It’s pretty tough to find an unbiased source on this issue–it’s a pretty polarized issue. Even the newpapers and news sources have been accused of bias in some instances. But like I said to faithfool, if you doubt them, then click on their sources or find one from the opposite side that is saying something opposed.
Sorry for the triple post, but these came in separately.
You didn’t see my next question. How about newspapers and news articles? Do you believe them? Why?
No, it’s not the same thing, in that all citizens have the same number of votes (one), but each citizen’s *ability *to donate is different.
It is perfectly reasonable to require a person who wishes to have a *disproportionate *effect on public policy to do so publicly.
This is all just so much whining. If they wanted to scurry about in shame and secrecy while denying others their rights, they should have restricted their politicking to the ballot box.
So, would it be OK to post on GoogleMaps the addresses of gays or pro-gay people?
and, really, PUBLIC voting…you (who are in favour) must be joking.
Unbiased is going to be nearly impossible, I agree. But some like her have made a career out of demonizing gay people. That puts you pretty far out of the credible catergory in my mind.
I don’t know what you think I have to do with anything. I just googled (as anyone could) Prop. 8 violence for faithfool who asked repeatedly for evidence that there was any. I picked the first few cites that looked like they might come under the category she was looking for.
I actually saw Michelle Malkin’s name originally when you linked to her site, so yes, I did know that you found her to be against your cause.
As for this particular piece of evidence, no one is saying to believe her. You can click on her source which links to a news report with a picture of the graffiti as evidence. I guess I should have done that instead. Who knew that there would be such a knee-jerk reaction to a source that the information contained in it would then be tainted as not credible even if it came from a local news station. . . with a picture showing the evidence.
Perhaps you’re not in the credible category either since you’re not objective about the evidence presented to you.
As I tried to say, I don’t disbelieve all things I read, but I do like something beyond “Someone did X to me.” Having been on the receiving end of such tactics (and seen what’s played out in politics of late), there needs to be more than that. At least in link about the violence at the rally, that seems easily verifiable. As to the Malkin article, I did now go back and click on the additional links (thanks for the head’s up as I didn’t see that going in) and do not see a police report. Rather just a news station. Am I missing something? And again, I’m being sincere. If there is more, than I can look for that too, but I feel the burden of proof is probably on the one’s making the claim.
Like where I talked about the tires being slashed? Since we felt the ex-wife did it, I still think (lo these almost 16 years later) it was up to us (unfair as it is) to somehow prove it. We couldn’t and thus nothing happened. I honestly don’t know what else to say that illustrates my belief in this across the board.
Well, I try to aim for as unbiased as I can. For instance, if I were going for a cite, I wouldn’t use that pro-gay blog to support me. I’d prefer to use something somewhere that didn’t have a slant one way or another. Equally, I wouldn’t quote Michelle Malkin either. In real life, for instance, here in my home state of Texas, I wouldn’t use the Dallas Observer for fear of a pro-liberal slant and the Dallas News is pretty conservative, so I’d keep that in mind before I’d use them.
I’ve never thought about it. Can I have a bit a moment to mull that over so that over? I’d like to be as consistent as I can.
Actually, it gives their name and location (as in city), not their specific physical address.
sincere apologies!! I meant to say that put HER out of the credible catergory. I honestly don’t know how I missed that.
Okay, this is first glance ‘further thought,’ so I’m not really sure if I’m giving the issue as much weight as I would upon reflection (because maybe I’m only seeing a couple of sides of the issue right now), but I say that no, voting in general should be private so that the populace is free to really vote as they feel they should with no coercion allowed. However, I feel campaign contributions should be public. Be it for gay rights or opposition, school vouchers, policeman auxilary funds, highway taxation, playgrounds or anything else. Again, if I put my name behind it, I completely do so and I don’t care who knows (or decides negatively about me as a consequence) about it.
Now I think I’m going to go play a video game. If anyone has any more questions for me, I’ll either check back in later or catch up tomorrow.
So, is that a yes? Listing all gays or pro-gay people in a city?
If you’re not going to believe a news report with a picture of the evidence, I’m not sure I can help you more than that. As for the question about the police report, I’m not sure what that is about.
From my perspective, I’m not seeing it.
Probably Freudian. 
No problem.
I did realize that it was a biased source. But then again, to look for a cite where pro-gay marriage people were going to be giving stories about how violence was thrust on Yes on 8 supporters seemed a little unreasonable to me.
And I didn’t give the example that you gave in another thread about an elderly woman getting assaulted in a protest. And I think you mentioned another incident as well?
Sure, if you actually show any relevance to the topic at hand. No one here is proposing that we post the addresses of homophobes on GoogleMaps. Hell, I don’t even know the name and address of magellan01 (who it should be noted is only a mild homophobe, lest we have another freaking thread about the definition of the word). The argument is whether it’s okay to post names, etc., of homophobes who donate to a PAC. Since it’s okay to post that info on anyone who donates to other PACs, why would this be different? Want the donors to the Independent Banker’s Association of Texas? No problem. How about donations to the NRA? Okay.
In fact, have fun going through the lists for all sorts of PACs here.
I don’t understand what listing all gays has to do with anything, as I’m assuming no one’s publishing the actual physical address of all homophobes who have NOT donated to campaigns of this sort. But I have no problem listing the city and name of the pro-gay people who give to pro-gay campaigns. Hell, my name is Kemi. Anyone need anything more than that to qualify me as practicing what I preach as a pro-gay proponent?
Well, then I don’t know what to tell you. I answered your questions as thoroughly as I could, after some bizarre diatribe you got into about Christians and every single time, I asked (and replied) in good faith, despite you calling me otherwise. I even went back and re-read what you said (paraphrased) I basically ignored, to make sure I was trying to explain myself the best that I could. Now I’m not sure what else I can do. I try to weigh all the information as possible and wonder when others seem to skim past it. Like, in light of what happened this political season, should we have taken those people at face value? Especially when time and again they were proven a hoax that was self-perpetrated but used to slander the opposition. And you know what, even then I waited to see what other evidence came in before jumping on Ashley Todd or any of the others that lied. Would you prefer otherwise?
So what exactly do you do then?
“I try to weigh all the information as possible and wonder when others seem to skim past it. Like, in light of what happened this political season, should we have taken those people at face value?”
Dear Og, the above sentence should read…
I try to weigh all the information as well as possible and wonder when others seem to skim past it. Like, in light of what happened this past political season, should we have taken those people who were shortly found out to be liars, at face value?
Also, I realize the next sentence was pretty mangled, but hopefully anyone can get the gist.
And since my video game is sucking, I need to go on to bed.
I was secretly hoping there would be one donation from somewhere like South Korea. There are plenty of christians there, after all.
What I find puzzling are the two donations from Grand Rapids and Philly. And not piddly ones either, these two donations alone represent more than half a million bucks. Yet they’re from people who aren’t subject to the proposed law and are not even in the same State, why should they be allowed to influence its politics ?
The laws as they are now are to promote transparency in politics and I have no objection to them.
The individuals vote is protected with a anonymous ballot. If a person wishes to use their wealth power or influence to convince others to vote in a similar fashion it is public information.
The anti gay crowd is more then welcome to put up maps of people who support gay causes. Nothing has prevented them from using similar tactics. Its my personal belief they refrain from doing so because it is likely to hurt their cause when people see a map with hundreds of gay rights supporters that people can look at and realize its not just some crazy left wing perverts that want this.
Fuck these prop 8 people. They’re scum. I wouldn’t do business with white supremacists, neonazis, black nationalists or prop8 people. They’re all the same kind of trash.
Now a McCain voter, they might have just had different ideas about things. That’s all right and I would still do business with them.
Prop 8 supports deserve all the harassment they get.
That scenario is perfectly acceptable. Would you expect black people to do business with a known KKK supporter?
There are rules governing who is allowed to donate, and how much they can donate. If all donations are kept anonymous, how can any campaign financing oversight be possible? When Hillary says that all the donations she’s received are on the up-and-up so don’t you worry your little head about it, you’re honestly going to just smile and accept that?
Your views on preventing who we can and can’t do business with are interesting. I never picked you as a socialist.