George Will on ABC’s “This Week”: Opp...

George Will on ABC’s “This Week”: Opposition To Gay Marriage Dying

There are 150 comments on the lezgetreal.com story from Dec 9, 2012, titled George Will on ABC’s “This Week”: Opposition To Gay Marriage Dying . In it, lezgetreal.com reports that:

It is tempting to do two things in the analysis of the move towards Marriage Equality. The first is to announce the death of the anti-equality groups, and the second is to conflate same-sex marriage with abortion.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#25 Dec 9, 2012
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
That is only half the story. What is actually more surprising about the story is that support for marriage equality is rising almost uniformly among all age groups. Where as people over 65 expressed 20% support ten years ago, they now express 30% support. And people in their twenties ten years ago moved from 50% support to 60% support in their thirties. Meanwhile, the new cohort of twenty-somethings supports marriage equality by 70%.
The increase in support is fairly uniform among other demographic measures as well, including religious affiliation, geographic location, minority status, etc. I dare say support among GLBT's themselves has increased with the country as a whole.
So the 1% annual increase in support across all groups is compounded by the change in the cohort: A group expressing 20% support has been replaced by a group expressing 70% support. It also helps that the twenty-somethings are more numerous than those over 65. If only they would vote more reliably...
Given the fickleness of the younger vote, I think it's important for the time-being to take our battles to the ballot during Presidential election years. Look how different the North Carolina vote turned out from the polls. I suspect that, like in Maine, Maryland, Washington, and Minnesota, the vote would have more closely resembled the polls if held in November.
Agree 100%. Especially on the taking ballot measure to the polls.

My biggest concern is groups will push for votes in Ohio, Oregon, Colorado, Michigan, etc in 2014 when the voting demographic is much older and therefor much more anti-gay instead of waiting until 2016.

I know it's a bitch to consider waiting 4 years to overturn a some of these state bans, but at this point we still need the BEST shot possible and can't afford to go back to losing a string of votes just because we're getting impatient.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#26 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? Marriage exists apart from government in many places. We even have civil unions.
You didn't know that?
Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
So you've been shacking up for 36 years?
And that is a gay twirl tactic of deliberately misstating a point and taking a ridiculous conclusion.

Another proof that your cause is illegitimate.

Smirk.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#27 Dec 9, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Agree 100%. Especially on the taking ballot measure to the polls.
My biggest concern is groups will push for votes in Ohio, Oregon, Colorado, Michigan, etc in 2014 when the voting demographic is much older and therefor much more anti-gay instead of waiting until 2016.
I know it's a bitch to consider waiting 4 years to overturn a some of these state bans, but at this point we still need the BEST shot possible and can't afford to go back to losing a string of votes just because we're getting impatient.
If you call the tail on a dog a leg, what is it?

Smile.
AzAdam

Waynesboro, VA

#28 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
The pattern of history is that when a culture embraces gay sex, it collapses.
:-)
The pattern of cultures is that they collapse.
The pattern of bigots is to pick anything they didn't approve if on that culture a declare it the reason for the collapse.
The logic is absent.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#30 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
The pattern of history is that when a culture embraces gay sex, it collapses.
:-)
AzAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
The pattern of cultures is that they collapse.
The pattern of bigots is to pick anything they didn't approve if on that culture a declare it the reason for the collapse.
The logic is absent.
You mean like the Jews?

Hardly. I simply note that most cultures collapse from within because of legalized or default moral degradation. The justification of a direct violation of evolutionary design usually signals a complete disintegration.

As SCOTUS has noted several times, marriage and family are the fundamental building block of society. When those are corrupted, the culture is fatally undermined.

Your denial is present.

Smile.
david traversa

Rosario, Argentina

#32 Dec 9, 2012
The collapse of nations throughout history has never had anything at all to do with gays.. This is cheap, pseudo-Christian propaganda and the reason such tactics continue to be disregarded by thinking, well-informed men and women. It's rather the crimes and abuses of the so-called "normal" that have precipitated these downfalls.- You people think that by repeating half-baked lies the world will take you seriously.. All you gain is its contempt and ridicule.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#33 Dec 9, 2012
Hardly. I simply note that most cultures collapse from within because of legalized or default moral degradation. The justification of a direct violation of evolutionary design usually signals a complete disintegration.

As SCOTUS has noted several times, marriage and family are the fundamental building block of society. When those are corrupted, the culture is fatally undermined.

Your denial is present.
david traversa wrote:
The collapse of nations throughout history has never had anything at all to do with gays.. This is cheap, pseudo-Christian propaganda and the reason such tactics continue to be disregarded by thinking, well-informed men and women. It's rather the crimes and abuses of the so-called "normal" that have precipitated these downfalls.- You people think that by repeating half-baked lies the world will take you seriously.. All you gain is its contempt and ridicule.
You touched on my point, "the crimes and abuses of so-called "normal"," but then turn around and exclude homosexuals. Hardly logical or honest, don't you think?

The 'fact' is that cultural collapse is a debated and unsettled issue. "The coupled breakdown of economic, cultural and social institutions with ecological relationships is perhaps the most common feature of collapse." The premise I hold to is that moral degradation allows other issues to careen out of control.

As to 'half-baked lies', trying to equate a redumbant couple to the fruit bearing evolutionary reunion of genders into one is hard to top.

You were saying...

smile.
Mr Smartypants

Minneapolis, MN

#34 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
The pattern of history is that when a culture embraces gay sex, it collapses.
:-)
Any examples?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#36 Dec 9, 2012
Mr Smartypants wrote:
<quoted text>
Any examples?
Maya culture.

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#38 Dec 9, 2012
LOL

Put some more water in the soup that'll make it thicker.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Maya culture.
david traversa

Rosario, Argentina

#39 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
Hardly. I simply note that most cultures collapse from within because of legalized or default moral degradation. The justification of a direct violation of evolutionary design usually signals a complete disintegration.
As SCOTUS has noted several times, marriage and family are the fundamental building block of society. When those are corrupted, the culture is fatally undermined.
Your denial is present.
<quoted text>
You touched on my point, "the crimes and abuses of so-called "normal"," but then turn around and exclude homosexuals. Hardly logical or honest, don't you think?
The 'fact' is that cultural collapse is a debated and unsettled issue. "The coupled breakdown of economic, cultural and social institutions with ecological relationships is perhaps the most common feature of collapse." The premise I hold to is that moral degradation allows other issues to careen out of control.
As to 'half-baked lies', trying to equate a redumbant couple to the fruit bearing evolutionary reunion of genders into one is hard to top.
You were saying...
smile.
The sexual preferences of a minority can never be the cause of any nation's collapse.. That leaves who, according to you, as responsible for such happenings? It's a well-known scientific fact that there's no such thing as a completely normal person, straight or gay; though, no doubt, you fancy yourself as one of the elect few.. A human being can never be described as redundant (not "redumbant" PLEASE!!).. Just because they didn't reproduce, Leonardo da Vinci, Donatello, Christopher Marlowe, Walt Whitman and Walter Piston could be described as "redundant" according to your low and narrow standards of judgement.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#42 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
If you
believe denying marriage to a relationship
will prevent love
Love, of course, precedes marriage. How can the antecedent prevent the precedent?
If you
demand any committed relationship
has to be called marriage
The rights and responsibilities of marriage flow from the unification of two lives--financially, spiritually, and intimately. Marriage law simply recognizes the reality of two lives intertwined.
If you
claim rights and benefits can only be acquired
by a imposition on marriage
Many rights and responsibilities can be obtained through contract negotiation. But this is an extensive and time-consuming process. Such contracts have frequently been challenged by other relatives and overturned by courts. Many other benefits of marriage cannot be obtained by any other institution.
If you
equate the diversity of two genders
with the redundancy of same genders
I'm not sure what you mean by this red herring.
If you
desecrate the sacred tradition of all major religions
and violate the historic practice of every single culture in history
Same-sex marriage desecrates nothing, but rather honors the traditions of all cultures. And your evident claim that no cultures recognize same-sex marriages marks you as ignorant, disingenuous, or--most likely--a lying POS.
If you
believe a fundamental change to the building block of society
will have absolutely no affect
Including more families in this fundamental building block will enhance society. No marriage meeting your stricter definition will be changed in any way.
If you
think a law can change
the reality of crucial distinctions in relationships
And what crucial distinctions would those be?
If you
pretend duplicating sexuality
is the same as blending masculinity and femininity
Isn't this the same red herring that made no sense the first time you posted it?
If you
condemn some children to parents of only one gender
and deliberately deny some children one natural parent
Some children have only one parent. Some children have no parents. Some children move from one foster home to another. Some children grow up in dysfunctional biological families. With or without same-sex marriage, gays have raised children and will continue to raise children for all time. The only thing you will accomplish by refusing to recognize same-sex relationships is to condemn children to live with unmarried parents and, therefore, have fewer advantages in life.
If you
ignore the design of sexual union
to manipulate a harmful act
Huh?
If you
violate evolution's law of reproduction
to equate a genetic dead end
The very existence of homosexuality empirically contradicts your claim. If homosexuality was a reproductive dead end, homosexuals would not exist. But they do exist in thousands of species.
If you
risk the healthiest human relationship
to include one of the unhealthiest
All monogamous relationships are healthy. I am not sure what you are getting at.
If you
parallel the sole birthplace of every other relationship
with one that can reproduce none
Huh?
If you
dilute all these things
down to just 'a committed relationship of two people'
It is you who dilute the commitment of two lives together down to a single sex act. We are the ones who recognize the fullness of the relationship. We are the ones who recognize that any two idiots can reproduce together. That does not create a relationship or a marriage.
Then, and only then, can you equate same-sex unions with marriage.
For all practical purposes, same-sex relationships are equivalent to opposite-sex relationships.

Since: Jan 10

Lewis Center, OH

#45 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
The pattern of history is that when a culture embraces gay sex, it collapses.
:-)
<quoted text>
Wrong again. Married 36 years.
I'm simply going by historical precedence. Marriage has existed in every single culture in 8000 years of human history.
Gay unions have risen briefly in only a handful. They have never established themselves and spread. Not one single time. Instead, the cultures that embraced them have quickly collapsed.
As a wise man once said, "There is nothing new under the sun".
Smile.
Are they the only civilizations that collapsed? I think you’re trying to determine a common denominator where is none. You need to study and then you may be able to post an intelligent hypothesis. That’s the problem with opportunistic haters, you make up stuff and then rely on lazy uneducated people to buy it foot line and sinker.

“Son of Abraham”

Since: Aug 07

Natural Deviant

#47 Dec 9, 2012
Hey, like, did you know that every empire that collapsed actually embraced food and water???

It's proof eating and drinking is a sin!!!!!

How f'n stupid are you?
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#49 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
The pattern of history is that when a culture embraces gay sex, it collapses.
:-)
There's a problem, you see.

If I'm standing next to someone who keeps telling me the sky is purple, I eventually stop listening.

We cannot sit and argue forever with people who are extremely committed to distorting reality because ... they hate gay people.

So what you say meets the fate that probably scares you must -- it goes ignored.

Seriously.
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#50 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You clearly have a comprehension problem compounded by a reality deficit.
Smirk.
See? This is the antigay.

This is why they get ignored by the pro-gay.

If you don't agree with the antigay, if they cannot force their reality to become yours, they claim 100.0% of the time that the problem is yours. In reality, the problem is theirs -- 100.0% of the time.

Why listen to lies *which the liars know they've made up*?--*shrug*
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#51 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
The pattern of history is that when a culture embraces gay sex, it collapses.
:-)
<quoted text>
Wrong again. Married 36 years.
I'm simply going by historical precedence. Marriage has existed in every single culture in 8000 years of human history.
Gay unions have risen briefly in only a handful. They have never established themselves and spread. Not one single time. Instead, the cultures that embraced them have quickly collapsed.
As a wise man once said, "There is nothing new under the sun".
Smile.
You guys, look at the "logic" here. Think for a moment.

Does something glaring occur to you?...

... It should. If what this person said were even TRUE, there's still a gigantic problem with it: It conflates *sex*(antigay viewpoint) with *homosexual actions*(antigay viewpoint) and *immorality*(antigay viewpoint).

Could it be that *immorality* caused these civilizations to collapse?

Not gays, mind you: The *false* conflation of GAYS with IMMORALITY gave people the view that the societies in question were IMMORAL,

and we know that for far more than 8,000 years, humanity has been clinically obsessed with forcing a definition of morality upon everyone.

So yeah, I am not only not buying this so-called "logic," but I can explain *exactly* why, and 100.0% of the times that I explain *exactly* why I don't buy it, the antigay either have no response or their response is another pack of see-through nonsense which I can deconstruct immediately.

They never have a *sound train of logic*, you see.
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#52 Dec 9, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Well then nearly every 1st world nation will be collapsing soon. Probably on 12/21/2012.......
This, too; basically, THE WORLD is going to "collapse," so.
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#53 Dec 9, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Agree 100%. Especially on the taking ballot measure to the polls.
My biggest concern is groups will push for votes in Ohio, Oregon, Colorado, Michigan, etc in 2014 when the voting demographic is much older and therefor much more anti-gay instead of waiting until 2016.
I know it's a bitch to consider waiting 4 years to overturn a some of these state bans, but at this point we still need the BEST shot possible and can't afford to go back to losing a string of votes just because we're getting impatient.
Which is smart logic by any means, and *I know full well we will disagree and always have*, but the MESSAGE this sends is what disturbs me so profoundly.

That's why I *LIKE* what Boies did even. if. it. results. in. a. loss.

Boies was of the logic that no matter how long you waited, pro-gay imperatives were based in logical and moral imperatives, and so there was no point in waiting. The moral imperative dictated to him that this be handled *immediately* and fought nonstop forever.

That's what the antigay do.

They base their actions on *moral imperatives* they feel must be fought for, EVEN IF they have zero percent chance of prevailing. I realize the very mental picture of the pro-gay behaving this way may disturb you or grate on your nerves; I am not necessarily saying it's a good thing but I will tell you, I believe the antigay look like they have more conviction, as I've said for over two years now and as I constantly get "yelled at" for saying -- and it's because they let *nothing* stop them in their fight, something I wouldn't force the pro-gay to do but I am goddamn well going to cheer Boies on *even if* he loses; I will still think he did the *morally right* thing, and that the "justices" on the supreme court are laughable jokes who did the *morally wrong* thing. Period.

All of which is to say I see your viewpoint but it makes me feel sad.(LOL. But I'm serious!)
KiMares conscience

Italy

#54 Dec 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
The pattern of history is that when a culture embraces gay sex, it collapses.
:-)
<quoted text>
Wrong again. Married 36 years.
Smile.
Married in a lie for 36 years? or in a lesbian, gay, marriage for 36 years?
Lesbian sex is gay sex. You are a lesbian trapped in a straight mans body. A straight mans body does not make you straight, it's the equivalent of a strap-on and a sperm donor.

Bark!

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 2 min Freedomofexpression 13,064
News Birth-record fix for gays falls to lower court 6 min Hilda 17
Corn Shuckers 9 min Milton 3
News America opposes gay marriage (Dec '09) 32 min Fhipog 1,788
News Trump reportedly joked that Pence wants to see ... 1 hr truth be told 18
News Who would be a better president: Donald Trump o... 1 hr Noe 36
News Stopping hate crimes against transgender Americans 1 hr Ronald 6
News Supreme Court To Hear Arguments In Case Of Bake... 1 hr Wondering 341
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 2 hr NoahLovesU 57,591
More from around the web