Prop. 8 Supporters--YOU SUCK!!!

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 441 - 460 of total 1091 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

Binks

Social climber

May 27, 2009 - 05:10pm PT

Well, it is bigotry plain and simple. If the shoe fits, wear it.

dirtbag

climber

Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2009 - 05:11pm PT

"I don't have one on this issue. I am just calling shots like I see 'em. Again, I DID NOT VOTE for this issue, and I will not. I honestly could care less where the vote swings. What I do see is a ton of bullsh!t from one side making it about victims and hate. PUH-LEEZ!!! "

No, of course it isn't about hate. Putting into law something that says a group of people aren't good enough for marriage is not hateful.

No sir, no hate there!

GDavis

Trad climber

May 27, 2009 - 05:13pm PT

" Putting into law"

you mean changing pre-existing law.

Are you campaigning in other states after it passes in Cali? Just curious.

atchafalaya

climber

Babylon

May 27, 2009 - 05:21pm PT

"Most of my hard core Repub friends would have no problem with a new term for a gay union."

What do your hardcore friends call their homosexual relationships?

Binks

Social climber

May 27, 2009 - 05:22pm PT

about the being a victim part...

i'm heterosexual so i would never be affected personally, however i feel like the people that supported 8 hold repugnant, bigoted, racist and suppressive agendas in general. give them one inch and they will take a mile. if they can get fascist fearmongering theocracy they'll take it. if they can smear or take power from anyone or any group that isn't part of their intolerant views they will do so. and make no mistake they aren't interested in just opposing homosexuals, their intolerance extends to everyone who does not practice their particular brand of fundamentalism. they subscribe to an "us versus them" view of the world in general. their mirror image is the terrorist. this country is about freedom, not about denying rights to people who offend your weak sensibilities.

dirtbag

climber

Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2009 - 05:42pm PT

Double amen.

And GDavis, I don't know what I will do after CA.

the Fet

Supercaliyosemistic climber

Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La

May 27, 2009 - 05:46pm PT

"Most of my hard core Repub friends would have no problem with a new term for a gay union."

Binks

Social climber

May 27, 2009 - 05:49pm PT

I'll give an example. They don't just oppose gay marriage, they also oppose homosexuality. They don't just oppose homosexuality, they think it should be a crime. They don't just think it's a crime, they think you will spend eternity in hell if you practice it.

They don't just oppose abortion, they actually oppose all birth control. They don't just oppose all birth control, they think no unmarried people should have sex. They don't just think no unmarried people should have sex, they think the only purpose for sex is procreation. They don't just think sex is only for procreation, they think men and women should only follow what they consider traditional gender roles. They don't just think traditional gender roles are better, they think they are mandated by their god in their version of their holy book. They don't just think women shouldn't have careers, they think they should be staying home raising children. They don't just think women should only be home raising children, they think women are actually only suited for doing this.

They don't just dispute global warming, they dispute any sort of environmental regulations. They don't just dispute environmental regulation, they think unsustainably exploiting the environment is their right. They don't just think unsustainably exploiting the environment is their right, they believe that the suffering of animals and plants and the damage to ecosystems isn't worth considering. They don't just think the damage isn't worth considering, they think the earth is fallen, it's the realm on Satan. They don't just think the earth is the fallen realm of Satan, they think it can only end in a literal Armageddon. They don't just think it will end in literal Armageddon, they want on some level to see it happen and act accordingly. They don't just want to see it happen they think they will be the only ones who some how survive it.

Maybe as a prop 8 supporter you only fall partially down these rabbit holes, but many of these people fall all the way down.

dirtbag

climber

Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2009 - 05:51pm PT

"I'm talking equal benes/hardships, just a different term."

Equal, but separate

the Fet

Supercaliyosemistic climber

Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La

May 27, 2009 - 06:11pm PT

"Equal, but separate"
exactly.

I used to feel the same way fattrad, give them civil unions, but then I realized:

Seperate = different = bigotry

Put yourself in their shoes, what if Cali passed a law where you couldn't be married due to your background, but could have a civil union. How would that make you feel.

All Men are Created Equal. It can't be erased from the declaration of independence.

All Men used to mean white male landowners. But the idea was greater than the men who wrote it, and the logical conclusion is ALL men.

What do Prop 8 supporters have to deal with if there's gay marriage? The mental anguish to know two gay people can get married; sorry if I don't cry a river for them. If they can't tolerate (not accept) homosexuality I have no pity for them.

What do gay people lose with Prop 8? The right to marry the person they love, just like everyone else wants to do.

One group faces a far greater loss than the other.

Jaybro

Social climber

Wolf City, Wyoming

May 27, 2009 - 06:24pm PT

The word, is marriage.

I was married to someone I loved. I believe you were too,fatty, how can we deny that Right to someone else on the basis of being ucky with their choices?

coward

Trad climber

Boulder, Wyoming

May 27, 2009 - 06:58pm PT

GDavis wrote: "being a victim feels Good"

Spoken like someone who has never been a victim

coward

Trad climber

Boulder, Wyoming

May 27, 2009 - 07:21pm PT

At the veery start of this thread someone said what amounted to "political threads have no place on this forum." I couldn't disagree more. It keeps this place kickin' when there's no new route or adventure to talk about or nobody can remember that one time back in the day...

I definitely have found my opinion swayed on one issue or another by going through these threads that have emotions and real human issues at stake that apply to everybody, or at least a few.

This thread, for example - you get to read about what both "sides" have to say, and a full spectrum of viewpoints for that matter. Gay marriage - it's a really complicated issue because it affects relatively few people and most people can't or don't want to relate to the purported victims.

I find that it's no business of anyone what a choices a person has a right to make, provided that they don't adversly (in a real way) affect the way others' live their lives. On an issue which my gut is telling me is about a majority opposing the full rights enjoyed by a minority, I find the voters of California in support of Prop. 8 at fault.

The blessing of this I suppose is that this will force the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court, where a major ruling will take place affecting the rights of homosexuals to marry. With all the legal inconsistencies on this matter waiting to be revealed and evaluated cumulatively, the Court will have to rule in such a way that doesn't appear to be another national embarassment like the Plessy v. Ferguson "separate but equal" case.

Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber

May 27, 2009 - 08:07pm PT

"The blessing of this I suppose is that this will force the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court, where a major ruling will take place"

You would think so, but my money's on the court refusing to hear it on the grounds that it is a matter best left up to the individual states. They'll have to frame it in a federal context to bend the justices' ears.

What I don't get is why this isn't attacked as a "separation of church & state" issue. Same thing for abortion. Constitution's pretty clear on that.

okie

Trad climber

San Leandro, Ca

May 27, 2009 - 09:46pm PT

Gay people should have an equal right to be as miserable as the rest of us hetero miserable ball and chained bastards! Frankly, I think they have it so good the way it is- why ruin it with marriage? Here's a question: why is divorce so expensive? Answer: because it's worth it! Ha Ha Ha!!!

Matt

Trad climber

primordial soup

May 28, 2009 - 02:08am PT

Gdavis wrote:
"Therein lies the rub, you see. Its a race to be a victim. Go ahead, honestly, and have the parades and the emotional oscars acceptance speeches and the whole hooplah. Its childish and its attention mongering.

I honestly, HONESTLY, deep down to the center of my being, could care less about the issue. I choose not to vote or to defend one ISSUE (not those defending/supporting, but the ISSUE - an argumentative fact most people are unable to seperate) on it because its being so blown out of proportion by everyone else little needs be said. Why are there not crying hippies in the streets of how many other DOZENS of states that do not legalize gay marriage? Because its not about gay marriage, its about being the victim, and being the victim feels good."

wow-

there is no other honest reaction i can offer, but to call you an idiot.

do you know anyone who is gay?
do you REALLY know anyone who is gay?

do you care about anyone who is gay?
do you REALLY care about anyone who is gay?

this is a distant issue only for people who are distant from this issue, and anyone less distant from this issue pretty much has an opinion.

those opinions are either forged from an interest in making everyone's opportunity at a truly happy and fulfilling life 'even steven', or forged from a fundamental interest in making anyone different from what they are familiar with and comfortable with having obstacles to becoming 'even steven' with everyone else...

to say that you really could care less either way, that statement says plenty, and i am surprised to hear that you don't see it or understand it that way.

what if the issue was inter-racial marriage?
would you have an opinion? would you vote your opinion? would you publicly state that you could care less either way? would it be fair to call you a racist if you did?

Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber

May 28, 2009 - 10:59am PT

Rokjox "You do NOT need permission to marry from a government or a religious figure."

You're right in principle, but not in the law. The issue is that our gov't has not defined who can "marry" and as such, it is left up to the whims of "tradition" and personal prejudice. So to get the legal protections and benefits that "opposite" marriage endows, it is imperative that the legal definition be refined to be in line with the spirit and intention of the Constitution - "All [people] are created equal"

dirtbag

climber

Topic Author's Reply - Dec 16, 2009 - 12:27pm PT

So it looks like the Right Wing Homophobe Wet Dream of imprisonment for gays and death penalty for HIV transmitted through gay sex will likely occur in Uganda:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2009/12/16/vassileva.uganda.anti.gay.bill.cnn?iref=allsearch

(I guess transmitting HIV, which is rampant in Uganda, through straight sex is more acceptable)

Prop 8 supporters should be jumping up and down over this, though they are probably too hypocritical to do so.