While I, by no means, assume the nutjobs on 8 represent the ‘silent majority’ like it or not, they are the visible ‘face’ of the gay rights movement. As much as the Folsom Street Fair is the ‘face’ of every couple that practices spank, tickle, and rope in their bedroom.

That is why the denouncement of the violence and insults has to be clear and no hedging. Saying “I disagree with their means, but…” or attacking the messenger is not going to help the cause.

Compared to tearing a cross out of someone’s hand, or chasing people out of the Castro district, makes even the most disagreeable rant on the internet seem lucid by comparison.

it’s going to be a LONG decade for you folks.

By the way, you’re telling people to listen to a woman who attacked Rachel Ray for wearing a piece of clothing because it’s allegedly the garb worn by terrorists? puh-lease.

You’re absolutely right. The keffiyeh is soooo yesterday while Che Guevera t-shirts are back in vogue this season! Give me a break. I agree with Malkin on this. Do you even know what the history of the Palestinian version of the keffiyeh is or have you swallowed some BS, PC-inspired version of this being a symbol of the struggle of the peace-loving people of Palestine?

What the hell is it with the lib fascination with brutal thugs and dictators? These are the same folks who would target gays and liberals of all kinds in the West if they had a chance. Puh-leeze.

Maybe if you folks see Milk when it comes out next week, then maybe you’ll learn something about a man who was a great liberal and didn’t need to “learn from conservatives”.

First of all, only a fool would claim either that liberals have nothing to learn from conservatives AND vice versa. We all may not agree exactly on what that may be, but we are all human and none of us are perfect. Second, the biggest problem I have with Hrvey Milk was his cruel outing of Oliver Sipple, the former Marine who saved then-President Ford’s life. I first read about that in “Conduct Unbecoming” and lost a LOT of respect for Milk for his exploiting Sipple for political gain. I still find that to be completely despicable.

We’re not the ones hurling racial slurs at blacks.

I only wish it had opened wide before the November elections – then perhaps the outcome of the prop 8 vote would have been different.

By the way, you’re telling people to listen to a woman who attacked Rachel Ray for wearing a piece of clothing because it’s allegedly the garb worn by terrorists? puh-lease.

malkin linked a story about a group of christians who were chased out of the castro by a group of angry gay residents.

and Chad adds:

it is particularly cruel to call a group of people an insane mob when they are simply asking for civil rights and equal protection under the law.

Chad, I think, means the angry gays, not the Christians. I assume this because Chad notes:

on the other hand, maybe some people are entitled to their anger. some of the most effective gay activist movements were predicated upon anger. see ACT UP circa. 1987-88.

Chad’s conclusion about Michelle Malkin is that:

she’s distorting the prop 8 narrative to get more hits on her blog, and her mistakes need to be corrected by more reasonable conservative voices.

So, Chad, what is the “Prop 8 narrative” that the gay activists are unfolding and Michelle Malkin has wrong?

Smacking a cross out of an old woman’s hands, hissing the N-word, disrupting church services, picketing Mormons and chasing Christian missionaries out of the Castro district seems like a narrative to me. Did something escape my lying eyes? Remember, I am straight, so I am a homophobe and need careful instruction.

“Blacks and Mormons have been the main targets of the gay activists’ anger. Seventy percent of blacks voted against gay marriage in California, so racial epithets were hurled at blacks in Los Angeles — not in black neighborhoods, by the way.”

I suppose when the gay activists have had done with the Mormons, they will turn their attention on clearing out the black neighborhoods. They can start in the nursing homes.

Personally, I think the eHarmony lawsuit was wrongly decided, but if I’m allowed to cry discrimination against people who I disagree with because they don’t want me around, I just might take you up on the offer.

Louise B

Okay, maybe the heckling of evangelists is not related to rallies against prop 8, but she didn’t say that it was. And heck, you’re doing the same thing, bringing in extraneous points about Michelle’s others posts which I don’t address in this one (to which you attach your comment) and have no relevance to the issue at hand.

Seems you just want to vent at Michelle. So, why don’t you go do that her blog?

on the other hand, maybe some people are entitled to their anger. some of the most effective gay activist movements were predicated upon anger. see ACT UP circa. 1987-88.

i don’t think malkin has anything to teach the gay community or the anti-prop 8 movement about good sportsmanship. i also think your defense of malkin is misguided. she plainly IS trying to portray the entire anti-prop 8 movement as gripped with insane rage. on monday, under the headline “anti-prop 8 mob watch: christians in SF’s castro district”, malkin linked a story about a group of christians who were chased out of the castro by a group of angry gay residents. but the incident was not connected in any way with an anti-prop 8 protest. it was a spontaneous reaction by neighborhood residents who were upset by antagonizers who came to the castro to convert its gays to the straight lifestyle. why would she deliberately conflate the anti-prop 8 movement with an incident that was plainly not associated with prop 8?? why would she refer to protestors as a mob unless she is trying to define the entire movement as gripped with “insane rage”?? and as i mentioned earlier, it is particularly cruel to call a group of people an insane mob when they are simply asking for civil rights and equal protection under the law.

as far as your defense of malkin on the grounds that she is serving as a MSM watchdog, well, that too is misguided. in the post mentioned above, malkin links a MS television source that reported the story, a source which was careful to point out that the incident was not connected to organized prop 8 protests. she’s not “reporting” on stories that the MSM ignores; she’s distorting the prop 8 narrative to get more hits on her blog, and her mistakes need to be corrected by more reasonable conservative voices.

First, you just don’t do that to anybody.
Second, don’t even think about touching my cross, bee-atch.
Further, what happened to their oh-so-liberal sensibilities? She had as much of a right to protest as they did. There was undoubtedly a lot of name-calling from both sides, but at 57, I’ve been called everything and really don’t give a hoot.

Calm yourselves down. When Shakespeare said “First, kill all the lawyers”, he was talking about the surest way to cause anarchy. Let the lawyers speak for us, but make sure you make yourselves heard by the lawyers. Anarchy is the worst state of affairs to be in — which speaks to why the angry mobs never get much done. Well, I take that back: there was the French Revolution, which took decades and killed untold thousands of people.

I paid for my appointment at the SF city hall for us to be married in December after 25 years. Whether or not the government intercedes and determines that it was an illegal ballot, we’ve decided not even to do it there. We’ll go home to my family in Massachusetts where the issue is fairly secure. Heck, I may even find a priest from my religion to do a blessing.

Our choice to do it in SF was originally a peaceful attempt to let our numbers be counted (we are going to SF anyway, so admittedly, it was an afterthought). If such union is in peril in the eyes of the State, we know that it is not in our eyes. We wanted to avoid having the family shell out for gifts and killing the fatted goat, but it will be more comfortable than making a statement like that in a war zone like KKKalifornia.

IMHO, I think we shouldn’t concentrate on the word “Marriage”, but instead on equal rights. I want every single freaking right that straight people have (who, at this point, don’t last as long as we have. My kid brother is on his third marriage since we’ve been together, and his present mail-order bride will get his benefits). I want him to get my Social Security. I would have wanted to adopt, but we’re too old and really don’t personally want to live anywhere but Florida, home of vestiges of the Anita Bryant abomination.

I urge folks to redirect the thrust towards equality and not what others consider usurping “their” word.

EQUALITY!

Problem with that, GPW, is that you are asking a population that has been taught for decades that nothing that ever happens to them is their fault to take on self analysis