Scalia must join 21st century and change gay marriage stance

Dec 12, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Orlando Sentinel

The Supreme Court's announcement last Friday that it will take up gay marriage is more than a chance for the justices to recognize the emerging national consensus in support of gay rights.

Comments
21 - 40 of 48 Comments Last updated Jan 9, 2013

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#25 Dec 13, 2012
NoQ wrote:
Wow, you perverts always talking about being bullied, talk about being called names and insulted, calling people bigots that disagree with you. Speaking how much you despise hate, and here you freaks are wishing and hoping someone will die so it POSSIBLY might help your cause just a little. Just shows how terribly worthless you freaks are.
The fact that you would attribute the opinions of SIX WHOLE PEOPLE here on Topix as if it were the opinion of MILLIONS nationwide, shows how blindly biased you are.

You came here prepped to complain about ANYTHING you found. If these people had been calling for nothing more than a letter writing campaign, you'd be bitching about THAT.

Fat chance that you'd even NOTICE the thousands of calls for ALL gay people to die, postings which infest the internet nationwide, every day.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Peoples Bushes, Arizona

#26 Dec 13, 2012
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> Because so called "gun control" demonstrably does not work? Just a guess.
Well, I agree there. I'm a staunch supporter of Americans' Second Amendment RIGHTS. But The Obamaniac, Rahm Emmanuel, and their assorted fellow travellers of Democratic cronies certainly are not. They're the ones who are always screaming, "GUN CONTROL !" Why aren't they doing that regarding the ongoing bloodbath in Chicago ? why is their homicide rate 400% that of New York's with a population 1/3 the size ??? Doesn;t The Obamaniac and Rahm even CARE about the carnage in Chicago ?!

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#27 Dec 13, 2012
BS Detector wrote:
Scalia's job is not to advocate a personal position, but to interpret the Constitution. Personally, I disagre with the idiots who would like to mangle the constitution into a bunch of "suggestions." I agree with the original intent types. And the mental midgets like JohnInToronto and NoCalNative are the usual hypocrites who whine if anybody dares say anything they don't approve of, yet are the first to engage in childish name calling about somebody who can't answer them. Frankly, kids, you are no better than the anti gay types who stupidly call you perverts. Justice Scalia is worthy of respect even if you aren't.
Awwww BS, you hurt my feelings after all the kind comments you have said to me in the past and the e-mails we have shared......I'm hurt........truly, I am that you base your comments on my post without even knowing who made the comment!!!!

Justice Scalia is not worthy of anything but what he has gotten......NO ONE is worthy of respect just because of a position they hold, even in the Military, an officer is only respected by they way they lead!!!

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#29 Dec 13, 2012
NoQ wrote:
Have not seen that on Topix like you're saying, however I have seen it from several of your kind on here.
If a Hetero would threaten or wish someone dead on here, they've be repercussions. If Gays or Satans Wh_ore post anything like that, nothing is ever said or done about it. You make a comment to Jade or one of you all and they turn it around like it were you that did something wrong and not them. So I don't want to hear anything about what you think I might or might not notice, cause you all sure don't.
Maybe you could help me out with something. I was trying to find these "threats" you speak of. Couldn't do it. Here are the only relevant posts that even come close...

"Fat chance that Scalia will change his stance...he has a better chance of dying first"

"If only he'd be so accommodating"

"That would be nice, but somehow I don't see him doing that to soon either"

"He won't live forever"

"Let Scalia lie miserable in his grave and think on this for eternity."

Somehow, I don't see a single one of those as "threats". They might be mean-spirited HOPES, some sour-grapes WISHES, but no threats. Not a one.

I still think you came here HOPING to find threats, and that you were committed to complain about ANYTHING you found, even these innocuous comments. Some of you are so blindly burned onto the path of hate, so knee-jerk bigoted against EVERYTHING that gay people do, we could point to North on a map and you'd complain that we were perverting the "traditional" cardinal points.

It simply isn't WORTH it, to come here wasting your time to kick and scream about a tiny handful of people who are anticipating the death of an old man who places more weight on his feelings rather than on justice. Is this really the crime of the century? Are you a superhero because you've come here to complain about people complaining?

You're just another tired gay-hater, who had an empty day and so came here to hate the gays. Goodness gracious, you found out that we're not all gleeful angels with only good wishes to spread. Some of us are actually angry about our unjust treatment, and we just might vent our anger with not-so-nice words. Surprise.

Why don't you go hang out at a "Christian" website, where there's a constant barrage of posts by people who can't wait to see us TORTURED WITH FIRE FOR ALL ETERNITY. Sure, that's not a "threat", either, but it's a hell of a lot uglier than just waiting for nature to take its course.

At the same time that you're telling US to be more civil, you could tell THOSE people to do the same thing. Somehow, I doubt that will happen.
BS Detector

Los Angeles, CA

#30 Dec 13, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
Awwww BS, you hurt my feelings after all the kind comments you have said to me in the past and the e-mails we have shared......I'm hurt........truly, I am that you base your comments on my post without even knowing who made the comment!!!!
What are you talking about?
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
Justice Scalia is not worthy of anything but what he has gotten......NO ONE is worthy of respect just because of a position they hold, even in the Military, an officer is only respected by they way they lead!!!
Again, what are you talking about? Justice Scalia (At least you did call him 'Justice Scalia" and not just Scalia) deserves respect for what he has acheived, which is why he has acheived his position. Just like Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor. You see, adults can disagree with other adults while not descending into childish and name calling or disrespectful behavior.

And in the military (have you ever worn the uniform?) one salutes the rank if not the person who has earned said rank. But also in the military, bother officers and enlisted earn respect for their accomplishments. One does not earn promotion by not performing their jobs.

I can, and do disagree with Mr. Obama and would have preferred a different outcome in the election. Still, I respect his having earned acheived a position that only 43 other men in history have acheived, unlike some others who did not have similar respect for his predessor.

Now you. Why do you deserve respect? Do you deserve any? And why should anybody have respect for you based on your words and behavior in this forum?
BS Detector

Los Angeles, CA

#31 Dec 13, 2012
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I agree there. I'm a staunch supporter of Americans' Second Amendment RIGHTS. But The Obamaniac, Rahm Emmanuel, and their assorted fellow travellers of Democratic cronies certainly are not. They're the ones who are always screaming, "GUN CONTROL !" Why aren't they doing that regarding the ongoing bloodbath in Chicago ? why is their homicide rate 400% that of New York's with a population 1/3 the size ??? Doesn;t The Obamaniac and Rahm even CARE about the carnage in Chicago ?!
Well, it's getting a bit off topic but that's how the left works and many people agree with that. They are into power and control more than the founding principles and the people. Many people are sincerely into that. I'm not and it seems like you're not either. I do like the Constitution, and I do like freedom and the concepts of personal responsibilty and smaller government. Many, many people do not.
BS Detector

Los Angeles, CA

#32 Dec 13, 2012
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe you could help me out with something. I was trying to find these "threats" you speak of. Couldn't do it. Here are the only relevant posts that even come close...
"Fat chance that Scalia will change his stance...he has a better chance of dying first"
"If only he'd be so accommodating"
"That would be nice, but somehow I don't see him doing that to soon either"
"He won't live forever"
"Let Scalia lie miserable in his grave and think on this for eternity."
Somehow, I don't see a single one of those as "threats". They might be mean-spirited HOPES, some sour-grapes WISHES, but no threats. Not a one.
I still think you came here HOPING to find threats, and that you were committed to complain about ANYTHING you found, even these innocuous comments. Some of you are so blindly burned onto the path of hate, so knee-jerk bigoted against EVERYTHING that gay people do, we could point to North on a map and you'd complain that we were perverting the "traditional" cardinal points.
It simply isn't WORTH it, to come here wasting your time to kick and scream about a tiny handful of people who are anticipating the death of an old man who places more weight on his feelings rather than on justice. Is this really the crime of the century? Are you a superhero because you've come here to complain about people complaining?
You're just another tired gay-hater, who had an empty day and so came here to hate the gays. Goodness gracious, you found out that we're not all gleeful angels with only good wishes to spread. Some of us are actually angry about our unjust treatment, and we just might vent our anger with not-so-nice words. Surprise.
Why don't you go hang out at a "Christian" website, where there's a constant barrage of posts by people who can't wait to see us TORTURED WITH FIRE FOR ALL ETERNITY. Sure, that's not a "threat", either, but it's a hell of a lot uglier than just waiting for nature to take its course.
At the same time that you're telling US to be more civil, you could tell THOSE people to do the same thing. Somehow, I doubt that will happen.
NoQ's being a complete idiot notwithstanding, I wouldn't call those ideas innocuous but I agree they don't qualify as threats.

And I disagree re Justice Scalia in that he's not so much into personal feelings as his job being to interpret the Constitution. Mr. Obama is the one who wants Justices to have empathy, i.e., using personal feelings to influence their decision. I disagree with that. I want them to interpret the Constitution per the intent of the framers who actually wrote the thing and therefore likely had a decent idea (as in better than anybody else's) as to what it meant.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#33 Dec 13, 2012
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> What are you talking about?
<quoted text> Again, what are you talking about? Justice Scalia (At least you did call him 'Justice Scalia" and not just Scalia) deserves respect for what he has acheived, which is why he has acheived his position. Just like Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor. You see, adults can disagree with other adults while not descending into childish and name calling or disrespectful behavior.
And in the military (have you ever worn the uniform?) one salutes the rank if not the person who has earned said rank. But also in the military, bother officers and enlisted earn respect for their accomplishments. One does not earn promotion by not performing their jobs.
I can, and do disagree with Mr. Obama and would have preferred a different outcome in the election. Still, I respect his having earned acheived a position that only 43 other men in history have acheived, unlike some others who did not have similar respect for his predessor.
Now you. Why do you deserve respect? Do you deserve any? And why should anybody have respect for you based on your words and behavior in this forum?
I am a Navy Veteran, when we first ran into each other I was posting under my name, all that's changed is my nic......you have sent me e-mails before under a rather bizarre name and now, you don't know who I am......reading my profile might help that!!!!

Oh and saluting an officer is a requirement, it has nothing necessarily to do with respecting the person, more respecting the regulations!!!

I don't deserve respect unless I earn it or it's coming from my children or grandchildren!!!

By the way.....the name's Rose!!!

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#34 Dec 13, 2012
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> What are you talking about?
<quoted text> Again, what are you talking about? Justice Scalia (At least you did call him 'Justice Scalia" and not just Scalia) deserves respect for what he has acheived, which is why he has acheived his position. Just like Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor. You see, adults can disagree with other adults while not descending into childish and name calling or disrespectful behavior.
And in the military (have you ever worn the uniform?) one salutes the rank if not the person who has earned said rank. But also in the military, bother officers and enlisted earn respect for their accomplishments. One does not earn promotion by not performing their jobs.
I can, and do disagree with Mr. Obama and would have preferred a different outcome in the election. Still, I respect his having earned acheived a position that only 43 other men in history have acheived, unlike some others who did not have similar respect for his predessor.
Now you. Why do you deserve respect? Do you deserve any? And why should anybody have respect for you based on your words and behavior in this forum?
By the way, it's Mr. President or President Obama......he deserves at least being addressed properly!!!

We still address former Presidents and Governors with their title, our current President deserves no less considering he is Our President!!!
BS Detector

Los Angeles, CA

#35 Dec 13, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, it's Mr. President or President Obama......he deserves at least being addressed properly!!!
We still address former Presidents and Governors with their title, our current President deserves no less considering he is Our President!!!
"Mr." is a perfectly accepted form of address as are their office titles.(Did you really need six exclanation points?)
BS Detector

Los Angeles, CA

#36 Dec 13, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
I am a Navy Veteran, when we first ran into each other I was posting under my name, all that's changed is my nic......you have sent me e-mails before under a rather bizarre name and now, you don't know who I am......reading my profile might help that!!!!
Oh and saluting an officer is a requirement, it has nothing necessarily to do with respecting the person, more respecting the regulations!!!
I don't deserve respect unless I earn it or it's coming from my children or grandchildren!!!
By the way.....the name's Rose!!!
Ah, yes! Rose! Sorry. It's been a while. Apologies for forgetting your nic. Hope you are your better half are doing well.

1. Your profile is currently blocked.

2. You're Navy. The less said about that the better.:-)

3. "I don't deserve respect unless I earn it or it's coming from my children or grandchildren!!!" I completely agree.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#37 Dec 13, 2012
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> Ah, yes! Rose! Sorry. It's been a while. Apologies for forgetting your nic. Hope you are your better half are doing well.
1. Your profile is currently blocked.
2. You're Navy. The less said about that the better.:-)
3. "I don't deserve respect unless I earn it or it's coming from my children or grandchildren!!!" I completely agree.
We are doing good......and no worries, I don't let comments bother me as much today as maybe I did a couple of years ago.......and I do understand your point, I just don't have a lot of respect for Justice Scalia and I seriously doubt he will change his position on this issue.

Don't be to hard on folks, remember this is just about voicing one's opinion and trust me, some opinions can get rather nasty and very ugly!!!

Peace and have a wonderful Holiday Season:-)

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#38 Dec 13, 2012
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> Ah, yes! Rose! Sorry. It's been a while. Apologies for forgetting your nic. Hope you are your better half are doing well.
1. Your profile is currently blocked.
2. You're Navy. The less said about that the better.:-)
3. "I don't deserve respect unless I earn it or it's coming from my children or grandchildren!!!" I completely agree.
Where I post my be blocked, but you should be able to view my profile on the side:-)

Since: Jan 08

Portland, OR

#39 Dec 13, 2012
NoQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Have not seen that on Topix like you're saying, however I have seen it from several of your kind on here.
If a Hetero would threaten or wish someone dead on here, they've be repercussions. If Gays or Satans Wh_ore post anything like that, nothing is ever said or done about it. You make a comment to Jade or one of you all and they turn it around like it were you that did something wrong and not them. So I don't want to hear anything about what you think I might or might not notice, cause you all sure don't.
As attributed to Clarence Darrow, I, too, may not have killed anyone, but their obituaries gave me great satisfaction. There are several obits in the future that will give me great pleasure when I see them, perhaps yours as well.
Ray

Lincoln City, OR

#41 Dec 13, 2012
The court system does not have the authority to redefine marriage.

“MARY HARTMAN, MARY HARTMAN”

Since: Nov 12

Avon, Co

#43 Dec 14, 2012
I see the mentally ill closeted homosexual troll is on this thread too! He's seems to live on mine but now is on other LGBT threads. He can't get enough because he's a closet case.

A real hetero male would not be wasting time on LGBT threads. He would be trying to hook up with a woman.
BS Detector

Los Angeles, CA

#44 Dec 14, 2012
Queen Elizabeth 1st wrote:
A real hetero male would not be wasting time on LGBT threads. He would be trying to hook up with a woman.
When, and how, did you become an expert on "real hetero male(s)?" Do you, by that reasoning, allow that a hetero male can be an expert on real gay men? I've seen a whole bunch of really stupid comments by born-again nut jobs opining about the evil of gays, said opinions being rather, well, stupid. A "real hetero" can't comment contrary to your point of view and still "be trying to hook up with a woman?" Would you have the same stupid opinion if his views were the same as yours? You've never heard of, or been at all proficient in, multi-tasking... beyond the occasional walking and simultaneously chewing gum? Do not even you see how your stupid tantrum reflects badly on legitimate exchange of ideas?

Now, since I'm far more intelligent and a whole boatload more honest than you can ever hope to be, I will also demonstrate my uncanny ability to predict the future. I predict that you (and perhaps others on your side) will respond with something stupid (do you see a recurring theme here?) that you will foolishly and mistakenly consider to be ever so clever.

Prove me wrong, Queen. Seriously. Give it your best, albeit inadequate, shot. And try to not sound like a raging, flaming Queen in the process. Personally, I don't believe you are capable of doing that.

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

#45 Dec 14, 2012
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> Well, it's getting a bit off topic but that's how the left works and many people agree with that. They are into power and control more than the founding principles and the people........
As are our Republican leaders. It's not a "right vrs left" argument most of the time, although both side would have it framed so.

It a matter of who will take the most, and from whom it will be taken.
FP

United States

#46 Dec 14, 2012
Key word is "will be" they are starting to group everyone who disagrees as "haters" and eventually will probably be lumped under the "hate speech" law.

I personally don't care what consenting adults do behind closed doors but people have just as much right to disagree with homosexuality and not be called "haters"
No More Apples

El Paso, TX

#47 Dec 14, 2012
Maybe Scalia does not need to be enlightened. Maybe he simply has a differing opinion on gay marriage. Why can't we simply agree to disagree in a civil way?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Once more on fascism knocking on the Balkan doo... (Aug '09) 42 min Dalmatino 1,046
Is Vladimir Putin Another Adolf Hitler? 57 min Fa-Foxy 904
Five Disgraced Business Owners Who Learned That... 1 hr Willinrichland 9
3 states, plaintiffs want Supreme Court to hear... 3 hr Fa-Foxy 7
California Takes a Stand Against Gay and Trans ... 3 hr Dubya 42
7 Surprising Ways Your Company Can Still Discri... 3 hr NE Jade 3
Supreme Court: Was gay marriage settled in 1972... 4 hr TomInElPaso 541
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 4 hr Pietro Armando 54,871
Biggest Gay Lies 4 hr Dwayne 1,678
Gay Marriage Vs. the First Amendment 8 hr dduttonnc 398
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Gay/Lesbian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••