I am in the first camp. I believe that the ideals behind marriage are sound.

#71:

We should be making inroads to minority communities, not attacking them.

What passes for leadership in the gay community needs new copies of “How To Win Friends And Influence People” for Christmas.

I think the pro-SSM side is divided into two camps: those of us who genuinely want marriage in its “traditional” sense (monogamy, commitment, &c) and those who want to deconstruct marriage to subvert the traditional culture they resent (see AE’s post #64).

I suspect that many of these protestors don’t really want marriage and all that goes with it. They just want to be pissed off. Does anyone know how many civil unions have been filed in California? After all, a CU in California is legally a marriage in all but name.

I’ve long thought that the left consists mostly of “aggrieved” groups that really don’t like each other. This is a good example: lefty gays making racial slurs:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTM3MWYyMGE5MTY0MDJiMmNiODdjNzI0ZTkzY2Q4N2I=

When it comes right down to it, what they really want is to believe themselves an aggrieved minority. Victomhood is the new status symbol on the left. Belonging to an aggreived minority group lends an air of righteousness and brings real moral clout. And what many liberals have discovered is that it no longer requires actual victimization in America to obtain that moral “high-ground” — that feigning victimhood now suffices. And being different is much harder when you can’t claim victimization, it requires introspection to come to terms with one’s differences — that’s much harder than blaming others.

In that vein, most of the gay-left have actually convinced themselves that there is no significant difference between gay relationships and straight relationships and as such, believe, or at least have convinced themselves, that they are being denied a fundamental right by not having their relationships treated the same way straight relationships are.

So, I guess what they want is two-fold. They want society to validate them — even if they have to force society to do it — and until they get that, they want to play the victim.

So, in a sense, by protesting and threatening to riot (and worse), they are geting precisely what they want — they are reinforcing their own delusions of victimhood. But because the underlying problem is their own insecurities, it wouldnt matter if you gave them marriage, if you gave them openly gay military service, they would still find reason to be aggrieved. Thats why everywhere gay marriage has been passed, gays are still suing churches, religious leaders and others for discrimination, hate speech, etc…

It will be quite a dilemma for The Zero’s Justice Department if teh gheys start burning black churches.

Sounds like AE wants to have his own Kristallnacht. And then what AE, shooting squads or gas chambers, or does your hate filled mind have other delights in store for those who “are at the very center of everything that divides this country”. blah, blah, whine, whine, woof, woof…

A Differently-Abled Dave,
I’m not the one taking to the streets with torches ready to burn down churches, thats you guys, I’m not the one talking about “the enemy”, that’s you guys…

just more evidence to prove my point. Name any issue that divides this country and the one thing they all have in common is that the gay-left is always front and center, hysterically demonizing, demagoguing, and dividing more energetically, more vocally, and more hatefully than anyone else.

And no, I dont think you should be rounded up and shot or gassed, thats what lefties do, not conservatives. I think you should be mocked, ridiculed, your asinine ideas destroyed and laid bare, and then I think you should be largely ignored until such time as you see fit to grow the fuck up.

#9 But something like 60% of Americans openly say they wouldn’t vote for a Mormon President. Anti-Mormon prejudice is more rampant than anti-gay prejudice. The “No on 8″ folks were fools to not fight fire with fire.

If I were to give the ‘No On 8′ campaign any credit, they were smart not to use the Mormon religion as a negative-positive, meaning demonizing them (funny how we all use that religious term) via exoneration by association. Affirming that a Mormon position is the same as that of many Baptists, Catholics, Presbyterians, Assemblies, etc. helps to legitimize Mormons in the minds of suspicious Christians, ultimately unifying ‘Yes On 8′ and future political issues.

But I don’t give them any credit.

As for “religious freedom,” a church or synagogue that wanted to perform gay marriages would be in violation of the law in California (and most places, really). Is that not a violation of religious freedom?

No it wouldn’t. Certain denominations (Unitarians are one example I think) perform gay union ceremonies all the time, and any church that wants to is just as free as ever to continue performing them. Nothing illegal about it. The state simply doesn’t recognize it. The state only recognizes one kind of marriage no matter who performs it.

Seriously, is there anyone besides gay conservatives who is for gay marriage who has the slightest idea what they’re talking about?

Via Insta-P

So what we have here are people like Dave, who are currently running around screaming about how evil Mormons and threatening to break their windows and burn their sacred buildings, invoking Kristallnacht.

Every magnet in the city and county of San Francisco just went flying towards that post.

Attmay, what does SoCalRobert’s friend committing suicide have to do with you refusing to be a victim regarding the passage of Proposition 8? SoCalRobert’s friend didn’t kill himself because same sex marriage isn’t legal in California. He did it because he was devastated by relationships with men who refused to be monogamous. What is the connection?