Some gay-rights foes claim they now are bullied

Jun 11, 2011 Full story: Contra Costa Times 12,363

In this Wednesday, Dec. 2, 2009 file picture, New York state Sen. Ruben Diaz, D-Bronx, right, speaks during a debate over same-sex marriage in the New York state Senate at the Capitol in Albany, N.Y. Diaz complained in May 2011 that he's received death threats because he opposes legislation to legalize same-sex marriage.

Full Story
Mother of Anne

Pompano Beach, FL

#12893 Jan 28, 2013
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
People who have sex with the same sex fulfill the definition of disgusting pervert.
Now, Anne, are you fighting with Butchita again?

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12894 Jan 28, 2013
Anne Ominous wrote:
"In the 1970's, to reinforce their sense of identity as a community, American homosexuals adopted the term gay to defile themselves and spoke of the gay community. Not content with an objective and scientific sounding name such as homosexuality, they created a positive denomination. Moreover, by this term, homosexuals wanted to answer the psychiatric argument that homosexuality was a result of unhappy childhood. They wanted to emphasize how joyful homosexuality is.
After creating a positive word to define themselves, homosexual activists invented a negative word to attack their opponents : homophobic. Like gay, homophobic is new a term adopted by the medias. Since phobia refers to a psychological symptom, the term homophobra shifts the accusation of mental disorder from the homosexual to any person hostile to homosexuality. "
Your inaccurate quote (source?) relies on pejorative terminology and fails to provide any legitimate governmental interest sufficient for harming others by refusing to treat them as you would yourself, under the law.

Use of the word "gay" by LGBT people to describe themselves predates the word "homosexual".

Anti-gay prejudice is observable in critical and hostile behavior such as legal discrimination, slurs, and violence on the basis of a perceived non-heterosexual orientation.

Since: Sep 08

Anderson, IN

#12895 Jan 28, 2013
PlacitasRoy wrote:
"pressuring companies and law firms into policy reversals, making it taboo in some circumstances to express opposition to same-sex marriage." Ironic that all these intolerant right-wing bastards are opposed to the free market.
"They're advocating for a lot of changes in the name of tolerance," said Jim Campbell, an attorney with the conservative Alliance Defense Fund. "Yet ironically the tolerance is not returned, for people of faith who don't agree with their agenda."
To tolerate intolerant people is morally reprehensible! Especially when they are self-righteous bigoted bible thumpers.
""We are unjustly called 'haters' and 'bigots' by those who have carefully framed their advocacy strategy," Truth hurts their little bigoted feelings!
"Exodus International, a network of ministries which depict homosexuality as a destructive condition that can be overcome through Christian faith." 'Pray Away the Gay' is psychosocial malpractice that can lead to depression and suicide.
Pray away the gay is a monetary scam by the corporate born again evangelical political party cult of the republicans.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#12896 Jan 29, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I denied no range, I specifically addressed two extremes of the lesbian range.
I suspect you understood my question perfectly and are simply making a lame attempt to divert from it.
If you can't answer it, or don't want to, simply say so. But why would you try to twist and distort what I said? Do you think that honors your position???
Smile.
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
You repeat that stereotype so often it appeares you believe all lesbians fit that model.
Why those who fulfill your stereotype do so, I have no idea. You'd have to ask them.
But why do you care?
It also appears your repeated use of this stereotype is intended to demean all lesbians.
I repeat it because I'm waiting for a honest answer. You still don't have one do you? Nothing new on a host of points...

As usual, you resort to the ad homoan attack about supposed hate in lieu of a logical answer. Simple fact is, I make no judgment about lesbians. I simply ask a fair question.

Your false accusations will not stop me from stating facts. I know that is embarrassing and frustrating to you.

Sorry.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#12897 Jan 29, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are right, thinking is always changing. Many times it runs in cycles. But that is reality, and reality never changes.
The science is not 'in'. It is coming in, which brings up genetic epi-markers. It is now the most likely explanation for homosexuality. A epi-marker defectively left on the wrong gender. This explains the question of homosexuality and evolution, and one of the many simple, but clear questions of how a orientation could violate the design of the anus. Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning.
Before we judge discrimination, we must determine if a relationship equates to marriage.
The most basic essence of marriage is this; a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Out of all relationship types, gay couples are a direct defective failure of the primary purpose of evolution and mating behavior. Literally 'unmarriage'.
Smile.
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
When a fundamental right such as marriage is involved, we judge discrimination by the denial of equal treatment.
Your personal requirement is not a requirement of law. No law requires the ability for procreation. Same sex couples can fulfill all of the requirements, except for the gender requirement in those jurisdictions where gender restrictions still apply.
Your beliefs about anal sex are yours, and not shared by most who practice it. There is no inerrant harm, and it is not inherently demeaning for those who voluntarily practice it.
Yet not all men, and few women practice it, yet you use it as a way to demean all gay men and women.
Under your definition, any relationship by any number of people can claim the rights and benefits of marriage.

I simply expressed the basic essence of marriage. No need to require procreation, it typically happens. Gay couples fail miserably at that very starting point. Hardly a denial of equality!

I never stated 'my beliefs' about anal sex. I simply stated the medical facts. Nor did I distinguish between orientations. Your problem is not with my beliefs, it is that I expose the distinction between natural sex and the primary form of gay sex.

Where heterosexual is the union of two designed to fit together, gay sex is a violent abuse of design, and lesbian sex, at the opposite extreme, has nothing to 'fit'.

Please stop whining and give some logical reasoned answers, or concede.

Smile.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#12898 Jan 29, 2013
Dude, I totally love your smiles and smirks at the end of every post. With just one word you manage to convey what a total piece of shit you are. I applaud you, a job well done.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#12899 Jan 29, 2013
MrProstitute wrote:
Dude, I totally love your smiles and smirks at the end of every post. With just one word you manage to convey what a total piece of shit you are. I applaud you, a job well done.
A well reasoned response mrporstitute.

Snicker.
Mother of Anne

Pompano Beach, FL

#12900 Jan 29, 2013
Anne Ominous wrote:
WTF does the KKK have to do with anything?
LOL, the H-word. Perfect timing :)
Now, Anne, you know this means you get the soap tonight!

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12901 Jan 29, 2013
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are right, thinking is always changing. Many times it runs in cycles. But that is reality, and reality never changes.
The science is not 'in'. It is coming in, which brings up genetic epi-markers. It is now the most likely explanation for homosexuality. A epi-marker defectively left on the wrong gender. This explains the question of homosexuality and evolution, and one of the many simple, but clear questions of how a orientation could violate the design of the anus. Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning.
Before we judge discrimination, we must determine if a relationship equates to marriage.
The most basic essence of marriage is this; a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Out of all relationship types, gay couples are a direct defective failure of the primary purpose of evolution and mating behavior. Literally 'unmarriage'.
Smile.
<quoted text>
Under your definition, any relationship by any number of people can claim the rights and benefits of marriage.
I simply expressed the basic essence of marriage. No need to require procreation, it typically happens. Gay couples fail miserably at that very starting point. Hardly a denial of equality!
I never stated 'my beliefs' about anal sex. I simply stated the medical facts. Nor did I distinguish between orientations. Your problem is not with my beliefs, it is that I expose the distinction between natural sex and the primary form of gay sex.
Where heterosexual is the union of two designed to fit together, gay sex is a violent abuse of design, and lesbian sex, at the opposite extreme, has nothing to 'fit'.
Please stop whining and give some logical reasoned answers, or concede.
Smile.
You still provide no legitimate governmental interest sufficient for denial of the fundamental right of marriage.

Straight couples gain nothing, and gay couples are harmed for no reason other than to support a traditional irrational prejudice.

It is you who should concede and stop offering irrational yet demonizing and dehumanizing excuses for harming others by denial of equal treatment as promised in the founding documents and required by the 5th and 14 amendments for all persons.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#12902 Jan 30, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
You still provide no legitimate governmental interest sufficient for denial of the fundamental right of marriage.
Straight couples gain nothing, and gay couples are harmed for no reason other than to support a traditional irrational prejudice.
It is you who should concede and stop offering irrational yet demonizing and dehumanizing excuses for harming others by denial of equal treatment as promised in the founding documents and required by the 5th and 14 amendments for all persons.
You not only have failed to equate gay couples to marriage, you have dumbed down marriage to a friendship that the government has no prevailing interest in supporting AND establish discrimination by limiting the friendship to two people.

You also make an unprovable and idiotic assertion that there will be no affect on society.

You conclude by asserting a gross violation of Constitutional intent.

Once again, before you take your straw man down any of these rabbit trails, you must establish that out of all relationships, gay couples equate to marriage.

Good luck.

Smile.
Anne Ominous

Sayre, PA

#12903 Jan 30, 2013
Not Done Babbling wrote:
<quoted text>
Your inaccurate quote (source?) relies on pejorative terminology and fails to provide any legitimate governmental interest sufficient for harming others by refusing to treat them as you would yourself, under the law.
Inaccurate my ass.

blah blah blah the same tired, worn out homobabble over and over. Get some new material, grow up, and stop trying to characterize yourselves as helpless victims.
Mother of Anne

Pompano Beach, FL

#12908 Jan 30, 2013
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
Inaccurate my ass.
blah blah blah the same tired, worn out homobabble over and over. Get some new material, grow up, and stop trying to characterize yourselves as helpless victims.
My little Anne has always had an inaccurate ass.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12909 Jan 30, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You not only have failed to equate gay couples to marriage, you have dumbed down marriage to a friendship that the government has no prevailing interest in supporting AND establish discrimination by limiting the friendship to two people.
You also make an unprovable and idiotic assertion that there will be no affect on society.
You conclude by asserting a gross violation of Constitutional intent.
Once again, before you take your straw man down any of these rabbit trails, you must establish that out of all relationships, gay couples equate to marriage.
Good luck.
Smile.
"In the court’s final analysis, the government’s only basis for supporting DOMA comes down to an apparent belief that the moral views of the majority may properly be enacted as the law of the land in regard to state-sanctioned same-sex marriage in disregard of the personal status and living conditions of a significant segment of our pluralistic society. Such a view is not consistent with the evidence or the law as embodied in the Fifth Amendment with respect to the thoughts expressed in this decision. The court has no doubt about its conclusion:... DOMA deprives them of the equal protection of the law to which they are entitled."

If you are going to deny a fundamental right, you must demonstrate a compelling and legitimate governmental interest for doing so. Your prejudice fails to qualify.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12910 Jan 30, 2013
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
Inaccurate my ass.
blah blah blah the same tired, worn out homobabble over and over. Get some new material, grow up, and stop trying to characterize yourselves as helpless victims.
Ad hominem attacks remain the refuge of those with no argument on the merits.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12911 Jan 30, 2013
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage is not a right.
Don't you know by now that is not true? On 14 occasions the Supreme Court has affirmed marriage as a fundamental right of the individual.

Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632, 639-40 (1974):“This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978):“[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.”

Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987):“[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right” and an “expression[] of emotional support and public commitment.”

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992):“These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
la verdad

El Paso, TX

#12912 Jan 30, 2013
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
Better get that butthurt taken care of
If you put this much effort into finding a job, your ass would be employed and not living on welfare. Now stfu bitch.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#12913 Jan 30, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
"In the court’s final analysis, the government’s only basis for supporting DOMA comes down to an apparent belief that the moral views of the majority may properly be enacted as the law of the land in regard to state-sanctioned same-sex marriage in disregard of the personal status and living conditions of a significant segment of our pluralistic society. Such a view is not consistent with the evidence or the law as embodied in the Fifth Amendment with respect to the thoughts expressed in this decision. The court has no doubt about its conclusion:... DOMA deprives them of the equal protection of the law to which they are entitled."
If you are going to deny a fundamental right, you must demonstrate a compelling and legitimate governmental interest for doing so. Your prejudice fails to qualify.
"the government’s only basis for supporting DOMA comes down to an apparent belief that the moral views of the majority may properly be enacted as the law of the land in regard to state-sanctioned same-sex marriage"

A clearly dishonest and prejudicial statement.

You still fail to establish a legitimate identity of equality as opposed to any other relationship.

Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Gay couples are at the opposite spectrum. A direct defective failure of the primary goal of evolution.

Simple facts you have no defense for, because they are pure truth.

Smile.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12914 Jan 30, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
"the government’s only basis for supporting DOMA comes down to an apparent belief that the moral views of the majority may properly be enacted as the law of the land in regard to state-sanctioned same-sex marriage"
A clearly dishonest and prejudicial statement.
You still fail to establish a legitimate identity of equality as opposed to any other relationship.
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Gay couples are at the opposite spectrum. A direct defective failure of the primary goal of evolution.
Simple facts you have no defense for, because they are pure truth.
Smile.
No matter how often you repeat your beliefs, they remain irrelevant to the individual fundamental right of marriage.

If you are going to deny a fundamental right, you must demonstrate a compelling and legitimate governmental interest for doing so. Procreation ability, intent, or even desire has never been a requirement, yet gay people do raise children both biologically related or adopted. Your prejudice fails to qualify as a legitimate governmental interest sufficient for denial of equal treatment as required by the 5th and 14th amendments.

Denial of equal treatment provides nothing to opposite sex couples, while harming same sex couples needlessly.

“These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”(SCOTUS)

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#12915 Jan 30, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
No matter how often you repeat your beliefs, they remain irrelevant to the individual fundamental right of marriage.
If you are going to deny a fundamental right, you must demonstrate a compelling and legitimate governmental interest for doing so. Procreation ability, intent, or even desire has never been a requirement, yet gay people do raise children both biologically related or adopted. Your prejudice fails to qualify as a legitimate governmental interest sufficient for denial of equal treatment as required by the 5th and 14th amendments.
Denial of equal treatment provides nothing to opposite sex couples, while harming same sex couples needlessly.
“These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”(SCOTUS)
No matter how much you repeat your wishful legal twirl, gay unions are not just the opposite of marriage, they are a direct defective failure of the core goal of evolution. Just a simple fact you have to live with.

Smile.
LetsGetReal

Albany, NY

#12916 Jan 30, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
"the government’s only basis for supporting DOMA comes down to an apparent belief that the moral views of the majority may properly be enacted as the law of the land in regard to state-sanctioned same-sex marriage"
A clearly dishonest and prejudicial statement.
You still fail to establish a legitimate identity of equality as opposed to any other relationship.
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Gay couples are at the opposite spectrum. A direct defective failure of the primary goal of evolution.
Simple facts you have no defense for, because they are pure truth.
Smile.
So, weed is legal in your state, huh?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Troy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 4 hr Los Angeles 19,209
NY Who do you support for Governor in New York in ... (Oct '10) 10 hr henu 6,432
cash detection Tue jake101now 1
6th Street Tue Jom B 3
Debate: Gay Marriage - Albany, NY (Jul '10) Sep 15 InChrist 1,605
Cops: Couple caught having sex in public bathroom Sep 15 Anne Ominous 2
Nano college is officially SUNY Polytechnic Ins... Sep 13 UtiKowfuck NY 26
•••
•••
•••

Troy Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Troy People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Troy News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Troy
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••