• on a comment on What About My Religious Freedom? over 4 years ago

    All Christian values are the same because they're all based on the Bible.

    So it is you who don't get it!

  • on a comment on What About My Religious Freedom? over 4 years ago

    When I voted for Prop. 8, I was not voting against my gay friends.

    No, no, no.

    Prop. 8 was a vote for values, not against anyone.

  • comment on a post What About My Religious Freedom? over 4 years ago

    You're kinda all over the place here; you seem to be conflating a general anti-LGBT bigotry or hatred with the successful Prop. 8 push.

    Prop. 8 was strictly about gay marriage. It was not about devaluing any member of society. In fact, Prop. 8 elevated or lauded principles once held to be sacrosanct and incontrovertible.

    So I'm confused here, because you seem to be pitting Christian denominations against each other when you state the more-so "laid back" groups, like the Quakers, etc. and obliquely attack the Mormons, and the Catholics, the Four Square people, the Jehovah Witnesses, the Southern Baptists, etc...

    I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish in this diary.

  • on a comment on Where's my gay marriage? over 4 years ago

    Marriage is a contract.

    Privileges afforded by a contract are just those, privileges.

    When state courts and legislatures decide to open those privileges to same-sex couples willy-nilly on the basis of conferring "rights," then they're not practicing good jurisprudence, they're just kow-towing to a special interest group.

    It would be better in my mind if courts and legislatures just said, instead of hiding behind the Constitution as a basis of conferring "rights," if they just said, "We are afraid of looking like bigots. We are afraid of gay people, and we are afraid that we may get voted out of office."

    If they said that, that would be a more compelling argument than the faux-jurisprudential nonsense that's spewing out of the Northeast right now.

  • comment on a post Where's my gay marriage? over 4 years ago

  • on a comment on Where's my gay marriage? over 4 years ago

    Marriage doesn't confer rights; it confers privileges.

  • comment on a post Where's my gay marriage? over 4 years ago

    Wait--

    You're playing one SUPPOSED bigotry off another to prove a point.

    Damn it, I've been called a bigot so much, now I'm actually believing it.

    Gay marriage is not a progressive cause.

    Marriage is a privilege, not a right.

  • on a comment on Where's my gay marriage? over 4 years ago

    I'm not going to get into that argument with you.

    Suffice it to say, it's not the same thing.

    You're playing one bigotry off another to prove a point, and you look stupid doing it.

  • comment on a post Where's my gay marriage? over 4 years ago

    Dumb diaries like this get on the rec list.

    That just shows how self-serving this blog is to divisive causes like gay marriage.

    I write something remotely cohesive about why there should not be gay marriage in any state (particularly California where I live) and I'm branded a bigot.

    Go figure.

  • comment on a post A Complicated Question over 4 years ago

    What if Gore had picked Edwards in 2000?

    What if, what if.

    I'm sure they wouldn't have won NC, but the combination of Gore's vision and Edward's perceived vibrancy of youth might have put them over the top in Florida.

    Oh well!

  • on a comment on PA-Sen: Arlen Hoping Norm Wins over 4 years ago

    It's not BS.

    Lieberman is a perfect example.

    With us on everything save the war.

    Whatever Dem legislation comes through, Lieberman is for.

    The Senate is all about making deals and putting chits in the hat until it's time to pull out what you want.

    Specter is going to have come to the left and start putting his chits in, I agree with you, it's just that being a Democrat shouldn't necessarily be an "all-or-nothing" proposition.

  • on a comment on PA-Sen: Arlen Hoping Norm Wins over 4 years ago

    Ugh, if every Dem has to pass a progressive litmus test, then what would be the point of having in Reid's words, a "variegated" caucus?

  • on a comment on PA-Sen: Arlen Hoping Norm Wins over 4 years ago

    What am I saying is let's give them a good, full year to govern and accomplish some legislation....

  • on a comment on PA-Sen: Arlen Hoping Norm Wins over 4 years ago

    Oh wait--the comment is totally tongue-in-cheek.

    Yeah, Mark Halperin was screwing with us....

    I'm not reading The Page again.

  • on a comment on PA-Sen: Arlen Hoping Norm Wins over 4 years ago

    Hmmm...

    You'd have to think the floor for a Generic (R) in PA is 40% (a la Rick Santorum in 2006), and the floor for a Generic (D) is 45% because of the partisan shift.

    With Specter in the GE as an (I), you'd have to figure he'd get at least 35% of the vote, with 35% of the vote for the (D), and 30% of the vote for the (R). That's too close for comfort. He'd probably lose in a squeaker.

    I don't think Specter has the energy in him to hustle like Lieberman did in 2006 and win as an (I).

Diaries

Advertise Blogads