Poll: Maine Voters Favor Marriage...

Main Page | Report this Page

Politics Forum Index » Homosexuality Politics Forum » Poll: Maine Voters Favor Marriage...

Page 7 of 8 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Poll: Maine Voters Favor Marriage...

Author

Message

BE-VA...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:35 am

Guest

On 2009-11-04 21:32:11 -0500, Mark Sebree <sebree at (no spam) infionline.net> said:

Quote:

On Nov 4, 7:10 pm, Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:
On 2009-11-04 17:54:48 -0500, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> said:

On Nov 4, 2:11 pm, Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:
On 2009-11-03 09:21:03 -0500, "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯)
www.LayoffRemedy.com> " <x... at (no spam) m.com> said:

As for the people in Maine, and marriage

They have clearly stated "FUCK OFF HOMOS"

Not really. It is more like, "wait for a few more years and try
again. Let the right get even more discredited, and the truth become
plainer."

In your dreams

Actually in reality. More and more states will be moving towards
equality, and the lies that the extreme right tells. Additionally, it
is the older generation that is most heavily against same sex
marriage, and the younger generation that is most heavily for
equality, so as the population ages, the numbers and proportion
against same sex marriage decreases and the number and proportion for
equality increases. The numbers are close now, so it will not take
much to overturn the bigoted and discriminatory laws.

Seems you haven't heard the news about the baby-boomer generation <SNIGGER>

Mark Sebree...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:46 am

Guest

On Nov 6, 2:13 am, BE-VA <blackwater-evangel... at (no spam) testland.org> wrote:

Quote:

On 2009-11-04 21:32:54 -0500, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> said:

On Nov 4, 7:38 pm, BE-VA <blackwater-evangel... at (no spam) testland.org> wrote:
On 2009-11-04 17:37:38 -0500, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> said:

Mark Sebree
Former US Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class, AT2 (1991 - 1997)

What else but a "Tweety Bird."

At least I joined and served during during a declared war.

Name your duty station, squadron or ship.

RTC: Orlando, FL.
A-School: NAS Millington, TN.
First Command: VP-60, NAS Glenview, IL
Second Command: NAF Washington, DC

And what makes you think that I could not do so?

Quote:

And I have never heard that "nick".

Obviously there's much you haven't heard.

I served with Marines. I heard a lot.

Quote:

I see that you could not actually try to refute anything I said.

You haven't said anything.

Actually, I did. I provided you with facts which refute your claims
and your distortion. You just did not want to hear any of the
facts.

Quote:

You've cried a lot though.

Nope. I did not cry at all.

Quote:

Typical homo behavior.

A statement which only demonstrated your bigotry and homophobia. I
have not said anything which indicates that I am homosexual.

Mark Sebree

Quote:

Mark Sebree

Mark Sebree...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:51 am

Guest

On Nov 6, 2:35 am, BE-VA <blackwater-evangel... at (no spam) testland.org> wrote:

Quote:

On 2009-11-04 21:32:11 -0500, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> said:

On Nov 4, 7:10 pm, Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:
On 2009-11-04 17:54:48 -0500, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> said:

On Nov 4, 2:11 pm, Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:
On 2009-11-03 09:21:03 -0500, "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯)
www.LayoffRemedy.com> " <x... at (no spam) m.com> said:

As for the people in Maine, and marriage

They have clearly stated "FUCK OFF HOMOS"

Not really. It is more like, "wait for a few more years and try
again. Let the right get even more discredited, and the truth become
plainer."

In your dreams

Actually in reality. More and more states will be moving towards
equality, and the lies that the extreme right tells. Additionally, it
is the older generation that is most heavily against same sex
marriage, and the younger generation that is most heavily for
equality, so as the population ages, the numbers and proportion
against same sex marriage decreases and the number and proportion for
equality increases. The numbers are close now, so it will not take
much to overturn the bigoted and discriminatory laws.

Seems you haven't heard the news about the baby-boomer generation <SNIGGER

I am a member of the baby-boomer generation, and I was relating the
facts that you cannot face. I have looked at the demographic
distribution of opinions, and it is the children of the baby boomers
who support equality and homosexuals having equal rights. It is the
parents of the baby boomers who are most against same sex marriage,
and they are the ones that are dying out from old age. This, with
time, the demographic shifts.

Mark Sebree

Mike...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 11:34 am

Guest

On Nov 4, 4:19 pm, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> wrote:

Quote:

On Nov 4, 9:11 am, Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:

On 2009-11-03 12:49:50 -0500, "Syd M." <pdwrigh... at (no spam) yahoo.com> said:

On Nov 3, 6:39 am, duke <duckgumb... at (no spam) cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:49:40 -0800 (PST), Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.n
et
wrote:

On Nov 2, 10:22 pm, "J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote:
Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the referen
dum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government.

That would be people like you.

It's time for America to show
the world that we are truly a democracy.

You do not want to face the fact that equal rights should NEVER be
subject to the will of the people, or they are not rights, and the
people are not equal.

The queers ARE equal. They want special rights.

Lying will not help your side, Earl.

Yours seems to have done nothing for your side either since you lost
the BIG ONE <SNIGGER> The idea of homosexual marriage in the US has
gone down in flames..

Not even close. The number of places where same sex marriage is legal
is still growing.

You may know begin to kiss each other's ass good
bye and return to your respective places of abode.

Why? We are still fighting the discrimination and bigotry that you
espouse.

REMEMBER THE MAINE!

We will, and hopefully next time we will win. The votes are getting
closer all the time. Soon, equality will start winning over bigotry
and discrimination.

That's great PR there, alienate everyone who does not enthusiastically
support SSM by calling them bigots. That will win them over to your
side real fast!

BTW, have you any idea how much contempt blacks have for gays trying
to wrap themselves in "civil rights." It really is an insult to them,
since they've dealt with real bigotry.

Mike...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 12:30 pm

Guest

On Nov 2, 11:54 pm, "W.T.S." <m... at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote:

Quote:

"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote in message

news:38kt7h.ol8.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net...> Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the referendum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government. It's time for America to
show the world that we are truly a democracy.
http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000011370.cfm

And many would still vote for segregation if given the chance.

We're not talking about civil rights. It's a false comparison, the
proverbial apples and oranges thing. Gays never had separate drinking
fountains or bathrooms, like blacks did. Gays never saw signs posted
in places of business saying "straights only" like blacks saw "whites
only" signs in restaurants. Gays never had to face fire hoses, big,
brutish deputies, or have police dogs sicked on them when they
marched. In fact, gays trying to apply the civil rights struggle to
themselves is extremely offensive to blacks, and it insults the
intelligence of everyone else.

Many did

Quote:

vote amendments to state constitutions during the civil rights movement to
continue segregation. Civil rights and liberties aren't for the ballot box.
They were designed to protect minorities from majority oppression.

At the time that the U.S. Constitution was being drafted, was gay
marriage taking place? Of course not. No one thought about it. Men
marrying men did not register. It was so so utterly non-existent that
it never even crossed the minds of anyone during the whole
Constitutional Convention and the later ratification. Marriage was
what it was. Fish swam in the water. Birds flew in the air. Men
married women. Marriage had a certain natural, biological
prerequisite and everyone knew what that was. Oh, what they didn't
know!

Fast forward to today. Idiots and moon-bats abound. I believe it was
in the 70s, wasn't it, that some gays applied for marriage licenses
and got turned down? And now you are saying that your rights were
taken away? Those rights were never there, gay marriage being a
recent fabrication, an anomaly that does not enter into normal social
and legal discourse.

Quote:

--http://folding.stanford.edu
Save lives, visit today!

Mike...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 12:52 pm

Guest

On Nov 4, 9:45 pm, rfisc... at (no spam) sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

Quote:

Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:
On 2009-11-03 00:54:20 -0500, "W.T.S." <m... at (no spam) earthlink.net> said:

"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote in message
news:38kt7h.ol8.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net...
Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the referendum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government. It's time for America to
show the world that we are truly a democracy.
http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000011370.cfm
And many would still vote for segregation if given the chance. Many did
vote amendments to state constitutions during the civil rights movement to
continue segregation. Civil rights and liberties aren't for the ballot box.
They were designed to protect minorities from majority oppression.

But not one of them is based on sexual orientation or who you like to
fuck. Get real, BOY! Blacks and women are not such by choice -- YOU
ARE!

Actual scientific research indicates that you're wrong.

So what does the research say about someone who has a heterosexual
marriage, has children by it, but actually prefers homosexuality?

If you are homosexual by birth, wouldn't that mean that it would be
impossible for you to be aroused enough to have sex with a female and
inseminate her?

What about bi-sexuals? Are they scientifically incapable of sticking
to one sex, so that they have have to have sex with women as well as
men, because it is not their choice, but something in the genes they
were born with?

What about trans-genders? Wasn't there a woman a few years ago who
was being changed to a man, but who let herself get pregnant before
the transformation was complete? If she was actually a man in a
woman's body, wouldn't that be the last thing he would want to do,
since men don't get pregnant? What's the scientific validity behind
that?

Quote:

But you bigots cannot handle the truth so you make up lies.

Do have any idea how lame and how utterly desperate you sound when you
fling the "bigot" pejorative at virtually everything that breathes?

Quote:

--
Ray Fischer
rfisc... at (no spam) sonic.net

Mark Sebree...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:37 pm

Guest

On Nov 6, 4:34 pm, Mike <mgcul... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

On Nov 4, 4:19 pm, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> wrote:

On Nov 4, 9:11 am, Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:

On 2009-11-03 12:49:50 -0500, "Syd M." <pdwrigh... at (no spam) yahoo.com> said:

On Nov 3, 6:39 am, duke <duckgumb... at (no spam) cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:49:40 -0800 (PST), Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.n
et
wrote:

On Nov 2, 10:22 pm, "J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote:
Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the referen
dum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government.

That would be people like you.

It's time for America to show
the world that we are truly a democracy.

You do not want to face the fact that equal rights should NEVER be
subject to the will of the people, or they are not rights, and the
people are not equal.

The queers ARE equal. They want special rights.

Lying will not help your side, Earl.

Yours seems to have done nothing for your side either since you lost
the BIG ONE <SNIGGER> The idea of homosexual marriage in the US has
gone down in flames..

Not even close. The number of places where same sex marriage is legal
is still growing.

You may know begin to kiss each other's ass good
bye and return to your respective places of abode.

Why? We are still fighting the discrimination and bigotry that you
espouse.

REMEMBER THE MAINE!

We will, and hopefully next time we will win. The votes are getting
closer all the time. Soon, equality will start winning over bigotry
and discrimination.

That's great PR there, alienate everyone who does not enthusiastically
support SSM by calling them bigots.

Good thing I did not do so. It is the bigots, usually from the
extreme right, that are lying to the masses and thus manipulating
them. It is when the lies are exposed that even more people will
realize the truth.

Quote:

That will win them over to your
side real fast!

BTW, have you any idea how much contempt blacks have for gays trying
to wrap themselves in "civil rights."

Given that it is a case of equality and civil rights, their contempt
is probably misplaced.

Quote:

It really is an insult to them,
since they've dealt with real bigotry.

You mean like the real bigotry that homosexuals deal with? Like the
real denial of rights that homosexuals have to face?

Despite your lies, homosexuals do deal with real bigotry.

Mark Sebree

Mike...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:56 pm

Guest

On Nov 6, 5:37 pm, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> wrote:

Quote:

On Nov 6, 4:34 pm, Mike <mgcul... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 4, 4:19 pm, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> wrote:

On Nov 4, 9:11 am, Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:

On 2009-11-03 12:49:50 -0500, "Syd M." <pdwrigh... at (no spam) yahoo.com> said:

On Nov 3, 6:39 am, duke <duckgumb... at (no spam) cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:49:40 -0800 (PST), Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.n
et
wrote:

On Nov 2, 10:22 pm, "J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote:
Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the referen
dum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government.

That would be people like you.

It's time for America to show
the world that we are truly a democracy.

You do not want to face the fact that equal rights should NEVER be
subject to the will of the people, or they are not rights, and the
people are not equal.

The queers ARE equal. They want special rights.

Lying will not help your side, Earl.

Yours seems to have done nothing for your side either since you lost
the BIG ONE <SNIGGER> The idea of homosexual marriage in the US has
gone down in flames..

Not even close. The number of places where same sex marriage is legal
is still growing.

You may know begin to kiss each other's ass good
bye and return to your respective places of abode.

Why? We are still fighting the discrimination and bigotry that you
espouse.

REMEMBER THE MAINE!

We will, and hopefully next time we will win. The votes are getting
closer all the time. Soon, equality will start winning over bigotry
and discrimination.

That's great PR there, alienate everyone who does not enthusiastically
support SSM by calling them bigots.

Good thing I did not do so. It is the bigots, usually from the
extreme right, that are lying to the masses and thus manipulating
them. It is when the lies are exposed that even more people will
realize the truth.

That will win them over to your
side real fast!

BTW, have you any idea how much contempt blacks have for gays trying
to wrap themselves in "civil rights."

Given that it is a case of equality and civil rights, their contempt
is probably misplaced.

Given that 60's civil rights struggle was about the real right to vote
and the fake civil rights fight of today is about having society
redefine what marriage has always meant, I would say their contempt is
well placed. I wouldn't be happy either.

Quote:

It really is an insult to them,
since they've dealt with real bigotry.

You mean like the real bigotry that homosexuals deal with? Like the
real denial of rights that homosexuals have to face?

Despite your lies, homosexuals do deal with real bigotry.

Excuse me, where exactly did I lie? Or is a lie defined as any
contrarian statement?

I didn't say that homosexuals don't encounter some bias for being
gay. However, I think society has made lots of gains on their behalf,
gains that they should be happy with. At the company I work at, I
occasionally see notices about LGBT functions of some kind.

What I don't buy is this business about "civil rights" and
"equality." You've already got civil rights. You can vote, it is a
crime to discriminate against gays in the workplace, is it not? And
didn't President Obama just sign a hate-crimes bill?

What I don't buy is this equality thing, where you get to define
marriage to make it mean something that no society ever had it mean
before. Neither you nor anyone else has that right.

Quote:

Mark Sebree

Mark Sebree...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:12 pm

Guest

On Nov 6, 7:56 pm, Mike <mgcul... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

On Nov 6, 5:37 pm, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> wrote:

On Nov 6, 4:34 pm, Mike <mgcul... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 4, 4:19 pm, Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.net> wrote:

On Nov 4, 9:11 am, Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:

On 2009-11-03 12:49:50 -0500, "Syd M." <pdwrigh... at (no spam) yahoo.com> said:

On Nov 3, 6:39 am, duke <duckgumb... at (no spam) cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:49:40 -0800 (PST), Mark Sebree <seb... at (no spam) infionline.n
et
wrote:

On Nov 2, 10:22 pm, "J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote:
Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the referen
dum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government.

That would be people like you.

It's time for America to show
the world that we are truly a democracy.

You do not want to face the fact that equal rights should NEVER be
subject to the will of the people, or they are not rights, and the
people are not equal.

The queers ARE equal. They want special rights.

Lying will not help your side, Earl.

Yours seems to have done nothing for your side either since you lost
the BIG ONE <SNIGGER> The idea of homosexual marriage in the US has
gone down in flames..

Not even close. The number of places where same sex marriage is legal
is still growing.

You may know begin to kiss each other's ass good
bye and return to your respective places of abode.

Why? We are still fighting the discrimination and bigotry that you
espouse.

REMEMBER THE MAINE!

We will, and hopefully next time we will win. The votes are getting
closer all the time. Soon, equality will start winning over bigotry
and discrimination.

That's great PR there, alienate everyone who does not enthusiastically
support SSM by calling them bigots.

Good thing I did not do so. It is the bigots, usually from the
extreme right, that are lying to the masses and thus manipulating
them. It is when the lies are exposed that even more people will
realize the truth.

That will win them over to your
side real fast!

BTW, have you any idea how much contempt blacks have for gays trying
to wrap themselves in "civil rights."

Given that it is a case of equality and civil rights, their contempt
is probably misplaced.

Given that 60's civil rights struggle was about the real right to vote
and the fake civil rights fight of today is about having society
redefine what marriage has always meant, I would say their contempt is
well placed.

Then they are not looking deeply enough. Then, as now, it is about
discrimination, being relegated to a second class citizen status, and
being denied rights that one is supposed to have according to the
Constitutional guarantee of equal rights and equal application of the
law to equivalent groups of people.

And by the way, the civil rights fight today is very, very real, and
there is no redefinition involved since the definition of marriage
includes ALL types of marriage, including heterosexual, homosexual,
group, polygamy, polyandry, and others.

Quote:

I wouldn't be happy either.

But then, you present yourself here as a bigot that wants to deny
homosexuals equal rights.

Quote:

You claimed that they are not fighting a civil rights battle for one.

Quote:

Or is a lie defined as any
contrarian statement?

Nope. It is defined as a statement that is contrary to the truth and
the facts.

Quote:

I didn't say that homosexuals don't encounter some bias for being
gay.

They also encounter discrimination in the law, and are denied equal
rights under the law. And if they stop, they would be in danger of
losing the momentum they already have. That is why they have to keep
fighting until they achieve equal rights. In a manner of speaking, to
stop is to die.

Quote:

However, I think society has made lots of gains on their behalf,
gains that they should be happy with.

Why? They are still treated as second class citizens. They are still
denied a great many rights, especially the right to marry in the same
manner and for the same reasons as heterosexual couples. They still
cannot serve openly in the military. Even where they are allowed to
get married, their marriage is not recognized in most of the country
in contravention of Article, Section I of the US Constitution.

Quote:

At the company I work at, I
occasionally see notices about LGBT functions of some kind.

So? That just means that you work for a large company, and that it
has nondiscrimination policies in place. That does not mean that
homosexual couples have any where close to equal rights.

Quote:

What I don't buy is this business about "civil rights" and
"equality."

You should look closer into the issue then. A heterosexual can marry
the single, unrelated, consenting adult of his or her choice because
that choice is for someone of the opposite sex and homosexuals have an
overwhelming majority. Homosexuals are prevented from marrying the
single, unrelated, consenting adult of their choice because that
choice is for someone of the same sex. And this choice for either
orientation depends on who the person is physically and romantically
attracted to, and whom they want to spend their lives with. Demanding
that a person can only marry someone that they have no attraction to
results in the person being single forever.

Even where homosexual couples can get married, they are denied access
to over 1100 federal rights and laws which deal with marriage, which
is unconstitutional. If they move, they are unlikely to have their
marriage recognized in the state that they are moving to, which is
unconstitutional.

Homosexuals also cannot openly serve in the US Armed Forces. They are
forced to hide their sexual preferences and make sure that other
service members do not find out. They cannot talk about any dates or
significant others that they have, and they are forced to remain
celibate for all practical purposes. If their sexual orientation is
discovered, then they are immediately discharged without any other
cause, even if they are filling a critical role in the command.
Heterosexuals do not have any such restrictions. They can be
completely open about their sexuality, and can even brag about it.
They can bring their partners and lovers to functions, both casual and
formal, and show their affection without any fear of reprisal.
Married heterosexuals actually get more pay and more leniency on
housing and not living in the barracks.

Quote:

You've already got civil rights.

But not as many as heterosexuals like me have. In fact, they are
denied a whole host of rights under the law which heterosexuals take
for granted.

Quote:

You can vote, it is a
crime to discriminate against gays in the workplace, is it not?

Depends on the state. I do not believe that discrimination against
LBGTs being illegal has been enacted at the federal level, although
such laws are trying to wind their way through congress.

Quote:

And
didn't President Obama just sign a hate-crimes bill?

There is still a long way for them to go. There is still marriage
discrimination, denial of federal rights, denial of the right to have
their marriages recognized in other states, denial of the right to
openly serve in the military, and some others.

Quote:

What I don't buy is this equality thing, where you get to define
marriage to make it mean something that no society ever had it mean
before.

What makes you think that? Homosexual marriages were performed by the
catholic Church for about 1000 years. There is even at least one male
couple of martyrs/saints who where lovers, Bacchus and Serge. Same
sex marriages were permitted in Native American cultures, Ancient
Rome, Egypt, and Greece, as well as other cultures. The current
definition of marriage includes same sex marriage. And the current
definition of marriage is only about 150 years old in any case. Prior
to that, women were treated primarily as property for the most part.

Quote:

Neither you nor anyone else has that right.

And nobody is trying to. However, the "definition" of marriage has
changed many times in history and across many cultures, and it
includes same sex marriages as well as other types.

Mark Sebree

Quote:

Mark Sebree

IAAH...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 6:56 pm

Guest

On 11/4/09 8:51 AM, * IAAH wrote:

Quote:

On 11/4/09 7:06 AM, * duke wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:16:44 -0500, IAAH <no at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:

On 11/3/09 6:39 AM, * duke wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:49:40 -0800 (PST), Mark Sebree
sebree at (no spam) infionline.net
wrote:

On Nov 2, 10:22 pm, "J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote:
Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the
referendum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government.
That would be people like you.

It's time for America to show
the world that we are truly a democracy.
You do not want to face the fact that equal rights should NEVER be
subject to the will of the people, or they are not rights, and the
people are not equal.
The queers ARE equal. They want special rights.
What rights would SSM confer only to homosexuals, then?

A special authorization just for their enjoyment.

Nonsense. SSM wouldn't be only available to homosexuals.

Right now, a queer has the right to marry the woman of his choice just
as we do,
and etc for the lesbo. They want SPECIAL RIGHTS which takes a new law.

WHAT special rights? It's a simple question.
What rights are same-sex couples demanding that you conclude would only
apply to them, using the common understanding of what a special right is?

Two and a half days, duke.

WHAT special rights?

--
"I do not pretend to be able to prove that there
is no God. I equally cannot
prove that Satan is a fiction. The Christian god
may exist; so may the gods of
Olympus, or of ancient Egypt, or of Babylon. But
no one of these hypotheses is
more probable than any other: they lie outside the
region of even probable
knowledge, and therefore there is no reason to
consider any of them."
Bertrand Russell

Ray Fischer...

Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 2:15 am

Guest

Mike <mgcullin at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

On Nov 4, 9:45 pm, rfisc... at (no spam) sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:
On 2009-11-03 00:54:20 -0500, "W.T.S." <m... at (no spam) earthlink.net> said:

"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote in message
news:38kt7h.ol8.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net...
Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the referendum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government. It's time for America to
show the world that we are truly a democracy.
http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000011370.cfm
And many would still vote for segregation if given the chance. Many did
vote amendments to state constitutions during the civil rights movement to
continue segregation. Civil rights and liberties aren't for the ballot box.
They were designed to protect minorities from majority oppression.

But not one of them is based on sexual orientation or who you like to
fuck. Get real, BOY! Blacks and women are not such by choice -- YOU
ARE!

Actual scientific research indicates that you're wrong.

So what does the research say about someone who has a heterosexual
marriage, has children by it, but actually prefers homosexuality?

It says that people who are uncomfortable/afraid of change, who are
rigid in their thinking, tend to think of the world in simply yes/no
black/white terms.

The reality is that biology is messy and complicated. Sexuality, being
all about biology, is not simple male/female, hetero/homo. There's a
broad range.

Quote:

If you are homosexual by birth, wouldn't that mean that it would be
impossible for you to be aroused enough to have sex with a female and
inseminate her?

Fallacy of the false dichotomy.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer at (no spam) sonic.net

Ray Fischer...

Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 2:16 am

Guest

Mike <mgcullin at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

Yes we are.

Quote:

Gays never had separate drinking
fountains or bathrooms, like blacks did.

Are you sure?

Quote:

Gays never saw signs posted
in places of business saying "straights only"

You must be stupid.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer at (no spam) sonic.net

Lefty...

Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:21 am

Guest

On Nov 6, 7:56 pm, Mike <mgcul... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

You don't get to decide which desired rights are "real" and which are
"fake". Those words are meaningless in this context.

Quote:

I believe it was your use of "dealt with real bigotry". The
implication was that homosexuals do not encounter it. That is not the
truth, not by the way bigotry is officially defined. Perhaps you are
applying some weird personal definition, in which case it's not a lie,
but it is moronic.

Quote:

I didn't say that homosexuals don't encounter some bias for being
gay.

But not "real bigotry", whatever you think that means. You like to
posture as the ultimate judge of what is real and what is not, I've
noticed.

Quote:

However, I think society has made lots of gains on their behalf,
gains that they should be happy with. At the company I work at, I
occasionally see notices about LGBT functions of some kind.

This is the basis for your claim, some notices on the bulletin board
at your work?
Weak doesn't even begin to describe that.
Oh, and BTW, homosexuals themselves made those gains by pushing for
equality. "Society" did not make gains for them. How condescending you
are.
Basically, you are saying they should be happy with what they have and
not push for more. Why should they?

Quote:

What I don't buy is this business about "civil rights" and
"equality." You've already got civil rights. You can vote, it is a
crime to discriminate against gays in the workplace, is it not? And
didn't President Obama just sign a hate-crimes bill?

That is your definition of complete equality, then? The ability to
vote and the existence of laws forbidding discrimination at work and
hate crimes?

Quote:

What I don't buy is this equality thing, where you get to define
marriage to make it mean something that no society ever had it mean
before. Neither you nor anyone else has that right.

So your argument is that nothing should ever change, simply because
you like tradition?
What self-absorbed twaddle.

Lefty...

Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:41 am

Guest

On Nov 6, 5:30 pm, Mike <mgcul... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

On Nov 2, 11:54 pm, "W.T.S." <m... at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote:

"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote in message

news:38kt7h.ol8.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net...> Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the referendum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government. It's time for America to
show the world that we are truly a democracy.
http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000011370.cfm

And many would still vote for segregation if given the chance.

We're not talking about civil rights. It's a false comparison, the
proverbial apples and oranges thing. Gays never had separate drinking
fountains or bathrooms, like blacks did. Gays never saw signs posted
in places of business saying "straights only" like blacks saw "whites
only" signs in restaurants. Gays never had to face fire hoses, big,
brutish deputies, or have police dogs sicked on them when they
marched.

Bullshit of the lowest order. In fact, homophobic abuse by law
enforcement continues unabated.

"AI's research has revealed that law enforcement officers profile LGBT
individuals, in particular gender variant individuals and LGBT
individuals of color, as criminal in a number of different contexts,
and selectively enforce laws relating to "morals regulations," bars
and social gatherings, demonstrations and "quality of life." AI's
findings indicate that race continues to be a motivating factor in
presumptions of criminality, and that racism compounds the homophobic
and transphobic treatment of LGBT people of color by police. The
targeting of LGBT people of color by law enforcement mirrors the
systemic racism found in policing in the USA in general, and is
consistent with previous AI documentation."

"Morals Enforcement - Policing Public Space
AI received reports of targeted enforcement of "morals
regulations" disproportionately against gay men in all four cities
studied by AI, as well as in several other cities across the US
including Detroit, Michigan, Columbus, Ohio, and Denver, Colorado. AI
and other organizations including ACLU, LAMBDA and the Detroit
Triangle Foundation are concerned that vaguely worded regulations lend
themselves to discriminatory application since laws and regulations
leave almost entirely to an officer's judgment the definition of
offending conduct. In a number of cities, law enforcement agencies
utilize targeted undercover operations as a primary means of enforcing
of morals regulations, in which undercover officers patrol areas known
to be frequented by gay men and invite sexual or lewd conduct by their
words or behavior. Reports in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York,
Washington D.C. and Detroit indicate that police target locations
where Latino, African American and/or South Asian, as well as
immigrant individuals, are reported to congregate for lewd conduct
enforcement."

Police Raids of LGBT Gatherings
Although raids of gay bars are no longer as widespread as
previously, reports indicate continued police targeting of venues
where LGBT people socialize. According to the NCAVP, between 1999 and
2003, police raids have been reported in New York, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Detroit,
Houston and St Louis. AI is concerned about reports of verbal and
physical abuse as well as inhumane and degrading treatment of LGBT
individuals during raids. Some raids have reportedly involved high
numbers of officers and excessive force against individuals.

Demonstrations - Targeting of LGBT Demonstrators and Activists
AI has received reports that law enforcement personnel have
selectively targeted LGBT contingents and activists at demonstrations;
employed excessive force at LGBT demonstrations and rallies; used
homophobic and transphobic slurs; and arbitrarily detained and
searched individuals. Advocates reported to AI that transgender and
gender variant demonstrators tend to be selectively targeted by
police. AI is concerned at reports that LGBT demonstrators were
detained and denied medication despite carrying necessary
prescriptions and identification. AI also heard reports of transgender
individuals and LGBT people of color being detained for longer than
other protestors before being released following an arrest at a
demonstration.

Quality of Life" Enforcement and Gentrification
Reports to Amnesty International in all four cities studied
indicate a pattern of discriminatory enforcement of "zero tolerance"
and "quality of life" regulations against members of LGBT communities,
in particular transgender individuals, LGBT people of color, LGBT
youth, homeless and poor individuals, and those engaged or perceived
to be engaged in sex work. Reports indicate that while a person may
initially be targeted based on their race, for example, the risk of
police abuse may increase when the person's sexual orientation or
gender identity becomes apparent. Discriminatory policing of "quality
of life" regulations appears to be strong in gentrifying areas, which
have traditionally provided safe space for LGBT individuals."

"Reports to AI indicate that sexual, physical and verbal abuse
frequently occur together. Sexual and physical abuse by law
enforcement against LGBT individuals are often accompanied by
homophobic and transphobic slurs. In addition, verbal abuse against
individuals perceived to be LGBT is often sexualized, in particular
toward lesbians and transgender individuals.

* Reports indicate that LGBT individuals who do not conform to
traditional gender "norms" in their appearance or presentation are
more likely to be singled out for sexual, physical or verbal abuse,
and that transgender individuals are disproportionately targeted by
law enforcement.
* Incidents reported to AI indicate that homophobia, transphobia
and racism often occur together in incidents of police misconduct and
abuse against LGBT people of color. AI's findings further suggest that
a significant proportion of reports of sexual, physical and verbal
misconduct against LGBT individuals concerned people of color,
mirroring general trends of police brutality in the U.S.
* Age and socioeconomic and immigration status also compound the
risk of sexual, physical and verbal abuse by law enforcement. AI is
further concerned at reports alleging that officers have responded to
victims of crime, including hate crimes, with verbal and physical
violence."

http://www.amnestyusa.org/lgbt-human-rights/stonewalled-a-report/profiling-and-selective-enforcement/page.do?id=1106614

http://www.amnestyusa.org/lgbt-human-rights/stonewalled-a-report/sexual-physical-and-verbal-abuse/page.do?id=1106607

You are so utterly full of shit it is staggering.

Quote:

In fact, gays trying to apply the civil rights struggle to
themselves is extremely offensive to blacks, and it insults the
intelligence of everyone else.

Such manipulative, hypocritical drivel is an insult to human decency.
Don't even try to pretend you care about human rights and supposed
"insults" to blacks.
You're completely transparent.

Quote:

Many did

vote amendments to state constitutions during the civil rights movement to
continue segregation. Civil rights and liberties aren't for the ballot box.
They were designed to protect minorities from majority oppression.

At the time that the U.S. Constitution was being drafted, was gay
marriage taking place? Of course not. No one thought about it. Men
marrying men did not register. It was so so utterly non-existent that
it never even crossed the minds of anyone during the whole
Constitutional Convention and the later ratification. Marriage was
what it was. Fish swam in the water. Birds flew in the air. Men
married women. Marriage had a certain natural, biological
prerequisite and everyone knew what that was. Oh, what they didn't
know!

No, ~sex~ is natural. Marriage is 100% a social construct, meaning its
definition, indeed, its very nature, can be altered as social mores
change.

Quote:

Fast forward to today. Idiots and moon-bats abound. I believe it was
in the 70s, wasn't it, that some gays applied for marriage licenses
and got turned down? And now you are saying that your rights were
taken away? Those rights were never there, gay marriage being a
recent fabrication, an anomaly that does not enter into normal social
and legal discourse.

By that reasoning, since women never had the right to vote, they
shouldn't have gotten it. It wasn't a right that was removed.
Your arguments, if one can even call them that, are goofy and lame.

Lefty...

Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:12 pm

Guest

On Nov 6, 5:52 pm, Mike <mgcul... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

On Nov 4, 9:45 pm, rfisc... at (no spam) sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

Bibon <bi... at (no spam) semper-gumby.org> wrote:
On 2009-11-03 00:54:20 -0500, "W.T.S." <m... at (no spam) earthlink.net> said:

"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote in message
news:38kt7h.ol8.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net...
Let the will of the people be law, whatever the results of the referendum
are. Fanatics want the will of the government. It's time for America to
show the world that we are truly a democracy.
http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000011370.cfm
And many would still vote for segregation if given the chance. Many did
vote amendments to state constitutions during the civil rights movement to
continue segregation. Civil rights and liberties aren't for the ballot box.
They were designed to protect minorities from majority oppression.

But not one of them is based on sexual orientation or who you like to
fuck. Get real, BOY! Blacks and women are not such by choice -- YOU
ARE!

Actual scientific research indicates that you're wrong.

So what does the research say about someone who has a heterosexual
marriage, has children by it, but actually prefers homosexuality?

If you are homosexual by birth, wouldn't that mean that it would be
impossible for you to be aroused enough to have sex with a female and
inseminate her?

<sigh>
Another brainless attempt at an argument.

You don't need to be aroused by the sex partner her/himself in order
to have sex. Straight men often have gay sex in prison. Gay men often
have straight sex to hide being gay. All you have to do is fantasize
you're screwing a dude, or a chick, as the case may be, and it can be
done. That does not mean their orientation is a choice.
By your own reasoning, since hets are also capable of gay sex,
heterosexuality is a choice. So by that token, it is completely equal
to homosexuality and should be treated as such. Giving hets the sole
right to marry their chosen partner is a special, exclusive right
according to your very own reasoning.
You've defeated your own argument.

Quote:

What about bi-sexuals? Are they scientifically incapable of sticking
to one sex, so that they have have to have sex with women as well as
men, because it is not their choice, but something in the genes they
were born with?

No, they aren't ~incapable~ of it anymore than you're incapable of
having sex with a guy. But you prefer women, right? That means you're
straight. Bisexuals can go either way. Why is that so difficult for
you to understand? Are you stone stupid, or do you just have no
imagination?

Quote:

What about trans-genders? Wasn't there a woman a few years ago who
was being changed to a man, but who let herself get pregnant before
the transformation was complete? If she was actually a man in a
woman's body, wouldn't that be the last thing he would want to do,
since men don't get pregnant? What's the scientific validity behind
that?

No, it's not that simple. You live in a totally black and white world.
Gender is about a state of mind to many people, not just a physical
thing, so a pregnant man is not at all out of line with that point of
view. I don't happen to feel that way about gender myself, but I'm not
so self-centered as to automatically deny the validity of feelings I
don't share. You, apparently, are. Open your mind.

Quote:

But you bigots cannot handle the truth so you make up lies.

Do have any idea how lame and how utterly desperate you sound when you
fling the "bigot" pejorative at virtually everything that breathes?

A bigot is a person who is intolerant of the beliefs of others and
stubbornly, unreasonably attached to his own opinions. You don't think
your narrow-minded pronouncements here indicate that you qualify? What
have you really said that can't be boiled down to; "marriage must stay
between men and women because it is traditional. I like tradition and
what I like should be enshrined into law. Homosexuality is a choice
because gay dudes sometimes fuck women. So that means it's not a civil
rights violation to forbid them to marry the partner of their choice"?
That's your basic philosophy, in a nutshell.

Page 7 of 8 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:33 am Politics Forum Index