Community | November 05, 2008 | 43 comments

I am ashamed of America

Image
PoisonTheMonkey
The national ballot results are in, and let me tell you--I am disgusted and ashamed of my fellow "Americans". Ballot measure after ballot measure, bigotry won by a narrow margin.

How dare anyone who voted against same-sex marriage call themselves Americans? Or those voting to keep same-sex couples from adopting children? How DARE you?

How dare you burn our Constitution and Bill of Rights, how dare you toss aside everything this country is supposed to stand for? Whatever happened to equality under the law? What deranged, hateful idea got into your heads that you had the right to control the personal relationships of others? Whether it be in the name of God, family, or tradition, the real reason was hate.

America is not a free country, it seems, and only half the country desires it to be free. The rest of you, it seems, would prefer an ultra-right wing country where "freedom" is only allowed for the Christian, conservative, traditional minority.

If marriage is not a right guaranteed to all consensual adults, who are engaged in legal relationships (remember, folks, homosexual relationships ARE legal!), then it is not a right for you, either. Supporters of the bans against gay marriage, I'm sure you would gladly give up your 'privelege' to be married, then? Until you've earned it as a group?

You bigoted, hateful people amaze me...

Do any of you faux Americans understand the company you keep, and the damage you have done?

Many of you whined and said that you weren't against gays, but you were for children and families. You used children for your hateful, bigoted politics. Any idea who else did this?

That's right, Adolf Hitler.

Adolf Hitler, too, claimed to want to "defend" marriage. He himself used children for his own political gains, and perhaps that's where the campaigners for these freedom-killing measures got their strategy: you can convince a population of anything, he said, by doing it in the name of the children. He brainwashed children into singing for his cause (sound familiar?) and used the cause of children and family as a cover for his policies.

Hitler, too, hated gays, though he took it a step further and killed thousands of them because they didn't fit into his narrow worldview. It was done in the name of family, children, and traditional "morals".

When 52% of the people get to tell the rest how to live their lives, you know freedom is dead. I only hope that someday, 52% of the people strip you of your rights to be married. You deserve it.

I truly hope there is a hell sometimes.
  1. groups:
  2. tags:
    Elections Freedom Constitution Fascism 18 more
  3.     
    |

43 comments // I am ashamed of America

  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  
    • I know that this won't actually help but.....

      Why exactly is polygamy against the Law?

      and bigamy meaning "2 married" does't really make sense if you look at what it really means versus what it has come to mean.

      Explain to me Please why having more that 2 parents is bad -- and well we have lots of people that are the products of various divorces and re-marriages more or less meaning that the children are ofspring of a Polygamious relationship.

    • 3 years ago
  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  
    • casandrakumsung

      No The United States of America is not a democracy - The founding fathers made sure of that!!

      Its a Representitive Republic - They were keenly aware of the problems of democracy leading to the tyrany of the Majority and definitlly didn't want that to happen.

      There has never been a True Communist country yet.

      And BTW ... you forgot to mention that the Hittler taged the homesexuals with a pink triangle as far as selection goes pink triangles were lower in the pecking order than the yellow stars and were often sent to the "showers" first

      Those who don't bother to study history are doomed to repeat it

    • 3 years ago
  • casandrakumsung
    • 0
      casandrakumsung  
    • This is a democracy, majority rules. The courts are there to override the majority.

      Name calling and insulting people who disagree with you is UnAmerican and childish.

      If you do not want a majority rule then vote it out or go to a communist country like Cuba or Russia. (There are no by the book communist countries it was tried and did not work).

      One has to vote with ones conscience, even if it is wrong to some. I would support your vote event if I disagreed with it and not name call.

      PS using Hitler as an comparison to Prop 9 is sick. He cleared the prisons, mental institutions, and orphanages into the gas chambers.

      He killed babies born to the master race Gestapo, if they were defective.

      He killed all races, gypsies and religions not just the Jews, that were not his "race".

      More non Jews died in the gas chambers than Jews!

    • 3 years ago
  • Libertas
    • 0
      Libertas  
    • This is the problem of direct democracy, the tyranny of the majority.

      I'm probably going to get into trouble for this, but why does the state have be involved with marriage anyway? Why can't people be free to form a contract without any hinderance from the state? Why do I need a permit to get married?

      Church membership is voluntary, so why force membership standards on non members?

      For the Church, marriage is a sacrament. It doesn't need the state to sanctify it, nor does the Church have any authority over non-members and their unions. It seems to me that the Church and State have no authority over how people want to live in a contractual agreement.

      Augustine and Thomas Aquinas and especially the early Christians did NOT believe that the state could legislate virtue. Christians and others should remember that legalization does not mean approval. Free will is fundamental in understanding Christian theology. Whenever the Church or State has forgotten that, crimes against humanity and conscience have occurred. The Church has every right to proclaim the Gospel and teach her followers but does not have the right to dictate how non-members may live. The Church may give an opinion; non-members may ignore it. The State should also butt out and allow people to live and make agreements as they please if they do no harm to others (and being offended is NOT being harmed!).

    • 3 years ago
  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  
    • Libertas:

      The only reason people need civil sanction to be come "Married" is the rights it despenses to those who are Married.

      Rights of probate, gardianship, visitation, medical treatment, Health care coverage, pension, servivor's benefits, and the like are all tied to Marriage rights - "Civil unions" don't grant all the protections that Marriages do.

      This is the only reason anyone really cares if they are excluded from being able to be married.

    • 3 years ago
  • onechance
    • 0
      onechance  
    • Re: "They're going to force-feed gay porn to my kindergartner" (OR something close to that effect...)

      Once again, another blind regurgitation of a Yes On 8 talking point which is untrue, fear-mongering, non-pertinent and non-factual.

      Do these people really believe that treating people equally under the law has anything to do with teaching young children about gay anything?

      Please.

    • 3 years ago
  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  
    • I have one observation that I have as yet not stated so here it goes.

      It seems to me that the people who favored this amendment are AFRAID of someting I'm not sure exactlly what the FEAR but the certianally FEAR something.

      I have messaged many of them asking them what it is that they FEAR will happen to them and no one has responded in any sort of respectful way.

      I have a FEAR that this being added to the constitution will abridge my LIBERTY

      Liberty is the most important part of the United States with out it everything is lost.

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • I find it amazing that this blatant lie that legalizing gay marriage would make homosexuality taught in schools continues to spread. How do people believe something so obviously false, something that has been proven false time and time again?

      A story I read comes to mind, of the teacher's group that came out and denounced the Prop 8 ads, saying they and no other teachers were teaching same-sex marriage or homosexuality to kids, denounced it as a lie.

      A Pop 8 supporting mother's response? She took her daughter out of school in protest, because they WEREN'T doing what the liars said was happening to her children.

      That doesn't even make sense!

      What is wrong with people?

      And I'm sorry, telling someone to get out of the country because they don't agree with or have any respect for un-Constitutional, un-American stripping of rights is downright dumb. The Constitution governs us, not the majority. I don't really remember anything in the Constitution saying that the majority got to take away guaranteed rights.

      Or is that part only taught in Christian homeschooled lessons?

    • 3 years ago
  • RCS
    • 0
      RCS  
    • PoisonTheMonkey asked about Hitler quotes, and there's one that's relevant to persecution of all the groups of people, including gays, that Stalin pursued. Between them, Lenin and Trotsky had created and instituted the idea of using concentration camps as centres of extermination for class enemies.
      Stalin went on to enlarge those camps in a manner that might have even exceeded Lenin and Trotsky's most ambitious dreams. Tens of millions of people were either worked to death, starved to death or simply murdered in the Soviet concentration camps.
      In speaking of Stalin and his accomplishments in the Soviet Union, Adolph Hilter made the perfect summation of the man. He said, "Stalin is a beast, but he is a beast on a grand scale." Not a bad line that!

    • 3 years ago
  • RCS
    • 0
      RCS  
    • There's a good point made here about Hitler by PoisonTheMonkey in the original post. He deemed gays degenerates and launched a vicious persecution of them. He was not the only one. One thing that most totalitarian tyrants have in common has been their demonization of gay people.
      Tsarist Russia had similar laws criminalizing homosexuality as most Western countries had. As often as not, if the behaviour was private, it was ignored. When the Soviets came to power, and got around to writing their own laws on sexual behaviour, all that changed. Gays were rounded up, along with other class enemies, and sent to concentration camps to be worked to death. One of the reasons that the great bisexual Russian poet Essenin killed himself was his depression over all his gay friends being arrested and put in concentration camps.
      Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Kim Il-Sung and Ho Chi Minh all had a hatred of homosexuals and persecuted them. Today Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe continues their tradition of hate and bigotry. All of these people, along with Adolph Hitler, would have been staunch supporters of Proposition 8 if they could have been. It fits right in with their respective political philosophies.

    • 3 years ago
  • onechance
    • 0
      onechance  
    • Ironic that this very article is 50% red, 50% green (BLUE?)... Sad. Even current has plenty of stupid bible-thumping bigots...

    • 3 years ago
  • onechance
    • 0
      onechance  
    • Great post.

      It's the civil rights era all over again. Lame. People are so damn brainwashed.
      Your God doesn't want you to hate other people, I promise.

      WAKE THE F*CK UP.

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • Lol Casandra. Take your misinformed anti-socialist and communist bitching somewhere else, please, and get informed. Then you'll realize how ridiculous it is of you to say that in a Communist society you don't get to vote. Inform yourself, please. ;)

      Because Communism cannot be a dictatorship, it cannot be totalitarian, by its very definition it must be ruled by all the workers, which makes it a democracy of some sort. Go and learn more, then bitch.

    • 3 years ago
  • casandrakumsung
    • 0
      casandrakumsung  
    • PoisonTheMonkey:

      And it never worked because someone has to be in charge and take the orders from the people, and those people do what they feel is best.

      Look at all the communists countries of today, I have seen nearly every communists country fail in my life time, none worked and none were ruled by the people and will never be.

      You are in a fantasy world that does not have humans. Humans do not want equality they want what is best for them. They have free will and are all different so everyone wants a differnt world which can not work in a communists world.

      This conversations is a good example in a communists world one of us would be locked up for causing trouble.

      Good luck and take a few college courses I work at a college and have over 300 units how about you?

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • PoisonTheMonkey:

      Amazing. You are incredibly misinformed sweetie.

      There aren't any Communist countries today, and Russia and China and other countries certainly never were.

      If you actually bothered to learn about this stuff instead of just believing whatever you're told without question, you'd probably be less ignorant. But can't blame you, I guess.

      Those 300 units sound great, too bad they didn't teach you anything. You sound so proud of them, though.

      See, it works like this.

      The basics of Communism are classlessness, worker freedom and rule, and cooperation. For there to be classlessness, there can be no ruling class. Which means everyone must work and rule as well, which completely tosses any sort of state rule and further any dictatorship or authoritarian rule out the window. countries like Russia and China were ruled by the class of the haves, who forced the have nots to work. This is the opposite of Communism.

      With workers forced to work, that's the opposite of worker liberation and rule.

      Nowadays countries like China still call themselves Communist when they are clearly just state-controlled capitalist countries. There is not cooperation but competition, and of course, the ruling class forcing the working class to work.

      These countries called themselves Communist because on the surface they looked Communist, and because that is what the revolutions that gave them power wanted. However, just as countries like Zimbabwe can look like democracies without actually being democracies, these countries looked Communist while violating the basics of Communism.

      How many credits is that, dear?

    • 3 years ago
  • simplecj
    • 0
      simplecj  
    • well now, I'm not about to call names.. all I say is if the majority votes against it, then so be it.

      In reality though it boils down to an argument over the definition of a word. They have been offered legal equality through civil unions and they were not satisfied with that and really that is just stupid!

      Accept the fact that majority rules or get out of the US!

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • simplecj:

      Actually, there is no legal equality in civil unions. They are not guaranteed many of the same rights, mostly having to do precisely with it being the word!

      For example, if a straight couple like my fiance and myself gets married while he visits here (he is currently living in Belgium and can only visit occassionally, unfortunately), he gains the right to citizenship here because we would be a married couple.

      However, if he were a woman, or if I were a man, and we got a civil union, because marriage is the word used and not civil unions, he would not be allowed to be a citizen. There are documented cases of this tearing same-sex couples who live in two different countries apart, since immigrating here legally is so difficult.

      Civil unions also don't give the same rights when it comes to sperm-donated children or adopted children, since often only one parent will get custody and they will not be considered a child of the other. This can tear families apart.

      Further, there have been cases where a woman, for example, was dying in the hospital and her civil partner and children could not come in to see her before she died because they were in a civil union, not married.

      There are many more examples, but these are a few of the saddest. It is a myth: Civil unions and marriages are not equal.

      Even if the government went in and fixed all of these inequalities, there is still the fundamental problem: why are they separate, when there is a legal precedent that separate is not equal, and when equal treatment under the law is guaranteed?

    • 3 years ago
  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  
    • simplecj:

      If it is as you claim as simple as a WORD then why are you so admiant that your definition be used?

      Civil Unions are not presently equal to Marriage under the LAW .. If everwhere in the LAW the words "Civil Union" were to replace the word "Marriage" then no one would argue and the religous faction the believes marriage is between only one man and one woman can still call it that .. .but the Law then would recgonize only the status of "CIVIL UNIONS" not Marriage and everything else would be Moot.

      Though I doubt that you would like that either because then in the schools "civil unions" would be taught where some of them have same-sex partners or maybe even multiple ones (aka Polygamy)

    • 3 years ago
  • JuliusBC
    • 0
      JuliusBC  
    • I don't know that I necessarily hate the haters, it is more of the disdain that I feel for what they incite and the damage they do to the recipients.

      Generally, further distaste comes when they invoke God into the equation. They pick and choose which fragment of scripture they want and then use it to pummel their prey.

      The trouble with most scripture is that it comes from a book that has been putrefied by the agendas and manipulations instilled within the pages down through time by man, not God.

      The initial question is whether or not the book was of God to begin with. I whole heartedly believe it was written about god but from various people from different periods of time.

      So does God or some higher entity exist? In my mind and belief, yes! Does God hate Gays, or Blacks, or Jews, or Whites, or any other divisions of humankind? No!

      For those of you who don't believe in a God, then all the better. Why is it better? Well that substantiates that all hatred and ill will is humankind based.

      However, if you look back far enough you will more than likely find evidence to the fact those haters ancestral trail will be connected to some bigoted or biased religion. Their hatred was spawned by this religion and handed from generation to generation.

      Thus the ills of man and their personal decisions to hate or deprive due to some difference they deem to be less or undesirable in fact comes from man.

    • 3 years ago
  • casandrakumsung
    • 0
      casandrakumsung  
    • What is interesting is that PoisonTheMonkey is a socialist, look at her profile.

      She would have the world be socialists or a communism. In her world she would not exist because there is no voting or opinions of the people or a constitution in a communists world, and people like her are locked up.

      Communism failed because absolute power corrupts absolutely and humans need incentive being equal is not enough for most.

      Her utopian society can not exist with Humans, we have free will.

      Obviously a antisocial personality filled with hate, just look at her posts.
      .

    • 3 years ago
  • simplecj
    • 0
      simplecj  
    • You made my point clearer Casandra! What is the point of your fight and anger? Is it because you won't be awarded the title of "marriage", or are you trying to push it beyond reason? You are most likely seeking a redefinition of the word, but in doing that you are ushering in more discrimination by the religious right when you have already been given the legal equality of "civil unions'.

      As I said there are bigger fish to fry, get over it and accept the fact that you are not actually being discriminated against, rather you are fighting over semantics... and that is ridiculous in the grand scheme of things!

    • 3 years ago
  • casandrakumsung
    • 0
      casandrakumsung  
    • simplecj:

      True, but I am married. But it is not gay having the word marriage it is my kids I am protecting. I could not care less if gays get married as long as they keep it in their bed rooms out of the the schools. But they will not that has been shown.

      Thanks for the comment. There are lots other problems marriage is nothing to get worked up over.

    • 3 years ago
  • simplecj
    • 0
      simplecj  
    • simplecj:

      I am also married, but no kids yet. I think though that I totally agree with you that this should not be something taught in schools. I remember growing up... kids experiment... kids get confused. I've had friends raised by gay parents and I've seen the emotional and sexual confusion they've had to deal with. I don't want my kids any more encouraged towards that sort of confusion than is avoidable. Gays should be satisfied with civil unions if they do in fact grant equal legal rights.

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • simplecj:

      I'm sorry but you are both terribly misinformed.

      Gay marriage is not taught in schools. In fact, NOTHING about marriage is taught in school! I don't think I ever once heard a damn thing taught in school throughout my entire years as a student.

      This is all just a lie fed to you by bigots.

      What IS taught, however, is acceptance and niceness towards everyone, including gay and transgender kids. If that doesn't sit well with you, you've got some issues.

    • 3 years ago
  • casandrakumsung
    • 0
      casandrakumsung  
    • Let us make a few things clear. First, if 100% of the people, voted Prop 8 would not have passed. That is simply do to lazy people who do not care, and California is not alone on that! I doubt any conservative idea would pass in the US if 100% voted!

      Second "Right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence and not part of the US constitution so it is not a "right" only a suggestion and that has been found to be so in court. The founders might have meant the Declaration of Independence part of the US constitution but has found not to be.

      Third. This was an election, if you do not like the idea of an election and do not like the people in this country maybe you should go to a country that does not have elections you would be happier there.

      Insults, Hitler comparisons and name calling is childish and vindictive. Your letter was full of hate it was sick!

      Intolerance of people that think differently than you is not American. I am sure you hate anyone that is not like you, I have meet many like you.

      Tolerance is part of being in this country and you people are intolerant to what the majority vote for and are insulting the voting process.

      Fourth: Most people in the US are Christians, marriage is a religious issue. Children are fiercely protected so it became an issue of protecting our children! I do not want my 6 year old kid taught homosexuality, she is too young to understand it and I do not want her confused and thinking it is a normal thing to be or do! This is a tough world for them as it is.

      It has been shown that gays are not just happy with having equal rights. In California they have all the rights of marriage with a domestic partnerships just not the name Marriage, it was taken. They want to force acceptance of homosexuality and for it to be taught in schools as an alternative life style like getting a job with the fire department! (They lied in the adds when they said gay marriage is not taught in schools as they forced teaching gay marriage in Massachusetts. If they did not lie then it might not have passed.)

      Do not blame the people blame the system!

      PS: What is the big deal most marriages end up in divorce. Marriage is a legal document a financial contract created by the government, bankers and lawyers and the churches, it is nothing but a piece of paper and a WORD.

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • casandrakumsung:

      So if a bunch of Muslims moved in we'd live under Muslim law?

      I'm sorry, but marriage is NOT a religious issue. All straight couples in this country are allowed to marry, regardless of religion or lack of it. Marriage was around long before Christianity, long before Judaism. That excuse doesn't even begin to fly.

      Second, how exactly does allowing two people to get married protect children? That's utter bull.

      As I said on another post here, let me repeat this, GAY MARRIAGE IS NOT TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS.

      It is not taught in schools.

      It is not taught in schools.

      My entire years of school, I don't think marriage of any kind was mentioned, not once. My friends and younger nieces who are still in school have never been taught anything about marriage, let alone gay marriage.

      This has been debunked again and again and again but you people are incapable of getting it.

      Gay marriage is not taught in schools.

      No one is teaching your kids to be homosexual, you twit. Do you honestly think that they are? How ignorant can you be, I'm sorry? Really?

      And I'm sorry, me intolerant? That's like slapping every black person you see and crying if someone calls you out on it and calling them 'intolerant'. That's like being called 'intolerant' for hating Hitler. I am intolerant of intolerance. Because that is exactly what those who are against same-sex marriage are--interolant. There is no denying that.

      Yes, it was an election, however, what was being voted on is downright unConstitutional as I have explained her. You cannot give a right to one group and not to another without a good reason. Same-sex couples are engaging in consensual, legal relationships just as straight couples are. There is no reason to deny something to one group and give it unconditionally to another. It is not equal treatment under the law.

      How would you like it if the majority voted and decided Christians couldn't marry? It's unconstitutional!

      But of course, people like you have no respect for the Constitution, you only want to vote on other's lives.

      Why not have elections on everyone's lives! Let's vote whether or not Jane and Joe can get married! Have kids! Divorce! Fall in love! Have sex! Use a condom! Watch TV! Because that's what America's all about, right? Shoving your beliefs down people's throats and stripping them of their rights?

      Hey, when do I get to vote to take away your rights?

      Again, as I said before, they don't have the same rights with civil unions. Read my other post on that. Civil unions don't even begin to come close to the rights of marriage, and even if they did, they are still not equal because it is separation which a legal precedent has said is not equal, therefore unlawful.

      If being allowed to marry is not a big deal to you, I hope you'd gladly give up your right to it.

      I have every right to compare people like you to Hitler. If you actually look, there's little difference. Saying you're against gay marriage because of "children" (when time and time again it has been shown CHILDREN ARE NOT TAUGHT GAY MARRIAGE IN SCHOOLS, but no one seems to want to admit that), "tradition" (right, because we still have the traditional marriages where the woman has no rights and is her husband's slave and property...), etc, etc, used to mask intolerance and hate.

      I'm sorry, but I have no respect for people like you, especially when you're dishonest enough to deny being intolerant and hateful of homosexuals and try to use children as an excuse.

    • 3 years ago
  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  
    • casandrakumsung:

      Uh excuse me .... the constitution says its supposed to secure the blessings of LIBERTY
      --------------------------------------------------------
      We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
      --------------------------------------------------------
      If your not sure of what liberty is
      see this
      The Philosophy of Liberty

      http://www.isil.org/resources/introduction.swf

    • 3 years ago
  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  
    • casandrakumsung:

      marriage is a religious issue.
      -------------------------------------
      Well not exactlly ----------------
      If you want to put into LAW then its not a religious issue any longer but one of public law
      The Law is supposed to insure liberty to all not just people of one point of view.

      ---------------
      Children are fiercely protected so it became an issue of protecting our children!

      I do not want my 6 year old kid taught homosexuality, she is too young to understand it and I do not want her confused and thinking it is a normal thing to be or do! This is a tough world for them as it is.
      --------------------------

      I think you under estimate the intelegence of your child. No one said that the should be taught the explicit details at that age. Only that some people have same-sex parents and some don't and its not a reason to bully them

    • 3 years ago
  • J_Jammer
  • simplecj
  • simplecj
    • 0
      simplecj  
    • Well, I think the drug war is a far greater travesty against the American people. Especially for something as potentially beneficial to society as cannabis and hemp.

      No, it doesn't seem right that a slim majority can decide over the rest, but our demockeracy is set-up that way. Would you think it right if the 46% of Americans who voted for McCain rose up and threw a fit because McCain didn't win? Of course not... why? Because that's how our government is set up. Majority rules.

      I'm not saying that it's right to deny people to be legally married, but I don't think that the right to legal marriage is explicitly given to us in the constitution. The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is as well as equal rights. But still, I personally have no issue with either gay marriage or someone who wants to kick back and enjoy a fatty, but until we get a majority of the public to accept that, we will just have to be content in our civil disobedience.

      Personally I think marriage is just a word and from what I understand this "civil union" proposal gives people the same rights without the same verbage. My thought is, so what? Doesn't marriage really come down to a commitment between two people (and maybe their God if they have one). Why should this be such a huge deal? I mean go ahead, fight for equal title, but you should be content knowing they aren't directly interfering with your relationship itself. If it's that important to say you're "married", then go ahead and say it. The word only has the meaning you give to it...

      I don't know if I'm making sense, but I think there are far greater issues than a homosexuals right to claim their union is a "marriage" instead of a "civil union." It seems petty for both sides of the argument....

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • simplecj:

      Not explicitly, not marriage, no. However, what is guaranteed is equal treatment under the law. To have one group which is engaging in fully legal relationships be denied what another group is given is not equal treatment under the law. :)

      Either it's a right for everyone, or it's a right for no one.

    • 3 years ago
  • casandrakumsung
    • 0
      casandrakumsung  
    • simplecj:

      You are right Marriage is a word. When I was married our minister said we were already married because it is a state of mind between two people! The marrage certificate is just a paper to make it "legal". Say you are married it is fine.

      Also I liked most of the gays I knew or worked with. I am sure I would not like PoisonTheMonkey she is too hostile and full of hate toward people that do not agree with her.

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
  • PoisonTheMonkey
  • daledrops
    • 0
      daledrops  
    • challenges like these will make us stronger. Those who believe in equal rights are all going to have to ban together and stand united against the fight for equality. Fuck your god- this is NOT a moral issue, it is about EQUAL RIGHTS for ALL americans.

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • I don't think a slim majority should be able to take away the rights of anyone, ever. Our rights are protected under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, beyond that, people are free to vote on what they want.

      An angry majority voting to strip the rights of those who have done nothing wrong defies our Constitution, which guarantees equal treatment under the law. The majority has, in the past, been in favor of unConstitutional policies like segregation and slavery, however, these things were obviously unConstitutional and there should never be a vote on things like that. Is democracy really people voting on how individuals can live their private lives? No, not really. (We're not a democracy, anyways, but meh).

      And I think I've got every right to write such a scathing letter. ;) These people stripped the rights of innocent people. They do not deserve an ounce of respect.

    • 3 years ago
  • simplecj
    • 0
      simplecj  
    • I agree with kenny... as usual.

      However, the majority rules even if it is by a slim margin. That is how democracy works, if you don't like it you can leave. I just don't think it's right to write such a scathing hate letter because something didn't pass. I mean, the public voted, the majority won..

      I for one wish we could end this damn drug war and legalize cannabis and utilize hemp, but it hasn't happened yet. So for the time being I will wait patiently and do my best to inform and enlighten whomever I can.

      Hating those who hate only leaves everyone pissed off.. be patient. There has been major advancements in both of our choice causes! Just be glad McCain didn't take the presidency or we'd both be waiting even longer!

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • Indeed...while America is patting itself on the back for being so "progressive" because it voted in a black president (how that was even an issue amazes me), another minority has found itself being shit on by the right wing.

    • 3 years ago
  • lulu81
    • 0
      lulu81  
    • I was very upset to hear about this..esp stopping homosexual couples from adopting in Arkansas i believe how can anyone try to attempt to decide for someone else who and what a real parent is......or who can and cannot get married..truly a sad day for progress. for G&Ls

    • 3 years ago
  • kennymotown
    • 0
      kennymotown  
    • Sometimes it's like we take two steps forward, and then one step backwards. I feel for the gay community and hope someday as humans we can just accept people for who they are. Such intolerance is unexceptable in a civil society.

    • 3 years ago
  • PoisonTheMonkey
    • 0
      PoisonTheMonkey  
    • Compiling a list of Hitler quotes. Having a bit of trouble, however. Any help would be appreciated, specifically the one that says something to the effect of "You can convince a population of anything if you use children" or some such.

    • 3 years ago

top videos