« Is Obama A Democrat Eisenhower? | Main | The Knucklehead of the Day award »

The Great National Sissy Hissy Fit

Well, yesterday was the big day for people to hold massive rallies in support of gay marriage.

Yeah, I didn't notice it much, too, but I was at work. And New Hampshire just passed a civil unions bill in the last couple of years, so we're OK -- for now.

The push for gay marriage is not something that will be won by a couple of judges, or screaming demands, or threats of violence and coercion and retaliation against its opponents. And, quite frankly, it will not be won by people like these exhibitionistic idiots. (warning -- SERIOUSLY NSFW images. They're from San Francisco during a street fair this summer. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.)

No, what will win the day in the end (so to speak) -- and I both hope and believe that it will happen -- is that enough "normal" gay people -- as in "they're a lot like us, they just do things a bit differently in private" -- will resent their case, calmly and rationally, appealing to America's sense of fair play and decency, it will happen.

It already is. 20 years ago, in most places, gays were pretty thoroughly closeted across most of the nation. Four states (including, as I said, New Hampshire) offer civil unions. Another four have "domestic partnerships." And the world has not come to an end.

When you push a demand for something, you can usually expect a push back. And the harder you push, the harder the pushback will likely be.

There's an old saying that "you get more flies with honey than vinegar." The folks out in California could stand to be reminded of that.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/33001.

Comments (38)

What you failed to mention ... (Below threshold)

What you failed to mention is that over the past ten years, thirty-five states have put in their state constitutions that marriage is between one man and one woman. While this trend continues, the gay community still insist on having the "marriage" tag added to all the civil rights they have been afforded.

The whole agenda is that a marriage between two men or two women is the same as the religious traditional marriage of one man and one woman. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME AND THEY NEVER WILL BE.

In a large Saturday Portlan... (Below threshold)

In a large Saturday Portland, Oregon rally, both the Mayor, who is the former Portland Police Chief, as well as the Mayor-Elect both addressed a large crowd. This certainly added legitimacy to this large rally attended by supporters for full civil rights for all citizens.

"And New Hampshire just pas... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"And New Hampshire just passed a civil unions bill in the last couple of years, so we're OK -- for now."

Wanna bet?

They want it all, and if the courts won't give it to them, they're gonna get in your face.

I'm still waiting for them to demonstrate in front of a Black or Chicano church.

There is still a majority o... (Below threshold)
Stan25:

There is still a majority of people in this country (mostly in "Flyover country") think that gays are an abomination and should not be given any rights, other than the basic ones. These are the hard working blue collar non-union people that still have moral values. The demonstrations in the large liberal bastions of our larger cities are going alienate them further from the rest of the country.

We are sick and tired of every pissant minority forcing their will upon us, because they think they have been discriminated against. It is the minorities that are doing the major share of the discriminating, by demanding what they know that they will never get. Falling over on your back and kicking and screaming in a circle will not endear them to anyone. It is about time they learned this.

You can't stop it. Gay mar... (Below threshold)
Me:

You can't stop it. Gay marriage will happen. Gay people are no more able to NOT be gay than you are able to NOT be heterosexual. Nobody is asking you to stop doing what comes natural to you so if you think you can stop gay people from being gay or protesting for the same rights, forget it. Get used to it. And Stan, you are a bigoted piece of shit.

It is a hissy fit, isn't it... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

It is a hissy fit, isn't it.

If the "Gay Movement" wants our respect, it'd be best to drop the junior high school girl hysterics.

There is a cure of homosexu... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

There is a cure of homosexuality. It's called Sharia law and according to government sources in places like Iran, it has eliminated homosexuality completely. If we lose the war with Islamic terrorists we'll get to see if it does the same here.

By the way, "Me," if being ... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

By the way, "Me," if being gay were normal, there'd be no humans on earth, as the gay lifestyle is a non-procreation one.

BEER NUTS!!... (Below threshold)
Chris G:

BEER NUTS!!

It's no great wonder the ma... (Below threshold)
Hansel2:

It's no great wonder the majority of Americans reject the politics and cloaked racism of some in the right. And no, I don't give a rats ass what religion you hide behind so you can claim your intolerance and bigotry is God's will. I grew up a Congregational Protestant and not a single minister in my church would preach the garbage you people seem to.

I'm a heterosexual male - yet to me, the idea of dictating the terms of a gay person's life here through legislation is grotesque and backward. Quite honestly, if there are those out there who truly feel gay people are an "abomination" who deserve less rights than we have, you're the real trash you need to look in the mirror. Your ignorance and intolerance is embarrassing and, by the way, the opposite of Christ's teachings (no, I don't care how you interpret the bible. The minute your interpretation descriminates against others, you've completely missed the point).

You want to argue over the term "marriage" as opposed to "civil union" - well, I think there's an argument there. To co-opt the term "marriage" can be a non-starter for many. But to me, that's all it should be. Linquistics.

"You want to argue over the... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"You want to argue over the term "marriage" as opposed to "civil union" - well, I think there's an argument there. To co-opt the term "marriage" can be a non-starter for many. But to me, that's all it should be. Linquistics."

Congratulations.....this is EXACTLY why most people voted the way they did. But the hissy-fit crowd wants to claim discrimination, bigotry, hatred, etc. Makes for better press. Which is also in their pocket. While I've seen many letters to the editor stating the above; I've yet to see it in any of the 'articles' in the MSM. Selective amnesia, just like with Obama.

How come the left wants to ... (Below threshold)
GianiD:

How come the left wants to make/change the rules as they go.

They put Prop 8 up for a vote, why not respect the will of the people?

Hansel2,I... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Hansel2,

I grew up a Congregational Protestant and not a single minister in my church would preach the garbage you people seem to.

Too bad you didn't pay attention; you might have learned there's a difference between the sinner and the sin. Christ died to save sinners, but nowhere in the Bible does it even imply that God is ok with sin. God forgives the repentant adulterer, but does not condone adultery. God forgives the repentant murderer, but does not condone murder. Both the old and new Testaments clearly teach homosexual acts are sin.

I know others like you don't agree, nevertheless we live in a society where voters still have some say in how this society operates. As a Bible believing Christian I have every right to vote according to my beliefs just as anyone else does, and I don't need ignorant fools telling me that it's racist or hatred. If you want to persecute me for my religious beliefs, well you'll find me taking a lot more interest in suppressing those doing the persecuting and there are many millions like me. It might be a good idea for gays to back off and be happy with civil unions while they still have them.

That is it in a nutshell Ma... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

That is it in a nutshell Mac Lorry. But the left find it impossible to disagree with someone but not hate them. That is the way they are. ww

It kind of makes me wonder ... (Below threshold)

It kind of makes me wonder why, in states where civil unions provide the same rights and privileges, they would continue to harp on the word "marriage". I thought this was about equal rights, not equal terminology.

I have no problem with gay couples having a binding contract recognized by the state to extend all the same rights as a traditional hetero couple who, incidentally, has to have the same legal binding contract. So what if they're called different things? They ARE different.

It's not even about "gay", ... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

It's not even about "gay", it's about state tax revenue. More weddings bring more money. You can fool some of the people some of the time...

Pardon my un-PCedness, but ... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Pardon my un-PCedness, but I still think it's a defect like alcoholism. My personal prejudice, but from my visit to San Francisco, and reading the likes of Andrew Sullivan, it appears to be more of an "affliction" than the trait of a healthy person.

That's my bias--dysfunction exists in nature, but it's not "natural" in the sense that it is a good thing, or healthy.

By the way, I don't hate. I know some very nice gay folks. And some nice alcoholics, too.

The tactics of sending whit... (Below threshold)
Thomas Jackson:

The tactics of sending white powder to churches, disrespecting church services, boycotting businesses that don't support the queer cause, attacking old women, and acting gay is a sure way to win converts and respect.

Keep it up. I'm sure all those people out their will support the queer nation.

Real soon.

If those people in those ph... (Below threshold)
Stan25:

If those people in those photos, had been straight, they would have been thrown in jail for indecent exposure. The cops would have called in the paddy wagons and made sure they would put into them. Being that they were queers, they got a free pass, because they were practicing free speech. What I want to know, since when having oral sex on the public sidewalk free speech for queers and not for the straights

Yeah, I didn't notice it... (Below threshold)
MyPetGloat:

Yeah, I didn't notice it much, too, but I was at work.


On a Saturday? These things happen when you don't meet the 37 pieces of flair quota.

The state really should hav... (Below threshold)

The state really should have no business in defining, promoting, prohibiting, condoning, regulating or deciding anything in regards to marriage. Period.

Marriage, by tradition, has been a socio-cultural institution, most often defined by religious doctrine. The state has not held any sort of interest in the tradition other than to provide a legal repository for recording marriages for the purpose of inheritance rights. From there it grew to include taxes, insurance, and other legal and financial rights and responsibilities. In other words, administrating the legal contract aspect of marriage.

But does being married require the legal contract? Can't marriage exist as a contract between a couple and God? If we stand before family and friends together, and make a vow to God that we will be faithful and loyal to, honor and obey until death do us part ... are we then married? Why or why not? Does the Christian Bible require anything more than this?

We certainly could go to the courthouse, obtain a marriage license, swear our commitment before a justice of the peace and be married that way. No prayer, no vow to God, no Biblical promises. Are we married then?

I submit that the two things are different. One is a contract with the state, the other is a vow before God. One offers financial and legal benefits, the other sanctifies the bond for eternity in line with Christian teaching.

Which one, really, are gays more interested in? In light of such passages as Romans 1:24-27, I would think that the religious marriage would be less appealing, and also harder to justify. So, why bother?

As a Bible believin... (Below threshold)
Hansel2:

As a Bible believing Christian I have every right to vote according to my beliefs just as anyone else does, and I don't need ignorant fools telling me that it's racist or hatred. If you want to persecute me for my religious beliefs, well you'll find me taking a lot more interest in suppressing those doing the persecuting and there are many millions like me.

You apparently don't see the hypocricy in any of this, but that's not unusual for someone so narrow minded.


"Avoid hypocrisy. Consider your own faults rather than criticizing others." Matthew 7:3-4

"Treat others as you would like to be treated." Luke 6:31-34

There's many lessons in the bible that contradict your hard line on "punishing" the sinners. Let God punish the sinners. This is not your job, unless you fancy yourself God.

Furthermore, there is a reason this country has chosen a separation between church and state - it's because intolerant kooks, with the right amount of backing, could turn this country into a theocracy. Fortunately, the founding fathers were smart enough to consider this.

And, as far as your beliefs being racist or bigoted, I think people with these type of beliefs find their own justification any way they can. There are millions of Christians who would disagree with your interpretation, just as there are millions of Muslim who scoff at the belief that all Christian infidels should be destroyed. Beyond that, if the alternate interpretation (from yours) of the bible allows for treating others equally, I'm apt to believe yours is wrong.

Try this. Stay out of others lives. Someone being gay and wanting to have a civil union does not impact your life (I know you think it does, but you're just wrong, again). We're not heading back to the times of Sodom and Gomorrah. I know it's convenient to believe that, since it allows you to continue being a bigot, but it's just not so.

@Hansel2There is not... (Below threshold)

@Hansel2
There is nothing hateful or bigoted about stating the fact that the Bible says homosexuality is a sin. There is nothing hateful or bigoted about being a devout Christian that holds the Bible to be the true, complete and inerrant Word of God. But calling those who believe in the Bible hateful and bigoted seems, well ... hateful and bigoted, don't you think?

Homosexual behavior is a sin in the same way adultery, stealing, murder and lying, among others, are sins. And homosexual people are sinners ... JUST LIKE EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE REST OF US ARE SINNERS.

Plain and simple facts there. No judgment, no condemnation. Just the facts.

WHY should any state or government entity justify, or worse - condone - any sinful behavior?

But the left find i... (Below threshold)
hansel2:

But the left find it impossible to disagree with someone but not hate them.

Find anywhere in my post - or for that matter, others - where they've said "I hate you." I hate your some of your beliefs, simply because If see them as intolerant and exclusionary. Not very Christian. But your twisted interpretation of the world around you is likely another reason people like you have lost all power in the government. Most are looking beyond division.

Even without the religious ... (Below threshold)
Mckay:

Even without the religious implications, there are serious legal issues with same sex marriage. It is not a "fundamental right" to marry someone of the same sex any more than it is a "fundamental right" to marry ten consenting adults. The love may be the same, but the legalities are not. Our legal system has limits for a reason. Marriage has been defined as one man - one woman legally.

People argue that it is all linguistics. That is what all law is about - linguistic definitions of what is legal and what is not. That is the essence of it. The people of the state of California have spoken. The people who believed in traditional marriage outvoted the people who believed in same sex marriage. It's a democracy.

I didn't vote for Obama and my vote lost. That doesn't mean I will be out picketing and rioting. Obama will be my president, just as he will be yours, and I will respect him as that. More concerning that a vote that didn't go their way, is the thought that same sex unions are not only "entitled" to marriage, but to bully the state of California and its citizens because they lost the vote. It wouldn't be tolerated in the presidential election and it shouldn't be tolerated in any election.

Talk about fundamental rights - what about the right to vote without being retaliated against?

Hansel, to enlighten you, t... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Hansel, to enlighten you, this country is of, by and for the people. If my government approves of gay marraige, then that means I have signed off on it. I would be a reluctant co conspiritor. homosexuality is what it is. Plain and simple. I do not want them harmed or mocked, but they should be prayed for and pitied. In your mind, it is either or. You accept them or I am a bigot that does not follow the tenants of my faith.

I have no idea why those that adamantly support homosexual marriage cannot understand those that just as adamantly do not. ww

WHY should any stat... (Below threshold)
hansel2:

WHY should any state or government entity justify, or worse - condone - any sinful behavior?

Because what you consider sinful behavior in the Christian faith another faith or religion might not. And this is a country that allows freedom for many religions - and a government that is not supposed to be governed by any one of them in particular.

And as far as being hateful in my condemnation of someone who discriminates? Well, first I am not "hateful" of that person...second, while I can tolerate someone who might think Hootie and the Blowfish are groundbreaking, I find a great deal of difficulty not voicing my opinion (opinion, not legislation) about an opinion that is exclusionary at it's core - and treats another group of people as second class citizens.

McKay,I agree with... (Below threshold)
hansel2:

McKay,

I agree with you that it should be a state-by-state definition - and as i mentioned before, this is a case of civil union and not marriage. If a group wants to co-opt the term marriage, I would have issue with that as well.

There are, granted, some states that their constituents will not in any form approve a civil union. I may disagree with them, but that is the democratic system. I don't think any of this should be federally mandated. And if a majority of American's decided it should be federally mandated, than that's democracy. But as it is now, it's not a majority.

Personally, it doesn't affect me. I don't care if my neighbors are gay, straight, legally bound or living in sin. It's not my need to dictate the terms of another person's life because I feel uncomfortable.

And I also have friends who are gay. I don't "protect" my kids from them. I don't "pity" them as Wildwillie seems to (that's just a neanderthalic notion and very condescending). I just accept them for who they are.

If my government ap... (Below threshold)
hansel2:

If my government approves of gay marraige, then that means I have signed off on it.

No, it means your democratic system is working just fine and disgrees with you - and you can feel free to sit home and gripe about it.

I have no idea why ... (Below threshold)
hansel2:

I have no idea why those that adamantly support homosexual marriage cannot understand those that just as adamantly do not.

Could you understand if you were told you couldn't legally marry your wife because society finds your desire to "marry" another person detestable?

Could you understand if were not allowed to legally vote because of the color of your skin?

The reason you don't understand is because you can't see beyond your prejudices. And if you chalk it all up to your religion being the catalyst for your descrimination, you really ought to question what your minister is preaching.

And, once again, when you use the term "marriage" you cloud the issue. Is it "marriage" you have a problem with or a legal contract between two consenting adults? And if it is just your religion that is dictating your position, that is why this is a country that doesn't govern simply to your religion alone.

hansel2, <blo... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

hansel2,

You apparently don't see the hypocricy in any of this, but that's not unusual for someone so narrow minded.

Actually the narrow mind is yours. My beliefs are based on wisdom that has withstood the test of time.

"Avoid hypocrisy. Consider your own faults rather than criticizing others." Matthew 7:3-4

"Treat others as you would like to be treated." Luke 6:31-34

I'm not judging anyone, only believing what the Apostle Paul says about the homosexual act, that it's sin. You're the one who's judging and not just me, but the Apostle Paul.

There's many lessons in the bible that contradict your hard line on "punishing" the sinners. Let God punish the sinners. This is not your job, unless you fancy yourself God.

Our society punishes many sins including murder, theft, false witness. In fact if you knew anything about the Bible you would know it's the duty of government to punish such sins so that society can prosper.

Furthermore, there is a reason this country has chosen a separation between church and state - it's because intolerant kooks, with the right amount of backing, could turn this country into a theocracy. Fortunately, the founding fathers were smart enough to consider this.

Well you obviously don't understand what separation of church and state means. It's not even in the Constitution, but rather it's a doctrine of the Supreme Court. It in no way means individuals can't vote their beliefs and use all lawful means to shape society in the way they want. Gay's have used the courts and then complain when others using the ballot.

And, as far as your beliefs being racist or bigoted, I think people with these type of beliefs find their own justification any way they can. There are millions of Christians who would disagree with your interpretation.

It's not my interpretation. It's written quite clear in the Bible by the Apostle Paul. The millions of us who believe the Bible is the word of God accept as fact that the homosexual act is sin. Those who don't believe the Bible is the word of God, well I don't know why they bother with it at all. Calling someone's religion racist or bigoted is racist or bigoted itself.

Try this. Stay out of others lives. Someone being gay and wanting to have a civil union does not impact your life.

Anything that changes the laws of the land is my business and the business of every citizen. As soon as gays demanded legal rights they made it my business. I don't care that much what gays do, but as soon as they start persecuting Christians for their beliefs they cross a line they will come to regret crossing.

Hansel2, I can appreciate y... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Hansel2, I can appreciate your homosexual lifestryle is pushing you in this overly emotional lashing out you are demonstrating. But you should take a breather. Your arguments are not making sense. Just labels and name calling. Because I do not believe like you does not make me bigoted or prejudice. They are just hateful words you like to throw around. So much so, they have become meaningless.

I am responsible to my God for my actions. I want to please my God and condoning, encouraging or living in sin will keep from that relationship. It is that simple. I desire to be with God thus I have to live the way God says I should live. There are no gray areas here. Sin is sin. Whether governments legalize the sin does not make it NOT a sin, it is still a sin in Gods eyes. It seems you have a very huge argument with God. Talk to him. ww

Hansel2, I can appr... (Below threshold)
hansel2:

Hansel2, I can appreciate your homosexual lifestryle is pushing you in this overly emotional lashing out you are demonstrating.

First of all, it's a healthy debate. Secondly, and while I do not need to clarify this in any personal way, for the purposes of not clouding my position and motives, I stated earlier that I am not gay. Happily heterosexual.

Just have a few friends who are and find discrimination against them distasteful.

From our resident homophobe... (Below threshold)
JFO:

From our resident homophobe WW:

"I do not want them harmed or mocked, but they should be prayed for and pitied." # 26 above.

Tell us Willie how this and your statements about sin and God fits with your suggestion back in March that terrorists be released on the city of San Francisco? Now it's pretty easy to figure out why you would pick San Francisco as a place to unleash terrorism on innocent people. Enlighten us would you Willie?

It still amazes me the "so ... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

It still amazes me the "so tolerant" left cannot get their minds aroung this.

I work in the healthcare field and have many friends that are gay. They know where I stand. They accept it. They think I am wrong and I think they are wrong, but they also know we have a right to our beliefs. Pretty grown up stuff, huh? You should try it Hansel2. ww

I work in the healt... (Below threshold)
Hansel2:

I work in the healthcare field and have many friends that are gay. They know where I stand. They accept it.

I know people who are racist. I tell them they're wrong. They tell me I'm wrong. I know they have a right to their beliefs and I wouldn't deny them their opinion. Doesn't make them right, no matter how much they believe it - or if it were even condoned by their religion (women are treated as property in some religious circles. Doesn't make it right).

hmm I find discriminatio... (Below threshold)
MF:

hmm I find discrimination tasteless as well

how about in recent years.
I have white qualified male friends that are having trouble finding jobs because of all of the 'fairness legal laws'
something to think about
maybe we have gone too far and need to simplify
and get back to the constitutional basics

Hansel, now your being plai... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Hansel, now your being plain stupid. I get it comes naturally though?

I see murderers on the news. I think what they did was wrong but they believe the person had it coming. On and on the stupidity goes with you lefties. ww




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy