I knocked on doors and called in Maine, (0.00 / 0)and I used the script, but I never felt all that honest about it. I don’t support gay marriage because I’m so fond of gays–I don’t have gay friends or family–and I don’t support gay marriage because I’m so fond of marriage–though I am.

I support gay marriage because I support equal rights. I took my 4-year-old son to a rally, and explained to him that while a woman is allowed to marry a man, a man is not allowed to marry that very same man … just because he’s a boy.

That pissed him right off. How come a girl can marry Bill, but he isn’t allowed?

I guess I’m in a tiny fraction of a solipsistic minority, but I don’t see this is a gay issue. I don’t work on this issue for anyone except myself, my he’s-already-checking-out-girls-at-five-years-old son, and my country.

All of that said, this looks like a great tool. Almost as good as my personal conversational favorite: go batshit on them.

chengdulaoshi

I think what Ms. McCain is doing is calling out the Republican Party for *their* hypocrisy in sheltering Miss Prejean from outright ostracism in deference to her position on gay marriage.

I greatly respect Ms. McCain for her position on gay marriage, and I realize that it must take enormous courage for a Republican to express support for a gay’s right to marry the person he or she loves.

I believe that marriage is a fundamental human right, and laws restricting that right must be subject to strict scrutiny.

In other words, unless the law is necessary to accomplish a compelling state objective (and no less restrictive means is available to accomplish the objective), the law is unconstitutional and void ab initio.

I have yet to hear opponents of gay marriage state a legitimate, much less compelling, state objective that requires restricting marriage to a man and a woman. All they can say is “marriage is between a man and a woman because marriage is between a man and a woman.” This obviously begs the question.

Although the religious right and the anti-gay marriage crowd are certainly entitled to their personal notions of what a marriage should be, they must not be allowed to cram those notions down other people’s throats.

This nation was founded by people who were deeply suspicious of religiosity and the strong tendency of some people to subvert the legitimate purposes of law to further their personal religious agenda. That’s why the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a state religion.

Laws forbidding marriages between homosexuals are analogous to the establishment of a State Religion, where marriage will only be permitted in cases in which it comports with the State Religion’s definition of a marriage.

I think President Obama has articulated a position on gay marriage that was designed not to offend a large percentage of the electorate. Although I support Mr. Obama, I think this is an unfortunate stance that he has taken, which is inconsistent with his stated desire of equal human rights for all Americans.

History has shown that the notion of human rights evolves with societal norms. At one time, slavery was not only legal, it was considered by many to be a moral good. Less than 50 years ago, a black man and a white woman could be imprisoned in America for up to five years for the “crime” of interracial marriage.

The day will come when the U.S. Supreme Court recognizes that anti-gay marriage laws operate to deny gay citizens their 14th Amendment right to equal protection under the laws, and identifies the right of gay citizens to marry the person of their choice to be a fundamental human right.

It may not happen during our lifetimes, however.

I am on a never ending search for a rational argument against same sex marriage and all of the other rights that are denied to LGBT people. I not only have not found one, it’s getting more and more challenging to find any new arguments. So when I do, I feel compelled to share them.

If only because we all need a laugh.

If you have read any of my blogs, you know I like to analyze reader comments on news articles.

dynagen says:

Proof of human rights violations against hetero married couples:
1. the gay couple will never have to agonize over family planning, or the side effects of drugs.
2. the gay couple will never have to agonize over sterilization
3. the gay couple will never have to agonize over abortion
4. the gay couple will never have to have an untimely birth, and when they want one, there would be money in the house.
5. the gay couple, through adoption, has control of choice in: sex selection, race, appearance, motor, psych and mental skills. They are not obligated to choose a disabled child because they do not birth any.
6. the gay couple will be less likely to have to experience debt, as the burden of educating and raising children, while keeping them safe and healthy.
The agony that homosexuals have to deal with regarding their orientation is no more nor no less than the agonies hetero married couples must face in life. Gays want all the joys, none of the sorrow: heteros always will have B

September 5, 3:26 PM

dynagen says:

heteros always will have BOTH. You acll that fair? In fact it is a human rights violation, HAVING NOTHING TO DO W/RELIGION. Oh, and dare I ask if it is fair for the gay married woman to have the magic right to look her same lovely self after getting a child in comparison to the trainwreck heteros wives look like after going through the PAINS of birth, which the oh so privileged and newly endowed gay married woman does not have to endure. Nor the fact that she might have to have her belly opened, uterus exposed, for a child to come out, and pay $12G for that RIGHT? Wow, what a privilege! Which hetero married woman WOULDN’T give her right ovary to have a painless birth, look like a princess immediately afterward, cost nothing, and can even take part in CHOOSING a perfectly cute, nondisabled, right sexed, perfectly TIMED baaaaaby? Only the elite of the elite! The gay married class, who simply must regard that stupid breeder class of getting nothing right!

Wow! Dynagen has had some kind of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder going on here.

I really had no clue gay couples had it so easy when it comes to having children. Here I thought they had to  first find a clinic willing to provide artificial insemination to lesbian couples, it’s even more challenging for men. Using a surrogate mom can run up to $100,000. You have to really want a child to spend that kind of money.

Any pregnant woman, straight or gay,  may have to agonize over an abortion if there is something medically wrong with the fetus. Gay people will never have a disabled child? Lesbians run the same risk as straight women.

The fact that straight people have unwanted pregnancies is their own fault. I don’t think you can blame that on gay people.  Everyone in this day and age has access to birth control, unless they were raised in a religious fundamentalist bubble that doesn’t teach them about birth control. Agonize over sterilization? Who agonizes over sterilization? It’s a choice. Hmm, do you mean if a woman has to have her ovaries or uterus removed due to a medical condition? The odds are the same for lesbians. You think lesbians don’t get ovarian cancer, cervical cancer, endometriosis?

Gay couples often cannot adopt children as a couple, with both individuals having parental rights. Gay couples often adopt unwanted children.

Less likely to experience debt because they don’t have the burden of educating and raising children? If children are a burden to you, DON’T HAVE THEM. Safe and healthy? Never thought I would be pointing out that alcohol and drug abuse can be a problem in the LGBT community, due to homophobia and lack of acceptance. Yes, let’s get mad at the LGBT people who consciously do their best to take care of their safety and healthy. Because straight people certainly don’t have that choice! We’re forced to be obese, not exercise and have unprotected sex.

Gay people have no more agonies than straight people? What wonderful society do you live in Dynagen where gay people have it so good? Let us know. LGBT people will move into the gayborhood in droves, along with their straight allies. Goodness knows they need a safe haven from bullying, discrimination, losing their jobs, not having rights to protect their partners and children, the ability to live their lives openly, free of the fear that they might be beaten or murdered.

Last, gay women go through the same ups and downs in a pregnancy as straight women. They do not have a higher rate of C sections, nor do they magically get their bodies back the day that babies are born.  If they did, I would have signed up to be a lesbian before I made the choice to become a mother.

Dynagen, if gay people had it this good, don’t you think straight people would be converting as fast as they could?

It seems to me that 50 million people without healthcare is national failure. Death panels? They are called insurance companies. They have to make money too. Hospitals and doctors? Need to learn to implement practices to stop making mistakes. Need to start using more physicians assistants, nurse practitioners and other health care specialists. Did you know that the percent of time that a doctor gets the right diagnosis and right treatment on the first visit is around 25%? How many times have you had to keep going back to the doctor? Think about it. Clearly, there is research and work to be done to improve this. It isn’t the fault of well intentioned doctors. It’s a combination of the current healthcare system and the state of science and medicine.

Here is what I do know.

What if this were education? Would we really tolerate not educating 50 million people?  Our founding fathers, in one of their looking into the future moments, realized that if all citizens were educated, then society is better off. No, it’s not “free” as I was recently told by a right-winger. Taxpayers pay for it. And as a taxpayer, I can tell you I certainly prefer to live in a society where people are educated. Could public education use some help? Why yes it could. In fact, it could use some help just uncovering their ears and listening to our President tell children and parents to work hard in school, work toward goals and be responsible.

Gasp. Such socialist rhetoric. Cover the ears of our children and haul out the death panel bedtime stories just so you can sleep at night.

Would we accept a world where parents had to pay for their children’s education? And those that could not afford it would not go to school? Don’t the same arguments apply? After all, if only the children of parents wealthy enough get to go to school, the odds are good that test scores will go up. If we send those who cannot afford it, gasp the “quality of education” might go down.

Sounds ridiculous, biased and offensive, doesn’t it?

Republicans and Teabaggers are against a public option.

Don’t like public options? Better start to make a list because it is long. Say good bye to:

Free roads. Yep, my Illinois iPass is gonna be real handy now. If I decide to drive on all of those toll roads.

Set up private police and fire departments. It should be covered by your insurance right? Can’t afford insurance? Too bad for you. Why weren’t you born richer? Underprivileged? Not in America, where any big corporation CEO can earn millions a year running a company into the ground.

Bye bye National Parks, State Parks, County Parks, City Parks. Sure, some have a nominal fee. But it doesn’t cover the cost.

Wait, don’t go. I haven’t gotten to the biggies. Social Security for seniors and disabled, Medicare and Medicaid, public colleges that are largely subsidized by taxpayer dollars. Remember when Bush wanted to privatize Social Security, when stocks were booming? I think if he had gotten his way, the economy would be even worse off than it is now. I lost half of my 401k. You really want me to believe that the private sector is well run? Hey, I’m not saying the government will be written up in Harvard Business Review right next to Jack Welch. I’m just saying, not that many companies are stellar. Certainly I don’t feel a lot of sympathy for bankers and brokers on Wall Street.

Let’s not have taxes for anything. You want it? You pay for it, you donate to it. That includes the military too. Want a war? Have a bake sale.

Obama’s HealthCare Speech

Shared via AddThis

Marriage. The word of this decade. Opponents of same sex marriage, the kinder ones, will say “call it anything but marriage”. I have to admit, at least they are willing to give gays and lesbians equal rights. I think they just don’t understand what the word marriage means to a couple. It’s a reflection of the commitment that two people have together. If you are in a domestic partnership, how do you answer the question “Are you married?” Better yet, how do we now ask if a person is single or….. what? Married? Domesticated? Civil unionized?

Marriage is a religious word. Really? Then why is it on a marriage license? I decided to look for some marriage licenses. I looked at my own. Nope, nothing there asking me my religion. I looked on the web. Could not find a single license that asked what religion the parties were. Couldn’t find one asking if they plan to procreate. But most surprisingly, many did not ask if the parties were male or female. Take a look for yourself.

Marriage is a secular word that has been used by the legal system for well over a hundred years. It seems  a little late to make a claim that it is a religious word. It’s just a word. Just because it appears in a religious text, doesn’t make it a religious word, any more than father or mother are religious words.

For information on marriage laws in all 50 states, click here.

When I was growing up, I remember President Kennedy saying

“Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”

As an eight year old, who kept a Camelot scrapbook, I was idealistic and already had a sense of pulling my own weight, I knew right from wrong and I knew what fairness and justice were.

Fast forward to today.

Isn’t working hard and being responsible the conservative pitch? If you are a conservative, please, explain your gripe with this. You want kids to be lazy and irresponsible?

We all know this isn’t why they are objecting. They don’t like Obama. They have taken their ball and gone home. Except they didn’t shut up. They will not like a single thing that Obama says, even if it is what they completely agree with.

These are the same people whose ministers are OPENLY admitting that they are praying for Obama to die. Did anyone pray for Bush to die? You might say yes but everyone I know didn’t. Because we all knew Cheney was worse. (The key to staying President is to select a VP that no one would want.)

These are the same people that want prayer in school, God in science class, and are terrified that teaching children that gay people exist, that their children will become gay.

These are the same people, who after Sept. 11, demanded that children say the pledge of allegiance every morning in class. And when they didn’t, they were marginalized and called traitors. These are the same people that supported the Patriot Act and holding suspected terrorists for years without any charges.

These are the same people who were mad when allegations of abuse at Guantonomo became public because it undermined our nation’s security. These are the same people who state that waterboarding isn’t torture, yet refuse to be waterboarded to prove it.

These are the same people who teach abstinence, which only leads to higher pregnancy rates, teach that people they don’t like are going to hell. These are the same people who think that only Christianity is the true religion, that Obama’s healthcare plan will lead to death panels and all was right under George W. Bush.

Well, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t force your religion into schools and government, then complain when the President of the United States wants to tell children to work hard and be responsible.

So why do I think prayer belongs in school?  I don’t. But prayer seems to be the last resort, since neither logic nor civil discourse works with people who refuse to unclench their fists.

Barna report: Variation in divorce rates among Christian faith groups:

** Barna uses the term “non-denominational” to refer to Evangelical Christian congregations that are not affiliated with a specific denomination. The vast majority are fundamentalist in their theological beliefs. More info.

Barna’s results verified findings of earlier polls: that conservative Protestant Christians, on average, have the highest divorce rate, while mainline Christians have a much lower rate. They found some new information as well: that atheists and agnostics have the lowest divorce rate of all.  George Barna commented that the results raise “questions regarding the effectiveness of how churches minister to families.” The data challenge “the idea that churches provide truly practical and life-changing support for marriage.“

Donald Hughes, author of The Divorce Reality, said:

“In the churches, people have a superstitious view that Christianity will keep them from divorce, but they are subject to the same problems as everyone else, and they include a lack of relationship skills. …Just being born again is not a rabbit’s foot.”

Hughes claim that 90% of divorces among born-again couples occur after they have been “saved.”

From Religioustolerance.org

Teacher burns a cross into a students arm. Wins Christian Soldier of the Day Award.

Gay rights activist Cleve Jones will speak in Madison

Cleve Jones, friend of gay rights pioneer Harvey Milk and founder of the AIDS Memorial Quilt, will be speaking in Madison on Monday, August 31^st. Jones is currently organizing the Nation Equality March in Washington D.C. on October 10 and 11 to demand equal rights under the law for the LGBT community.

Cleve Jones will speak at 7:30 p.m. in 3650 Humanities on the UW campus. Doors open at 7 pm. His talk, “Why We Can’t Wait,” will focus on the urgent need for demanding LGBT equality now.

“It is for equality. And it’s for shifting the strategy,” Jones said in an interview with Democracy Now. “We’re tired of this state-by-state, county-by-county, city-by-city struggle for fractions of equality.”

The event will be hosted by LGBTI Equality Now, a newly formed grassroots group in Madison and Haymarket Books, a Chicago-based radical book publisher. LGBTI Equality Now began out of inspiration from the victories of gay marriage in Iowa, Connecticut, Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire.

“We agree with Cleve Jones that it is time to demand full equality under federal law,” Emily Wickenhauser, LGBTI Equality Now organizer said. “With Obama’s vacillations on gay rights, it’s up to everyone who believes in equality, gay and straight, to demand civil rights.”

The event is co-sponsored by WORT Radio, Wisconsin Capital Pride, Outreach, International Socialist Organization, The Havens Center, Madison PFLAG, UW LGBT Campus Center and the MATC Pride Alliance, as well as LGBTI Equality Now and Haymarket Books,

Tickets are $5-10 (sliding scale) and are available at Room of One’s Own Bookstore (307 W Johnson St), Mother Fools Coffeehouse (1101 Williamson St), MATC Student Life Center (Truax, 3550 Anderson St.) and the LGBT Campus Center (UW Memorial Union, second floor), Woofs (114 King St) and Shamrock Bar (117 Main St.).

For more information, email lgbtequalitynow@gmail.com or call 608-446-0273.

###