Best example: liberal Democrat lesbian Bonnie Bleskachek, who screamed that her being investigated and punished for demanding sex from coworkers, for retaliating against those who refused to give her sex, and for discriminating against those with whom she didn’t want to have sex was “homophobia and sexism”.

Good god, is it 1928 already?

Actions do not have civil rights, people have civil rights.

I notice that you clearly and loudly do not definitively identify “the religious right, that hates us.”

Around the block from my vacation house here in Key West, they blocked off a few blocks of Duval Street for the Mrs. Key West Queen Coronation last night. I took my straight self down there to join in the fun. In a house adjacent to the contest, you can get fantasy play and body parts manipulation for a price. The sign says so. I did not take my straight self in there to join the fun, because it is not my game. The guys who wander the street with socks stuffed in their thongs are a tad bit pathetic. As a rule, society in general does not let porn shops do outdoor displays across from schools. People who troll for sex are normally restricted from areas where polite society gathers.

Yes, it is 1928 already. Bozo! Take your self consumed sexual overdrive person to work dressed in a thong and try humping the water cooler and see how long your version of civil rights gets protection.

Until you and your army of outraged comrades can muster the strength numbers in force or reason, you will simply have to be satisfied to do your parades in limited venues. Everywhere else, you will have to pretend that your sex life is a private matter.

Suggested names for retort: Victorian prude, homophobe, uptight pond scum, gay-basher, right-wing religious bigot, POS, etc.

Good god, is it 1928 already?

I do worry supporting any republican empowers the religious right, that hates us.

This old nag will not run. You can certainly find the religious right that hates the sin of homosexuality, but there are darn few on the religious right who hate the sinner.

If you can not be a part of the public square without flaunting your sexual proclivities, blame it on yourself, not those who do not give a rat’s patoot about your private business.

Gay people who care passionately about their own equality have a clear choice. Conservative gay people who have the same passion have a less clear choice, but they can’t pull the lever for McCain without sacrificing a great deal.

And who would that be, Matthew?

Because, as I showed above, liberals like yourself think that Democrats who endorse and support state and Federal amendments to ban gay marriage are “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive”, and that their behavior does not “harm” or “support the distruction (sic) of our families”.

However, infringing on the civil liberties of others because your subjective religion admonishes it clearly is ANTI-AMERICAN in every respect.

If marriage is going to be part of government (which I do not think it should be to begin with) then it must be afforded to all individuals who seek its benefit(s).

If discrimination of marriage is to be decided for only certain members of the society, then it is disenfranchising other members and cannot continue to be part of the framework of government; nor should it be. One’s distaste for homosexuality should not be legislated into law - this is ANTI-AMERICAN in every sensibility.

Any law or subject for public discussion must be reduced to the simplest objective reflection of our nation in order to embrace ALL AMERICANS and not discriminate against any one majority or minority group.

Matthew, please provide proof of these statements. Otherwise, get out of the gene pool. You are embarrassing all of us reasonable gay people.

Regards,
Peter H.

Get over it there is no place in the republican party. The republican party does not want us they seek to harm us. They are all a bunch of religious nutcases, even Mccain.

This utterly-predictable and slavish behavior is why you’re effectively ignored by both parties.

Talk about a money shot. Can I quote you on that?

Torrentprime, do you remember this back in 2004?

I think the title says it all: “Kerry Backs Massachusetts Amendment to Outlaw Gay Marriage”.

And of course, liberal gays and lesbians fell all over themselves to give him millions of dollars, endorse him, and scream “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive”, even though he explicitly said that he had the “same position” on gay marriage as President Bush.

You remember….the position liberal gays and lesbians called “homophobic” and “hateful”.

What people have figured out, torrentprime, is that gays and lesbians like you scream “antigay” if it’s a Republican and “pro-gay” if it’s a Democrat, regardless of their actions.

This utterly-predictable and slavish behavior is why you’re effectively ignored by both parties.

Here’s the problem - the guy was actually straight.

D’OH!!

The story is here.

Regards,
Peter H.

But, note, these are privileges the state grants not rights it denies.

That’s really splitting hairs. One could argue that about any legislative principle the government backs. Certainly schooling could fit into that category. As could equality in public accommodations, since otherwise that’s largely out of the purvey of government.

Equality in our legislative law is not a privilege, it’s a right.

no candidate is perfect… the under30 crowd doesn’t yet grasp that…