BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 28 Apr 09 - 02:15 AM

Let me make something else perfectly clear: parents do not "want" their children to be gay, since they themselves are obviously inclined to heterosexual multiplication. But the question is not what they want, when the issue arises.

The question is, why would you abandon someone in what is necessarily going to be a very very difficult passage in their lives, regardless how it comes out? What a cheap pasteboard version of love that would be!!!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 28 Apr 09 - 12:36 AM

Well, I wasn't asked, but I am quite comfortable my answer would be: "You are loved, and you deserve to be loved and to be happy."

I think you must have a very limited exposure to gays and their families; the typical response to heavy condemnation of gays by a parent is either complete secrecy or complete misery, or both. It is the last reaction a parent should wish on a child announcing they were gay.

And, probably, the most harmful.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 11:56 PM

Ok, that being said, then, would you want you children to choose a homosexual lifestyle, and be in a same sex marriage?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: frogprince
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 11:49 PM

Asking someone whether he would be happy if his child turned out to be a homosexual could be an honest, if touchy, question for soul-searching. Throwing in the notion that someone would become a homosexual because his parents didn't firmly condemn homosexuality makes the question as stated an absurdity.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 10:28 PM

Ok, my turn..sorry, I was away, today.....Don, do you have children?
Would you be happy, if your children, witnessing your permissive attitude, in regards to your friend's situation, may think it perfectly alright to become homosexuals, and have that same kind of relationship?

Note: At this time, I have to ask you that. Before you answer, just honestly think, and tell me. Don't worry about whether your answer is 'correct' or not,..just,..Do you want your children to acknowledge, and pursue that 'lifestyle'?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 09:42 PM

Same sex marriage might finally be the magic bullet that stamps out society's addiction to religion. As soon as it's legal in enough places, somebody somewhere will insist that some witch-doctor unite him/her with his/her lover, and it'll be just like segregated lunch counters. No church will be able to refuse, especially since they work so hard to keep their tax-exempt status. As soon as one of them slimy men-of-the-clothe goes to jail for refusing to perform the ceremony, the walls will crumble.

                     People will see the insanity in going to church, and gays will quit insisting on getting married there. It will be a new day, brother...

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: DebC
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 09:13 PM

My husband's uncles will be celebrating 40 years together in June. They have one of the most beautiful and loving relationships that I have ever seen. They live in Florida, so they are still not allowed to have their relationship formally recognised.

We have had same-sex marriage here in Massachusetts for five years
and it's been really wondrous to see all the love. Love will always win.

Debra Cowan

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 07:27 PM

Without comment.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 07:17 PM

My goodness, Ake, that's quite an outburst!

Now who did you say was the "jibbering idiot?"

By the way, Merriam-Webster says the word is "gibbering" is spelled with a "g" rather than a "j".

[In my best Mr. Rogers voice]:   Can you say "conversion reaction?"

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, Ake, you are the one who keeps bringing miscellaneous livestock into the works. I fear for your pet goldfish.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 05:59 PM

Simply a bit of an abbreviation curmudgeon

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 05:56 PM

Don...It wouldn't affect your marriage, because you don't appear to care how marriage is defined.....man/woman...man/man...woman/woman..man/man/woman....man/man/ man...or any other combination you wish to propose....I suppose you could include your accordian/car /horse.....the mind boggles, but unfortunately for swingers like you, the vast majority of married folk are happiest with just a husband , a wife and couple of kids.
Oh I know it's so boring, but sometimes life's a bitch.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: curmudgeon
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 05:47 PM

"...the pro-homo 'liberals'."

True colors exposed?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 05:44 PM

I don't think you'll manage the same trick over on "Obama torture"

Much better class of bigot!!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 05:42 PM

Let me go on record now as predicting that Iowa will not sink like Atlantis or be destroyed like Sodom and Gomorrah.

I hope you are right, Don. Of course we had record flooding last year. Maybe it was due to a clerical error and wasn't supposed to happen until this year.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 05:41 PM

Well done Hawk ....you have succeeded in transforming well educated, pompous,self satisfied members into jibbering idiots in a mere handful of posts.....no mean feat, even for you!

The thread has disintegrated into feeble stand up comedy, a great improvment on the opinions being offered by the pro-homo "liberals".

Perhaps it's what's known as creaing a diversion??

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 05:12 PM

Let me go on record now as predicting that Iowa will not sink like Atlantis or be destroyed like Sodom and Gomorrah.

I know that there are those who maintain that Sodom was destroyed because they allowed the practice of anal intercourse, hence the term "sodomy." This apparently springs from someone's fertile imagination, because there is nothing in the Scriptures to support the idea.

Now, can someone tell me what "gomorrahmy" might be?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 04:23 PM

A limp lance is as useless as a muzzled dachshund.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 04:18 PM

Meanwhile, back at the Ranch.

Same sex couples have been applying for, and receiving, marriage licenses today. According to the county-by-county map at the Iowa City Press-Citizen website it looks like around 200 had applied as of 11:37 AM (local time). Not an exact figure, the map gives amounts for each county but doesn't total them up. A waiver can be requested from a judge to wed right away, otherwise the couple must wait three days.

I actually thought there would be more than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:58 PM

Exactly so, Little Hawk. And if we were to let Steve and Dave's marriage bother us, that would be our problem, not theirs.

The idea that opponents of gay marriage have that it would "destroy the institution of marriage" just doesn't wash. I believe that GfS has made this claim, and the question is directed at him/her. I would like to see GfS actually maintains this, and if so, how he/she tries to support or justify the idea.

Congratulations on #700! (Yup. We're havin' fun.)

Don Firth

P. S. And yeah, Amos. Nuthin' more frustrating than a limp lance!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:52 PM

Speaking of futile and Quixotic pursuits, does it occur to you, as it does me, that all this foofarah seeking to slay the terrible dragon of Gay Union is actually a lot like charging at windmills with a broken lance? ;>) I understand that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but still...



A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:48 PM

Not a chance, Amos!

In its normal context, it would indeed be "bated breath," but in this context (breath smelling like cheese in order to lure Mickey from his hole), "baited" seemed the more precise word.

This illustrates a common problem when trying to commit a pun in written form:   different spellings of the crucial word. Whereas, if it were just spoken, no problem.

I did agonize over the spelling for some time before choosing that one.

Don (careful attention to detail) Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:43 PM

Hey! I just got the 700th post, and I wasn't even trying. Wow.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:39 PM

As far as I can see, it could only affect yours and Barbara's marriage, Don if either one of you chose to let it do so. (and I gather there's no danger of that...) ;-) What I mean is, if one of you was all upset about it and went on and on about it day after day, well, then, that might become an annoyance to the other, and then that might affect your marriage. Possibly. In which case it would be your reaction to David and Steven's marriage that was affecting your marriage! ;-D Since that's not the case, however, my guess is that I have just wasted a whole bunch of keystrokes on a fool's errand here. Ah, well, such is life in the provinces...

Now you have the answer you were seeking. Or maybe not. Well...you have an answer anyway. That's a bit better than no answer at all. Refer back to this post whenever you get the nagging feeling that no one cares enough to respond. (grin)

Are we having fun yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:38 PM

I should have read the latest WAV thread before my last post. Seems I have omitted a dot.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:30 PM

Oh, I read it; I just thought there might be a slim chance I could slap his wrist for an error or something, but I can see it is a lost cause.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: curmudgeon
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:27 PM

Amos - Read Don's sentence again - Tom

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:26 PM

But Amos, Don may have written it that way intentionally...

From here:

For those who know the older spelling or who stop to consider the matter, baited breath evokes an incongruous image; Geoffrey Taylor humorously (and consciously) captured it in verse in his poem Cruel Clever Cat:

Sally, having swallowed cheese,
Directs down holes the scented breeze,
Enticing thus with baited breath
Nice mice to an untimely death.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:21 PM

Don:

Unless you have been eating anchovies again, the word you want is "bated", a contraction of abated, or shortened breath.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 02:10 PM

Again? You need me to ask it again!??

Considering the number of times I have asked the question on this thread, only to have it still remain unanswered, in fact, not even addressed, I find myself biting my tongue (actually, since I'm typing, biting my fingers) to keep from blurting out some fairly acid witticism, but I will do my best.

The question is:

How does the fact that David and Steven are married affect, in any way whatsoever, Barbara's and my marriage?


Like the cat who ate the cheese and breathed into the mouse hole, I wait with baited breath. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 01:32 PM

It's the arm waving, Amos... (grin)

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 01:23 PM

WHo are you calling a windmill????



A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 01:14 PM

LOL! Good one, Akenaton. I like your sense of humour.

Yes! I am determined to finally achieve harmony and mutual respect among the posters here. It is my Quixotic nature that leads me on into such rash adventures.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 10:55 AM

I am not sure you can get to either destination in ASCII, Ake.   Unless you have a heart attack from sheer ire. Or are willing to accept the admiration of a few old folkies as "glory". I guess that's close enough for folk music, as they say. Remember Humpty Dumpty's guidelines for making words behave properly.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Apr 09 - 03:26 AM

Little Hawk seems to be on a mission to bring this thread to a happy and peaceful conclusion......which would be a shame after so much blood and guts.

We must not allow ourselves to be sucked into the syrupy porrige!
Onwards! to death or glory!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 10:38 PM

It's definitely entertaining as far as I'm concerned. ;-) That's why I keep coming back.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 10:34 PM

Ahh, but be it for a little wit, this would really be a drag. The problem with politics in general, is trying to find a truth, out THEIR lies. The truth that politicians use, are in layers...like peeling an onion. The truth that parrots tell,...are crackers!

(made that one up myself..just now...no 'cut and paste')

Being educated, in a field, though one may have spent a lot of time learning, can easily be lost, due to A.D.D. It is not that there is a lack of attention, that causes an impediment to acquiring knowledge, as much as needing to fill another void, the deficit, of getting attention, once you have it!

I prefer accurate information, as opposed to those who merely hold forth with an 'opinion', they gathered, just because it sounded consistent, and resonated, with THEIR acquired and preferred pathology...would you say?

Though I've exchanged barbs, witty jabs, and sparred with you, yours is the only opposing opinion, on this topic, that to me, I can respect, not only because of your friends, but of your love for them.

Besides, being as this is a forum, comprised mostly of musicians, and more than likely writers of music,(and other such), as I've stated before, I'm trying also, to stimulate the circuits, and virtually giving away, not just material, but avenues, by which to think larger, and approaches and insights to 'enhance' one's writing...plus, you gotta' admit, some of this stuff is pretty fucking entertaining!

I mean to say, don't you look forward to the next exchange..and done some thinking in between?.......Not you, Amos.......(wink)

Now, what was that question, you wanted me to answer. I'll do it as accurately as possible, and if you make nasty remarks back, ..well, I might just cut you to shreds....again. (grinning)!...but at least, I'll try to make it entertaining. THERE'S a lot out THERE that isn't, these days......

(smiling),
Guarded Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 10:25 PM

Yes, you may have. I wasn't necessarily challenging you personally, Don, when I said that, just making a general observation about something I've noticed in life.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 10:22 PM

"Merely memorizing volumes of known facts and minutiae does not necessarily result in wisdom, a good attitude, a kindly heart or a good character."

I believe I said something along that line up above, Little Hawk.

Don Firth

P. S. Out for the rest of the evening. I'll check in again tomorrow to see if anyone has finally answered my question.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 10:15 PM

GtS:

Oh, I'm sorry--have I missed one of your scintillating questions? I think I was not avoiding the subject but trying to move this thread back to its original topic. If I recall aright you were trying to make it a thread about my inner psychological makeup, instead. If I further recall aright, I told you that I was unwilling to enter into such a relationship with you, giving the reasons why. Based on your emotional frenetic volleys in this and other threads, I simply would not be willing to trust you as a correspondent in such a dialogue. You may assert your credentials as much as you wish; I know the core fundamentals of the trade, and one of them is an agreement of trust, which as far as I am concerned you simply have not earned.

If there is some other question you think is germane to the subject of the thread--the relationship between gay marriage and law-- then by all means ask. Being neither gay nor a lawyer I can only offer to do my best.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 05:19 PM

As for "well educated"...well, that isn't a synonym for "highly intelligent". There is such a thing as an educated idiot, after all. I've seen a few of those in my time. Merely memorizing volumes of known facts and minutiae does not necessarily result in wisdom, a good attitude, a kindly heart or a good character.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 05:12 PM

Respect for another's intelligence is something that is always renewable, Don.

My own take on the matter is that I think you are probably both quite intelligent.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 03:14 PM

Well, GfS, I was affording you the courtesy of assuming that you were reasonably well educated until you began denigrating my educational level by apparently assuming that movie cartoons were as far as my intellectual capacity goes.

After all, one can be a cartoonist and/or enjoy movie cartoons without having been a nursery school drop-out. In fact, a well-conceived cartoon requires a fairly high degree of intelligence. In something like Wile E. Coyote's apparent inability to learn from experience and his habit of concentrating so hard on his ignoble goal that he manages repeatedly to wipe himself out is something a bit more than mere slap-stick comedy. Those of a philosophical nature may see allegories of true-to-life situations and examples of the behavior of some people with whom they are acquainted.

Rather than referring to those with whom you disagree as "parrots," and likening someone to a stopped clock that manages to be right twice a day, along with a whole lexicon of other insults and epithets you have used, if you want people to extend to you the courtesy that you feel you are due, then you need to remember that the door swings both ways.

Now, as to the as yet unanswered question I keep asking. . . ?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 02:31 PM

Yes, Don, again a broken clock is right twice a day....I missed the spelling of 'their'...when I went backed, and proof read it. When you called it to my attention, I saw the one,..not the other. I stand corrected...it was a typo..but then I read typonese, pretty well myself. Your bit on your education was interesting, so, in light of that, one can surmise that you know what your talking about. The same courtesy should be afforded myself....
As to your other, I'll get back on that, and I will, but I have to run, presently.

Amos, by shifting focus on some other drivel, you do NOT get yourself off the hook. Try answering questions posed to you, before running around saying, 'No, look over here..no, over here...no over here,..no, no, no, try over here'. I think you can be just maybe a little more mature than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 02:14 PM

Lest someone spots this and feels impelled to comment on it:

My apologies for the grammatical error in my above post.

". . . the title comes from a remark of Ernest Hemingway . . ." should read either "a remark by Ernest Hemingway" or "a remark of Ernest Hemingway's."

(Physician, heal thyself!)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 02:03 PM

Among the style manuals that reside on my bookshelves are Webster's. the Chicago, the New York Times, and several others. One of my favorites is both a style manual and an excellent guide for editing and revising entitled Getting the Words Right (the title comes from a remark of Ernest Hemingway, who, when asked why he had rewritten the last chapter of one of his books twenty-nine times, said, "I was just trying to get the words right!"). And, of course, Strunk and White's The Elements of Style.

I have been writing all my life (honorable mention in the Atlantic Monthly high school short story writers'* contest), and so far, I have been paid for about thirty magazine articles. In addition, I have worked as an editor, and as a news director and copy writer for a network affiliated radio station.

You've written enough here, GfS, that finding examples of grammatical errors and incorrect word usage would be no sport at all. Like shooting fish in a barrel. So much for your attempts to denigrate others by claiming to have had a superior education. However, lest you lapse into despair, let me reassure you that there are others here who are even sloppier than you are. Your confusion of "they're" and "their" is a common boo-boo.

Now—I have asked this question several times on this thread, and I have yet to receive any kind of answer:

How does the fact that David and Steven are married affect, in any way whatsoever, Barbara's and my marriage?

Well?

I'm waiting. . . .

Don Firth

*To preempt any attempts to cast aspersions on my punctuation, in the possessive of a plural, the apostrophe goes to the right of the "s."

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 12:39 PM

Not at all, dear lass. It is quite defensible and has been handily defended by self and others, thank you. You have yet to offer a factual or even meaningful rebuttal to it.

I know you could do better, but you won't try.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 12:34 PM

Speaking of indefensible, is your position on this particular thread. I do believe you have discredited your self irreversibly, on this topic.
Still on the hook, there, ol' chap....!
Send out the beaked minions!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 11:55 AM

Indeed they are, but please abandon the defense of the sentence you wrote, as it is indefensible.

D-u-u-uhh!Some jerk-offs even study campaign lies and think their gospel, too! means, at best, that they study campaign lies and also contemplate their own gospel. ("Thinking about Jesus as I study them campaign lies...").

Your intent was to tell us that such jerk-offs, having studied campaign lies, believe that such lies are as credible as gospel.

Thus, they think or believe the lies are true or that they are gospel. Hence, "they're".

By the way, it was also a very rude sort of sentence, even insulting in its petty way.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 11:47 AM

'They', are the possessors of their lies.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 26 Apr 09 - 12:55 AM

Hold that line!! Hold that line!! Send 'em back to Nassau, Eli!!!


A