You’re the Rightwing gay boy, why aren’t YOU trotting out why you oppose the amendment, and challenging every last one in your party in favor of it???

Isn’t that supposed to be your savin grace? changing your party from within it?

Or is it just easier to label a Big Bad “GayLeft” and leave it at that?

It appears nobody is, or too few people are, truly discussing the amendment in a civil fashion.

Let’s examine: The president never mentions gays and lesbians when discussing his support of the amendment. Supporters who are politicians seem to speak ad nauseum about “activist” judges, the welfare of children, family being the foundation of society, but they never seem to publicly talk about gays and lesbians, or to suggest ways in which we can obtain similar legal recognition (Bush did speak of support of civil unions on the eve of his re-election, but civil unions are still not recognized federally). Supporters who are religious conservatives do not listen to gays’ and lesbians’ stories; they simply believe that marriage is between one man and one woman, and will publicly state that homosexuality is wrong.

Then, of course, after a lifetime of being bullied in school, of being worried about losing our jobs if our bosses find out, of feeling forced to marry to appease our families and communities, gays and lesbians feel angry. Yes, many times, we have a knee-jerk emotional reaction to people who talk about and around us rather than talking to us.

No, Bush-bashing and yelling don’t promote debate, but one has to acknowledge the difficulty in combatting [religious]indoctrination.

And, Dan, it just wasn’t Democrats criticizing the president. No one can question the Republican credentials of longtime GOP strategist Ed Rollins. Here’s what he said about Bush’s promotion of the marriage amendment:

“What the president needs to do is look like a leader, not be somebody who looks like a politician who is overreacting to polls…If anything, he is reminding people of what they don’t like about the Republican Party.”

(Of course, there were a couple of benefits from the debate. Like seeing soon to be ex-Senator Santorum make a fool of himself ranting about sodomy and [indirectly] masturbation.)

Again. Wow.

The brain difference they’ve found between straight and gay people – and they are real, and need explaining – are currently hypothesized to be a result of developmental events in pregnancy. Possibly with the assistance of an unknown multiple of genes.

We’ll be waiting a long time…

Supreme Court cases

And in none of them was the decision binding on the question of whether marriage was a right. If it had been, then every state law restricting who may or may not get married would have been stricken down.

There is no such thing as a right to get married. And even if there were, gays are not barred from marrying opposite sex spouses.

But, I know, you’ve been a-listenin’ down on the Democrat Plantation to the pro-choice feminists, the eco-terrorists, the affirmative action activists and the those vicitimized minorities who THINK their best bet for progress is by judicial fiat –you can’t help it, you been a-brought up to think them ways.

Sorry, it don’t get us past first base; Hell, it doesn’t even get our issues up to bat… thanks for providiing that sterling piece of political advice to ndtovent.

“It would be lovely….” Right. Great, the GayLeft is the last group pushing for activist judges… how quaint but pathetic in its impotency.