Four dead in Ohio
Drinks, that is. Now that I’ve killed them, I’m out. If I sleep long enough, I may wake up to a president-elect. Have Wolf Blitzer wake me if’n it happens.
I had a post election ballot measure rant going somewhere around here, but I postponed it when it descended into profane rambling. In the meantime, consider these words from God, and take heart:
. . . Now you see this one-eyed midget
Shouting the word “NOW”
And you say, “For what reason?”
And he says, “How?”
And you say, “What does this mean?”
And he screams back, “You’re a cow
Give me some milk
Or else go home”
Because something is happening here
But you don’t know what it is
Do you, Mister Jones?
You’re my boy blu!!!!
Why not? I’ve got the camera ready and everything…now just step over into this tub full of jell-o. No no, I haven’t been drinking at all….
Don’t encourage it Tim.
CHICK FIGHT!
Clearly you, Sally who Rides, have no integrity, because you don’t include your email address. I dare you to email me. I.dare.you.
And in true Zoloft fashion, how do you know I’m a woman? I consider myself to be without gender. I prefer to be called by non-gendered terms. And if you don’t get that, and you take me seriously, then you have no business in this thread.
I don’t take xanax. I take zoloft. And you don’t offend me.
Sure. Sorry to go on.
Perhaps it’s time you guys let it drop?
Then I may have misunderstood your position. I think we’re both speaking in tautologies here – when I say “no convincing arguments”, I can only mean “convincing to me” and by what I’ve already said it’s pretty clear I’m not convinced by the pro-36 line. Your tautology is in the phrase “socially not acceptable” – presumably, if it were socially acceptable, then the measure would have failed. Your observation is correct; but I’m trying to make a moral argument based on what I think should be socially acceptable.
My view point on the subject has nothing to do with religion, and not any sort of bigotry to homosexuals.
I was trying to figure out why it won, and so far we have come to the answer that “there are no convincing arguments in favor.” People voted through thier emotions and religous beliefs on this issue. It is logically right and concurrent with a classical liberal ideology? No, it is not. But, I believe that the gays lost on this issue because it was socially not acceptable at this point in time. That is an observation. Will it be struck down? Im positive.
Andy, I wouldn’t dream of trying to marginalize you, and I’m being as careful as I can not to call you either a moron or a bigot. I hope that’s clear.
On the other hand, I am trying to disagree with you as strenuously as possible. I said:On the other hand, I have not heard a single argument in favour of Measure 36 that I consider to have a shred of value…I still haven’t. I understand that, as you say, the majority of Oregon voters apparently feel that there is some meaningful moral distinction between homosexual and heterosexual relationships. But a constitution isn’t just a laundry list of majority opinions, and I’ve heard no argument – not even an unconvincing one – as to why this view should be enshrined in law.
What I am trying to answer is the sentiments of those in favor of 36 and like amendments who say, “people who voted for 36 are morons and bigots.”
To me, that really isn’t an acceptable answer in this day an age if someone disagrees with your stance. This sort of “rational” is proliferious throuout the University about Bush winning, Iraqi war defenders, and numerous other topics that don’t fit the UO paradigm.
You say that its folks try to be folks, and when it’s prased like that, you marginalize persons who have an opposite view, which is normal in an argument, but it doesn’t answer the question why they hold those views because the only reason that someone wouldn’t want “folks to be folks,” would be if they are morons or bigoted agaisnt a group!
There is opionion, which we get a lot of here, and then there are answers. The phrases I used may make you uncomfortable, but your phrases make the other side eqaully so!
I conceded earlier that there should be some sort of life partner situation, but that there shouldn’t be tax loop holes for such. Here in Oregon I think it was wrong for county commissioners to make the choice. The people should make the choice.
Im trying to help bring another view point to the conversaion. You can either listen to it like open minded, and then counter it, or you can “quash” it .
Wow. It’s getting contentious up in here.
Phrases like “the gay agenda” and “the homosexual community” make me really uncomortable, I have to say. It’s just regular folks trying to be like, well, regular folks. Andy, you and the majority of voters may not agree with me on that, but the times are (slowly) changing – thirty years ago, I doubt we’d even be having this discussion. We’ll get there in the end.
Gotta watch out for that gay agenda, one day they might even want to drink from the same fountains as straight people! Damn those uppity gays! How dare they want to be treated like people!
Then did friends of gays create this measure? Are you saying that gays had no part in this whatsoever?
The reason that I believe the gay agenda was defeated resoundly was that your clause, “Marry and let marry,” is not equal in the minds of the majority of the people in the United States. In oregon, there was debate, the choice was made by radical county commissioners, and nationally there has been no debate either.
Gay marriage is not equal to normal Marriage in the minds of the majority of the nation, and the more you and te gay agenda continue to neglect that fact, you will face staunch reistance because it seems that you are forcing people to accept gay mariage to be just as socially acceptable as normal.
Oh, and in true “I’m Melissa and have to post twice in a row because I forgot to take my Xanax fashion”
“If someone doesn’t like gay marriage, fine. Live and let live for everyone, even those people. But don’t start throwing your ate on everyone else”
The gays and lesbians attempted to do just that…live and let live. Marry and let marry. They didn’t ask for this measure. They didn’t create Measure 36. They have every right to protest the outcome. Your side won Melissa (I don’t care how you say you voted…I don’t believe you).
Can you just let it go now? No need to beat people while they are down. Just please…stop the bitching about the bitching. It really isn’t becoming.
“Everyone is entitled to their own voice, and voters turned out and said yes, marriage should be between one man and one woman. The homosexual community just doesn’t like that reality.”
They don’t like that reality and what…voice their opinions about it?
Make up your mind and stop bitching.
Dear Sally, your being condesending without stating why. Please, take this smack on the head. ::smack::
Dear Melissa…from a woman…to a woman. Please take your Midol. You are seriously being very dramatic. Thanks.
Plus, this woman clearly has an inferiority complex.
Olly: I don’t have a problem with gay people. I voted no on 36 because I think there’s a more constructive way to solve the problem.
As for being a bigot, I don’t like dramatics, from gay people or straight people or ze and hir. Just because someone voted yes on that measure doesn’t a bigot make. Everyone is entitled to their own voice, and voters turned out and said yes, marriage should be between one man and one woman. The homosexual community just doesn’t like that reality.
It’s like a friend asking if I think her dress is pretty, and when I tell her it’s horrible, she beats me up for hating her when she was the one who asked in the first place.
Andy: A moderate libertarian is one who recognizes that there are legitimate uses of government, but generally want folks to be left the hell alone.
Calling people bigots is virtually always unconstructive, and Dinah is laying on the purple prose a bit thick.
On the other hand, I have not heard a single argument in favour of Measure 36 that I consider to have a shred of value, and I can’t think of any that didn’t hinge in some way on the proponent’s distaste for gay people, either directly or indirectly (slippery-slope arguments involving bestiality, etc.) Calling people bigots for being bigots doesn’t bother me.
As is presumably clear by now, I feel very strongly about this. I don’t think telling people to count their blessings is going to have much of a positive effect, either. (For the different meanings of “tolerance” as it applies to individuals and institutions, see my response to Andy a couple of posts ago.)
Stan: I think a special post-election episode of COPS is in order. Bad Republican, Bad Republican, wacha gonna do….
That’s supposed to be “hate,” not “ate.” can I have an account now, please?
Melissa: it could be worse:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-pscrewdriver28oct28,0,7776269.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines
See my above post on how I voted on 36 and why.
Anyone see the lovely parade through campus today? It isn’t enough to be lesbigay or a supporter now; oh no, they have to be dramatic and drag out the fake blood, crosses and loud costumes, chanting obnoxiously while they block traffic. See, Dinah, this is why I dislike some homosexual people. It isn’t because they’re homosexual…it’s because they exibit obnoxious anal-retentive behavior revolving around being homosexual.
According to their signs, everyone who voted yes on 36 is a biggot.
My problem with this is the same problem I have with liberalism in general. There is a philosophy of tolerance and respect, of trying to understand other people’s persepectives, yet anyone who disagrees with liberal values themselves are called names and burned in effigy. If someone doesn’t like gay marriage, fine. Live and let live for everyone, even those people. But don’t start throwing your ate on everyone else.
So, liberals who read this, know that calling someone a biggot for disagreeing with you goes against every thin thread of reason you cling to. This has little to do with hate, and everything to do with standing up for what you belive in. Besides, the government is just after your money anyway. Be glad you can love each other and dwell in peace relatively tax and big-brother free.
What is a moderate libertarian? A semi-socialist?
Erm, well, not so much no. More with the “moderate libertarian.”
You rock melissa, im availible ; )~
What an interesting paste post. Although it is sad for me to say, state marrige really should be disbanded. I’d say this is a conservative journal of opinion in Eugene, but else where in the united states radical left.
Regarding this post:
Nope, don’t remember making it.
Regarding Dinah:
In the words of Jon Stewart, “Why do I get the feeling this isn’t the only meeting you’re attending tonight?”
Angry liberal spam? Only time will tell.
Ms. Smith, who do you think we are, the letters to the editor page of the Oregonian? Oh, and as Tim said, read our blog first before assuming anything about us just because we are a “conservative journal of opinion.”
Of course, I highly doubt you’ll be back to read this comment thread. Oh well.
Dinah might be well served by, you know, reading the content contained here-in before spouting off. Sucks about 36, it’s unsurprising, but it sucks.
I voted no on 36 because I don’t want the government interfering with personal business. It has nothing to do with liking/not liking lesbigay people.
Besides, the voters have spoken. They don’t like gay marriage. It doesn’t make them wrong, but it does make them the majority who showed up and voted. Get over it.
Note to Dinah: most of us on this blog aren’t even IN Oregon.
I am in Oregon, and for the record, I don’t think there should be marriage for ANYONE. But it is exactly your seflish, blame extracting, I’m-so-oppressed attitude that makes me intensly dislike people who wear their homosexuality on their sleeve. Hi, I’m Melissa, and I’m heterosexual, but that’s really none of your business. You are homosexual, and your name is Dinah. Your sexuality preceeds yourself.
Act like a person, hm? And treat other people as people as they deserve to be. Think and feel as a person, not as a sexual preference. I don’t really care for your whining, dear.
To the people of Oregon:
How dare you? How dare you tell me Im less than you? How dare you have me face every person I know, meet or interact with each day and wonder if they are part of the 56% of you who believe you are better than I that you deserve rights I do not have.
How dare you hide behind school children and make this issue about their protection. What about the children in school who question their own self-worth, their own sanity, because they dont fit the mold?
Do you feel safer now? Help me understand how preventing others from marrying protects your marriage? Are your marriages so fragile they can be shaken by the events of people you dont even know?
In a state where live and let live has always been the forefront of every argument, how can you justify this?
Oregon has joined the ranks of Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Georgia, and South Carolina (to name a few) in progressing the cause of discrimination. Dont ever dare joke about those states being backwards and ignorant again. Dont ever dare think of yourself on a higher ground than those states that put politics in pulpits and bedrooms that plaster religious documents in their courthouses and courtrooms. Dont dare look with distain and distaste at states that allow a confederate flag to fly above their capitals. You are no better. I am appalled by your hypocrisy.
Be ashamed of what you have done. Be ashamed of the level to which you have sunk.
Dinah Smith
Salem, OR
You got dumped over electoral politics? Now that’s just fucked up.
Kerry conceded. Bush won. He won Ohio. 4am.
I was also released from my relationship because of this. Liberal-Nazi boyfriend…exboyfriend.
BUSH WON AND I’M SINGLE!!!!!
Let’s hope that the election doesn’t take 10 days to resolve.