Miss California: Carrie Prejean

[angel_luv]

Carrie is a real winner, in my opinion- regardless of the outcome of the pageant.

I think it is awesome the way Carrie stood up for her beliefs and how she is handling the very public repercussions of her courageous choice.




http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_12193174?source=rss

By Randy McMullen
Contra Costa Times
Posted: 04/21/2009 04:00:02 PM PDT
Updated: 04/21/2009 05:07:05 PM PDT


Still the center of a raging debate two days after her anti-gay-marriage remarks at the Miss USA pageant, Miss California Carrie Prejean went on the "Today" show Tuesday and maintained she was proud of what she had said.

During Sunday night's competition, Prejean was asked by openly gay celebrity blogger Perez Hilton, a judge in the pageant, if she felt all states should move toward allowing same-sex marriage.

She said, "I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman ... that's how I was raised." Besides setting off a firestorm of pro- and con-gay-marriage/freedom-of-speech twittering and blogging, the remark was widely believed to have cost her the crown. It also prompted Hilton to later post a nasty and unprintable rant about her on his massively popular Web site perezhilton.com.

"I was ready for my question, and when I heard it from (Perez), I knew at that moment after I'd answered the question, I knew that I was not going to win because of my answer," she said. "Because I had spoken from my heart, for my beliefs and for my God. ... It's not about being politically correct, for me, it's about being biblically correct."

Earlier in the day Prejean went on MSNBC's morning show, where she was asked about Hilton's attack on her.

"I can only say to him that I will be praying for him. I feel sorry for him, I really do," Prejean said. "I think he's angry, I think he's hurt.


Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. He asked me specifically what my opinion was on that subject and I gave him an honest answer."

[Winehole23]

Oh god. This.

[angel_luv]

It's not about being politically correct, for me, it's about being biblically correct."

I saw Carrie's interview with Sean Hannity and heard her say that.

She is an amazing woman- self assured and at the same time incredibly gracious.

[Winehole23]

Ms. Prejean's personal integrity is totally respectable IMO, but what she said apparently wasn't.

C'est la guerre. She whacked the hornet's nest and she (probably) knew it.

[BRHornet45]

I applaud her for standing up for what she believes and not taking the "easy" route. that is the problem with most phony liberals today .... especially in Hollywood and show business. they are so concerned about what the trendy political views are that they would rather sell themselves out just to fit in with the crowd.

for many examples .... go look about 95% of Hollywood actors and actresses.

[ploto]

The way she said it was problematic- not what she believes. That quote intentionally left out part of it where she said "IN MY COUNTRY."

My bible teaches compassion and the example of how Jesus dealt with those brought to him in sexual sin displays that.

[LnGrrrR]

I don't really have a problem with her saying that. I also don't have a problem with other people wacking her for it. Go tolerance!

[BRHornet45]

The way she said it was problematic- not what she believes. That quote intentionally left out part of it where she said "IN MY COUNTRY."

My bible teaches compassion and the example of how Jesus dealt with those brought to him in sexual sin displays that.


I agree to an extent with you on the "my country" part. She could have left that out, but it was probably just nerves talking there and her stuttering to find the right words. who knows..... HOWEVER. ... if it would have been the OTHER WAY around and she was SUPPORTING gay marriage and said "in my country", no one would have gave a damn....... oh and she would have won the competition.

[Marcus Bryant]

I don't really have a problem with her saying that. I also don't have a problem with other people wacking her for it.

Right. It's freedom of speech, not freedom from speech, or more accurately, freedom from criticism.

[Marcus Bryant]

Oh god. This.

I'd have to agree. But the news cycle beast must be fed.

[BacktoBasics]

Bigotry Forum.

[angel_luv]

I knew better than to put this in the Club.

[BRHornet45]

Bigotry Forum.

blah .. go back to jacking off to re-runs of Bill Maher

[coyotes_geek]

I personally believe that if we just gave U.S. Americans a bunch of maps this would all work itself out.

[DarrinS]

I guess standing up for your beliefs is admirable, but she's dumb if she wanted to win the pageant. I thought all these girls attended the same PC training camp for answering those questions.


I have to give her an "F" for her pageantry skills.

[Spurminator]

I wonder if that worthless fuck realizes he's just given the anti-gay marriage movement a new hero. Good job, moron. Stick to the tabloid shit.

[BRHornet45]

I guess standing up for your beliefs is admirable, but she's dumb if she wanted to win the pageant. I thought all these girls attended the same PC training camp for answering those questions.


I have to give her an "F" for her pageantry skills.

son that goes back to what I said above .... she chose to be REAL and not another phony show business liberal. She said what she truly believed instead of selling herself out just to give them what they wanted.

[ratm1221]

Carrie is a real winner, in my opinion- regardless of the outcome of the pageant.

I think it is awesome the way Carrie stood up for her beliefs and how she is handling the very public repercussions of her courageous choice.

Why do you hate gay people? I don't see why gays marrying is such an issue. Do you think they are any less gay if you stop them from getting married? Maybe they will stop being gay all together if we don't allow them to marry.

What if someone singled you out and said you couldn't get married because you are a nut job? It's dangerous for crazy people like you to get married because you usually marry other crazy people, and everyone knows how scary it is when two crazy people get together..

[Winehole23]

I personally believe that if we just gave U.S. Americans a bunch of maps this would all work itself out.We're all US Americans, after all.

[Heath Ledger]

I sincelrely hope Perez chokes on a cock sandwich.

[Marcus Bryant]

Why do you hate gay people? I don't see why gays marrying is such an issue. Do you think they are any less gay if you stop them from getting married? Maybe they will stop being gay all together if we don't allow them to marry.

What if someone singled you out and said you couldn't get married because you are a nut job? It's dangerous for crazy people like you to get married because you usually marry other crazy people, and everyone knows how scary it is when two crazy people get together..


How exactly is opposition evidence of hate?

And since I'll undoubtedly have to submit to the gay inquisition my views on the matter, I think the state should get out of the marriage business altogether and people legally free to enter into a marriage contract between whoever and however many individuals they wish.

[ratm1221]

We're all US Americans, after all.

Gays are just plain Americans. They only wish they could be US Americans.

[Marcus Bryant]

Before I forget, why is it that Mav Fan is consistently the worst poster in this forum? I've seen Mav Fan on the right and left distinguish themselves in this forum. Got damn the Metroplex is a fucking shithole.

[ratm1221]

How exactly is opposition evidence of hate?

Hate - the emotion of intense dislike; a feeling of dislike so strong that it demands action

I think of a better word to describe the anti-gay-marriage movement.

[Marcus Bryant]

I see no evidence of said emotion.

[BacktoBasics]

I'm so proud of her.

She chose to be a bigot all on her own. How admirable. She believes in discrimination based on her opinion. We should all stop and applaud this.

[Marcus Bryant]

Now if you were to ask me if I "hate" Mav Fan and most other Dallasites (yes, pronounced like parasites), I'd have to answer in the affirmative.

[angel_luv]

Why do you hate gay people? I don't see why gays marrying is such an issue. Do you think they are any less gay if you stop them from getting married? Maybe they will stop being gay all together if we don't allow them to marry.

What if someone singled you out and said you couldn't get married because you are a nut job? It's dangerous for crazy people like you to get married because you usually marry other crazy people, and everyone knows how scary it is when two crazy people get together..

Though I strongly disapprove of the practice of homosexuality, I do not in any way, shape, or form hate gay people.
On the contrary, a much loved, longtime friend of my family was homosexual.
I say was because he moved away when he got aids and has secluded himself since.
He does not want to be found and so I no longer have contact with him.

While it is true that I believe that a marriage ought to be between a man and one woman, only, this is not what the thread was meant to be about.

I feel that it is of the utmost importance for each of us to know what we believe and to stand up for our beliefs, no matter what the cost.
That is exactly what Carrie Prejean did and I greatly respect her for it.

That was the point of this thread.

[jman3000]

I thinks it's ok that she said what she said... even though her delivery made her look kinda dumb.

Now I just don't give a fuck about her because she was literally on every Fox News show yesterday. She's gonna end up better off than Miss South Carolina just based on all the political exposure she's gonna get. She'll be used like a female Joe the Plumber (gags).

And Perez Hilton reacted like a little bitch when he bitched and moaned on his video blog. How the fuck is someone like that a judge for Miss America.

[jman3000]

:lol I love how people who are discriminatory against gays always start their sentences with "one of my best friends is gay"... it's like it gives them credence because they know someone.

gay marriage is gonna happen. It's a constitutional inevitability.

[BacktoBasics]

I say was because he moved away when he got aids and has secluded himself since.
:lmao I don't know why but :lmao

[Spurminator]

A question at a beauty pageant by a trashy gossip merchant leads to martyrdom of a beauty contestant and subsequent tour of heroic interviews on sensationalist cable news programs.

Holy shit, I can't think of a single thing I could add to this story to make it more irritating.

[BRHornet45]

:lol I love how people who are discriminatory against gays always start their sentences with "one of my best friends is gay"... it's like it gives them credence because they know someone.

gay marriage is gonna happen. It's a constitutional inevitability.

son its just like people saying ... "I'm not racist! I have plenty of black friends!" ... yet they would choose a white person over a black any day.

[ChumpDumper]

It's Miss USA -- an important distinction.

I don't think that kind of question should be asked in a beauty pageant. I don't know why they even have Q&A or "talent" portions of the contest.

[BacktoBasics]

:lol I love how people who are discriminatory against gays always start their sentences with "one of my best friends is gay"... it's like it gives them credence because they know someone.

gay marriage is gonna happen. It's a constitutional inevitability.Its how bigots make themselves feel not so bigotty.

[angel_luv]

:lmao I don't know why but :lmao

I don't know why you are laughing either.

My close friend feels so overwhelmed and ashamed about how his life has turned out that he believes his best option is to die alone.

What about that amuses you?

[coyotes_geek]

a question at a beauty pageant by a trashy gossip merchant leads to martyrdom of a beauty contestant and subsequent tour of heroic interviews on sensationalist cable news programs.

Holy shit, i can't think of a single thing i could add to this story to make it more irritating.

+1

[Marcus Bryant]

A question at a beauty pageant by a trashy gossip merchant leads to martyrdom of a beauty contestant and subsequent tour of heroic interviews on sensationalist cable news programs.

Holy shit, I can't think of a single thing I could add to this story to make it more irritating.

The inevitable protests, counter-protests, and book deal.

[BRHornet45]

I'm so proud of her.

She chose to be a bigot all on her own. How admirable. She believes in discrimination based on her opinion. We should all stop and applaud this.

so just because she doesn't believe in gay marriage makes her a bigot? wow you really are fucking stupid. how is she discriminating? dude seriously ... turn Bill Maher and MSNBC off for a few minutes and take a break.

Also I find it hilarious and pathetic how people try to compare gay marriage to the civil rights movement ... as if black people CHOSE to be black. what a joke and a slap to the face to African Americans for even mentioning gay marriage in the same sentence. being gay is a lifestyle choice and sexual preference. boo fucking hoo if they can't get married ... whats next? people wanting to marry dogs and cats with the argument "well they are living creatures and I love my poodle!! how dare you discriminate against me you bigot!!" ... just give it time and I am sure we will see shit like that as well.

[BacktoBasics]

I don't know why you are laughing either.

My close friend feels so overwhelmed and ashamed about how his life has turned out that he believes his best option is to die alone.

What about that amuses you? I bet he now feels that he shouldn't have been gay and perhaps led a life at the mercy of god.

Its funny because there is no way possible for you to have known a gay person not dying of AIDS. I just knew the moment I read that you had a so-called gay friend the story would end with his demise from a gay related sickness. Deep down inside your heart you feel he had it coming or deserved it. Release your anger onto us...

[ratm1221]

Before I forget, why is it that Mav Fan is consistently the worst poster in this forum? I've seen Mav Fan on the right and left distinguish themselves in this forum. Got damn the Metroplex is a fucking shithole.

Why is Sperm Fan consistently a douche? Some things will just have to remain a mystery...

[Marcus Bryant]

Why does Mav Fan constantly think about sperm and douching?

[BacktoBasics]

so just because she doesn't believe in gay marriage makes her a bigot? wow you really are fucking stupid. how is she discriminating? dude seriously ... turn Bill Maher and MSNBC off for a few minutes and take a break.

Also I find it hilarious and pathetic how people try to compare gay marriage to the civil rights movement ... as if black people CHOSE to be black. what a joke and a slap to the face to African Americans for even mentioning gay marriage in the same sentence. being gay is a lifestyle choice and sexual preference. boo fucking hoo if they can't get married ... whats next? people wanting to marry dogs and cats with the argument "well they are living creatures and I love my poodle!!"Did I say black people? How typical of a black man to make this all about the trials and tribulation that he never lived.

Bigot:

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

She fits it to a T.

[FromWayDowntown]

whats next? people wanting to marry dogs and cats with the argument "well they are living creatures and I love my poodle!! how dare you discriminate against me you bigot!!" ... just give it time and I am sure we will see shit like that as well.

There it is -- the completely refutable, totally asinine slippery slope argument.

With the line set at 25 posts, I took the under. I don't know whether to be happy to have lost (because it took long than expected to get there) or sad to have lost (because this indefensible crap keeps getting play in this debate).

[ratm1221]

Why does Mav Fan constantly think about sperm and douching?

I believe someone is an in-the-closet mav fan... :lmao

[jman3000]

Fox News DOES have some hot bitches on screen all the time.

Courtney Friel? Yes please.

[BRHornet45]

Did I say black people? How typical of a black man to make this all about the trials and tribulation that he never lived.

Bigot:

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

She fits it to a T.

typical coming from a RACIST phony piece of shit like you ....

please learn how to read and comprehend son. I never ONCE said that you said any of that .... I clearly put the paragraph about the civil rights movement separate from the first paragraph which I addressed your nonsense. It needed to be brought up because MANY people believe that the gay marriage issue is just like the civil rights movement and its not.

[angel_luv]

I bet he now feels that he shouldn't have been gay and perhaps led a life at the mercy of god.

Its funny because there is no way possible for you to have known a gay person not dying of AIDS. I just knew the moment I read that you had a so-called gay friend the story would end with his demise from a gay related sickness. Deep down inside your heart you feel he had it coming or deserved it. Release your anger onto us...


The friend was like a father to me after my own dad died.
Losing my friend was like losing a father all over again and is one of my greatest losses to date.

I have nothing but compassion for my friend and his condition.

I also have a great deal of pity for you.
You are speaking ignorance.

[jman3000]

I love mav fan. One of my closest friends is a mav fan.

He got the AIDS and died... but he was totally my friend.

[BRHornet45]

Fox News DOES have some hot bitches on screen all the time.

Courtney Friel? Yes please.

that comes to no surprise though ... Republican women are much hotter than liberal Democrat trash.

[coyotes_geek]

so just because she doesn't believe in gay marriage makes her a bigot? wow you really are fucking stupid. how is she discriminating? dude seriously ... turn Bill Maher and MSNBC off for a few minutes and take a break.

You started off well............


Also I find it hilarious and pathetic how people try to compare gay marriage to the civil rights movement ... as if black people CHOSE to be black. what a joke and a slap to the face to African Americans for even mentioning gay marriage in the same sentence. being gay is a lifestyle choice and sexual preference. boo fucking hoo if they can't get married ... whats next? people wanting to marry dogs and cats with the argument "well they are living creatures and I love my poodle!! how dare you discriminate against me you bigot!!" ... just give it time and I am sure we will see shit like that as well.

............and then it all fell apart. So what if gays get to start filing joint tax returns just like you do? Boo fucking hoo.

[BacktoBasics]

typical coming from a RACIST phony piece of shit like you ....

please learn how to read and comprehend son. I never ONCE said that you said any of that .... I clearly put the paragraph about the civil rights movement separate from the first paragraph which I addressed your nonsense. It needed to be brought up because MANY people believe that the gay marriage issue is just like the civil rights movement and its not.
oh its not racism I just think because of my religion that the blacks are bad. I mean I don't want one of you going out and shooting the other or bickering over who gets the last swig from the 40oz, its all good my Bro. I just don't want you guys loitering in my nice clean neighborhood.

[FaithInOne]

I don't really care about gay marriage, but once again the liberal/homo side comes out in full force to tear down a person for disagreeing with their supreme command.

Nothing new.

[BacktoBasics]

The friend was like a father to me after my own dad died.
Losing my friend was like losing a father all over again and is one of my greatest losses to date.

I have nothing but compassion for my friend and his condition.

I also have a great deal of pity for you.
You are speaking ignorance.Fair enough but having had a gay person so close to you how can you justify your bigotry when it comes to getting equal rights.

This man meant so much to you but and you still can't treat him like an equal. Does.Not.Compute.

[DarrinS]

Why does Mav Fan constantly think about sperm and douching?

:lmao

[jman3000]

oh its not racism I just think because of my religion that the blacks are bad. I mean I don't want one of you going out and shooting the other or bickering over who gets the last swig from the 40oz, its all good my Bro. I just don't want you guys loitering in my nice clean neighborhood.

BR is white.

[BRHornet45]

You started off well............



............and then it all fell apart. So what if gays get to start filing joint tax returns just like you do? Boo fucking hoo.

son I don't give a shit if they get married or not. I'm not going to go march and protest EITHER way. to me personally I could careless .... but I am not blind. I see lop sided media coverage on it and this Miss California / Hilton shit shows just how bad our country has gotten. You can't DARE have a different opinion than the way liberals view things or else you are called a bigot and ran out of town ... in her case, the liberal judges voted against her simply because she didn't bow down and kiss gay ass like they wanted her to.

Its funny though that no matter how hard MOST media/entertainment like CNN, MSNBC, MTV, and Hollywood tries to cram homosexuality down American's throats .... the over whelming majority of the country is against gay marriage.... and it will stay that way.

[BRHornet45]

I don't really care about gay marriage, but once again the liberal/homo side comes out in full force to tear down a person for disagreeing with their supreme command.

Nothing new.

exactly ... that's the problem. if you don't agree with THEIR OPINIONS, then you are attacked.

[ChumpDumper]

the over whelming majority of the country is against gay marriage.... and it will stay that way.It is not an overwhelming majority and probably will not stay a majority much longer. Once gay marriage becomes common in the places it is legal and the world doesn't end because of it, things will move along rather quickly in most states.

[BacktoBasics]

BR is white.Bullshit. No way that koonass is white.

[jman3000]

I see what you did there.

[BRHornet45]

It is not an overwhelming majority and probably will not stay a majority much longer.

BS .... go look up the stats son. I would say that over the next 10-20 years maybe 6-8 states will allow it. LOL not even the most liberal state in the country could pass it.

[BRHornet45]

It is not an overwhelming majority and probably will not stay a majority much longer. Once gay marriage becomes common in the places it is legal and the world doesn't end because of it, things will move along rather quickly in most states.

keep telling yourself that.

[Spurminator]

This girl is an overnight hero and has hours of television and maybe even a book deal in her future. She will be booked for more speaking engagements than the REAL Miss USA, and her term doesn't end in a year.

How is she a *victim* of the liberal establishment???

[ChumpDumper]

BS .... go look up the stats son.I did.
I would say that over the next 10-20 years maybe 6-8 states will allow it. LOL not even the most liberal state in the country could pass it.A generation is about right. Like I said, the world won't end and they won't give everybody gay, so it will happen.

[angel_luv]

Fair enough but having had a gay person so close to you how can you justify your bigotry when it comes to getting equal rights.

This man meant so much to you but and you still can't treat him like an equal. Does.Not.Compute.

I believe marriage is between a man and a woman.

Just like I do not object to there being gyms which are for women only or the fact that I as a female cannot get a haircut at Sports Clips, which is a salon for men only, I feel that marriage as an institution ought to be reserved only for one man and one woman.

I don't feel that the same sexes should marry. I also do not feel that men should have mulitiple wives.

As far as legal rights for homesexuals go, I am more liberal than you might expect.

I believe as a citizen, homosexuals have the right to chose to live together, to purchase property together, to share a phone plan, visit each other in the hospital as a family member, and even to adopt kids, although I do not support the latter practice. ( I believe kids ought to be raised by a male father and a female mother.)

The bottom line is I view marriage as a privilege and one ought to be extended to adult heterosexuals only.

[ChumpDumper]

keep telling yourself that.It's not that important to me, so I don't need to keep telling myself that. Just an observation. Apparently it is VERY important to you.

[ChumpDumper]

The bottom line is I view marriage as a privilege and one that has been traditionally and is rightly extended to adult heterosexuals only.That statement is inaccurate.

[jack sommerset]

Men fucking men. Still makes me laugh and cringe. Obviously its not against the law to suck each other off so it should not be against the law to get married. After they are married maybe they will stop sucking each other off.

[Spurminator]

This girl is an overnight hero and has hours of television and maybe even a book deal in her future. She will be booked for more speaking engagements than the REAL Miss USA, and her term doesn't end in a year.

How is she a *victim* of the liberal establishment???

Beauty queen runners-up and 6-figure plumbers...

The Right sure picks some interesting heroes.

[BRHornet45]

It's not that important to me, so I don't need to keep telling myself that. Just an observation. Apparently it is VERY important to you.

LMAO gimme a break. I could careless about them fucking each other in the ass and spreading STD's and Aids throughout the gay community .... you care just as much about it and you know it. or else you wouldn't be in this thread going ape shit over the topic.

[angel_luv]

That statement is inaccurate.

You're right. I should have just said ought to be.

I'll fix it.

[coyotes_geek]

son I don't give a shit if they get married or not. I'm not going to go march and protest EITHER way. to me personally I could careless .... but I am not blind. I see lop sided media coverage on it and this Miss California / Hilton shit shows just how bad our country has gotten. You can't DARE have a different opinion than the way liberals view things or else you are called a bigot and ran out of town ... in her case, the liberal judges voted against her simply because she didn't bow down and kiss gay ass like they wanted her to.

Its funny though that no matter how hard MOST media/entertainment like CNN, MSNBC, MTV, and Hollywood tries to cram homosexuality down American's throats .... the over whelming majority of the country is against gay marriage.... and it will stay that way.

I'm in complete agreement with you that being opposed to gay marriage does not automatically make one a bigot. But if you truly don't care whether or not gays get married, why the references to marrying animals and the alleged insult to blacks for gays to try to draw similarities between their plights?

[BRHornet45]

I'm in complete agreement with you that being opposed to gay marriage does not automatically make one a bigot. But if you truly don't care whether or not gays get married, why the references to marrying animals and the alleged insult to blacks for gays to try to draw similarities between their plights?

why not reference it??? ....

all you have to do is turn on the TV and hear gay people comparing this to the civil rights movement. that is a total joke.

[SnakeBoy]

Bigot:

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

She fits it to a T.

So does the judge.

[BacktoBasics]

Opposing gay marriage is by definition bigotry.

Think what you want but it is what it is.

[Winehole23]

Men fucking men. Still makes me laugh and cringe. Obviously its not against the law to suck each other off so it should not be against the law to get married. After they are married maybe they will stop sucking each other off.Jealous much?

Being gay isn't 100% about the sex. The topic is gay marriage and a would be Miss America.

Why are you mining the theme of gay oral sex, Jack? Is it relevant to you in some way?

[jack sommerset]

Jealous much?

Being gay isn't 100% about the sex. The topic is gay marriage and a would be Miss America.

Why are you mining the theme of gay oral sex, Jack? Is it relevant to you in some way?

:lol its called a joke. Don't be so serious all the time.

[BRHornet45]

back to basics you are just as much a bigot as anyone else ... since you love throwing that word around so much.

you criticize ANYONE who disagrees with YOUR politics and the way Bill Maher tells you to view things. grow up bitch

[baseline bum]

America needs a return to traditional marriage: polygamy via property/monetary trades with the bride's parents.

[BacktoBasics]

back to basics you are just as much a bigot as anyone else ... since you love throwing that word around so much.

you criticize ANYONE who disagrees with YOUR politics and the way Bill Maher tells you to view things. grow up bitchWhatever helps your bigoted conscious sleep at night.

You got a real hardon for Bill Maher don't you. I guess I can't form a statement or have an opinion without you pinning the blame on some kind of media persona. How very unclever of you. I criticize anyone who disagrees with my politics??? Really? You and I both know I've never done that. :rolleyes

[Winehole23]

:lol its called a joke. Don't be so serious all the time.It was slightly funny. Like a mother in law joke, kinda hacky, but it has detectible humor.

[BlackSwordsMan]

let the fags get married would have been a better response than what this bible thumper gave
stupid whore

[Blake]

......and the alleged insult to blacks for gays to try to draw similarities between their plights?

it's an insult because the similarities are extremely few and far between....... especially considering it was legal in America to beat the crap out of a Black man along with other things that gays have not ever had to endure in this country.

[Blake]

I also think that Perez had no business being a judge, no business asking that loaded question to a friggin beauty pageant chick, and no business blowing up on his website.

[coyotes_geek]

it's an insult because the similarities are extremely few and far between....... especially considering it was legal in America to beat the crap out of a Black man [among other things] that gays have not ever had to endure in this country.

I see. So if we just make it legal to beat up gays then their claims will have equal merit. It's like a gang initiation thing. Gotta get your ass kicked before you can join the club.

[Winehole23]

it's an insult because the similarities are extremely few and far between....... especially considering it was legal in America to beat the crap out of a Black man [among other things] that gays have not ever had to endure in this country.Final answer?

In Alamo Heights (this would be mid eighties) guys bragged about dragging the bushes and beating the bathrooms at Olmos Park for queers. Baseball bats were just the thing for it.

Whereas I thought it was unseemly to cruise Olmos Park for any reason. Each to his own taste. Even if the stories I heard are total bs, the bolded above is obviously overqualified, to the point of being total bs itself.

If you want to say racism and homophobia are don't bear much comparison, that is one thing, but you just suggested gays *have not ever had to endure* bigoted violence and random terror.

IMO this opinion is objectively false.

[Crookshanks]

Whether or not you agree with her, that insipid little faggot (see, I can hurl insults just like the idiot Perez) asked for her OPINION, and he got it! He had no business asking such a politically loaded question.

This is still America and people have a right to their own opinions. She didn't say everyone should feel the way she did - she just said that was the way she was raised and that's what she believes.

The fact that she's being attacked by the left shows that tolerance only goes one way. The only thing they tolerate are views that they agree with!

But I love how it's backfired so gloriously against Perez and the rest of his hateful crowd!

[baseline bum]

Whether or not you agree with her, that insipid little faggot (see, I can hurl insults just like the idiot Perez) asked for her OPINION, and he got it! He had no business asking such a politically loaded question.

This is still America and people have a right to their own opinions. She didn't say everyone should feel the way she did - she just said that was the way she was raised and that's what she believes.

The fact that she's being attacked by the left shows that tolerance only goes one way. The only thing they tolerate are views that they agree with!

But I love how it's backfired so gloriously against Perez and the rest of his hateful crowd!

People have a right to think she is an idiot and express that, even if it does get the right all butthurt.

[Blake]

I see. So if we just make it legal to beat up gays then their claims will have equal merit. It's like a gang initiation thing. Gotta get your ass kicked before you can join the club.

If it were ever legal to beat up gays, then absolutely their claims have equal merit.

[Winehole23]

OIC, it's a measuring contest. Whose victimhood is more worthy.

I think I'll leave that to the self-appointed actuaries of PC and get on with my life thanks.



Do continue, Blake.

[Blake]

Final answer?

In Alamo Heights (this would be mid eighties) guys bragged about dragging the bushes and beating the bathrooms at Olmos Park for queers. Baseball bats were just the thing for it.

Whereas I thought it was unseemly to cruise Olmos Park for any reason. Each to his own taste. Even if the stories I heard are total bs, the bolded above is obviously overqualified, to the point of being total bs itself.

If you want to say racism and homophobia are don't bear much comparison, that is one thing, but you just said gays *have not ever had to endure* bigoted violence.

IMO this opinion is objectively false.

In Alamo Heights in the mid 80s it was illegal to hit a "queer" with a baseball bat.

I may have not worded my post the way I meant it to sound.

I meant that gays have never had to endure legal beatings among many other legal things a white man could do to a black man.

There are plenty of instances that people that were different than others were dragged back into some bushes to get the crap beat out of them, whether it was for physical or even philosophical differences.

[Blake]

OIC, it's a measuring contest. Whose victimhood is more worthy.

Legally speaking, in what way(s) have gays been victims?

[101A]

If a gay man and a gay woman want to get married; I think they can, can't they?

See. No discrimination.

[Winehole23]

In Alamo Heights in the mid 80s it was illegal to hit a "queer" with a baseball bat. It wasn't much punished that I saw, but then again, maybe it never happened.


I may have not worded my post the way I meant it to sound. Ok. That could happen to anybody.

Maybe I overread you a little. Sorry about that, Blake.

[JoeChalupa]

I think she answered it honestly and good for her. She's smart enough to take advantage of the situation presented her.

[Winehole23]

Legally speaking, in what way(s) have gays been victims?If I was a little more bored than I am right now, I might look into that for you.

I'll confess to knowing not very much about it.

[ploto]

I have more of a problem with the fact she seemed rather stupid than with her opinion. She did not have a clear way of expressing what she believed nor did she exhibit any depth of thought with regards to the issue. She could have discussed ways the state can insure legal rights for same sex couples without the institution of marriage, but she did not.

And while Hilton is a tool, her response is just to say she will pray for him rather than to discuss the issue being raised. She epitomizes what bothers people about those who claim to be religious but have no apparent depth of examination.

[CuckingFunt]

Carrie is a real winner, in my opinion- regardless of the outcome of the pageant.

I think it is awesome the way Carrie stood up for her beliefs and how she is handling the very public repercussions of her courageous choice.

There's nothing courageous about promoting the status quo.

[JoeChalupa]

Sandra would have nailed that question.
http://thecia.com.au/reviews/m/images/miss-congeniality-7.jpg

[ploto]

All of this over some woman with such integrity that she probably had a boob job, a nose job, and who knows what else trying to win a beauty pageant.

[ChumpDumper]

I have more of a problem with the fact she seemed rather stupid than with her opinion.That should make her more qualified to be Miss USA.

[coyotes_geek]

I have more of a problem with the fact she seemed rather stupid than with her opinion. She did not have a clear way of expressing what she believed nor did she exhibit any depth of thought with regards to the issue. She could have discussed ways the state can insure legal rights for same sex couples without the institution of marriage, but she did not.

And while Hilton is a tool, her response is just to say she will pray for him rather than to discuss the issue being raised. She epitomizes what bothers people about those who claim to be religious but have no apparent depth of examination.

There's a reason she's in a beauty pagent instead of being off somewhere finding the cure for cancer.

[ChumpDumper]

All of this over some woman with such integrity that she probably had a boob job, a nose job, and who knows what else trying to win a beauty pageant.That's why the question never should have been asked. It's supposed to be about bikinis and Vaseline on your teeth.

[clambake]

hey...angel.....did it ever occur to you that "your friend" is seeking seclusion as a shield to bigoted ridicule?

[SnakeBoy]

People have a right to think she is an idiot and express that

So why aren't you spending your time callin President Obama an idiot and a biggot since he shares the same view as her.

[CuckingFunt]

I don't know why you are laughing either.

My close friend feels so overwhelmed and ashamed about how his life has turned out that he believes his best option is to die alone.

What about that amuses you?

Is his homosexuality and status as HIV/AIDS positive the only source of his shame? Because, if so, that would seem to send a pretty clear message about how the attitudes you hold make people with that lifestyle feel in this country.

I know that if I considered myself one of God's children and a good Christian, the fact that a family friend/loved one felt the need to seclude himself from me would be a pretty good reason to thoroughly investigate my beliefs and the impact they have on other human beings.

[BacktoBasics]

Is his homosexuality and status as HIV/AIDS positive the only source of his shame? Because, if so, that would seem to send a pretty clear message about how the attitudes you hold make people with that lifestyle feel in this country.

I know that if I considered myself one of God's children and a good Christian, the fact that a family friend/loved one felt the need to seclude himself from me would be a pretty good reason to thoroughly investigate my beliefs and the impact they have on other human beings.C'mon now a good Christian would let the gay self destruct privately.

[Winehole23]

The new status quo also demands tolerance for gays. I give my own unbegrudingly.

Ms. Prejean could've fudged it like a good little girl and maybe gone on to be Miss America, but instead she was true to her school, suffered the flames (oh, the agony!), and will probably soon be marketed as a Joan of Arc -like action figure for mass political rallies.

My hat's off to her.

[CuckingFunt]

BS .... go look up the stats son. I would say that over the next 10-20 years maybe 6-8 states will allow it. LOL not even the most liberal state in the country could pass it.

What's the most liberal state in the country? I have a feeling you mean California, but as a lifelong Californian I can tell you with certainty that isn't the case.

[DarkReign]

What's the most liberal state in the country? I have a feeling you mean California, but as a lifelong Californian I can tell you with certainty that isn't the case.

I was the dumbass who assumed Cali would overwhelmingly pass the marriage bill.

Woo-hoo, was I wrong.

[JoeChalupa]

Poise counts!!

[DarkReign]

Free country.

She was asked a question, she answered. Judges didnt like the answer. She lost.

Is that what this is about? And why the fuck is Paris Hilton judging Miss America/USA/wtf ever?

[CuckingFunt]

why not reference it??? ....

all you have to do is turn on the TV and hear gay people comparing this to the civil rights movement. that is a total joke.

It is a movement with the goal of attaining rights at the civil level. Seems kinda similar to me.

[DarrinS]

Ms. Prejean could've fudged it like a good little girl and maybe gone on to be Miss America, but instead she was true to her school, suffered the flames (oh, the agony!), and will probably soon be marketed as a Joan of Arc -like action figure for mass political rallies.

My hat's off to her.


That's pretty funny.

[CuckingFunt]

OIC, it's a measuring contest. Whose victimhood is more worthy.

One of my favorite terms for this practice is "oppression olympics." Good stuff.

[CuckingFunt]

I have more of a problem with the fact she seemed rather stupid than with her opinion.

And I have more of a problem with the fact that this morning on The Today Show she mentioned a plan of involvement with breast and ovarian cancer advocation.

Ugh.

[coyotes_geek]

Ms. Prejean could've fudged it like a good little girl and maybe gone on to be Miss America, but instead she was true to her school, suffered the flames (oh, the agony!), and will probably soon be marketed as a Joan of Arc -like action figure for mass political rallies.

............and somewhere Joe the Plumber reminisces about the times that were.

[Sec24Row7]

I'm sorry did California just not vote on this with the Majority of people taking the stance she represented?

She is representing a state after all.

[Winehole23]

No need to apologize, man. You just made your stand.

[NASCARdad]

I'll gladly help her support marriage between a man and a woman.

[Blake]

and will probably soon be marketed as a Joan of Arc -like action figure for mass political rallies.


:lol

my daughter wants the complete set that also includes a runway, a perez hilton action figure with webcam and miss junior south carolina that talks.

[desflood]

And I have more of a problem with the fact that this morning on The Today Show she mentioned a plan of involvement with breast and ovarian cancer advocation.
Oh my.

[SnakeBoy]

Free country.

She was asked a question, she answered. Judges didnt like the answer. She lost.

Is that what this is about? And why the fuck is Paris Hilton judging Miss America/USA/wtf ever?

Perez, sir, Perez.

From what I have heard the rules of the contest are that contestants will be judged on how well the answer the question not on the content of the answer. Get ready for minute by minute lawsuit coverage from Greta.

[Blake]

One of my favorite terms for this practice is "oppression olympics." Good stuff.

I didn't realize gays and lesbians had a term for their practice.

[Winehole23]

............and somewhere Joe the Plumber reminisces about the times that were.Oh, he's already over.

There could be a lengthy reality TV/porn/wrestling afterglow, but he's clearly done.

[CuckingFunt]

I didn't realize gays and lesbians had a term for their practice.

They actually have several colorful terms for their practices.

As do heterosexuals.

But that's not what I was referring to, here.

[Winehole23]

:lol

my daughter wants the complete set that also includes a runway, a perez hilton action figure with webcam and miss junior south carolina that talks. Hell, maybe I want one too!

[DarkReign]

Perez, sir, Perez.

I had to google that...

Who the fuck is Perez Hilton? From the wiki, a gossip columnist?

Man, I am so out of the loop. Oh well...

[koriwhat]

marriage is a scam for the government to make some money, same as religion.

[SnakeBoy]

I had to google that...

Who the fuck is Perez Hilton? From the wiki, a gossip columnist?

Man, I am so out of the loop. Oh well...


Don't feel bad, I had to do the same.

[FaithInOne]

It's too hard to sympathize for a beauty queen out of Cancerfornia :lol

[SnakeBoy]

Men fucking men. Still makes me laugh and cringe. Obviously its not against the law to suck each other off so it should not be against the law to get married. After they are married maybe they will stop sucking each other off.

How is it that in a thread about Carrie Prejean you visualize men fucking and sucking off each other?

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/11539/c.jpg

[Summers]

I applaud her for standing up for what she believes and not taking the "easy" route. that is the problem with most phony liberals today .... especially in Hollywood and show business. they are so concerned about what the trendy political views are that they would rather sell themselves out just to fit in with the crowd.

for many examples .... go look about 95% of Hollywood actors and actresses.

I don't think I can add anything to this argument, nor do I wish to do so, but I think a good thing to remember when having a debate like this is that people who disagree with you have spent as much time considering the issue and searching their souls, heathen or otherwise.

[Smart Ass]

She's hot.

[Cry Havoc]

This thread cracks me up. People getting indignant about a statement made by a beauty pageant queen? Really?

[E20]

Men having sex with men is pretty disgusting. But I dont' really care what gays do and if they want to get married or whatever wtf cares, besides they are going to hell anyway. But just two erect hard penises rubbing on each other and in other mens mouths and buttholes is nasty.

[td4mvp21]

Hilton needs to grow up a bit. That's a really personal question to begin with, so be prepared to hear something you don't want to hear. Oh no, she doesn't agree with you! Let's throw a fucking media tantrum because that's really mature :rolleyes

[jman3000]

And I have more of a problem with the fact that this morning on The Today Show she mentioned a plan of involvement with breast and ovarian cancer advocation.

Ugh.

:lol

you can tell her handlers are having a field day trying to get her as much exposure as possible and maximizing this opportunity. she just seems too empty a shell to pull it off.

nude photos of her showing up in 3...2...1...

[Oh, Gee!!]

This thread cracks me up. People getting indignant about a statement made by a beauty pageant queen? Really?

Exactly---I like my pageant contestants stupid

[Yonivore]

Exactly---I like my pageant contestants stupid
Ironically, Perez Hilton probably voted for Barack Obama who is on record as opposing same-sex marriage...just like the contestant.

I wonder why the selective outrage? Is Perez calling Obama a bitch too?

[SnakeBoy]

But just two erect hard penises rubbing on each other and in other mens mouths and buttholes is nasty.


Hmmm...I just post a pic of Prejean and that's what you think about? Might be time for you to have a Costanza moment.

IXvPqOGujXc

[ChumpDumper]

Ironically, Perez Hilton probably voted for Barack Obama who is on record as opposing same-sex marriage...just like the contestant.

I wonder why the selective outrage? Is Perez calling Obama a bitch too?Maybe. However, is Perez Hilton's opinion really noteworthy in any context?

[Spurminator]

Ironically, Perez Hilton probably voted for Barack Obama who is on record as opposing same-sex marriage...just like the contestant.

I wonder why the selective outrage? Is Perez calling Obama a bitch too?

Actually her answer sounded a lot like Biden's in the VP debate.

But what does this have to do with them?

[Yonivore]

Actually her answer sounded a lot like Biden's in the VP debate.

But what does this have to do with them?
I think the selective outrage of this Perez Hilton character is indicative of the hypocrisy entrenched in the left. It's so blind he doesn't even see the contradiction.

[jman3000]

I think the selective outrage of this Perez Hilton character is indicative of the hypocrisy entrenched in the left. It's so blind he doesn't even see the contradiction.

huh? the only people outraged are those on the right.

perez hilton is a sleez ball and shouldn't be famous (is he) let alone be judging a Miss USA pageant. i think she's dumb, but I don't hold her views against her. I think Perez Hilton is a stupid fuck head... but I don't really give enough of a shit about him to form an opinion of him.

[Yonivore]

huh? the only people outraged are those on the right.

perez hilton is a sleez ball and shouldn't be famous (is he) let alone be judging a Miss USA pageant. i think she's dumb, but I don't hold her views against her. I think Perez Hilton is a stupid fuck head... but I don't really give enough of a shit about him to form an opinion of him.
Perez Hilton = Jeanene Garafolo = Keith Olberman...etc...they're all the same.

That's my point.

[jman3000]

Is it an absolute certainty that Miss South Carolina would have lost if Miss Cali's answer had been different?

I'd say SC was hotter tbh.

[Yonivore]

Is it an absolute certainty that Miss South Carolina would have lost if Miss Cali's answer had been different?

I'd say SC was hotter tbh.
I don't follow these things but, my understanding was that it was Perez Hilton's vote that sunk her.

[FaithInOne]

Can you really get a book deal out of something like this?

hmmmm We need to do some brainstorming...

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I like how the left preaches tolerance and acceptance but then is completely intolerant and hateful of anyone who doesn't agree with the views of the left.

Couldn't find a bigger pack of hypocrites if you tried.

[Winehole23]

I like how the left preaches tolerance and acceptance but then is completely intolerant and hateful of anyone who doesn't agree with the views of the left.

Couldn't find a bigger pack of hypocrites if you tried.Rather than universalizing the example, could you narrow it down to this thread? Which posters do you mean?

[MaNuMaNiAc]

:lmao @ bigots crying about people's intolerance towards their intolerance!

[CuckingFunt]

I like how the left preaches tolerance and acceptance but then is completely intolerant and hateful of anyone who doesn't agree with the views of the left.

Couldn't find a bigger pack of hypocrites if you tried.

I'm curious as to who, exactly, has been intolerant of her comments in this thread. I disagree with them, quite vehemently, but recognize her freedom to express her opinion.

In fact, thinking back on my own comments here, all I've said about Miss California at all is that she's dumb and that her comments weren't particularly courageous. The rest of the comments here from "the left" have been quite clear in expressing that she's entitled to her own opinions.

[Trainwreck2100]

:lmao @ bigots crying about people's intolerance towards their intolerance!


their intolerance isn't being attacked, they are.

[Trainwreck2100]

"I was ready for my question, and when I heard it from (Perez), I knew at that moment after I'd answered the question, I knew that I was not going to win because of my answer,""

She didn't want to pander to the local status quo which is pretty much pageant 101 so she deserved and knew that she would lose.

[PixelPusher]

lol "opposite marriage"

[ElNono]

I wonder if Carrie is the AntiChrist... Says the right things to appease the religious people and gain their confidence. That's how it all starts. :stirpot:

[sabar]

Why is the government saying who can marry whom?
Maybe they should say who can date who, who can kiss who, and so forth.

The ONLY thing the government should do is track relationships for legal purposes when it comes to health care, insurance, child custody etc. They should have NO say in why these relationships occur unless they are illegal as a product of another law, aka, 30 year olds can't marry 8 year olds as it implies sexual relations between an adult and minor.

[Winehole23]

You seem like a reasonable person, sabar.

Will you please start posting in here more?

[Heath Ledger]

I hope Perez Hilton chokes on a cock sandwich.

[Jacob1983]

I know want to why a beauty pageant became a political debate. You know the MISS USA pageant is desperate when they have a gay internet blogger as one of the judges. Why is an internet blogger judging a beauty pageant? I do think that Perez Hilton is a hypocrite and somewhat of a bigot. He's a bigot toward people that are against gay marriage. He just can't let people be entitled to their opinions. They can only be entitled to their opinions if they are the same as his.

[JoeChalupa]

I know want to why a beauty pageant became a political debate. You know the MISS USA pageant is desperate when they have a gay internet blogger as one of the judges. Why is an internet blogger judging a beauty pageant? I do think that Perez Hilton is a hypocrite and somewhat of a bigot. He's a bigot toward people that are against gay marriage. He just can't let people be entitled to their opinions. They can only be entitled to their opinions if they are the same as his.

That describes many posters in this forum and a few talk show hosts I know.

[Winehole23]

I do think that Perez Hilton is a hypocrite and somewhat of a bigot. He's a bigot toward people that are against gay marriage. He just can't let people be entitled to their opinions. They can only be entitled to their opinions if they are the same as his.So you're entitled to your own intolerance, but you can't abide his. Yeah.

Everybody got to have their say. No one was prevented from having it. Ms. Prejean expressed her opinion, and Mr. Hilton reacted badly to it. C'est la guerre.

Perez Hilton isn't my boss -- is he yours, Jacob? If he isn't, why get all hung up on his opinion? Perez Hilton is neither powerful nor particularly influential in public affairs. Why pretend that he is?

The notion that Spurstalk posters take marching orders from Perez Hilton is a little bit laughable, and finds very little support in the actual thread IMO.

[Jacob1983]

Hold the phone, I never said I was against gay marriage. If you're gay and want to get married, I'm not gonna stop you. However, don't expect me to throw a parade because you're gay and can get married. Personally, I think each state should be allowed to determine who can get married.

Perez Hilton is not powerful but he was powerful on Sunday night.

[ChumpDumper]

Perez Hilton is not powerful but he was powerful on Sunday night.It's true -- he made Prejan a much bigger name than if she had only won the Miss USA pageant.

She owes Perez the rest of her career.

[Heath Ledger]

I hope Perez Hilton chokes on a cock sandwich.

[velik_m]

Personally, I think each state should be allowed to determine who can get married.

Yeah, screw personal freedoms! We need more government control!

[LnGrrrR]

+1

+2

[ratm1221]

I'm sure this question has come up before, but what gives the right to Christians to claim marriage like they are the ones that made it up or something? Marriage pre-dates your religion, or even history for that matter. So what gives you the right to decide how marriage is defined?

[Oh, Gee!!]

Perez Hilton = Jeanene Garafolo = Keith Olberman...etc...they're all the same.

That's my point.


your point is stupid

[George Gervin's Afro]

Carrie is a real winner, in my opinion- regardless of the outcome of the pageant.

I think it is awesome the way Carrie stood up for her beliefs and how she is handling the very public repercussions of her courageous choice.

I thought it was an inappropriate question. I hope that is not the reason why she lost.

On a side note, I'd do her.

[JoeChalupa]

I thought it was an inappropriate question. I hope that is not the reason why she lost.

On a side note, I'd do her.

http://www.3click.tv/mp4//Seinfeld/season6/metadata/79169-304146.jpg

KRAMER: Let's try a few more questions, alright? If you were Miss America, and the U.S. was on the brink of a nuclear war, and the only way the conflict could be averted was if you agreed to sleep with the enemy's leader, what would you do?

KAREN: Kramer, are these questions really that important...?

KRAMER: Yes, they're important! If you stumble, if you hesitate, you can kiss the crown goodbye. Now if I've told you once, I've told you a thousand times - poise counts! It's just as important as the others. Swimsuit! Evening wear! Talent! POISE!

[MaNuMaNiAc]

I know want to why a beauty pageant became a political debate. You know the MISS USA pageant is desperate when they have a gay internet blogger as one of the judges. Why is an internet blogger judging a beauty pageant? I do think that Perez Hilton is a hypocrite and somewhat of a bigot. He's a bigot toward people that are against gay marriage. He just can't let people be entitled to their opinions. They can only be entitled to their opinions if they are the same as his.

oh that's rich! :lol

People outraged by the anti-gay marriage "movement" aren't the ones trying to impose their own bullshit moral standards on other people. Who the fuck are you to say they can't get married, and THEN be pissed that they are outraged that you think you should have any fucking say on their lives.

You can't be a bigot for being intolerant of intolerance! That's like saying someone is a bigot because they can stand anti-semitism...

some people just don't have a clue :rolleyes

[Trainwreck2100]

You can't be a bigot for being intolerant of intolerance! That's like saying someone is a bigot because they can stand anti-semitism...



You're hating someone for their belief system. How is that not bigotry. There's a reason MLK and Ghandi worked when most others failed, because they didn't practice the hate that you do.

[Extra Stout]

You're hating someone for their belief system. How is that not bigotry. There's a reason MLK and Ghandi worked when most others failed, because they didn't practice the hate that you do.
MLK and Gandhi were able to persuade people that the principles of their own belief system required them to change their specific position on an issue.

The tack taken in the current debate is simply to shout people down as bigots.

The reason for this becomes clear if one reads much left-wing intelligentsia material. Gay marriage in those circles is only secondarily about gay rights. It is primarily a stepping stone in overturning patriarchy, so appealing to patriarchial belief systems is counterproductive.

[baseline bum]

You're hating someone for their belief system. How is that not bigotry. There's a reason MLK and Ghandi worked when most others failed, because they didn't practice the hate that you do.

Ah, the old 'you must tiptoe around religion' argument. As long as someone can find some way to hide behind religion, everyone has to respect his view no matter how ridiculous.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

You're hating someone for their belief system. How is that not bigotry. There's a reason MLK and Ghandi worked when most others failed, because they didn't practice the hate that you do.

I don't hate what they believe, I hate that they think they can dictate what others should do because of what they believe. Believe anything you want, just don't try and impose it on others.

Plus MLK and Ghandi's approach was about non-violence, not tolerance. They did not tolerate racists, they simply chose not to be violent towards them. Now, show me where exactly did I condone violence in my posts??

[Marcus Bryant]

MLK and Gandhi were able to persuade people that the principles of their own belief system required them to change their specific position on an issue.

The tack taken in the current debate is simply to shout people down as bigots.

The reason for this becomes clear if one reads much left-wing intelligentsia material. Gay marriage in those circles is only secondarily about gay rights. It is primarily a stepping stone in overturning patriarchy, so appealing to patriarchial belief systems is counterproductive.

Right. Which is why the idea that the state shouldn't be involved in regulating marriage at all is not attractive to either side.

[Trainwreck2100]

I don't hate what they believe, I hate that they think they can dictate what others should do because of what they believe. Believe anything you want, just don't try and impose it on others.

Plus MLK and Ghandi's approach was about non-violence, not tolerance. They did not tolerate racists, they simply chose not to be violent towards them. Now, show me where exactly did I condone violence in my posts??

i didn't say you hate what they believe i said you hate them

[Trainwreck2100]

Ah, the old 'you must tiptoe around religion' argument. As long as someone can find some way to hide behind religion, everyone has to respect his view no matter how ridiculous.

So its not ok to tiptoe around religion. but it is ok to tiptoe around "gay marriage?"

[baseline bum]

So its not ok to tiptoe around religion. but it is ok to tiptoe around "gay marriage?"

How is requiring the equal rights demanded by the constitution tiptoeing around it?

[Trainwreck2100]

How is requiring the equal rights demanded by the constitution tiptoeing around it?

Well that went over your head

[Winehole23]

The reason for this becomes clear if one reads much left-wing intelligentsia material. Gay marriage in those circles is only secondarily about gay rights. It is primarily a stepping stone in overturning patriarchy, so appealing to patriarchial belief systems is counterproductive.Are left-wingers really so doctrinaire and hide-bound? I wonder. This strikes me as a bit ivory tower, and a bit dated.

Who knows? Maybe I am the one who's dated. Maybe I took my finger off the pulse when I dropped out of college.

I think left-wingers have compassion for their gay friends, think of them as equals and, and want them to actually be equal. Outside the academy I see little evidence there is any great public animus against "patriarchal belief systems", unless by patriarchy you mean religion. I don't see any necessary ideological linkage b/w support for gay marriage and feminist doxa, but instead a more general concern for fairness. Giving allegiance to pomo/feminist theory first place puts the cart before the horse IMO. Left-wingers judge first and give reasons later like everybody else.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

i didn't say you hate what they believe i said you hate them

Except I don't. I hate what they are trying to do, there's a difference.

[baseline bum]

Well that went over your head

Blow me, douchebag.

[Trainwreck2100]

Blow me, douchebag.

okay but we can't get married so we'll just have to leave it at that

[Trainwreck2100]

Except I don't. I hate what they are trying to do, there's a difference.

so you like bigots?

[CuckingFunt]

Outside the academy I see little evidence there is any great public animus against "patriarchal belief systems", unless by patriarchy you mean religion. I don't see any necessary ideological linkage b/w support for gay marriage and feminist doxa, but instead a more general concern for fairness.

They are actually quite strongly linked under current feminist theories. Unlike the "typical" me-first radical theories of first- and second-wave feminism, modern feminist thought favors an approach of intersectionality in which all systems of inequality, power, privilege, and oppression (including among them patriarchy and capitalism) are seen as fundamentally linked in such a way that it is impossible to ever fully address/solve the issues faced by women without also addressing/solving issues of race, class, dis/ability, sexuality, etc.

[BacktoBasics]

I'm sure this question has come up before, but what gives the right to Christians to claim marriage like they are the ones that made it up or something? Marriage pre-dates your religion, or even history for that matter. So what gives you the right to decide how marriage is defined?

[MaNuMaNiAc]

so you like bigots?

no, I don't like bigotry... do you?

[Winehole23]

They are actually quite strongly linked under current feminist theories.Hence my qualifier, outside the academy.

Guess I'm out of the academy and out of step.

[Trainwreck2100]

no, I don't like bigotry... do you?

so do you hate bigots?

[MaNuMaNiAc]

so do you hate bigots?

not particularly no. I think they are pathetic. I do hate when they act on their bigotry though.

[Extra Stout]

Ah, people are talking past one another again.

In the vast majority of human cultures, there has been an impulse for members of the opposite sex to enter into long-term cohabitation and cooperate in the raising of children they bear. There are exceptions, but these prove the rule.

In the majority of these cultures, technology is limited, and the greater brute strength of the male tends to put him in a position of power.

The means by which the couple makes a living varies. Usually the new wife is added to the husband's family's household; sometimes, vice versa. Sometimes a new family unit is formed, and a deposit is put up front for the support of the new family unit. If the husband's family puts it up; sometimes the wife's family puts it up. Wealthy men might be able to afford more than one spouse; likewise, powerful men might have multiple families offering them daughters to be wives.

These relationships are organic and amorphous at the edges. However, as people submit to government over their lives for the general welfare, this government will have some say about the conduct of these relationships. A man cannot just take a woman and use her without providing for her welfare in a society where women don't have rights for themselves. In a society where clan distinctions matter, an illegitimate child conceived outside the clan may not get full inheritance rights. If there are disputes about dowries or bridewealth or ritual purity or what have you, the people may submit to the judgment of their government in resolving the disputes.

Now let's say these societies lead a Hobbesian existence where rearing a child to adulthood is a challenging effort that fails as often as it succeeds. I would expect in such societies there to be a fair amount of interest in involving the government, so far as it exists in its embryonic form, to regulate family affairs in order to ensure that there is enough fruitful progeny to carry on the society, contemporary libertarian arguments notwithstanding.

Now let's take one, rather unremarkable patriarchal Afro-Semitic society in the Levant. It indeed has an ancient law code regulating family affairs. Most men have one wife; a few remarkably wealthy men have several. As these people are conquered by successive cultures, their social mores are changed. As a particularly advanced civilization spreads through Asia, their philosophy and way of life significantly alters this still-cohesive society's way of thinking, such that monogamy is considered normative even for the wealthy.

Another, even more powerful society takes hold of the area. Meanwhile, within this ancient Afro-Semitic society's religion a splinter group emerges that believes God himself took human form, was killed, and then rose from the dead. This splinter group maintains many of the ethical and social norms of the larger group, with key exceptions. After a few centuries, this splinter group has spread to include many people outside the original ethnic community. The ethical and social norms of the original ethnic group take on a dogmatic, religious significance.

The powerful society that conquered the Levant holds a vast empire for centuries. As this empire starts to decline due to decadence and incursion of other tribes, its leader decides that it must shift its political and economic focus further east. He finds a strategic location for a new capital on a natural harbor lying along a narrow strait which made up a fulcrum of trade routes stretching thousands of miles. The emperor's mother, meanwhile, starts following this new religion mentioned above. The area where the new capital is planned to go happens to be a hotbed of this religion. The empire had been persecuting it off and on, but now it gets fully legitimized and gains access to the resources of the empire for its own spread.

The religion explodes in popularity all over the empire, even outside it to the invading tribes which were weakening parts of it. The social and ethical mores of that little Afro-Semitic tribe, modified through its interaction with conquering societies, survive largely intact and are spread over an entire continent.

The descendants of the invading tribes a millenium later are forced by circumstances to take to the seas and end up discovering other lands. This discovery and subsequent exploitation make them vastly more powerful than even that ancient society whose culture still informs their own.

In this period, the religion adopted a millenium earlier still held vast sway, and social and ethical norms inherited from that Levantine society way back when were still matters of religious doctrine. This included views of marriage -- a patriarchal, heterosexual, monogamous relationship held to represent the relationship between God and his people. The government's role could hardly be separated from that of the religious authorities in regulating it.

Some of these descendants end up displacing the native population over a wide swath of one of the discovered continents. Maybe of these people arrived because their ancestors had to flee from persecution, as their views of the prevailing religion differed from those of the religious-political power nexus. They were influenced by changing philosophical views back on the old continent that questioned the role of religion. Ultimately, these people broke free from colonial power and formed a nation where state power and religious power were kept separate. Nevertheless, most of them still followed the religion, and its social and ethical norms regarding marriage were still considered authoritative.

Over time, a lot of people stopped following that religion in anything but a perfunctory sense. Many repudiated it entirely. Its social and ethical norms no longer were considered authoritative for the whole society. Meanwhile, the understanding of marriage changed. No longer were legal family bonds absolutely necessary to keep women and children from abandonment -- women could earn a living in a technological society where brute strength was not the most important skill. The state instituted social programs where in the event a father left the household, the state could provide for the children though tax revenues, or could compel the father to pay for their provision outside the household. Marriage stopped being an obligation for good social order and began being a contract recognized by the state which accorded certain privileges.

With this new understanding of marriage, people in other kinds of relationships besides that traditionally regarded as marriage began lobbying to receive the same kinds of privileges for their own relationships. The constitution of their own government called for equal protection under the law, and extended that requirement to all its provincial subsidiaries. These people also sought to take hold of some of the echo of sanctity within the cultural residue of the society's old ideas of marriage in order to counteract the marginalization, ostracism, and persecution they experience because of their preference in sexual relationships.

Meanwhile, others lament the loss of adherence to the old religion and the concomitant drift in social and ethical norms, and seek to use state power to enforce notions which no longer are authoritative within the culture.

Another group is allied with the marginalized people seeking to acquire the same privileges for its own relationships, but this group has a bigger agenda. It sees the old cultural residue of the society as an impediment to its further progress. Marriage cannot be extricated from patriarchal oppression and must eventually be abolished. The culture must shift again so that monogamous, long-term heterosexual relationships are no longer normative. The new ideal would be relationships of indeterminate period between an indeterminate number of parties of indeterminate identity where all individuals have total freedom to enter and exit as they please. Familial affinity cannot be separated from ethnic preference and must be abolished. The culture must shift again so that people do not feel any extra bond to those of blood relation but choose "families" based solely upon mutual affinity. All relationships must be based solely on feelings of companionship and emotional love. While they recognize this would result in a drastic drop in fertility, they see this as a feature, not a bug, in a world where population will peak at nine billion this century and where the society in which they live consumes a vastly disproportionate amount of resources.

Still others think that the implementation of that last group's agenda will result not in a utopia of freethinking individuals, but rather a total collapse back into a Hobbesian society, because freed from the basic cultural obligations of family, people will revert to radical selfishness until the infrastructures and safety nets brought about by the collaboration of communities past are eroded to destruction.

[Winehole23]

Still others think that the implementation of that last group's agenda will result not in a utopia of freethinking individuals, but rather a total collapse back into a Hobbesian society, because freed from the basic cultural obligations of family, people will revert to radical selfishness until the infrastructures and safety nets brought about by the collaboration of communities past are eroded to destruction.This process was already well underway before gay liberation. If gay liberation fancies itself the vanguard of the destruction of the social nomos, it really isn't. It's more like the cherry on top of the sundae.

IMO the amoral market (and its tacit, anything goes libertarianism) is the universal solvent of traditional culture, and ideology is just a lagging indicator of the damage done.

[angel_luv]

Is his homosexuality and status as HIV/AIDS positive the only source of his shame? Because, if so, that would seem to send a pretty clear message about how the attitudes you hold make people with that lifestyle feel in this country.


No. It is a lot more complicated than just the disease, as such situations usually are.
I hope you will forgive that I don't expound further as this is a sensitive subject.

[lefty]

Fucked Perez Hilton; biased judge :tu

Bravo Carrie :tu (for speaking your honest opinion; I'm not anti-gay or anything)
I'm a man; would you marry me?

[Extra Stout]

This process was already well underway before gay liberation. If gay liberation fancies itself the vanguard of the destruction of the social nomos, it really isn't. It's more like the cherry on top of the sundae.

IMO the amoral market (and its tacit, anything goes libertarianism) is the universal solvent of traditional culture, and ideology is just a lagging indicator of the damage done.
Yes, the process was underway before gay liberation. No, I don't think gay liberation fancies itself as the great promulgator of social antinomianism. I think the people who are ohhhhhh so smart in the academy fancy themselves that. I don't think gay liberation is the cherry on top, either. The heterosexuality and monogamy of traditional marriage in the academic view are inextricable from its patriarchy, so polyamory is next in line. Gay liberation is maybe the colorful sprinkles on top.

I think after the West falls, some future people will come up with another system that fixes the flaws of this one, and have a great run of 300 years before the cracks in their system break it apart too.

[Marcus Bryant]

At least someone really spoke their mind. That's become less common over time. Yes, the venue was trifling, but it's good to see someone, anyone, dare to do something other than the routine banal regurgitation of what they are expected to say. Sure, her motives may have been less than idealistic. We've become a society ever ready to ferret out cultural heresy and condemn it. Or draw a penis and ejaculate outline on it.

[YouTube]

33odacwy0y0

[Spurminator]

At least someone really spoke their mind. That's become less common over time. Yes, the venue was trifling, but it's good to see someone, anyone, dare to do something other than the routine banal regurgitation of what they are expected to say. Sure, her motives may have been less than idealistic. We've become a society ever ready to ferret out cultural heresy and condemn it. Or draw a penis and ejaculate outline on it.

I don't know. In many circles, what she said WAS a routine banal regurgitation of what she's expected to say. I know that if I was in front of a national audience and I DIDN'T say I believed marriage was between a man and a woman, I'd have some pretty uncomfortable family reunions and church lunches...

If it wasn't a publicity-obsessed douchebag with an agenda asking the question and docking her points, we never would have heard about this. If she makes the same response to the same question, but instead of Perez Hilton it's some other WGAF "celebrity," she probably wins the pageant. And so we'd have a Miss USA who took a "courageous" stand on her beliefs in the face of a rabidly PC culturewhere supposedly people can't express such beliefs, and aside from a few blog posts on gay advocacy websites nobody would care.

[JoeChalupa]

How long before she joins "Joe the Plumber" on the talking circuit? and her book comes out?

[Marcus Bryant]

I don't know. In many circles, what she said WAS a routine banal regurgitation of what she's expected to say. I know that if I was in front of a national audience and I DIDN'T say I believed marriage was between a man and a woman, I'd have some pretty uncomfortable family reunions and church lunches...



Sure. She didn't say what was expected in that venue. I don't know, I guess I'm more offended when someone tells me what they think I want to hear.

[Spurminator]

If in that venue you mean in response to Perez Hilton, I agree, but I think she toed the typical beauty pageant "God and Country" line pretty loyally.

[Marcus Bryant]

Anyone have the responses of the other contestants to that query?

[PixelPusher]

Anyone have the responses of the other contestants to that query?

Don't have the youtube link anymore, but each contestants had a different question. They were equally brilliant in their responses.

[Summers]

I believe marriage is between a man and a woman.

Just like I do not object to there being gyms which are for women only or the fact that I as a female cannot get a haircut at Sports Clips, which is a salon for men only, I feel that marriage as an institution ought to be reserved only for one man and one woman.

I don't feel that the same sexes should marry. I also do not feel that men should have mulitiple wives.

As far as legal rights for homesexuals go, I am more liberal than you might expect.

I believe as a citizen, homosexuals have the right to chose to live together, to purchase property together, to share a phone plan, visit each other in the hospital as a family member, and even to adopt kids, although I do not support the latter practice. ( I believe kids ought to be raised by a male father and a female mother.)

The bottom line is I view marriage as a privilege and one ought to be extended to adult heterosexuals only.

Angel, you and I disagree on a lot, but because we're friends, I hope you know that this is meant as intellectual prodding and not an attack.

A lot of people say they have no problem with gays having the right to have civil unions and the same rights as the rest of us, when it comes to making medical decisions, making end of life decisions, inheriting property, sharing bank accounts, etc. Doesn't that just make this argument one of semantics? Is it the word "marriage" that gays can't have? As for adoption, I have a cousin who's a social worker for CPS and he says within the foster care system, gay fostering/adoption has become a nonissue. I suppose I share his opinion that any loving adult who wants to make a commitment to a child should be allowed to do so.

I guess I also disagree that marriage is a privilege, rather than a right. Violent criminals are allowed to marry. Minors are allowed to marry. We heterosexuals are allowed to marry strangers, get married as many times as we want, have as many children as we want (in or out of marriage). I know some people mock those of us who believe this is a civil rights issue, but 60 years ago, in some states, marriage was a privilege for people marrying within their own race, and those who wanted to marry interracially were warned that their children would grow up confused and outcast.

[Jacob1983]

In order to make everyone happy, a person should be allowed to marry whomever they want. Gays and straight people shouldn't be the only ones that are allowed to get married. If we are going to talk about equal rights and making everyone happy, then there should be no limitations to marriage.

[ChumpDumper]

We're not talking about making everyone happy.

[Jacob1983]

So people that have incestuous relationships and nonmonogamous relationships are basically shit out of luck if they want to get married.

[ChumpDumper]

Yep.

The civil union option seems workable, but honestly I haven't given it a lot of thought.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I'm curious as to who, exactly, has been intolerant of her comments in this thread. I disagree with them, quite vehemently, but recognize her freedom to express her opinion.

In fact, thinking back on my own comments here, all I've said about Miss California at all is that she's dumb and that her comments weren't particularly courageous. The rest of the comments here from "the left" have been quite clear in expressing that she's entitled to her own opinions.

Didn't really bother to read the whole thing. This was more about people like Perez who called her a bitch because of what she said, Garafolo or whatever her name is saying anyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist, etc.

We used to have some great discussions on this board but it's turned into a microcosm of our country over the last 6-10 months - you're pretty much way on the left or way on the right and there's little in between.

I'm sure some knucklehead will call me a hypocrite for saying that, and fine - I'm guilty of it too, but what can I say - people like Obama, Reid, and Pelosi have pushed me way more to the right than I'd like to admit.

But back to this thread, again, I just think it's lame as crap when people like Perez preach tolerance, acceptance, etc. but your opinion only matters if you agree with them. If you disagree, you're a bigot/bitch/racist/whatever.

Gimme a break.

[Dim Tuncan]

Good for her. Nice to see a well adjusted, Conservative, normal and heterosexual (the latter two are redundant, I know) woman stand up to the queer choicers and their liberal enablers.

[Jacob1983]

So should incestuous and nonmonogamous relationships be allowed to have civil unions?

[ChumpDumper]

Nah. I'm fine with drawing the line at monogamous gays.

[Marcus Bryant]

Incestuous? No. The potential health problems of offspring warrants the restriction, not to mention that one generation of imbeciles is enough.

Polygamy? I don't see why not. The notion of human relationships as being between two adults is nearsighted and discriminatory. Polygamy has been practiced throughout human history and is accepted in other countries this very day. We need to broaden our horizons as a society.

[JoeChalupa]

I have no issues with what she said and Perez Hilton is the one who handled it badly. She is now the GOP's babe and Palin better step it up and get her Defense Fund moving asap.

[ploto]

I really do think that for many people it is the use of the word marriage.The fact that the word gay has to be placed in front of it to communicate what is meant, in a sense, supports the claim that it is not the proper terminology.

[coyotes_geek]

I really do think that for many people it is the use of the word marriage.The fact that the word gay has to be placed in front of it to communicate what is meant, in a sense, supports the claim that it is not the proper terminology.

I agree. I always thought the "civil union" concept was a fair compromise. I personally don't care what it's called, but I do recognize that the word "marriage" has strong religious implications to a lot of people. I know people who believe that any ceremony outside of a church is a civil union and not a marriage.

IIRC the gay marriage ban Texas passed, which included verbage about not allowing civil unions or any other terminology, made it by something like a 75-25 vote. It would be interesting to know what the results would have been if the vote was to prohibit the use of "marriage" but allow civil unions. This being Texas I'm sure it still would have passed, but by what margin?

[Winehole23]

I agree. I always thought the "civil union" concept was a fair compromise. I personally don't care what it's called, but I do recognize that the word "marriage" has strong religious implications to a lot of people. I know people who believe that any ceremony outside of a church is a civil union and not a marriage.If I recall my Wm. Maitland, it did not originally. In fact it was so hard to get people to church to do it, that Roman Catholic dogma was eager to sanctify words exchanged in private or mere promises as valid marriages. But this is a quibble. Within the more immediate historical frame, you are surely correct.


IIRC the gay marriage ban Texas passed, which included verbage about not allowing civil unions or any other terminology, made it by something like a 75-25 vote. It would be interesting to know what the results would have been if the vote was to prohibit the use of "marriage" but allow civil unions. This being Texas I'm sure it still would have passed, but by what margin?I do not share your certainty that it would, but it could be sold as legislation to ban gay marriage even though in effect it installs a back door.

I foresee religio-populist outrage over the back door privileges, but perhaps this outrage is no longer dispositive in Texas.

[Winehole23]

Sound off, Spurstalk.

Yea or nay: a bill banning gay marriage, but establishing civil unions?

Qua citizen, WH23 objects on the grounds of religious freedom and for the record inclines to Marcus Bryant's view that there is no longer any compelling state interest in marriage, and that the institution in the future might well fall under liberty of contract.

Qua believer, WH23 rues the desacralization of marriage and fears the exotic forms a more libertarian conception may take.

But WH23 votes as a citizen.

Nay to banning gay marriage. (Yea to releasing marriage from state control. I confused myself on this one)

[Bender]

Bigotry Forum.

someone should move yours to the Dumb Ass Posts Forum

[angel_luv]

Angel, you and I disagree on a lot, but because we're friends, I hope you know that this is meant as intellectual prodding and not an attack.

A lot of people say they have no problem with gays having the right to have civil unions and the same rights as the rest of us, when it comes to making medical decisions, making end of life decisions, inheriting property, sharing bank accounts, etc. Doesn't that just make this argument one of semantics? Is it the word "marriage" that gays can't have? As for adoption, I have a cousin who's a social worker for CPS and he says within the foster care system, gay fostering/adoption has become a nonissue. I suppose I share his opinion that any loving adult who wants to make a commitment to a child should be allowed to do so.

I guess I also disagree that marriage is a privilege, rather than a right. Violent criminals are allowed to marry. Minors are allowed to marry. We heterosexuals are allowed to marry strangers, get married as many times as we want, have as many children as we want (in or out of marriage). I know some people mock those of us who believe this is a civil rights issue, but 60 years ago, in some states, marriage was a privilege for people marrying within their own race, and those who wanted to marry interracially were warned that their children would grow up confused and outcast.

We are friends and I greatly like and respect you. True though that we do disagree on a few things. :)

For me marriage is a sacred thing- something I will one day enter into solemnly with my spouse before God.

I believe that God ordained marriage to be between a man and a woman and I want to protect that sanctity.

Marriage to me is not just an agreement with the state, it is also a covenant with God.

Like Carrie Prejean said, it is my goal to be Biblically accurate, not politically correct.
I have to stand up for what the Bible defines as God's model for marriage and family- that a man will marry one woman and that children should follow marriage not preceed it.

I cannot in good conscience support homosexuals marrying each other or adopting kids because I feel that is contrary to what God desires.

However, I have no interest in fighting over the more practical issues such as property ownership, insurance etc.
People who are common law are afforded certain benefits. And I think it would be hypocritical of me to deny homosexual people the rights of a common law couple.
And I am not trying to deny them those.

My point is that, for me and those who share my faith, marriage is a sacred thing.
I don't think it is fair that I be considered a bigot because I cherish marriage as something special between one man and one woman and want to see it sustained as such.


Furthermore, I feel that by insisting on redefining marriage, it is the homosexual community, who is being unreasonable.
What rights of the homosexual is not accomplished through a civil union?

[ChumpDumper]

If they have separate drinking fountains, they still have drinking fountains.

[CuckingFunt]

What rights of the homosexual is not accomplished through a civil union?

You'll find many, if you take the time to research.

I don't always agree with NOW as an organization, but they provide a pretty good (very basic) overview (http://www.now.org/issues/marriage/marriage_unions.html)of some of the differences between legally recognized marriage and civil unions.



And this isn't an issue of rights affecting "the homosexual," it is an issue of rights affecting a collection of people. An important distinction to make, and an important fact to remember.

[Oh, Gee!!]

gays should be able to marry one another because they want to, it's really that simple.

[angel_luv]

You'll find many, if you take the time to research.

I don't always agree with NOW as an organization, but they provide a pretty good (very basic) overview (http://www.now.org/issues/marriage/marriage_unions.html)of some of the differences between legally recognized marriage and civil unions.



And this isn't an issue of rights affecting "the homosexual," it is an issue of rights affecting a collection of people. An important distinction to make, and an important fact to remember.

Thanks for taking the time to post the link.

[coyotes_geek]

Sound off, Spurstalk.

Yea or nay: a bill banning gay marriage, but establishing civil unions?

Qua citizen, WH23 objects on the grounds of religious freedom and for the record inclines to Marcus Bryant's view that there is no longer any compelling state interest in marriage, and that the institution in the future might well fall under liberty of contract.

Qua believer, WH23 rues the desacralization of marriage and fears the exotic forms a more libertarian conception may take.

But WH23 votes as a citizen.

Yea.

Yea. I'd also vote Yea to just calling it gay marriage. As long as the rights are conveyed, I'm not too worried about the terminology.

[Spurminator]

Sound off, Spurstalk.

Yea or nay: a bill banning gay marriage, but establishing civil unions?

Qua citizen, WH23 objects on the grounds of religious freedom and for the record inclines to Marcus Bryant's view that there is no longer any compelling state interest in marriage, and that the institution in the future might well fall under liberty of contract.

Qua believer, WH23 rues the desacralization of marriage and fears the exotic forms a more libertarian conception may take.

But WH23 votes as a citizen.

Yea.



Agreed word for word.

[JoeChalupa]

marriage is just fine with me.

[jman3000]

Why can't we just call gay marriage, gay marriage and call hetero marriage, opposite marriage?

It makes sense to me.

[Summers]

We are friends and I greatly like and respect you. True though that we do disagree on a few things. :)

For me marriage is a sacred thing- something I will one day enter into solemnly with my spouse before God.

I believe that God ordained marriage to be between a man and a woman and I want to protect that sanctity.

Marriage to me is not just an agreement with the state, it is also a covenant with God.

Like Carrie Prejean said, it is my goal to be Biblically accurate, not politically correct.
I have to stand up for what the Bible defines as God's model for marriage and family- that a man will marry one woman and that children should follow marriage not preceed it.

I cannot in good conscience support homosexuals marrying each other or adopting kids because I feel that is contrary to what God desires.

However, I have no interest in fighting over the more practical issues such as property ownership, insurance etc.
People who are common law are afforded certain benefits. And I think it would be hypocritical of me to deny homosexual people the rights of a common law couple.
And I am not trying to deny them those.

My point is that, for me and those who share my faith, marriage is a sacred thing.
I don't think it is fair that I be considered a bigot because I cherish marriage as something special between one man and one woman and want to see it sustained as such.


Furthermore, I feel that by insisting on redefining marriage, it is the homosexual community, who is being unreasonable.
What rights of the homosexual is not accomplished through a civil union?

Good points, all, and perfectly reasonable desires for yourself. (For the record, it wasn't me who accused anyone of being a bigot.)

I don't think you really cleared up for me whether this is about the literal word "marriage". If you're in favor of any couple of consenting adults having the same rights as any other (and if the law bore that out, theortetically), then the difference between a marriage and a civil union is... whether or not you get married in a church? Is it which color paper your certificate from the courthouse would be? I'm not trying to be snarky; I honestly am trying to understand where the exact point of opposition is.

You and I have discussed religion in the past, so you know I no longer practice my faith, but I respect people who do. I think a solemn oath you take before your God is a beautiful thing. I really do, and I would never joke about such a thing (despite my title :)). But that's your religious choice. My husband and I made a sacred vow to each other about 14 years ago and it's working out pretty well so far. (We make gorgeous children!). My marriage doesn't diminish the sanctity of anyone else's marriage, does it? Many people choose to have affairs, divorce, etc. Those people don't diminish what I think is sacred about my marriage. Do you see the point I'm trying to make? You have a standard for what you want your marriage to be, but not everyone wants to get married under the same conditions, nor should they have to.

And, btw, I like and respect you as well, and I appreciate that you and I can have this conversation without making it personal.

[jman3000]

meow?

[Summers]

meow?

Me? :( No, not intentionally, if it came off that way.

[DarkReign]

I personally don't care what it's called, but I do recognize that the word "marriage" has strong religious implications to a lot of people.

In much the same way that the word "gay" holds a different connotation to those who were alive prior to 1960?

Words have meanings, but those meanings do change. Marriage will change as well, I think WH23 said it is about a generation away from being normal across the nation.

I would agree with that estimate.

[DarkReign]

Yea or nay: a bill banning gay marriage, but establishing civil unions?

Nay. I see no reason to compromise. Marriage, as a term, means one thing to me. A contract between two (or more, do not care) consenting adults.

I do not need another term to distinguish the same principal of my definition. But I concede to the majority as this is not an issue of import to me. It is a social issue and should be dealt with at the appropriate local level(s).

Besides, this is only an issue of time. Time and social change will not be stopped by the time-honored traditionalist. For better or worse, it is true nonetheless.

[Yonivore]

Nay. I see no reason to compromise. Marriage, as a term, means one thing to me. A contract between two (or more, do not care) consenting adults.

I do not need another term to distinguish the same principal of my definition. But I concede to the majority as this is not an issue of import to me. It is a social issue and should be dealt with at the appropriate local level(s).

Besides, this is only an issue of time. Time and social change will not be stopped by the time-honored traditionalist. For better or worse, it is true nonetheless.
Marriage is a religious construct established by the churches and co-opted by government. And, so long as government's idea of marriage jibed with that of the church, everything was just peachy.

There's also the matter of the ambiguity introduced into the contract law by same sex marriages. Right now, you have people pretending to be gay -- so they can enjoy the same contractual benefits of some "gay-friendly" city governments. I don't think our legal system is prepared to resolve some of these issues.

[ChumpDumper]

Marriage is a religious construct established by the churches and co-opted by government. And, so long as government's idea of marriage jibed with that of the church, everything was just peachy.

There's also the matter of the ambiguity introduced into the contract law by same sex marriages. Right now, you have people pretending to be gay -- so they can enjoy the same contractual benefits of some "gay-friendly" city governments. I don't think our legal system is prepared to resolve some of these issues.Yeah, straight people never married in order to receive some benefit or advantage from the government.

http://www.horroria.com/i/nposters/00/09/941-YC.jpg

[Extra Stout]

Marriage is a religious construct established by the churches and co-opted by government.
That is so utterly ridiculous, it leaves me convinced that you simply regurgitated a talking point you received without even thinking about it. I'm not sure which source you should be most embarrassed about ignoring:

1) copious documentary evidence of human marriage in pre-Christian and non-Christian societies
2) one of those pieces of documentary evidence being the freaking Bible
3) plain common sense

[MaNuMaNiAc]

That is so utterly ridiculous, it leaves me convinced that you simply regurgitated a talking point you received without even thinking about it. I'm not sure which source you should be most embarrassed about ignoring:

1) copious documentary evidence of human marriage in pre-Christian and non-Christian societies
2) one of those pieces of documentary evidence being the freaking Bible
3) plain common sense

Yoni doesn't give a crap about facts. He either steals his ideas or makes them up.

[angel_luv]

Me? :( No, not intentionally, if it came off that way.

Your post was well written and gracious. :)

[Jacob1983]

I don't get why the ACLU hasn't come to the defense of incestuous and nonmonogamous relationships when it comes to marriage. They should have a say in the marriage debate in my opinion. The ACLU always has gays and lesbians' backs but they never stick up for polygamists and incest enthusiasts. I mean if gays and straight people can get married then any person should be allowed to marry whomever they want. Besides, you can't control how you feel. If we have to make everyone happy and equal when it comes to marriage then there should be no rules or limitations when it comes to marriage.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

I don't get why the ACLU hasn't come to the defense of incestuous and nonmonogamous relationships when it comes to marriage. They should have a say in the marriage debate in my opinion. The ACLU always has gays and lesbians' backs but they never stick up for polygamists and incest enthusiasts. I mean if gays and straight people can get married then any person should be allowed to marry whomever they want. Besides, you can't control how you feel. If we have to make everyone happy and equal when it comes to marriage then there should be no rules or limitations when it comes to marriage.

are you really this fucking stupid??

[Winehole23]

Tell me this, Jacob 1983: what's the compelling state interest in marriage?

[Jacob1983]

You do realize I was being sarcastic right? I was trying to make fun of the fact that the ACLU loves to defend gays and lesbians' marriage rights but they could care less about polygamists and incest enthusiasts' rights.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

You do realize I was being sarcastic right? I was trying to make fun of the fact that the ACLU loves to defend gays and lesbians' marriage rights but they could care less about polygamists and incest enthusiasts' rights.

I do, and that's why I asked

[scott]

This is important.

[Ignignokt]

That is so utterly ridiculous, it leaves me convinced that you simply regurgitated a talking point you received without even thinking about it. I'm not sure which source you should be most embarrassed about ignoring:

1) copious documentary evidence of human marriage in pre-Christian and non-Christian societies
2) one of those pieces of documentary evidence being the freaking Bible
3) plain common sense

ok, were there ever societies that allowed gay marriage?

[Extra Stout]

ok, were there ever societies that allowed gay marriage?
Who cares? The point being, that if a person opposes gay marriage, yet asserts things that are patently absurd to the most casual observer, he is at best useless to his cause.