Indexes
February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
February 1st, 2010
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Will terrorists be given Miranda warnings? (75)
- Lodi Unified School District president issues warning to speakers over cuts (64)
- President Obama's first year (45)
- Many reject the politics of 'no' (45)
- Islamic symbol in mosaic — what is all the fuss? (44)
- Writer comments on Neely column (42)
- The Home Depot hopes to join Costco at Reynolds Ranch (41)
- Time to shed the convenient sham of 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy (34)
- We need to conduct respectful conversations (30)
- Tasered suspect claims he is Yosemite Sam (25)
ADVERTISEMENT
Is same-sex marriage a civil rights issue?
Thursday, October 16, 2008 6:12 AM PDT
Emotions are high surrounding Proposition 8, the marriage amendment. Putting the religious aspect of the debate aside for a moment, let's look at it from a purely sociological standpoint.
A common argument is that gay marriage is a civil rights issue. But is it? As Americans, both heterosexuals and homosexuals have the same rights — the right to get an education, own a home, pursue a career, live where they want, worship as they choose and vote their convictions. As Americans, this is the way it should be.
But, gay activists say their civil rights are violated because homosexuals can't marry whom they want. This argument is flawed because heterosexuals can't marry whomever they want, either. If a man fell in love with his sister, his daughter or his female first cousin, society would prohibit him from marrying her. And, society would also prohibit a woman from marrying her brother, son or male first cousin even if she fell in love with him. There are moral laws in our society against this.
In our society, marriage is defined as the union of one man and one woman. A man can marry a woman of his choice and a woman can marry a man of her choice as long as that person is not already married and is distant in terms of blood relationship. This is held as morally acceptable by the majority of Americans and should not be changed. As proof, over 25 states have already passed marriage amendments defining valid marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman by an overall margin of 2 to 1.
The argument against gay marriage is not based on prejudice, hate or shoving one's morals down another's throat. It is based on societal moral convictions on what is natural and normal. And these moral convictions have been held for centuries. No, gay marriage is not about civil rights, it is about approval. It is about a small percentage of the population working to have their behavior, which the majority of Americans find morally wrong, accepted as normal by society. In deciding about Prop. 8, keep this in mind.
Frank Nolton
Woodbridge
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
begsbelief wrote on Oct 26, 2008 4:41 AM:
Marriage an insitution given by a God.
Why any one person who is not of the usual genders for marriage would consider marriage shocks me. Let me explain why I am shocked.
The same God who gave marriage for men and women is the same God who said homosexuality was not right.
Let me say, "I am not homophobic."
If I was gay, I would not get married because of the above fact. I would not want to get married because I am saying that this God is right on the things I agree wIth and wrong where I do not agree. How can I believe marriage is right? what is marriage?
What difference does it make. Divorce is expensive. What is the difference marriage makes? "
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 24, 2008 11:54 PM:
That's weak, Fruitchrist.
And telling me to do it won't work. You are impotent. You got yourself there, lie your way out of it or bet. "
real facts wrote on Oct 24, 2008 10:33 PM:
Now what? ").
DO IT "
real facts wrote on Oct 24, 2008 10:32 PM:
it's funny how you feigned you couldn't come up with those scriptures that YOU SAID for a father to have sex with his daughter. you full on lied about it, and twisted it's meaning, then when i asked you to prove it - BUPKISS.
all you will do is twist my words into your deviant amalgamation cesspool.
big whoop
as far as sam goes, i don't owe her squat, because she lied about who "real_facts" was, so you can keep throwing that lie out there all you want.
that's all your pathetic excuse of a life amounts to, is spraying the blogs with your sick lies.
prison would be too much of an allure for it to be a speedbump in your life.
with all your busyness of "normalizing" homosexuality, prison for you would be a dream come true. you wouldn't last a day in prison lying like you do in here.
in there, you would HAVE to tell the truth.....laughing
i can't believe how good billy is at making homosexuality seem normal, loving and warm/fuzzy. "
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 24, 2008 7:52 PM:
I'm satisfied with what your answer reveals about you and your fake religion. "
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 24, 2008 7:50 PM:
What would you be willing to wager that you did in fact say that? Not merely implied it, but flatly stated it.
Saint Fruitchrist wrote:"i NEVER said the financial collapse was a direct result of gays, but you might be right. thanks for owning it"
How much is this one worth to you?
Are you willing to honor your old (welched) debt to Sam and pay the $1,000 you still owe her? I'll bet she'd even let you do some good with your wretched self by donating the money to a charity of her choice.
C'mon, big boy. Pony up. You say you didn't say it, I say I copied the blog and you're lying.
Now what? "
real facts wrote on Oct 24, 2008 7:18 PM:
if they are caught having homosexual sex, then they should go to jail, just like it used to be.
come on now billy, your telling me that going to prison wouldn't create new exciting adventures for you?
with the ease in which you pass yourself around, you would think you would jump all over that, the chance of you being "queen billy" and all.
on a lighter note, there is a reason they QUARANTEEN inmates that are homosexual or HIV positive. even to criminals, your CHOSEN behavior is disgusting.
imagine that fact. even prison is a place that throws up when it thinks of you. if that isn't a barometer of what you chose to be, you are beyond help.
say, how is the war on "normalizing" homosexuality going? do you think your winning?
billy the human toilet. if you and i are still going at it in here 5 years from now, there will never be another eupheism that describes you better "
real facts wrote on Oct 24, 2008 7:07 PM:
i would be lying, like you are if i said that, because i don't hold that position, nor have i ever implied it.
it's just another one of your desperate pathetic lies that you pump out daily on your way to "normalizing" homosexuality.
but hey, cheer up. voter thinks your sane. isn't that great? robb thinks your lies and perversion are acceptable as well under the guise of "doing business" in here.
yep, your sickness is gathering admirers. H5
your one sick human being to lie about me that deep. but hey, your a human toilet, and we all know what human toilets regurgitate.
what goes in, must come out
what kind of lies do you have tonight, or will you be too tired from being the party favor?
i NEVER said the financial collapse was a direct result of gays, but you might be right. thanks for owning it "
real facts wrote on Oct 24, 2008 6:58 PM:
" I will volunteer to drive real facts... ").
dude, you can't even steer your own ship, how are you going to drive a puny little car? "
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 24, 2008 1:05 PM:
Tell us more about how God is causing the finacial collapse because of gays. You said gays are the cause and I love reading about it.
And tell us again how you wish for more horrifying eternal torture for me. It gives me such a thrilling feeling, too.
Tell us how you want the atheists and gays assassinated daily. Killed. Imprisoned, tortured, murdered. Tell us how nice it will be when the gays are all exterminated.
Oh, Saint Fruitchrist, your radiance must be visible to God in heaven. I know he loves you best. "
Robb wrote on Oct 24, 2008 10:39 AM:
real facts wrote on Oct 23, 2008 11:19 PM:
another billy-ism, on why homosexuality is "normal".
i have some good news for you billy. as far into the sewer of life you have traveled, you still have a fan.
a fan, because voter stated in the other blog your a reasonable "sane" guy.
imagine that. voter also thinks your sick garbage of a life that you spill daily in here is "normal"
you know what that adds up to don't you? you now have someone who will drive you TO the bridge, once you decide what your facing in this life because of your CHOICES, isn't worth all that passing yourself around at the noodle.
good for you. i cannot imagine your excitement. should you not decide to jump, maybe voter can hold your hand just before you check out of this life, having succumed to your "times" pre-post noodle.
truly, i am sooo happy for you.
love, real facts "
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 23, 2008 3:18 PM:
Have you asked your boy-crush at the food place during one of your daily pilgrimages you indulge yourself to get a look at him? I bet he knows where it is and maybe he'd welcome an escort. You've been looking for an opening line to start your conversation; this could be it. Give it some thought. "
Lulu_Oni wrote on Oct 23, 2008 2:54 PM:
Lodian wrote on Oct 23, 2008 1:50 PM:
" I know your secret. "
I think we all know. ;-) "
real facts wrote on Oct 23, 2008 1:49 PM:
coming from the guy who passes himself around like a piece of meat between sets to the highest bidder at the lavender noodle......the guy who incessantly perverts ANYTHING into some twisted sexual garbage......yeah YOUR the pillar of "intelligence".
expound on how much "intelligence" it takes if AFTER knowing that incessant multiple sex partners can kill you, but how that doesn't even slow you down. so much so anytime i raised the debate about aids, you left the building.
intelligence NEVER = heinous majorus non interrupturedus, but YOU live like it does "
Lodian wrote on Oct 23, 2008 1:49 PM:
" "Campfires" ?
Is that the code word for cross burnings? "
Yes. "
Lodian wrote on Oct 23, 2008 1:48 PM:
deblaw: Yes, there are more like you. "
Lodian wrote on Oct 23, 2008 1:39 PM:
" Lodian.. Yes, I am a parent of 6 and grandparent of 12.... My offsprings could be your one of your neighbors... Seen any campfires late at night in your neighborhood! "
I doubt they live in my neighborhood. Why are your kin out late at night starting campfires? "
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 23, 2008 10:01 AM:
deblaw wrote on Oct 23, 2008 7:01 AM:
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 23, 2008 6:30 AM:
Is that the code word for cross burnings? "
deblaw wrote on Oct 23, 2008 5:40 AM:
deblaw wrote on Oct 23, 2008 5:38 AM:
Again, 4 million and count on it to grow.. "
voter wrote on Oct 22, 2008 11:06 PM:
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 22, 2008 9:27 PM:
Oh, my yes, there are lots of you. You know, statistically speaking, fully half of the population is of less than average intelligence. So yes, indeed, there are lots and lots of you. "
Robb wrote on Oct 22, 2008 6:09 PM:
real facts wrote on Oct 22, 2008 5:42 PM:
" YOU need to look back in the logs, bucko, I NEVER said what you just accused me of saying, ..... ")
not a problem, seeing how i don't make an accusation i can't back up. i am the complete opposite of you, in that i don't lie, and i am more than willing to back up what i say.
please feel free to choke on yet ANOTHER of your lies. culled from the blog "one sin leads to another"...
for your viewing pleasure
***************************************
("Robb wrote on Oct 19, 2008 7:30 PM:
" I NEVER LIE...
I am still waiting for you to keep your word, as I have...")
robb said "i never lie"
what a pathetic liar
you create opportunities for me to embarass you so easily. why do you do that? do you suffer from sort of freakish martyr SINdrome?
"i never do" "i never have" "i have never lied about you" "i have never mocked your God"
what a loon "
deblaw wrote on Oct 22, 2008 5:33 PM:
deblaw: Face it. You've lost the debate
Fat Lady hasn't sang yet..
4 million strong last time this was on the ballot and I didn't even vote, think there are more like me out there? "
real facts wrote on Oct 22, 2008 5:24 PM:
if it DID say that, billy would have posted it a thousand times. everytime i challenge him to do it, he NEVER HAS.
that's because he is a liar, just like you
even if you HADN'T read it, you know he is lying and promoting the most debased act a human can do, and YET you still high five billy "
Robb wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:44 PM:
real facts wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:42 PM:
" I have NEVER lied about you ").
your a slimeball.
first you said "i never lied", and CHANGED it to "i never lied 'about' you".
pure evasive purposefully lying semantics.
your a pathetic liar anyway, because you have done BOTH. you lied several times in here, INCLUDING "about me".
it is unbelievable how much you pathetic losers lie in here, and that given NONE OF YOU are any good at it, because right after i bust you about it, you come right back with another lie.
all you people ever end up doing is solidifying that i am right about you.
by all means, please continue "
real facts wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:34 PM:
" Mainframe: Now RF will attack you at every turn because you showed a little opposition to him and saw him for what he really is. That's how he lives").
you show respect, you get respect.
you play games, or call me names etc, then it's on.
mainframe needs to make a choice. either he/she is going to be respectful towards me, or by his/her choices i will add them to the pile, the PILE you reside in.
THAT'S how i live "
real facts wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:30 PM:
" And, I don't care what billy said about you, I was not here then, are you still in HIGH school?, he-said, she-said").
so you think you can get away with it, by lying as if "you never read it"?
what a moronic liar.
you read what he wrote because YOU commented RIGHT AFTER he did, and then YOU high fived it.
you know exactly what bily said verbatim even in the other blogs, because YOU threw your ego around in there as well.
your lying excuses only make you MORE guilty for what goes on in here, and what side of truth you pick.
you lying about it again makes you a bottom feeder right along side billy and lodian.
someday your little tug-o-war with the truths of life will catch up to you robb, and you won't be able to blame me
lying purposefully shows your a weak man "
Lodian wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:25 PM:
Lodian wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:23 PM:
real facts wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:21 PM:
" Robb: He likes it when people back him up. He needs it. That's where all the new handles come in").
sure. after taking out your lying trash, and dealing singlehandedly with everyone else that challenged me for nearly two years, i "need some one to back me up". that's a joke.
"That's where all the new handles come in". you display how pathetic and weak you are, everytime you purposefully lie.
you know i never have, yet you purposefully lie about STILL.
that's some position of "strength" you have carved out for yourself in life lodian.
lying, ISN'T a strength.
continual lying is a sign of weakness and despeartion "
Robb wrote on Oct 22, 2008 10:38 AM:
real facts wrote on Oct 22, 2008 10:26 AM:
" Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 21, 2008 6:12 PM:
" He can say whatever he wants. I don't care, really. He's nuts. "
Billy Rubin: I think I'm getting that picture loud and clear. ").
picking solidarity with someone that advocates child molestation mainframe.
good career choice. don't worry, it won't be too much longer before you realize the effects of that choice "
Robb wrote on Oct 22, 2008 10:08 AM:
deblaw wrote on Oct 22, 2008 10:05 AM:
What kind of twisted world do you live in. CrEePy. "
YOURS!!! Even CrEePyIer!! "
Robb wrote on Oct 22, 2008 9:50 AM:
Lodian wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:48 AM:
Lodian wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:47 AM:
Robb wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:22 AM:
Gettin' kinda old? right? "
Robb wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:20 AM:
Mainframe wrote on Oct 22, 2008 2:11 AM:
" He can say whatever he wants. I don't care, really. He's nuts. "
Billy Rubin: I think I'm getting that picture loud and clear. "
edumacation wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:58 PM:
edumacation wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:56 PM:
"I am the only member of the congressional gay spouse caucus," Moses wrote in the Washington Post in 1991. "On Capitol Hill, Barney always introduces me as his lover."
Barney Franks gay lover, Moses ended his seven-year tenure at Fannie Mae, where he was the assistant director of product initiatives. According to National Mortgage News, Moses "helped develop many of Fannie Maes affordable housing and home improvement lending programs."
Critics say such programs led to the mortgage meltdown that prompted last months government takeover of Fannie Mae and its financial cousin, Freddie Mac. The giant firms are blamed for spreading bad mortgages throughout the private financial sector.
Although Frank now blames Republicans for the failure of Fannie and Freddie, he spent years blocking GOP lawmakers from imposing tougher regulations on the mortgage giants. In 1991, the year Moses was hired by Fannie, the Boston Globe reported that Frank pushed the agency to loosen regulations on mortgages for two- and three-family homes, even though they were defaulting at twice and five times average. "
real facts wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:08 PM:
" I am referring to real freaks remarks").
in the other blog, you said you don't call me any names, and when i called you a liar for posting MULTIPLE lies about a slew of things in the other blog, your accompanying quote was "I HAVE NEVER LIED".
your a liar without conscience "
real facts wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:04 PM:
billy rubin, selling the idea that homosexuality is "normal".
PUKE "
real facts wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:01 PM:
let's hear your "resounding" condemnation of billy telling me to go have sex with my daughter.
it wouldn't matter WHAT AGE either one of us was, "over 18" has NOTHING to do with your weak position.
is it perverted or not?
if you think for a moment you will slink away from this one, you underestimate my resolve. my resolve to make you own your own words, by reminding you until you come clean on this till the day you do.
DO IT "
real facts wrote on Oct 21, 2008 8:55 PM:
your lying trash too, both because you know FULL WELL he (billy rubin) specifically said it, AND you STILL don't condemn it, but HIGH FIVE it.
liar.
you high five perversion when it suits you, and that's a FACT about your joke of a life.
since you think billy's just a gem of "normality", maybe instead of billy taking the bus because it's "impersonal", YOU can drive him TO the bridge, and while you are there, you can contemplate YOUR pathetic life.
bottom feeders high fiving perverted sex between a father and his daughter.
it doesn't get any sicker than that "
real facts wrote on Oct 21, 2008 8:46 PM:
you AT FIRST tried to pull your garbage straight out of hell about the bible saying fathers are to have sex with their daughters, THEN you DIRECTLY told me to go do it, "because the bible says to".
your a lying piece of trash
the bible DOESN'T say that to begin with, and i challenged you NUMEROUS times to show where it does, and you REFUSED to post it because you are a human toilet.
if-it-DID-say-that, you-would-post-that-all-day-long-in-EVERY-blog
prove it, or throw yourself off a bridge and do the rest of humanity a favor.
you won't prove it, and feign some lying excuse, because your the lowest a human being CAN go.
watch all the people line up behind you to condemn your obvious lying trash.
billy rubin, proving once again homosexuality is "normal".
anyone that fronts for your sewer tactics, deserves your company in hell.
tell you what so you can't cop out, you can either google biblegateway.com and PROVE IT, or i can buy you a ONE WAY buss pass to the golden gate bridge.
take your choice "
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 21, 2008 6:12 PM:
I never told Saint Fruitchrist to score on his daughter.
First off, I don't believe for even one second he's ever seen a disrobed person of the female persuasion, much less marry one and father a child with her. Nobody can post on these blogs 18 hours a day as he does and support/raise a family. He certainly lives alone.
Second, he claims to follow all biblical laws and traditions and I asked IF he had sex with his "daughter" because parent/child incest IS in the bible. I asked IF he was going to sell "her" into sexual slavery because doing so IS sanctioned in the bible. I asked IF he made his "children" watch while he killed the sacrificial animal on his homemade backyard altar before throwing it on the barbeque to cremate and make nice smells for God to be pleased.
He can say whatever he wants. I don't care, really. He's nuts. "
Robb wrote on Oct 21, 2008 3:22 PM:
Lodian wrote on Oct 21, 2008 2:28 PM:
" If the laws can be changed for one perversion, why not others? Equality for all perverts is only right, do you not agree "
deblaw: So now you are advocating the laws be changed for criminals? What kind of twisted world do you live in. CrEePy. "
Lodian wrote on Oct 21, 2008 2:25 PM:
" I am referring to real freaks remarks, the ones where he insists you told him to have "relations" with his daughter.. "
Robb: Unfortunately, as you most certainly know all too well by now, RF takes a word or two from a post and makes up a whole story of his own. It's really weird and very creepy. "
Lodian wrote on Oct 21, 2008 2:23 PM:
" Lodian, check the laws again, a young person can marry with parent consent... "
Oh, please! I sure hope you are not a parent. You keep dragging on with this 10 year old sexual comments and underage marriage. What's wrong with you? "
Robb wrote on Oct 21, 2008 1:56 PM:
Billy Rubin wrote on Oct 21, 2008 12:36 PM:
Robb wrote on Oct 21, 2008 12:10 PM:
Robb wrote on Oct 21, 2008 12:08 PM:
Robb wrote on Oct 21, 2008 11:23 AM:
Robb wrote on Oct 21, 2008 11:23 AM:
real facts wrote on Oct 21, 2008 11:05 AM:
" I do NOT agree with your "any Age" perversion.... ***18*** ").
oh so you agree FOR perversion, as long as it's over "18"?
baWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
actually, your a liar robb. you high fived billy AFTER he said what he said about my daughter.
even your "over 18" garbage doesn't fly, because billy suggested father/daughter sex, and YOU HIGH FIVED IT.
the FACTS REMAIN, you STILL have NOT condemned what billy said specifically, because your sick position won't allow you to.
maybe because you ARE billy?
you keep thinking your a walking talking hallmark card, when actually your a gatekeeper to the sewers of life "
deblaw wrote on Oct 21, 2008 8:36 AM:
Robb wrote on Oct 21, 2008 8:06 AM:
deblaw wrote on Oct 21, 2008 7:03 AM:
deblaw wrote on Oct 21, 2008 7:03 AM:
Lodian wrote on Oct 21, 2008 1:15 AM:
real facts wrote on Oct 20, 2008 7:49 PM:
" you draw the line exactly where it is ...18 ").
well robb AND lodian, not if your billy rubin, or those that support his human waste.
you BOTH talk like a hallmark card out of one side of your mouth, then you impliHATE yourself out of the other.
i will grant you the opportunity for you to "explain" your reasoning when you AND lodian BOTH high fived billy when he told me to go have sex with my daughter. oh yeah, you won't.
you BOTH lied. your sick agenda DOESN'T have an "age limit"
you both high five any kind of perversion, when it fits your anything goes joke of a position "
real facts wrote on Oct 20, 2008 7:41 PM:
Hopefully 100 years from now our descendents will know even better yet").
leaving these areas of life up to your "flushing", there is NO WAY humanity will be around another 100years.
we haven't even touched on your liberal stance on calling people evil in this world what they are, and systematically taking out THEIR trash.
with your liberal garbage, we will be lucky if we make it another 20 "
real facts wrote on Oct 20, 2008 7:37 PM:
That's right! There are many heinous things that were done in history that we should not continue as a tradition today. We have evolved and know better today").
yeah, like pornography and all the "great things" that have come from that.
maybe YOU can expound on all the great things that have come out of homosexual sex, like i dunno, maybe the proliferation of sexually transmitted diseases, suicides, the lying to oneself that it's "normal".
good speech on the need to "evolve" humanity lodian. puke
you can "evolve" yourself straight into extinction.
as for me (and the MAJORITY of the world), WE will stick with what God himself DESIGNED -
adam and eve, not 'adam and steve'
you claimed (but lied) that you were a Christian in these blogs.....did you ever stop to think why God created adam and eve, NOT adam and steve?
no you haven't. both because YOUR NOT a follower of Christ, and you have to lie that it is "normal" "
Lodian wrote on Oct 20, 2008 5:10 PM:
" you draw the line exactly where it is ...18 "
You are so much better at getting right to the point. :-) "
Lodian wrote on Oct 20, 2008 5:09 PM:
Lodian wrote on Oct 20, 2008 5:06 PM:
Robb wrote on Oct 20, 2008 4:47 PM:
deblaw wrote on Oct 20, 2008 4:24 PM:
deblaw wrote on Oct 20, 2008 4:22 PM:
Lodian wrote on Oct 20, 2008 4:17 PM:
That's right! There are many heinous things that were done in history that we should not continue as a tradition today. We have evolved and know better today. Hopefully 100 years from now our descendents will know even better yet. "
Lodian wrote on Oct 20, 2008 4:14 PM:
deblaw wrote on Oct 20, 2008 11:25 AM:
Vote yes on 8, to avoid perversion taught in CA schools...
http://www.kcra.com/news/17714619/detail.html
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49813 "
real facts wrote on Oct 19, 2008 6:01 PM:
what i was referring to, is that homosexuality has ALWAYS been a perversion, for ALL of history.
the "we" in that factual statement refers to the MAJORITY of the world, and THEIR opinion of it.
6,000 straight years of history on that position cannot be wrong "
mainframe wrote on Oct 19, 2008 4:53 PM:
hey man a lot of bad sheet happened in history that i sure don't want to see done again today. so what are you talking about??? "
real facts wrote on Oct 18, 2008 5:19 PM:
" It's ironic that some conservatives say they are for a lot less government in our lives, but they want government to legislate the choice for Americans in whom they choose as a spouse").
purposefully wrong semantics.
nope. what "we" want is for history to continue, because history knows what it's talking about
there is nothing "govermental" about moral issues. it's just that when a SMALL segment of society cannot act within it's human decency parameters, sometimes it takes a governmental move to get it back in line.
morality is an issue that isn't contained within the walls of religion OR government.
so far lodian, even in your most desperate of attempts, you STILL have not come close to making homosexual sex of ANY KIND "acceptable"
the irony is you, and how YOU fade in and out of what's moral, and what's not when it is obvious to the rest of the MAJORITY of the world, and that since the beginning of time "
real facts wrote on Oct 18, 2008 5:11 PM:
bulldog: You seem to think these things were not around before 1950. You're wrong.
The things you metion here have nothing to do with a gay marriage. Being gay is not illegal. ").
they WERE around, obviously. but obviously as well, not near in the numbers it is NOW thanks to people like you looking the other way while morality gets bulldozed right out of history.
like i said it WAS illegal to have homosexual sex. still is some states.
it still should be in EVERY state, so it could accurately represent the perversion that it is.
for ALL of history, homosexual sex has NEVER been "loving" in any context. that is but ONE of the current lies that the homosexual community is using toward their camPAIN toward legitimacy.
funny thing is, it NEVER HAS BEEN for the last 6,000years "
Lodian wrote on Oct 18, 2008 4:00 PM:
bulldog: You seem to think these things were not around before 1950. You're wrong.
The things you metion here have nothing to do with a gay marriage. Being gay is not illegal. "
Lodian wrote on Oct 18, 2008 3:54 PM:
real facts wrote on Oct 18, 2008 1:50 PM:
" It's especially interesting that you label STDs, teen pregnancy, and rape as modern inventions. Really, you honestly believe this is true? ").
like i said, when YOU have to lie to support YOUR position, you DON'T HAVE a defensible one.
you know EXACTLY what bulldog meant, and you purposefully didn't address the truth he/she spoke.
you know for a FACT, that what was previously designated in history AS perversion, and what your ilk has sought to legitimize, has now opened the fallout floodgates of bulldogs truth list.
because of the likes of YOU voter, incidences of STDs, teen pregnancy, and rape, et al - HAVE increased.
it's a travesty that in order for you to be "free", you have to lie in order to accomplish it.
that's not freedom. that's handcuffing yourself right into irrelevancy "
real facts wrote on Oct 18, 2008 1:41 PM:
" Bulldog, when was a loving commitment to anyone ever branded as a depraved act in the course of human history? ").
since the beginning of time. for ALL of history, and you lie if you say that is not true. the "loving" angle was birthed not that long ago in the homosexuals lexiCON of attempted justification. just until the last couple of decades, the "loving" angle wasn't even around. for them, it was ALWAYS about sex, and it's "justification"
it's-not-"love"-voter, and-you-know-it.
you ONLY argue for it's 'acceptance', so that you can make up for YOURSELF what is right or wrong.
your position is so weak, you have to put aside absurdity to make YOUR life palpable.
i have yet to find someone who holds such an absurd position by demonstrating ONE TIME in history where homosexuality WAS "acceptable"
go ahead voter. i want to see YOU be the first
watch this.....voter won't, because voter can't, and he will skate clear around that challenge.
you would think if "their" position is so right, they would be all over that in a san francisco minute "
voter wrote on Oct 18, 2008 1:08 PM:
voter wrote on Oct 18, 2008 1:06 PM:
bulldog wrote on Oct 18, 2008 10:50 AM:
You say a 16 year old is a child. Is she? When will that line move? We already let 16 year olds make their own decisions about killing children in their wombs, why not let them decide who they sleep with?
How about porno in general. When they let Playboy into the public, many of the same arguments that were made then are being made now about gay marriage. Hey, it is up to consenting adults to decide if they want to purchase that magazine. Get the government out of our bedrooms. Now, rape, child porno, sexually transmitted disease, and teen pregnancy are common in our society. But it was jsut a magazine in the '50s that wanted to publish to consenting adults. That was the slippery slope then, and gay marriage is the slippery slope now. "
real facts wrote on Oct 17, 2008 8:21 PM:
" I guess its time to spray some Troll Begone.
This blog is not displayed because you have added the blogger "Real Facts" to your Ignore list. ").
that was always code for leonard was always too chicken to answer questions that would prove he didn't know what he was talking about, after spraying the blogs with his faux "theology", pretending he knew biblical truths.
lying you can't read my blogs, only solidifies my 'assesment' of your family tree.
at least i know where you get it from.
the post i highlighted about your dad (ivan dixon) showed HE had no clue what the bible passages he trotted out in here really meant.
you know me, when YOU, or ANY other member of your fallen DNA pull that, the lie ejector comes on
it's what i do
shhhhh. don't tell leonard i wrote this whole post in a magic ink that everyone else can read BUT leonard "
Bob Hussein Loblaw wrote on Oct 17, 2008 8:20 PM:
Today your RF name is Reclusive Fairy. You can throw that one in with your Fruit label. Remember, it is all about mocking YOU, Freak Show. "
voter wrote on Oct 17, 2008 4:18 PM:
voter wrote on Oct 17, 2008 4:11 PM:
bulldog wrote on Oct 17, 2008 3:57 PM:
What is the difference between a pervert and an accepted member of society? Are we just going to keep pushing the envelope? Hey, if enough people want to do it, why not? It is only sex, right? What right do I have to condemn the person who wants to have sex with a 16 year old? Hell, that 16 year old can make the decision on her own to get an abortion, so she must be able to choose who she wants to have sex with, even if it is a 50 year old man or woman, right? Should we be looking in her bedroom at night? Doesn't she have the same sexual rights? Who are you to impose your morality on her?
I hope you can see the sarcasm in this post. I am NOT advocating child porno. "
lapdog wrote on Oct 17, 2008 3:42 PM:
Should the state make a protected class out of people based on how they act in bed? And haw do we determine if one is really gay? Do we make them go in a back room and prove it with their partner?
Your last post shows that society (except the military, apparently)is capable of moving forward and accepting of actions once frowned upon. "
Bulldog wrote on Oct 17, 2008 3:08 PM:
You can't twist my words that way.
By the way, there was a time when it was illegal to engage in anal and oral sex. I believe (someone here can check it out) that it is still the case in the military. "
Leonard wrote on Oct 17, 2008 2:08 PM:
This blog is not displayed because you have added the blogger "Real Facts" to your Ignore list. "
lapdog wrote on Oct 17, 2008 2:04 PM:
Hey, Bulldog - biblically speaking, sex is for procreation. so, should we prohibit people from doing it for pleasure? Anal sex is not an exclusively gay act. By your reasoning we should also ban oral sex, masturbation (are your palms hairy, Bulldog?!?), three-ways, promiscuous heterosexuals, etc. "
Leonard wrote on Oct 17, 2008 2:03 PM:
ahhh, i remember it well. those blog filled posts not that long ago where your son "leonard" tried to pull his faux knowledge of scripture out of thin air to make his point, and i busted him for not knowing what the heck he was talking about.
i see where he gets it now. the old the apple doesn't fall far from the withering tree
cut the act ivan. you don't really know what scripture DOES say, and you wouldn't care less if you did.
honesty ISN'T in your family DNA
The pictionary definition of the word irony.
:) "
Leonard wrote on Oct 17, 2008 1:59 PM:
The "poop chute" has one purpose in the body. That is not bigotry, it is biology
Interesting. So would you bar the millions of heterosexuals who engage in anal sex from marriage as well? "
Lodian wrote on Oct 17, 2008 12:06 PM:
SportsGuru wrote on Oct 17, 2008 11:57 AM:
CIVIL LIBERTIES
Denying marriage to homosexuals doesn't infringe civil liberties.
DUE PROCESS
It's clear that denying marriage to homosexuals does not infringe upon a homosexuals ability to justice under the law - unless a homosexual wants to make the case that marriage is a legal state that they don't have access to. But then marriage is defined as 'between a man and woman' so they actually are being denied nothing. They have to then change the definition to claim they are being denied due process.
EQUAL PROTECTION
Again, the marriage laws are for "a man and a woman" so the only way to claim being denied equal protection is to first change the definition of marriage.
FREEDOM FROM DISCRIMINATION
The only way a homosexual can say they are being discriminated against with regards to marriage is to - again - make the case that the definition of marriage is NOT "between a man and a woman".
So there are no civil rights being violated.
BUT if homosexuals can legally change the definition of marriage, they will then be able to claim civil rights violations - and LAWSUITS ($$$) would be soon to follow. "
SportsGuru wrote on Oct 17, 2008 11:50 AM:
The American Heritage Dictionary defines Civil Rights as:
"The rights belonging to an individual by virtue of citizenship, especially the fundamental freedoms and privileges guaranteed by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and by subsequent acts of Congress, including civil liberties, due process, equal protection of the laws, and freedom from discrimination."
The only way to make Gay Marriage a Civil Rights issue is to argue that prohibiting it would infringe upon a gay couple's..
a) civil liberties (Fundamental individual rights, such as freedom of speech and religion)
b) due process (An established course for judicial proceedings or other governmental activities designed to safeguard the legal rights of the individual)
c) equal protection of the laws (The equal protection requirement of the Constitution protects against legislation that affects individuals differently without a rational basis for doing so)
d) freedom from discrimination (immunity from discrimination on the basis of race or gender or nationality or religion or age; guaranteed by federal laws of the United States
CONTINUED "
LodiReaderFromStockton wrote on Oct 17, 2008 11:42 AM:
real facts wrote on Oct 17, 2008 11:32 AM:
Genesis 28:1!
Deuteronomy 7:3,4! ").
ahhh, i remember it well. those blog filled posts not that long ago where your son "leonard" tried to pull his faux knowledge of scripture out of thin air to make his point, and i busted him for not knowing what the heck he was talking about.
i see where he gets it now. the old the apple doesn't fall far from the withering tree
cut the act ivan. you don't really know what scripture DOES say, and you wouldn't care less if you did.
honesty ISN'T in your family DNA "
real facts wrote on Oct 17, 2008 11:27 AM:
-it is illicit sex, not marriage
-it is against God's law
-it is unnatural
Anyone who opposes interracial marriage today would be labeled racist or worst, and rightfully so. Hopefully in a decade or so the same can be said of those who oppose same sex marriage. Unfortunately it seems this generation is not ready to free their minds. ").
oh, you mean like calling gays "fruits" like you did in the other blog?
here in this post, bob is selling himself as a man with a position "against" the opposition against homosexual "marriage", et al.
BUT, bob has schziNOphrenia because he IS a homophobe, because he PURPOSEFULLY used the derogitory term "fruit" to describe gays.
poor bob. he just can't figure out who he is
sorry. i just had to highlight the man that bob "ain't" "
lapdog wrote on Oct 17, 2008 11:06 AM:
Lodian wrote on Oct 17, 2008 10:59 AM:
" T&C, apparently you hang out where there are many displays of flambouyancy by gay men. I, living in midtown Sacramento, have yet to see such prominent displays. You want to see what a sham and disgrace the institution of "traditional marriage" has become, spend a couple hours listening to the arguments in Family Court in Sacramento County (3341 Power Inn Road). "
lapdog: What a terrible way to spend the day by witnessing the tragedy of traditional marriages battling it out in Family Court. The children always lose. "
Lodian wrote on Oct 17, 2008 10:45 AM:
Aris wrote on Oct 17, 2008 10:43 AM:
Bills like that may seem innocuous, but they are the proverbial foot in the door. If Proposition 8 fails and gay marriage remains the law of the land, do you think textbooks will in time become more explicit? Or can we count on activists from this particular political group to stop at the mere mention of gay accomplishments?
We certainly should teach our children to be civil towards all. Bigotry and hatred should be discouraged at every turn. But does this require we teach them the particulars of every alternative lifestyle? "
Lodian wrote on Oct 17, 2008 10:33 AM:
When you cannot respect other law-abiding citizen their right to enjoy the same rights you enjoy then there is a problem. You can argue, debate and completely 100% disagree with what they do in their bedroom with their chosen partner in life, but as an American I would think that you would fight for their right to make that choice for themselves.
Being gay is not illegal. It's not a crime. Yet you still want to deny them the same right to marry that you enjoy. Your religion tells you that gay people are making the wrong choice. It's your choice to believe that teaching. That's fine. It's your right!
We separate church and state in this country (THANK GOD!) and we are to afford each American the same rights. This also gives you the right to practice religion and have your personal beliefs. If you hold this right dear then do not deny the same rights to other Americans. "
lapdog wrote on Oct 17, 2008 10:08 AM:
lapdog wrote on Oct 17, 2008 9:59 AM:
T & C wrote on Oct 17, 2008 7:28 AM:
Bulldog wrote on Oct 17, 2008 7:22 AM:
"When words of blatant prejudice and bigotry are hurled in attacks at some good law-abiding people then why should the response NOT be vicious? "
So, following your logic, those who would call others "HOMOPHOBES" show their blatant "prejudice" and deserve to be responded to "viciously"?
The gays who openly call those of us who hold our beliefs "small minded" "bigots" "prejudiced" and "homophobes" seem to think they are just being righteous in their beliefs, but the knife cuts both ways. I am sick and tired of not being able to ever discuss this issue in any way that does not result in the queers screaming that my personal beliefs offend them. Somehow, they believe that I should be shut up while they go on spouting thier own hate.
This issue is not about "loving couples" wanting to live in peace, it is about godless, amoral individuals seeking acceptance of an abnormal sex act. "
Ivan Dixon wrote on Oct 17, 2008 5:05 AM:
Genesis 28:1!
Deuteronomy 7:3,4! "
Lodian wrote on Oct 16, 2008 9:04 PM:
lodisafeway: When words of blatant prejudice and bigotry are hurled in attacks at some good law-abiding people then why should the response NOT be vicious? "
lapdog wrote on Oct 16, 2008 8:38 PM:
Ivan Dixon wrote on Oct 16, 2008 7:01 PM:
Bob Loblaw wrote on Oct 16, 2008 12:06 PM:
-it is illicit sex, not marriage
-it is against God's law
-it is unnatural
Anyone who opposes interracial marriage today would be labeled racist or worst, and rightfully so. Hopefully in a decade or so the same can be said of those who oppose same sex marriage. Unfortunately it seems this generation is not ready to free their minds. "
lapdog wrote on Oct 16, 2008 10:09 AM:
lapdog wrote on Oct 16, 2008 9:55 AM:
lodisafeway wrote on Oct 16, 2008 8:49 AM:
It is my opinion that Proposition 8 will pass handily on November 4th, but it won't pass based upon religious convictions (although this may drive many in reaching their conclusions), but because the majority of Californians believe that marriage should be limited to a union between a man and a woman based at least in part upon the facts presented by the author of this letter. "
Mazie wrote on Oct 16, 2008 8:33 AM:
T & C wrote on Oct 16, 2008 7:56 AM:
Comments on this story are now closed.