hatred, bigotry, traditional, marriage, gay, same sex, dna, ufi,Since the beginning, traditional marriage advocates have claimed that preventing gays from marrying has nothing to do with bigotry against gays. "We like the gays! They're our friends! We just don't think they should get to marry."
Bullshit.
Now that bigotry is law in Maine, the true face of traditional marriage has come out into the open. It's not pretty.
Bullshit.
Now that bigotry is law in Maine, the true face of traditional marriage has come out into the open. It's not pretty.
goinbroke of kingfield, ME
Nov 11, 2009 9:37 AM
Does anyone know where we can get window stickers that indicate that this particular business is not homosexual friendly? think of it as an anti-rainbow flag. It's about time we "came out" and let the homosexuals from away know how Mainers feel about seeing their sick side show act in our cities and towns.
See above, goinbroke. We did that for many years in this country, to blacks, hispanics, and the irish to name a few. It's something we used to be ashamed of. We still should be ashamed.
Chinook of portland, ME
Nov 8, 2009 9:41 PM
goinbroke of kingfield, ME Nov 8, 2009 8:51 PM
Bob, ... ...Also the next time you are in a business or a resturant and are waited on by some flaming gay guy or lesbian, ask for another server. Simple enough as the customer has the right to be "uncomfortable" as they say. Nothing personal just go away. Mainers can vote with their pocketbook and the homosexuals will get the message and leave. This happens all the time in San Francisco.----------
(What does a "flaming lesbian" look like? I'm unable to picture that.) So, people in San Francisco leave restaurants when the waiter is gay? All the time? Nobody eats out in San Fran, I guess. Also, if you ask for another server in that situation, I sincerely hope the cook wipes his ass with your food, because spitting in your food doesn't quite seem enough.
I very much fear that gays in Maine will soon be reaping what people like the DNA, UFI, the Catholic Church, the Mormons, et al. have sown: hatred. The bigots have won, and now they feel free to put up "No Gays Allowed" posters and refuse to interact with them in public. We can all guess what happens next, and I will be holding each and every one of you bigots personally responsible.
UPDATE: Are you missing valuable opportunities to express your bigotry while barbecuing, walking your dog or just breathing? Then buy one of these lovely MAN + WOMAN ONLY tshirts, aprons or doggy shirts!
Somebody keep me away from the internet before I do myself harm.
So you dug up quotations by a few bigoted people. Brava! That has nothing to do with the majority of people who do not agree with changing the definition of marriage.
ReplyDeleteThe people that you quote mean and ignorant. One can hope that they change their bad thinking. However, you are wrong to castigate an entire group (those who do not want to change what "marriage" means) because you found two individuals who are hateful.
One thing is certain. Those people are not Christians, whatever they might call themselves. No Christian in right standing with God could treat people the way that these folks advocate. They seem more to me like the garden-variety heterosexual who has a visceral reaction against homsexual people that is irrational. They wrongly choose not to override that reaction with a bit of reason and compassion.
Hey Renny, I've been looking for someone who can explain to me something, and you seem like just the guy. How do you unbigots weasel around the embarassing fact that the traditional, biblical definition of marriage has been "one man and as many women as possible, probably underage"?
ReplyDeleteRenny, I want you to type "No True Scotsman" into google. Read, then repeat as many times as necessary.
ReplyDeleteMAN+WOMAN ONLY? That pictogram looks like "public toilet" to me
ReplyDeleteLOL!!!one!!!
ReplyDeleteIf I ever see anyone wearing that symbol, I'll be sure to ask them exactly which pocket they're expecting me to pee in.
Traditional marriage advocates, religiously motivated or not, are bigots. Marriage is a secular institution conferred by society on consenting couples who are willing to assume certain legal obligations in return for receiving certain legal rights. It's that simple. If you can give me even one good reason for excluding same sex couples from the secular institution of marriage, I would love to know what it is.
ReplyDelete(What does a "flaming lesbian" look like? I'm unable to picture that.)
ReplyDelete- - - - -
Tune in to MSNBC at about 9 pm EST. There's a very handsome lady who can help your stunted imagination.
How do you unbigots weasel around the embarassing fact that the traditional, biblical definition of marriage has been "one man and as many women as possible, probably underage"?
ReplyDelete- - - - - - - -
Hey, Uzza, how do you get around the embarassing fact that in the very beginning only one woman was created for Adam? One man, one woman came first, you dope.
Hey, Uzza, how do you get around the embarassing fact that in the very beginning only one woman was created for Adam? One man, one woman came first, you dope.
ReplyDeleteFar be it from me to point this out, especially since your comments prove you'll not actually listen, but anyone who is willing to take the Biblical creation story as literal truth really doesn't get to claim that their opponent is a dope. Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden did not exist. Period. End of story.
To say anything else is to reveal a complete ignorance of science. And history. And logical reasoning. And probably some other things, too.
If you can give me even one good reason for excluding same sex couples from the secular institution of marriage, I would love to know what it is.
ReplyDelete- - - - - - - -
Because your messiah, Obama, is against it.
Because your messiah, Obama, is against it.
ReplyDeleteYou know, the only people I've run in to who claim that Obama is the left's messiah are the jackass wingnut commentators. Obviously you haven't been paying attention to anything outside of the FOX News echo chamber, but the left has been pretty damn disappointed with much of the Obama Administration so far.
But, of course, if you knew that or were able to admit that you knew it you'd have to come up with some sort of actual talking point. And that requires thinking, which we already know you can't do. So, hey, best of luck with all that. Why don't you go hang out at the kids' table. Y'know, Red State or something...
Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden did not exist. Period. End of story.
ReplyDelete- - - - -
Oh, were you there?
Why don't you redirect your History degree pomposity towards Uzza, who decided to cite from the Bible first.
...the left has been pretty damn disappointed with much of the Obama Administration so far
ReplyDelete- - - - - - - -
It takes courage to admit that you were wrong...but many people still need more convincing. What else can we do, Geds, to get through to the rest of your friends?
Why don't you redirect your History degree pomposity towards Uzza, who decided to cite from the Bible first.
ReplyDeleteWell, for starters, I do have an actual history degree. But we don't capitalize it like that, since it's not a proper noun, nor is it an official title. I'm also a member of the Phi Alpha Theta National History Honors Society, which we do capitalize, since it is actually the title of an organization. And the reason I'm not directing my "pomposity" at Uzza is because Uzza is correct. The Bible shows many, many varieties of marriage, most of which are plural, many of which are between older men and what we would consider underage girls in modern society.
Now, the folks who want to weasel out of this often do so by pointing out that part where Paul said that a man was to have one wife. But these are the same people who pick and choose whatever scripture they want, so they decide to take Jesus's words that "Whoever is not for us is against us," over his similar, but wildly different, admonishment that, "Whoever is not against us is for us." They also believe that the Levitical injunctions against, say, eating shellfish or meat mixed with dairy or pork or having clothing with two types of fabric or not trimming a man's beard are null and void, but the rules against hating gay people are not. They also regularly avoid commands to care for the alien in their midst in order to support anti-immigration policy and point out that their swarthy-skinned neighbor looks a lot like one o' them terrorists. Not that I'm saying that you, specifically, are a racist, Anonimouss, just that it happens and it helps to prove the selective reading many people are willing to put to their so-called infallible text.
And, no, I wasn't in the Garden of Eden. There are many things that would have had to happen for that story to be true and they simply didn't. We have plenty of paleontological evidence to show that Homo sapiens evolved some 200,000 years ago and archaeological evidence that the first civilizations started popping up some 10-11,000 years ago in the Middle East, northern Africa, and the Indus River valley. This makes the Biblical account of the Garden of Eden well nigh impossible.
Furthermore, I'm sure you believe that the Jesus story was real. Tell me, were you there for it?
What else can we do, Geds, to get through to the rest of your friends?
ReplyDeleteYou're a complete and utter dipshit, dude. Seriously, watch the Daily Show some time. You'll see plenty of Obama bashing.
The reason I gave Mr. Atheist Missionary Position for being against gay marriage is because Obama is against it. That should be enough for him. Period. End of story.
ReplyDeleteanonimuss said:
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you redirect your History degree pomposity towards Uzza, who decided to cite from the Bible first.
geds said:
Well, for starters, I do have an actual history degree.
HAHA- calling somebody out fail!
I'm also a member of the Phi Alpha Theta National History Honors Society
ReplyDelete- - - - - - -
Oh, your boyfriend must be proud. They have have nice sweaters, don't they?
HAHA- calling somebody out fail!
ReplyDelete- - - - -
Ha ha , I read his profile first. That's how I knew...epic failure, Personal Failure!!!!
Seriously, watch the Daily Show some time
ReplyDelete- - - -
Oxymoron, moron.
Oh, your boyfriend must be proud. They have have nice sweaters, don't they?
ReplyDeleteOh, I get it. You're still in junior high. You don't actually have anything to say, so you think that if you imply that I'm a homosexual you'll win the argument because you don't actually have anything else to say.
Because now I'm supposed to be all, "Hey, I'm not gay! Gays are all icky and stuff!" Then everything gets derailed because I lose the original thread of the argument because of your ad hominem attack against my heterosexuality.
Well, first off, I'm not gay. Second, I don't take, "Dood, U R so gay!" as an insult. Third, you're an uneducated, bigoted jackass.
Oh, and fourth, you still don't know jack about history. You probably know significantly less about your own holy book than I do, too.
Did I mention that I was an evangelical Christian for the first 25 years of my life? Did I mention I was accepted at and offered scholarships from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School? Did I mention that by then I knew that what the Bible says and what the people I went to church with claimed the Bible says are wildly divergent, so I decided to be done with the whole religion thing?
Begone, troll. The only thing you can do from here on out is show your bigoted ignorance for this tiny corner of the internet to see. And like all bigoted ignorance, it's neither true, nor noble, nor right, nor pleasing, nor lovely, nor admirable. But you choose to think on such things.
Your Jesus would probably be disappointed in you. Y'know, if he actually existed and wasn't just a conglomeration of the stitched together hopes and dreams of a messiah-crazed culture...
Seriously, watch the Daily Show some time
ReplyDelete- - - -
Oxymoron, moron.
You might want to crack a dictionary there, sparky. There is absolutely nothing oxymoronic about saying, "Go watch this thing that happens on TV some time." Here, I'll help:
Main Entry: ox·y·mo·ron
Pronunciation: \ˌäk-sē-ˈmȯr-ˌän\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural ox·y·mo·rons also ox·y·mo·ra \-ˈmȯr-ə\
Etymology: Late Greek oxymōron, from neuter of oxymōros pointedly foolish, from Greek oxys sharp, keen + mōros foolish
Date: 1657
: a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (as cruel kindness); broadly : something (as a concept) that is made up of contradictory or incongruous elements
— ox·y·mo·ron·ic \-mə-ˈrä-nik, -mȯ-\ adjective
— ox·y·mo·ron·i·cal·ly \-ni-k(ə-)lē\ adverb
So please, tell me how that's an oxymoron...
Applying the trollbegone wand . . . now.
ReplyDeleteNope, turns out I can't selectively ban, other than to kick out actual anonymous commentors.
ReplyDeleteOh, well, ignore the troll. He has school tomorrow anyway.
Oh, well, ignore the troll. He has school tomorrow anyway.
ReplyDeleteYeah. Someday he will have a low paying entry level clerical job of some sort that allows him to sit in front of the computer all day, though. Or he'll be unemployed and living in his mother's basement. Then we'll be sorry.
Anonymass, I don't know if you noticed, but it was pointed out to you that marriage in the Bible doesn't fit the "Biblical definition of marriage." Given that, pls. go away until you've educated yourself.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI can't selectively ban you Anonimuss, but I can go through and delete your obnoxious comments.
ReplyDeleteBuh-bye.
Anonymass, given that the Biblical definition of marriage is between a man and any number whom he keeps as property, and the "Biblical definition of marriage" is between one man and one woman, the least you could do is educate yourself about the Bible. Not to mention the Establishment Clause.
ReplyDelete*that should read "any number of women"
ReplyDeleteHoly shit! Those shirts. No Gays Allowed!11!!11
ReplyDeleteAlso, somehow I doubt that Bob and company in Maine would mind if flaming lesbian Portia de Rossi was their server at a restaurant.
Renaissance Guy how is it not bigotry to say you don't think gay people should have the same rights you do?
ReplyDeleteIf you were reasonable and compassionate you wouldn't be against gay marriage.
why do people *always* forget Lilith?
ReplyDeleteya know, Adam's first "wife"?!
and why do bigoted people ALWAYS insist that their bigotry isn't bigotry? that "all they want is to not have to deal with X type of people"? the very DEFINITION of bigoty! bigotry is "stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own".
refusing to accept a waiter/ress because s/he is gay IS BIGOTRY. period.
wanting to prevent people from marrying IS BIGOTRY. period.