Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 172

Thread: Keith Olbermann goes off on Prop 8.. you can feel the fury coming off him

  1. #91
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    379

    Default

    That's not how it comes across to anyone who cares to actually read what I've said rather that jumping at my throat with some preconceived notion of what you think I'm saying.

  2. #92
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Ive read everything you've posted. I've dissected what you said. I've answered every thought.

    Evidently SOME people here are in agreement with what I've said, otherwise it would be just you and i bitching forever.

    How can I have a preconceived notion of what you're saying, if you haven't said it, and im telling you the impression what you say IS GIVING, present tense?
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  3. #93
    Elite Member Lobelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    a backwards hillbilly state
    Posts
    20,801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nana55 View Post
    What you are is homophobic even if you won't admit it.
    Wow, you've said some doozies over the years, but you've now outdone yourself. Congratulations. You've accused a person who is by all accounts in favor of legal rights for gays, and accused her of being homophobic because you disagree with the way she thinks the issue should be approached. That is just about the most backward & destructive way to have dialogue about this issue. Cheap & nasty, really.

    Personally, I advocate a one-step-at-a-time approach. Get the legal rights FIRST. Get your legal recognition & respect. Then go for the other stuff. But flipstick is right - you start talking about teaching anything controversial in schools, and people get all kinds of fired up, and the hysteria begins. It's counterproductive to the issue of legal marriage, whether it's real or scare tactics. But agree or disagree - my opinion here damn sure doesn't make me homophobic.
    "I've cautiously embraced jeggings"
    Emma Peel aka Pacific Breeze aka Wilde1 aka gogodancer aka maribou

    Yip, yip, yip in your tiny indignation. Bark furiously on, lady dog.

  4. #94
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tati View Post
    Was my school just ridiculously wonderful and inclusive?
    Canada probably just has better schools than much of the US. I don't think teaching evolution in schools is an issue in Canada, least not that I've heard otherwise.

  5. #95
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    379

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    Ive read everything you've posted. I've dissected what you said. I've answered every thought.

    Evidently SOME people here are in agreement with what I've said, otherwise it would be just you and i bitching forever.

    How can I have a preconceived notion of what you're saying, if you haven't said it, and im telling you the impression what you say IS GIVING, present tense?
    Actually that's not true or logical to suggest at all. Most people are not going to read the entire post. You know that very well. And since you are in senior standing on the site, your interpretation will be regarded with authority.

    Several other people have realized that what you suggested I was saying, I wasn't.

    You have a preconceived notion that I personally regard homosexual tolerance as teaching about sex. That is not what I said at all. Not once. What I said was, this is how the people who voted against you see it. Tah dah?

    What I have consistently said on this site, if you go back and look is this vote was unconstitutional tyranny of the majority. I actually said it so much I thought I sounded lame so I stopped saying it. If you had read that, you would have realized what you were saying was impossible.

    Edited to add Thanks Lobelia for getting it!

  6. #96
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Again, that's not how it was worded. You were speaking from YOUR point of view, and that is how i assimilated it, hence my past mentioning of communication issues.

    The vote itself was not the topic of discussion at the time. The topic was the whole "teaching kids about different families including gay ones in school", which YOU PERSONALLY and quite vehemently seemed to oppose.

    Not other people, you. It was not written from the point of view of how others might see it.

    Now, this is the kind of educating tool I'm talking about:

    Amazon.com: The Family Book: Todd Parr: Books

    Take a look. This is a good example of what I'm saying, and hence my complete bafflement at yours or anybody elses opposition.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  7. #97
    Elite Member RevellingInSane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Where Being PC is understood as a fault!
    Posts
    11,592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fluffy View Post
    You seem to be forgetting that the US Supreme Court does not have to take up a court case they don't want to. Since Prop 8 deals with the California Constitution, I don't see why the US Supreme Court would feel the need to take up the issue.
    Don't forget Islam, which isn't Christianity. Religion overall is a large part of the issue. Christianity is not the only religion in play.

    If you can not understand why there would be a need for the federal courts to get involved, when two states have conflicting laws, exactly what more needs to be explained? Let's try this again.

    California Court throws out Prop 8. Gays are allowed to marry.

    Gay couple, married in California, find themselves in another states. The rights they have as being married in California don't follow them to the state they are in, because said state does not recognize gay marriage.

    Am I correct in understanding gays want the right to marry in every state and have it legally recognized? If so, California's Court has no effect on that and unless the Supreme Court steps in, there are states in which no gay union will hold any weight.

    You do bring up a good point. The Supreme Court can refuse to hear the case, thus allowing the individual states to vote or keep the laws they have already voted for. The result? Gay marriage isn't recognized nationally. Any couple who wants to be married would have to move to a state which allows it and recognizes it.



  8. #98
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    379

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    Again, that's not how it was worded. You were speaking from YOUR point of view, and that is how i assimilated it, hence my past mentioning of communication issues.

    The vote itself was not the topic of discussion at the time. The topic was the whole "teaching kids about different families including gay ones in school", which YOU PERSONALLY and quite vehemently seemed to oppose.

    Not other people, you. It was not written from the point of view of how others might see it.

    Now, this is the kind of educating tool I'm talking about:

    Amazon.com: The Family Book: Todd Parr: Books

    Take a look. This is a good example of what I'm saying, and hence my complete bafflement at yours or anybody elses opposition.

    My point was that when freaked out straight folks are voting against you because of irrational fear, you need to pick your priorities. I said it clearly over and over again. In fact if you go back and read it without your bias you will see its pretty clear.

    Its not a necessity at this point. In my opinion the priorty is gay rights not gay tolerance.

    As I clearly stated several times Brown versus the Board of Education was forced rights that eventually led to tolerance. The children had to be escorted into the schools. You won't get anywhere trying to get tolerance. One thing I do have to agree with Revelling on, is what people are telling you to your faces and what they say behind your back are two entirely different things

    You are blaming Christians and people you hate for this happening but really the people who said they were on your side are the ones who are allowing it to happen. Because where is the unified outrage and demand for constitutional rights? Where are the millions of straight Americans in full protest for what is happening? Curiously silent most of your friends.

    This sad reality is why the vote should have been fought against from the get go. I said it immediately when Arnold said this is how he was going to handle it. I knew this would happen.


    That's a great book btw!

  9. #99
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    Don't forget Islam, which isn't Christianity. Religion overall is a large part of the issue. Christianity is not the only religion in play.
    I didn't forget Islam. I saw no point in mentioning it since it's a minority religion in the US, and proportionally-speaking, there aren't THAT many Muslims compared to Evangelical Christians.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    If you can not understand why there would be a need for the federal courts to get involved, when two states have conflicting laws, exactly what more needs to be explained? Let's try this again.
    Plenty of states have different laws on different issues. That by itself is the nature of jurisdiction!

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    California Court throws out Prop 8. Gays are allowed to marry.

    Gay couple, married in California, find themselves in another states. The rights they have as being married in California don't follow them to the state they are in, because said state does not recognize gay marriage.
    Guess what? Different states have different minimum age requirements for marriage and when you can get a marriage license. That is an issue up to the states.
    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    Am I correct in understanding gays want the right to marry in every state and have it legally recognized? If so, California's Court has no effect on that and unless the Supreme Court steps in, there are states in which no gay union will hold any weight.
    Yes, gays in all 50 states would like to get married. Marriage licenses are issued by the state, not the federal government, which is why this is a state issue.

  10. #100
    Elite Member Lobelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    a backwards hillbilly state
    Posts
    20,801

    Default

    It's like feeding babies solid food for the first time. You have to do one thing at at time, or they get pukey or allergic or reject it. Get them to nom their carrots. Good. Now for the broccoli. Nobody said never feed the broccoli, just wait for the carrots to settle first.

    eta: my apologies for a very strange post
    "I've cautiously embraced jeggings"
    Emma Peel aka Pacific Breeze aka Wilde1 aka gogodancer aka maribou

    Yip, yip, yip in your tiny indignation. Bark furiously on, lady dog.

  11. #101
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flipstick View Post
    Where are the millions of straight Americans in full protest for what is happening? Curiously silent most of your friends.
    How do you know they're all silent? Lots of people have day jobs and find other ways to protest, like sending in an IRS complaint on the Mormon church.

  12. #102
    Elite Member *DIVA!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    15,742

    Default

    I really don't get it, why would people deny others the right to have their love and commitment recognized, when for so long a lot of commitments weren't recognized, or legal.
    On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pleaded guilty and were sentenced to one year in prison, with the sentence suspended for 25 years on condition that the couple leave the state of Virginia. The trial judge in the case, Leon Bazile, echoing Johann Friedrich Blumenbach's 18th-century interpretation of race, proclaimed that
    Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and He placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with His arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that He separated the races shows that He did not intend for the races to mix.
    Loving v. Virginia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    This is a good read:
    Why the Ugly Rhetoric Against Gay Marriage Is Familiar to this Historian of Miscegenation

    Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival....
    Baltimore O's ​Fan!

    I don''t know if she really fucked the board though. Maybe just put the tip in. -Mrs. Dark

  13. #103
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    379

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SSDiva View Post
    I really don't get it, why would people deny others the right to have their love and commitment recognized, when for so long a lot of commitments weren't recognized, or legal.
    On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pleaded guilty and were sentenced to one year in prison, with the sentence suspended for 25 years on condition that the couple leave the state of Virginia. The trial judge in the case, Leon Bazile, echoing Johann Friedrich Blumenbach's 18th-century interpretation of race, proclaimed that
    Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and He placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with His arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that He separated the races shows that He did not intend for the races to mix.
    Loving v. Virginia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    This is a good read:
    Why the Ugly Rhetoric Against Gay Marriage Is Familiar to this Historian of Miscegenation

    Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival....
    Interesting post. And it shows how the courts had to step in long before tolerance did. The courts stepping in led to tolerance. Not the other way around.

    To me the big heartbreak in this vote is that people actually thought Cali would go for them.

    Its to me an issue of people not taking you seriously. I once had a college professor who pointed out that when Black men acted like white men could accept them (in sports and entertainment) they were richly rewarded. But yet they would still struggle on a lesser level for equal rights.

    Equal rights is not about people treating you equally. Its not about tolerance or acceptance or kindness or friendship. None of those friendships will get your rights. Its hard thing to recognize that people are not taking your isse seriously because it tdoesn't really effect them. It effects you, and these are your rights and you deserve them.

    I want to see a class action lawsuit in all of the states by people who want to get married. You have to stand up for yourself.

  14. #104
    Elite Member nana55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    dreaming about being on a lake in Ontario
    Posts
    4,085

    Default

    Prop 8 does not mention children. The people who wanted prop 8 are the ones who kept bringing up the children. People opposing it just wanted the right to marry. That was all. They don't want the right to teach it in school, or make people love them. They just wanted a basic right. Bringing children in to it muddies the water. It was a simple straight forward prop. It was wrong-headed but nothing about school or education.
    If I can't be a good example, then let me be a horrible warning.

  15. #105
    Hit By Ban Bus! AliceInWonderland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    you already know.
    Posts
    44,442

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Tom Brokaw: Chris Matthews & Keith Olbermann have gone too far
    By witchcurlgirl in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: August 29th, 2008, 09:28 AM
  2. Keith Olbermann and Glenn Greenwald feud over FISA
    By witchcurlgirl in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 27th, 2008, 02:15 PM
  3. Keith Olbermann throws fit over ketchup?
    By mrs.v in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: June 26th, 2008, 08:21 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: November 14th, 2007, 08:11 PM
  5. Olbermann completely skewers O'Reilly.
    By ohmygoodness in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 3rd, 2006, 02:58 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •