Comments on: FREEDOM

By: c'est moi

c'est moi — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:48:46 +0000

If you believe that two men marrying is wrong, I thoroughly support your right to not marry a man. but why should that belief give you a say in what two people totally unrelated to you decide to do?

By: Thursday

Thursday — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:50:04 +0000

I love you…that’s all I can say to that comment.

By: keithybabes

keithybabes — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 09:39:54 +0000

The ancient Greeks considered homosexuality as normal. How does that fit in with your theory? OK, so there was no same-sex marriage, but they definitely made allowances for human nature..

By: No1askedme

No1askedme — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 07:49:06 +0000

I already spoke of prop-8 above. It was only passed on the lies of the so called “moral standards” of the “religious right.” They are fascists, end of discussion.

By: No1askedme

No1askedme — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 07:47:13 +0000

Republicans are not conservatives anymore, they’re their own group of political ideology centered around fear-tactics, moral imposition, and party politics. The modern republican party’s policies and ideology border on fascism thanks to the “religious right.”

By: Doydle

Doydle — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:28:06 +0000

Free chocolate eggs? I’d go!

By: Fevagirl

Fevagirl — Sat, 02 May 2009 17:11:42 +0000

Well played, suicide_blonde.

By: Anonymous Critic

Anonymous Critic — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 20:39:16 +0000

No constituency is neutral. That’s one of the first things you learn at university, in hte process of analysing discourses, stated or understated.
From personal past discussions with gays and bisexuals, they believe that everyone is bisexual. That is a political statement. Why? It implies that bisexuality and homosexuality are natural.
LGBT people having been granted mainstream status (UK), they have been using their position of power to impose themselves in pretty much every sphere. Any dissenting voice is crushed. In the same way that questioning questioning the prioritising of non-caucasian migrants is systematically attacked as being racist.
LGBT people in tribal societies are extremely rare. The raw necessity of day-to-day survival does not, it seems, lend itself very well to such activities as crossdressing, panto and gay parades…
Widespread homosexuality, it can be argued, occurs in complex, sedentary societies, in which the division of labour has become sufficiently developed for tribal coming of age rituals to have been abandoned. Because human beings develop more on the basis of post-natal social condition as against atavism as in less evoluated animals, young humans who are not offered a strong cultural tradition of rites of passage to assuming the trappings of their gender, are left at the mercy of alternative influences.
Thus, it is my contention that the normalisation of homosexuality is a product of the advent of complex societies. A concept closely associated with this problem is ‘anomie’, coined by French sociologist Emile Durkheim, and which refers to a society where norms have been eroded.
It is essential to stress that the setting of LGBT ideology is capitalist society, one that is anything but normal. That society has, for the last 250 years, coerced hundreds of millions of people to migrate to cities through mechanisation. That same society is also responsible for the near breakdown of the very life systems of which we are part, the biosphere.
The imposition of LGBT ideology in all spheres of public life – work, church, politics, education etc. – has been creating an environment in which the young person is presented with LGBT so-called ‘lifestyles’ sold as perfectly natural options.
Clearly, something is amiss.
With the breakdown of capitalism in the face of climate change, developed societies are set to revert to more family- and community-centred social structures. I believe that LGBT ideology will suffer a huge weakening in the process, with numbers of LGBT people dropping back to pre-industrial levels.
It is because we are still very much embedded in anomic, capitalist societies that we are intellectually powerless at refuting LGBT ideology. This is very sad, as countless people are made to suffer in silence before what amounts to a form of hegemony, not to say totalitarianim.

By: Danbala

Danbala — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 15:59:15 +0000

And YAY and HOORAY! Our parliament voted for same gender marriage today, s from May 1st marriage is gender neutral here.
.
*dances a happy dance*
.
*returns to normal self*
.
… Now, I just wonder why it had to take so long. :p

By: tinuviel

tinuviel — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 03:50:50 +0000

Well, there’s plenty of LOLcats that are more along the lines of two kittens curled up in a basket with a caption saying ‘Friendship’ or similar. The heartfelt LOLs appear in about equal quantity on both sites.

Although I suspect that if you’d realized that, you would have converted your argument to ‘just because they do it on icanhascheezeburger, doesn’t mean that should do it here’.

By: ginny

ginny — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:26:10 +0000

Gross, circus circus?

By: Rachel

Rachel — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 06:43:30 +0000

What about siblings?…

By: rhorho

rhorho — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 23:41:30 +0000

The win of this post blew my hair back.

(Either that, or I have the fan set too high…)

By: Zora

Zora — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 23:30:45 +0000

Amen to this.

By: icanhazdoublecheezburger?

icanhazdoublecheezburger? — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 21:12:34 +0000

hug 4 u 2 !

By: icanhazdoublecheezburger?

icanhazdoublecheezburger? — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 21:07:14 +0000

*facepalm

By: icanhazdoublecheezburger?

icanhazdoublecheezburger? — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 21:04:29 +0000

and a smile that looks vile from a mile

By: icanhazdoublecheezburger?

icanhazdoublecheezburger? — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 21:02:50 +0000

hug 4 u!

By: Dash

Dash — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 02:24:01 +0000

The problem is that our concept of law and morality as separate is a relatively new one. Throughout history people have lived in homogeneous cultures. People have used law to keep their cultures homogeneous. Somehow, the founding fathers of the United States of America managed to create a legal system that was supposed to protect individuals from homogeneous culture, rather than the other way around, despite the culture of the early settlers being relatively homogeneous compared to our current population.

Then again, maybe they had no clue what they were creating. It’s really irrelevant now. Our legal structure should reflect what the human race has learned since then. We shouldn’t be criminalizing actions or denying rights to people who cause no harm to others. The legal system should stand as a means to counterbalance what’s wrong with the majority opinion, otherwise it serves no purpose.

By: Kit

Kit — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 07:48:14 +0000

Your lot had the last 8 years, quit being butt hurt just because the rest of the country got sick of the screw ups you lot put in office.

By: Kit

Kit — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 07:40:56 +0000

I have never understood this line of logic. Just because something is legal doesn’t mean you have to tolerate it or like it. There are plenty of people who think interracial marriage is wrong. There are plenty of people who think that people of two different religions shouldn’t be married. Plenty of people hate skate boarders, yuppies, or whatever other group anyone wants to hate or dislike.

Legal doesn’t mean acceptable by the population. Hell, taxes are legal, plenty of people disagree with those.

By: minerva146

minerva146 — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 16:05:18 +0000

So we’re going with the tried and true, “I know you are, but what am I?” defense?

By: Sud_Vicious

Sud_Vicious — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 15:55:07 +0000

There were no facts in your first statement. Only assertions of opinions.

While you are educating yourself on history, pick up[ a logic text.

By: Danbala

Danbala — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 15:43:54 +0000

I love that optical illusion – where the twists to the right makes everything look decidedly twisted to the left.

By: Sane Person

Sane Person — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 15:43:50 +0000

Pfff

By: Sane Person

Sane Person — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 15:41:59 +0000

Pffftt… Typical Liberal hogshit.

By: Cowpie

Cowpie — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 04:29:19 +0000

*giggle*

By: Starrfade

Starrfade — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 22:47:05 +0000

I was going to keep my nose out of this discussion, however I
find myself having to disagree. Of all the people I know who
practice polyandry (or would practice if they could), none of
them are interested in little girls or their own relatives.

By: The Steve

The Steve — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:46:28 +0000

You love to hate gays because they’re gay.

How is that different than hating blacks because they’re black.

You’ve hoisted yourself by your own petard.

By: slan agat

slan agat — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:25:32 +0000

As I expected. No facts whatsoever in response.

Put up or shut up: What are the FACTS supporting your claim that “same gender attraction is oppression”?

By: slan agat

slan agat — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:19:13 +0000

It isn’t even the hate speech that’s the problem.

You have no right to wield the force of law to privilege your religiously driven sensibilities over anyone else’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Just as no one else has the right to wield the force of law to abridge yours.

You can wield your voice all you want, subject of course to the rights of others to disagree with you (and make you a social pariah if you’re unduly offensive about it). But you have no calling to dictate another’s beliefs and actions if they are doing you no tangible harm.

By: slan agat

slan agat — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:09:12 +0000

Why restrict it to the right to marry?

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Oh wait, we already have that. READ IT, YOU FOOLS.

By: Somebody

Somebody — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:55:27 +0000

Even better! I am behind it.

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:38:05 +0000

The right of citizens of the United States to marry shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of gender, race, or physical disability.

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:22:17 +0000

I’m told that Mississippi took the slavery owning stuff off the books finally in 1995…
I can only assume that they thought (hoped) they may need them again…

By: Somebody

Somebody — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:16:48 +0000

Oh, and for the record, this is what I would like to see happen. I would like
an amendment to the US constitution that states:

The right of citizens of the United States to marry shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of gender or sex.

By: Somebody

Somebody — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:09:36 +0000

That’s what I always wonder.

How many times would the bill have had to go through the southern state
governments before they “voted out” slavery? It had to be abolished at
the federal level, “by force” if you must.

I do not understand why the rights of gay people are even up for a vote.
They are full human beings who deserve all the rights and resposibilites of
being citizens of a given country. We don’t need to vote on that.

But some people think we do, and that the results of such a vote are
somehow valid. To me, this is a bit surreal.

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:07:40 +0000

One that allows the majority to vote on people’s rights with a view to limiting them by law is essentially flawed…

By: Somebody

Somebody — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:00:44 +0000

Unless you dig a hole under it.

By: dissimilitude

dissimilitude — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:57:42 +0000

tl;dr

By: Nick

Nick — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 14:53:55 +0000

In a way yes you are. If you tell a fundamental christian that because gay marriage is now legal, he can’t spew what would then be called hate speech but is for some reason an opinion right now, then he would have to apply your morals over what his opinion is. I think its fine if he says those things but in the end i’d rather live under my morals then his.

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:22:55 +0000

Think the ‘people’ would have dismantled slavery without it being forced?

By: Somebody

Somebody — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:20:10 +0000

When I meant “the point”, I meant the point of the person making the caption,
actually, which I don’t think was you. I was commenting on why that person
put “self-proclaimed” in front of “greatest nation”.

But you raise an interesting point. This photo “demonstrates the exact
opposite”? How? It’s just two happy guys in love and one is holding a weird
basket. It’s not like it shows a guy and a dog, or a guy and a four year old
girl. It’s two grown people-who in this case are both men.

How does that demonstrate the exact opposite of why marrying the love of
your life should never be wrong?

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:02:48 +0000

Do you even TRY to make sense?

Not even a blind stab with a short stick…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:53:41 +0000

You conservatives think you can impose your values on a country like it’s a 20cent N!gg3r… so I’d say we’re now fair and balanced…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:49:57 +0000

Same with friends of mine too… only this time it was the sister who wanted her pound of flesh from the deal…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:29:52 +0000

No, that’s because you’re an idiot… it’s not a wonder to me at all…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:25:33 +0000

It was you in the basement of the Watergate building with Woodward and Bernstein, wasn’t it? not some Spook who took the credit…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:08:57 +0000

That you’re an idiot, but it was a little *too* subtle… it was why I’d dumbed my comment down for you too…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:06:03 +0000

@Frou: Sorry about the qualifier, but you sometimes fall of the wagon…
I’m considering putting together a 12-step plan, but even then people do falll…