |  February 20, 2010 at 10:54 pm

        lol. I don’t think I’ve ever been more excited to go to the zoo. I can’t wait to drop the new terminology!

        Reply
    • 255. PDXAndrew  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:28 pm

      Maybe she meant voodoo? But she’s such a cookoo, she don’t know what too doo?
      STOOOOOOPID!

      Reply
  • 256. Alan E.  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:02 pm

    “Debating a denier is like trying to nail a blob of Jello to the wall.”
    Holocaust Historian Deborah Lipstadt

    I think this quote hits the nail on the head.

    Reply
  • 257. RAY in MA  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:04 pm

    Am I missing something? Being gay, am I unaware of an (obvoius) straight characteristic…

    Do all straight people dwell on the sex acts of heterosexuals as much as thery do about homosexual sex acts?!?!

    They should be ashamed of themselves…a very immature characteristic… their sexual development must have been arrested at a young age. (sound familiar?)

    Reply
    • 258. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:11 pm

      Yes.

      Reply
    • 259. Ed-M  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:49 pm

      Yes, and it’s always the gay male sex acts they get fixated on.

      Reply
    • 260. fiona64  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:55 pm

      Not all of us. I suspect that the thinking straights (of which I like to consider myself one) lack that kind of prurience.

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 261. Ed-M  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:47 pm

        OK my bad, then. But you have to admit that it’s the completely warped “professional heterosexuals” like Maggie Gallagher and her ilk who always obsess about these things. And they’ve been very good at warping other heterosexuals’ brains to the point of obsession, too. And to top it all off, they probably consider thinking straights like you who aren’t prurient about us are a little bit queer. So in that vein now as well as other veins before, we’ve been referring to you guys and gals Queer Straights and Straight Allies See, we do recruit! :) .

        Reply
      • 262. fiona64  |  February 18, 2010 at 6:55 am

        Ed, I think that you have a point about the “professional heterosexuals.” They seem to be obsessed with a single, solitary act — and not to grasp that hetero couples indulge in that same act.

        Me? I don’t care what people get up to in their bedrooms. Furthest thing from my concerns, and frankly I don’t understand the people who are so damned prurient that it’s all they can think about.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
    • 263. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:24 pm

      Actually, Ray, I think the ones who re so fixated on how LGBTQQI’s are having sex are so fixated because they aren’t getting ANY sex!

      Reply
  • 264. Jason  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:12 pm

    Forgive me but I have to share this comment made to me from a You Tube user after I posted supportive comments to a pro equality video.

    mrcrazydudeful (3 hours ago)

    Gay marriage doesn’t exsist! States allready allow gays to be gay so they have their rights! You can’t change what’s been difined! Gay rights is letting gays be gay! Every state allows that so shut up and get clue you liberal moron!

    Reply
    • 265. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:20 pm

      Wow!!!…the uneducated ignorance that is just spelled out right there…I hope you lay into that Bigot…and might I ad Moron….because there is nothing smart in that statement….does this person live in the real world?…What has already been redefined in 8 states?….That person is a FOOL!!!!…and you can quote me on that….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
    • 266. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:40 pm

      Well, his username IS mrcrazydudeful.

      He’s, like, alerting you to his stupidity right up front, brah.

      Reply
  • 267. K  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:21 pm

    So, did anyone listen to or see Andrew Sullivan debate Maggie Gallagher today at the Cato Institute?

    http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/listen-andrew-sullivan-vs-maggie-gallagher-at-the-cato-institute/politics/2010/02/17/7922

    I can’t get the sound to work on my smart phone, but sure would like to know what was said!

    Love,
    Kaye

    Reply
    • 268. Bill  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:45 pm

      Yes. Definitely check it out when you have audio. Not to be missed, I thought.

      Reply
    • 269. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:56 pm

      i didn’t see it but dieter posted all the good parts…<3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 270. truthspew  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:40 pm

    That video, much ado about nothing. Around here they separate the bigots, cops are present, etc. Look, the cross gets knocked out of your hand and trampled. That’s a fitting end for a cross in my book.

    Reply
  • 271. K  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:44 pm

    A military fellow is traveling around holding town hall meetings with the troops, and none of them seem to be concerned about the repeal of DADT.

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/85439.html

    Seems like the troops are OK with serving alongside open gays.

    Love,
    Kaye

    Reply
    • 272. Tomk  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:05 pm

      My opin’ is that if I was straght I would be sayin’

      ‘I know i look damn hot and i know the only one who is lookin’ is that gay dude over there so…if there is going to be anyone to save my sorry ass in a battle itll be that gay dude whos been lookin at it all year!!!!’

      Tell me I aint right!!!!

      Reply
    • 273. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:16 pm

      K, it isn’t just ANY military guy who is holding these town hall sessions with the troops, it is Admiral Mike McMullen, Chariman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It was in our local paper in Fayetteville, and Adm. McMullen was surprised that in his town hall meetings that none of the military were askin about DADT, and when he brought it up, they all told him that the y already knew wo the LGBTQQI’s were in their unit and felt that they deserve the right to be fully open and that their spouses should have the same dependents coverage that their spouses have. Guess our troops are smarter than Senator McCain, huh?

      Reply
  • 274. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:03 pm

    “it” is a hacker because several of us received emails that “it” was banned…and yet….Julia….I will call the FBI cyber crimes devision…..<3…Ronnie

    Reply
  • 275. dieter  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:04 pm

    My submission for the next television ad we need to air before the supreme court decides on gay marriage:
    Prepare to be mystified!!

    Reply
  • 281. Straight Dave  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:05 pm

    Richard Walter:
    Would you be willing to share when and where you are getting married?

    If you don’t want it this open, I am sure we can find a way to communicate privately.
    I’m not on FB, being a really old guy, but I might make an exception.

    Is there some easy way to have an offline conversation?

    Reply
    • 282. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 7:22 pm

      Straight Dave, I have no problem sharing where we are getting married. That will be in Danbury, Connecticut. As for the exact date, that has not yet been determined, as it is tied to a Jewish wedding ceremony BZ is going to Lititz, PA to conduct, and we will not know that until about a month before it happens. I will certainly keep you posted as we find out anything. I am so excited about it. Email me rawalter63@yahoo.com, and I will email you our landline number. I would email the cell number also, but it doesn’t seem to work in the house.

      Reply
  • 283. TPAKyle  |  February 17, 2010 at 8:35 pm

    For those of you who have been tracking the Nancy Elliott “wriggling around in excrement” story from New Hampshire, there has just been a Remove Nancy Elliott from Office group established on Facebook and we need 10,000 supporters.

    Facebook users please join the group ASAP. This need to go viral so we can send a message to New Hampshire that we do not accept their attempt to repeal marriage equality!

    Tell all your Facebook friends…

    Search Groups: Nancy Elliott to join.

    Reply
    • 284. Ronnie  |  February 17, 2010 at 8:51 pm

      I joined it and invited all me friends…pretty much all of them joined tracker and the 1,000,000 people for marriage equality group…lets bring this Betch down!!!!…..<3…Ronnie

      Reply
    • 285. Kathleen  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:03 pm

      I joined and sent messages to fb friends

      Reply
    • 286. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:29 pm

      I just joined and sent invitations to all of my FB friends who are not already members. thanks for the Heads-up!

      Reply
    • 287. TPAKyle  |  February 18, 2010 at 7:55 am

      Thanks, everyone! Despite the good news that came yesterday upholding marriage equality in New Hampshire, we still intend to send a message to Nancy Elliott and her peers who, no doubt, will attempt to discriminate again.

      Here’s the story from New Hampshire:

      http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/638251-196/house-upholds-marriage-parity.html

      Reply
  • 288. Beth Taurasi  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:10 pm

    I am appalled at the idea that people would chant offensive messages about gays and lesbians. It would be like saying, “Blind women are …” Or “f—- blind women or f— black women” as well. I take no exception to those folks who are able, sighted, straight, and otherwise known as Aryan or perfect. I take nothing from these people as they could not only be offending gays and lesbians in their quest to become equal citizens of the United States, but they are offending me as a blind woman who has to suffer one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation, a high illiteracy rate in the nation, and stuck earning low wages due to earnings limits on social security.

    Reply
  • 290. Billy  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:37 pm

    Bawww… people post too fast, and I end up re-posting stories lol

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Support the Prop 8 Trial Tracker

Connect with us

Get to know your fellow Prop 8 Trial Trackers on Facebook.

Please send tips to prop8trial@couragecampaign.org

Follow us on Twitter @EqualityOnTrial

Sign-up for updates on the Prop 8 trial, including breaking-news alerts.

Categories

TWITTER: Follow us @EqualityOnTrial

Share this

Bookmark and Share

SITE STATS (by Wordpress)

  • 4,585,297 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...