Gays worse than terrorists, but hey, no offense intended!
posted at 2:40 pm on March 16, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
An Oklahoma lawmaker has received an avalanche of criticism, reportedly including a few death threats, for calling homosexuality a greater threat to America than terrorism. Republican state legislator Sally Kern has apparently made the comment in more than one venue, and even now defends her statement while the condemnation rolls in from around the country. Kern has only mellowed it to insist that she meant no gay-bashing:
A YouTube audio clip of a state lawmaker’s screed against homosexuality, which she called a bigger threat than terrorism, has outraged gay activists and brought death threats rolling in.
“The homosexual agenda is destroying this nation, OK, it’s just a fact,” Rep. Sally Kern said recently to a gathering of fellow Republicans outside the Capitol.
“Studies show no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted, you know, more than a few decades. So it’s the death knell in this country.
“I honestly think it’s the biggest threat that our nation has, even more so than terrorism or Islam, which I think is a big threat,” she said. …
Kern said she has no regrets for her statements and denies she was gay-bashing. Her Christian faith teachers [sic] her to be loving to individuals, but not their lifestyle, she said.
Gays are a bigger threat than Islamist terrorists? Only if one feels less than confident about their own sexuality. In the real world, gays don’t threaten anyone with their choices. Kern, however, has paranoid notions of gay infiltration of city councils in an effort to drive America to ruin. Oh, the humanity!
But don’t let anyone say that Kern engages in gay-bashing! No, no, no, she hates the sin and loves the sinners. She just doesn’t love it when they conspire to undermine city councils and conduct indoctrination of children into their networks. She doesn’t love gays who sneak gay-themed books into childrens’ libraries, which prompted legislation sponsored by Kern, and which failed to pass in the Oklahoma legislature. But don’t say she bashes gays, for Pete’s sake!
Unfortunately, many take this far too seriously. Republicans at some point have to distance themselves from those whose paranoid impulses lead them to these extremes. In practical terms, they are no better than those who blame Halliburton for conspiring to push the nation to war, or those who believe that the CIA secretly masterminded the 9/11 attacks in order to bolster their budgets.
Worst of all, it takes our eyes off of those who really do want to destroy America — like Osama bin Laden, the Iranian Guardian Council, and other real enemies of our nation.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 ... 8 Next »
Amen.
freevillage on March 16, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Pray for her. And America. And the World.
Zorro on March 16, 2008 at 2:46 PM
These comments won’t resonate well with the Oklahoma Supreme Court which last week said it was OK to look up the skirts of underage girls.
THE CHOSEN ONE on March 16, 2008 at 2:47 PM
Forget about suicide belts….suicide dog collars and chaps are soon to follow. Are we to believe that any suicide dog collar would be well accessorised and color coordinated?
Laughable.
Somewhere there is a village missing its idiot.
moxie_neanderthal on March 16, 2008 at 2:47 PM
The whole indoctrination thing is an issue. But one should be able to address certain issues without COMPLETELY LOSING PERSPECTIVE.
BuzzCrutcher on March 16, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Sally Kern, I reject and denounce you.
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 2:51 PM
Thanks Ed! If the conservative values of small-government, self-reliance, and strong national defense are going to survive, it’s best to distance ourselves with people who pre-occupy themselves with cheesy red herring issues such as violence in video games, teaching abstinence in schools, and worrying about someone’s personal lifestyle.
LT Nixon on March 16, 2008 at 2:51 PM
William F. Buckley Jr. apparently didn’t drive all the kooks out of the party.. >:{
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Doesn’t sound that bad. I can see where one could think the homosexual agenda was a threat while not condemning homosexuals. Other than the ones pushing the agenda.
And how about the argument that the homosexual agenda, with help from the rest of the liberal agenda, has undermined American values and mores and morals, and helped create the political correctness that plagues us.
Which political correctness has undermined our fight against terrorism, turning terrorism into a bigger threat than it would have been in a sane, non-pc world. Where it wouldn’t be shameful to actually fight back against enemies.
It could be looked at as a greater threat than terrorism, in that light.
Or is that too much of a stretch?
misterpeasea on March 16, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Good points. The media is able to use someone like her to make the GOP look intolerant. The party needs to make its case in November on national defense and the economy.
dedalus on March 16, 2008 at 2:57 PM
This woman doesn’t know what she’s talking about. Where are her priorities?
The Muslim Brotherhood are actually engaged in a premeditated plan to destroy America as it now exists.
The Mexican government talk openly about colonising San Diego.
aengus on March 16, 2008 at 2:57 PM
As offensive as her remarks and those of Revernd Wright. I am heartened that they show that the First Amendment is strong.
snaggletoothie on March 16, 2008 at 2:58 PM
You’re absolutely right, Ed. And this is what loses America so much of that vaunted “international” support – there are a lot of old-school liberals out there who try to defend America, but are trumped with completely ridiculous statements like Kern’s. I’m a Canadian (but even still!) could never vote for the tarted-up socialism of Democrats, but I also couldn’t bring myself to support the religious freaktitude of oh-too-many Republicans. GOP heal thyself!
SeoulMan on March 16, 2008 at 2:59 PM
No, they aren’t. Unless the GOP leadership actually counts on people like her to vote for them and don’t speak up against this crap.
freevillage on March 16, 2008 at 3:00 PM
Is that a political issue or something that should be pursued outside of politics, say at home or in Church and within communities?
As for an agenda maybe a strong case of paranoia?
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Kern: a ‘real’ conservative?
Pax americana on March 16, 2008 at 3:03 PM
the conservative values of small-government, self-reliance, and strong national defense are going to survive, it’s best to distance ourselves with people who pre-occupy themselves with cheesy red herring issues such as violence in video games, teaching abstinence in schools, and worrying about someone’s personal lifestyle. – Lt Nixon
Nice. Just got my vote, Leftenant Nixon. If we expect the Dems to purge their lunatics, why shouldn’t the GOP do the same?
SeoulMan on March 16, 2008 at 3:03 PM
I support her! Love the sinner but hate the sin. We need more like her to start saving this country from the moral and social decay we are falling into!
melachiro on March 16, 2008 at 3:05 PM
Her point could have been in a fashion that wasn’t completely stupid.
AbaddonsReign on March 16, 2008 at 3:06 PM
This chic will get the Lifetime Achievement Ward for Conservatism at CPAC next year.
THE CHOSEN ONE on March 16, 2008 at 3:07 PM
I’m just waiting for her quotes to be put into rotation following Jeremiah Wright’s as evidence of bigotry and intolerance on both sides of the political fence.
All the more reason we need someone who can reach across the divide and heal our hurting nation (snark)
moxie_neanderthal on March 16, 2008 at 3:09 PM
In the same way that this woman does not represent the Republican Party, nor the people of Oklahoma, with her anti-gay rant…I hope people understand that many gay groups don’t represent the opinions of the majority of homosexuals in this country either.
Ugh…I can’t stand it when anyone refers to a “homosexual agenda”. May has well say there’s a “straight agenda”.
JetBoy on March 16, 2008 at 3:09 PM
She looks gay herself. Perhaps she’s one of those self hating closet gay people.
SoulGlo on March 16, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Not in the same category as terrorism, certainly. But no gay agenda to influence the public school curriculum and other places? Give me a break.
Note to gays and all other whining minorities. STFU
JiangxiDad on March 16, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Oh, lordy. 1000-comment thread coming.
Me, I didn’t realize there was an Oklahoma branch of the Westboro Baptist Church.
ReubenJCogburn on March 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM
Is the agenda a political issue? I’d say yes. There is a homosexual political agenda.
I don’t think it’s paranoid to see a homosexual agenda. I can see questioning the threat of the homosexual agenda, but not the existence. I’d've said the existence was proven. I’m not saying there’s a conspiracy, I’m saying there’s an agenda.
Are there any national gay organizations? Are gays trying to get more rights? Are gays active in politics AS GAYS?
I’d've said the answer to each of these questions is clearly yes. Doesn’t that qualify as a gay agenda? Advocating rights for gays AS GAYS?
misterpeasea on March 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM
I personally, have a strong tolerance for intolerance. Some things don’t deserve tolerance. Wanting to seem mainstream and tolerant is what has gotten us where we are. Our current Republican President is arguably to the left of JFK. Being politically correct isn’t going to fix that. OTOH, I understand someone’s offense if one has no moral objection to homosexuality. Just go for a walk in the park in Amsterdam.
ConstantSorrow on March 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM
What a dumbass
V15J on March 16, 2008 at 3:12 PM
Consider this. I argue that it is a fact that as values decline so does the society. Acceptance of homosexuality as a norm leads to a greater acceptance of other abnormalities (abortion, euthanasia, infantcide, etc.) which will lead to a further decline in societal values. I’m a conservative so I don’t care what you do at home in private, but it should stay at home and don’t bring it in the streets and especially not the schools. (Which it is: see California’s recent decision to not use the terms mother and father) The terrorist want to destroy us. That will lead us to rally together and fight. The homosexuals want to change us. That will lead to a more liberal worldview until we are no longer the United States if America but a liberal caricature of what we once were. I think that the reason we have such a decline in morals is due to what Lincoln said. “The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.”
So the reason the Homosexuals are more dangerous is because they are the enemy among us. How many homosexuals do you know who like/support the troops? How many support the idea of a smaller govt? I will admit there are some but they aren’t the ones who are pushing to normalize homosexuality. Those are the ones who are dangerous.
jdog on March 16, 2008 at 3:13 PM
misterpeasea
Right at every turn. The ‘agenda’ has turned this country into a weak, irresponsible cesspool. Death threats my ass.
frizzbee on March 16, 2008 at 3:13 PM
Before Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome was called AIDS, it was called GRIDS–Gay Related Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome. How much has that lifestyle cost, and is costing, us. They quarantined a man because they thought he had a communicable disease, but try to quarantine an HIV carrier? There would be weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth.
But it is not the government’s role to try to change people’s hearts.
davidk on March 16, 2008 at 3:13 PM
I have to disagree with you, Ed, on some of this. Homosexuals do have what some call a very bad “…agenda…” in store for the US, and backed by organizations like the ACLU, they’ve already had uncalled for progress, such as making it some sort of crime in California to insinuate when teaching children that families are father and mother. You’ve already got an article up that talks about parks in Amsterdam being made havens for nighttime gay sex; do you really think that if such a thing was passed, here, it wouldn’t be utilized post-haste? I think she was saying that while we have a Department of Homeland Security, a Federal Bureau of Investigations, a Central Intelligence Agency and a National Counter Terrorism Center to deal with terrorist threats, there is no one, seemingly, with any commitment to the protection of the United States in terms of maintaining and preserving what she would call traditional Judeo-Christian values. Her calling gays ‘worse than terrorists’ was a really blunderous, unprofessional and ignorant way of wording it, and I’d really have to tell her that, if I met her. However, if I’m right on her meaning, I’m inclined to agree with her, on this point.
Virus-X on March 16, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Are you wanting to deny people rights?
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Ummm…
The Ugly American on March 16, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Heh…I was just thinking the same thing. And by the looks of a few comments above, I’m good for a couple dozen.
JetBoy on March 16, 2008 at 3:15 PM
I would agree with that. Also, political correctness aside, why is it that the smallest segments of the population hollar the loudest when they feel they have been wronged? Are not the needs of the many outweighed by the needs of the few?
Tennessee Dave on March 16, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Maybe she’s right and it’s a sin…but they’ll be tried by a much more competent judge than her, if the Christians are right. I think you’d see a lot less carping about homosexuality if that community would shut up and go home to have sex, instead of making a point of shoving it down people’s throats. (So to speak…) There’s a saying in the West: just don’t scare the horses.
As for worse than Islam..? You have to be a complete backbirth to think that a bunch of people looking for a quick hook-up are worse than a group of people looking to blow others up for (their) God. Or impress women into perpetual, veiled service.
Where the hell did common sense go in this country?
black campbell on March 16, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Yes, this fleshes out the argument in my first comment.
I’m not saying I agree, even. I’m saying the claim that the homosexual agenda is more of a threat than terrorism isn’t TOTALLY kookoo bananas, to be sneeringly dismissed with a wave of the hand.
misterpeasea on March 16, 2008 at 3:19 PM
What rights are currently being denied? Furthermore, I don’t know of any group or politician advocating the removal of rights from a particular identity group. I think that’s called a “writ of attainder”.
ConstantSorrow on March 16, 2008 at 3:19 PM
The homosexual agenda IS going to be more of a threat because of the likes of many on this thread who view it ony as a “lifestyle choice”. Yet, they see Islamism as the threat it is.
melachiro on March 16, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Who would you rather confront. The Magnificiant 19 or the Fab 5?
RobCon on March 16, 2008 at 3:20 PM
LMAO!!!!
And with that, I say we close this thread.
LOL……
The Ugly American on March 16, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Damn skippy I am, if the argument for the right rests on one’s sexual orientation, or race, or some other irrelevant factor. “Being a citizen” is the factor on which I want arguments for rights based.
Equal rights. That’s what I’m for. Just to be clear.
misterpeasea on March 16, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Did she send these remarks in via the telegraph or smoke signals?
THE CHOSEN ONE on March 16, 2008 at 3:23 PM
The way I see it, “Gays” want “rights” much like what heterosexual couples have.. nothing more. (Not even sure IF they are sticklers for having the word “marriage”)
two person domestic partnership(without sexual orientation should cover it, and that would even allow 2 straight sisters that live together to “marry” and get tax benefits)
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Sally Kern’s son isn’t gay…he’s “celibate”.
In 30 years, the time spent hounding gays and lesbians is going to look silly compared to the real challenges mounted by Islam.
brian h on March 16, 2008 at 3:23 PM
So far, that’s the most inane, ignorant remark I’ve seen. Homosexuality exists…therefore, it is “normal”. Gay people aren’t the enemy. And, once again, there is no “homosexual agenda”. You can’t take the words of a few, and apply it to all.
JetBoy on March 16, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Tax benefits, also rights relating to medical issues.
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:25 PM
There used to be a time,not long ago, that every person in this country knew,without having to take a class on the subject, that two men are not supposed to get married to each other.
The fact remains that America is decaying and will fall soon.
SaintOlaf on March 16, 2008 at 3:25 PM
31 year old virgin!
txsurveyor on March 16, 2008 at 3:27 PM
The problem with the “tax benefits/employee benefits, etc.” argument is that once every person over the age of 18 is “married” those “benefits” will go away and some other perceived object of inequality will need to be corrected. If everything is sacred, nothing is sacred.
ConstantSorrow on March 16, 2008 at 3:28 PM
Wow, I’m 33 divorced and celibate also(Not gay by a long shot!)
Celibate for over 4 years now.
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:28 PM
From a strictly rationalist perspective, the fact that homosexuality has only been a “death knell” for “societies” because it opened them to power plays by radical Islam should tell you which phenomenon is more “dangerous.”
HitNRun on March 16, 2008 at 3:28 PM
That’s the most asinine argument I’ve heard yet. Murder exists too. Does that make it normal?
txsurveyor on March 16, 2008 at 3:29 PM
Not that there is anything wrong in blowing up yourself at a gay convention!
Ropera on March 16, 2008 at 3:29 PM
what exactly is the “gay agenda”?
And for those who are pushing the indoctrination thing, the only sexual indoctrination that’s been going on in this country has been making gays straight (it’s a sin!) and forced into bathroom stalls in the Minneapolis bathroom the get their rocks off.
Tom_Shipley on March 16, 2008 at 3:30 PM
She’s a ridiculous moron, but what’s with the death threats?
Dan Collins on March 16, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Has the ability for any man and any woman to be “married” and get benefits killed the benefits for all married people? Obviously people don’t get married on a lark, be they gay or straight.
Viscount_Bolingbroke on March 16, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Looks to me like gays DO have the same “rights” as heterosexuals with respect to marriage (I say “right” because it’s not really a right like free speech).
I, a heterosexual man, can only marry a woman of a certain age and metal state. A homosexual man has the exact same right.
Ditto heterosexual women marrying only men of certain ages and mental states, and homosexual women having the exact same right.
misterpeasea on March 16, 2008 at 3:33 PM
What was women’s suffrage?
End women’s suffrage! >:D
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Thank you, Saved me some typing.
speed911 on March 16, 2008 at 3:34 PM
What rights are being denied to gay people?
They have the same rights as I do as defined by the Constitution.
Marraige is not a right. Anything that you have to get a license for is not a right. Whom you can or cannot marry is defined by the state.
Hospital visitation. This is only from personal experience, but, not once in my life have I been denied visiting a relative, loved one, or friend in the hospital. So I have no idea what that complaint is about.
Passing on stuff. Um, it is called a will.
Gays aren’t being denied rights. They want to redefine things so they can have special considerations.
I have no problem with that if it is done through an electable, accountable legislative process. I have major problems with that if it goes through unelected, unaccountable judges.
As for this woman. She needs to hone her rhetorical skills.
Blarg the Destroyer on March 16, 2008 at 3:38 PM
I believe that a country that is predominantly made up of persons consumed in their own narcissism is destined for a fall. That encompasses a lot of behaviors.
Before I look to judge others so strongly, I need to take a long, hard look at myself. I trust that Rep. Kern did this.
MoCoM on March 16, 2008 at 3:38 PM
Trying to equate gays and murders is what’s “asinine”. I know you’ll disagree, but speaking from experience, one is born gay. And most studies done will say that between 8-10% of the population is gay. So how is that not normal?
JetBoy on March 16, 2008 at 3:39 PM
That’s the most asinine argument I’ve heard yet. Murder exists too. Does that make it normal?
txsurveyor on March 16, 2008 at 3:29 PM
Homosexuality and asexuality exists in animal and plant populations infinite times, dude.
THE CHOSEN ONE on March 16, 2008 at 3:39 PM
LOL. Larry Craig was forced into that bathroom stall? We have to have special vice squads roaming our public parks to eliminate public gay sex because the perps are forced to do it? As with all these arguments, the two extremes scream the loudest.
a capella on March 16, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Just goes to show that there are nuts on both sides of the aisle and it’s important for people to think for themselves and not blindly follow anyone else.
Gay’s are not going away and that’s a fact. What we should be doing is keeping what goes on in our bedrooms in our bedrooms. Anyone ever notice only gay’s have the urge to make sure other people know what their sexuality is? Like I’m suppossed to care? Men all over the world are relieved that Rosie O’Donnell is a lesbian, that’s just one less crazy fat chick a guy may wake up beside after a night of heavy drinking..
Hog Wild on March 16, 2008 at 3:41 PM
The point is….that when those “benefits” are legally bestowed by the gov’t, there will be a marriage boom. So many people will have Clinton(read: sham) marriages, that the supposed benefits will lose their meaning. Instead of the “marriage penalty” (which is, in itself, redundant) there will be the “single penalty”. Then that will need a legal remedy, too. Then after that maybe there’ll be married couples who decide not to co-habitate who need tax breaks to offset the additional housing costs. and then, and then, and then….
ConstantSorrow on March 16, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Once again the truth police go to work.
I don’t agree that homosexuality is a bigger threat than terrorism, I think that it’s a form of domestic terrorism. The political activists in the ‘gay community’ or the ‘Pink Hand’ has made public education in California that much worse because of the initiatives or bills that have passed making it discriminatory against same sex parents to use the words, mom or dad. Look it up, Ahnult signed them into law.
Christine on March 16, 2008 at 3:41 PM
See, that’s where you’re wrong. The vast majority of gays only want equal rights, not special rights. Again, the vocal and bigoted gay groups do not speak for the majority of gays…much like Obama’s Rev. Wright does not speak for the majority of preachers.
JetBoy on March 16, 2008 at 3:41 PM
ditto
jdog on March 16, 2008 at 3:41 PM
I agree completely.
jdog on March 16, 2008 at 3:45 PM
If you want to quote percentages, what percentage would any behavior have to fall below to be not normal? 5%? 1%? 0.0001%?
txsurveyor on March 16, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Do you remember the Terri Schiavo case?
OK.. Point made. Homosexuals are denied, rights.
Her husband was allowed to make medical decisions for her. etc.
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Read my whole post. Marraige is not a right. I cannot marry my cousin. I cannot marry a 12 year old. I cannot marry multiple women.
Once again, since you missed it the first time, marriage is defined by the state. If the legislative and executive branches chose to redefine marriage for their state, I have no problem with it.
This whole gay “rights” movement is B.S. They already have the same rights as anyone else. To claim that they don’t is idiotic, and beyond the pale.
Blarg the Destroyer on March 16, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Ding ding. That’s my view. I really don’t see myself as homophobic. Marry each other, don’t marry each other, whatever. It’s the reading of new rights into 200+ year old documents, like the Massachusetts Supreme Court did, that gets me exercised. As soon as any state legislature or population votes for it, I’m good with it.
The liberal agenda (there’s that word again!) has been advanced this way since the “switch in time saved nine” from (that fascist thug) FDR.
misterpeasea on March 16, 2008 at 3:47 PM
JB, maybe some of the non-bigoted gays need to get vocal. Kinda like the “moderate” Muslims?
ConstantSorrow on March 16, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Historically incorrect. I would (tentatively) suggest she google
GreekGreek history.This sort of issue is periodically thrust into the chasm that separates the three legged-stool of fiscal, defense and social conservatives. No doubt she will take a pounding over this. I just hope we can finish and get on to more pressing issues and still talk to one another in the morning.
moxie_neanderthal on March 16, 2008 at 3:48 PM
She is right, and she wasn’t gay bashing. Sure the terrorists are a mighty threat in killing people, but they aren’t as fearsome, because they tend to unite us…hence can never destroy us.
However, more and more the gay lifestyle is promoted, which erodes family values ( btw I will add Divorce is more of a threat to our country than homosexuals ) the more our foundation is undermined. Where is the uniting force to combat this degrading morality…we now live in a country where a whore becomes a celebrity. There is no shame anymore. And that is destructive…it destroys what is understood as family values, and as long as we keep our families strong, our country will be strong.
Terrorists can only hope to win a battle or two, but the leftist agenda is winning the war, and will continue until we stop with this pc crap.
Conservative Voice on March 16, 2008 at 3:49 PM
I am outraged that my parents didn’t produce a sister for me to marry. I demand a little sister and the right to marry her!!!
ConstantSorrow on March 16, 2008 at 3:49 PM
I remember it quite well. At what point was Mrs. Schiavo’s family denied the right to see her? At what point where her friends denied the right to see her? None, as far as I can tell.
If a homosexual wants to have his/her companion to have life or death medical decisions made upon his/her belhalf they can get a special power of attorney.
Ok, so what rights are being denied again?
Blarg the Destroyer on March 16, 2008 at 3:49 PM
That is nice IF it a proteacted event like the Schiavo case, what IF it’s a sudden accident, and decisions have to be made fast? see.. (Also, why do they have to pay for attorneys?)
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:52 PM
That’s why everyone should have a medical POA and a will, so it’s in place when/if a sudden accident happens.
txsurveyor on March 16, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Ellen calls Sally Kern during her show
SnarkVader on March 16, 2008 at 3:56 PM
In the same respect, what percentage would it have to hit to be considered normal, 20%, 50%, 75%?
Nope. That’s like saying blacks had the same rights as whites during segregation. Might have had to drink from separate water fountains, and relieve themselves in separate bathrooms, but…
JetBoy on March 16, 2008 at 3:56 PM
If that “special power of attorney” wasn’t setup they are denied rights.
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:57 PM
The fact that one is married is no guarantee of hospital visit or medical decision-making. Visit an assisted-care facility once in a while.
ConstantSorrow on March 16, 2008 at 3:57 PM
moxie_neanderthal on March 16, 2008 at 3:48 PM
I am not a scholar, but I am a thinker…but how is that Greek Empire?
There are two related things that destroy society, though on the surface they seem separate. Bankruptcy with money and bankruptcy of the soul. When society focuses on ME, instead if WE, it begins to decay, and become sick. To the point that it is conquered because they no longer can defend themselves.
Conservative Voice on March 16, 2008 at 3:57 PM
This chic could make men turn gay. Uhhhhh gross.
THE CHOSEN ONE on March 16, 2008 at 3:57 PM
When with “married” heterosexual couples its implied.
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 3:58 PM
The ancient Greeks were not homosexuals. Sodomy and homosexuality are not synonymous.
aengus on March 16, 2008 at 3:58 PM
If, if, if, if.
You can throw out all they hypothetical situations you want. Well, if it is a sudden accident (never heard of a slow accident, myself) and no special power of attorney has been drawn, well then they are just S.O.L.
It is the same responsibility for everyone, regardless of orientation or marital status, to make a living will, or have a special power of attorney to make their will known in the case they can’t make medical decisions for themselves.
As for your cost argument, please that is so weak. Marraige licenses cost money to. Why should people have to pay for that?
Blarg the Destroyer on March 16, 2008 at 3:59 PM
I think I’m going to have to go with 33.33%.
txsurveyor on March 16, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Blarg the bigot. >:D
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 4:00 PM
JetBoy on March 16, 2008 at 3:56 PM
They have the same opportunity to get married and have the same rights. One can’t de-color their skin. Homosexuality is a behavior, and a mental disorder…but that isn’t pc, so they no longer call it a mental disorder…as if that changes the fact.
Conservative Voice on March 16, 2008 at 4:00 PM
BTW, I do have a gay brother.
He’s a libertarian :{
(At least he doesn’t vote democrat)
Chakra Hammer on March 16, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Yup, that is me. All homophobic bigots are perfectly okay with homosexual marriage if the legislature enacts it right?
Would that all bigots were so tolerant, right? :)
Blarg the Destroyer on March 16, 2008 at 4:03 PM
I see her point.
When we institutionalize sin into our Law, our Law is corrupt and so will go our entire nation.
This is why the RINO/liberals have taken over both parties and there is no longer any hope for America.
You know the world is upside down when this woman is the one who is the “lunatic” and the RINO Libs here, who think gay marriage is A-Ok, are the “normal ones”.
“Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men, is abomination in the sight of God.” –Luke 16:15.
SaintOlaf on March 16, 2008 at 4:03 PM
Sigh. Name-calling is no substitute for logic and reason.
misterpeasea on March 16, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Well, that’s where you’re wrong. If any of you who think like that can please explain to me why anyone would either choose to be gay (so, in essence, you choose to be straight?) or that how it is a “mental disorder” (which goes against it being a choice then), I know I’d love to hear it…
JetBoy on March 16, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 ... 8 Next »