Expected? Shocking? The decision handed down on Tuesday by the California Supreme Court on upholding the same-sex marriage ban takes away rights of homosexual citizens in this country. Don’t they pay taxes? Don’t they follow laws of the land? Aren’t they outstanding citizens? So why was it hard to give them their well earned fundamental right - the right to marry - by virtue of being citizens in a country they live in and support?
Imagine if someone took away your right to marry the person of your choice … Much as we can’t equate this to interracial marriages, can you imagine what would have happened if majority white voters had decided by the proposition to ban interracial marriage?
It is a sad day in America … Its sad that people can be given the legal and political power to just vaporize other citizens’ rights away. 
Tags: interracial dating, black dating site, interracial dating sites
Popularity: 17% [?]
Wow this is popular topic! To ensure the page loads in a reasonable amount of time, we are only showing the most recent 200 of 207 comments
Comment by xistential on 30 May 2009:
I am not intending to sound critical, but a little constructive critisism is what people should practice. A “right” is guaranteed by the constitution is a “Civil Right!” Please edit this entry. If you are going to post publicly, please make sure that you distinguish the homonyms “right” vs. “rite”. Try using MerriamWebster.com if you don’t know or are unsure. Putting bad grammar out there is not cool, and deflates the message you are putting out there. Not to mention that if you want the topic taken seriously, the tag line needs to display understanding of the the topic. But, if you are discussing sensitive legal topics, you should take care to illustrate that you know the difference between the two words, by not using the misspelling “rite” (which is something unrelated to a right). Take it from a “legal” person. Fix the tag and instantly be labeled informed and “smart.”
Comment by xistential on 30 May 2009:
Also, the focus on morality should not and cannot be used as a political paperweight. I am tired of being beat over the head about this issue. Although I am a black woman, I can’t stand it when the issue is intertwined with black struggle in this contry. Race is immutable. A person’s physical looks are the first thing people see. One’s sexual prefernce is not something anyone can judge by looking at them (usually). If I can be made to understand the correlation between black struggle and homosexuals’ marriage rights, then maybe I will change my mind about my stance. Homosexuality is not new. And there are bigger problems to deal with other than debating this issue, particularly: “education” “recession” “unemployment”
“nulcear armns proliferation” “N. Korea” I can go on. I care about people as people. I treat them with the respect I expect. But to close out, you cannot force this country (which is as progressive as can be on most other topics, but Victorian as HELL when it comes to discussing SEX, while at the same time the watchdogs sell SEX to the tweens (jonah bros., miley c.) and the rappers and R&B stars sexualize every damn song they make these days (usher) AND the Christian COnservative right have a “DO LIKE I SAY MENTALITY” and continue to cover up indiscretions of their “Family Values” bandleaders who frequently use prostitutes (hey Dave) and abuse prescription drugs (Hey Rush). PHEW! If you love someone, you love someone. There are just as many ALTERNATIVE lifetyle relationships out there as there are people. We all have less idiosyncrasies. Alway, be beautuful everybody.
Comment by fkoi on 30 May 2009:
I think it was a perfect storm that Proposition 8 in California was brought to a vote at the same time that Barack Obama was running for President. McCain and the weather lady didn’t really have a chance in that election, especially after the economy collapsed under Bush’s deregulation of his low friends in high places. Unfortunately Prop 8 was already on the ballot and hindsight is always pretty keen.
The effect though was that the homophobic forces had the opportunity to throw their full weight behind support for Prop 8. They were also blessed by the wording. “No” on Prop 8 meant “Yes” on not banning same sex marriage. It confused me, and I’m not that easily confused. Homophobes basically got to vote “Yes, I’m against gay rights,” however they coloured it to rationalize their views. For the rest of us, it was not intuitive to vote “No, I’m in favor of allowing individuals to choose whom they wish to marry.”
In light of the electorate’s vote, the Supreme Court of California had no choice but to support the law. They may already have been a little out of line in putting their own beliefs ahead of judging the law as it stood and ironically that decision probably gave firepower to the Yes on 8 forces.
I’m not a legal scholar so I may be wrong in my interpretation. One thing I am sure about though: It will come to pass that same sex marriage will be sanctioned in the near future, not just in California but across the country, just as Black/White marriages, once anathema to many of the same individuals who attacked in favor of Prop 8, are now supported.
Comment by laugh_sailor on 30 May 2009:
The decision was to uphold the legitimacy of Proposition 8 as a modification to California State Constitution, rather than overturn it as a revision, which would have required a 2/3 vote in the state legislature.
While I don’t agree with this decision (I think it’s a revision of the state constitution, which guarantees equal protection.), the court took pains to say that other challenges to Proposition 8 may still be heard and it’s bound to be challenged soon: This challenge was just the easiest and most direct to make.
The current situation is ridiculous and the court is well aware that the position of having tens of thousands of legally-married gay couples while at the same time stating that others can’t marry now because it’s illegal can not stand as law. This in itself makes for a much stronger rebuttal to Proposition 8 and similar ballot measures.
Kudos to Party1 for being such an open-minded citizen in supporting the rights of a group he does not identify with!
Comment by laugh_sailor on 30 May 2009:
xistential, Please don’t come down on Ria for using “rite” instead of “right.” I found it amusing. After all, a wedding is a social rite of passage and when sanctioned by the state, literally both a civil right and a civil rite. Aren’t we a delightfully primitive society, to even have this conversation of who gets the benefits of this rite? Hand me my spear - I’m off to battle the neighbors. Can’t stand people who put toilet paper in the dispenser the wrong way.
Comment by homesteader on 31 May 2009:
I do intend to be critical ; The proper sentence in my educational training , would have been written - ” Putting bad grammer out there is not cool and deflates the message ” is Proper . xistentail . Thank you . Myself sometimes , I spell incorrectly , type with error or am repeatative in my words . I know not much about the legal profession , alas are you able to parallel park a W900L Kenworth tractor with 53′ trailer attached the first time as I am able to ? You did say that even with maybe a wrong spelling ,that you understood what was written .
Comment by homesteader on 31 May 2009:
People on AfroRomance , really come to meet others . P.S. Sorry if I offend , my daughter is the English teacher in our family . Rite - in my eyes refering to the ceremony of marriage . Which is what I understood from the Blog topic .
Comment by homesteader on 31 May 2009:
Which is also what was denied . Thank you Ria .
Comment by homesteader on 31 May 2009:
Laws are overturned .
Comment by CanadianGC on 31 May 2009:
As laugh_sailor mentioned the California Supreme court simply upheld what was an freely voted for proposition.
I learn towards the whole concept of same-sex marriage as simply symbolic of being accepeted by society.
Same-sex couples can get married anytime they want, the marriage is simple not recognized by various religious and government instituitons.
If same-sex couples have the same rights and acesses to goverment and legal benefits as hetrosexual couples, then there really should be no issue.
If your marrying someone, hopefuly the reason your doing so is because you are making a life long commitment to the other person and whether it is recognize by the courts or anyone else, shouldn’t make any difference.
Comment by Girlstar7 on 31 May 2009:
I must say that when I heard the prop 8 bill did
not pass last november, and marriage should be
only between a man and woman I agreed.And hearing
very recent that it still did not pass, is good
news. I do not hate the gay community at all!.If
they choose to be together in their bedroom so be
it. I as a christian woman must stand up for the
naturalness of God’s law and morality. And I am
so tired of the disrespect that the homosexual
community tries to compare their injustice to
the injustice of African Americans. Could some
one please let them know, you can never compare
a “choice” of sexual preference to a people
who had no choice to be black and totally treated
worse than farm animals. That is an insult and
a true shame to compare the historical injustice
to people that have a choice to be gay. Stop it!!
Comment by Girlstar7 on 31 May 2009:
I personally don’t feel it is a sad day in america
that prop 8 did not pass. And this is sad to see many of our young people choosing that lifestyle. If they only knew that it will entail a lot more
than the physical side of it.It rips your soul to pieces and honestly, even though I may get nailed
for these comments.But? we’re all adults and just
because I don’t agree does not make me evil or
with no compassion. I just feel that that life
style is not good for any man, less knowing our
children. It takes away your spiritual closeness
with God in my opinion. I think that it was very
cruel for society to “HATE” Miss California.She
does not have to agree and she should not have
been harassed and done an evil revengfull dis-
service. You don’t have to agree people!, that
does not mean you are evil or going to engage
in hateful acts towards someone you disagree
with. In the heterosexual community we too are
far from perfect!. But? I feel at least we are
following the natural law to some degree. Does
that mean the things of lust that we do is good
and pleasing to God.. No!. So, we all need to
get it together for real. Say what you want
about me or my comment, we are adults and this
is free speech in America…
Comment by fkoi on 31 May 2009:
Laugh_sailor, good catch. I have long been considered a master punster (or as a grand server of corn depending on one’s perspective) but I agreed with Ms. Xistential at first. Sadly, I am so used to bad spelling/grammar/usage in general and on the Web in particular that I have to pick my battles or I’d be proofreading full time for those who should know better (or who could hire me, as that is part of my professional skill set). I chose not to pick this battle with Ria. I’m glad I didn’t now!
Plays on words in headlines is a longstanding tradition. Without it, in New York, the “Daily News” and the “Post” would be out of business. The upside of that possible turn of events is a topic for another time and place.
As it is, kudos, Ria. It was a brilliant use of homophonic humour about a homophobic historic event. If you didn’t intend it that way, keep it under your hat.
Comment by salsera77 on 31 May 2009:
Girlstar7, I’ll second your emotion. I’m a Christian too. I am no hater of gay people or anyone and if they want to live that lifestyle so be it. I will be kind to them but I will not consort with them just be kind to me. However that being said, I am bone weary of the gay community trying so badly to lump the passing of interracial legislation in with their own plight and also comparing themselves to that of being black. Their plight has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with being black or interracial relationships/marriage. It’s as if they need support/company so badly that they’re grabbing at any idea they can find for support. Sorry, but being black or interracial relationships are not something for gay people to use as justifications. Their circumstance is a totally different entity all unto itself and I don’t like the fact that they want to ride on coattails where they don’t belong.
You can’t rub the black off you’re skin or out of your DNA and there are interracial
relationships in the good book.
Also, I agree there’s a kind of reverse discrimination going on when someone speaks their mind like Ms. California did. It’s as if that Hilton guy couldn’t wait to flog her in public. Not everyone has to agree with Hilton and no surprise, Donald Trump kept her.
Comment by kristent on 31 May 2009:
Girlstar,
I know you have a right to your opinion, and therefore I will not rebut your argument on the morality of being gay. For the record I will say that being gay/lesbian/bisexual is no more a choice than you being black, but, it really is irrelevant.
You say that the reason you feel that gay couples should not get married is that it violates “the naturalness of God’s law and morality”. That may well be a reason for your church to refuse to perform a wedding for a gay couple, but has no relevance in the area of law.
Our country has had a long standing distaste for the mixing of religion and government. We do not endorse the establishment of a national religion, and prohibiting a couple from marrying because of a religious/faith based objection would be giving favor to the religion whose standards deny the couple those rights. We also cannot force any religious institution to perform a wedding ceremony for a gay/lesbian couple for the same reason.
The gay and lesbian community is fighting for the right to enter into a marriage contract under the eyes of the law. It is a contract that provides them and any of their dependents the same legal protections and obligations that a straight couple receives, and reaffirms their status as a couple for themselves and their loved ones. The ramifications you would feel, Girlstar, if a gay couple decided to get married, are nonexistent. Just as you are not impacted by any other random straight couple that decides to marry.
I am sure that no matter which side of this issue a person falls on, they wish that everyone else would feel exactly the same as they do. However, we are a vast nation with widely divergent opinions on religion, morals, and social justice. The Constitution and the US government have provided a framework of laws giving all of our citizens the same rights, and while we live here, neither of our opinions on religion or morality should have an undue negative effect on how the other lives his/her life.
~maximum respect
Comment by laugh_sailor on 1 June 2009:
Girlstar7 - Thank you for your honest opinions. Please be open to my rebuttal, which is kindly and respectfully meant. I strongly feel this is a pointless, unnecessary conflict that greatly damages our society.
One of the founding principles of our country (USA) is tolerance. Sadly, we’ve had to struggle with that concept. Minorities (and yes, gay is a minority, just as black is) are generally treated worse in just about any way you can measure and many that can’t, to varying degrees. As you probably know (being a mother) babies have no concept of discrimination - They have to be taught that. Proof is that babies and toddlers will happily play with each other, regardless of the number of limbs they have, what color their skin is, etc.
My bachelor’s degree is Political Science and my honors thesis was on non-violent conflict resolution, so I’m not a stranger to this subject. One way discrimination is perpetuated is through “The Politics of Hate.” This works as follows:
(1) You and I are members of Group A. (either fact or desire to be part of that group)
(2) Group A is better than Group B. (ego boosting reason to identify with Group A)
(3) Group B is different. (If there’s not a difference, who cares what group you’re in?)
(4) Group B is morally bad. (Fear of association with Group B)
You can find examples of The Politics of Hate in many places but talk radio and evangelistic religion are two of the most common and superficial in this, in the United States, so this hateful speech is easy to spot those mediums. The Politics of Hate has the following characteristics:
(1) It can only exist in an atmosphere of ignorance of fact.
(2) It thrives in extremities, such as jihadism, gay bashing, racism, etc.
It’s important to be factual and respectful when dealing with rumors (urban myths) planted by hateful people and groups. Examples of these lies are:
* Obama is a militant jihadist.
* Blacks are a different species than whites.
* Gay is a choice.
“A fanatic redoubles his efforts when he has forgotten his aims.” - Santiago
What’s the goal of hatred of homosexuals? I think it’s a combination of fears of the unknown and weak ego: The person bashing gays usually does not have close mainstream gay friends and with no personal knowledge to refute hateful rumors, is trapped by the process outlined above into believing them. The person may have doubts of self, a child, friend, etc. and worry about “turning gay.”
FACTS:
* The reason gays “come out of the closet” is that they can not live with the lie of pretending to be straight any more. This is an indication of how strongly they are ostracized. Imagine how you would feel if you had to pretend to be gay, in a gay society but were really straight. It would gross me out - Think about how they feel!
* “Turning gay” is an urban legend. Our brain chemistry determines our sexual preference and that’s something we’re born with. Gays have substantial and specific physical differences in their brains that determine their sexual preferences.
* “Gay lifestyle” is a label homophobes use to falsely label sexual orientation as a choice. It’s a prime example of The Politics of Hate in action.
* “Natural law of heterosexuality” Is another false label. All mammals have gay populations and there are many properly-conducted scientific studies validated by mainstream, respected organizations to prove this.
* “If I only talk hatefully, I have no responsibility for a hate crime.” Legally, you’re on the road to “Inciting a riot.” We are responsible for our actions and words. Everything we say and do contributes to our society. Do you want a hateful society like the Taliban? No? Well, stop hating!
* It is impossible to be blissfully, peacefully happy and hateful. Make your choice and live it.
People are born straight, bisexual or gay. We live in a heterosexual society and the small minority of gays is heavily ostracized: Think of it like being a black walking by yourself downtown in the early 1900s, in various places. You’d be ok in some places and lynched in others. You’d never, though, be unaware of your vulnerability or potential hostility of others. The similarity of abuse in both cases is horrifyingly startling. One of the most frightening things about this behavior is that people can think of themselves as morally good people while at the same time having absolutely immoral hatreds. The weak points of these hatreds are:
(1) Facts.
(2) Sympathy.
(3) Pride of membership in a tolerant society.
(4) Understanding that citizenship means supporting other good citizens and their differences in our society even if they are not lives we would personally want.
We have many motivations for the groups we identify with - Identification with being a Christian is a fundamentally personal choice and can have totally contradictory meanings - My mother’s an example of one, in that she lives her life consciously in the way Christ would be personally proud of her to live it. Hate simply isn’t in her vocabulary. Can you possibly imagine Christ bashing gays? If you can, try reading about his life and what he was about The New Testament. One of the largest Christian denominations until very recently interpreted the Bible as declaring blacks’ skin color as “The mark of Cain” and therefore labeling blacks as “Spawns of Satan.” Should I spread racist, hate-filled speech because of that? I could hide my actions by claiming I am just being a good Christian and I’m sure I could find religious authority to sanction my actions. I wouldn’t be responsible for my hateful speech and actions then, would I?
It’s easy to be judgmental about people but really, what’s the point? Doing so only makes everyone, especially the person who’s so critical, unhappy. This is what the founders of The United States of America understood when they drew up our Constitution and Bill of Rights so carefully and yes, so beautifully.
Comment by thick_lover on 1 June 2009:
First of all, it is not a right, despite Ria’s insistance. Secondly, our rights are determined by a democratic process. The people have spoken.
Comment by laugh_sailor on 2 June 2009:
thick_lover - Our rights are NOT derived from any democratic process. They are recognized as inherent to us as not merely members of civilized society but more fundamentally as people, with intrinsic worth. Our laws protect our fundamental rights - They do not create them.
Philosophically, the most direct influence in this case is Thomas Locke. Our governmental origins plainly state this in the opening statement of our Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Democratic processes determine the best ways to protect our rights, though, as stated clearly in the next phrase: “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
This is a fundamental principal in our Constitution, Bill of Rights and therefore throughout our law, as well. Wikipedia has an excellent discussion of these three fundamental documents of our government (You might want to start with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence ): Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights. For further understanding, The Federalist Papers are fascinating reading.
I hope this helps your understanding of the philosophical core of our law and government and you find it as inspiring as I do.
Comment by laugh_sailor on 2 June 2009:
Please forgive the typo: “This is a fundamental principal in our Constitution” should have been “This is a fundamental principle in our Constitution.” Thanks!
Comment by homesteader on 2 June 2009:
laugh_sailor ; good comments , 2x + y = z in Mathematical terms / A little off topic . After reading about A & B in your comment . I felt like a small amount of shared learning myself . Fact ; Gays are similar to suicide bombers - as they will never reproduce . Our United States of America , was built on Freedom of Choice . Here’s hoping that idea never changes .
Comment by homesteader on 2 June 2009:
I / myself in the Transportation industry met thousands of people and Found that by Respecting each and all . Life flowed with an even current and was so much easier . When we speak of Gays / we never will know who they are unless they have the Desire to tell . They still are just good people same as I .
Comment by fkoi on 2 June 2009:
Laugh_sailor, your last two comments were among the best analyses/depictions of bigotry I can remember. Keep pitching, Brother. Don’t the B.S. get through. It is unfortunate that as far as gays go, you are preaching to the choir. Those who are not homophobic see a thousand reasons not to be. Those who are tend to have a mind closed so tight on the subject that nothing can penetrate. Even so, if you reach one bigoted mind, then you have done a lot.
An important truth is that bigotry is bigotry. It serves no good purpose to say that my suffering at the hands of bigots is worse than yours, therefore yours isn’t suffering. Of course it doesn’t serve to say that all suffering has been equal either.
For some reason, the bigot that gets my goat the most is the Bible toting bigot, who tosses spears exclusion and uses the good book as a shield. It’s always pickers and choosers who have the most hate. The guy working on his third divorce or with three babies by three different women, none of them a wife. The woman working on a plate of shrimp as she heads to work on Sunday. If you ask what would Jesus do and you were honest about it, you would have to find it in your heart to love your neighbor as yourself, no matter what! Oh yeah, then there’s that little thing about casting the first stone.
Comment by homesteader on 2 June 2009:
And I disagree with the statement that it is a lie “Gay is a choice ” / as I Believe who one has sex with would be Mutual Consent .
Comment by kristent on 2 June 2009:
Homesteader I have to say that you may have the right to you opinion but maybe you shouldn’t post it so much. I have been trying very hard to ignore your multiple and usually senseless posts for weeks now, but you have crossed a line. There is nothing about gay/lesbian people that could even remotely be used to compare them to suicide bombers. And on behalf of all LGBT people I am EXTREMELY OFFENDED. Gay/lesbian people are just people; some are peaceful and some are aggressive, some are intelligent and some are the village idiot, and every possible place in between. To compare all of these people to suicide bombers–and on a false premise to begin with–is libelous misrepresentation. Get your head out of your ass before someone sues it off.
Comment by hazelpride on 2 June 2009:
I totally agree with Thick lover, the people have spoken, and our rights are determined by a democratic choice. No offence to the gay community, I totally have nothing against them, and I feel I am very tolerant, and what they do is their business. I just do not share their understanding, because mine is derived from a christian background that condone this type of union.
Comment by starthai on 2 June 2009:
So I guess procreation does not matter.
Comment by homesteader on 2 June 2009:
All I stated was a ” Fact ” that once you have been a suicide bomber , you shall never have any more children to carry on your killing spree and two people of the same sex who marry will never bring children into this world from their joining . Because it takes a Woman and a Man to procreate . Gay people in my past years have always been and always will be productive citizens . Also Jesus Christ in his own time was an Insurgant against the Ruling power of where he lived and was tried and convicted . If you gather 13 members in a group and decide to overthrow our gov’t . Someone is going to prison . God made Jesus as an example to teach people what happens from doing wrong in life . God also gave us the Devil to cover his own evil .
Comment by homesteader on 2 June 2009:
Having to live life in todays world , becoming Disabled at a young age and sleeping with hunger many nights in my young years , I saw how cruel people can be alas I always obeyed the Law and spoke Honestly . Becoming Disabled a second time with a Massive heart attack . Brought me to have my life threatened several times / even to the point of someone walking into my house uninvited / while I sat at my desk and them grabbing me by the throat and saying ” I am going to Kill you muther f-cker ” and my voicebox having already been broken in 1966 . At that time stealing $50.00 from me . Sheriff came by the house and told me it was my word against his - nothing could be done , Breaking into my house repeatedly vandelizing and destroying many things when I went to town on the first to purchase groceries . Came home to a locked gate and FIRE was written across my front door . kristent , I did not intend to Offend you alas to walk in my shoes , was to carry a great deal of senseless pain for the last 43 years .
Comment by homesteader on 2 June 2009:
Correction ; 41 years , because the last time he came and tried to force his way into Our house my new wife called 911 and having a witness finally - he was charged with Criminal Trespass and had to pay a $1,500.00 fine .
Comment by homesteader on 3 June 2009:
After driving cross-country for 28 days , I would come home for a 5 or 6 day break . With my house illegally entered . My refridgerator would have been unpluged and it would take me two days to clean the rotten food every month . I would call Sears repair and the technician who came out ten mouths in a row would always tell me nothing was wrong with my unit .
Comment by laugh_sailor on 3 June 2009:
hazelpride - Sorry my posts are long. Please check out our Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights to see for yourself how our laws exist to protect our fundamental rights, which are intrinsic in each of us as worthwhile people. It’s why God loves every one of us and why we don’t get to vote for our personal worth.
Thank you, fkoi, for your kindness. I think you have a good point about bigots ostentatiously hiding behind morality and your comments about Christlike thought and behavior are right on target. It’s the small steps we take daily that determine our worth - How do we treat those who are at a disadvantage?
For those preaching hate (Yes, gay-bashing is hate.) in the name of Christ -
(1) Get real. That’s about as Satanic as I can imagine. If you really have to hate, take my mother’s advice: “If you don’t have something nice to say, don’t say anything at all.”
(2) Identify with the many wonderful Christian aspects, instead.
(3) Get perspective - There’s a lot more pressing problems in our world to worry about: Many that organized religion can really help to address, such as schools, hospitals, shelters for battered women, vaccinations for children, etc.
(4) Understand that there are many Christian sects and many of these do not teach gay-bashing: It’s particularly un-Christian thought and behavior.
(5) Denying fundamental rights to people is bullying.
(6) Toning down hateful speech is a good first step but that and disclaimers with hateful speech still suck and don’t fool anyone, just as saying “I love you” and then hitting someone doesn’t fool anyone, either.
You know that song:
R-E-S-P-E-C-T,
Tell me what it means to me…
Why am I (a completely heterosexual person) advocating so forcefully for gays, especially when I’d so much rather spend an evening writing self-help articles about sailing? I can’t stand bullies.
It’s also important for someone to stand squarely against injustice: When publicly shamed, people tend to back away from bad behaviors. We get into really horrible trouble when we do not stand up for minorities - Letting hate grow to be the norm is how lynchings come to be. It’s how The Holocaust and genocide in Rwanda and currently in Sudan started. Hate crimes and hateful attitudes also spill from one group to another, further worsening our quality of life. I don’t think we’ll have mass lynchings of gays in the U.S. because there are enough people who won’t allow that. There are far too many cases of gay-bashings, though (Both verbal and physical abuse). It’s wrong and I don’t condone it. Further, we have a special place here in welcoming and being open to others - Let’s not spoil this kind, accepting place, please.
There’s two reasons I can see for this behavior: Groupthink, in which one values their group so much that they suppress their own morality when they think the group will value a choice they don’t approve. This helps the person to think they are seen as belonging because they are parroting what they think the group will approve. One of the most famous examples of this was the Bay of Pigs fiasco, which almost started a nuclear war - No single person on either side wanted to escalate the standoff but each person thought so highly of their group and thought that the group decision would be to escalate militarily, so each person voted to do what every one of them later said they personally thought was immoral and desperately did not want to, just to be seen as loyal to the group. Strong personal senses of loyalty and denial also helps mightily in groupthink.
The other thing I see happening is lack of awareness of how many small bigoted acts and attitudes add up to big problems in our society in general. A number of mean and disparaging comments over time really do substantially worsen our lives generally. What saddens me here is people who have been victimized by discrimination and hate crimes acting just as badly towards others. There’s always an excuse: Just as a wife-beater says “She made me hit her,” they say “Gays choose immoral behavior so I can deny them full, normal lives.” It’s willfully ignorant, self-deceiving, just plain insulting and it doesn’t fool me or anyone else for an instant.
I’m sorry to have to lecture like this. It’s very distasteful to me. I’d so much rather share happy, fun times. I’m sure we all would, so as Rodney King said “Can’t we all get along?”
Comment by FearlessCrusader on 3 June 2009:
Girlstar7, your comments were thoughtful and to the point. It was terribly unfair of Laugh Sailor to use your post as an excuse to condemn all who do not agree with him as being haters, especially after you stated that you do not hate the gay community and in fact much hate is directed against anyone who dares to differ with them.
Comment by homesteader on 3 June 2009:
Being part of a far smaller Minority Group ” the physically Disabled ” who have been continually Victims of persecution and injustice in life without a Doubt . I have visited Descrimination daily in my life . With no Group to assist such a small minority No one ever fought for me / save myself . I was born to a family with a father who beat my mother repeatedly , yet never saw any help for her . Judging Gays is Gods job in the end . The many hundreds that I have met always treated me as a Good person as I RESPECTED them in return in personal conversations . I speak of what I have seen with my own eyes / Knot that which I read and hear in the Media . The Bill of Rights also was written for the severely Disabled .
Comment by homesteader on 3 June 2009:
kristent ; Maybe if you were to take the time to comprehend what I write and did not ignore , you would not be classifing good people as ” Village Idiots ” . This shows your Bigotry of others .
Comment by hazelpride on 3 June 2009:
I am sorry Laugh_sailor, I am sure, I am allowed to exercise my beliefs even though to some they might seem misguided, even within some christian sectors. I think you are open minded person, good for you, maybe with time I will reach the same understanding as you. As, homesteader said most of these people are very nice people and I have seen it first hand but does not convince me to shake my beliefs, maybe I need to be educated more on the subject lol.
Comment by homesteader on 3 June 2009:
thick_lover ; Ria’s topic was written as ” rite ” not ” right ” and she was totally correct in the spelling of the word as per the topic she intended to bring forth for discussion .
Comment by kristent on 3 June 2009:
homesteader I do not express bigotry of others. It is no surprise to anyone that there are people in this world who make bricks look smart. I have taken more than enough time to read your posts. As a physically disabled person you do have a group to assist your minority. You have a law; the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Laws protect you. When you go to a job interview you know it is illegal for you to be discriminated against based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, and DISABILITY STATUS. I have been fired because my employer found out I was in a relationship with another woman. I have had friends have their children taken away from them and custody given to the abusive ex husband because they were in a lesbian relationship and the judge was homophobic.
If I end up making a life with a woman as my partner, I still intend to have children. I would very much love to someday use a sperm donor to fertilize a partner’s egg and have it implanted in my uterus. Before you can criticize that idea of parenthood, let me point out that IVF, surrogacy, and sperm donation are all widely used practices for straight couples who have difficulty conceiving independently.
The fact that your house was vandalized repeatedly is certainly a vicious crime, and regrettable. It is unfortunate that you have been carrying around “senseless pain” for 41 years, BUT BOTH OF THOSE FACTS ARE STILL IRRELEVANT TO THE CONVERSATION AT HAND.
Your own unrelated struggles in life do not excuse your choice of words or your defense of your own disparaging comments. Justifying yourself in this is tantamount to using the word n*gger to refer to black people and then saying it is okay because you support the civil rights movement. Everyone else in this discussion has their own opinion and has been able to present it without villainizing comparisons.
*And congratulations to New Hampshire for becoming the sixth state to protect the rights of ALL its residents to get married.*
Comment by fkoi on 3 June 2009:
Oh this topic has the bees buzzin’ doesn’t it? Mr. FearlessCrusader, it would be a good idea to read posts carefully before you comment on them. Mr. Laugh_sailor didn’t “hate” on anyone. He was respectful and thoughtful of Ms. Girlstar7, Ms. Hazelpride and even of Mr. Thick_lover. If you think he did, and this is not “hating” either, you have misread. Paragraphs are used to separate thoughts in the English language, as are other forms of punctuation. Laugh_sailor made appropriate use of them.
Pointing out where (and this is a new paragraph beginning a new thought) one disagrees with someone or even where they are misinformed and incorrect is not “hating” on them. And pointing out bigotry is not “hating” either.
And “hating on” someone is not even hate. Hate is “intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury” according to the primary definition in Merriam-Webster. Hate is when you take a bat to someone who has been born with different sexual preferences, gender or skin colour just because of their difference. There is a name for it. It is called a hate crime.
In a country where separation of church and state is one of the basic tenets of and reasons why we are here, there is a lot of God talk creeping into a political issue. It doesn’t matter what you believe. You can opt to belong to a church that doesn’t allow gay marriage. But if you vote against someone’s right to that rite in a venue that has nothing to do with your church you are voting for prejudice. Everyone has the right to love another adult and the rights given to a formal declaration of that love, even if you believe that choosing a partner of the same sex condemns them to eternal damnation. Save their souls as best you can but don’t mix your religious beliefs into government.
Comment by laugh_sailor on 4 June 2009:
Hazelpride - Thank you for your open mind in discussing this and more importantly, in introspection - The more we honestly look within ourselves, recognize and change things we need to, the happier and more fulfilled we make our lives. I think a great way of balancing personal beliefs and societal respect is Jazz70’s earlier post here:
“This is a tuff one for me! I too believe a marriage is between a man and a woman…that’s God’s word. I try very hard to live by God’s word but would never impose my view point on anyone else. I really don’t know what the right solution is but may God bless the gay community.”
She’s got it exactly: Living her life personally as her belief system dictates, taking pride in her empathy of others, understanding that it takes all types to make our society and respect in their living their lives fully as well. Live and let live. In this case, it means let others marry. You’d be awfully offended if someone wouldn’t let you marry, wouldn’t you? I bet it would be terrible and would eat at you endlessly.
There’s something else at work, as well - The power of positive thinking. By thinking generously and kindly of others, even if they live lives different than we would personally like, we have enriched our own lives so much more than the effort we’ve given. The dark side of this is miring our lives in hatred and making ourselves wretched. Do you think the Spanish inquisitors were fundamentally happy and blissfully content? They were utterly convinced of their biblical and Catholic duty torture people to death and steal their possessions. This shows how it’s important to question hateful advice and actions. If everyone did, militant jihadism wouldn’t be a problem - It starts with little things.
Finally, I am as supportive of your fundamental human right to live your life as you see fit, as I am of gays. I am so grateful we live in a society that protects and even celebrates your ability to worship and live your life fully. We all live best, respectfully. Join me in extending this welcome to others, please. It’s pretty much the message of the ACLU.
FearlessCrusader - Kindly carefully re-read my posts: You didn’t get them at all.
Comment by homesteader on 4 June 2009:
hazelpride ; I stated ” All ” Persons that , I have met have been shown the utmost Respect from Me . Fact ; We were all born naked . Continuously using Jesus Christs name as a crutch in statements to Justify one opinions would seem proper to me if one could Quote ” his exact words ” on this topic . Anything else is Opinion .
Comment by homesteader on 4 June 2009:
kristent ; I apologize , even I read incorrectly / misinterpret ideas in front of me . My stance on Gay lifestyle is freedom of choice . Thank you for taking the time being patient , so I could understand what you are saying .
Comment by homesteader on 5 June 2009:
In my own defence ; I have been using multiple posts / because of my ignorance in typing [ not knowing how to form paragraphs WITH PROPER SPACING for my seperate thoughts ]. Hence a different post for a different thought . Until I met my wife , who showed me how to access many gov’t supplied help items . kristent ; Thank you for bringing the ADA & TFEEOL to my eyes . Alas these where not known to me when I needed them . People not knowing where to turn , when confronted by lifes many problems . Then , there are people as myself / who once read a Joke - offered daily online and felt free to spread it to others in my thoughts [ slightly revised by me ]- not really thinking that it would hurt others feelings . Alas I do vote every election / and firmly Believe in Freedom of Choice for All citizens of Our country . My father fought for that Right for us in WW2 . May God Bless him in his spot in a National Cemetary on this personal Holiday of my 61 st birthday . Amen [ Please , forgive my tears as I write ]
Comment by homesteader on 5 June 2009:
laugh_sailor ; positive thinking / when under alot os Stress from lifes many problems , it is always at the top of my thought paterns . Alas we all live in different situations in our daily lives as much as we are all different in our needs to be productive Happy citizens . The stealing of others possessions did not stop after Catholic believing Spanish invaders of the new world . I once read in the far East [ that they would cut off a persons hand legally in other gov’ts for stealing ] . In the United States gov’t , our representatives voted themselves high wages and this carries on into their Retirement or even if they fail to achieve re-election . Where may I ask ? do poor people turn when their right to Life , Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness has been Denied by those elected to Protect these God given Rights ? All people being born equal have an equal opportunity to the Rite of Marriage to Whom ever they Choose , Guaranteed by Our Bill of Rights . I know that it is Difficult and costly / but if you wish to marry someone that local law says is illegal . I will suggest traveling to a State that has made it Legal / get married , go home and with thje proper Document inhand Demand Your Rights to benefits as a Family Unit . Where in the United States you married should not be able to be Denied in any other State by Law of Our Country . People have been Married on Cruise ships by their Captains and upon arriving at home ports are recognized as Legal . Do Cruise ships have any law against marriage of Gay persons ? Mississippi River night cruises or my Dream of Restoring Our Vows on a Columbia riverboat cruise at a later date in time . Come on down lottery numbers !!!
Comment by whurr on 6 June 2009:
I would like to quote the comment from XISTENTIAL:
‘Try using MerriamWebster.com if you don’t know or are unsure. Putting bad grammar out there is not cool’
Thanks for your comment. You obviously needed to clarify the difference between ‘right and ‘rite’. Obviously, by your own definition, your blog post is very uncool. I am going by your own definition of what makes a blog post ‘not cool’.
Within your post, you actually put commas between subjects and predicates. You have countless spelling mistakes. You even use clauses as complete sentences.
Before you criticize others about their writing style, make sure that you show your grammatically perfect side. We wouldn’t want to offend your ‘legal’ side because we all love when someone focuses on grammar in blogs.
Comment by firecatluv on 6 June 2009:
Ria, no worries! The tides of change are coming. This is a progressive country and as long as those who are on the side of civil rights continues to hold strong, this too will pass.
As for all the rest of the “so called” Christians (especially my fellow ladies) do we really want to go back to the biblical definition of marriage? You know the one where a man can have a multitude of wives and concubines on the side? Or is we just using the definition that we want to use when it comes to us, and another when it comes to people that are different form us?
The bible has been used by to oppress, cultures, minorities and women throughout the ages. People are known for cherry picking scriptures and forgetting the whole “love your brother”, or “judge not or ye shall be judge bit.” Is it any wonder that Jesus said that not everyone who calls his name shall find his way into heaven? It seems people have lost empathy when it comes to those that are different.
You don’t like gay marriage, fine. Plenty of people don’t like interracial marriages either. Does that give you the right to take that from someone else? Nope. Cuz what you believe has nothing to do with what someone else, and if you live in America, you have no excuse.
Since Loving vs Virgina, marriage has been determined to be a right, and to prohibit that right to fellow americans is nothing but biotry at its finest. “But I’m not a biogot, I just believe . . . blah blah blah”
You don’t want to be called a bigot, then my God, quit acting like one!
Comment by Girlstar7 on 6 June 2009:
To Kristent: First off! If you take God out of the
political system you might as well remove him from
creation and any exsistence. That is never going to possiable!. Second I feel strongly on the fact that
our young people are being brain washed by the call
of an unnatural spirit to act believe that this kind of lifestyle is conded by God. No countrey in
the world condones or approves of this lifestyle under any circumstances!. And to insult the harsh and brutal treatment of my ancestors, who did not
ask to be in America as free labor and treated so
much worse than farm animals,is a disgusting insult!
and if you or whom ever want to support gay rights,
so be it!.If they want the hetero community to feel
compassion for them, they better show some for us!
When we disagree don’t harass us and whine and be
hateful and evil like they did to Miss California.
That is the result of yes on prop 8 again!..
Comment by FearlessCrusader on 6 June 2009:
Fkoi, how about taking your own advice? I did not say that Laugh Sailor was hating on anyone as you claim. I was objecting to his using Girlstar7’s post as an excuse to go off on a tirade about “Politics of Hate”, a term that doesn’t even make much sense, and then go on to talk about “hatred of homosexuals”. Now, if you will also re-read Girlstar7’s post, you will have to agree with me that his response was NOT logically based on hers and was entirely uncalled for. I don’t think anyone here has used the words “hate” and ‘hatred” as much as he did in that one post. Hate is not the issue here, and it is entirely inappropriate to subvert the real issues by using hate as a red herring.
Comment by Girlstar7 on 6 June 2009:
To laugh_sailor: I respect your opinion on the
issue of gay rights, but of course I will stand
up and totally disagree. Some of your comments
as far as them “coming out”of the closet and the
other comment of “natural law”is a false label.I
am sorry but? “wrong answer”. First off! to say
that being gay is a minority as blacks is a joke.
Then to say that politics of hate in the country,
WHAT HATE?.We Californians totally disagreeded and
voted this lifestyle and law as unnatural.And yes,
to choose God or not is a choice one must make
in their life.Life is hell with out god..lol. I
assume that you feel it is ok? to compare or class
their struggle with the struggle of African/
African Americans from African and this country’s sheer hell subjected on a good and very decent and loving strong people. Witha great history and now have lost our true identity due to the hell we are still struggling to be respected.Leviticus 18:22-23
you shall not lie with a male as a women. It is an
abomination. Nor shall you mate with any animals,
to defile yourself with it. It is a preversion.So
I choose not to entertain that lifestyle. You can call me and the california yes on prop 8 whatever
you choose that is your right. But, just know that
everything the world offers even as a heterosexual
one does not have to except!.Harassing the hetero
community is surely not a way to win prop8 any time
soon. I feel that miss california was a victim of
hate for her rights and truth to just say no!. So
that is just it, remember jesus spoke out against
wordly things that god did not approve of and he
found himself very unpopular so much that he died
for all of us!. God loves all of his children whom
ever they are and whatever they decide on their
life.But? like a parent he does not at all have to approve.
Comment by ngbabe on 7 June 2009:
homosexuality is a personal preference on the part of those who engage in such behaviors. Frankly, I don’t understand why people need special protection under the law strickly based on their sexual preferences. In my opinion, gays and lesbians belong to the human race and should be treated with dignity and respect—that doesn’t however imply their lifestyles should be imposed on those of us with traditional values or who believe marriage to be a sacred union between a man and a woman—Can anyone please sight any historial examples where societies are forced by special interest groups (which is extaclty what the homosexual activists groups are)to re-define what they mean by marriage?
Cultures in the past had/still do have differences in marriage ceremonies but marriage has always involved the union b/w men and women.
I think the gay community have a political agenda that transends the need to be treated with equality and dignity—there’s a message of contradiction out there from the gay community: To this writer, it’s as if they’re shouting “we have been made to live in closets for centuries, now it’s time for straight people to try living in the closets and see how it feels”. Many with traditional values are now labled haters, homophobic or other derogatory name callings. The point is, if those with traditional values are being asked to treat gays and lesbians with equality, the same rule should apply to the gay activists in order for us (all God’s children)to live together amicably.
Enough of the gay community’s continued efforts to sholve their lifestyles down people’s throats or else!!! I mean, couple of months ago, I was at the aiport with my 9yrs old and two gay men were publicly engage in explicit sexual conducts(shot of actual intercourse) as if trying to make a statement of some sort with no regard for my kid or other kids present.
Comment by motoryacht on 7 June 2009:
I think it GREAT , I fully support that court action ,and any other court action . Im glad to see that there are some morals left in this country . Personally I believe its a GREAT DAY not a sad one
Comment by kristent on 7 June 2009:
Girlstar and ngbabe
First of all, I do not have to take god out of the political system, that is already one of the basic ideas that this country was founded on. Also Girlstar, you have been doing a good deal of whining and being hateful for someone who thinks that they are a victim of that sort of behavior. No one is defending the brutal treatment of slaves or insulting the struggle of African Americans today. I believe all minorities are deserving of EQUAL treatment under the law, not special treatment.
I do feel that you are misguided in labeling all black people in this country as “good and very decent and loving strong people”. That label certainly holds true for many but not all of any group of individuals. Ngbabe’s experience with at the airport is certainly regrettable if the gay couple in question was truly engaging in explicit sexual conduct, as no couples should be doing that in public. Though without being more specific on what that conduct is, I’m afraid I will take her homophobic viewpoint on it with a grain of salt. (Just being honest. It is hard to believe your opinion unflinchingly when you are rather biased.)
As far as saying that “no country in the world condones or approves of this lifestyle under any circumstances!” I would like to provide the following list of countries that allow gay marriages:
Canada
Sweden
Norway
Netherlands
Belgium
Spain
South Africa
Civil Unions/domestic partner benefits:
Finland
France
Iceland
Norway
Portugal
Denmark
Sweden
Germany
United Kingdom
Switzerland
Israel
New Zealand
These are in addition to the states that recognize/perform gay marriages (Massachusets, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire) or civil unions (Connecticut, Vermont, New Jersey, California, Hawaii, Maine, Washington, New Hampshire, Oregon).
*Note that some states/countries have both options. This information can be verified at http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/wheremarriage.htm
~Maximum Respect
Comment by fkoi on 8 June 2009:
FearlessCrusader, I’m going to type this slowly because it seems to challenge you when I type at normal speed.
To “hate on” means, “to insult or verbally attack someone,” according to the Urban Dictionary. You stated that laugh_sailor used Girlstar7’s post “as an excuse to condemn all who do not agree with him…” Girlstar7 clearly doesn’t agree with him. You therefore accused him of “hating on” her. It’s simple “if > then” logic.
You may not understand the term “Politics of Hate” either, and therefore think it “a term that doesn’t even make much sense.” However it has about 66 million references on Google alone. People like Bill O’Reilly and Kim Weissman, for example, seem to make sense of it.
When Girlstar7 uses terms like “choosing” and “lifestyle” to describe being gay, as innocent of bias as she may have meant it, she is uninformed. Having sex with someone of the same gender(or of different gender) is a choice. Being homosexual is not, at least according to people who have studied it scientifically.
For laugh_sailor to use those terms of “otherness” as a jumping off point for an explanation of how verbal separation plays a major role in furthering the “Politics of Hate” was logical, appropriate, informative and expressed in very gentle terms (reflecting what a gentleman laugh_sailor has always been).
I really had no intention of posting anything further on this topic. However, when you called me out by nickname, and so erroneously, I felt I had no choice. I suggest you not be so Fearless the next time you decide to challenge me to a battle of wits OR linguistics because you clearly come to the battlefield under armed.
Comment by Glock on 8 June 2009:
First of all I must say that I am against gay marriage. That being said, as someone who believe in that premise of the U.S. constitution I believe that each state should be free to choose it’s own destiny. And I think that if someone wants to marry someone of the same sex, it should be allowed. However, I don’t believe that their right to marry someone of the same sex should require anyone to “marry” them if THEY don’t believe in gay marriage.
If the door is opened to gay marriage, what about polygamists? How about their right to marry as many women as they want? What’s fair for one is fair for all….equal protection.
I also think that gay marriage and the promotion of gay marriage is a contributor to the degradation of American culture.
But not to worry California, I’m sure this will be appealed to the 9th circuit and be overturned. If not there, the U.S. Supreme court will overturn it.
Comment by laugh_sailor on 8 June 2009:
Was it right to be denied the right to marry interracially, in the United States, until 1967? I don’t think there’s anyone reading this who would think it was. The issue now is the same for another minority group: Gays. The question is one of empathy and humanity: Can you put yourself in someone else’s shoes? How would you want to be treated? Can you honor and respect and defend someone who does not agree with you? As I’ve shown, the United States was founded on the principle that we have intrinsic worth and that our union is greater than the sum of ourselves - Our strength comes from our dignity and respect. It’s why no one wants to live in North Korea and so many want to immigrate here. It’s also why Obama’s foreign policies are so successful, so quickly where Bush Jr.’s failed miserably. Bush ran roughshod over others and Obama treats them respectfully - More than that, he listens and incorporates their input in his policies and gives them credit, too.
ngbabe - You’re correct in identifying the changing nature of our society: You, as a black woman, would not have been allowed service in many of the southern airports in the 1930’s. I am so glad that our society has become so much more accepting and understanding of others that no one thinks twice about you in an airport. We have not, however, as a society, accepted gays as freely as blacks, yet and your reaction to gays kissing and making out in the airport is typical. Would you have had the same reaction if it was a man and a woman? Their behavior is upsetting to both of us because it’s lacking in respect for others and I wouldn’t care if it was gay or straight behavior - I’d be peeved, just the same, at the lack of decorum, while understandingd their joy in being reunited. At some time, we’ve got to teach our kids about race and sexual relations, respect and tolerance in relation to our society and you have a great opportunity to do so, in this. There are many gays who would be offended by that behavior, as well - Doubly so, because they know they have to show themselves to be the best citizens so they aren’t discriminated against. I’m sure that as a black and as a woman, you can relate to that.
As firecatluv pointed out a couple posts above you but did not go into detail on, the U. S. Supreme Court decided that in the case of Loving v. Virginia (This was 1967!), that marriage is legal between people of different races in the United States. Until then, several states were holding out against that and marriage between usually blacks and whites was illegal. California only let blacks and whites marry in 1948 and has consistently been one of the most liberal states. Marriage has historically been used as a tool for many religious, social and political reasons, with examples of forcing, selling, prohibiting, annulling, suspending, punishing, jailing, lynching, murdering and pretty much any kind of interference that’s possible. Sound familiar? This kind of behavior’s been applied to gays and blacks and… well, anyone who isn’t like us.
For those who claim that sexual orientation is a “lifestyle,” please note that those who claim this have not a shred of scientific evidence for the claim, no experience being gay and no medical or scientific expertise in which they base this false claim. It’s simply a justification for bigotry. You can easily discover the truth of this by doing two things: (1) Ask a gay person if their sexual orientation is just a personal preference or something they are biologically driven to do. (2) Ask the same and look within yourself, if you’re straight. I’m entirely heterosexual and just as my sexual orientation is not anything I can change or would want to, yours and theirs isn’t, either. We’re born with that wired into our brains. There are a host of articles and studies in mainstream popular medical science periodicals proving this beyond question. Here’s a good place to start, with many excellent, accredited references:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/253/5023/1034
The idea of imposing your religious views on someone else is the cause of much strife in our world. It’s almost entirely the cause of the problems in the Middle East, right now: If we removed religious hatred, the wars and animosity between Arabic and western cultures would vanish. Wars are often fought between two competing religious factions, with each side utterly convinced they are solely anointed by God with a duty to kill the infidels. Logically, they both can’t be right and in fact, they are both wrong: The vast majority of religious believers and scholars will tell you God doesn’t like that stuff.
ngbabe - Please see my earlier posts in this blog for a fairly complete explanation of what rights are, legally, in the U. S., why we have them and how they are not anyone’s to take away. Hopefully I have also lucidly explained the striking similarities in the plight of the gay and Afro-American minorities.
Does membership of majority status as heterosexual entitle one to hurt another, gay minority, because being black is a minority? I would think that racism would make blacks especially sensitive to such social ostracism. Is it desire to fit in that turns one minority against another? I’m sure there are lots of unexamined reasons for such behavior but it perplexes me.
Girlstar7 - You have my best wishes for all you do in life. There were many gays that fought for your right to marry interracially. If nothing else, remember the Golden Rule and return the favor. Doing so makes our society more tolerant, less likely to be abused by extremists and literally happier. Removing attacks on gays from your life (such as supporting bans on gay marriage) will also benefit you with living literally a more socially fulfilling, peaceful life - Dare I say a more Christian one? As firecatluv pointed out so eloquently, there are many contradictory, inappropriate and outdated things written in the Bible. Why not focus on the big picture of being a Christian? Didn’t Christ have a close friend who was a prostitute, that he publicly supported? That’s Christianity, to me and what I’ve been talking about, here.
I know that what I have been posting is, as you put it, a “wrong answer,” from the perspective of current conservative Christian dogma. I speak merely from a factual basis and was quoting your earlier post: “I as a christian woman must stand up for the naturalness of God’s law and morality.” If it’s unnatural, why are there gay rats, monkeys, etc.? Do they decide to live a “gay lifestyle?”
Fearless Crusader - Explaining some of the reasons for social conflict and our legal rights protections takes some depth and care. Your disagreement takes terms out of context, skips considerable arguments, ignores fact and is a good example of what I’ve been discussing. If you carefully read my posts and perhaps the references to our Constitution, I’m sure you’ll come to a greater understanding of this issue, at least from a legal viewpoint, if not of social processes and motivation.
An excellent overview discussion, fully documented and accredited, of the mechanisms of The Politics of Hate is at:
http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/5/9/5/2/pages259520/p259520-1.php
Understanding of subjects like this is an inherently introspective process. Much of what interests me about people is their core - Not so much that someone is a gay-basher but are they willing to look within themselves and not only see their defects but change them? Do they see and treat others as they would like to be treated and if they don’t, do they change their behaviors and come to enlightening thoughts? The highest-quality people, to me, are those with the courage to see through others’ eyes something they have always assumed and then grow to be a more understanding, wise and kind person. It’s this person I’m posting in this blog for.
Comment by kristent on 8 June 2009:
laugh_sailor, I think I love you.
Comment by Girlstar7 on 8 June 2009:
Kristent: My dear let’s be realistic about the
countries that support Gay Marriage!. Non of them
are Latin, Africa, India, Carribean, Haiti. Cuba
Dominican Republic or any country where the people
are of color. So waht does that tell you?.Europeans
only tolerate this non sense for total media and
fear purposes. Believe me behind closed doors they
are praying as we did in California, yes on prop 8
agagin!!!. Gay marriage is unnatural and ungodly
in every thought, process know to mankind. You or
anyone can not remake or reprint God’s law and will
for manking, period!!. And when this country was founded God was the center piece of this country.
Since everyone wants to be free to choose, that is why this country is where it is today. Gone into a
major diaster. When you take god out of a nation or
a people, you welcome the things of the world!.
WHEN YOU TAKE GOD’S WILL OUT OF IT’S NATURAL INTENT
YOU HAVE WHAT YOU HAVE TODAY… FIGTURE THAT ONE OUT?. Humans can try and do all that we want, but?
we all have to stand before god-jesus-and the holy
ghost in judgement. Which master will you be trying to serving?. God or the world (devil). I choose to
stick with a known winner, God. So that’s my stand on that! Have a blessed day…
Comment by Girlstar7 on 8 June 2009:
laugh_sailor: Excuse me sir, please tell me how on
earth can you compare homosexuals to an interrace
married couple in 1967. There no comparison what so
ever!. Tolerant of their personal choice to choose
I agree. Feel like they deserve the same rights of marriage as myself and other heterosexual couples
that are in the right of God’s law for man and woman
to be a holy and legal union?… I don’t think so!
I wish everyone would stop trying to force us with
this nonsense and unnatural union with a crazy guilt
trip. Using the civil rights movement and interrace
couples as the same thing. Please do not insult us
or God up above with that foolishness!. Give me a break.Yes on Prop 8 again and again..
Comment by firecatluv on 8 June 2009:
Laugh sailor, well written, but those who should read it WONT read it. These people are so blinded by their prejudices that they have become such a perfect example of rationalization; so much in fact that Freud is probably gleaming at his genius as he sits in heaven. There is plenty of information out there for those who care to catch up to the 21st century. So I didn’t elaborate on my comment because, If they haven’t educated themselves yet , they aren’t going to do now.
Education shatters ignorance. It is a bigot’s kryptonite so they will stay, far, far, far away from it.
“I’m standing up traditional marriage,” is nothing but baseless rhetoric that is being thrown around the political scene nowadays. But if you talk to someone about what that really means, they have absolute no clue what it means. They don’t know what “traditional marriage” stands for, not historically and defiantly not biblically.
(If you are black in this country you shouldn’t even worry about going to the court house, because traditionally all we had to do was jump over a broom stick and THERE YA GO! )
Historically marriage has been used to preserve a class system, securing property, etc. And guess what? For those who know how to google, gay marriages have occurred in history.
Biblically it was okay to get married to your family members, or sell off your pubescent daughter to a old perve who already had other wives. So I don’t know WHY anyone would want to uphold that.
Oh heres another one: “I can’t stand when people compare gay rights to black rights, we had it worse (waaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh) ”
ummmmmm PETTY much??? An injustice is an injustice no matter what form it takes on. Its ridiculous to sit there and try to take a body count.
Blacks were killed mutilated and abused because of white people ancestors (and African ancestors that sold them out. Btw for all those who’ve never been to Africa, you should go sometime they still do it) for over 600 years. And guess what? It was JUSTIFIED because of tradition and the bible. To go against it, as the pope of the 1450s said when he granted it, was to go against God. After all weren’t Africans just were heathens and non believers? (Ironically after stuffing the bible down the throats of illiterate “heathen” slaves, they still didn’t release them. When slave trade was deemed illegal, homophobia in African Americans was nicely seeded there by slave masters who freed their slaves might not breed like they should. After all these years, and its surprising how many people don’t even know that link either.)
But lets go back to the several centuries years of slavery. I mean that was pretty bad, right? Well how about the thousands of years of killing, mutilation, and abuse that went against gays? How about its 2009 and they are still being ostracized in the “Land of the Free”. Homophobia was sentiment that was founded by ignoramuses that didn’t know the earth was round and the earth rotated around the sun.
As for body count, they estimated Hitler (estimated to being gay himself) killed more gays in concentration camps than white supremacist groups killed blacks in America.
Bet you didn’t know that.
During the civil rights moment, minorities, women and gays marched together for equal rights. The evangelical movement (the anti-everything movement of the 60s & 70s) were the antithesis of what these groups of the boycotted. They opposed civil rights, and we all stood together in a rainbow coalition to combat such evil.
It’s sad to see many blacks forgetting this history. After we stood tighter then, its unfortunate for me to see my people standing on the same side of the BS argument with the modernized “dixiecrats”
“But . . . But it’s morally wrong!” Only according to your morals and in the United States of America you can NOT force your morals on another. You can’t abridge their freedoms. Because marriage is a RIGHT.
These same people sit there as child RAPISTS sitting in prison are getting married on our tax dollars but they find no problem with that.
But the when gays down the street who’s tax dollars are also supporting these killers and murders want to get married, now you don’t want to let them? Amazingly how morality turns off and on like a light switch!
In a country that allows priest pedophiles to walk around scott-free after abusing children, we barely bat an eye. We don’t put petitions on ballots or ostracize perverted priests. After all they are men of the cloth! It would be Blasphemy!
But when a gay wants to get married (or heaven forbid serve in the military!) then all the bigots come out in droves.
My questions to the Christians are: When this ruling came down, and people were crying did you lend them your shoulder? What Christian thing did you do to help your brothers and sisters to help them feel better? What and support did you give to them? (Looks like some people need to review the Sermon on the Mount, huh?)
Let me guess, you did nothing. You sat and took secret joy in the misery of others and had the nerve to do it in Jesus’s name.
Pathetic.
Comment by homesteader on 9 June 2009:
We understand one Fact in life and that is all people are born Naked / Disprove this Fact with a bunch of Scientists that say they know who will be born otherwise . What ” Style ” of life one shall live is Personal choice . Were you; laugh_ sailor born on a sailing vessel ?
glock on the other hand in his first sentence states that he is against Gay marriage and also says ” and I think that if someone wants to marry to someone of the same sex, it should be allowed ” showing how easy it is to set on the middle of the top of the fence without falling off .
Comment by homesteader on 9 June 2009:
I graduated high school in 1966 . What people did in 1967 was what they did in 1967 . That was 42 years ago .
Most have learned from their mistakes and looked forward to building a more productive Future for themselves and their families .
It is now 2009 and what my Wife and I did was Celebrate our second year of Marriage . My third birthday Celebration as Husband and Wife .
There in my eyes are still too many on these Blogs / who still Desire to live as people did in the Last Millienium . History teachers and Scientists , we already many moons ago as well as the many others that read these blog topics , received our Learning Degrees . Most likely .
Grow up this world has changed .
Scholars write of the Past , Real people live in the Present and look forward to the better times ahead in the Future .
Move forward from the mistakes of the past / change has Happened - try to live with it .
AfroRomance helped Us to come together as One .
Enjoy Today , put them books back on the shelf . Look to the Sun rise in the East . That my friends will never change .
Comment by homesteader on 9 June 2009:
Today , I would like Propose a vote ;
How many Desire to live with History repeated daily on Blogs .
How many Desire to live in the Present day world with Prosperity .
How many Desire to look into the Marvelous Future of Change .
As in the case of my Wife and I meeting at AfroRomance just two years ago and taking the vows of Marriage .
Comment by tallnwhite1 on 9 June 2009:
Gay people’s “Civil Rights” were not violated. First it does not state anywhere in the Constitution that homosexuals have a “right” to marry. We live in a Republic with a Democratic form of government. Therefore majority rules. The majority of citizens in California voted against homesexual marriage. The decision has been made.
On a non-legal note. Homesexuality is not healthy for society. Marriage between a man and women is the foundation of any society. Nowhere in history has a society thrived, much less even survived under legislation and approved consent of homesexuality in public affairs.
In the US and western world the “homesexual agends” is a radical militant one at best. Several Mormon churches were burned and people were attacked as a result of Prop. 8 by members of various homesexual organized movements. The homesexual agends is to “force” by any means necessary there will upon people. Most of the homesexual groups websites openly advocate this type of behavior. The objective is if anyone dares to resist the “gay agenda” they are to be punished with public opionion. Anyone who dares critize them is to be labeled “racist”, “homaphobic” and “sexist” while denying so called “civil rights”. Homesexuals can vote, worship, congregate, enjoy free speeech, set up special college scholarships and enact special legislation protecting them. What they do not have the right to do is “force feed” their perverted agenda against people and try to “intimidate” people who disagree with them. Open displays of deviant, unatural behavior that is offensive to most poeple should not be tolerated. Maybe one day the “gay movement” will treat other people the way that they themselves want to be treated. But I personally am not going to hold my breath waiting…….
Comment by BrownB09 on 9 June 2009:
Hey Sailor,
Well said sweetie! How are you!
Comment by I Make Thousands of Dollars a Month Posting Links on Google from Home on 9 June 2009:
Nice post, thanks.
Comment by kristent on 10 June 2009:
Girlstar, in many circles Spaniards are considered latin and South Africa, I’m pretty sure, IS IN AFRICA.
Thus far I have been pretty respectful of your opinion even though I believe it to be wrong. I have not “attacked” your religion, though I could combat your arguments with religious and biblical counterattacks, it would just be irrelevant to the law.
I will keep my opinions on the sinfulness of your lifestyle to myself, and I would also like to point out that I have never insulted you or any of the other breeders posting hateful comments on this discussion.
I think this is going to be my last post of this thread. I, laugh_sailor, and others have pretty much summed up the entirety of the case for equal marriage rights. Honestly I don’t see any more productive discourse coming from these posts, so I think it’s best if I just move on.
Good luck to you, and may you always be treated as you treat others.
~Maximum Respect everybody.
Comment by laugh_sailor on 10 June 2009:
Kristent - Aw, thank you! Send me a note and let’s elope. Thanks for your informative posts - I’ve enjoyed learning from you and am sure we’ll laugh at the contrived pettiness of these bigots while we revel in nature’s beauty, cruising the seven seas. Maybe not - these bigots are causing a lot of completely unnecessary pain.
Firecatluv - I love your saying “Education shatters ignorance. It is a bigot’s kryptonite.” May I forever quote you, please? Thank you for your insights - I’m happily enlightened. One sailor’s spinach is another’s kryptonite, eh? I sadly will have to choose between you and Kristent because I choose not to have a biblical household of more than one wife, married with a backwoods conservative Christian minister.
Thank you also for your sensible history of Afro American homophobia - I’ve read about the importance slavers attach to breeding, of course. I’m glad you brought up current African slavery - Worldwide, slavery’s on the rise and tragically, not many realize that (In Sudan, the same Arabians are collecting slaves from conflicts between African tribes, still.). Your enumeration of the mortality of gay bashing is also quite sobering. It’s all simply awful and more so because our societies are so blind to history.
Girlstar7 - “‘Separation of church and state’ is a political and legal doctrine that government and religious institutions are to be kept separate and independent from each other.” This is from Wikipedia, speaking of our Constitution, which is the foundation of United States law. If you check out any of the links I’ve provided, you can see for yourself. The actual words in our constitution are: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” You have repeatedly mistaken this fundamental principle of our government - We have a secular government with strong protections “from religious persecution” - Not the other way around. Rather than continue to look silly stating something that’s not true and is common knowledge, please look up the links I’ve given to our Constitution and take five minutes to read about it. I have taken care to provide well-accepted, accurate and easily-understood explanations of the concepts I’ve spoken of, here.
tallnwhite1 - The following highly successful civilizations, empires and countries have flourished under open gay and lesbian citizenship: Rome, All the Greek city-states, Carthage, Egypt, Crete, Turk, Ottoman, all the mesopotamian city-states, many native tribes worldwide (Offhand, I can’t think of any that are/were homophobic.), Mongol, India, China, Japan, Indonesia, Thailand, Viet Nam, Cambodia and if either of us researched, we’d come up with a host more. Kindly read my previous posts for an accurate understanding of U.S. civil rights law. The gay community, consisting of people of all kinds, probably is more united on one stance than any other and that is for people to just let them be and treat them like anyone else. Your gay bashing is really quite rude, offensive and out of place. No one believes for an instant that you’re persecuted as you claim. I am certainly not and I am also tall and white.
Do people really think that publicly bullying on a dating site will get them attractive, happy mates and fulfilling romances? “Jane and I met on this dating site - She was gay-bashing and I fell in love with her bitter, narrow-minded, conceitful state of denial right then. It’s what our romance is all about.” What kind of friend and quality of thought does this attitude bring to life? Wake up - It’s the 21st Century and it’s not ok to behave like this in public. Take all that negative energy and do something positive and happy with it, instead - Go have a playful picnic with one of the wonderful people here… with any but firecatluv and kristent - We’re going to have a religiously-sanctioned polygamous marriage.
Glock - Good to see you again! You’ve raised a very good against gay marriage: First gays, then polygamists? Where do we stop? My answer is that it’s a process we’ve already started on: Blacks can marry and blacks and whites can marry and now gays are slowly gaining that recognition. Polygamists have been roundly defeated in the courts of law and public opinion and I don’t see that changing - Do you? I guess firecatluv, kristent and I will have to marry in a secretly-sanctioned, backwoods, fundamental-Christian wedding. Bummer.
Comment by How to Make Thousands of Dollars Posting Links on Google on 10 June 2009:
Thanks for posting, I’ll definitely be subscribing to your blog.
Comment by Curious on 11 June 2009:
Girlstar 7 and all,
I would like to know your opinions to these questions:
1. Why is it the people that always try to compare African-American struggles to being gay are in fact mostly not African-American people?
2. Why didn’t the gay movement compare their struggles and/or equate them to other ethnic groups’ struggles like the Holocaust, Japanese Internment Camps, and other discriminatory events?
3. If gay marriage is overturned in the U.S. Supreme Court, will the same people advocating for gay marriage also advocate for pedophiles, bestiality, and any other sexual orientation minority group to marry who they love?
I am interested in all opinions. Please do not recite anything from Wikipedia because it is not 100% accurate since it is an online collaboration.
Comment by Glock on 11 June 2009:
Tallnwhite, I have to disagree with your statement about there being nothing in the Constitution about homosexuals having the right to marry. Although the constitution does not say “specifically” that they have a right to it, it does not deny it either. The Constitution is a LIMIT on the power of the federal government. It describes the specific duties the federal government is allowed to do, although nobody would ever know that today. I would invite you to read the 9th and 10th amendments.
Also, America is not a democracy where majority rules, again, nobody would know that based on what goes on today. It’s a republic not a democracy. There is a huge difference.
Laugh_Sailor, I have to admit, I am not in favor of gays marrying nor approve of gay lifestyle. However, that being said, if the issue of gay marriage is the discussion, than why not polygamy? Or any other “alternative” lifestyle between consenting adults? We are afforded equal protection under our constitution (at least are supposed to) and if gays will be allowed to marry, then it’s only a matter of time before other lifestyle will demand their day in court as well.
This is a huge slippery slope.
Yes I agree that blacks and whites are allowed to marry today. But lets remember too that marriage is a religious issue originating from the judeo-christian arena. God did not approve of homosexual relationships although it happened in biblical times, as well as the empires and cultures you mentioned. Simply put, you can’t stop it. I do however put “interracial” marriage in a diffferent catagory altogether than homosexuals relationships. And I think the most ardent racist would as well. Even many who condone gays being allowed to marry I think would have the opinion that it’s just not natural. But of course the degradation of society follows those who life their lives with no regard with what is decent and respectful public and private behavior.
Just my opinion.
Comment by firecatluv on 11 June 2009:
Laugh sailor-
You are more than welcome to use it. Bigots always have to be dragged into the future kicking and screaming. Five states have gay marriage, several more recognize civil unions, other countries have allowed it for a while. And guess what, the sky hasn’t fallen. But they don’t see that, they are too scared to educate themselves, too scared to learn about the world. Because you see, if they do, then they have to admit their bigotry. And that’s very, very hard. So they will rationalize, put up strawmen, throw a red herring or two, anything to keep them from facing the ugly truth about themselves. Some will wise up, most never will. But who cares, the dinosaurs of the old eventually die outand if the polls are any indicator of the future, its only a matter of time before kids 20 years from now will be asking “what was the big deal again?”
Curious
1. They compare it to interracial marriages which affects not just AA. They draw similarities to interracial marriages because Loving vs Virgina was a case where the supreme court ruled that marriage was a right. They also compare it to any civil rights argument, AA aren’t the only minorities in this country. And you are wrong about AA not comparing it, there are many of us libby AA that do. Do you have any facts to back up a claim that AA don’t compare it to the civil rights struggle. Please give me some websites that prove such a statement, you know one not from wiki.
This also answers #2
for #3, why stop there? Why not ask if we are going to let chickens get married to dolphins, martians to butterflies, and ducks to snakes? that’s the slippery slope argument right?
here’s the thing, if you are going to bring up random hypothetical situations that has nothing to do with the topic at hand, i say get creative!
Glock
marriage is only a religious institution? My God man, pick up a history book!
AND the constitution is a work in progress, it was never made to be the end all be all. If it was, we sure as h’ll wouldn’t have had 27 amendments in less than 250 years! What are we averaging an amendment every 8 or 9 years?! Lol!
So gays can’t get married because some bigot (who never picked up peer reviewed literature on the subject) thinks it not natural.
It would be pretty hypocritical if the people that make this claim did anything that wasn’t natural.
For example: like get medical treatment or type on the magic box hooked up to the “internets”
These poor, poor souls prob don’t drive cars, or ride in boats or fly in planes. they don’t own guns, oeat processed foods, or have central heat and air!
In fact if you guys meet one of these rare natural humans running around feral please let me know cuz i know plenty of scientists that will love to put such creatures in cages and research them!
Me being one of them!
Comment by starthai on 11 June 2009:
Glad to see you back posting Glock
Comment by laugh_sailor on 12 June 2009:
Glock - You’re quite right: I don’t think there’s a Constitutional barrier to further permutations of marriage. It is philosophically, as you mention, a very slippery slope and in a purely philosophical light, I don’t think there’s a strong case to be made against other permutations as a class of marriage (There are, though, strong cases to be made by individual type.): Each is unique to a great extent and we haven’t allowed a particular class of marriages - Just the most acceptable types, one by one. Your comparison between homosexual and interracial marriage/relationships philosophically is interesting and I suspect it’s implied from one’s sexual/interracial orientation: A gay racist might loathe interracial heterosexual marriage, ardently support gay intraracial marriage and be completely conflicted at the thought of a gay interracial marriage.
You’re quite right in pointing out the essential religious beginnings of marriage, as well, though it’s transcended religion quite some time ago, while retaining many of the old trappings and in many cases is still a religious rite. As I mentioned, I think the limits are social: There’s a near-unanimous dislike of polygamy, so I don’t think it will fly, politically (As an example, electing supreme court justices is essentially a political process.). I think the same may be said of other marriage types and though I dearly love my sailboats, sadly I don’t think I’ll ever be allowed to legally marry them. Thanks for your thoughtful views!
Comment by hazelpride on 12 June 2009:
Glock I think you summed it all up, and I like your opinion than those being put across. Somehow Laugh_sailor just made it hard to enjoy the debate, that is my view.
Comment by tallnwhite1 on 12 June 2009:
To Sailor-time to get schooled once again. ALL of the modern society’s that you mention previously. Japan, China etc. DO NOT openly endorse homesexual marriage. Nor does their individual governments “endorse and promote” the practice of a homesexual lifestyle. As for Ancient Rome, Greece, Carthage, Mesopotamia. They have all been destroyed and have been gone for thousands of years. Most have ceased to exist not from neighboring countries but from their very own systems.
As for the Constitution and the united States in general. There is a dirty little secret to the founding of America. It was founded primarily by Christian fundamentalists. Quakers, Mononites, Catholics, Evangelicals etc. all came to America in order to practice religious freedom which was openly endorsed by the US government. Again, no where in the Constitution does it call for a seperation of Church and state. If you need more documentation about the role of religion in the US. Read the Getttysburg Address, Washington’s Farewell Address, or just look at the top of a dollar bill in your pocket. Mine says “In God we trust”. Not “in a secular government we trust”.
You also did not address the wonderful, oppressed tolerant, secular homesexual groups that burned several Mormoun churches in California after the Prop 8 vote.
Comment by tallnwhite1 on 12 June 2009:
To Glock
I never said we live in a Democracy. I specifically stated that we live in a Republic with a Democratic form of Government. However if majority does not rule (as you stated) then who elects our government officials? How are the outcome of elections determined? I think you might be referring to the popular vs electoral vote. But if majority does not rule then how are bills passed in congress if not by a majority rule?
As for the Constitution you are partly corrrect. It does not state specifically support or denying of gay marriage. Nor would it since the overwhelming majority of Americans were practicing Christians during the time of the writing. To the best of my knowledge ALL of the signers of the Constitution were Christians. So the deviancy of gay marriage and the ills on society that would result from it would not even be an issue. Again name one society in history that has flourished or survived with government and public consent of homesexuality?
And finally, again, where in the Constitution does it state of a seperation of Church and state? Do not feel bad though. I used to drive my more highly educated, open-minded, liberal college professors crazy when they could not answer that one!
Of course I can talk and explain and cite context after context to no avail. The fact of the matter is that we are living in a selective-socialistic welfare state that has no “moral center” anymore. As long as it is “politically correct” and popular. Anything goes…….until we eventually implode in the near future since we learn nothing from history.
Comment by Curious on 12 June 2009:
Firecatluv and all,
Thank you for your answers, excluding the condascending comments.
I never stated anywhere in my post that African-Americans did not make this comparison. However, one can deduct from reputable sources (Washington Post & Los Angeles Times), not from Wikipedia, that many African-Americans would not correlate being gay to the struggles of African-Americans from the voting outcomes. Please read the links below.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/06/AR2008110603880.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/11/70-of-african-a.html
Since I am a native Californian, you are unaware of many things that have taken place in my state to warrant such questions. I will say this though that I never saw one advertisement that compared being gay to any other ethnic group’s struggles. Furthermore, my original-creative thought is that Proposition 8 will be eliminated in a higher court.
With that said, you may see opening the door for any sexual preference minority group for marriage as hypothetical, but it will come down the pipeline sooner or later. I will venture to say in my opinion if that doesn’t work then the next move will be the marriage band wagon since any sexual preference minority group is entitled to their Civil Rights. Here is an example: http://www.nambla.org/welcome.htm
The question is will you be advocating for those groups as well - polygamists, pedophiles, bestiality, etc.?
Comment by homesteader on 13 June 2009:
Freedom of Choice / Love it or Leave it . Some Win / Some Lose . But you gotta play the Game . I may knot be correct to a Few - Alas , We found Success here at AfroRomance . The Right to Happiness . I vote every Election / Do you ?
Comment by Glock on 13 June 2009:
HOLY COW!! Where do I begin?? I will try my best to address all the points, questions and assertions made toward me, so if I leave one out or forget one it wasn’t intentional. Remind me that I didn’t address something and I’ll fix it. I believe good discussion are not only good, but very important. Here goes…
FIRECATLUV:
Yes, marriage has it’s origin in religion. God performed the first marriage. And the Bible is a history book. Now if you want to paint me as some religious nut for saying that, I’m guilty as charged.
The Constitution is NOT a living document or a “work in progress” as you say. The Constitution was written to put limits on the federal government describe what responsibilities the government has. The constitution has it’s roots in natural law, believing that people have inherent rights just being a human being.
As far as the rest of you post, I have know idea if it’s directed to me or what you’re trying to say.
LAUGH_SAILOR: Remember just 30 years ago if you were gay, you didn’t make it public knowledge. More so if you were a public figure or celebrity. Now, not only do public figures and celebrities make it public knowledge, it enhances their careers! So, even though polygamy is illegal and looked down upon now, who knows if that community will demand it’s “rights” in the future based on what happens today with gays. Never underestimate the power of the media. The media has had a tremendous influence in shaping public opinion on gay “rights” and gay “marriage” to the point that now if you don’t support gay “rights” you’re a “bigot” or “homophobe”.
TALLNWHITE1: Your previous post you said that we live in a “Republic with a democratic government, therefor majority rules.” That is partially correct. We live in a republic, that part is correct. However the reason we live in a republic is so that the majority would NOT dictate. Majority rule IS a democracy. With a democracy you have the will of the majority deciding what rights the minority have. That is not a republic. If we had a democracy and majority rules, there would be no need whatsoever for a constitution, period because “majority rules”.
We hear politicians speak very frequently about “The American People want…”, they are referring to a democracy. These same people know that the constitutions does not allow them to do the many things they propose but instead rely on Americans ignorance about how government is run and what the constitution is for.
As far as “naming you one society that has florished or survived because of consent of gay marriage”. Where did I make that assertion? I didn’t. I don’t believe America will either.
And again, where did I say anything about the seperation of church and state in the Constitution? I don’t feel badly, in fact I know the term “seperation of church and state” came from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Connecticut Baptist Association and has nothing to do with the constitution.
Well let me know if I didn’t address something that someone felt I didn’t address.
Comment by takinitall on 13 June 2009:
You know as a Black female, I am amazed and embarrassed at the responses from the other Black women. We have a huge epidemic of down low/ closet gay men and our community who are afraid to come out because of homophobic people. If we continue to push people into the closet by sending the message of hate, we will continue to have more straight women end up with AIDS/ HIV and other problems because we won’t allow people to be themselves. Besides for you proclaimed Christians, GOD is the only one who can judge us. GOD also says all sin is created equal and no one is without sin. I’m willing to bet that every one of you who shun gay people, are having pre marital sex yourself. There’s nothing worse than hypocritical Christains. Get a life and a man of your own. You can’t control the life of others. Gay people work, pay taxes, adopt children and contribute just as much to society as straight people do. Bottom line is Get Over It! Denying their right to marriage is not going to stop them from being gay.
Comment by ed_36 on 13 June 2009:
actually its a good thing that they are denied to get married.. 1 thing is that it is an abomination.
it is not normal living, and it is wrong. and they way it is, is that if they want rights then they need to return to a normal straight life style.
there is no real happiness in it and one main reason they do it is just because it is the oposite of what God says. to Love God & hate sin.
its not the people that is to be hated, it is the sin and the wicked lifestyle. but , thats all thier is to say about it. but they like everyone will stand at the judgment and be accountable for thier themselves, but if they want to live that way thats thier bisuness but the consequences will be not good
Comment by malamo on 14 June 2009:
Kristent,i think life is how you take it,history says we descover who we are by trieng a lot of different things(talents)but i dont see any reason why someone can be against others,nevertheless gay is said to be life in another world.
Comment by Just Me on 14 June 2009:
(Do I really want to get involved in this mess of a discussion?)
How about we all agree to just disagree? Arguing will get us no where, and in the end I’m still going to hold my beliefs and values just the same as I did when I entered this discussion (and I do not agree with gay marriage–I have the right to believe what I want to). If we can’t “discuss” this without being offensive to others, then let’s drop it!!!
(My grammar may be off–I don’t care.)
Comment by FearlessCrusader on 14 June 2009:
Glock, that was very good. You hit the nail on the head and drove it right on through the board. Keep up the good work!
Takintail, if there’s anything worse than hypocrital Christians, it’s knuckleheads who make false accusations against others. You would probably consider me one who shuns gay people (I’m friendly with some of them and I believe they should have the same rights as others, but I cannot approve of their sin); however, I never had premarital sex so you have lost your bet. Pay up. Just becaue you do it doesn’t mean everybody does it.
Comment by coreyr on 15 June 2009:
Discrimination yes, discrimination just because I don’t like you..?
Of course not. If I think anal copulation between two men should be embraced as a healthy, happy societal norm I’m the only one enlightened? I think not.
So “We the People” have the right to choose the course of our own society but lets not spin the issue into “Civil rights denied”.
Black people never had a choice….gay behavior although prevalent does not equate to normal or unavoidable. It is a mental and psychological mindset.
Gays themselves never called upon marriage until sodomy laws were overturned in Lawrence vs. Texas.
Marriage by definition equals two opposite sexes.
Gay relationships have never equaled two opposite sexes. Its the same as trying to say I was born black even though I’m whiter than Kevin Bacon. You can’t be something you’re not.
After gay marriage gets shoved down our necks, we’ll be calling gay men by their “married” alter egos
“…this is Nancy, he will be your personal trainer today…”
Can’t wait.
Comment by firecatluv on 15 June 2009:
glock- well maybe YOUR constitution isn’t a work in progress, but MINE is. YOUR constitution, stated that only white wealthy men had the right to participate in law making, MY constitution has been admended to grant ME equal rights. ;P
So god performed the first marriage? What was that about 6000 years ago when the earth was created? Anyway it doesn’t matter, as a constitutional champion, you should know that should have no bearings on governmental decisions. so bringing this up matters only to the people who believe it, and no one else.
takinitall- well said!
Comment by homesteader on 16 June 2009:
Adam & Eve were Commonlaw , they had no Choice of others to Marry / they were the only two created . Therefore no Ceremony of Marriage .
No courthouse to issue Marriage certificate or store records , no witnesses or Best man and Maid of Honor / flower girl .
Just a snake to eat bugs off apple tree , Hehe .
Then thousands of years later , people to write of that which they never actually saw happen . Heresay , rumors and conjecture in it’s earliest form .
Gays already maintain that Rite as per # 3 / Websters Dictionary - Stating ; Any Close Union .
The United States of America was build on the Platform of Freedom of Choice and Freedom of Repression of others .
The Bill of Rights is Similar to the Bible in that each Interprets what they read in their own way .
Amen
Comment by Glock on 16 June 2009:
Nope it’s the same one. Question, can you tell what article in the constitution it says “Only white wealthy men have the right to participate in law making”?
And yes, God performed the first marriage. And yes it does matter.
Comment by firecatluv on 16 June 2009:
Glock-
???
wasn’t this learned back in highschool civics?
If you forgot, you really can google this stuf.
The founding fathers made blacks fractions of people, women insignificant, and worried about the uneducated masses ruining the legislative process. Native americans and other minorities wasn’t even on their radar.
“We the people”, was a statement made only for the oligarchy of the time. They didn’t even consider women and minorities, as they couldn’t even fathom anyone arguing that property would have inalienable rights.
The poor were only represented in 1/2 the congressional branch and the founding fathers argued over even giving them this . While the poor was represented in the house, they still couldn’t vote.
Only Property owners (i.e. the wealthy) was allowed to vote, be nominated to the judicial branch, serve in the executive branch, or serve in the senate. Which means only 10-15% of the population (dep on your source) were allowed to vote or participate.
It was a system that was built for the elite and only through the last century has the original premise been molded into a more democratic process.
http://www.enotes.com/government-checks-balances/historic-roots-legislative-branch
http://www.progress.org/2004/vote28.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_rights_in_the_United_States
aruging for the rights of women, minorities & the poor to bigots back then is as futile as aruging for gay rights to bigots right now.
Comment by Glock on 16 June 2009:
I see homesteader that stupidity still runs rampant in your statements.
I know you’re trying to make a point, but it would take a psychiatrist to figure out what the heck you’re trying to say. I’ve given up long ago on trying decipher your posts.
Comment by Glock on 17 June 2009:
Fircatluv: To answer your question (something you failed to do for me) most of what I learned about American government happened AFTER I graduated from our government schools. Government (I mean “public”) schools wants the populace ignorant.
Sure, I’ll check out your websites if you want me to, however, I’ve dont more reading about our history than just your 3 websites.
Your first comment about blacks being counted as fractions demonstrates how inaccurate these websites (or your sources) can be. Blacks were not counted as fractions or (3/5’s as the constitution states) because they were worth less, it was for apportioning money to the states. With the many slaves in the south, the north felt that an unfair amount of money would be going to the south. The south actually wanted blacks to count as whole, not the so-called enlightened north.
Woman stated home and raised the kids because the husbands were out farming. The were not considered “insignificant”. Maybe in “modern” terms their status might be considered that but not then. If you ever had a chance to read some of the letters written by the founders to their wives, you would know this. They held their wives in very high regard.
And yes I will agree with you that the founders were very concerned about the uneducated involved in the legislative or governmental process. They knew that people who were not knowledgable about our new form of government, a republic, would destroy it. There are two people who’s quotes I am trying to remember that illustrate this. One is from Ben Franklin who said when asked after the signing of the constitution what kind of government did we get, “A republic, if you can keep it.” The other quote from Thomas Jefferson relates to the success of a republic relying on an informed and knowledgable people. The exact quote escapes me at the moment (I’ll have to find it.) Bottom line is we did NOT create a democracy (mob rules) that was exactly what they were trying to avoid, but rather a republic in which the wishes of the majority would not trample on the minority (yes I’m fully aware of the hypocrisy of the founders talking about minority rights and owning slaves, and I am also fully aware that the abolishen of slavery was addressed and quashed in order to get a constitution signed.
You are wrong about the “We the People” preamble being for the “oligarchy” at the time. It was written at the last moment by Gouverneur Morris from Pennsylvania. It was not proposed or discussed at the convention center.
If the system was built for the “elite”, they really screwed that up because instantaniously, people who were motivated started climbing the ladder to success. For example, John D. Rockefeller came from very humble beginnings and became the richest man in the world.
And no, I don’t believe everything I learned in school.
Comment by homesteader on 17 June 2009:
Thank you glock , I stated Facts / if indeed Adam & Eve were married , it was not a case of Choice . As their were no others to chose from .
Maybe if you had studied harder in school , You may have learned what they taught was what they read from books . Written by those that also were knot perfect and made errors in Judgement .
Mothers and children also worked the fields together / Thus larger families .
These stories you write came out of Books and yet you say ” I don’t believe everything I learned in school .
Half of Knowledge is knowing where to find it / The other half is the Desire to Learn from what you have Found .
Maybe , because I thought that I was speaking to others with intelligence . When I missed a few words here and there . I thought that some could read between the Lines .
The Bible was also written by Men and Women , WHO TELL STORIES OF WHAT THEY SAW AND HEARD .
John D. Rockefeller , believed what he was taught and Earned his money .
You talk of things that happened in the 1700’s / Like you were there at that time to know - What they were speaking of .
In my eyes / To see is to Believe . Your stories that I read , constantly are full of Contrivances of Conjecture
This Blog topic was written about the Rite of a Marriage Ceremony that was Denied to a few United States Citizens . And this was in recent time knot a couple hundred years ago .
Leaving me to ask what the Constitution has to do with the topic anyhows . This was presented about Gay rights and the word ” Slave ” was never used in the Question .
So what the flock are you talking about ?
Comment by ngbabe on 17 June 2009:
To Laugh_sailor and Kristent
On a previous post you stated “ngbabe - You’re correct in identifying the changing nature of our society: You, as a black woman, would not have been allowed service in many of the southern airports in the 1930’s.
I am afraid you would have to use a d/f analogy that I can relate to. You wrongfully assumed as a black woman, I am a direct descendant of slaves. I am afraid I can’t relate or be grateful for being allowed access to anything. Like you, I was born and remain a first class citizen in a country where being black was/still the only thing to be. I personally hate it when some whites such as yourself seem eager to use the slavery experience to sort of bring black people back to their place–Next thing I know, you will be telling me to be grateful that your society now allows me to date outside my race. If I were a white woman with similar perspective on this issue, would have used the same line of argument to reason with me? or maybe your intention was not to reason rather,to use what you thought was a humble background to remind me of how grateful I ought to be!!! Sorry to disappoint you but I am not grateful;had I been born and living in the 1930’s, I would have still been a first class citizen with access to everything my mind could imagine.
For the record, I am against gay marriage, I do not however condone those crazy fanatics out there who simply hate folks b/c of their sexual preference. My policy on gay rights/marriage is that such lifestyles need to remain in the privacy of ones bedroom.
No amount of name calling by you or Kristent who labeled me homophobic will change my feelings on this issue.
I think it pure ignorant and immature that grown adults can’t disagree without resorting to name calling. I challenge you and Kristent to intelligently articulate your arguments without insulting or calling others offensive names
Comment by homesteader on 18 June 2009:
Please excuse me the last should read ; So what glock are you talking about ? THANK YOU .
Comment by Glock on 18 June 2009:
Homesteader, once again, I can’t make heads or tails about what you’re trying to say. But hey, I’m not doing anything important right now so I guess I waste some more of my time and respond to the parts of your post I can sort of make out.
I can remember back a while ago were you got lambasted about your incessant incoherent driveling. I see you haven’t stopped. If I was you and married to the wonderful woman you tell us about all the time, I WOULDN’T BE ON A SINGLES SITE!! I would be enjoying my WONDERFUL WIFE!!!
But, since you are not me, and since you believe all the things they taught you in government school, perhaps you could use that education and make complete coherent setences, rational statements and maybe break out a dictionary once in a while just to check on a word or two.
Now…
No, Adam and Eve didn’t have a “choice”, but they were going to conceive children and God would not have them fornicating without being bound to one another.
I speak of the 1700’s because I can read. Duh!! Do I really need to respond to that Homesteader? There are many people in this world who speak of history who were not there. David McCullough, one of my favorite biographers speaks very authoritatively about the 1700’s but wasn’t born until 1932. Should he keep his mouth shut then??
If you’re going to criticize me for speaking of things in the past which I was not a part of, then YOU better follow your own advice and never reference the past to illustrate a point!
As far as the rest of your rediculous post Homesteader, I have wasted enough of my time responding to yet, another one of your idiotic posts that are so incoherent that’s it’s almost impossible to understand. Here’s a suggestion, when two people are involved in a serious, thought provoking, intelligent discussion that may delve into other areas needed to support a point, stay out. Observe, you may just learn something instead of being the “joe-blow” from down the street that has to butt into every conversation, always making an #%#* of himself.
Comment by homesteader on 19 June 2009:
I repeat ; This Topic was about others Rights to the Rite of Marriage . #%#* signing off .
Comment by fkoi on 19 June 2009:
Homesteader, there are times when I wonder what the heck you are talking about. But then there are times when I wonder the same about me.
I have to say though that there are those posts when the pearls you cast before swine are of the highest quality. Keep firing away. I can always sort through and find something that I can use.
Comment by FearlessCrusader on 19 June 2009:
Thank you very much for the much-needed perspective, ngbabe. Words of wisdom from a very wise woman…
Comment by homesteader on 21 June 2009:
fkoi ; First impressions lead me to emit the first thoughts that come to my mind .
Granted the location in which we live is totally different from where others live , Thus allowing a totally different outlook in that which We see happening and as in the Lives of the Gay community . People regardless of their station in Life will be Persecuted by other people Daily even if there is no Reasoning in this difference of opinion .
I Praise the Benefits , that We as a couple have gained from coming together at this AfroRomance Date Ting site .
We as a Loving Couple / have experienced all of the Daily Strife that comes from being in an Inter-racial Marriage . Alas by Looking at the bright side . All the Bigotry seems to exist only in the minds of Those that only wish to see what - Was -. Knot by the ones who wish to see what Can be .
I talked to one of my friends from years past just the other day and at the start of Our Life together / had had many Bad things to say out in the open where others were present to hear / inorder to impress those who still choose to live in the dark ages .
We had never lost Our friendship , it was just the case of Him realizing that My way of Life had knot changed at all . Other than I had became Happy again .
With time and seeing that I did knot throw unintelligent Comments in return to his less than friendly Remarks . We HAVE once again found a meeting of the minds / Showing Me that indeed people will change with Learning of others Smiles and Happiness in Life .
With Positive thoughts of the Future / Knot constant Reminders of a Less Educated time in History when the Greed of a self-proclaimed society chose to enslave others for their own Profit .
My thoughts come from a Personal History of how others have Affected my daily ventures / Knot that which I read in books . Thus being which I have actually Witnessed in Seeing how Beautiful Life can be if one Desires ” The Brighter Side ”
I also feel that the Cave Dweller have their Right to Live Exactly how they feel .
My first comment on this Blog Topic / Tells it as I have seen Life unfolding in my younger years . I do knot sleep in others Bedrooms / Therefore I have totally no Reason to Tell them how to Arrange their Furniture . That Being their God given Right to a Life of Happiness as they see Fit .
” Don’t compare your life to others , as you have no Idea what their life is About . “
Comment by homesteader on 21 June 2009:
fkoi ; Thank you for the Laughter this morning about the piece of sand that found its’ way into the Oyster shell as the Pig in the pen was eating the Snake / which had found its’ way { crawled } into his living quarters .
Showing again the many differences that can exist from unwanted Vermin trying to move into places that they do knot Belong . These We shall see Everyday , All things in life no matter how annoying at First , can become Beneficial with Time if you take the time to Enjoy what God has given Us .
Happy Fathers’ Day
Comment by Glock on 21 June 2009:
LOL.
Comment by fkoi on 21 June 2009:
Homesteader, Your way with words is sometimes a zen poem. Your last was just such. I even had to think for a minute what I had said that would elicit such a response.
I can’t remember if you are a father but I am, so Happy Fathers’ Day
Comment by homesteader on 22 June 2009:
P.S. glock when I write my opinions online speaking to the World at Large , I try to be Honest and informative in my Statements .
Maybe throwing in an alternate spelling of some words to draw Special Attension .
As I feel that what I write is viewed by so many that it rates at the Top of being ” Important ” teaching others what I have Learned about life .
Also I always have something to do while Reading others opinions and weighing on my Personal Scale if they Really have anything to say . I Learn something New everyday .
My opinion of Rereading books that I read in prior years is only for Refreshing my memory on topics that I have already Learned .
My Questions this morning ;
How many times do we have to reread the Constitution to know that the First Ten Amendments are called ” The Bill of Rights ” ?
or reread the Bible to know that God created Heaven and Earth and Me in his own image ?
Comment by Dawnshyne on 22 June 2009:
WOW, I seemingly have missed an extremely spirited discussion. I have to agree with takinitall, I too noticed the similarities in those who chose to support the marriage ban and was disappointed along with you.
I am also going to agree with the sistah whose opinion was that it was this teaching and thinking that is helping to perpetuate the rising number of HIV infections in the black community. We alienate and hate amoungst ourselves the worse it seems.
Please let’s leave the judging for the One qualified to do such a thing.
Peace
Comment by mahogany2007 on 22 June 2009:
I am not a Christian and have no religious affiliation whatsoever, but believe the only legally recognized union should be between a heterosexual man and a heterosexual woman.
Comment by Glock on 22 June 2009:
Homesteader you bring it on yourself. The only reason I respond to anything you say is because you attack my comments. Then you want to claim some kind of innocence.
You make statements, then contradict them almost immediately. Yet you ridicule anyone who disagrees with you. You deride people for actually knowing something about that which they speak. Then do the same thing. Perhaps jealousy?
Personally I do not view your comments as “The top of being important” And if you call that teaching, then your message is lost in a cloud.
And to answer you “question”; Every day.
Comment by ngbabe on 22 June 2009:
Fearless crusader
Thanks for being a gentleman—Some of the guys on this site could learn a thing or two from you lol
Laugh_sailor
I hope you don’t think because you have an undergraduate degree in political science that you’re now a constitutional expert. Try making your point w/out claiming expertise in the law unless of course you’re an attorney and a constitutional one for that matter.There are many people on this site, myself included who possess far more advanced degrees but chose not to use this site as a forum to brag about our academic achievements.I was also wondering if by any chance you’re a closet gay man–because u seem to lack objectivity in your arguments!!!
Comment by Tim on 23 June 2009:
I AM A GAY MAN AND I DO NO BELIEVE IN GAY MARRIAGE PERIOD. IT IS NASTY AND IT IS AN ABOMINATION.IT GOES AGAINST THE BIBLE.
Comment by jack47 on 23 June 2009:
I find it amazing that people still, to this day, refer to being gay as a “choice”. I don’t know of anyone who would willing choose to be ostracized by their own society, to be denied some of the basic rights that are freely given to other members of that society based on their sexual “choice”, to actually place themselves in a lifestyle where certain people would consider them less than human and, in some cases, murder them because of their “chosen” lifestyle. This is a choice? Didn’t the Declaration state that American citizens are allowed “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”? Are gay and lesbian citizens who work jobs, pay taxes, own property, not allowed those same rights? Isn’t being married to someone you love part of that “pursuit”? Why are we trying to “protect” the institution of marriage? Do you really think that the heterosexual community has done such a great job of protecting it? Not in my estimation. I also find it amazing when people bring “god” into the question. This is the self same being who’s name was used to torture and burn people during the Spanish Inqusition, whose name was combined with Manifest Destiny as an excuse to destroy the Native Americans across this country. And this is the entity people turn to for a decision on this subject? No wonder reality tv is so popular.
Comment by homesteader on 27 June 2009:
glock ; when you grow up and quit calling names on other blogs . Maybe someone will marry you , meanwhile the only name I will call you is ” Child “. I could never be Jealous of one who still hides in the closet with Fearless Crusader at his side . You boys behave .
Comment by Glock on 28 June 2009:
Typical Homesteader response. Practice what you preach Homesteader.
Comment by Nandi on 29 June 2009:
What a pity that others feel because of their own disapproval, it is okay to deny others. All marriages are civil unions. With or without the religious factors and no state should uphold bans against anyone based on religious beliefs.. Just because a person disapproves of another, what gives them the right to deny others…Never could get that point. Homosexuality is not a matter of choice for the majority of them and why is it anyone business. If you do not approve of homosexuality, than do not engage in same sex, sex…I am a person of faith, my faith tells me not to judge others, no one of faith can condemn another, since they do not know themselves if they are going to heaven or hell. I believe Jesus and God can handle judgement day…Why is it that “religious people” are the biggest haters? Go figure…Which only proves you do not need religion to have morals, standards and compassion…At this rate, if I make it to heaven, I just might be bunked out with RuPaul, Elton John and Bill Maher.
However, I think the gay communities should go with civil unions for the sake of arguments, eventually the heterosexuals with hi-jacked the civil union concept and the term marriage will only matter if one wants it to, kinda like marriage today, which usually ends up in civl court for dissolution of marriage..Go figure
Comment by homesteader on 30 June 2009:
Facts / only the Truth Hurts . I was Successful in my Search . As We live in the Present and look forward to a very very very Profitable Future for Us Together .
I did knot Preach or try to give History Lessons and I do knot sleep alone .
I found a Wife here at AfroRomance / Seems to Us you are looking for a Slave - Mr. Slave Trader .
Best of Luck in your search .
Comment by homesteader on 30 June 2009:
As per your recent comment on the April 16, 2007 Blog , glock
Comment by Nandi on 30 June 2009:
takinitall, Great post! I am amazed at the hyprocrisy of religious folks, all sin is equal sin..
It really is a shame that, but for hyprocrisy, ignorance and bigotry..Black America would not have the AIDS cases they have, nor the teen pregnancies or single mothers
Because I am sure God disapproves. Which is why I am for anything that seperate church from state.
Comment by Glock on 30 June 2009:
Homesteader, you’re such a loser. I could care less if you’re married or not, it’s clear that you spend very little time with her because you spend all your time here blogging. Hell, you spend time going all the way back to 2007!! to find something (what it is I don’t even care!). I’m flattered that I am such an interest in your life that you would go to the length of RESEARCHING all the posts for the last 2 years to find something I wrote!!! But you’re not my type, you’re white and male. So please find someone or something to occupy your time, say, maybe your WIFE!! She might appreciate it if her husband actually spent time with her instead of a website?? Talk about me being single? So is your wife!! YOU get a life.
But as far as these rediculous rants of yours, go ahead and post all you want. I’m done wasting my time with you and your rediculous and stupid posts. I may be single, but I certainly have more of a life than you.
Comment by M.Elliot on 3 July 2009:
Nandi,
As an African American I find it highly offensive that you would post a comment without investigating the mitigating circumstances which have lead to African Americans not being as progressive as other races in the United States. It is easy to point a finger at African Americans and say they are he cause of their own circumstances, but I ask you to consider these factors Nandi. When looking at the conditions of Africans Americans post slavery in America the freed slave faced several conditions. The most important condition I will touch on is education. Their was a great debate among African Americans as to what type of Education the newly freed slaves should receive. For many African Americans a practical education in trade and the service industry was notunthinkabble and often frowned upon. The African American elite wanted African Americans to receive an education similar to their European American counterparts. The problem with such an education is that it proved useless for the African American to receive a advanced degree in subject matters that offfered no oportunity for employment in still racially segregated America. Many of these African Americans with advanced degrees in literature, science, art, ect… would accept a menial post and feel happy to receive minimum wage in their feild. For instance a frican American business managment major whose parents were by trade laundry washers would take a menial job at European American Industrial laundry center sweeping floors and be thankful. These miseducated graduates would frown upon the idea of returning to their parents small business and using their degree to advance their parents small operation making it more successful. A farmer son would take his Agriculture degree and get a minimumm wage job at a harvesting center rather than take his knowledge back to his fathers farm and use it to exploit the land to grown a larger harvest resulting in higher income to buy more land to farm. Due to the large number of African Americas geting college degrees post slavery and fnding out that in a still segregated America opportunity for well paying jobs in companies still was not readily possible many African Aericans becae disillusioned with the European American system of education. The realization that their their new degree tile still earned them the same amount as the uneducated African Amerian picking fruit. This disillusionment lead to a movement away from advanced degrees and education all together. many African Americans of those generations felt an were to a large extent right about the fat that no matter what degree they obtained the would still be relegated to certian forms of employment.
Growing up under the beleif that no matter how hard you work or aspire to be something you will be locked out of the American dream can have a negative impact upon generations. A total rejection of a practical eduction to return scholrs back to their rurual farming communities or urban cities lead to apply their education to the advancement of African Americans internally was at large frowned upon. Although it has always been conceived that no people have ever ascended to prosperity without internally building their prosperity, the impact of slavery and segregation still left many mental scar among African Americans. This idea turned on the beleif that in orer to push forward as a people African Americans must only consider working for European Americans rather than opening their own banks, grocery stores, harvesting palnts, ect. . . mental slavery would lead African Americans into the idea of mutual self destruction of their own communities. Resentment for African Americans who did attempt to start small business was often found amongst African Americans. For instance an African American who wished to start selling ice Within his own community would face many African Americas willing to travel 3 miles away to the European American grocery store to purchase ice because they felt the European Americans ice was colder or their honey was sweeter. This type of mental slavery takes year to wash away because it has been passse down from generation to generation. Only recently in america have African Americans began to feel that they have the opportnity to be anything they want to be. That was not always so. My parents attended aegregatd high schools. College down souh was not an option for them as they had to travel up north to be educated att the desegregated universities. These are my parents not my ancestors 10 generations removed. The mental scars are still present in America amongst African Americans. My parents were a lucky few who mad it out of the cycle of abject hoplesness many African Ameircans endured. However, what you speak of regarding Aids and teen pregnancies is the despair of generations who were told they were worthless. This self hate and the feeling of nothingness would lead African Americans to take and sell drus within the comunity for profit. Such self hate would cause women and to grow up fatherless in neighborhoods where the only sucessful African Americans they ever saw were Pimps Drug Dealers, or Atheletes. Such conditions would make a young woman or man view these men as heroes. Seeking a way out of poverty women choose these men to date because these men are what they define as strong African American men struggling against the oppressive system Many men would gravitate towards these father figure men because no other positive African American men are around. These single mother pregnacies you speak of are often the children of incarcerated men or drug dealers who place these women on scholarship. The AIDS epidemic you speak of is a direct product of the heroine inner city drug epideic of injecting heroine with an already infected needle or unprotected sex. It is not the knowingly, willingly, and purposefully intention of these African American to contract AIDS it is simply a lack of self worth and a feeling that thy have nothing to live for that leads o such decisions. I urge you to reconsider those harsh and cruel remarks you made regarding African Americans. Consider that if your anestors had been captured instead of those you speak so harshly of you might very well be in aerica tryin to overcome those conditions aformentioned Lastly I would also educate you to the idea that Latino Americas now top the chart in single mother pregnancy. Furthermore, I fail to see how a choice to have a child relates to Gay marriage
Comment by M.Elliot on 3 July 2009:
Sorry for mistakes no time for correction.
Comment by Kanzan on 3 July 2009:
While my comment may be taken “off color” (no pun intended), I am speaking only to bring a thought to mind:
If gay men and women are legally allowed to marry, with all the rights bestowed to them that were once only granted to heterosexual partners, then there is the “risk” that polygamists would be allowed to practice their beliefs about marriage as well. In similar fashion, older men (40 - 50 year old men) would be allowed to marry teenage daughters of parents who gave “signed approval” to such an arrangement, as is the practice in some Middle Eastern countries.
Now me personally, I dont get too worked up about gays getting married; there are many issues in America more important to get worked up about. However, I do think that the “definition” of marriage will change over the next few decades to include what I discussed previously all because of the gay marriage issue.
Comment by surprised on 3 July 2009:
MARRIAGE IS A BIBLICAL CONCEPT, is is designed to bring God into the relationship. Guess what God doesn’t want any part of Gay marriage! Have a civil union and leave marraige for a man and woman!!!!
Comment by Nandi on 4 July 2009:
M. Elliot, I am offended by your skewed logic and long winded offense of something I did not say, I never compared African-Americans to “other progressive groups” Whatever that means! The rest of your rant I took as you having a brain fart…Thanks for your interpretation of a history lesson, being that it is history…Don’t get it
And I don’t you can speak on the mental state of people in terms of teen pregnancies, AIDS and STDS and no Latinos are not the leading AIDS cases, it is African-Americans. You should check your facts…This is 2009
I believe you would be the only one to describe thugs, dope dealers and disease carriers as “strong black men”.
Racism does exist and will not go away, still did not stop a African-American from being elected President of the United States…I guess one just have to make it happen for themselves…I would imagine you do not know the difference between electing to have a child out of wedlock, premartial sex and the argument that gay marriages is a sin, escapes you…But I positive that premartial sex/fornication is a sin also….So, one shouldn’t bring out the bible for others, while ignoring their own transgressions…That was the point and in that same bible no one can condemn and judge another, that was the other point. The major point was in the USA, church is supposedly seperate from state at all times…
The rest of your rant is so ridiculous, it is not is worthy of an reply other than to say, I sorry you feel that way about your self, but if you think a terminal case of AIDS is the way out, and will enhance your sense of self-worth…Well that is your perogative.
Comment by MissSofia on 4 July 2009:
For everyone’s info whether u agree or not…being gay is NOT a choice…someone doesnt just get up one day and say “o i think I’ll be gay today” the truth is gays struggle their entire lives, most lose family and friend bonds wen they come out wit wat they felt since they were kids…they have a hard time strugglin to accept themselves wen the world doesnt and is always demonizing, lowerin, and hurtin them. they are livin in fear, discrimination, and pain. Now no matter where u stand please dont say being gay is a choice..coz its offensive to gays and it undermines their struggles, and their pain. please ask gay people wat it feels like to be gay before u judge them this is in general and not commentin on any 1 person. p.s. I’m straight
Comment by Nandi on 4 July 2009:
Personally, I do not understand the polygamy aspect. Homosexuals are not asking for plural marriages/civil unions. And there is a big difference between consenting adults marrying and children marrying old farts. It makes about as much sense and some folks believing that if priests were allowed to marry, they would stop molesting little boys…
BTW, In many states girls can marry with parental consent as young as 14 years old already, so that is already happening and has been for quite some time.
Comment by FearlessCrusader on 5 July 2009:
Laugh Sailor, your June 10 response to Tallnwhite1 pretty much proved his point. The countries you listed were once some of the greatest civilizations on earth, but where are they now? Some of them no longer exist; others are just now coming out of their own “dark ages” and rejoining the rest of the world in modern times.
Comment by M.Elliot on 5 July 2009:
Nandi,
I would urge you to first educate yourself on African American history before spouting of your ignorant responses. Secondly, I would urge you not to not use a racial group in a negaive light to get your point across. If you meant to say one who sins shoul dnot judge others then you could have said it without making an outlandish attempt in poor taste to make a negative comment regarding African Amerians. I have read comments on this blog pro and against the topic of debate. These comments were posted by people of all races and ethnic backgrounds. Therefore, I fail to see why you would feel the need to only point out African Americans and in a negative light. If your going to find fault at least be consistent and equal in your fault finding, but to only point out the misgivings of African Americans makes you a small and petty coward especially when the problem of African American women single mothers and is not at issue in this blog. Did you ever consider that African American women in America have always large inpart been single mothers because of the system of chattel slavery whch often lead to fathers being sold off. In short the history of Africans in this country began with single parent mothers. I also see that living in your fantasy world you did make understand the statement regarding the impact of many African American youth never seeing positive role models and therefore in the absense of such role models ignorantly admiring the only men who are present whih happes to be men of low moral character. I would urge you to read more carefully because I never stated in my first writing that African Americans AIDS statistics fell, I only re-educated you to the fact the Latino Americans hav enow surpasses Africans regarding teen pregancy rates in America. I only pointed this out because you were inaccurate in your comment that if you were consistent instead of bashing only African Americas especially Black women you might have reported that Latinos had overtaken African Americans in this category. I urge other to chime in and tell me were Nandi;s statments regarding a race neutral topic appropriate when peoples of all races and ethnic groups reported on the matter. I especially as African American women to tell me if you found her comments offensive if you were or are a single mother when their ae single mothers of all races and the topic of conversation was not on single mothers or African Americas and their problems ut gay marriage. Did Nandi go to far?
Comment by homesteader on 5 July 2009:
Intelligent People only tell of what they see in their opinions , People who Quote History only tell of what they read from long ago .
I believe in the year 2009 / Most people have read Newspapers , daily . Which tell of more recent actions and reactions involving the Medical state of the World .
Nandi has a right to her opinion , as do the rest of Us .
American Citizens have the right to Happiness as they see fit .
To all you Christians / Judge not for Yee shall be Juged is how I was raised to understand Gods’ word .
M.Elliot ; by your drawn out comments , I do not Believe there is any Educational Information present .
Comment by homesteader on 5 July 2009:
I am knot the least bit care - ing for mis-spelled words as I carry not any kind of Psycho - related Degree as others do . Our daughter is the English Teacher in the Family .
I , myself ” Learned common sense ” on the Streets of Life talking to other people for the past 43 years since I turned 18 .
Not from the opinions of Books written by others from Textbooks they read to get a 4 year degree .
Comment by Nandi on 5 July 2009:
M. elliot and I urge you to re-educate yourself and atleast update yourself to the year 2009 and no I am not aware of Black men being sold off in 2009, leaving behind single moms.
Personally, your rant is so skewed, however if this is your mantra, you should be about it and stop taking about shyt that in 2009 doesn’t matter. Because of history, an intelligent Black people would go after what is available now and honor their ancestry by taking advantage of the many options they have now…Life moves forward not backwards.
BTW, role models are for emotionally needy people, sorry not me…But you should get one…
And for the record, I posted my initial response by someone black who pointed out hyprocrisy in the Black communities…You know with down low men, who are spreading AIDS and fast as creating unsupported babies. I still stand that God surely disapproves..
Comment by Nandi on 5 July 2009:
M. Elliot, could you stop posting to me, you are coming across and an internet stalker type, you know with miseducation, rants not germaine to the topic, skewed history lessons and logic and NO Latinos have not surpassed African-Americans in AIDS or teen pregnancies..Why lie, except to irritate and not intelligent dialogue.
Comment by Nandi on 5 July 2009:
Your kinda creeping me out
Comment by fadedsuede on 5 July 2009:
Nandi:
The reason why I said what I did about polygamists was because of the potential for setting a legal precedent by gays for subsequent use by polygamists. If Gays can successfully argue in court for their “rights” to marriage (by arguing / redefining the definition of marriage) it could set a precedent for subsequent arbitration by polygamist groups. I didnt say gays are wanting to become polygamists. People need to look further into the issue of how the courts work and how a new legal ruling can have a “domino-effect” into related legal rulings in the future.
Comment by homesteader on 6 July 2009:
M.Elliot ; The Blog Topic was ” Civil Rite Denied ” as pretaining to rights of Citizens of California of a similiar sex to be married .
My own Father , who was born of Polish Heritage in the United States of America / Making him an American Citizen from birth . Had to leave school before graduating because he was needed to fight for - Our Freedoms to live Free from oppression . Due to the power called ” the Third Reich ” .
Had a limited education because of his duty to the country in which he was born [ Army Air Force ] . His mental anguish from the Freezing Cold sitting in a glass bubble with German fighter planes trying to shoot down , the bomber which he shot back to protect . And you talk of Ice Cream sales where people used their right of choice to purchase where they felt it tasted better .
It is Highly Offensive to me to listen to your rants - off topic . My Father married a woman of his own color , Went on to Management in a typewriter factory in which my Mother worked piecework on machines .
In order to support Our family .
You blame lack of education on Slavery . I blame circumstances for Denied education to others .
Growing up Poor , I myself washed dishes for a living at less than minimum wages . Alas by cleaning the cooks kettles and cooking tools / Really clean . I was provided with Excellient Meals everyday .
I , Aqquired my Education in the Trades with Diplomas from two different States . Only because , I got off my Ass and worked for it . Knot because anyone gave it to Me .
And I did this while being severely Disabled at the age of 18 . I blame no-one but Myself for what I could not Earn , I did knot turn to illegal ways to make a living .
God Retired Me at the age of 52 with a Massive Heart Attack , because He saw it was My time to Relax .
In todays World as I see daily / Those that work earnestly at their jobs . Live better than those that blame Injustices of the past centuries for their problems today .
Comment by homesteader on 6 July 2009:
Nandi ; I see a very limited vocabulary in one who claims your responses to be ignorant .
As he claims to be educated , yet repeatedly uses the same two words which start with an A . [ African American ] if it got missed in his rantings .
There are millions of other race combinations in the world today , almost as many as there are people / Why only speak of one ?
It shows Bigotry in his words / Continually .
Comment by Glock on 6 July 2009:
MissSofia, I would disagree with your statement that homesexuality is not a choice. Although I am far from an “expert” on the topic, I do know there are many scientist and researchers who still disagree on whether its a choice or if they’re born that way. So this part of the debate is still unknown.
Personally speaking, I believe it’s a choice.
Comment by Glock on 6 July 2009:
Did Nandi go to far? Why would ask that? And why ask people if they felt her comments were offensive? People really need to get over this whole thing about finding someones statements as “offensive”. We’re adults here (well except for one I can think of off the top of my head) and as such should be able to have discussion about different topics without someone claiming a comment was offensive.
I’ve always found Nandi’s comments short and to the point. I also like the fact that she can make a point in one or two posts and not post literally hundreds of meaningless one sentense posts in an attempt to make a point.
Comment by miri2008 on 6 July 2009:
Man, I always get to these things way late! lol… anyhow… we are all stating our opinions here… mine is not intended to offend anyone, but since this is such a touchy subject for many people, no doubt it will… a position on this subject is mostly based on how much stock a person places on biblical principles…or not. Biblical principles tell me that a gay lifestyle is not what God has designed for us…
New Internaltion Version (NIV) Bible Romans 1:18-32
‘18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.’
okay… here goes… just remember I just cut it from the Bible and pasted it here : )
Comment by homesteader on 7 July 2009:
In my comment made - ” Offensive ” was knot about the comment made , but the implied notion that calling another person’s responses ” Ignorant ” in an open forum / While being Blind to the other persons Educational Abilities .
History teachers’ Degrees in the State of Texas take 6 years of study and Hard work to Earn . Those that preach History in a Present day Date Ting site , without Valid Credentuals are just Spouting Hot Air .
Adult is being educated enough to Investigate fully prior to Degradation of others opinions .
” Meaningless ” because one dones not understand anothers written word .
The proper spelling of Sentence , may help to prove your point / glock
American Citizens ; be they straight , gay , orange , purple or grey Should have the same rite to marry whom ever they choose , in My Opinion .
Comment by homesteader on 7 July 2009:
And I post my comments about topics while My wife is sleeping Peacefully .
And glock , I did knot Research back to 2007 , for a statement that you made a couple weeks ago in a Blog topic Dated 4/16/2007 [ What will be the Largest minority in the United States in the year 2015 ]
Don’t Flatter yourself your memory sure nuff is short winded . Go see your Doctor and have it checked before it gets any worse .
Hot air for sure or is that your Feeble Attempt to embarrass Me in a Public Forum . Go back and re-read your History books . Seems that is why you comment on Blog topics .
We Won at AfroRomance , you on the other hand still tell of things they tried to teach you in Gov’t school that . You / yourself claim to knot believe .
Comment by elliot on 7 July 2009:
A blog is an expression of opinion, but a blog is also meant to debate controversial opinions. If you did not want your comments responded to then simply do not post them. I urge you not to make false accusation which have no merit behind them as you apparently do not know the difference between a response on a post and the serious offense you have incenuated me off. I will say that if you imply that a responsive blog debating your view is creepy then perhaps you might need counseling for some unfortunate incident in your past involving men. After you last false accusation I can see why you are single now, your very ugly on the inside.
Comment by yoyo99 on 8 July 2009:
IMO:
We all make choices, we are neither born heterosexual nor gay - we make the choices on who we are sexually and emotionally attracted to depending the external environments and influences in which we are raised and live.
Everyone has equal equal access to their ‘rights’ and ‘rites’.
Quoting the Bible is hardly a valid arguement - it’s merely stating what the authors views were, which may or may or not have reflected the prevalent view of society in their day. Qoting the Bible is no more valid than quoting the Q’uran, The Meditations of the Dalai Lama or George Orwell’s 1984 - unless someone wishes to start a new blog on the sovreignty of the Bible I suggest we leave it out of this discussion
Finally, it’s pretty sad to see how a discussion on gay marriages can deteriorate into an arguement about race - when will we ever learn!
Comment by yoyo99 on 8 July 2009:
A gay inter-racial marriage…now that’s something to celebrate !!
Comment by Glock on 8 July 2009:
Two post for me today huh Homesteader? Why thank you. Still see you’re rambling again and calling the kettle black (it’s ‘not’ rather than ‘knot’). I can admit to a mistake, you have difficulties with it.
Rest of your post, I can’t decipher and could care less. Go spend time with your wife instead of your computer.
Comment by homesteader on 8 July 2009:
Our Cast Iron pots are Black , I drove while others slept for many years and most generally awake about 1:30 A.M. . My logbook generally started at Midnight [ less traffic ] .
To read what has been addressed to my Handle and about 4:00 A.M. after about a pot of Hot Black coffee start to respond .
My Wife on the other hand Desires to Sleep at this early morning hours , so being the Gentleman , I am I allow her to .
Or as she has told me more than once , she will take a frying pan to my Black Ass . If I don’t get out of the kitchen and stop rattling pans . As I Was a Professional Chef in my younger years and fed as many as two thousand people a day .
Also a member of the American Bakers and Confectioneers Union for several years and We worked early morning hours also .
Being I Love her , I try real hard to listen . You on the other hand when / You tell me what to do , I really don’t give a flying #^#% .
I spend 11 or 12 hours a day on my computer , talking with Many others and taking care of My Business .
We have a Full Life Together 24/7 , alas at times We work alone .
I have always been a people / person . A Christian , who turned the other cheek , TOO MANY TIMES .
My Wife has been working to change that , alas it is Hard to teach an Old Dog / New Tricks .
This Blog topic is about California and the vote to abolish Gay Rights . Try admitting to the topic at hand .
And as you still say ” I can’t decipher ” / Why the Hades don’t you leave me alone ? This computer is my Retirement Life , Thank you .
I do knot remember ever Make King a Mistake as being an Adult with Freedom of Choice . I shall do as I darned well Please .
Comment by FearlessCrusader on 8 July 2009:
Miri, don’t feel bad about getting in late - your post will undoubedly incite many new responses. You can expect rebuttals from heathens who don’t know that the Bible was written by the one who created mankind and who therefore has the right to tell us what is right and what is wrong. But we just have to be patient and bear with them. As God Himself said, “The preaching of the cross is foolishness to them that perish.” Or as Jesus Himself said, “Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do.”
And of course you’ll have comments on “hot air” from the world’s foremost authority on such.
Comment by homesteader on 8 July 2009:
Knot - because ” [ well one I can think of off the top of my head ] ” seems to go with the flow - Knothead if you didn’t understand . Please allow me to allow you to go back to the centuries past . Along with the other Historians here without Proper Degrees , who only tell what they read in Gov’t schools from books written by others who make mistakes as they heard it through the Grapevine / and did not live in that part of times past . I am a Has been / I Has been a Truck driver . LOL . And I got nuthin else to do .
Comment by homesteader on 8 July 2009:
yoyo99 ; We were all born naked is a Fact , the separation of Church and State in the United States Gov’t is also a Fact and we are all born equal is another Fact . Fact is opinions are Knot always governed by Reasoning . People tend to carry their Bibles on the dashboard of cars when they go to vote and their cold beer in the cooler .
Comment by Glock on 8 July 2009:
I disagree yoyo99. Regardless of anyones religious beliefs, the Bible does represent a legitamate part of the marriage debate for many people. Disregding the Bible in this debate would be the same as telling someone who is gay to disregard what “so-called” experts say in regards to the “born gay” argument.
Are the arguments of the so-called experts today to be held in higher regard because they are “contemporary” or politically correct versus what was said 2000 years ago? Is it not up to the individual to decide for themselves based on their beliefs, and choose “opinions” from either today or long ago?
So when you say “We are neither born heterosexual nor gay…”, who’s “opinion” is that?
Comment by miri2008 on 8 July 2009:
Interesting perspective Yoyo : ) but, IMHO, what the Bible has to say on the subject is actually the basis for many people’s stated opinions and views on the matter, here and elsewhere. And, in the same way that some site research artcles and other sources, I have simply posted the actual content of the reference that many people on this very blog are alluding to.
I suppose if I were in the Middle East I’d be quoting the Q’uoran, but since I’m in America (… you know… pilgrims, puritans, and what not…) I’m quoting the Bible ; )
Comment by kristent on 9 July 2009:
Well I know I said I wouldn’t be posting on this particular thread any longer, but I have been following the discussion and it appears I just can’t help myself.
I won’t get into the debate, but it seems as if there are a lot of tempers running high. I certainly understand the emotional firestorm this topic can be. Everyone knows I’m not perfect, but I encourage everyone to remember that no matter what the other person says, debating is about invalidating the other person’s argument, NOT the other person as a human being. Whether you believe in the Bible, or the Quran, or the Bhagavad Gita, or nothing at all, everyone is taught to treat others with respect and consideration.
On the most current topic-just to weigh in with my personal life and not as a representation of anyone else-I was totally born queer. My first crush on a girl was in kindergarten. Her name was Adrian, and she was so beautiful; redhead with freckles and a little pixie nose. I agonized over how to invite her to my birthday party at the roller rink. Should I give her the invitation in person? But what if she says no- I would be crushed. Should I put it in her backpack? What if she doesn’t check that pocket until the party is over and that’s why she doesn’t come? Oh, I was distraught! Of course I didn’t realize until I was considerably older what my feelings for her meant, but looking back it was kind of a defining moment.
Anyway, I just hope everyone has had a chance to cool off and take a deep breath. Maximum respect to everyone.
Love,
One Happy Heathen
Comment by yoyo99 on 10 July 2009:
The statement about being born neither gay or heterosexual is my own opinion and should not be taken as fact. As yet I haven’t come across any persuasive scientific evidence to prove one or the other, so until then I just base my opinion on my own limted knowledge and experience.
I agree that the Bible is relevant to the debate and actually forms the basis of many peoples views - I believe it to be a powerful political proclamation of how humankind should live in harmony and mutual servitude. My objection is to Biblical quotations being presented as fact or truth or the ‘Word of God’… God’s Word is revealed in many forms and I think that such Biblical statements should be considered in the debate only as one of many varied opinions.
Comment by yoyo99 on 10 July 2009:
As far as I am aware God did not say that “the preaching of the cross is foolishness…” - I believe that was the apostle Paul and similarly the “forgive them Father” statement was said not by God but by Jesus…?
Comment by Glock on 10 July 2009:
Not only that Miri, but even non-believers and atheists who get married are still participating in a custon (marriage) that has it’s roots in religion. The Bible or Judeo-christian beliefs are where the institution of marriage has it’s genesis. No pun intended.
Comment by homesteader on 10 July 2009:
The Truth the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth / kristent ; It is a Pleasure to read yuor words .
Thank you , Enjoy .
Comment by homesteader on 10 July 2009:
your / correction
Comment by homesteader on 10 July 2009:
it has been 100 degrees here for over two weeks / Hot Air if you Please .
Thank you .
Comment by yoyo99 on 11 July 2009:
The institution of marriage has it’s genesis in the Bible…according to the Bible! There are many other sacred writings and records of history that have alternative versions of the origins of marriage which are equally valid - they all seem to refer to heterosexual marriages which is interesting…though the stories refer to marriage between siblings and even with the spirit world.
Comment by homesteader on 12 July 2009:
the story of Adam & Eve being married from Conception of time by God / Along time later people wrote the Books telling the story of Life .
Different peoples read books from their own language in their own Cultural Habitat .
Alas whatever we all are / We are Human beings , given the right to learn from birth .
Enjoy the day / We will Hehe , LOL
Comment by Glock on 12 July 2009:
I don’t think there are any (to my knowledge) historians who claim there was a religion that predates the Bible. In fact there were no Jews.
I know today, there are many revisionists in the world who want to cloud not only this topic but many topics in an effort to confuse and misguide people away from the truth. I’m not just talking about religious revisionism but history and political thought as well.
As far as the “Other sacred writings and records of history that have alternative versions of the origins of marriage which are equally valid.” I would disagree. There may be other writings on this topic speaking of the origin of marriage, it doesn’t necessarily make them vaild.
Comment by yoyo99 on 12 July 2009:
Revisionism is a sign of progress…it’s good to continually critically analyse our beliefs, philosophies and world views - in doing so we either come to a new ‘enlightment’ or have our beliefs reaffirmed. The intention in doing so is not to misguide away from ‘the truth’, but rather to promote understanding.
I don’t think there is such a notion as ‘THE truth’…especially when it comes to religion and politics etc - what is true for me, may not be so for another.
It may be the case that the validity of historical records whose dates correlate with those of the Bible is questionable…what I am suggesting is that set alongside the Bible, they are ‘equally valid’.
In the discussion about gay marriage, we should consider the Bible as having an important contribution to make but not take it as the definitive of what is right or wrong.
Throughout history, homsexuality is accepted and even celebrated in many cultures and I see no reason to deny homosexuals their right to marry.
Comment by kristent on 13 July 2009:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/time/origtime.htm
This seems like a nifty little site to help clarify things. It looks at the approximate starting date of each of the worlds current 12 major religions. It only looks at the current top 12, so there are many religions that may have once been in favor that are not on here, and many younger religions that haven’t made the top 12.
Comment by miri2008 on 14 July 2009:
I appreciate Kristent’s reminder that the discussion points are being debated and opposed - not the individuals making the points. I’ve seen a number of other blogs that could benefit from this reminder : )
Here’s my last post on this topic. I have made my perspective on this topic pretty clear, and I stand by that.
HOWEVER, I also want to make it equally clear that although I do not agree with what I perceive to be the choice of a gay lifestyle, I am in no way opposed to gay people. I see all people as human beings deserving of respect, dignity, autonomy, and the right to peaceful existence free of harrassment.
Myself, I believe that true inner peace and the ability to spread that to others comes from a personal relationship and connectedness to God. This is what I wish for everyone. I don’t believe in dealing with people from a place of harshness and judgement, but from a place of love. I see my responsibility in the world as trying to care for and help others, and promote peace. I leave the judging to God, as he told us that he’s the only one who can execute judgment righteously.
SO… to all my fellow bloggers, gay, straight, guys, girls, whatever slice of the beautiful rainbow of ethnic diversity you occupy… Peace and Love to you.
Miri
Comment by peteone on 14 July 2009:
On the issue of same sex marriage one must look to the Constitution for wisdom and guidance since this document forged 222 years ago (September 17, 1787, by the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, PA) is the foundational document and therefore judicial and moral philosophy for our Judeo-Christian constitutional republic. We know that the Founding Fathers (FF) were predominantly evangelical Christian and were thus influenced more greatly by the Bible than any other document when pondering the many fine points of the Constitution.
Nowhere in the Bible does God condone homosexual behavior (while He does love gays and lesbians as much as any of us who are sinners), so it’s logical to assume that the FF’s opinion on the matter of same sex marriage would have been one that paralleled the teachings of the Bible on the issue of homosexuality. Having said that, there’s absolutely NO constitutional provision and no case law precedence in American legal history to support the notion that same sex marriage is a “civil right”. So for the original poster to title their message “Civil rite denied!” is very misleading and completely untrue in terms of the constitutionality of same sex marriage. The brutally honest truth is that there is NO guaranteed “civil right” for two people of the same gender to get married. Thus, it’s not a mandate of the State to force it on people if they in a public referendum (California’s Prop.
as a majority, vote against recognizing it.
No one with any heart or brain wants to deny anyone basic civil rights; however, our laws must be based on the Constitution and not on “emotions”, “feelings” or whatever may be “popular” in the pop-culture, or whatever is politically correct at the time. And even more important to consider, the Creator of the universe, God Almighty has said that marriage is only reserved for a man and a woman. (Genesis 2:18,23-24; Matthew 19:6; Ephesians 5:22-23).
Comment by Glock on 15 July 2009:
Peteone, although I agree with your first paragraph, I have to disagree with at least part of your second.
The reason there is no provision in the constitution dealing with same sex marriage is because the constitution deals with what the federal government’s responsibilities are. That’s it. The 9th amendment to the constitution states “The enumeration in the constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The framers believed that these types of issues or anything else not specifically mentioned in the constitution should be something for the several states to decide for themselves. The framers believed that our rights were limitless, as long as we did not infringe upon the rights of others.
That is why same sex marriage is not mentioned in the constitution nor is interracial marriage mentioned either.
Comment by yoyo99 on 15 July 2009:
Has the USA ratified Article 16 of the UN Convention on Human Rights, which asserts an individuals right to marry?
If so, is it not then hypocritical to ratify the agreement then deny the right to homosexuals?
Comment by bellara on 15 July 2009:
i agree w/miss california=> marriage is btwn adam and eve not adam and steve BUT i think the gov’t shld leave homosexuals alone because its becoming an over rated and annoying issue. its not much abt having their rites denied its more about hate. young generations are growing up hating homosexuals because society is portraying them as God forsaken creatures. who are we to pass judgment on them or treat them with such hate and immoral behavior. there are more serious issues out there that needs to be focused on such us homelessness, crime rate reduction, the sick, the needy, the elderly, disease fighting and so on. so its rather too pointless to prolong this issue=>live and let live! so in other words let God be the judge.
Comment by bellara on 15 July 2009:
yoyo i agree with ur first paragraph=> heterosexuality or heterosexuality are choices we make. no pickle headed doctor or so called expert can tell me other wise. we cant chose our race, gender, or intangible things that come with life. but we can chose who we are sexually attracted to just like some of us on here are choosing which race they’d rather date. so it ticks me off when a homosexual opens his/her mouth to say he/she were born that way like seriously?
sofia:u didnt wake up and chose to be straight. u’ve acknowledged the existence of men and women and decided that u are attracted to men so if been gay is not a choice what is it…madness?disease? curse? we all know its neither of those so lets be real homosexuals made that choice.
Comment by yoyo99 on 16 July 2009:
I went to watch the new movie ‘Bruno’ last night…it is very very funny and also a powerful social commentary…I recommend to all on this blog
Comment by Glock on 16 July 2009:
In regards to the U.N., who cares what the U.N. ratifies? The UN does not control the U.S. And believe me, you don’t want the UN to have any influence over the U.S. in any way.
We are supposed to be under the U.S. Constitution and nothing more. The U.N. stands for nothing more than world governance and controling the world population. Anyone who disagrees has not done their research or payed any attention to what’s going on in the world.
So, the U.N. has no influence over gay “civil rights in this country.
Comment by yoyo99 on 19 July 2009:
You entirely misunderstand the UN, and underestimate it influence…
…your comment just illustrates the typical, narrow minded, blinkered world view of the average american citizen and shows just how far behind the rest of the world the US is in protecting and promoting human rights (some might say how far ahead in abusing them)…
…only 2 countries have failed to ratify the UN convention on the rights of the child…the USA and Somalia - says it all!
Comment by Glock on 19 July 2009:
No, I do NOT misunderstand the U.N. and I certainly do NOT underestimate it’s influence! Believe me the U.N. is getting more and more influencial in the world AND the U.S. This is not a good thing.
You want to talk human rights? Ok. What is the only country on the face of the earth that recognizes all human beings as having inherent rights that cannot be taken away simply because they are human? The U.S. It’s based on natural law. ALL other countries believe rights come from the government and thus can be granted or taken away.
What the U.N. is attempting to do is convince the world that it’s benevolence is genuine and that the U.N. is looking out for us. If it is so concerned about people through out the world, where was it in 1994 Rwanda? There is a prime example of it’s incompetance. The U.N. was only set up to be the world government. It has only recently begun a huge power grab.
Only two countries have not ratified the U.N. convention on the rights of the child? So that means China, Russia, Cuba, and Iran have? Hmmmm, why don’t you ask the citizens of those countries how their “human rights” are working out for them…LOL
By the way, you do realize that those “civilized” countries through out the world, including the ones I just mentioned will have direct influence over your life if this country ever succumbs to the U.N. dominance. How do you think that is going to work out for you. No more having inherent rights by your creator just because you are a human being. No more constitutional protections. Your rights will be decided by the world court.
So your little names you want to sprinkle down on me only reflects how little YOU know about what’s going on in the world. Of course you won’t realize it until it’s to late.
But I’ll take your names calling with pleasure. Coming from you, it’s actually a compliment.
Drink some more kool-aid.
But the next time you shoot your mouth off about something your clueless about, do alittle research first. That way you won’t look so foolish.
Comment by yoyo99 on 21 July 2009:
LOL…..hey mate it wasn’t kool-aid I’d been drinking when I wrote all that!
I was going to apologise for the name calling, but as you take them as a compliment I’d be better off not.
I am anything but clueless when it comes to world affairs but I’ll just leave it there.
Don’t be so paranoid!
Comment by glock on 21 July 2009:
No apology needed at all. I do take it as a compliment from you. Paranoid? LOL. Call it what you want. I am only pointing that you’re view of the UN is tantamount to having one’s head in the sand.
Comment by homesteader on 21 July 2009:
Don’t Bogart / Pass
Comment by Wayne330 on 21 July 2009:
Let us keep something in mind. Marriage is not a right provided by the US government so I disagree with it being stated the “right” to marry who we desire. Marriage existed long before the US Government as I am certain you know. Marriage was given from God to Man and no Government created it. If Homosexuals wish to be joined together in a union then fine but they need to come up with something that encompasses the union of members of the same sex. The name “Marriage” has never in all history encompassed members of the same sex. So do we think we are so great as to alter a practice that had stood as it is for thousands of years. I think not.
Comment by Nandi on 22 July 2009:
In the Loving Case, the Virginia law was shot down by the 14 amendment of the constitution that trumped the 10th amendment that allow for states to make their own law, as long as it was not hindering others consitutional right…And altbough, same sex marriages and interracial mar4riage was not mention in the making of the 14th amendment or the 10th amendment…However neither is hetorsexual marriages for that matter…However under the 14th amendment of our constitution..
Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment provides:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
2. 206 Va. 924, 147 S.E.2d 78 (1966).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0388_0001_ZO.html
The Constitution has always served to guarantee freedoms to Americans, never to deny them, witness the ban on the sale and consumption of alcohol— Prohibition— which was repealed. The Constitution, in particularly the Bill of Rights, provides Americans with freedom of religion, and forbids the establishment of a state religion, and banning same-sex marriages based upon Biblical principles is crossing that line. Affording same-sex couples the basic rights reserved to heterosexual couples will not bring the Wrath of God upon the U.S., neither did ending slavery, desegregation, or granting equal rights to women.
Comment by homesteader on 22 July 2009:
The Right to Happiness which is Guaranteed , United States Citizens bye the words of the Constitution has been infringed upon to many by the vote which denied the Rite of Marriage to people of the same sex . Partily for the Benefits Packages at work places .
The United Nations was established in order to allow countries to Negotiate problems between each other - Not as a World ruling power .
Comment by Shotgun007 on 22 July 2009:
I have mixed thoughts on this issue. I find it rediculous that the Supreme Courts in CA decided to ban gay marriages thus the loss of basic rights by gay individuals. I don’t know but I think this is a huge mistake for America.
Comment by yoyo99 on 23 July 2009:
Amen Nandi !
Comment by bcontent2b on 25 July 2009:
I live in this system of world order that is controled by Satan, and must follow certain laws of Man, but when it comes to spiritual and moral laws, I follow the laws of my Creator.
Man is corrupt because of Sin and can never fulfill what he was intended to be until the return of the King of Heaven,Jesus, who will rule with an iron rod and restore us to what we were intended to be in the first place…”Perfect Man”
Here is a message for those of you who doubt.
PAY ATTENTION TO THE P.S. AT THE
END!!!!
Letter from the Devil
This can really make you think. It actually made me really mad while I was reading it, but it made me realize some things,
Plus,
I had to send it because of the P.S.
This is deep…. And I wasn’t going to forward or share it, but that last line…you’ll see.
A LETTER TO YOU FROM SATAN
I saw you yesterday as you began your daily chores.
You awoke without kneeling to pray. As a matter of fact, you didn’t even bless your meal, or pray before going to bed last night.
You are so unthankful, I like that about you.
I cannot tell you how glad I am that you have not changed your way of living, fool, you are mine.
Remember, you and I have been going steady for years, and I still don’t love you yet.
As a matter of fact, I hate you, because I hate GOD.
He kicked me out of heaven, and I’m going to use you as long as possible to pay him back.
You see, Fool, GOD LOVES YOU and He has great plans in store for you
But you have yielded your life to me, and I’m going to make your life a living hell.
That way, we’ll be together twice. This will really hurt GOD.
Thanks to you, I’m really showing Him who’s boss in your life with all of the good times we’ve had.
We have been ….
Watching dirty movies,
Cursing people out,
Stealing, lying, being hypocritical, fornicating, overeating, telling dirty jokes, gossiping, being judgmental,
Back stabbing people, disrespecting adults, and those in leadership positions, no respect for the Church, bad attitudes.
SURELY you don’t want to give all this up.
Come on, fool, let’s burn together forever. I’ve got some hot plans for us. This is just a letter of appreciation from me to you.
I’d like to say “THANKS” for letting me use you for most of your foolish life.
You are so gullible, I laugh at you. When you are tempted to sin, you give in
HA! HA! HA! You make me sick.
SIN is beginning to take its toll on your life. You look 20 years older, and now, I need new blood.
So go ahead and teach some children how to sin.
All you have to do is smoke, get drunk or drink while under-aged,
CHEAT, GAMBLE, GOSSIP, FORNICATE, AND LIVE BEING AS SELFISH AS POSSIBLE.
Do all of this in the presence of children and they will do it too. Kids are like that.
Well, Fool, I have to let you go for now. I’ll be back in a couple of seconds to tempt you again.
If you were smart, you would run somewhere, confess your sins, and live for GOD with what little bit of life that you have left.
It’s not my nature to warn anyone, but to be your age and still sinning, it’s becoming a bit ridiculous. Don’t get me wrong, I still hate you.
IT’S JUST THAT YOU’D MAKE A BETTER FOOL FOR CHRIST.
P.S. If you love me, you won’t share this
Comment by homesteader on 26 July 2009:
Thank you ;
bcontent2b / All I saw in your comment was anothers opinion .
You talk of one belief and speak with another / Satan.
The Devil speaks to you personally is what I gathered from your written word .
At the very least / you Desire to Quote from him .
God will judge in the end of each persons Life / not you as it seems to me that you have an Attitude .
P.S. One should be careful who they communicate with in Life .
Comment by Glock on 26 July 2009:
Where is it writtenwe have the “right to happiness” guarenteed? Hint: if you’re looking for it in the constitution, you won’t find it there….that’s because it’s not written there OR in the Declaration of Independence. That’s right. However, if you look in the Declaration of Independence you’ll find these words “life, liberty and the PURSUIT of Happiness”. Big difference.
I would also suggest that anyone who believes the UN is here to “allow countries to negotiate their problems”, do alittle research into the UN. Because that is exactly what they want you to believe.
Comment by WHURR on 26 July 2009:
I’m skurred Mommy!!
Comment by homesteader on 27 July 2009:
Y’all can realize / We found Happiness here at AfroRomance .
I hold not any Educational Degrees in History / Alas I have lived recent history .
As far as Researching the United Nations and that which they talk about . In Our small part of Texas / that wood bee the Largest waste of my time for several reasons ;
1. I am a Retired Transportation Engineer who drove 3 - 2000 model tractors - Two of these were Brand New Trucks in the year 2000 [ Shows My Quality of Service to my Company ], when I was fortunate enough to have lived through a Massive Heart Attack at the end of that year [ 12/28/00 ] and do knot care about what I cannot do anything about .
It is raining here and I am spending more time on Gardens and lawncare .
2. It is Foolish to argue with one who has no more Education and knowledge of them than I do .
3. Ain’t none of my business anyhows .
4. The Topic of this Blog has Totally nothing to do with the United Nations .
5. This is a Dating Site not a worldwide state of affairs Nightly News show .
I came here to find a Wife / I did so - now another male Wishes to Debate something that has no Reason to even take up space on this Blog topic .
God Bless those that are Seriously Looking for another .
Their Choice of Sex of their partner for life is ” Their Business ”
Mind Your Own Business and Life May find Happiness for you . Generally Speaking .
Comment by homesteader on 27 July 2009:
I found the Happiness in Our Government Documents ; By being Intelligent enough to read between the lines and Interpret in My own way / What they were trying to do .
In order to free themselves from Oppression and Taxation without Representation
Under constant Threat of Death from the Ruling country of their time , for the actions they put on paper .
In this day and age / others ask for the Rite of Marriage in this country Built on freedom and justice for All and have been Denied .
Ria ; I agree with You , it is a sad day when Happiness is taken from others who Pay their Taxes in this country .
Comment by fkoi on 27 July 2009:
Glock said it right. Happiness cannot be guaranteed. But the pursuit of it was considered an unalienable right by the founders of this experiment called the United States. Important enough to be named along with life and liberty, along with other unnamed rights. The document further states that the purpose of government, receiving their JUST powers from the consent of the governed, is to secure these rights.
If we agree to being citizens, we are agreeing to the above.
Comment by homesteader on 27 July 2009:
The only thing that can stop one from being Happy is all in their own mind . We awoke beside each other again this morning . Free yourself / Enjoy the Day .
We do .
Everyday is Special , if you yourself make it like that .
Smile , here in East Texas it takes three of us to get a full set of teeth / unless they plastic .
Comment by homesteader on 27 July 2009:
fkoi ; P.S. I was born here / I had no choice . LOL
Naturalized Citizen / No Wants - No Warrents strickly Legal . Life , Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness .
Bahhh Humbug I am Santa Claus when that time is here .
Comment by yoyo99 on 28 July 2009:
Having worked in close partnership with a number of UN agencies throughout my career, I can assure you that it is anything but a mechanism to rule the world - it plays an important role in setting standards to which sovereign countries can be held accountable. Each country has it’s own constitution, but I beleive the world needs a mechanism to which countries can be held accountable, even though these standards are generally not enforceable by law.
Article 16 of the UN’s Declaration on Human Rights says that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and have the right to marry as consenting adults.
The USA is governed by it’s own constitution and is perfectly entitled to ban gay marriages, I’m just asking if it is hypocritical of the USA, and a host of other member states, to ratify this declaration then deny homosexuals their right to marry.
Everyone…I hope Mr Obama does his Irish forefathers proud and supports his brothers and sisters (pardon the pun…lol) to be treated as equals and give them the opprotunity to marry whom they please, regardless of race, gender, religion or political affiliation.
Glock…much of what you say is intelligent and clear, I just don’t see where your suspicion of the UN arises from
Homesteader… i love your posts - can you send me some of whatever it is you’re smoking..!
bcontent2b… even God is in Hell cause he’s supposed to be omnipresent, right? So if God is everywhere at the same time, then he must be in Hell as well as in Heaven, and if he’s not in Hell the he’s not omnipresent and therefore by definition isn’t God!!
Nandi…amen!
Have a great weekend y’all !
Comment by homesteader on 28 July 2009:
Life , a Good Wife , rain and flowers in the middle of a National Preserve / Fresh Air - Trees emit Oxygen .
Life after Retirement is to Enjoy / I drove at least a Million Safe Miles in My Trucking Career
Comment by homesteader on 28 July 2009:
P.S. Being made in his own image / Each of Us is God
Comment by homesteader on 28 July 2009:
P.S.S. Omnipresent as you say
Comment by Glock on 29 July 2009:
YoYo, if his Majesty Sir “Homesteader” will grant me permission to address your post….(watch, he’ll make 4 posts just for that sentence).
What is the purpose of the UN? Who started the UN? What is the history and the political philosophies of those who started the UN? Does the U.S not make treaties with the UN? If so who is our representation in the UN? How is he/she elected and do we have a vote? And does that election conform with the Constitution? The answer is NO. The UN does not represent the citizens of this country in protecting our rights as citizens of this country.
I have difficulty understanding how you do not see this.
Comment by homesteader on 2 August 2009:
Thank you I LEARNED SOMETIN ‘ NEW TODAY .
Someone needs to start a Profile for Declaration of Security Care for ” we ” who house the U.N.;
TO BE HONORED ACCORDINGLY BYE installation with Equal Rights as per all Countries represented there .
Comment by Shotgun007 on 3 August 2009:
Homesteader, Can you clarify the above post?
Comment by yoyo99 on 3 August 2009:
A nations representatives to the UN are nominated by the National Government and/or Leader…
…just same way othe political leaders are nominated…eg Hilary Clinton wasn’t democratically elected to her position…
…so those sent by a nation to the UN actually DO represent their citizens
Comment by miri2008 on 3 August 2009:
Did say that I wouldn’t post here again - guess that’s why we shouldn’t say such things
For those with the ‘born like this’ perspective, Here’s a link to what one gentleman has to say about his actual own personal experience in this area
http://www.theranch.org/Do-You-Believe-That-I-Am-Able-To-Do-This.60.0.html
Comment by homesteader on 5 August 2009:
Last evening , my wife put the movie ” the Patriot ” with Steven Seagal in to watch .
After seeing Ennis, Montana in a state of emergency after toxic chemicals were released by an upset landowner .
I listened carefully to the beliefs of one who Disagreed with Gov’t Laws .
Came to the conclusion / that others tend to believe in similiar form , Right here on these Blog Topics .
The Rite of Marriage / bye Decision of the California Supreme Court was Denied .
I ask as a Commentor on these Blog Topics / Will they ever worry about ” World Peace ” ?
Sorry that is another Movie Topic with Sandra Bullock titled ” Miss Congeniality.” LOL .
Shotgun007 ; Yes I am willing to Clarify that I indeed see it as I wrote it . Just a Retired ” King of the Road “
Comment by homesteader on 6 August 2009:
Go ; Mrs. Hillary Clinton / always a Winner in My eyes .
Comment by Glock on 22 August 2009:
YoYo, the example of Hillary Clinton is your justification? Are you kidding me?? That is an example of how lost our American public is when it comes the Constitution of this country.
The Constitution of this country lists the responsibilities of the federal government. The main responsibility is to protect the citizens from enemies and to protect the rights of the citizens. The Secretary of State has no power to pass any law upon the citizens of this country.
The U.N. passes resolutions with votes of “appointed” ambassador’s who then try to “enforce” the resolutions.
Say for instance the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. votes with the rest of the ambassador’s of other countries to confiscate all guns in the U.S. that are owned by our citizens. How are we to redress this grievance to our government? We can’t because the Constitution provides no provision for a “United Nations”. Nor do we elect the ambassador to the U.N. We do however elect our congressman and can take our complaint to Him/her.
You cannot, with a straight face, say that 300,000,000 people would go to the ambassador to complain. That is not redressing anything. That would be a mockery of representative government.
Just as Obama is appointing (currently 33) czars. Where in the constitution does it authorize him to do this? We didn’t elect them. They are supposedly in charge of different areas of the economy, they have no real power.
Try again…
Comment by whurr on 24 August 2009:
Its my kid’s first day of school tomorrow. They are tossing and turning and can’t sleep out of anxiety.
I am printing out this blog and forcing them to read it. Not for the topic or controversial posts… so they will fall asleep easier!
Dang y’all can type!