I also provided correct info. I also sent it to my local progressive radio program as well as Media Matters (I know they don’t do local, but what am I to do?) and DailyKos. I will tell everyone I know in San Diego. And report it on my blog. I don’t know what else to do. Please help! (http://www.pearlofwizdom.blogspot.com/)

BTW, for what its worth, I’m NOT gay. Happily married for 23 years. Gays should be able to enjoy the same. This is so FREAKING RIDICULOUS! What can I do???

I live in Utah, where it was already decided that marriage is only between a man and a woman, but if it is allowed in California, and Massachusetts, what state comes next? How do we keep our nation from being split in half over a rights issue?

Todd

Oops…that’s a sentence fragment!

I should proofread each post twice instead once as I do now.

As to the sentence fragments, sometimes they’re there for dramatic (or rhetorical) effect.

“I do, however, take the time to proofread, but sometimes when proofreading, will add a word to the sentence, intending to replace another and fail to replace the word that needs replacing.”

So in other words, you proofread, but you do it poorly. My English teachers would never have let me get away with that excuse. In this instance you actually changed the meaning of what you intended to say, so I pointed it out. As I said, it gets confusing. But I notice extraneous words and fragmented sentences in your posts all the time. Again, I’m not trying to be antagonistic, but you are the main contributor to a blog that is read by many people and that has been linked to quite a bit recently by other blogs. You’re trying to convey your opinions to your readers through your words and to many readers, sloppy writing (whether by accident or not) suggests sloppy thinking. You owe yourself and your opinions better than that.

To be fair, your grammar has improved dramatically since the last time I had to take my red pencil to your work (insert smiley emoticon here). Still, the minute or two it takes to focus on and reread your comments will benefit you and your opinions more than the speed with which you can post them.

I do, however, take the time to proofread, but sometimes when proofreading, will add a word to the sentence, intending to replace another and fail to replace the word that needs replacing.

Here’s what I meant to say, “The ad which I once thought was so bad it would cause voters to oppose the initiative seems to have had the opposite effect.” Since fixed.

“As far as I’m concerned, it’s not controversial for me,” Jaroflow said. “It’s certainly an issue I would be willing to put my job on the line for.”

That’s right. This narcissistic woman would put her job on the line to ensure that school children are indoctrinated into celebrating gay marriage. And liberals still have the nerve to insist that no public school teacher or administrator would ever DREAM of indoctrinating school children with their leftist political agenda.

And the ability to “opt-out” (the pet-peeve of every narcissistic public educator) doesn’t make it okay. The story indicates that the two children who didn’t participate “spent the duration of the 90-minute field trip back at school with another first-grade class, the interim director said.” Yeah, that’s not stigmatizing–the whole class gets to go to a GREAT BIG GAY PARTY and the Bible-thumping freaks get shuffled into a completely different class with different kids and a different teacher (wonder how much they learned during that 90-minute session?).

These people are completely out of control. Of course, if a teacher took a class on a field trip to a petting zoo and the teacher made a Muslim student hold a squealing piglet, the entire school board would have to resign in shame.

But remember, gay marriage won’t be taught or supported in public schools and with public funds, especially to very young children.

“The ad that I once though was so bad it would do cause swing voters to favor of the initiative seems to have had the opposite effect.”

First let’s clean that up as GPW never seems to take the time to proofread his own posts.

“The ad that I once thought was so bad it would cause swing voters to favor the initiative seems to have had the opposite effect.”

See the confusion? Voters will either favor the initiative or favor gay marriage, not both. The rest of the post suggests GPW meant to say either “…it would cause swing voters to oppose the initiative…” or “it would cause swing voters to support gay marriage…”. Several of the comments seem to confuse the two as well. Thus, I have a headache.

I’m not disagreeing with the arguments in this post. I’m just suggesting everyone think carefully when writing so as not to appear as if they support one thing when they actually support the other.

I do believe that court decisions give ammunition against the issue of gay marriage, especially among the religious (conservative or liberal) Americans, a significant portion of whom can talk the talk of their faith but not necessarily walk the walk. Everytime a court decision comes down, I celebrate like my gransparents must have for Brown v. Education or Loving v. Virginia, but I also cringe at the backlash that may be ahead.

I’ve only been with my partner for 6 years. Yes, we’re both male. But, unlike what I found written in GPW’s past article, I don’t find that there is any difference between our relationship and my parents’ other than that we’re both male. In meeting my partner 4 years ago, my mother was able to not just understand my being gay, but to embrace it to the point that she’s now the first person in her group to respond, “You know, my son is gay” whenever she hears any sort of anti-gay sentiment.

My conversations with both of my parents regarding handling finances, the prospect of becoming parents, resolving arguments have all led me to believe there the only difference between a committed gay or lesbian couple and our heterosexual counterparts is gender. For that reason, I believe the prospect of spending possibly enormous amounts of money to protect assests, make medical decisions on a partner’s behalf, or to ensure that children will be provided for really does create a system of separate but equal…and we know how well that doctrine turned out here in the South.

It would be great to work in a conservative effort to show people we’re just like everyone else, but I don’t think it should take time to to convince people to do the right thing.

Help from the courts should be sought with caution. Hopefully the Americans who oppose gay marriage will grow to open themselves to the our stories and experiences, and allow us the same protections the law provides regardless of sexual orientation.

“Anti-gay” = Politician who does not support same-sex marriage and when appearing on television has the letter “R” after his/her name.

“Pro-gay” = Politician who does not support same-sex marriage and when appearing on television has the letter “D” after his/her name.

which, of course, means a large percentage of Democrats are “far right.”

Casey, I think you’re full of it. You say you’ve been reading GP and commenting for years, but I had never heard of you until I saw this gem you posted a couple of days ago on a previous Prop. 8 thread (“Could Prop. 8 Win?”):

“Guys, I’m as concerned about courts going where they shouldn’t as anybody (though, having read the decision and studied the precedents, there really isn’t a principled way the CA court could have done otherwise once the case was brought before them)…”

Hmmmmm……Ruling in favor of gay marriage was the only “principled” thing the Court could do? Stop nitpicking NoOn8′s campaign like some elite food critic and “get in the game”? GPW is an “enabler for the right”?

Casey, it’s football season. Surely you can find some stadium that needs the ASTROTURF you’ve been rolling out on this blog for the past three days. Hit the road, Lefty!

So, of course Prop 8 will NOT affect Church tax status or teaching in schools. Prop 8′s passage takes back to status quo ante bellum (which in California was/is/will be, gay civil unions). It is *DEFEATING* Prop 8, and keeping gay marriage, that might affect Church tax status or teaching in schools.

Which is why the “No on 8″ ad is unbelievably bone-headed, making no sense at all. When the “No on 8″ ad says “Prop 8 will not affect Church tax status… And it will not affect teaching in schools…” they are telling the truth. That’s the problem. They’re actually defending Prop 8 at that point – not gay marriage!!! It is supposed to be an ad defending gay marriage!