Brief Analysis of the Yes on 8 Side

To give you an idea of the tactics of the people who want to strip Californians of their rights, here are a few YouTube videos, along with a few of my comments.

First up is one of the TV commercials. I have seen this one myself, so I know it is getting airplay on mainstream stations:

The commercial lies. Although there are state education standards, the classroom content is partially controlled by the local school board. Teaching second-graders that “boys can marry boys” will not be imposed upon a community from on high.

Also, I want you to look at who paid for this ad:

List of hate groups

First listed is the Knights of Columbus, an international Catholic organization. These are the same people who successfully lobbied Congress in 1954 to add “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance. They describe themselves as “being dedicated to the principles of Charity, Unity, Fraternity, and Patriotism.”

You can scratch Unity. It’s clearly a divisive group. First, they made all non-theists second-class citizens by adulterating the Pledge. Now they’re making gays second-class citizens by trying to take away their civil rights.

You can also scratch Patriotism. The Knights of Columbus are anything but. A true patriot supports and defends the Constitution. These people have nothing but contempt for it.

The second sponsor is the “National Organization for Marriage California Committee”. The National Organization for Marriage is a small religious political action committee with (in their own words):

…a focus on developing new strategies for increasing influence in the Northeast and West Coast, where marriage is most under threat.

So their goal is to impose outside values upon communities that don’t share those beliefs. That’s funny. Isn’t that exactly what the above commercial is trying to imply about gay marriage supporters?

The third sponsor is James Dobson’s Colorado-based Focus on the Fundie, one of the most repressive of all fundie groups.

What’s missing from this list? Californians!

Here’s another video. I don’t know if this runs on television, because it’s a bit longer than the typical commercial. It’s very slick, so it’s obviously intended for wide distribution. It stars that stellar example of family values, Newt Gingrich:

So by Newt’s logic, all judges are bad because they’re just lawyers. OK. So let’s get rid of the courts. That’s what he’s advocating. Let’s start with the activist judges on the U.S. Supreme Court. Oh wait. Newt wouldn’t want to do that, because his side is in control of those judges. In fact nothing was more activist than the judicial intervention in the 2000 presidential election. The U.S. Supreme Court installed King George upon the throne, despite the fact that Al Gore won both the popular and electoral vote.

So which is it, Newt? Do we need courts or don’t we? Is “judicial activism” good or bad? Who decides? I have a radical idea to fix things. Appoint judges who follow the Constitution! That’s what the California Supreme Court did when it overturned laws banning gay marriage. That’s what the U.S. Supreme Court did not do when it intervened in the 2000 election.

Newt, of course, is another outsider trying to tell Californians how to vote. In fact, let’s look at that issue a little closer. One of the groups trying to defeat the initiative is Californians Against Hate. They list the top donors who are trying to get the proposition passed:

  • Knights of Columbus, New Haven, CT ($1,275,000)
  • National Organization for Marriage, Princeton, NJ ($941,135)
  • John Templeton, Bryn Mawr, PA ($900,000)
  • Howard Ahmanson, Jr., Irvine, CA ($900,000)
  • American Family Association, Tupelo, MS ($500,000)
  • Elsa Prince, Holland, MI ($450,000)
  • Focus On the Family, Colorado Springs, CO, ($439,644)
  • plus many more

Of the top seven donors, six of them are out of state!

Now let’s drop the level of discourse down a notch or two and look at a couple of YouTube videos produced by individual bigots who haven’t aligned themselves with one of the national hate groups. Both of these videos reveal much about the people who are in favor of Proposition 8.

First up is “The Hidden Agenda of GARRIAGE (a.k.a. Gay ‘Marriage’)”:

One thing the marriage bigots have never made a secret about is that they are motivated entirely by religious doctrine. That video just underscores that apparently this is their only reason. But this justification is a total non-starter. We cannot base our laws upon the Bible. It’s prohibited by the Constitution. That’s the problem with fundies today. They’ve gotten so powerful they don’t even bother to hide their motives.

This last video claims that there are lots of good non-religious reasons to ban gay marriage. It lists three, all of which are disputable. Then it goes on to make its entire case solely on religious grounds. And this argument is supposed to convince me to abandon our Constitution? Do these people even understand the purpose of government?

54 Responses to “Brief Analysis of the Yes on 8 Side”

  1. Sarah Says:

    For the first video: Ok, even if they are teaching kids about homosexual marriage…what is the big deal? It’s not like they are handing kids a bunch of gay porn, they are just saying, “Now if you wanted to, when you grow up you can marry another girl or boy.”

    I swear, I love how as soon as it goes from het to homo, it is suddenly ‘dirty’ and ‘disgusting’

    The next one was just pathetic. Those judges are appointed to uphold the fucking CONSTITUTION! If they say it isn’t Constitutional and can back up their claims, then it gets tossed. Seriously…why do they feel like they have a right to fuck with the Constitution and yet everyone else has to keep away?

    Oh yeah, God said so.

    Ugh…the last two made me cringe Ron. I left a comment on both because seriously…the kinds of responses people were sending were sick. So inhuman…

  2. Thomas Says:

    Not living in California, I don’t see this fight going on from day to day. Has anyone on the progressive side taken out an ad on California TV pointing out that most donors on the conservative side aren’t even from the state in question? It strikes me that a commercial featuring the words, “Let California Decide for itself,” or somesuch might get some traction.

    On a side note, having grown up in Georgia, I’m forced to wonder why there are so many politicians from my home state that have outlandish first names. I’m thinking of Newt, mentioned above, but also Saxby, one of our current senators, Zell, a former governor and turncoat senator and Sonny, our current governor.

  3. Brian Says:

    Ron,

    I’m with you completely as far as feeling an immense sense of despair if this goddamned thing passes. Not only will it amount to legalized discrimination against citizens of your state and this country, it will be a victory for those smug, sanctimonious, uneducated bigots who would love nothing better that to shove the fucking bible down everyone’s throat (or is it up their asses? You never can tell with homophobes.) There are times when you know, down to your bones, that something is wrong. Telling people who they can and cannot love, and what they can and cannot do with each other in private is completely antithetical to what it means to be a human being. This is one of those times when people are faced with a choice between reasoned compassion and tolerance or ignorant, medieval hatred based not on facts but upon the narrow stupidity religions thrives on.

    To paraphrase the sage wisdom of Forrest Gump, I may not be a gay man, but I know what love is. I have gay friends to whom I would wish nothing but the best should my own state ever choose to emerge from the dark ages. At least in California you’re farther along toward true equality than most of the country, and for that you should feel proud. And remember that even if this thing passes, it won’t last. The country is moving to a more accepting position on this issue, especially among the younger citizens. I think its really only a matter of time before we will no longer have to argue about this.

  4. Sarah Says:

    Brian: But it makes so much sense! If the Bible is up your ass then there is NO WAI you can have teh gey buttseckz! It’s like a condom, only God-approved!

  5. ericsan Says:

    I donated quite a lot of money already to noonprop8.com, and started volunteering to do phonebanking last week. It’s an experience… I talked to some people who were so proud to tell me that marriage should be between a man and a woman like god intended, and they were voting yes on 8, but I also talked to more than a few straight people who were very supportive, and that made it all worthwile. The best part is always the few unmotivated you can talk into going to the polls to vote no.

  6. Greg Says:

    I feel like when these people cherry-pick the constitution like this, it’s just another feature of their cherry-picking of the bible itself. It seems to be in their nature! I very much hope that the people of California realize that the constitution is a little more important than self-righteous religion.

    Aaaaah! That last video almost made me vomit. Oh wait.. wait… yep. I threw up. I think it was the combination of stupidity, hate, vulgarity, and terrible christian music that did it to me.

    Whoever made that awful junk owes me a keyboard.

  7. Robert Says:

    Fellow Christians!

    BEWARE OF MORMONS BEARING GIFTS! Vote *NO* on 8!

    This is an attempt from the Mormon “Church” to gain credibility among evangelicals. Don’t be fooled. A simple google search on mormon evangelical relations will reveal a lot about their plan.

    You’d tell your kids “Don’t accept candy from strangers.” Set a good example by not doing it yourself.

  8. Jason Failes Says:

    Personally, I’m against heterosexual marriage.

    Did you know that nearly half of all heterosexual marriages end in divorce; They’re ruining marriage for everybody!

    And did you know that the vast majority of teen pregnancies, cases of adultery, and STI infections, including AIDS, are caused by heterosexuals?

    And did you know that heterosexual sex is the leading cause of overpopulation worldwide?

    Stop heterosexual marriage: Vote “Yes” on 9!

  9. Jason Failes Says:

    And while I’m at it, I’m against Christian marriage!

    Marriage is supposed to be between two consenting adults,

    not two consenting adults plus between one and three deities!

    That’s obscene; what kinds of crazy orgies are all these Gods having with people?

    Won’t someone please think of the children

    Stop Christian marriage: Vote “Yes” on 10!

  10. Jeremy White Says:

    If marriage is for the children, then should single parents be forced to give up their children to a family with a mother a father?
    If marriage is for the children, then should heterosexual marriages be forced to have children?
    If marriage is for the children, then should sterile men be banned from getting married?
    Should women not be allowed to marry after menopause?

  11. Sarah Says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSfFa44p96o

  12. Eric Says:

    Marriage is a church sanctioned event. Does it seem odd that the far right is asking for the government to discriminate against gay marriage based on religeous conventions at the same time they are asking for separation of church and state? Maybe we should have a Sunday law and suggest everyone attend church – OOPS what about Seventh Day Baptists and Seventh Day Adventists? Hmm. Can you really have it both ways? I say throw out the term Marriage and grant everyone married civil unions and be done with it.

  13. Parrotlover77 Says:

    I say throw out the term Marriage and grant everyone married civil unions and be done with it.

    That is brilliant in it’s simplicity. Marriage itself then becomes a civil event (religious or not) instead of a government sanctioned event. Meanwhile, the benefits that come with marriage, such as tax benefits, spousal visitation, etc., are preserved equally for any couple in the civil union. Everybody wins. No “separate but equal” bullshit. Me like.

  14. LadyRavana Says:

    That is brilliant in it’s simplicity. Marriage itself then becomes a civil event (religious or not) instead of a government sanctioned event. Meanwhile, the benefits that come with marriage, such as tax benefits, spousal visitation, etc., are preserved equally for any couple in the civil union. Everybody wins. No “separate but equal” bullshit. Me like.

    Fuckin’ WORD.

    I’ve gotten into a debate with someone over “marriage should be between a man and a woman, but gays can have civil unions.” (Take note, this person was a conservative MORON.) I pointed out that it was “seperate but equal” bullshit. But yeah, this person made me want to bang my head on the desk, a lot.

    As a sidenote, I’ll just say that I’m a full supporter of gay marriage and gay rights.

    But yeah. I like that idea. Then everyone WOULD be equal.

  15. Modusoperandi Says:

    Thomas “On a side note, having grown up in Georgia, I’m forced to wonder why there are so many politicians from my home state that have outlandish first names. I’m thinking of Newt, mentioned above, but also Saxby, one of our current senators, Zell, a former governor and turncoat senator and Sonny, our current governor.”
    Yes, but would you rather be a Newt or Zell…or a Ray Ray or Junior?

    Jason Failes “Did you know that nearly half of all heterosexual marriages end in divorce…”
    …and the other half end in death. Nothing with a fatality rate like that should be legal.

    “And did you know that heterosexual sex is the leading cause of overpopulation worldwide?”
    Yes, but that bit at the beginning is sooo good.

  16. Robert Says:

    Some Evangelicals are starting to realize they’ve been duped and are recommending a no vote on Prop 8

  17. Sue Blue Says:

    I never understood how gay marriage threatens straight marriage in any way. I put this question to my fundie mom once. I asked her what would really happen if the state where she lives sanctioned gay marriages. Would straight couples suddenly be overcome with homosexual urges? Would they burst into flames as God, with His notoriously bad aim, punished the whole state for legitimizing buttsex? Would all the beer-drinkin’ NASCAR dads suddenly start lisping and wearing designer clothes? I mean, what the hell IS the problem? Why can’t christians just mind their own marriages instead of everyone else’s? She couldn’t come up with anything coherent. And if it’s so horrible and life-destroying and must be stopped, why does the all-powerful god need a bunch of shrill, hysterical idiots to do his work for him? Why not just let god do his own sodomite-smiting?

    Civil unions – no religion necessary. Just a straight property/asset arrangement. That would be great. I’m with you!

  18. Sue Blue Says:

    How about another heapin’ helpin’ of fundie luv o’ teh gay? Visit this compassionate, caring christian website and feel the warm fuzzies emanating from this woman.

  19. Sue Blue Says:

    Oh, and I flagged her blog and reported it for promoting hate speech and violence. Blogspot says it doesn’t censor but prohibits the above against any person or group. If you want to rattle this twat’s cage a bit, go flag her blog. Getting her blog knocked off the web probably won’t change her hatemongering ways, but it might just make her a teensy bit more aware that her twisted, repugnant “values” do NOT represent those of most Americans.

  20. Barbara Says:

    OH MY GAWD. What a horrible woman. And she is actively breeding. I reported her too though I am not sure it will do much good. I am so tempted to respond to her but she’ll just delete my comments.

  21. Ron Britton Says:

    OMFG! I’ve seen a lot of fundie hate speech in the years I’ve been writing this blog, so it’s hard to shock me. She managed to do it.

  22. S. Says:

    why does fundie talk of ‘protecting marriage’ always have to do with same-sex nuptials? If they really cared about marriage to begin with,then what have they done to help reduce the divorce rate bet. heterosexual couples?? doing things like taxing alimony…money that has usually already been taxed once (directly from the payer’s paycheck,at that),don’t help reduce the divorce rate at all,that’s just gov’t greed.

  23. Parrotlover77 Says:

    I flagged her and attempted to submit a comment, but (SHOCKER!) she moderates all comments before they are posted. It’s pretty weird how conservative blogs seem to rarely allow comments without first being screened and liberal blogs the opposite. Very weird. But I guess when you can’t win on points, the only thing you can do is censor. Very China.

  24. Barbara Says:

    I actually lost sleep over that woman’s blog, it disturbed me that much. She actually advocates death for homosexuals. Can you imagine what the outcry would be if she said that about African Americans or Jews or any other minority? It seems that the GLBT population is protected but not very much.

  25. Andrew N.P. Says:

    Huh. Looks like that post has been deleted. And she’s disabled comments across her blog. Maybe she’s finally seen the error of her wa-ha-hahaha. I’m sorry; I couldn’t finish that sentence with a straight face.

    It’s interesting, though. When McCain’s followers say crazy and hateful things, McCain personally repudiates their words. When Obama’s followers say crazy and hateful things, Obama personally repudiates their words. When God’s followers say crazy things, God… um… nothing happens, really.

  26. Modusoperandi Says:

    Andrew N.P. “When God’s followers say crazy things, God… um… nothing happens, really.”
    The thing about God, you see, is that He’s remarkably supportive of every position. One of religion’s strengths is that it’s never wrong, which is why you can have Quakerism, hyper-Calvinism, liberation theology, Unitarianism, 6day/6k literalistsm, and mysticism…that all believe in sometimes radically different versions of the exact same God. Take slavery, for example. He was both for it and against it. He supported it and helped get rid of it. Or Hell, which is a place where nonbelievers burn for eternity…or it’s where the sins are burned away before the sinner goes to heaven…or it’s a place without God…or it’s an ice cream store that only sells vanilla. Each one is correct to its believers (while everyone else’s version, by extension, is wrong), and each (for the most part) is equally undisproveable.

  27. ericsan Says:

    And whenever someone disagrees with and tries to point out the incoherence of their position, it’s simply a challenge brought by the devil to test their faith, so basically it’s heads they win tails we lose…

  28. Barbara Says:

    She’s removed the post and several others I believe, I recall reading some older posts that were as virile. Oh, and she goes by her first name only now ( maybe she got some phone calls?!?! I thought about it but decided best not to. )
    In any case her name is RAANI STARNES

  29. Modusoperandi Says:

    ericsan “And whenever someone disagrees with and tries to point out the incoherence of their position, it’s simply a challenge brought by the devil to test their faith, so basically it’s heads they win tails we lose…”

    Or they’re guided by the Holy Spirit, or you’re misinterpreting the passage, or only believers (or True Believers) can read it properly, or you’re too literal, or you’re not literal enough, or “Luther said…”, or “William Lane Craig says…”, or Pascal’s Wager, or…

  30. Barbara Says:

    Okay, so Raani Starnes has become my new Duggar family. I am obsessed and probably need an intervention but I did find where she gets the steaming pile of dogshit she regurgitates in her blog.

    http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/

    They aren’t quite God Hates Fags but they are pretty damn close.

  31. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Modusoperandi – You made my brain hurt.

  32. GregL Says:

    That homeschool blog lady is weird. She has apparently removed the most insulting of the posts, but reading through the others freaks me out. One post talked about the training she was using to get her 20 month old kid to sit still – her goal is for him to listen to an entire sermon on CD without him moving!

    Also, the freaky 3D-fetus on the sidebar…. well…. I’m at a loss for words.

  33. Andrew N.P. Says:

    On the one hand, I’m worried that we’re getting off topic. On the other hand, I guess these nutjobs are pretty relevant, in a way. “We don’t hate homosexuals. We just want to preserve a child’s right to be raised by a mother and a father.” Oh, right, right. Which is why you’re first in line to condemn the foul rhetoric of Raani Starnes, a.k.a. “Janine from Farmington, NM.” (I am not making this up. She just changed her profile. So much for “thou shalt not bear false witness,” amirite?)

    And for those of you playing along at home, Raani just put up a sermon from her pastor which may or may not be worse than what was deleted. Gentlemen,… BEHOLD! Apparently Ham raped Noah. So there you go.

  34. Parrotlover77 Says:

    The 3D fetus made me want to say post something like, “why did God make your fetus have a tail?”

  35. Sue Blue Says:

    Wow, I didn’t mean to hijack this thread by linking to that troglodyte twat’s blog, I just thought fundie attitudes towards gays have everything to do with the battle in California right now. I’m glad that everyone reported her blog, though. If it’s been taken down, it’s because people like you (and a lot of people over at Pharyngula, too) won’t just sit idly by and let deranged bible-bangers spout hate and violence in a public forum. Good for everyone here!

    I’m betting that “Raani”, or whatever her name is, will soon start shrieking about !!PERSECUTION!! to anyone who will listen. For some reason, fundies get all bent out of shape at us folks who hold our noses and yell “Damn, that shit stinks!” whenever they queef out another Turd of Truth from the biblical bowels, yet they can’t see why anyone should object to openly hoping for the death of gay kids. Just wait for it. Any minute now, the whining will start.

    And I will be ready.

  36. Sue Blue Says:

    I just checked out that link Andrew provided. Anyone else here wondering what that diatribe against “sodomites” has to do with homeschooling? Is this really what the christian homeschooling parents of Doohickey, South Dakota, are worried about? How about Math standards? Spelling? English? How to get a good job after “graduating”? How to keep from having your “homeschool” mortgage foreclosed? Talk about reality-denial.

  37. Modusoperandi Says:

    Parrotlover77 “Modusoperandi – You made my brain hurt.”
    That’s the most common side effect of me.

  38. Sue Blue Says:

    PL – yeah, that fetus is creepy. Also ironic – it’s whirling around, advertising its evolutionary origins with that little tail (among other things), and I’ll bet dimes to dollars that not one fundy visiting that site will ever stop and say, “Heeeey! Wait just a minute here…that don’t look like no human bein’! That looks just like a tadpole! How come God made our little babies look like tadpoles?!!”

  39. Parrotlover77 Says:

    I’m betting that “Raani”, or whatever her name is, will soon start shrieking about !!PERSECUTION!! to anyone who will listen.

    Christians love to feel persecuted. They live for it. It makes them think they are feeling what Jesus felt. Because, you know, a private company deciding they don’t want hate speech on their free website is the same as being crucified. ;-)

  40. Parrotlover77 Says:

    SB – I’ve read the answer to that before. It usually comes up with questions like, if there’s no evolution, why do we have so much DNA in common with our close genetic relatives. The answer they use is something to the effect of, God reuses animal pieces like how we reuse all the nuts and bolts of things we create. So, you see, God was just efficient (lazy?) when he decided to make Chimps and Humans 98% the same in their genetic make-up.

  41. ericsan Says:

    Meanwhile, Apple has publicly come out against Prop. 8 and contributed $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign (check out the “hot news” section on their web site).

    Their position is that they view it as a civil rights issue, not a political issue, therefore they are taking a position to support their employees’ rights. Go Apple! Just for that I’m buying me a new MacBook Pro with what’s left of my retirement money.

  42. Ron Britton Says:

    Meanwhile, Apple has publicly come out against Prop. 8 and contributed $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign

    Then count on the fundies starting a boycott. They’ve boycotted every other company that has given money to the No side.

  43. Ron Britton Says:

    Hey, Californians Against Hate has this post on their list of articles about Prop 8! I made it onto the website of one of the major anti-8 groups. w00t!

  44. LadyRavana Says:

    Because of Ericsan’s post, I think my next computer will be an Apple. XD!

    Seriously, they just got respect points from me.

  45. LadyRavana Says:

    I clicked on the link to that crazy fundie breeder’s blog (I probably should have grabbed the Tums to ward off the impending ulcer that was sure to come) and…it looks like she’s locked everyone out. It says it’s “open to invited readers only.”

    Huh. Imagine that.

  46. Peter Says:

    When did “activist” judges become “imperial” judges?

    Newty references the the Declaration of Independence as his reasoning for fighting against these “imperial” judges. Which if we look at the Declaration it says the following on Judges:

    “He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

    “He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.”

    That’s it. Basically, the complaint is that the king had been interfering in the Judicial system, and having the judges in his pocket.

    In other words, maybe we should be looking a little more at our King George…

  47. Parrotlover77 Says:

    I’m glad to see Apple support “No on 8″ but I’m still not buying an apple. I’m still a fan of the Evil Empire of Microsoft. ;-) (P.S. Bill Gates is a dirty hippy librul)

  48. j a higginbotham Says:

    off-topic, but in-family (daughter?)

    Thursday, September 25, 2008
    Hate

    I usually never write on my blog, but I finally have something to talk about. Jonathan came home from church and told us about an argument he got into with a boy at church. Jonathan said something about how God hated Esau. Then a girl with a puzzled look on her face said,”God hated Esau?” Then the boy quickly replied,”You are supposed to love everybody.” Jon said,”Sorry but, I ain’t lovin’ no fag!” So the boy said,”If you don’t it’s a sin.”That just makes me mad. It seems like that’s what everybody believes now. If it says in the Bible that God hated people, I don’t think it’s a sin. I just wish they would read 2 Chronicles 19:2 or Psalm 11:5 every once in a while!

    Posted by Jessica at 9:17 AM 1 comments

  49. ericsan Says:

    Leave it to ubergeeks to turn an anti-fundie blog into a PC vs. Mac slugfest ;)

  50. Blackrose Says:

    OK, I’ve been lurking for the past couple of days since I stumbled this blog, but I need to de-lurk to say something about all this. These commercials are disgusting. They are abhorrent examples of people who are so small minded that they don’t realize that these people love each other. That is all that should matter. Then the yell OH THE CHHHHIIIIILLLLDDDRRREEEENNNZZZZZ!!! Makes me ill. My mom is a liberal catholic who taught me about not discriminating against anyone no matter what. I was taught about homosexuality at a young age. It didn’t harm me in any way. I’m a better person because I was taught to be kind and not look down on people for bullshit reasons. These are the same people who keep their kids from reality for bitching to schools about teaching comprehensive sex ed, the kind I never had the pleasure of getting because I went to a Catholic school. These people shelter their children from the real world. I pity these children, because they will crumble when they get to the real world and realize that there is so much they don’t know and understand. These small minded bigots make me lose faith in this world. Hiding behind their god to excuse themselves from all criticism because of their beliefs. This is coming from a pagan, a theist who can see right through their shit. It infuriates me so much. Thank you for being a voice of reason. I love this blog, and You do all logical people, not just atheists, but others who are reasonable. Anyways, I apologize for the rant, I am far more articulate, but this makes my blood boil. Hope it made sense lol, it looks kind of jumbled, but when I get angry things don’t tend to come out in a coherent way

  51. Ron Britton Says:

    Blackrose:

    It makes my blood boil, too.

    One thing that really stands out about these Yes on 8 ads is that most of them are focussing exclusively on the schools. “It’s part of the homosexual agenda! They’re going to teach our kids to be gay! That’s how they recruit new faggots, because they can’t reproduce!”

  52. Blackrose Says:

    Yeah, just like you can teach gay kids to be straight, or that straight parents always raise straight kids! Makes so much sense. These people need a reality check…Plus I absolutely hate the term “Homosexual agenda” It’s crap. Since when is love an agenda?

  53. Chuck Says:

    My favorites are the third and fourth videos XD.

    In the third, his “argument” for children’s “entitlements” implies that single parents should either be stripped of their children so that the children can be placed in two-parent-heterosexual families, or that single parents should be forced into cohabitation so their children can have both sexes as parents.

    Even if this were true, which it obviously isn’t, his argument is incorrectly stated because sex isn’t strictly bound to gender, and most of these people really mean to say that a child should have parents of opposite GENDERS, or at least parents who display opposite gender characteristics. For example, there are straight couples (or at least, heterosexual couples) with very masculine women and very feminine men, but no one bitches about them having kids.

    I also love how he talks about marriage being historically child-centric. XD His ignorance is over 9000.
    Marriage in the West is a formalism created by patriarchal groups to create a blood bond to firmly seal a political or economic contract in such a way that would make it almost inviolable for either party. He’s correct that it has nothing to do with love, but he’s incorrect that it has something to do with children. Sure, if it was politically motivated everyone assumed children would result, but there were plenty of scandals in which an illegitimate heir was produced because they couple couldn’t make one of their own. *cough* Ishmael *cough*

    The fourth video is awesome because it tries to drawn on tradition as a valid argument against change. That worked well against heliocentrism, didn’t it?

    What about the higher STI transmission rate in gay men? What about the fact that lesbians have the lowest STI transmission rate of any sexually mature group, bitch? Guess that argument implies LESBIAN marriage should be the only legal marriage.

    Finally, I don’t know where the third point was fabricated, but there have been studies on the children of gay civil unions since we were allowed to adopt that show PRECISELY the opposite – just like in La Cage Aux Folles (The Birdcage, for you monolingual people), gays can have perfectly healthy, normal children of any sexual orientation.

    I hate fundies.

  54. Modusoperandi Says:

    Ron Britton “Then count on the fundies starting a boycott. They’ve boycotted every other company that has given money to the No side.”
    Do they actually buy anything worth buying anyway? I’m sure that Big Hairspray and Big Pickup would take a hit to their bottom line if they came out against Prop 8…

    ericsan “Leave it to ubergeeks to turn an anti-fundie blog into a PC vs. Mac slugfest.”
    PC v Mac? Pbbt! Amiga all the way! Woo! Go, Amiga! They’re due for a comeback, I tell you.

    Blackrose “…Plus I absolutely hate the term ‘Homosexual agenda’”
    I’ve read through it, and I don’t see anything all that bad about the homosexual agenda.