Video: Time for another “enraged anti-Prop 8 mob” video
posted at 5:37 pm on November 17, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The violence wasn’t captured on camera this time; read the boss for a description of that. The media’s unwilling to place blame where it belongs in these incidents since the identities of the harassers and harassed confound the established Narrative, so they resort instead to feeble, evenhanded tsk-tsking about how “both sides” need to “cool down.” Look out for that as the coverage of this breaks big.
There’s only one man now who can rescue Prop 8 opponents from the terrible trappings of democracy — and luckily, not only has he had a lot of practice at it, this particular issue is one of his specialties. Expect a major 5-4 equal protection decision striking down the referendum sometime next year, with you-know-who writing for the majority. A surefire consolation prize for conservatives? Angriest Scalia dissent evah.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
LOL well Baldi.. I don’t care about color.. never have. My ex was raised in California.. Ventura area. So he may have had some flash backs, I on the other hand just met some nice people. Even though I may be white, they thought I was pretty interesting, even though I was lost. :)
upinak on November 17, 2008 at 6:46 PM
Let me get this straight: You’re comparing praying Christians to skinheads now?
Wow.
capitalist piglet on November 17, 2008 at 6:46 PM
Bravo, AP.
capitalist piglet on November 17, 2008 at 6:47 PM
What some of you are missing is that this blocking of traffic is getting very very old, especially in LA, where if I had my way, it would be a capital offense. And it’s not just the demonstrators, it’s the msm and police helicopters flying in circles for hours above them.
That being said, I’m looking forward to the Day Without a Gay Day, 12/10/08. If it is anything like the Day Without a Mexican Day, it will be heaven.
Blake on November 17, 2008 at 6:49 PM
argh, well…one more:
A gay pride parade route would have been something planned well in advance. And it wouldn’t have been specifically targeted at that “Muslim enclave” in your example.
These people who marched in the Castro chose it specifically for it’s location. Chose it specifically with absolute intent to start a riot. And THAT has no place in civil society.
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 6:49 PM
If the gays just ignored them, and went about their business (so to speak), it would be much to do about nothing.
If you don’t like that someone is marching down your street, just ignore them.
Now if they begin to congregate, and intimidate, and continue marching back in forth as a challenge, that is something else. But just walking down a street is reason to be harassed? I don’t think so.
And BTW, the analogy of skinheads in a black community is foolish…how many of these bible thumpers came in with the expectations to do violence? If you can’t tell the difference between a Christian carrying a bible, and a skinhead carrying a gun, you have a bigger problems then we can help you with.
Hey Gays, here some advice, grow up…
right2bright on November 17, 2008 at 6:53 PM
LOL! Right. The evil Christians purposely attempted to start a riot. Get a grip.
Gregor on November 17, 2008 at 6:53 PM
Dear Militant Homosexual Community,
Try as you might, you all just look like a bunch of girls having hissy fits.
Sincerely,
Straight Christian Female
CarolynM on November 17, 2008 at 6:53 PM
I know you’re gone, JetBoy, but I just have to say that I would be extremely disappointed in anyone who would not condemn violence or the threat of violence against gay people. Where I live (Seattle), gay people enjoy a great deal of acceptance – wherever you are, that seems not to be the case, and that’s unfortunate. If you’re experiencing “daily attacks”, it’s hard to imagine where you live; I didn’t realize it was that bad anywhere in the country, so I appreciate your testimony.
capitalist piglet on November 17, 2008 at 6:53 PM
Hopefully you too,(like most people now) have learned your lesson and will never support the gay agenda again after this mess..
SaintOlaf on November 17, 2008 at 6:53 PM
I have an idea. When Obama shuts down Guantanamo, let’s set the inmates loose in the Castro and West Hollywood.
ramrocks on November 17, 2008 at 6:55 PM
Tolstoy Syndrome
Itchee Dryback on November 17, 2008 at 6:55 PM
I have more faith in Gay’s then you, and you are gay.
I say they do have the ability to control their emotions, they are not animals.
There is nothing intimidating about some “Christians” walking around Castro, but then I guess you have claimed it as some kind of “gay turf”.
Just ignore them, unless you are an animal and just can’t control your instincts.
right2bright on November 17, 2008 at 6:55 PM
Exactly. They want to validate their alternate lifestyles.
Sorry. I don’t care what you do or who you do it with but I still believe it is an unnatural relationship with many sad drawbacks. Like no children for one.
If sexual orientation should not matter why do they have to march on St Patty’s day under a banner that proclaims their sexual preferences? Couldn’t they march because they are Irish?
They want acceptance and approval from everyone .
It is sad that they allow their sexual preferences to define their entire identies.
DeweyWins on November 17, 2008 at 6:57 PM
Yeah, that’s the part I’m struggling with, too. Is a group of people walking, or standing around praying, considered on par with “fighting words” now?
The hostility toward Christians for being Christians (not talking about the Phelps variety here – I’m talking about the real thing) is getting way out of hand.
capitalist piglet on November 17, 2008 at 6:57 PM
Karma.
SnarkVader on November 17, 2008 at 6:57 PM
First, people in one of the most liberal states vote against them, then they become a national disgrace with their racism and hostile protests. Could it get any worse for gays? Yes, yes it can. How about another annoying female comedienne to go along with Rosie.
clearbluesky on November 17, 2008 at 6:58 PM
I have seen fat people humiliated, I have seen skinny kids beat up, I have seen videos of winoes being beaten and robbed, women have been raped (more women raped then gay men beaten), I have seen bald men laughed at, and ugly people made fun of (that one hurt me the most). The fact is, many people have been abused, some rise above, others become a “victim”, and they get to play the card.
Try being a Jew, and when you are growing up you are constantly being “jewed down”…
right2bright on November 17, 2008 at 7:00 PM
I really like when people make the daring statement as these Christians did in this episode. However, even in the context of making daring statements, it may be prudent to not do it when people are already riled up. For instance, I lived in a student neighborhood on 9/11. A house down the street was full of moonbats, and they told me of their plans to burn America flags on the night of 9/11. I told them to go far into the nearby woods, and for one rare moment of sense, they took my advice. I don’t want to permit a permanent right to be angry and thus end free speech, but it does to me that occasionally one should wait two weeks before being provocative.
I’d also point out that I support “Gay Hates Fag” church protesting unhindered at funerals. People should have enough sense to see that church as irrelevant.
thuja on November 17, 2008 at 7:02 PM
I’m interested in your experience. I grew up in the rural North Carolina and I’ve never encountered anti-Semitism there. Where did you grow up?
thuja on November 17, 2008 at 7:05 PM
Well if they stay out rioting in the streets then it may mean the End Of The Fashion World as who will design our clothes?
PercyB on November 17, 2008 at 7:05 PM
Hey JetBoy,
I’m STILL waiting for an explanation on how/why a woman silently holding a cross was “taunting” and “inciting” people.
Religious_Zealot on November 17, 2008 at 7:06 PM
Buddy, that ain’t happenin’. You’re just as nutty as the people rioting. Just because there’s lunatics on one side doesn’t mean we’ll listen to lunatics on the other.
MadisonConservative on November 17, 2008 at 7:06 PM
Fags are all Obama supporters on top of having abnormal brains. I wonder what is worst.
tocoloro on November 17, 2008 at 7:09 PM
Why hasn’t this lump of earwax been banned yet?
MadisonConservative on November 17, 2008 at 7:11 PM
not too sure i agree with your assumption that Kennedy will come down as you expect. unlike the CO. statutory ban on special rights being conferred to homosexuals, the CA, AZ and FL initiatives amended their state constitutions. that’s a huge difference. and in terms of equity, ‘civil unions’ afford same sex couples withe all the protection of being married. where are the damages, kenneth?
DrW on November 17, 2008 at 7:11 PM
tocoloro is banned.
Allahpundit on November 17, 2008 at 7:13 PM
hey, pal. go back to your rock and crawl under. we can disagree without calling names and using perjoratives.
DrW on November 17, 2008 at 7:14 PM
JetBoy has been consistently claiming that simply being a Christian or holding Christian symbols (a cross) is reason enough to be assaulted.
For him, a woman silently holding a cross is the same as “taunting” and “inciting.”
For him and other gays, being a Christian is akin to being a skinhead or any other type of hateful group.
So, if anyone thinks all of this is JUST about “marriage”, they really should think again.
Religious_Zealot on November 17, 2008 at 7:16 PM
I’d love to have a legal scholar explain to me how denying a gay couple the use of a term is denying their civil rights.
I say term because California has California family law code 297-297.5.
(a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses..
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=80525423302+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve
From what I could gather after reading the entire statute gay couples who regsiter as domestic partners are afforded every legal right and obligation afforded a man and a woman, termed “spouses” in the law.
Given to be married you register with the state/ county etc there is no undue burden for asking someone to register as a domestic partner. This law applies to everyone thus equal in it’s protections
theblacksheepwasright on November 17, 2008 at 7:17 PM
/shrug
Neither surprising, nor shocking, but it is sickening.
spmat on November 17, 2008 at 7:19 PM
It’s so hard to stay away…
This all happened in Manhattan, and Wash DC…go figure.
Should I compare all breeders to this, the way all gays are compared to the “mob” gays? Nah…
Have you seen fat, skinny, ugly, etc people denied marriage? That wouldn’t stand, would it? Just sayin’…
I explained that numerous times in the appropriate thread(s).
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:20 PM
No, you haven’t.
All you have done is simply repeat that some elderly lady silently holding a cross was ‘taunting’ or ‘inciting’ the crowd.
You have as yet to explain HOW that can be.
Religious_Zealot on November 17, 2008 at 7:21 PM
Show me where I said anything remotely like that?
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Way to sink to his level. The fact that using what is commonly accepted by your community to be a slur on straight people is very telling.
A shame, really.
MadisonConservative on November 17, 2008 at 7:24 PM
Every time you continue to insist that by silently holding a cross, the elderly lady was “taunting” or “inciting” the people.
Your continual evasion on this matter coupled with your continued attempts to blame the Christians every time they are assaulted can only lead one to believe that you think that BEING a Christian is enough to warrant being assaulted.
Maybe if you actually articulated how/why simply holding a cross is enough to “warrant” being assaulted, then maybe we could move on with this subject.
Religious_Zealot on November 17, 2008 at 7:24 PM
Jetboy, answer me this. Do you want to get married to a partner? Yes or No… easy question.
upinak on November 17, 2008 at 7:25 PM
heh, somehow I know someone would mention that…But please don’t tell me “breeder” is at the same level as “f*ggot” and “q*eer”…
Right now, no. But I’d like the option, and not be specifically denied that option.
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:29 PM
Just woke up from a nap, so I’m a little late to this thread. Sorry if I’m repeating stuff.
Does everybody know that the SF Chron published maps on Friday of the neighborhoods with the greatest amount of support for Prop 8, and an article on Saturday with an official “enemies list?”
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2008/11/13/MNIQ144185.DTL&o=1
and
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/15/BAIA145AQ9.DTL&tsp=1
Sure looks like inciting to riot from here. I’d also like to point out, to those who remember the Gay Community as sweetness and light, that Herb Caen, a liberal if there ever was one, 30 years ago opined that they should give up the label “Gays” for “Glums.”
warbaby on November 17, 2008 at 7:30 PM
And WHO was inciting the RAPE? You can seriously say these women weren’t LOOKING to get raped, considering the WAY they chose to dress?
See what I mean?
MB4 on November 17, 2008 at 7:31 PM
This has nothing to do with gays.
I don’t think two straight men should get married either.
Geochelone on November 17, 2008 at 7:32 PM
You’re right, it’s not. Gay people call each other queer all the time. Straight people don’t call each other breeder. So, if anything, breeder is more insulting.
You’re a bigot if you’re actually ducking this. You’re using words you know to be slurs and trying to defend your usage of them based on an isolated posters’ use of it.
MadisonConservative on November 17, 2008 at 7:33 PM
That is totally off-base and uncalled for. What a lame comparison.
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:33 PM
It’s an exact comparison. Both involve people engaging in legal and protected activities, and the result is people engaging in criminal activities in response, to “teach them a lesson”.
MadisonConservative on November 17, 2008 at 7:35 PM
Thanks Grue!! Some more grue-L for you? LOL!
But my first position is definitely having the government stay out of everyone’s bedroom… I’d like to know when we voted to relinquish our rights to the government? I worked for a tax firm, and I can tell you, they know EVERYTHING about EVERYONE… its all right there in every tax return! How much you make, any income from ANYwhere, what you own (boats, motorcycles, log cabins, etc), how many kids, etc… It just goes ON and ON, and I still don’t recall signing up for any of IT!!!!!
Oh, and I’m hella mad about it too!
Califemme on November 17, 2008 at 7:35 PM
No, in typical fashion, MadCon, you’re insinuating again. I didn’t mean “breeder” as anything negative. And you know it.
But toco’s comment shouldn’t be compared to all “straight people” (better?) just like the mob gays shouldn’t be compared to all gays.
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:36 PM
If someone gets themselves all “incited to riot” by hearing the views of others, and the view that won at the ballot box to boot, they need to be locked up. Or do the rest of us get carte blanche too?
MB4 on November 17, 2008 at 7:39 PM
I don’t understand the extreme reaction to passage of this proposal. It’s not as if the people of California hadn’t previously expressed their support for traditional marriage. I thought everyone pretty much understood that gay marriage would only remain legal in California until the next election. Isn’t that why so many gays rushed to marry their partners before the election?
I believe if gay marriage IS made legal, the distinction between civil marriage and marriage within the church will be heightened. Traditionalists will take a position much like that of the Catholic Church, where marriage outside the church isn’t recognized as a valid marriage. In this way gays will have their legalized civil “marriage” but everyone will understand that it’s really just a domestic partnership–and not the same as marriage between a man and a woman.
Dee2008 on November 17, 2008 at 7:40 PM
You’re dishonest, and you’re refusing to own up to a momentary (I would hope) loss of control due to rage. Always liked ya, dude, but that crossed the line. You know what it means, and you knew it when you said it.
Your response was understandable to tocoloro, but your dodging of responsibility for it is exactly the same kind of mindset that has you not condoning, but refusing to condemn the actions of a militant, violent, riotous mob. They tie in directly, and it’s a great risk to you.
MadisonConservative on November 17, 2008 at 7:41 PM
Anyone defending the behavior of those thugs is capable of defending any atrocity. Intolerance on the left and it’s protected minorities is heading toward a breaking point. It’s like 1933 Germany; go check your history. It looks like Christianity will soon be the only minority outlawed.
cjk on November 17, 2008 at 7:43 PM
Why?
Is it for the intention of making a family or to show your love and bank off of a marriage to prove it?
upinak on November 17, 2008 at 7:44 PM
Might be a good thing in many cases. People would do well to look to institutions with more spirituality than their state government to sanctify their marriage.
dedalus on November 17, 2008 at 7:46 PM
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Nobody is defending toco or saying he was justified in saying what he said. He was immediately banned. You are defending the actions of these people as justified.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 7:46 PM
On a related note, a couple of days ago on another Prop 8 thread I urged folks to contact Yelp (a user-driven rating service similar to TripAdvisor) about the sudden stream of negative “reviews” (and spurious attacks) for El Coyote by the No H8′ers. (El Coyote’s owner’s sin was that she sent $100 to the Yes on 8 effort. She happens to be a Mormon.)
This is their response:
Y-not on November 17, 2008 at 7:47 PM
So get a carry permit, or if you’re in a Soviet state, move, then get one. The right to defend oneself is universal.
doubleplusundead on November 17, 2008 at 7:48 PM
“bank off” a marriage? C’mon…
Hey, you’re straight. Do you need to have marriage? Is marriage ONLY for family-makers? Not to mention, you’d probably deny gays adoption as well…thus making it even more difficult to have a family.
And, not to mention, many gays DO have natural children.
It boils down to, is it MY choice to marry, or it it yours to tell me if I can or can’t…
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:49 PM
haha…
You make a point.
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:50 PM
Here’s the difference that JetBoy can’t or won’t admit.
Christians marching into Castro to sing “Amazing Grace” were inciting violence and wanted to start a riot, and thus, deserved what they got.
Yet, no violence and not insults were hurled against the anti-Prop 8 people.
On the other hand, anti-Prop 8 people have been actually engaging in violence and hurling hateful insults at Christians and Mormons. White powder has been mailed to some Mormon churches, a burning copy of The Book of Mormon was found on a church doorstep. In Michigan, a group of gays disrupted a church service, shouting “loving” things like “Jesus was a homo” and trying to pin up pro-homosexual banners.
Yet in all of these, none of the violent, hateful homosexual terrorists were assaulted.
To review – an old lady silently holding a cross and a group of Christians singing “Amazing Grace” equates with inciting a riot and, according to those like JetBoy, deserved to get assaulted.
Meanwhile, actual violence being perpetrated by homosexuals is met with stoic restraint.
Tell me again WHO is being hateful and violent?
Religious_Zealot on November 17, 2008 at 7:51 PM
*sigh*
I do not, nor have I ever, defended the mob.
That being said, I most certainly DO question the marchers choice of venue, and their intentions. This was never about a peaceful march. It was an incitement to riot. Camera included.
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:52 PM
Again, JetBoy…
…how is silently holding a cross “taunting” or “an incitement to riot”?
Still waiting for you to articulate that thought.
Religious_Zealot on November 17, 2008 at 7:54 PM
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 7:52 PM
I would agree to a point if the marchers were shouting anti-gay slogans. They weren’t. People need to be able to control themselves.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 7:54 PM
Look at all the assumptions. Not like you’re stereotyping or anything…
MadisonConservative on November 17, 2008 at 7:55 PM
It was totally on-base and totally called for and fit one for one. If you can’t see that you have been blinded by your prejudice and your hate. BTW, stop being so whiny.
MB4 on November 17, 2008 at 7:56 PM
Jet you are missing my point.
I have been married… it was NOT easy. People change in Marriage in most cases for the better but in some … not so much. I won’t go into the crap I had to deal with concerning it. The embarrassment and hurt, the money issues and the dirt. Even though it was both of us, I never cheated unlike him, yet I was pinned as the “bad guy” via all of our friends until they realized he lied and I was the one who had to do the bankruptcy while he walked away with everything we owned and bought together and was more or less left holding a bag. Was that fair.. nope that was life. I am very happy that we never had children, even though we were trying.
What I am trying to get at is marriage isn’t always fun… it is a LOT of work. It is also for those who want a family. If you don’t want a family, there is no reason you should get married. I can tell you it would probably be easier to just stay together then get married.
But this was how I was raised. You get married and have a family. If you are not “straight” or choose not to have children you live life like everyone else and have a partner, straight or not. There is no reason to get married.
upinak on November 17, 2008 at 7:57 PM
Jet.. and bank off means to hold a boat or craft at bank on a stream or river. The bank off (set off) to move further up or down.
upinak on November 17, 2008 at 7:58 PM
I went to the Michelle Malkin’s website for more information about this incident. It turns out that the character of the violence was more on the unpleasant side of the spectrum and no where near the lynch mob end of things. This is not to justify it, but it is to say that if it sets a standard for “hate-filled” rioting, no group has any claim to innocence.
thuja on November 17, 2008 at 7:59 PM
Read the account of the event that’s posted on Michelle Malkin’s site, Jetboy. Standing in a circle, holding hands and singing is inciting a riot? They went into the Castro because they care about you people, not because the wanted to incite a riot.
Bobbertsan on November 17, 2008 at 8:00 PM
Annoying whistles.
Bishop on November 17, 2008 at 8:01 PM
Yes, Bob, to people like JetBoy holding a cross or singing hymns is cause to get beat up.
We’re still waiting, though, on what he thinks the proper response should be to disrupting church services, assaulting elderly women or burning The Book of Mormon.
Religious_Zealot on November 17, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Right? Those whistles were friggin’ aggravating, I think I’d start launching teargas if I were a cop there for no other reason than to end that damned shrieking.
doubleplusundead on November 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM
How is peacefully marching and singing hymns an “incitement to riot?”
Or are you simply stating that these people go rabidly wild at any sign or symbol of Christianity?
Are you implying that holding a cross in front of gay people is like waving a red flag in front of a bull?
Religious_Zealot on November 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM
You attack the mob’s victims so I really don’t see a whole lot of daylight between the two.
MB4 on November 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM
F**k you. This isn’t Soviet Russia. And please provide evidence that the intent was to start a riot. No doubt it was meant to get into the face of their opponents (that’s kinda the point of marches and protests), but that’s not “inciting a riot”. In fact, homos are considerably better able to start riots since the police is so afraid to slam them due to “hate” crime laws.
Darth Executor on November 17, 2008 at 8:06 PM
My bad. Sorry, just looked like it meant to profit or something…
As for what else you said, of course I am truly sorry if you were in a bad marriage. It happens all the time. I just went to a good friend’s (girl) wedding last Summer…they’re already getting a divorce, as he was a big drinker (they both are) but he got a bit physically violent. So, it’s for the better they split.
Thing is tho, as the saying goes, we want the same opportunity to be miserable in a marriage if we so choose.
But to be denied marriage altogether? I just can’t sit quietly by.
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 8:11 PM
“I didn’t mean “breeder” as anything negative. And you know it.”
B.S. All the gays I’ve known HAVE used “breeder” as an insult. They use “breeder” the way straights use “faggots”.
This whole thing is just another example of the intolreance of the radical gays. When has marriage between same sex couples EVER been a right ? For two thousand years it was a religious thing between a man and a woman BUT radical gays just cannot bear to see “breeders” doing something they can’t.Civil Unions are not enough…they want the whole tradition of marriage changed. And once they’ve done that they’ll be coming for the Churches…they ain’t gonna be happy until every last tradition of Judeo-Christian society is ended. Funny how we don’t see these bigots demonstrating outside mosques …
Son of Albion on November 17, 2008 at 8:14 PM
Well, true, no one was killed. But knocking a girl to the sidewalk and kicking her isn’t exactly non-violent.
Dee2008 on November 17, 2008 at 8:15 PM
To quote from “Sixteen Candles”… Nice manners, babe!
No…this ISN’T Soviet Russia. My point exactly.
“homo’s are better able to incite a riot”? And people wonder…
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 8:19 PM
“But to be denied marriage altogether? I just can’t sit quietly by.”
But you expect Mormons and Christians to sit quietly by while something they deeply believe in is taken away from them ? Your energies would probably be better spent getting The UN to stop islamic preachers calling for the death of all gays. Do they have gay civil unions in ANY muslim country ?
Son of Albion on November 17, 2008 at 8:20 PM
Jet we are going to have to agree to disagree.
Marriage to many is more important then the right to have it.
In Churches you have to have 6 months of councelling now before you get married. But many go down to for a Civil Union or a Courth House wedding.
Marriage doesn’t make things easier…. neither does having a baby or adoption. Becareful what you wish for… you may realize people were right and you can’t change things.
upinak on November 17, 2008 at 8:21 PM
No, “civil unions” aren’t enough.
There’s a myriad of legal differences between “civil unions” and “marriage”. There’s a lot more different than simply a name.
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM
“No…this ISN’T Soviet Russia. My point exactly.”
But the Left/Gay thought police are doing their damndest to make it that way. No dissent allowed – your way or NO way.
Son of Albion on November 17, 2008 at 8:24 PM
Your point is that you want to suppress freedom of speech and expression… so we’re not like Soviet Russia? Did I suddenly step into bizarro world? Or is everything backwards with gays dna er’ew gnicneirepxe a noitacinummoc nwodkaerb?
Darth Executor on November 17, 2008 at 8:25 PM
You’re giving way to much power to the government. So is your opposition for that matter.
doubleplusundead on November 17, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Many Muslim countries are theocracies. The United States isn’t.
dedalus on November 17, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Actually that would depend on the local civil union laws.
Darth Executor on November 17, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Peacocks!
Sink me!
Think ye, sir,
How those feathered boys love to flaunt their tails!
Stallions!
Zounds, sir!
Hounds sir! Stags!
Of the goosie and the gander, sir
Which gender is the grander, sir
To render total candor, sir, the spendour is the male’s!
Be an example to your sex
Give your boot a dapper strap
And it’s smarter if your garter has some snap!
Cravats should be flounced about our necks
Wear a nightcap when you nap
Be bewitching with some stitching on your cap!
Now, drape your cape
And puff your cuff
Embroider those lapels!
Be the king of the beasts in pastels!
La, but someone has to strike a pose
And bear the weight of well-tailored clothes
And that is why the Lord created men
PercyB on November 17, 2008 at 8:27 PM
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM
Jet I was talking about Civil Unions for “straight people”.
You do realize they do that as well for Straight People. Don’t assume ok.
upinak on November 17, 2008 at 8:28 PM
Shame on those stupid Christians who have no manners and no sense of balance. It’s one thing to win the Prop 8 battle (which I supported), but to assume that your street preaching will be nothing but an insult to injury is typically moronic – a thing evangelicals have become expert at.
Drum on November 17, 2008 at 8:29 PM
I meant to write “anything … “
Drum on November 17, 2008 at 8:30 PM
The name “marriage”, something between men and women seems to already be taken, so perhaps you could chooses another name like “gayiage”.
PercyB on November 17, 2008 at 8:31 PM
“Many Muslim countries are theocracies. The United States isn’t.”
Name ANY muslim country that has gay civil unions…don’t split hairs about “many”. The fact that gays in San Fran can’t tolerate a handful of Christians praying in their streets shows the amount of hatred present in parts of the gay community . As usual on the Gay / Left, tolerance is a one way street.
Son of Albion on November 17, 2008 at 8:32 PM
A voice of reason shines through.
JetBoy on November 17, 2008 at 8:33 PM
There was no “demonstration” here, by anybody. As far as I’m concerned, anybody that would want to go down to 18th and Castro on a Saturday night is nuts. That said, it’s noted in all the accounts that the Christian proselytizers have been doing this as a regular thing for years, and have been treated by everybody as just sort of wacky.
I wouldn’t do it, but I recognize it as the act of a brave man (or woman.) Ganging up on a handful of people as part of a drunken mob is the act of a coward. End of story.
I’m still waiting for any news of a “demonstration” in the Fillmore district or the Mission. Until that happens, “Gay Rage” is a temper tantrum.
warbaby on November 17, 2008 at 8:33 PM
I actually do mean to be callous here:
Exactly how does anyone, ANYONE, tell you are gay from ANY distance?
Is it the pink shirts? Do you wear “I’m with Gay” embroidered on your jeans? Do you have a light on your head that flashes red when anyone with gay-dar comes near?
Honestly. Being gay is not like being black. You can tell if someone is black by the color of their skin. If you’re racist, you won’t really care if they are actually African-American or if the are Cuban or Puerto Rican or Jamaican.
You can’t tell if anyone is gay based on their appearance, unless they are wearing the most out of place flamboyant (or ill-fitted, in the case of the butch lesbian) clothing you have ever seen. And even then they could just have poor taste.
BKennedy on November 17, 2008 at 8:33 PM
It’s more than reasonable payback for the way homos have been acting since prop 8 passed.
Darth Executor on November 17, 2008 at 8:36 PM
Reading the description of the video really makes me wonder why none of these guys were arrested, and why these Christians didn’t press charges. Forgiveness is one thing. Allowing someone to get away scott free is another. Forgiveness doesn’t mean lack of personal responsibility.
Sir Corky on November 17, 2008 at 8:38 PM
JetBoy,
STILL waiting for an answer on how an elderly woman silently holding a cross is “taunting” or “inciting” people.
Religious_Zealot on November 17, 2008 at 8:38 PM
Now THERE’s a creative solution.
I wouldn’t criticize Christians too much when gays are invading churches and spewing hate and profanity during Sunday services. And perhaps those in the Castro District could take a lesson from Michigan churchgoers who DIDN’T riot or even attempt to drive the invaders from their church.
Dee2008 on November 17, 2008 at 8:41 PM
The use of the word many was due to the subjective definition of what constitutes a Muslim country. My point was that the ones that are most intolerant of gay people are Muslim theocracies–and living in any type of theocracy would be a step down from what we have in the United States. No countries with a majority Muslim population recognize gay marriage.
dedalus on November 17, 2008 at 8:42 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »