Teaching Gay History in California

Brian_G wrote:

The court ignored the law.

Project a lot, don'tcha? It sucks to be you.

Exactly, instead of law the Ninth demonstrated political partisanship, redefine Defendant and Plaintiff with homophobe and victim. There is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality, that was an ignorant mistake from science, not law. Antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and irrational fear are what you get with basic disagreements.

Democracy has political tools to reconcile agreements, compromise on civil unions and domestic partnerships seems perfectly fair. Keeping marriage between husband and wife allows that cultural institution to continue its function. The left would destroy family, church and home, to force reliance on government.

Good work, Ninth Circuit. I hope you're proud. Turning lies into gay pride and self aggrandizement is a dirty job, but now the Ninth has done it.

Curteese wrote:

<quoted text>How many kids do YOU have, you hypocritical wench? I am guessing none, due to you endless STDs in your long ago youth. Why not have 20 kids, of course you won't be able to support them, or nurture a huge amount, but, hey, why not be irresponsible and carefree and pump one out every year for 15 years and see how well they turn out.
I know some people who were from huge families, and they said it was a living hell of harried parents and lack of proper bonding and not enough money to go around. But, what do YOU care, I'm sure your 19 cats are all the lovin' you need.

Tsk tsk. I do like that in time you liberals all show your true colors and for that I thank you.

Curteese wrote:

<quoted text>How many kids do YOU have, you hypocritical wench? I am guessing none, due to you endless STDs in your long ago youth. Why not have 20 kids, of course you won't be able to support them, or nurture a huge amount, but, hey, why not be irresponsible and carefree and pump one out every year for 15 years and see how well they turn out.
I know some people who were from huge families, and they said it was a living hell of harried parents and lack of proper bonding and not enough money to go around. But, what do YOU care, I'm sure your 19 cats are all the lovin' you need.

"But, what do YOU care, I'm sure your 19 cats are all the lovin' you need"

Actually we have 2 American bulldogs a Male and spayed Female HETERO PAIR .They don't like cats.

The 19 cats are more down your path in life .

MEEEEEEEEEOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWW W

Curteese wrote:

<quoted text>You ungrateful BITCH. I was trying to be nice to you, to reach out to you as a human, but I see I was incorrect. Suck it WHORE. I tossed my pearls in front of a true swine. Eat me, you ingrate.
That shows me all I need to know about conservatives. Selfish to the end. They won't even TRY to see another person's point of view, but are as stuck as a wild animal in mud, but can't help but biting anyone who tries to help. Go down in flames, bitch.

"Go down in flames, bitch"

That reminds me. I have not seen your buddy "Aida Lott" in some time.

The Troll Stopper wrote:

And with darned good reason, bigot boy.

No reason justifies lies. Unless you are just trying to incite a mob.

That's the problem, playing with fire. Slavery was ended by War and democracy. Your courts are taking too much power from the people.

luv Sarah Palin wrote:

<quoted text>
"Go down in flames, bitch"
That reminds me. I have not seen your buddy "Aida Lott" in some time.

Who cares, I don't know him. You make me so WEARY at times. I hate an ingrate more than anything, which you are one of the more VIRULENT members of that cranky club.

I have actually gotten friendly with some HIGHLY conservative people on here...BS Detector, Honest Able, and a couple of others, who most of my pals here despise. We found each other's humanity a LONG time ago, though agreeing on virtually nothing.

I tried to treat you with respect and you slapped my hand away like some Victorian matron slapping away a child who got too close to her fine clothes. I know, sort of out there, but I just watched "Downton Abbey" last night.

Why are you so MEAN? I would much rather treat you with respect...disagreeing, sure, but how can I, dealing with your out and out nasty attitude and condescension and cruel retorts?

I thought the Christian way was about forgiving and embracing the enemy. Maybe you were absent the day they discussed those rules, or had nodded off after a long night of Topix bashing other people.

Why can't you try to be NICE for once?

Brian_G wrote:

<quoted text>No reason justifies lies. Unless you are just trying to incite a mob.
That's the problem, playing with fire. Slavery was ended by War and democracy. Your courts are taking too much power from the people.

then i would suggest that you stop telling them so often.

Nice, I'm plastered with meanie faces for trying to be a friendly human. Great soldiers of Christ running around here today. I'm sure He is very proud of you.

dances with weebles wrote:

then i would suggest that you stop telling them so often.

I believe in writing truth, nobody can stop me. Violence is always wrong, except in self defense. Gays and heterosexuals unite against the Islamist fiends of the Third World. Marriage is insignificant compared to life, everyone lives but not everyone will marry.

Brian_G wrote:

Exactly, instead of law the Ninth demonstrated political partisanship, redefine Defendant and Plaintiff with homophobe and victim. There is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality, that was an ignorant mistake from science, not law. Antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and irrational fear are what you get with basic disagreements.
Democracy has political tools to reconcile agreements, compromise on civil unions and domestic partnerships seems perfectly fair. Keeping marriage between husband and wife allows that cultural institution to continue its function. The left would destroy family, church and home, to force reliance on government.
Good work, Ninth Circuit. I hope you're proud. Turning lies into gay pride and self aggrandizement is a dirty job, but now the Ninth has done it.

More unsupported and unsupportable arguments that rely only on demonizing pejorative terminology.

In your "compromise" only the equal rights of gay people are compromised, while straight people lose nothing either way.

You fail to show how allowing equal rights "would destroy family, church and home, to force reliance on government." These are simply demonizing, unsupportable assertions, intended to justify your prejudice.

The Court: "I'm asking you to tell me how it would harm opposite sex marriages."

Mr. Cooper: "Your Honor, my answer is: I don't know. I don't know."

Brian_G wrote:

<quoted text>I believe in writing truth, nobody can stop me. Violence is always wrong, except in self defense. Gays and heterosexuals unite against the Islamist fiends of the Third World. Marriage is insignificant compared to life, everyone lives but not everyone will marry.

You are not telling the truth. You are using demonizing, unsupported, and unsupportable statements to promote irrational prejudice and discrimination.

While you are not harmed because you already have all currently recognized civil rights, you insist on harming others by refusing to treat others the way you wish to be treated.

Once gay people achieve full legal equality, we can focus on working together to overcome other problems. In the mean time, we are forced to focus on opposing the harm you seek to cause.

Not Yet Equal wrote:

More unsupported and unsupportable arguments that rely only on demonizing pejorative terminology.
In your "compromise" only the equal rights of gay people are compromised, while straight people lose nothing either way.
You fail to show how allowing equal rights "would destroy family, church and home, to force reliance on government." These are simply demonizing, unsupportable assertions, intended to justify your prejudice.
The Court: "I'm asking you to tell me how it would harm opposite sex marriages."
Mr. Cooper: "Your Honor, my answer is: I don't know. I don't know."

Then the court refused to admit evidence to answer the question. Simple economics, if there is so much available and it is split by a wider population, how much less does the original group get? If the government just prints money to pay for same sex "spouse" fertility treatment, where does it all end?

Same sex marriage is sci fi love, we have a definition for everyone, homosexuals marry all the time, there is no orientation test for a marriage license. How much harm does polygamy do your marriage and does that change it's morality under law?

The Court's new mascot got a rewrite of California law, thanks to imagination and sympathy. That's not justice.

Brian_G wrote:

<quoted text>Then the court refused to admit evidence to answer the question. Simple economics, if there is so much available and it is split by a wider population, how much less does the original group get? If the government just prints money to pay for same sex "spouse" fertility treatment, where does it all end?
Same sex marriage is sci fi love, we have a definition for everyone, homosexuals marry all the time, there is no orientation test for a marriage license. How much harm does polygamy do your marriage and does that change it's morality under law?
The Court's new mascot got a rewrite of California law, thanks to imagination and sympathy. That's not justice.

Brian it is justice to protect a minority in society from hypocritical laws that unjustly segregates them from society with binding laws. This is what our country is built on and what our armed forces have fought for.

Brian_G wrote:

<quoted text>Then the court refused to admit evidence to answer the question. Simple economics, if there is so much available and it is split by a wider population, how much less does the original group get? If the government just prints money to pay for same sex "spouse" fertility treatment, where does it all end?
Same sex marriage is sci fi love, we have a definition for everyone, homosexuals marry all the time, there is no orientation test for a marriage license. How much harm does polygamy do your marriage and does that change it's morality under law?
The Court's new mascot got a rewrite of California law, thanks to imagination and sympathy. That's not justice.

in this discussion, polygamy is a non issue... a red herring, if you would.

Not Yet Equal wrote:

Your argument relies on pejorative terminology rather than supported evidence.
(correction)

They aren't arguments. They are unsupported assertions and unsupported accusations and baseless insinuations.

I'm surprised that you bother.

dances with weebles wrote:

<quoted text>
in this discussion, polygamy is a non issue... a red herring, if you would.

It's not an issue, no, but it IS slightly germaine to the discussion.

Remember, included in U.S. history instruction is discussion of the founding of the Utopian movements of the 1800s, one of which were the Mormons. Their history is included and they were polygamists throughout the beginning of their subculture, and that part of their culture impacted Deserat's relations with the U.S. Government and Utah's status as Territory and State.

I mention this because Mormon participation and contributions to the History of the United States is not in question ... and they were nothing if not an alternative "lifestyle".

Brian_G wrote:

The court ignored the law. They aren't on our side, they have an agenda to help one of their mascot groups.
Court imposed same sex marriage is bestiality justice.

Homosexuality is not like bestiality. WTF is wrong with you?

Brian_G wrote:

Exactly, instead of law the Ninth demonstrated political partisanship, redefine Defendant and Plaintiff with homophobe and victim. There is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality, that was an ignorant mistake from science, not law. Antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and irrational fear are what you get with basic disagreements.
Democracy has political tools to reconcile agreements, compromise on civil unions and domestic partnerships seems perfectly fair. Keeping marriage between husband and wife allows that cultural institution to continue its function.

Hey, you stupid b!tch, nobody is getting rid of marriage between husband and wife.

Brian_G wrote:

The left would destroy family, church and home, to force reliance on government.

A "B movie" argument.
"Gay marriage will destroy Western Civilization, and turn us all into flesh eating zombies!"

Brian_G wrote:

Good work, Ninth Circuit. I hope you're proud. Turning lies into gay pride and self aggrandizement is a dirty job, but now the Ninth has done it.

Was that post made by a random con dumb catch phrase generator?
It missed tossing in an "Al Gore".

Brian_G wrote:

<quoted text>No reason justifies lies. Unless you are just trying to incite a mob.
That's the problem, playing with fire. Slavery was ended by War and democracy. Your courts are taking too much power from the people.

There was no vote, democracy had nothing to do with it.