Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Austin Nimocks :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Long Count
by Austin Nimocks
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


On the whole, there shouldn’t have been a surer thing than the defeat of Proposition 8 in the California elections last month.

The activists pressing for the approval of same-sex “marriage” had all the heavyweights on their side of the issue:  major corporations, big money, the media, the Hollywood elites, the California Teachers’ Association and the university big-wigs, the governor and the attorney general, and a fair portion of the legislature.  Even the state’s high court climbed into the ring, ignoring past election results to legalize same-sex ceremonies in a controversial decision last spring.

Going into November, activists promoting the same-sex agenda were giving defenders of marriage a public pounding that even boxing legend Jack Dempsey might have found impressive.

And yet …the activists lost.  What’s more, they’re still losing—giving up round after round in the crucial post-election bout for public sympathy.  And curiously, they’re losing for the same reason the powerful Dempsey lost his heavyweight title fight in 1927.

Boxing fans had waited a year for the rematch between the brutal “Manassa Mauler” and the nimble “Fighting Marine” Gene Tunney, who had won an upset victory against the legendary, savage Dempsey not by knockout, but on points.  Now, Dempsey wanted his title back—and in no time, the rematch found Tunney lying dazed and face down on the mat.

And that might have been it…except for what became known as “the long count.”

New rules required boxers to retire to a neutral corner once their opponents were down.  Only then could a referee start the 10-second count.  But Dempsey was famous for looming over a fallen opponent, waiting to pummel him if he dared get to his knees.  And that’s what he did now, despite the ref’s warning.

Long seconds ticked by before Dempsey stormed to his corner…and by then, Tunney had regained his senses.  Staggering to his feet on the ninth second of the ten-count, he came back to beat Dempsey again.

There’s a lesson there for activists who are, if anything, less willing than Dempsey to go to a neutral corner and await the judges’ decision.  Faced with election results they don’t like—and stung by the upset victory of their opponents—they’ve come out swinging, filing no less than six lawsuits to have the election results nullified and attacking their foes outside the courtroom, too.

By doing so, they’re putting themselves and their cause down for the count in the eyes of a growing number of their fellow citizens.  As more and more stories of retaliation and vicious persecution crowd the evening news and morning paper, you can almost hear people counting off reasons to look twice at those who’ve portrayed their cause as a monument to “tolerance”:

One … blacklisting.  The activists have laid hold of a list of those who donated to Proposition 8’s defense, and they’re using those lists to intimidate, ostracize, and bully individual citizens and business owners.  Some establishments have been effectively closed down by protesters, while a number of employers have succumbed to outrageous pressure to fire workers who merely exercised their God-given rights to speak freely and support the proposition.

Two … denigrating Christians and the Bible.  In defending a recent error-ridden Newsweek cover story on “The Religious Case for Gay Marriage,” editor Jon Meacham joined many same-sex “marriage” activists in contriving to prove that, by denouncing homosexual behavior, the Bible is actually endorsing it—although the Bible is not to be trusted, anyway, he says, since “to argue that something is so because it is in the Bible is more than intellectually bankrupt—it is unserious, and unworthy of the great Judeo-Christian tradition.”  (In other words, taking the Bible seriously is a disgrace to those who take the Bible seriously.)

Three … church attacks.  Across California and around the country, Mormon temples, Catholic churches, and evangelical congregations have been picketed, mobbed, invaded, damaged, and desecrated.  In many places, church members have been verbally and physically assaulted.

Four … mock germ warfare.  Mormon leaders in Salt Lake City received threatening letters in envelopes containing an unidentified powder.

Five … attacks on the elderly.  In Palm Springs, California, protesters yanked a cross out of the hands of an elderly woman and stomped on it.  In nearby Carlsbad, a man assaulted an elderly couple who put up signs in their yard supporting Proposition 8.

Six … racist attacks and insinuations.  Blacks (who supported Proposition 8 in large numbers) have been accosted with racial slurs—not in inner-city neighborhoods, but in areas like wealthy Brentwood, where many report being physically threatened as well.  Ironically, even some blacks who picketed against the proposition were verbally assaulted by other same-sex activists.

Seven … co-opting the Civil Rights movement.  These same activists have made disingenuous efforts to paint their campaign as the philosophical parallel to what blacks endured half a century ago—as if securing public enthusiasm for legal sexual behavior was somehow the moral equivalent of winning voting rights and access to public facilities.

Eight … indoctrinating children.  Those pressing the same-sex agenda continue to focus an abundance of effort and resources on brainwashing the next generation of children other than their own.  For this, they are using health classes, assemblies, field trips, and other venues away from parents to acclimate children as young as kindergarteners to the idea that same-sex “marriage” is as morally valid and laudable as real marriage.

Nine … despising democracy.  Unwilling to accept the voters’ verdict on Proposition 8, supporters of same-sex “marriage” are determined to do an end-run on the ballot box, accomplishing their objectives by judicial fiat and strong-arm tactics of tyranny, violence, and intimidation.

Ten … silence.  The conspicuous lack of criticism these vicious assaults have received from the leaders of the homosexual political movement speaks volumes.  Obviously, these activists have few qualms about the methods or madness being displayed by those who share their political priorities.  Their profound contempt for the most basic freedoms of the very citizens whose endorsement they demand is an irremovable stain on their cause.

That’s a full count—but the count goes on, because the judges of California’s Supreme Court haven’t ruled yet.  Awaiting their decision is a growing crowd of Americans who have repeatedly shown that they will go to the mat to protect marriage between one man and one woman—only, unlike the activists who oppose them, they’ve done it with a ballot in hand instead of a fist in the air.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Austin R. Nimocks is senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund (www.telladf.org), a legal alliance employing a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Austin Nimocks' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Jackbooted Rainbow Shirted Thugs
And the honor roll grows:

-Gay Activists
-Code Pink
-Chicago Police
-Bull Connors
-Brownshirts
-Klansmen



Calling all Attornies
We need a lawyer who will help us sue every group involved in denying constitutional rights to all of us. Class action lawsuits would bankrupt monetarily these radicals who are already bankrupt intellectually.

Austin Nimocks
Makes a good living fueling and feeding off of hatred for gay people.

Peace on earth, good will toward men.

Allen
You are only about 180 degress off target. It is the intolerence of the Gay community toward acceptance of the democratic process that is the problem. Diversity was fully represented in the groups who voted for proposition 8.

Hatred of certain human behaviors

does not equate to hatred of the humans doing the behaving.

If people really hated same-sex sodomites, they would leave them enslaved to their lusts.

I do not believe
That fundamental human liberties - rightfully described as inalienable rights - can legitimately be eliminated by legislative enactment or by constitutional amendment.

I would hope that you agree.

I would suggest that the issue between you and I is whether the right of gay people to equal protection under the law in the form of marriage equality constitutes one of these inalienable rights.

Since gay people and their supporters believe that this is an inalienable right, they are not hostile to the democratic process per se, but believe that it was misused in this case.

Since Prop 8 supporters believe that gay marriage is not a matter of equal protection, they do not see themselves as enemies of the fundamental liberties on which this nation and the state of California was founded.

This issue created by the passage of prop 8 is a Constitutional one, however, and can only be resolved by the courts.

Marriage = Man + Woman
It's time "gay marriage" is relagated to the ash heap of history along with group marriage, arranged marriage, incest, polygamy, and other nut-case schemes. Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Allen,

heterosexual same-sex couples cannot marry either. The issue of changing the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples has nothing to do with sexual orientation or the practice of same-sex sodomy.

Why is it that so many supporters of same-sex sodomy cannot understand that?

Mightily Confused
Ken in OR, and Allen in MT, certainly are confused about what a right v. privilege is. There is no "right" to marry regardless gender or sexual orientation. What exists are societal mores and natural law which have given us the foundations for man-woman union in marriage for 5,000 years. As for the "equal" protection argument, it's a red-herring. Civil unions address all legal obstacles to same sex unions. As for the "tolerance" and silence on the part of gay leaders, it harkens to mind the attrocities committed by Al-Queida or the Taliban with virtually the entire Muslim world remaining mute.

SHAME, PRIDE, & HUMILITY...

Shame; where most pride movements begin. A group of people with some similar characteristic gather together and collectively state to the dominant culture or social powers "we will not be ashamed of who we are. You will not oppress us because of the color of our skin, because of our age, or because of who we love." The thing that strikes me about shame is that there is an act of will attached to them. This is not to say that one can, by simple proclamation, shake off the effects of shame. It isn't as simple as that. Part of the purpose of the pride movements, however, is to shake off the willfully placed shame on their beings, to willfully disown the shame that keeps them in bondage. The shame of being a white male, insofar as the white male has become the ubiquitous scapegoat of the late 20th century. Having felt this shame, I can identify with PRIDE.

Pride; I still have problems with this word. While I will admit to struggling with those vagaries known as self-respect and self-esteem, pride always seemed like a rather large thing to claim just for being. It's a fact of life, much like being white or being gay. To be proud of such things feels like following a path from haughtiness, to arrogance.

Humility; a word to approach with caution. Still, it is a word that needs mention when discussing pride. True humility is also a choice, even if it is a choice claimed from a weak position. That "accepting of your station in life" talk -- is nothing short of menacing. It takes principal and virtue and makes it a club to keep the powerful in power and the oppressed in check. In a world that promotes success at all costs, a world that says you can have it all, humility looks like choosing weakness. Humility is about claiming and acting upon the conviction that every human being is worthy of dignity and worth.


Good column Austin
But the problem you speak of is only one of the countless demands brought on by Liberals,Homosexuals etc.

I say give California to all the Liberals, Homo's and other perverts to do with what they want. They can make their own rules (if there are any) to live by. Fence off the entire state and don't let them out. There they could wallow in their own culture cesspool to their hearts content with no one to bother them. They should be able to create their Liberal Utopia right?

The reason Prop 8 passed
God created humankind male and female. God instituted marriage as a male-female union, and what God has thus established, no secular civil authority has the right to change without interfering with religious practice and tradition extending over many thousands of years. That is the reason Prop 8 passed.

God established that the only context which he intended for the "one flesh" experience is a male-female monogamy, and that a same-sex sexual relationship (however loving and committed it may claim to be) can never be considered as a legitimate part of traditional marriage. There are no verses in Scripture that condones same-sex sexual relationships or same-sex marriage! And to suggest otherwise is to say God is a liar!

Why is it so hard to understand.
For thousands of years (and not JUST 5000 years), mankind has practices monogamous marriage, because through all the "arrangements", only this one arrangement has resulted in the best chance of raising children to continue the society.

Societies which practice other methods do not last. Obviously, same-sex couples cannot possibly have the children necessary to continue their society--new fertility medicine notwithstanding. In today's continuous assault on the societal practice of marriage, many think it necessary to "protect" the institution of marriage, and the paltry "perks" that go with it.

So it is natural that the proposal passed. It is also natural and understandable that homosexuals are angry that their attempt to propagate their society by unnatural means has been thwarted. It is also natural and understandable that homosexuals attempt to create "rights" out of thin air; it's rather like the teenager who demands to get the exact same tattoo, piercing, haircut, etc. as every other teenager to "express their individuality". It makes as much sense as "2+2=5", but if the parents buy it, they get what they want.

What is impossible to abide is the pernicious lengths to which the homosexual community and homosexual protagonists will go to to extort the majority into legitimizing and "celebrating" their inimical life-style.

There is no societal benefit in sodomy. Some may enjoy the act (though I've never heard of anyone begging to go back to prison for the sex), but there is no inherent right to force the majority of society to denigrate the foundation of societal future by creating a "right" to marry individuals who cannot possibly by the very nature of their proclivities...produce the required offspring essential to the furtherance of the society.

How Can Christians Be So Un-Christlike
I've always thought of myself as a Christian. I read the comments above from those speaking of God and the bible..yet it's filled with hate and judgment of others. The life of Christ was about love...doing unto others...judge not that you be judged..etc. Remember? It would seem that we need to look more into our own personal lives and work at doing better individuals. Love as we are taught and let the higher power make the final call. Mind our own business and love as we are taught. I like our Christ...I'm not so sure about our Christians these days.

Allen, Gene and the rest
All of you homosexuals have decided to create your own morality without God. What arrogance.

Cultural norms that have dictated morality that have existed for thousands of years, you discard, hiss at, and then decide that the only way to settle this issue is through the courts.

Something you hope you can control the outcome of.

Well, it has been settled by the courts many times.

Since New York is now a homosexual militant target state, consider one of the rulings by a New York appellate court in 1990:

"Persons of the same sex have no constitutional right to enter into marriage with each other."

Matter of Estate Of Cooper.

There are a dozen more like it I can list. Repeating the BIG LIE over and over again that homosexual marriage is a constitutional issue is simply false.

Reply To Jerrys Comment
Jerry if you are having these thoughts about Christianity, then you were never really a Christian. Sorry buddy.....

Um...
The Dempsey analogy begins to falter when one considers that Dempsey stopped after one try. This fight is going on and on until "Dempsey" wins. Old Dempsey didn't learn; new Dempsey learns, and wins.

I reply to all reasonable posts
I am happy to have an adult discussion and debate with conservatives who have different opinions than me. But it is not worthwhile responding to posts like anderson's and arnold's and eddie's, because the persons making those posts are generally willfully ignorant and impervious to logic, and don't respect the Constitution.

Reply to Jerry in CA
Regardless of whether you've considered yourself a Christian, your beliefs definitely identify you as a non-believer. The Holy Bible tells us that homosexuality is a sin; it is not us that judge but our God, we only read Gods word and believe. A Christian cannot selectively believe or disbelieve any of Gods teachings, it is all or nothing.
As for Homosexuality, is not a race, creed, or gender; it is a deviant sexual behavior. Contrary to the homosexuals’ belief, people are not born gay; there are no medical tests that can be performed to determine whether a child is homosexual. Even if it were true that wouldn’t make it right, many children are born with deformities and illnesses which are treated if possible to correct the illness. There are many homosexuals that have gone straight proving that it is a sexual choice and it is our responsibility to ensure that they continue to have that opportunity. Christians do not “hate” gays, we don’t judge, we believe in our heavenly father’s word.

AJ=CINO
Little judgemental aren't you? Who appointed you in charge? Judge not lest ye be judged.

Jerry
Some modern Christians, in their arrogance and self-righteousness, have assumed the mantle of gatekeeper, and issue their own meaningless and mean-spirited proclamations of who is and who is not a Christian, generally on the basis that if you believe exactly as they do, you are a Christian, but if you deviate in any way, in any matter of doctrine or even style of worship great or minor, you are not a Christian.

They have no moral or religious authority to do so, and should be ignored. They are bullies and bigots and only serve to tarnish the name and image of Christ.


It's been over two days
since the Electoral College started working on the results of the election, and the members haven't announced, "Halleluia, It's the Obamessiah". Do you think they might be looking at answering the questions about Obama's citizenship before starting the vote count?

Judgement
Some defensive posters fall back on the mantle....Judge not or if a little more learned...lest you be judged. This is from the Bible so I will use that authority.
The rest of the sentence reads....for with the same judgement you judge shall you be judged. At first that is a scary warning, but still I see some positive in it. If one gives good judgement then they will receive good judgement!!
God in His Word has already judged homosexuality with dannation if there is no repentance. Also concerning judging, the Apostle Paul says that, "The spiritual man judges all things." Also he chided those Christians for not judging a great sin in their midst and stated, "Do you not know that you shall judge angels?"
The Bible talks about judgement and in many cases it is for the lack of judgment in the nation that there was condemation.

Allen etc.
Thank you for the gratuitous comment. In previous posts you claim to be an attorney if I remember right.

No matter. I posted one decision from one apellate court. (NY)

Here are some more:

Jones vs Hallahan 1973(Ky federal court)
Singer vs Hora 1971(Washington State Court/Appeals)
Thornton vs Timmons- Ohio

Concerning homosexuals:

"not denied a license to marry because of sex, but because of nature of marriage."

Typical attorney response. Invent an arguement that has no mention in the constitution,federal, or state, and what is more than that, marriage is a privilege, left up to the states to decide, all 50 states decided not to say a word about homosexual marriage, other than to forbid it.

Say what you want about myself or other posters here, past posts of yours, and other homosexual militants have been obnoxious in nature. I specifically challenged you on more than one of yours.

Whats the matter Allen? Defending my beliefs is somehow obnoxious? And extolling yours is not?

I have taken a clue from the past 15 years of homosexual militancy. Your CDS, Christian Derangement Syndrome, leaves the majority of homosexual militants unable to respect the views of Christians, or tolerate them.

As I posted, the arrogance presumed in creating your own moral authority to affirm your sexual behavior is breathtaking.

Wayne
Good points are made about judgement. Homosexuality is a behavior that is unacceptable to God.

It is inconceivable to me that God would create something as natural, and then take the extraordinary step to specifically prohibit it.

This seems to be what the homosexual militant arguement suggests.

The Homosexual Agenda
Their push for marriage has nothing to do with equal rights as they proclaim; it is an attempt to force their lifestyle into acceptance and allow future attacks on our society. Proposition 8 did not remove any rights that homosexuals had before the proposition passed.

If it were truly about equal rights they could submit a proposition to the voters that would give those that participate in “civil or domestic partnerships” equal rights, responsibilities, and protections, under the law that are afforded married couples.

I believe such a bill which would stand a much better chance of passing and with very little opposition. This would give them the legal standing to enjoy both the benefits and responsibilities that go along with making a lifelong commitment. The benefits would be those of tax incentives, insurance and medical benefits, as well as legal protection for their common assets should they break that commitment.

Instead they choose to confront a basic tenet of religion and in effect demand that Christians deny the word of God and alter their faith, which is something a Christian can never do, and this is why this issue will never be allowed to rest.

They attack religion because it is religions that teach our moral values, and Christians will fight back because our religion is who we are. The Righteous will always be pitted against evil.

Charles #20 & 27
Charles, in #20 you stated: “There are many homosexuals that have gone straight proving that it is a sexual choice and it is our responsibility to ensure that they continue to have that opportunity. Christians do not “hate” gays, we don’t judge, we believe in our heavenly father’s word.”

Yeah and ask yourself how many of these so called “changes” were because of family, societal and religious pressure which denounced who they are! You have no concept whatsoever of what you speak of – you have no idea how great the pressure is when you are told by family, society and many Christians that you will go to everlasting HELL by being true to who you are! You have no idea because you are not an oppressed minority! Ask yourself too how many people publically show a heterosexual image and are engaging in same sex behavior behind closed doors so to speak! Now I’m not going to say that “no one” changes because there certainly are some numbers of people who might have mental issues which can lead to sexual behavior with someone of the same sex. It happens just like anything can happen! BUT, you make a HUGE mistake to think that is the norm!! Most homosexuals are homosexual simply because they ARE and were born that way!

In #27 you stated: “Proposition 8 did not remove any rights that homosexuals had before the proposition passed.”

How WRONG you are, same sex couples absolutely had the RIGHT to marry before Election Day! That right was taken away by a BARE majority! There are Constitutional requirements to follow that says before a fundamental change can be made to the Constitution (which taking away a RIGHT most certainly qualifies for!) that you MUST have legislative involvement AND requires a 2/3 majority to pass!!

That is why this is headed back to the Supreme Court!

Eddie #9
Eddie you stated: “heterosexual same-sex couples cannot marry either.”

Yet another intelligent response by eddie! NOT! It should not take a genius to figure out that Heterosexual and ‘same sex couple’ is a CONTRADICTION!

Arnold #14
Arnold you stated: “So it is natural that the proposal passed. It is also natural and understandable that homosexuals are angry that their attempt to propagate their society by unnatural means has been thwarted.”

You need to research a bit before you post a falsehood. Homosexuals have existed throughout time and across all cultures – no propagation is needed because it is a natural variation of human biology! Remember too that the vast majority of homosexuals were raised by STRAIGHT parents!!

A person does not become gay because they are raised by gay parents, any more than a child becomes straight because they are raised by straight parents!

Anderson #25
Anderson you stated: “No matter. I posted one decision from one apellate court. (NY)

Here are some more:

Jones vs Hallahan 1973(Ky federal court)
Singer vs Hora 1971(Washington State Court/Appeals)
Thornton vs Timmons- Ohio

Concerning homosexuals:

"not denied a license to marry because of sex, but because of nature of marriage."

Pretty old cases me thinks, times have changed! MA then CA and next NY.

You also stated: “Typical attorney response. Invent an argument that has no mention in the constitution, federal, or state, and what is more than that, marriage is a privilege, left up to the states to decide, all 50 states decided not to say a word about homosexual marriage, other than to forbid it.”

When are you going to realize that marriage has been considered a RIGHT for a very long time Anderson?!? As seen in the 1967 Supreme Court ruling that overturned bans on interracial marriages.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/388/1/case.html


General
There is already two separate and distinct versions of marriage! One is a 'Civil Marriage' and the other is a 'Religious (Christian) Marriage'!

A Civil Marriage does not have to be recognized or supported by the church! Religious beliefs should have no control over Civil Marriages! In fact to have laws which favor one set of religious beliefs over another is a violation of the first amendment and separation of church and state!

Bear in mind that a growing number of religious faiths and/or denominations DO support marriage equality for same sex couples!

See:
http://www.iwgonline.org/marriage/


LoveIsEqual, same old debunked prattle
Geez, not again.

Interracial marriage was in no way connected in any way to homosexual marriage.

NOte the word Interracial.

That case had everything to do with race, how does homosexual marriage equate to race?

Cite a legal linkage, a specific linkage to your premise.

Answer, it does not. Loving is irrelevant to homoseuxal marriage, and has been stated as such.

More meaningless blather.

Anderson you have the meaningless...
blather!

I refuted your claim that marriage is a privledge! Marriage is a RIGHT as ruled by courts in the past!

Note the CA Supreme Court ruling that said denying of marriage to same sex couples violated the Equal Protection clause! Is that or is it not the same violation ruled to overturn the interracial marriage ban?


Nothing meaningless
Unless you are LoveIsEqual, or other members of the homoseuxal militants who post here.

Marriage is a privilege, defined by the laws of the states, enacted by representatives of the citizens, reviewed by the apellate courts.

And finally by the Supreme court. No apellate court prior to the California decision, 5-4 by the way, ever ruled homosexuals have a right to marry when banned from doing so.

Grow up LoveIsEqual, you lost, and now by showing your true intentions and colors, citizens are not sitting on the sidelines.

Homosexual marriage is a distraction. Soon far more than 30 states will ban it. In ten years the homosexual marriage issue will be dead as a do-do bird. No state will recognize it.

Anderson you FAIL...
to acknowledge what I ACTUALLY said!!

You are going off on a tangent!

I am through debating homosexual marriage with you - we have LONG since agreed to disagree + I know that I cannot turn your bigotry around.

What I ACTUALLY stated is that the court LONG since ruled that MARRIAGE is a right and NOT a privledge!!

Do don't put qualifying terms around it because I stated MARRIAGE and not homosexual marriage as you like to call it!

The Loving vs Virginia reality
Sorry,

Marriage still stands as a privilege defined by the citizens of individual states according to the laws enaqcted by that state. Cite something, anything, that says marriage is a right to anyone who desires it.

A civil right, using Loving vs, Virginia is a clear manifestation of racial equality under the law, under the 13th amendment, among others.. Not anything else.

This case dealt with RACE. In no way was it a blanket endorsement of marriage being a civil right.

Quite the contrary. You should read it.

Quit embarassing yourself with non factual posts.

As to bigotry, well, that is anything you disagree with. No surprise there. A typical homosexual militant tactic.

Anderson, wrong again...
It stated that it was a violation of the Equal Protection clause. Race was certainly a factor but NOT the only factor! If you really read it, race was only ONE of the qualifying factors. From a Constutitional perspective the violation of the Equal Protection clause was the most important qualifying factor of which race was an underlying component!

Again, the same ruling reached by the CA Supreme Court in the same sex marriage question.

And no bigotry is not those who disagree with us, it is those who disagree with us AND use those beliefs to deny our Civil Rights! Otherwise we could care less how you or anyone else feels!

Not like you calling us bigoted against all Christians just because we fight against those who use those beliefs to deny our rights! MANY Christians individually believe that homosexuals should be entitled to marriage!

Most gays either have some Christian friends or in many cases are Christians themselves, so how could we be bigoted against Christians?!?!

That is almost like saying black people are bigoted against other black people!

Again, no way, sorry, no sale.
You have EVERY civil right due a citizen of this country, and always have.

Inventing a civil right, out of thin air, as you do, does not one make. Not legitimately.

Creating your own morality to replace existing morality based in the word of God is supremely arrogant. That is not realism, that is artifical morality.

And anyone who disagrees with any concept in current morality, should be able to construct theirs as well. According to you. Anything goes is your concept of morality and behavior. To say different is to practice selective morality.

Morality is based on cultural norms,and homosexuality is NOT, and never has been a cultural norm.

It is inconceivable God would create something "natural" and then prohibit who he created from practicing it.

Referring to those who diasgree with you as bigots shows yor lack of diversity, and the meaninglessness of the word bigotry.

30 states today, more next year, and then in the next 5 years, watch how the Muslims change the game.




And something else for LoveIsEqual
A Muslim link. Read what Muslim thinkers, the tolerant ones think of homosexuality.

http://straightway.sinfree.net/resources.msa_homo.htm

anderson #39
Why is it that you and those like you think that homosexuals having the same Civil Rights as everyone else somehow implies “everything goes”?!? That is yet another scare tactic used by you and others to turn people against us!

Contrary to what you believe you don’t even need religion to be a good moral person! And for homosexuals to have the same rights as everyone else is not ‘selective morality’! For example believing in the rights of same sex couples to marry does NOT include belief that it is ok to rape someone! One activity very much harms another living human being, the other does not harm anyone else.

Should I really have to tell you that?

Not hardly LoveIsEqual
You do have the same civil rights as everyone else, and you have always had them.

What the homosexual militant cause is after is much more. That is no scare tactic, it comes from YOUR side.

Your leaders, and yourself are keeping angry about non existent opression to further your aims.

Here is what Barbara McCullough Jones of Equality Az said recently. And she is a spokesperson for homoseuxal militants such as yourself, and her statements are representative of your agenda:

"There are many more rights that we need to fight for and address instead of just the right to marry."

What that means is that you personally are disingenuous in your posts about homosexual militant goals.

The use of the victim agenda, applied to the efforts to legitimize your behavior, is also a fraud.

Believe in what you want, that is your coice as to religion, but using Christians as the strawman for you tantrums about oppression has already backfired, dramatically.

Of course we're upset
Of course gay people are upset. If you were being discriminated against wouldn't you fight it, no matter what the law or the majority said? Boycotts, statements, and even demonstrations (provided they are conducted in reasonable fashions like not blocking access to a street or building) are simple exercises of free speach. The more aggressive behaviors like tresspasing, assualt, and white powder mailings, however, are totally unacceptable in a civilized society.

Anderson # 42
Don’t you dare misquote me!! I have never said that marriage equality was the only goal!! I have stated on more than one occasion that FULL equality is our goal! However, what you fail to see is that there is nothing sinister about that! EVERYONE deserves FULL equality and that includes LGBT people!!

Your spokesperson was absolutely correct, there are other goals of equality that we desire to achieve. I have never denied that! Again, it is called FULL equality!

And no there is not equal Civil Rights Anderson!

Being gay is not a behavior, it is a sexual orientation which we are born with. In case you did not realize it, YOU ALSO have a sexual orientation – heterosexual!

There is nothing disingenuous about anything I said! The topic of conversation on many threads have been the marriage equality issue so naturally like everyone else I talk mostly about that. But I have said on many posts before that FULL equality is the ultimate goal!

I’m not sure how you can even feel there is something wrong with that. You think we are not entitled to full equality?

K'ssandra #43
Totally agreed. I completely condemn anyone who has engaged in these kinds of behaviors which have involved violence or any other illegal activity!

Though these incidents have sadly occurred and the perpetrators should be punished severely for it, when you consider the number of protests/demonstrations, the number of people involved, etc the incidences of violence and other similar activity have been low in terms of percentage!

I point this out (for everyone’s benefit) not to make excuses for those who have participated in these despicable acts, but rather so that people know that for every incident like this there are NUMEROUS others which have remained totally peaceful!!

Because many try to make these incidents out to be the ‘norm’ when they in fact are NOT.

I have posted this link before but many have ignored it. It is a link to an HRC mailing that went out to ALL members back in November which calls for PEACEFUL demonstrations and protests. It shows that the LGBT community officially does NOT condone any illegal activity.

See:

http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2008/11/special-weekly.html

More drama LoveIsEqual
You have full equality.

Name a civil right you do not have, you can not, and as to equality, there is no doubt, you have full equality as any other citizen.

Your propaganda not withstanding..

What you and yours want is something far more sinister.

YOU intend to define what is equality.

Your intent is Orwellian, all men are equal, but some are more equal than others.

That is your goal.

What really kills you is your brazen attempts of linkage to civil rights, and your open falsification of claims about crimes committed against homosexuals.

LoveIsEqual misinformation on crimes
Homosexuals are not being targeted for crimes or discrimination as LoveIsEqual likes to claim.

Use Fabius statistical figure of .075, for a percentage of the homosexual population. LoveIsEqual claims that is too low, but lets start there.

Because my math is poor, use 1%. Easier to figure.

In 2007, out of at least a 3 million population of homosexuals in the USA, there were a recorded total of less than 2,000 hate, or bias crimes committed against homosexuals. Gee, what percentage would that be? 1 out of 10,000?

And many of those were PROPERTY crimes.

(5) murders were recorded as crimes against homosexuals, out of a 3 million plus population. That means that as a homosexual, your odds of being murdered because you are a homosexual, would be less than winning the powerball, and being hit by lightning all in the same day.

There were nearly the same amount of bias crimes recorded against Jews, as homosexuals. Never mind the rest of the religions.

Here is the link to the FBI UCR )uniform crime reporting) for 2007, the last year available.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2007/incidents.htm

Heterosexuals are being murdered at a far higher rate, along with the rest of the population.

Remember the sure way to view this is in population perspective, heterosexuals, 99%, homosexuals 1%.

Use LoveIsEqual percentages of homosexuals in the population of 10% and the totals are even more striking.

anderson #47
Hate crimes are crimes committed against people which are motivated primarily ‘because’ the person belongs to a particular disliked group or minority. In other words it does not include crimes in which the primary motivation was robbery, drugs or whatever. So, sure more heterosexuals are victims each year but that alone does not qualify them as a hate crime.

Using your own FBI statistics here is another link:

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2007/table_01.htm

Now there is no denying that according to these statistics that race and religion are higher on the list. Sexual orientation is third on that list, which means it is still a problem. And guess what? Race and religion are already covered on Federal Hate Crimes legislation!! One thing I don’t like is that Federal Hate crimes kicks in only when the victim is participating in a ‘federally protected’ activity. As the following link shows there is legislation to try and change that to be included whether or not a ‘federally protected activity’ is involved!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_ States

So again since race and religion are already included in Federal Hate Crimes, why not sexual orientation? Even according to your own FBI statistics, hate crimes against LGBT is third on their list!!

And the following ink shows that many hate crimes may not even get reported to the FBI as a hate crime, so who knows what the numbers would look like if it was truly all inclusive?

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/Articles/000,001.htm

Many people do not report crimes committed against them fearing reprisals and such. In other words many go unreported.

The point is that race and religion are covered already with a needed change that it should be covered regardless of whether the victim was participating in a ‘federally protected’ activity at the time. Sexual orientation should also be covered!

Lack of Civil RIghts
How many times does this have to be asked Anderson?

1) We don’t have the right to marry! Again please do not refute it by saying we can marry someone of the opposite sex! That is no more valid than saying your right to marriage would be equal if you had to marry someone of the SAME sex! A person cannot be required to change a core part of what makes them who they are in order to have a right granted to them.
2) There are still many places where a person can be fired solely because they are gay.
3) In many states a same sex partner can be refused visitation or the right to made medical decision for their life partner.
4) We are taxed unfairly in most states and at the Federal level when it comes to things like medical insurance for our partner, inheritance and many other categories.

Again, these name but a few. I’ve responded to this before but you never want to acknowledge it.

It is pointless to keep answering this same question from you Anderson!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.