I'd like to congratulate you on being a despicable, hateful person, Maggie Gallagher.
Why do you think your CHOSEN religion's views on sexuality should hold sway over the rights of homosexuals?
How can you be so against the rights of your fellow citizens? Are you not aware that one of the founding principles of our nation was protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority?
And please ditch the excuses that this is not about hate. It's about hatred and hatred alone. Bigotry in the guise of religion.
BTW, it's great that you have a popup of Carrie Prejean as the intro to your site. You're against gay marriage but fine with a woman who appeared in naked photos and pornography then signed a contract asserting she had not?
You support a woman who signed legal documents that broke one of the Ten Commandments yet show nothing but disdain for homosexuals who are honest about their lives and just want the same rights as everyone else.
No, I don't expect a response to this one, either. I'm a bit proud of myself, though; I did not refer to her as a "hateful cunt," despite that being my initial intent.
Posts
4 potentially witty retorts:
I just wish you would acknowledge that you already have the same rights as everybody else and stop lying for rhetorical effect. You know as well as I do that there is no state in this union that forbids you to marry. You could go to any of them and get married under their laws. But you do not want to exercise your right to marry under their laws. So it's your choice not to marry, and it's not "the same rights" you want, but a revision of what marriage is in those states. It's okay for you to want a change in the definition of marriage in those states, but it's not okay for you to falsify what you are asking for.
I figured you would respond.
I am not lying. I am forbidden to marry the man I love, and with whom I have spent the past 16 years, in the vast majority of states in this nation. Even in states where same sex marriages are allowed, they are still not reconized at the federal level.
I am not falsifying anything. If anyone is guilty of that, it's you with your outlandish arguments against gay marriage. You've shown again-and-again that you don't give a rat's ass about families and you don't especially care about children, either, since they're both vitally important yet totally irrelevant to your position. All that matters to you is a penis and a vagina, whether they are used, or even work, is of no import.
You've admitted you have no idea what benefits, rights and priviliges are automatically granted married couples. You've stated that carefully crafted civil union legislation could address some of these yet you've given little indication as to what you think we don't deserve.
In essense, your argument is in favor of thousands of changes to civil law at the local, state and federal levels, rather then one simple change at the federal level: apply Amendment XIV to all citizens, not just the heterosexual ones.
Nice email. :P
I'ma add to the argument that having the right to be able to marry a woman, isn't really a right for a male who's gay, it's more of a wrong, as i believe that everyone should be able to marry the one that they love regardless of gender.
NG has a point. Gays do have exactly the same rights as straight people, but it's like trying to squish a round peg through a square hole. "You're allowed to go through the square hole, even though you couldn't and wouldn't want to. And btw, you're not allowed any round holes!" So basically you're fucked. lol
We have the same marriage rights only by a very narrow and nonsensical interpretation.
I've heard the same argument used to justify laws against homosexual sex: heterosexuals weren't allowed to have sexual relations with people of the same gender, so allowing homosexuals to do so would be granting homosexuals "special rights."
The same argument could be used to make it illegal for anyone to write with his or her left hand. Right-handed people would be equally prevented from using their left hands to write, so the law would be perfectly reasonable and fair to left-handed people. Allowing left-handed people to write with their left hands would be a "special right."
The argument that the law is reasonable as no one can marry someone of the same gender is specious, at best. Heterosexuals do not want to marry people of the same gender. Legally preventing them from doing so is akin to making it illegal for vegetarians to eat roast beef.
Post a Comment
Be nice or your comment gets pulled and sent to the depths of Hell! Or the heights of Heaven, if you're some kinda wacky Devil worshipper.