BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 May 12 - 09:19 PM

David, you are assuming this is a democracy.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,David E.
Date: 09 May 12 - 10:16 PM

Well I was just wondering because I couldn't find the answer anywhere. I figured people here would have an answer. Whether I agree or disagree it concerns me when courts overturn the will of the voting public. That has happened, regarding this issue, at least twice in California. In time, gay marriage will be legal everywhere and hopefully because the majority of people say so and not because of a court ruling. But right now it's only a big deal to educated white liberals, to everyone else... not so much. (Just my opinion, please don't stone me.)

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bill D
Date: 09 May 12 - 10:26 PM

"Seems like everywhere I can think of it's been a court decision, not resident decision"

And it should NOT be an item which can be decided by popular vote!

Basic human rights should simply be affirmed by legal means, as in the Constitution. Where would the Civil Rights movement be if it had been put to 'popular vote' in the South? Or the right of women to vote?

What is possible, and what is often done by conservatives, is to drum up opposition using distortions, lies and scare tactics...then tying votes on 'rights' to other issues.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Janie
Date: 09 May 12 - 11:12 PM

Thanks, Bill D. Excellent point.

North Carolina had already passed a law prohibiting gay marriage. Laws can be challenged in court. Constitutional amendments have to be repealed by the voters. The constitutional prohibition against civil unions and domestic partnerships that is included in the amendment applies equally to heterosexual couples.

31 states now have constitutional amendments banning same sex unions, although there is considerable variation in the extent of the ban.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_constitutional_amendments_banning_same-sex_unions_by_type

There was significant variation in the vote in North Carolina by regional demographics. Rural vs. urban, areas with large numbers of professionals, higher incomes, and higher education tended to vote against the amendment in large numbers. Some of those people are Christian and also evangelical. However, the pastors of most of the churches they attend probably did not speak out and enjoin their congregations to vote against the amendment as did many conservative pastors. I haven't been attending my own, generally liberal Episcopal church regularly for awhile, but am pretty sure if I had, I would not have heard my Rector address the issue from the pulpit. My church leadership has been remarkably silent, publicly, in articulating a position on the controversy and chism within the Episcopal church regarding our gay bishop, other than to make clear his support for staying within the American Episcopal union.

I can not but help think of the central role leaders in African American churches played in the American civil rights movement, and to a certain extent continue to play. Conservative pastors today took a page from that book of lessons and wield it very effectively.

This is a civil rights issue in every way. Generally speaking, neither the liberal churches nor the African-American churches that continue to advocate for civil rights for African-Americans have had the courage to take a stand on this issue, or fail to recognize it as a civil rights issue.



It is a difficult task for a society to balance the benefits of acceptance and diversity with the benefits of cohesiveness.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: John P
Date: 09 May 12 - 11:45 PM

is there any state where the residents of that state have actually voted FOR gay marriage? Seems like everywhere I can think of it's been a court decision, not resident decision.

The Washington State legislature passed a gay marriage law. Sort of like the people voting on it. Since our local bigots have fielded a petition to revoke the law it won't be allowed to go into effect until after the elections this fall. So we will be voting on it.

But all of that is beside the point: You don't get to vote on my civil rights. Or you shouldn't, to be more accurate. Apparently in the Land of the Free you get to vote on other people's sex lives. There is nowhere this should be decided except in the courts. It's a Constitutional issue, not a school levy.

Interestingly, one of the big bigots here is the Seattle Catholic Cardinal, the same one who is "investigating" the American nuns for the Vatican. He is encouraging all Catholic churches to put the anti-gay initiative petitions out for people to sign when they come to Mass. Parishioners can get their love and their hate with one stop shopping. Thankfully, three local churches, including the big cathedral, refused to engage in his hateful, sexually perverted politics.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 09 May 12 - 11:56 PM

I've heard good things about that Seattle cathedral. I'm glad to hear they are still fighting the good fight.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: ChanteyLass
Date: 10 May 12 - 12:16 AM

Thanks, saulgoldie, for your post, "Well, this should be interesting. NPR reports that President Obama has just, er, "come out" for legalized same-sex marriage."

Soon after Obama decided to reveal this opinion, Sen. Jack Reed of RI finally did, too. Until now, he has been silent on his position. Coincidence? I don't think so, but now is better than never.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Mike in Brunswick
Date: 10 May 12 - 12:39 AM

Voter turnout in North Carolina was around 34 percent. The amendment passed by a 61% to 39% margin. So about 20% of the electorate voted to deny civil rights to gays.

Here in Maine, we've been on all sides of this issue in recent years. The legislature passed a law legalizing gay marriage. Unfortunately, it was subsequently overturned by a citizen's referendum. Now, as Sinsull says, we'll get a chance to vote on it again in November. But, as North Carolina proved, turnout is everything.

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: akenaton
Date: 10 May 12 - 05:18 AM

Apologies Will, i wasn't aware that a subsequent post had been deleted.
I still see no need to bracket what I see as fair comment, with the sentiments expressed in the deleted post.

I know many couples who "love" one another and have no desire to marry, so marriage is not a prerequisite for a loving relationship.
In the UK, Civil Unions provide all the benefits and legal protections of marriage, yet homosexual activists continually push for "the word",though their union is different in many ways from a hetero one.

I keep coming back to the "liberal" equality agenda which served a useful purpose in fighting real discrimination in the past, but is now a joke and has been twisted into a tool of manipulation for any minority, sexual or otherwise to impose their will on the silent majority.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Will Fly
Date: 10 May 12 - 07:10 AM

If I ever was to marry again - highly unlikely as it is - it would be a civil ceremony in a Registry Office. The ceremony would, in essence, be very similar to the ceremony for my friends I attended last Friday.

I wouldn't actually don't care whether it was deemed a Civil Ceremony or a Marriage - the social and legal ramifications would be the same. The basis for my disregard for such a label is that I'm not, and never have been, religious in any sense of the word - a mindset I've had since I was old enough to reason - so the religious overtones of the word marriage hold no meaning for me.

So, what's in a word? I suppose, in that sense, I'm equally amused by gay couples who feel the need for the word "marriage" - and by those who insist "marriage" shouldn't be used!

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Will Fly
Date: 10 May 12 - 07:20 AM

"wouldn't actually don't care" - should read "wouldn't care" - Doh!

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: akenaton
Date: 10 May 12 - 07:58 AM

I'm not religious either Will, so that aspect doesn't bother me.

In our area (West Scotland)"marriage" is widely perceived as a foundation for the building of a family structure and not so much a declaration of "love"
Maybe we are closer to nature here, and treat life a little more seriously than the Mudcat "liberals" :0)

As I said in another thread, many young couples are happy to live together unmarried, 'till the children come along, then the foundation of marriage seems much more important.
Many of my friends and neighbours find the "institution" devalued by opening it to what they see as a rather odd sexual minority.

However it is encouraging that you and I can discuss this issue in calm and adult manner....Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 May 12 - 08:18 AM

That's more than somewhat illogical, ake, in that the vast majority of animals are not monogamous and do not form permanent liaisons (there are exceptions) so if one were to take the set of all mammals rather than the set of all human beings it would be the unnatural preferences of a tiny minority that you support.

By way of contrast, throughout most of the world, within the set of human relationships, marriage is statistically rarely anything other than the formal subjugation of a woman to a man. It is only recently that the promise to obey became an option in CofE marriage.

I find it rather dispiriting that your discriminatory views are tolerated, even to the extent that they are.   The reason that your views are bracketed with those of the revolting and deleted guest (I have a note of some of them) is that those views of yours were (indeed have frequently seemed to be) similar and on this occasion appeared adjacent and seemed to give active support to those of the deleted guest to the extent that I for one thought that you were actively allying yourself with him.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 May 12 - 08:31 AM

PS - chance googling led me to some information on Akhenaten, the father of Nefertiti, and his life style choices seem to have been the very stuff of which Akenaton might have disapproved - being possibly bisexual and almost certainly having fathered Nefertiti by an incestuous relationship, also trying to introduce monotheism to supplant previous polythesim and the agricultural changes during whose reign may perhaps have been the melting pot that lead to the development of the first flu virus and a deadly pandemic. .

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 10 May 12 - 08:31 AM

Well, I guess the silver lining is in the poll numbers and not election results... The country has come a long way in a relatively short time and like other moral/pro-human movements we will overcome the bigotry here, as well...

What we are unfortunately seeing today is the last stand for the "AAWWM" (aging, angry, wealthy white man)... With the recent horrible Supreme Court ruling in "Citizens United" the AAWWM is taking his last shot with his $$$ to turn back the clock...

Here in Charlotte we were inundated with "Yes" ads... I mean, someone dropped some $eriuo$ ca$h on this campaign... Whose money was that??? The 5 $upreme Clown$ say it's none of our business to know...

We just need to ride this out... Bigotry dies hard... But it will die in terms of public policy one day... Just not today...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 May 12 - 09:04 AM

I'm willing to bet, that the BEST thing, at that ceremony, WAS the music, and you playing it!

It, otherwise, was just a gig.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Wesley S
Date: 10 May 12 - 09:56 AM

I loved the cartoon I was sent this morning. It said -

"North Carolina - where you can marry your cousin, just not your gay cousin."

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: meself
Date: 10 May 12 - 10:25 AM

I think we should approach this the other way: take the word 'marriage' out of the law, and replace it with something like 'civil union' - then you can call your own relationship whatever you want. Other than looking at how the benefits and assets get divided, it's not the state's business.

As for the religious angle - I'm not sure how the Church got control of the marriage business, but I suspect it was something like this: some cardinal realized that if the church were able to get a few cents, pence, or drachma for every new marriage in Europe, he would within the year be able to finance the construction of a villa for his latest whore - so the word went out: be married by clergy or be burned at the stake.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 10 May 12 - 10:46 AM

I, like your president and a large section of society am not in favour of "Gay Marriage", for reasons I have given on other threads

Alas, only today Mr Obama has given a speech in full favour of equal marriage rights. This is his opinion and probably will have no political teeth though, at this particular time, it could be politically damaging to him. Well done him for having the guts to "come out" on the issue once and for all.

The sooner this whole "gay" marriage wordage is dropped and it simply be called equal marriage (or just marriage) the better. The actual inequality and discrimination of the whole debate stands out a mile for putting the word "gay" in there with the title in the first place.

Obama's endorsement of equal marriage

Once again Mr Dylan's prophetic words are sounding out... The times they are a changing'. Indeed they are!

mp

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 May 12 - 11:00 AM

""The problem is the BIG LIES that the extreme right can afford to throw against gay rights... These are the angry, rich old white guys""

Half of whom are probably closet gays, envious of anyone who gets what they didn't have the guts to handle.



""If I ever was to marry again - highly unlikely as it is - it would be a civil ceremony in a Registry Office.""

The point, Will, is that your union with a woman, whether you care about the words or not, will be a wedding leading to a marriage.

A same sex civil ceremony denies the participants the same right that you would happily discard.

The discrimination is in the fact that they don't get the choice.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Wesley S
Date: 10 May 12 - 11:05 AM

I'd like to point out that since yesterday the only thing that has changed is one mans opinion. No new laws have been written, no amendments ratified, no executive orders handed out and no court cases decided. Even though he's the President it's just one mans opinion. Gays are still in the same place they were last week.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 May 12 - 11:18 AM

"The problem is the BIG LIES that the extreme right can afford to throw against gay rights... These are the angry, rich old white guys".

The 'extreme left' has their 'big lies' as well....it's just harder to see them when you live within their confines...just like 'the right'!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bill D
Date: 10 May 12 - 11:27 AM

meself said: "I'm not sure how the Church got control of the marriage business..."

In the 800s, Charlemagne had no restrictions...he had 5 'wives' and at least that many mistresses...and about 20 children. There were no particular restrictions, and the rich & powerful collected as many women as they pleased.
As society climbed out of the 'dark ages', and property was defined in a more 'orderly' manner, ownership, succession, power...etc. needed to be decided clearly... and the church was about the only institution with any organized ways to do this. Controlling 'marriage' was an obvious path to controlling other things. After all, all they had to do was SAY that they spoke for God in defining who is 'married'...(Henry VIII spent half his life scheming how to 'get around' church rules so he could change wives.)

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Amos
Date: 10 May 12 - 12:18 PM

David:

People do not have to vote FOR rights. The way oour society is notionally built, all rights come naturally from the people and are seconded to the States and the Federal government by acts of assignment.

That's the theory, anyway. Some folks fall into an upside-down blind spot where they think it works the other way around: that only those rights assigned to citizens by the government are valid. But those folks are nach'l born Fascists, not true Americans.


A

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 May 12 - 01:06 PM

The 'extreme left' has their 'big lies' as well.

What is your definition of the 'extreme left'?

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 10 May 12 - 01:16 PM

Amos is right, people don't have to vote to grant civil rights--what tends to happen is that referendums on Same-Sex Marriage are initiated by people who oppose various sorts of enabling actions by state and local governments.

Following what Janie says about African-American clergy--in D.C., which is one of the most politically progressive places in the U.S., the coalition of Progressive Liberals and African-American clergy was ripped apart on the issue of Same-Sex marriage, because not withstanding the extreme support Civil Rights issues have always had in the Liberal community, the African-American religious community is reactionary when it comes to Gay Rights.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 May 12 - 01:29 PM

Greg F: "What is your definition of the 'extreme left'?"

What's the matter?..Can't see the forest 'cuz of the trees??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 10 May 12 - 02:27 PM

You are, of course, quite right Wesley. It is only one man's opinion but he happens to the President of what is called the most powerful country in the world: Land of the Free.

All changes are made by just one man, or woman, making a stand and being counted. Personally I think highly of all those who have gone before and stood up when it was VERY dangerous to do so. Truth is it is still dangerous for many gay people to stand up - and their straight supporters - in many countries on this planet. Some countries still have the death penalty for being gay and there are no shortage of homophobes and bigots only too willing to murder gay people in any case.

Nevrtheless it was brave politically of Mr Obama to stand up and be counted. He did not have to. I doubt the gay vote alone would get him a second term. But saying what he believes in puts him on collision course I dare say with many dissenters.

Whoever would have thought, within my lifetime even, that America would have a Black President? Who would have thought that blacks may marry whites and that too be recognised? Who would have thought so many human rights would could into being in such a shgort space of time that would allow such things? All these changes started with one person at one time starting to make a change and others joining in with them to bring it about.

All that is needed for evil to survive is that good men do nothing.

The rights that gay folk now seek are akin to the struggle of many other minorities that have gone before them. The colour of a person's skin, their disability, their gender, their sexuality: all have been victim to discrimination and hate. All those folks deserve the same rights as the majority around them

So whilst I agree with your statement Wesley I hold great hope that such a man's decision will have far greater repurcussions than any of us could imagine

best wishes everyone

mp

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Amos
Date: 10 May 12 - 02:32 PM

There's never a wrong time to do the right thing. I'm proud of him for making his position crystal clear.

Back in the Fifties I never thought I'd see the day when a black President would espouse gay marriage, but I am surely glad to see it here now.

A

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: akenaton
Date: 10 May 12 - 03:29 PM

Dont know where you have been Googling Richard, but try to use a site with some credence.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 May 12 - 03:52 PM

Land of the free? Why is it that only Americans say that? And HOW can it be said on this thread at all?

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 10 May 12 - 04:16 PM

Richard: I am not American. I used the term "Land of the Free" in a way to emphasise that, for so many Americans, they are not free at all. However, they are heading there, as are so many countries, by every human right that they give to all.

I look forward to a day when America truly is a land of the free and, in the meantime, accept that their President was and is willing to make a statement on the world stage that perhaps helps those freedoms get a little closer. His words have actually leant more weight to a cause that can say "Land of the free" today with less discrimination than it could yesterday. People will be more exposed to the arguments and discussions than they were a week ago. Some will be educated. Some will change their minds for the better. Have you ever noticed how such changes tend to create better citizens and a more open minded society. It does not create more bigotry and hate: it quells a great amount of misinformation. Soon the boot will be on the other foot hopefully.

In this I can say I am proud that the UK is actually ahead in its fight to give human rights to one and all and that for our 'special relationship' with the US to mean anything, perhaps our leaders can now sing off the same hymn sheet to bring about more rapid, and fair, change in a global context.

These rights affect everyone and I think what opponents to human rights - rights they may have and take for granted - overlook is this. Once we get rid of all the minorities, if they had their way, who would they turn on then? What do these people think about if one of their family is born coloured, disabled, gay, transsexual, female opposed to male, brown eyes, red hair... the list is endless.

This is a global problem. The Americans are not responsible for this one. However, so many of them, and now their President, have took a stand for freedom of rights we should not lose sight of the good that has gone on here :-)

Best wishes as ever

mp

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 May 12 - 04:35 PM

"What is [GfS's] definition of the 'extreme left'?"

Anything to the left of the emperor Caligula.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 10 May 12 - 04:47 PM

Thanks , mauvepink, for your thoughtful posts...

Yes, the times they are a'changin'... We just need to get thru this last line of Neanderthals and with their $$$ it's going to be a slobber-knocker of a fight... They kinda have the game rigged right now in their favor and they are busy trying to set up as many roadblocks as they can so once we get by them we'll have even more work undoing the damage they are inflicting on out country...

That's the other part of Dyaln's song that is quite relevant:

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside
And it's a ragin'
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a'changin'

Seems that the $$$ is pushing about as hard as it can to "take the country back" to another time... As a student of American history, me thinks that the early 1820's is about where these folks would be happiest... Just so long as they could take their $$$, their McMansions and their toys with them...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 10 May 12 - 04:57 PM

Richard: We Americans get to use "Land of the Free", (often with some measure of irony) because it is a phrase from our National Anthem.   Lines from our National anthem are also used as titles for films and books   (these also with some measure of irony). "At the Twilight's Last Gleaming" is a particular favorite.

Here's the first verse. No one knows the rest of it.

Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars thru the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?
And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bill D
Date: 10 May 12 - 07:22 PM

"Land of the Free" is pretty much an 'official' position. Getting all groups and individuals to agree on how to define 'free' and determine how & when to implement this 'freedom' thing is rather like herding cats.

So far, we still are able to express our varied opinions on the matter, as opposed to certain countries in the news recently where expressing the wrong opinion can get you arrested.

We currently face attempts by one party to curtail 'free' voting rights. The struggle to live up to our claimed virtues never ends.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 10 May 12 - 07:56 PM

According to Jon Stewart, originally, marriage was not about love. It was about property and inheritance.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 May 12 - 09:22 PM

Kendall: "According to Jon Stewart, originally, marriage was not about love. It was about property and inheritance."

Note the first verse............and the rest seems 'not so dated'!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bill D
Date: 10 May 12 - 10:37 PM

According to Jon Stewart??

According to ME yesterday, about 20 posts above.

(Well, I got MY information from Dr. J. Kelly Sowards in about 1958.... maybe Jon Stewart took a history course from him, too... *grin*)

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Janie
Date: 10 May 12 - 11:51 PM

Ummm...the institution of marriage existed long before monotheism, folks, and in some form or other appears to have existed in every human culture.

Whether the cultural institution that we generally call marriage is a dyad or polygamous, the formal union, witnessed and acknowledged as a formal, contractual union by the community results in very real institutional obligations between the formally united parties, and also between the united parties and the community. Some such formal, contractual arrangement appears to exist, and to have existed in every human culture. While the shape of institutions may vary considerably across human cultures, there are certain institutions that are universal to human cultures, and marriage is one of them.

Richard, we are certainly animals. Through the process of natural selection we have evolved as social animals and that social attribute has contributed mightily to our survival as a species thus far. Survival of a species depends on evolutionarily successful strategies for producing a next generation and providing the conditions for a sufficient number of that next generation to do the same, and there is no doubt that the institutions of human groups, including marriage, have and continue,to date, to accomplish that imperative.

All social institutions, including those of other social species, are best understood as thus far successful adaptations that allow the continuation of the species. Successful species continue to adapt and evolve. For social species, there will always be a dynamic tension in play between the individual and/or smaller social units, and the larger social unit. All species of animals whose survival and successful adaption thus far has been promoted by a combination of in-species competition and cooperation experience this constant dynamic tension. The same is true regarding diversity and cohesion. Both are necessary and also in constant tension.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Neil D
Date: 11 May 12 - 12:15 AM

To reiterate the point being made by Amos and Stim, perhaps others, have made, civil rights should not be voted on. Putting minority rights to a popular vote turns majority rules into mob rule. The statement that "All men are created equal" is quite literally, the the first and founding concept of American democracy, enshrined in the two foundational documents of our republic. Passing laws that infringe on that self-evident truth, including laws prohibiting gay marriage, is by nature, unconstitutional. I call it Un-American.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 May 12 - 12:20 AM

You couldn't make up sillier stuff than this.....Obama comes out about the homosexual thing..after the White House says they were 'shotgunned' into HAVING to do it, because of comments by Biden, so he does...and says he still believes is 'States Rights' deciding it...and North Carolina just voted to ban homosexual 'marriage' by a 22% margin....and the Democratic Convention is slated to held in North Carolina!!!...and in the meantime, the Democrats are bitching about Romney who is accused of being a 'flip flopper'..when Obama has made comments both ways, but for him it's called 'evolving'...This is hilarious...and going to be a real trip watching the Democrats finagle there way out of this one!!!

..and the parrots are going to be flapping whatever bullshit, they think is going to work...and will call anyone who sees through the bullshit, and call them a 'Tea Bagger', extreme right wing bigot!!!

Laughing my ass off!!.....
..and THESE are the fucknut Keystone Cops you want running your health care????????????????????????

Quick, 'Media Matters' will come up with something inane, and fictional to explain and excuse it all away....just WATCH!!!

Fucking hilarious!
No, I'm not a right winger, but just not so fucking stupid!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: John P
Date: 11 May 12 - 01:00 AM

Here's a question for you, Michael: I would be happy to have my family, friends, and fans read anything I've written on Mudcat. Can you say the same?

You're not hiding behind anonymity anymore. You might want to start learning to behave like a civilized human being.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 May 12 - 01:16 AM

No, I don't mind if they read it...actually there are quite a few people I know who just love reading the exchanges, but they don't post, just read....but they are fairly intelligent people, who've got it clocked. A LOT of your posts, are the ones that I'd be embarrassed of letting people read; Some are just plain stupid, because some of you take holding the 'party line' to new heights of escaping common sense!!!
..and what's even funnier, some of you are SOOOO serious about being so ridiculous!!

...not only that, 'some of you' start attacking, instead of 'discussing' differences, and even trying to get to the truths about anything. Come on, John, you can do better than that!....(I think)...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 May 12 - 05:45 AM

I don't think I've seen any post from FFS that constitutes civilised debate, and precious few that constitute rational debate.

I'd also point out that characterising the changing of a point of view as "flip-flopping" is a foolish macho posture. Rational thought evidence and discussion ought to lead to changes of view. Anyone whose views are not susceptible of being altered by such things is a fool or a bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 11 May 12 - 09:25 AM

Neil D's point is what this is really all about... We shouldn't be voting to oppress anyone in America... Live and let live is an easy concept...

Here in NC the Republican statehouse purposely scheduled this vote to be held in conjunction with a primary where only about half the number of voters participate as in general elections... This was not by coincidence... More election riggin'... Here's the deal... Less than 20% of the NC electorate voted for this amendment...

Now that's the kind of democracy that Republicans love...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: John P
Date: 11 May 12 - 10:43 AM

Yes, we may as well have a vote on whether or not redheads should be able to buy gasoline.

The truth is that I have followed the logic and ethics on every stance against gay marriage that I've heard and they all add up to one thing: "I don't like it so it ought to be illegal!"

To anyone who thinks people ought to be discriminated against in this way, I offer a challenge: a moderated debate on the subject, where the logic has to add up, personal attacks get you kicked out, and all facts come from mainstream newspapers. Any takers?

GfS, you seem to think your mind works better than mine, all evidence to the contrary. Do you think you can take me on in a real debate, one where you have to act like an adult and support your statements? I'm tired of you rudely claiming superior discernment in near-illiterate terms. It's time to put your money where your mouth is.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Whistle Stop
Date: 11 May 12 - 10:43 AM

I'm from Massachusetts, the first of the US states to legalize same-sex marriage. There have been many gay and lesbian marriages in my state since then, and despite all the dire predictions, it hasn't done me or anyone else a bit of harm, nor has it threatened my (heterosexual) marriage in any way.

Someone else quoted Jon Stewart; I always liked another of his quotes on this issue: "I was against gay marriage, until I learned that it wouldn't be compulsory."

Why anyone wants to restrict anyone else's right to enter into a marriage involving two consenting adults is beyond me.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 11 May 12 - 10:50 AM

A LOT of your posts, are the ones that I'd be embarrassed of letting people read; Some are just plain stupid


...not only that, 'some of you' start attacking, instead of 'discussing' differences

GfS

Gotta love GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: kendall
Date: 11 May 12 - 11:10 AM

This will probably go to the Supreme Court, and when it does, I hope the justices glance up at the portal where it says, "Equal Justice under the law."