You, on the other hand, are a gay-sex liberal, so you support stripping people of their right to vote and overturning the constitution. That shows what pathetic fascists you and your Obama Party are.

That’s exactly the state of the law in Washington State, or will be when the governor signs the legislation. But the same Christian nutcases that “gay patriots” pimp for have announced their intention to gather signatures to put an anti-gay referendum on the ballot to overturn it. I expect “gay patriots” here to be at the forefront of the repeal movement. It’s what the self-hating queers do.

However responding to your remarks, according to Paula she has custody, that’s not the issue and I am not playing victim here. I never said she should have never had children, however children should be planned for and wanted and when surprized with pregnancy don’t murder the baby, adjust your plans. That is why I brought up cold blooded murder (aka abortion).

Back on topic, Paula insinuated that hatred by gays for Prejean’s position and personal attacks are justified and she is advocating violence against other innocent people. She uses her personal situation to justify the hate and violence and that is just sad, especially for her babies.

Hilton, Olberman and leftwing bloggers are haters of the stance Miss Ca took and are attacking her personally for it. Undeniable fact!

I will not change my own mind about marriage, but I do believe that there can be a compromise for the gay community in the form of a civil contract that has the same impact as getting a marriage license.

I appreciate the concession regarding civil unions. As for marriage, keep in mind that it has changed a lot in the past few thousand years, and I imagine will continue to change. Hopefully for the better, and for the better of all, as it has most of the time in the past.

I agree with your first statement. Maybe I missed something, but I’m not sure what abortion had to do with this discussion.

Those who play the victim card embellish, stretch the blanket, exaggerate or out right lie about their situation to garner sympathy. As far as Paula goes, I only believe half of what she’s said on face value and if verified she may be telling a 20% of story accurately.

I personally try my best to take one’s word here at face value, since that’s pretty much all you have on the Internet. Besides, some people are very good at seeming authentic, while lying through their teeth. So, despite people’s claims of expertise to the contrary, it’s impossible to know for sure the truth of anyone here.

Anyway, what I’m reading is that despite both of you undergoing unfortunate circumstances, Paula and you want what’s best for your own children. I’m guessing that if, say, you believe a custodial judgment was unfavorable to you, and more importantly, was not optimal for your children, you would fight for it, instead of saying that you shouldn’t have had children.

1.  Five Distortions of the Gospel in Our Day

2.  How the Calvin & Hobbs cartoon above resembles the public school system.
3.  How swine flu was started.

HT: A Ten O’Clock Scholar
4.  From a Gay Patriot – Why Demonize Su……

(Or … this seems to work.)

Pat, you raised excellent points as well. I will continue to talk as the straight person here because I believe that it helps dialogue between each side.

There is one point you raised and that is about pedophelia. The only way that you will change people’s mind on the subject is for other gays to speak up against it. By doing that you will win over straight people.

I see it as the equivalent of incest – the type between a father and daughter, but even this can be father/son, which is really deplorable in my mind. It has happened within my family and yes incest is really quite common. It is a very bad thing, and it should be spoken about and treated the same as pedophilia. It is the most shameful thing about heterosexuals. Several cases have recently come to light where fathers have attacked their daughters and the daughters have had babies. It is not just a father/daughter thing either, it can be a sibling thing as well.

In other words both sides have to deal with these shameful practices. Pedophilia is not confined to homosexual activity. It can be any sexual contact between an adult and a child under a certain age. The adult can be male or female and the child can be either same sex or opposite sex.

We all need to work to stamp it out, and by that I mean that the gay community needs to speak up against it, just like the heterosexual community needs to speak up against it and against incest.

There has been personal experiences within my family relating to incest. So I am speaking from experience.

If we are mature in how we handle these things, I do believe that we can come to some sort of compromise. I will not change my own mind about marriage, but I do believe that there can be a compromise for the gay community in the form of a civil contract that has the same impact as getting a marriage license. As it stands there are plenty of straight people who make a mockery out of marriage with their constant divorces and marriages.

Those who play the victim card embellish, stretch the blanket, exaggerate or out right lie about their situation to garner sympathy. As far as Paula goes, I only believe half of what she’s said on face value and if verified she may be telling a 20% of story accurately.

Paula, if I am wrong, please forgive me for doubting, as I do forgive you if I am right.

All too often today, it’s the other way around. Parents more often hate (or at least act like it) their gay children.

Where is Dad when you need him?

My understanding there was a second parent, and she passed away. So it’s, unfortunately, similar to a situation in an opposite sex couple where the father passes away, or takes off and takes limited or no responsibility for the children.

Also, you and other ugly lefties attacks on Prejean remind me of Frankenstein. That was the name of the creator, the creature was never named. But upon being abandoned and neglected, he became the monster.
Interesting thing is that today Frankenstein refers to the monster itself.
The same will happen to your campaign against Prejean. You’re ugly antics have created a useful tool for the anti gay marriage crowd – but in the end it will come back to bite you. It is already, I’m seeing good honorable people who used to support gay marriage now have doubts because of your boorish ugly attack methods.

Why just the gay left, Ashpenaz? There are plenty of gay conservatives who want the type of marriage that opposite sex couples have. What’s wrong with that?

I can’t speak for others, but I’m not ashamed about what homosexuals had to do in the past. Most people did the best they could with a bad situation. Further, when you bring up examples of “couples” in the past, we really do not know the nature of their relationship, do we?

What most people don’t want is a life and relationship built on silly euphemisms, but one in which they can be open and proud about, just like any opposite sex couple. And no, this does not have to be in your face, rainbow flag waving, etc.

As for the point of the post… Why must so many gay marriage advocates label their adversaries as haters? Don’t they even realize the irony that they are using hateful rhetoric to accuse others of hate?

I don’t know. Actually, I don’t know if the “hate” is much different than any other contentious issue. But there is hate on both sides of this issue. What about the many who oppose same sex marriage and civil unions simply because they hate gay people? Or just as bad, they “love the sinner, but hate the sin.” Right or wrong, people too often respond in kind.

On the other hand, imagine if opposite sex marriage was eliminated, and only same sex marriage was allowed. How do you think straight persons would respond to that? How do you think they would respond to hearing, “You have the same rights as everyone, you can marry someone of the same sex,” or having their relationships compared to incest, bestiality, polygamy, and pedophilia? Do you honestly think that all straight persons would say, “Gee, that’s too bad for us, but we should engage our opponents and try to have them understand our point of view, and let them gradually give our privileges back, and only if we’re all good boys and girls.”

Yes, the above is hypothetical and only to illustrate how hate can happen. In any case, I agree it doesn’t help our cause when Hilton behaved in the manner he did.

Why must so many gay marriage advocates label their adversaries as haters?
…What is behind this need to demonize?

Dan,
Have you not read Rules for Radicals? They do it on purpose. It’s one of the left’s many bullying tactics.

Personally I have no animosity towards men and women who are homosexual in their tendencies. What I do not appreciate Paula is the way that you are advocating violence towards others. The Malcolm X violence that you seem to advocate goes very much against the grain.

If there really are children involved, and there is a problem in raising them, then they should be given up for adoption. Now do not start histrionics on me, because I have a sister who had a child out of wedlock. You do not know the whole of my late sister’s circumstances but she was left as a single mother and her youngest daughter was only 14 when she passed away as a result of undiagnosed bone cancer. I could tell you a thing or two about how badly she was treated.

The world does not owe you or your children a living and you are not a victim of circumstance. People make themselves into being victims and yes sometimes circumstances do make people into victims. It is how you get over those situations that matters. Yes, I have been there and done that…… and I do not have to tell what I suffered when I was growing up. What I will tell you though, is that I do not advocate violence towards others, and you Paula, by espousing Malcolm X are indeed advocating violence towards others.

At the same time you have the same twisted ideas that I read from Levi and Gillie in particular on this site. Yes, I said twisted ideas because what they espouse is totally twisted.

I am an outsider, an observer, and from what I read about Miss California all she did to warrant the most disgusting attack upon her person in the form of vilification was to state her own personal belief about marriage being between a man and a woman. This is the same belief that is held by Obummer. The hypocrisy of the situation is that the left liberals are screaming at Miss Perjean for stating her own beliefs. At no time during the pageant did she try to thrust her beliefs on others, and for the record she did not say anything that was hateful. Instead, a rather foul-mouthed man by the name of Perez Hilton said some really disgusting things about this young woman. It was really foul language that was used. Yet, not one member of the left has castigated this foul-mouthed individual.

And along comes someone who says her name is Paula Brooks, who is advocating violence towards people who happen to hold a differing opinion to her own, because she thinks that the world owes her a living…. this is how I am reading the conversation here.

No, Paula, the government does not owe you or those children a living. The government does not owe you benefits for those children, especially if you are working and earning enough to pay for their living expenses. It is this welfare mentality that is bankrupting the USA, Australia, Great Britain and other nations.

If you cannot afford to look after the children, then give them up for adoption.