Some gay-rights foes claim they now a...

Some gay-rights foes claim they now are bullied

There are 12354 comments on the Contra Costa Times story from Jun 11, 2011, titled Some gay-rights foes claim they now are bullied. In it, Contra Costa Times reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Contra Costa Times.

Anne Ominous

Greeley, PA

#12632 Dec 6, 2012
Romneyblewme wrote:
<quoted text>
And that "jurisdiction" will soon be the entire U.S
Really?

When ??

And how ???

I don't see 32 States that have voted against homosexual marriage changing their minds anytime soon.

LOL

:)
Anne Ominous

Greeley, PA

#12633 Dec 6, 2012
Romneyblewme wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you want "reality"? Here's a little: Gay marriage is legal in New York State.
That real enough for ya?
Yes, only because of four traitors. Three of them have already been dealt with?

:)
Anne Ominous

Greeley, PA

#12634 Dec 6, 2012
The Troll Stopper wrote:
<quoted text>
When a cat or dog can legally give consent to a marriage, please let us know. Until then, feel free to STFU, troll.
Take your own advice.

As far as consent, a pet can certainly demonstrate love and preference. If we're going to destroy Traditional Marriage why not go all the way?

:)
Anne Ominous

Greeley, PA

#12635 Dec 6, 2012
ClamDigger wrote:
<quoted text>
Your definition of marriage is childish and as narrow as your mind. You don't see marriage as a committment between two people who are romantically and emotionally attracted to one another;
Marriage a contract. Romance and emotion have nothing to do with it.
Anne Ominous

Greeley, PA

#12636 Dec 6, 2012
Pattysboi wrote:
fr Anne Ominous:
>No one desires to "harm" anyone. No one is being "denied equality".
We seek to preserve what we have enjoyed for the future generations to come.
Family is Dad, Mom, Children. There is no such thing as a "same sex family".<
Completely WRONG on every single point. You must be a terror in classes.
GLBTs are denied EQUALITY everyday. In 33 states, you can unfortunately be evicted, expelled, fired, denied credit or bank accounts, simply for being GLBT.
My WIFE and I have been happily married for 4 1/2 years. We are a same-sex FAMILY, and nothing that YOU spew can change that.
You really need to get the true FACTS sbout GLBT's. Start with www.pflag.org . They're very helpful.
Oh you poor helpless little victim.

Yeah, I'm going to read a homoblog to get "facts".

LOL

:)
Bonafides

Lawrence, MA

#12637 Dec 6, 2012
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, only because of four traitors. Three of them have already been dealt with?
:)
It's the law. It doesn't matter how it got that way.

You may not like it, but who cares what you think?
Anne Ominous

Greeley, PA

#12638 Dec 6, 2012
Peenertrajectory wrote:
Most "straight men" who act unusually hostile toward gay men do so to mask the self loathing caused by their own latent homosexual desires.
No, they are not. But they are delighted that you consider it an insult to accuse them of it.

LOL

:)
Anne Ominous

Greeley, PA

#12639 Dec 6, 2012
tahW wrote:
<quoted text>
Somewhere on here a posting stated that marriage was based on a union of love. You will argue that a man or woman cannot love their donkey? There most certainly can be a union. Not an easy one, but I would imagine same sex aint easy.
As for when an animal can say, "yes", the animal doesn't have to say yes, the love is obvious. And no, we are not comparing gays to animals.
Bottom line is that no matter how much you cry and complain about unfair treatment and inequality, gays will never get there. It's simply not equal and not the same.
Marriage is a contract. You don't have to be in love to get married, and you can be in love without being married.
Bonafides

Lawrence, MA

#12640 Dec 6, 2012
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
Really?
When ??
And how ???
I don't see 32 States that have voted against homosexual marriage changing their minds anytime soon.
LOL
:)
You didn't see Obama being re-elected, either, so you're not a very good barometer.
Anne Ominous

Greeley, PA

#12641 Dec 6, 2012
Dellia wrote:
<quoted text>
Fossils like you are fading fast. Once your generation is dead and gone, younger, more tolerant people will take your place.
Go make yourself a spam sandwich and change your diaper, grandpa.
ROTFLMAO!!!

Keep dreaming, sweetie. The VAST majority of Americans support Traditional Marriage. Always have, always will.

:)
Bonafides

Lawrence, MA

#12642 Dec 6, 2012
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage a contract. Romance and emotion have nothing to do with it.
If marriage is a contract, then legally any two consenting adults can enter into it.
Bonafides

Lawrence, MA

#12644 Dec 6, 2012
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they are not. But they are delighted that you consider it an insult to accuse them of it.
LOL
:)
How would you know?
Bonafides

Lawrence, MA

#12645 Dec 6, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The law does not require marriage. It exists apart from the law. Like I said, it's fundamental purpose is to protect biological children and the mother.
There already are numerous laws that do so for default children.
Adding gay couples would add a huge percentage of childless couples whereas heterosexual couples are extremely likely and the only couple capable of having children in the natural and best setting.
ALL other rights and privileges other couples need are already available outside marriage.
There is no prejudice in what I say, simply facts.
:-)
Uradouche is right, you really are boring
Anne Ominous

Greeley, PA

#12646 Dec 6, 2012
Bonafides wrote:
<quoted text>
Was I talking to you? Mind your own business...unless you're f##cking Annie.
Somebody sounds a bit testy!

LOL

:)
Bonafides

Lawrence, MA

#12647 Dec 6, 2012
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
They know exactly what they are, but they are delighted that you consider it an insult to insinuate that they are actually hoemoes.
You obviously have not the slightest comprehension of the magnitude of revulsion that homosexuality generates in a normal person.
The thing is, you're not normal, so your opinion is pretty much moot.
Bonafides

Lawrence, MA

#12648 Dec 6, 2012
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
ROTFLMAO!!!
Keep dreaming, sweetie. The VAST majority of Americans support Traditional Marriage. Always have, always will.
:)
At best, 50% support "traditional marriage", and that number is comprised of old farts like you who will be dead in ten years.

Give it up Anne, your little world is coming to an end, and you know it.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12649 Dec 6, 2012
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
Marriage laws at their core exist to tie men to responsibility to their children.
A gay person cannot be put in this position. He/she cannot abandon his/her offspring that were naturally created with a same sex partner.
Marriage is about responsibility, not privilege. Each party has a duty to the other.
Traditionally the man had the responsibility to provide and protect and women had to be faithful and nurture. The laws were designed to support the natural order.
Homosexual relations cannot be part of this natural order because they do not give life and do not need protection the same way that life giving relations do.
:-)
<quoted text>
My 'prejudice'??? Now when you disagree with facts, it is prejudice??? So stupid silly...
Smirk.
Just a note. Children ARE harmed when they lose the only father and mother they will ever have. That is EXACTLY why marriage was given special rights!
Bazinga!
Again, this relies on your prejudice alone, not the facts of law or reflection of real world marriage relationships.

You don't have to raise children to get married, you don't have to get married to raise children, yet many gay people are married and raising children, while like many straight people, some choose not to raise children. Marriage is a fundamental right of the individual for all persons, independent of children.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12650 Dec 6, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The law does not require marriage. It exists apart from the law. Like I said, it's fundamental purpose is to protect biological children and the mother.
There already are numerous laws that do so for default children.
Adding gay couples would add a huge percentage of childless couples whereas heterosexual couples are extremely likely and the only couple capable of having children in the natural and best setting.
ALL other rights and privileges other couples need are already available outside marriage.
There is no prejudice in what I say, simply facts.
:-)
Your desire to deny marriage equality relies on your prejudice.

Marriage is a fundamental right of the individual for all persons. It does not depend on how many people exercise of that right. This right does not depend on having children. Your excuse to deny equality does not reflect real life families, nor the law.

Gay married couples are having and raising children, despite what you believe is the best setting. But your "best setting" ignores that Child Protective Services remove children from you imagined "best setting" every day as a result of abuse and neglect every day. Having two biological parents is no guarantee of proper parenting, let alone survival. Yet the fundamental right of marriage remains intact even when parents are found to be unfit as parents, even if they are sent to prison. Convicted child abusers in prison can still get married.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#12651 Dec 6, 2012
KiMare wrote:
Anne Ominous wrote:
<quoted text>
Too bad YOUR parents didn't see it that way.
<quoted text>
You expose the level of your intelligence.
Over and over.
Grow up and get help.
Take a bath while you are at it, you have crap in your mouth...
Smirk.
Bonafides wrote:
<quoted text>
Was I talking to you? Mind your own business...unless you're f##cking Annie.
This is an open forum sonny, I'll respond to anyone I please.

It is your problem that you have a dirty mouth and an empty mind. I suggest you shut up, listen and learn...

SMile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#12652 Dec 6, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The law does not require marriage. It exists apart from the law. Like I said, it's fundamental purpose is to protect biological children and the mother.
There already are numerous laws that do so for default children.
Adding gay couples would add a huge percentage of childless couples whereas heterosexual couples are extremely likely and the only couple capable of having children in the natural and best setting.
ALL other rights and privileges other couples need are already available outside marriage.
There is no prejudice in what I say, simply facts.
:-)
Bonafides wrote:
<quoted text>
Uradouche is right, you really are boring
In other words, you have no argument for truth.

Smirk.

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.

Activism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Congress doesn't want you to eat your dog or cat 2 hr Johnny Argent 649
News Detention centers fill up; border detainees sen... 5 hr OnlyOneTerm 133
News Peter Tatchell Sat Rainbow Kid 3
News Levels of racism in Northern Ireland revealed Jun 15 Elganned 1
News The 'Black Panther' actor who is an undocumente... Jun 14 davy 4
News Gay activist Jim Egan's fight for equality beco... Jun 13 Mitt s Polygamous... 4
News The home of Parkland survivor David Hogg was sw... Jun 9 Ring A Ding Ding 2