Imagine my surprise at opening my newspaper this morning and finding Arundel man challenges gay rights.
I have no words for this pea-brained snivelling cockrancher, other than to shut the fuck up and go slithering home on his belly (though his antics are almost comic in their absurdity).
On the other hand, I hadn’t known that Maryland had a gay rights law passed; you go away for a few years, come back, and the state did something right. Who’d have guessed?
Sigh . . . yet another person who is anti-gay in part because he was molested. I wonder what it will take for some people to realize that the VAST majority of people who molest children do not do so due to their homosexuality, and in fact that most are not gay.
He says in that article that homosexuality is a “Sad lifestyle.” I think hate is a sad life style. Why do so many people live a hate based life focusing on reducing the rights of others?
Because, Hastur-they hate themselves. There is something inside of them, that they hate so much, and in order to deal, they turn on others. It’s classic.
Maybe he never got over being molested, and he feels deep down he was at fault. I dunno-if that’s the case, I feel bad. But I don’t agree with him. I think he’s being a jerk.
He needs some counseling.
I mean, what I don’t get is the FUSS people make about gay rights-when they “don’t agree.” I mean, they have every right to think homosexuality is wrong, or whatever. BUT…why then, do they even CARE? I mean, what’s the big deal? How does it threaten them? That’s what I don’t get.
I don’t give a rat’s ASS about who’s gay, unless it was my husband or boyfriend or someone I have a crush on! Then that would suck. But some dude I meet at the bus stop? Big freaking deal. I have better things to worry about.
Note: I’m NOT saying, “Oh they flaunt it…blah blah blah…”
More like, oh well. I have more interesting things to think about, like picturing Mike Nelson in his boxer shorts…
mmmm…Mike Nelson…
oookay, I’m rambling…
Or, Mike Nelson doing naked jumping jacks. (:
We need a drooling smiley.
I agree with your points previous to the Mike Nelson one.
I am tired of being told that gay people want special rights when all the rights we are fighting for, straight people have and in many cases: take for granted.
How did we get from some bigoted fucker in a newspaper to sexual fantasies about the guy from MST3k?
There’s an upside. St. Paul’s is teaching tolerance.
I’m from that area, and lemme tell you, that’s progress.
How did we get from there to here? Because the newspaper bigot is seeking attention in order to gain power for his crusade. Refusing him this attention is good thing. Anyway, I am watching an MST3K right now. mmm… Mike Nelson.
This is by far the best quote in the article:
:eek: :eek: :eek:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
The horror!!!
Bill Murray was right. Soon there will be cats and dogs living together. Mass hysteria!
I’m picturing a gay Oliver Twist with his hands held outward towards the legislature and saying in his adorable cockney English accent “Please sir, may I have a marriage?”
“Marriage?!?” Screams the flabberghasted Senator in black, “You want a Marriage?!? You are hereby bannished from Maryland!”
[edited to fix width of post]
[Edited by Czarcasm on 06-02-2001 at 05:24 PM]
Okay, no matter how many angles I look at it from, I can’t see how not allowing homosexuals to be discriminated against in jobs and housing is a “special right”.
Because it mentions gays specifically… Or so goes the reasoning. It’s just political manuvering; Why argue against equal rights for homosexuals when you can argue against special rights for homosexuals.
They tried that exact tactic in my state, along with an even sneakier one; Recently, the OCA (Oregon Citizens Alliance, pretty much the political equivelent of a KKK-for-gays) promoted a law that was billed as making it illegal (Punishable with firing or fine) for the public education system to try to encourage students into the “homosexual lifestyle”… Or at least, that’s how THEY tried to promote it. The actual wording revolved around “condone, sanction, or promote homosexual behavior”. Condone, sanction, or promote. With promote, they can’t encourage it. But with condone and sanction? A neutral stance isn’t allowed; A teacher or counceler can not give off any indication of gay/bi behavior being “okay” (Not good, but just neutral “okay”) or they risk being fired and fined. It also meant students couldn’t be allowed to say so without the teacher/counceler opposing that (Or again, risk fine/termination). Fortunatly, everyone here in Oregon knows quite well what the OCA’s agenda is, with the acedemic system especially opposed to it, and it was shot down (Just as with every other law I can remember the OCA ever getting behind).
He has a point. They do, and should, want to be able to marry the one they love.
What he doesn’t explain is why this is a bad thing. And I don’t think he CAN explain that.
Haven’t you heard? God hates homosexuals. That’s why he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, and unleashed all those wonderful purifying STDs upon us to kill off the damned sinners. We can’t exactly let people run around having sex with someone of the same gender. That’s no way to go forth and multiply. You’re not allowed to use birth control or have abortions either, because you’ll be acting counter to God’s will. You’re not even allowed to masturbate if you are a man, because you’ll be wasting all those millions of halves of potential lives. And if you’re a woman, the only thing you should be putting inside you is your husband’s manhood. I’ll be right behind Tres Kerns. Jamming my foot in his ass.
No, no, that’s “God hates fags”. Apparently, multi-syllable words are too difficult for The Almighty.
Ah, now I see. I was going to redo my post in a more rednecklike fashion, but I became too disgusted with the whole thing. I trust you can use your imagination.
In my experience, most roads lead to sexual fantasies about Mike Nelson. What a cutie!
The guy in the link, however, is obviously a poisonous little prick. My favorite quote was the last. “This law says homosexuality and bisexuality is equal to heterosexuality, and they’re not equal. They shouldn’t be, and I think most people agree with that.”
Certainly, dude, most thinking people would agree that many (if not actually most) homosexuals are vastly superior to you, you bigoted, mean-spirited, short-sighted, candy-ass waste of skin.
So, apparently this Dreaded Homosexual Lifestyle we all must be on guard against includes taking vows of monogamous fidelity and registering for china patterns and arguing about whose turn it is to take out the garbage.
Nah. God doesn’t hate anyone. People hate. They look everywhere for justification for their hate. There’s a similar law in progress here in Delaware, and it got the same kind of knee-jerk venom from a local Episcopalian Minister. All these anti-discrimination laws do is codify Christian values such as the Golden Rule. If more ‘Christians’ actually read the Bible (and I don’t mean pick it up and zip through it, memorizing by rote! I mean study it.), we’d have a lot less hurt in the world, and wouldn’t need specific anti-discrimination laws. BTW: I’m Born Again. I find nothing wrong with the anti-discrimination laws. It doesn’t mean I approve (or disaprove) of being Gay or Lesbian, it just means I can’t see hating them for being different, nor is it any of my business. That issue is between them and their relationship with God.
Until that happy day when people start thinking clearly, we’ll need laws to protect people against idiots. Which reminds me: I need to check on the status of DE Senate Bill 99, and see how it’s doing.
I notice that this guy is wearing an American Flag necktie.
Didn’t conservatives used to frown on making clothing out of the flag?
Hmmm.
As I read the story, he (or his group) is pushing to overturn legislation by placing a question on the ballot. If, in fact, the majority of voting Marylanders favor the legislation, then his referendum will have little but annoyance value. If, on the other hand, a majority of voting Marylanders do not favor the law, it will be repealed.
Given the dearth of opposing argument, let me offer up this question: Do the voters of Maryland have a right to repeal this law?
Or is that too GDish for the Pit?