INDY500

If "drunken whore mongering" is our common denominator than it must be one's deeds in between the bottles and the broads that separate the Ben Franklins, Martin Luther Kings, Edgar Allan Poes, Frank Sinatras, Clarke Gables and Babe Ruths from you and I.

financeguy

I dunno about this reasoning - how come the constitution doesn't protect the rights of the unborn in spite of the wishes of the majority of the US electorate? That's not something you want to bring into the ambit of constitutional protections, I'd guess, because it doesn't suit your particular opinions about what should and shouldn't be brought into the remit of constitutional protection.

Faux-sentimentalism, I'm afraid, is not a debate winner.

financeguy

Hold on, you claim diversity is a two-way street??

You fail, because you forgot only the left can talk about diversity.

martha

Find a new song.



ETA: Here's a heads-up for you, financeguy. This is my last response to your baiting and unrelated posts. I'm not going to put you on actual ignore, because when you're talking about shit you actually know about, you're interesting. So, from now on, when I don't respond to your unrelated bullshit about the "rights of the unborn," you can pretend you finally got me! That should make your day.

__________________



Skywheel
Skywheel Blog

martha

This is what I want to know. How would MLK have responded to your exhortations to wait and see how full Constitutional protections for black Americans were received by the white majority? Those full Constitutional protections still don't fare too well in Mississippi; they do require court intervention, and the electorate isn't usually all that happy with it.

What would you say to him?

__________________



Skywheel
Skywheel Blog

yolland

How was this case critically different from any other instance of someone suing their county or state on the grounds that their constitutional rights were violated? Should states be able to arbitrarily declare particular subjects of legislation ineligible for judicial redress?

__________________
yolland@interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης

MrsSpringsteen

I watched that show too, I think that's a very interesting show. The only "comforting" factor is that people hesitate to become involved on that show across all types of situations. Of course it's not actually comforting that people are equal opportunity in that way.

Irvine511

can you give an example of any SCOTUS decision that isn't a "judicial fiat"?

further, can you give me an example of said "denigration" and "bullying"?

because gay people were never bullied ...

__________________

THE WORLD ONLY SPINS FORWARD

Irvine511

i'm afraid that you've just made your own argument -- there are many groups in the US who are trying, very hard, to use the courts to give the fetus the same status as a human being, you'll see this in cases when a pregnant mother is killed. they advocate for treating such a murder as two murders because two individuals have been killed.

simply because marriage equality cases have been quite convincing to many different state SC's across the country means just that -- they've been successful, and especially at a time when the courts have been stacked by the GOP. could it be that marriage equality folks simply have a logically sound argument that's incredibly persuasive and the "pro-life/anti-choice" folks haven't been as successful?

either way, i can guarantee you that it isn't martha's fault. nor does one have much to do with the other.

everyone uses the courts. this is why they are there. this is why we don't vote on civil rights or the rights of the minority. i think we should take a vote to see if we should let Irish Ron Paul supporters be able to post in FYM. would you live with the results? or would it take someone to protect your right to post against the tyranny of the majority.

__________________

THE WORLD ONLY SPINS FORWARD

INDY500

We could start with Prop 8... I mean Prop Hate.

Why did the San Francisco Chronicle and several websites feel the need to publish the names and home addresses of everyone who donated money in support of the proposition 8 if not to intimidate?

Oh, and I'm still trying to figure out while in the same speech Sean Penn thinks I should feel "great shame" but President Obama (who also opposes same-sex marriage) is "an elegant man."

Irvine511

so now political protest and public information and celebrities who make speeches at the Oscars makes you feel threatened and intimidated?

and i thought we were the drama queens.

are you going to compare this to the rhetoric that comes out of the Right on this issue? the whole "destruction of society" and whatnot?

__________________

THE WORLD ONLY SPINS FORWARD

martha

INDY, are you going to address the other questions people have asked of you?

__________________



Skywheel
Skywheel Blog

deep

every donation I ever made is on line now, it has always been.(for as long as I can remember been available to the public, they make one complete a form when one donates)

I think about my donations, especially when they are for local races and I know and am friends with more than one candidate.
Donations of $99 and less are not published, sometimes I go that route.

If this information was not available the "right" and religious people would be real upset.
They like to target people that support "pro choice", 'gun control' and 'pro immigration' and the like.

I do agree Prop 8 was Prop 'Hate'.
It was 'hate' that fueled it and 'hate' that made the pro 8 people donate. They will tell you it is 'hate' the sin. But it is still 'hate' directed at people.
Because 'sin' requires people doing so-called 'sinful' behavior.
Note this "sinful" behavior in question is perfectly legal and deemed by science and medicine to be natural.

BVS

Science and medicine pffffft

Nothing but liberal safe havens.

__________________
my music

Music Facebook

^Apparently he did.

MyBloodySleeve

INDY500

Except many of these people have actually been physically or verbally intimidated. And for nothing more than participating in the democratic process.

And unless you can name me a Hollywood celebrity who publicly endorsed Prop 8 then I guess we can assume there is a de facto blacklist in place. Remember when those were a bad thing?

The "destruction of society" (your term) isn't anti-gay as it as been applied to other deviations from traditional marriage as well such as high divorce rates and out of wedlock births. Which, while maybe not "destroying," are certainly having detrimental effects on society are they not?