Thursday, March 11, 2010

Prom Canceled When Girl Invites Girl

In our Maryland county we have to deal with a small cell of hardcore haters who spew a lot of venom but are viewed in the community as oddballs and outsiders. It's probably good to remember sometimes that there are places where those people are the majority, and things really happen their way.

Like, say, Itawamba, Mississippi.
Jackson, Miss. (CBS/AP) When Constance McMillen fought the law, the law canceled the fight.

With the backing of the ACLU, McMillen fought an Itawamba County school board to be able to take her lesbian partner and wear a tuxedo to the Itawamba County Agricultural High School prom, in the small town of Itawamba, Miss. about 20 miles east of Tupelo.

The school board responded Wednesday by announcing they were canceling the entire prom, scheduled for April 2. Constance McMillen Wanted to Take Her Girlfriend to the Prom, So the School Board Canceled it

Now, that's fair! Cancel the prom for everybody so that two girls don't dance together.
A Feb. 5 memo to students laid out the criteria for bringing a date to the prom, and one requirement was that the person must be of the opposite sex. The ACLU told board members the restriction violated the students' rights and not allowing McMillen to wear a tux violated her expression rights.

McMillen almost didn't return to school Thursday for fear of retribution by her classmates who had just lost their prom because of her.

"My daddy told me that I needed to show them that I'm still proud of who I am," McMillen said. "The fact that this will help people later on, that's what's helping me to go on."

I imagine peer pressure can get pretty intense at Itawamba County Agricultural High School. It is great to see her dad backing her up, it is great to see young people fighting for what's right and not backing down.
McMillen said she did feel some hostility toward her on campus, explaining, "Somebody said, 'Thanks for ruining my senior year."'

I wonder how many people complained to the school board that actually canceled the prom, instead of blaming Constance for failing to homogenize adequately.

I notice the Facebook group Let Constance Take Her Girlfriend to Prom! has 18,169 fans so far. Woops, I waited an hour to post this. The group has 25,024 fans now.

[ Update, Saturday morning, 143,385 fans. ]

[ Update, Saturday 3:50 PM, 163,858 fans. ]

34 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"A Feb. 5 memo to students laid out the criteria for bringing a date to the prom, and one requirement was that the person must be of the opposite sex."

so, basically, any event celebrating heterosexuality is a violation of someone's right to live in a world where heterosexuality is marginalized

why can't heterosexuals get together with those with similar perspective?

March 11, 2010 11:01 PM  
Anonymous Robert said...

I read that the school board was encouraging parents to organize a private prom, from which they could bar the girls. Total Massive Resistance. Such tactics have a long and noble history in governmental discrimination.

March 12, 2010 7:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

homosexuality is not beneficial to society, Robert

while legally permissible, it shouldn't be encouraged

March 12, 2010 8:09 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

And anonymous trolling is beneficial to society?

rrjr

March 12, 2010 9:44 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

And anonymous trolling is beneficial to society?

rrjr

March 12, 2010 9:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anonymous":
Heterosexuals get together with others of "similar perspective" every day of their lives...with NO restrictions! An event held at a publicly-supported institution of learning is not meant to be an "event celebrating heterosexuality".

A high school prom is a celebration of a milestone in an adolescent's development. Nowhere does it say that it is reserved exclusively for heterosexuals, and if such a situation exists, it is not morally defensible.

A prom can be held that is open to ALL students without taking away any right of heterosexual students to get together with their heterosexual friends...and yes, with their GLBT friends as well.

Using your "logic", we should return to segregated schools where those of different races, national origins, sexual orientations would be banned.


I'm sure that isn't your intent, is it? Reading your post leads one to the conclusion that you would be perfectly content with that situation.

"homosexuality is not beneficial to society,". Neither is bigotry and obsessive hatred, and, while "legally permissable" I'm sure you would agree that these blots on humanity should be erased.
RT

March 12, 2010 9:52 AM  
Anonymous g'day mates! hey, what mates? said...

oops!

looks like Malia and Sasha won't be taking Spring break in Australia on the taxpayer's dime after all

Barry must read TTF:

"President Obama has delayed his upcoming trip to Asia to remain in Washington for what could be the climax of his year-long battle for health-care reform, his press secretary announced via Twitter this morning.

White House officials have been pushing the House of Representatives to vote on the Senate's health care measure by March 18, when Obama was set to take off for a week-long excursion to Guam, Indonesia and Australia.

Top Democratic lawmakers had publicly and privately expressed increasing doubt that they could meet the March 18 deadline, and press secretary Robert Gibbs acknowledged Thursday that the administration understood that the vote could be pushed back.

"The President will delay leaving for Indonesia and Australia - the First Lady and the girls will not be on the trip," Gibbs tweeted Friday morning. Michelle Obama and daughters Malia and Sasha had been scheduled to join the president's trip.

The announcement represents the third time Obama has delayed travel in part because of the ongoing fight over health care."

this is a healthy development!!

March 12, 2010 12:37 PM  
Anonymous since Barry's got some free time next weekend said...

President Barack Obama's promise to stay "laser focused" on job creation has turned into little more than a side-long glance. Since making the pledge in February, the president has returned to a nonstop campaign to pass an unpopular government health care takeover and allowed the task of creating jobs to continue drifting.

The extent of his effort to put Americans back to work is the recently passed $15 billion jobs bill, which provides tax breaks for businesses that hire unemployed workers. Even some of the bill's Democratic supporters acknowledge that it will have little impact on the unemployment rate, which remained at 9.7 percent last month nationally.

That would give it a lot in common with the $800 billion stimulus package passed a year ago with the promise of keeping unemployment below 8 percent.

Jobs grow best in a climate of certainty and stability. Obama's single-minded drive to pass a health care bill that will likely raise the cost of employing a worker as well as the tax burden on employers has businesses wary of adding to their payroll. Likewise, worry about the effect of climate change regulations on business costs has added to private-sector jitters.

Entrepreneurial investment has dropped $327 billion, or 19 percent, since Obama took office and is not rebounding. Private investment is essential to employment growth.

Calming the waters would be the best way for Obama to fulfill his laser focus pledge.

We'd like to see him place a hold on any legislation -- including health care reform -- likely to create a burden on businesses, either through taxes or compliance costs, until unemployment drops to the 6-7 percent range. He also should try to immediately extend the Bush-era tax cuts, some of which have already expired, at least until unemployment falls.

The president should lobby Congress to pass the pending trade pacts with Colombia, South Korea and Panama. This would be an important signal that his administration supports vigorous free trade, which leads to greater exports and more jobs at home.

And he should order all of his departments -- especially the Environmental Protection Agency -- to examine all regulations and policies for their impact on private-sector employment and make them job friendly. It is particularly important to use caution in crafting regulations for financial institutions to guard against further hampering the flow of credit. Many businesses that want to expand and add workers report they can't get loans to do so.

That's what a laser focused jobs agenda would look like.

Obama should focus on reassuring job creators that he will stay out of their pockets.

March 12, 2010 1:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Heterosexuals get together with others of "similar perspective" every day of their lives...with NO restrictions!"

why can't they just be together at an event that is centered around heterosexuality without inviting the "act up" crowd to chime in?

"An event held at a publicly-supported institution of learning is not meant to be an "event celebrating heterosexuality"."

actually, proms are indeed a celebration of heterosexual curting rituals

there's nothing wrong with the involvement of a publicly-supported institution

education institutions should prepare kids for life and this is part of it

"A high school prom is a celebration of a milestone in an adolescent's development. Nowhere does it say that it is reserved exclusively for heterosexuals, and if such a situation exists, it is not morally defensible."

it's a heterosexual celebration that's become a milestone

homosexuals can invite a opposite gender companion or skip it

that's freedom

"A prom can be held that is open to ALL students without taking away any right of heterosexual students to get together with their heterosexual friends...and yes, with their GLBT friends as well."

why shouldn't they be able to get together with those who they have something in common with?

"Using your "logic", we should return to segregated schools where those of different races, national origins, sexual orientations would be banned."

only if you say the color of some folks' skins is the equivalent of sexual deviance

your "logic" isn't

"I'm sure that isn't your intent, is it? Reading your post leads one to the conclusion that you would be perfectly content with that situation."

I'm content with heterosexual encouragement that doesn't homosexuality

""homosexuality is not beneficial to society,". Neither is bigotry and obsessive hatred, and, while "legally permissable" I'm sure you would agree that these blots on humanity should be erased."

social discrimination based on sexual deviance is neither bigoted nor hateful

March 12, 2010 1:44 PM  
Anonymous Robert said...

I wonder if they have Proms where students can go, wear masks, make up names for themselves that they think are ironic, and insult everyone?

March 12, 2010 1:50 PM  
Anonymous shake a spear said...

ever read Romeo and Juliet?

a great heterosexual story with just such a scene

March 12, 2010 1:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Absolutely, Anon! The American Prom is a great American Heterosexual Institution!

I'd father do away with it rather than corrupt it and change it into something it wasn't meant to be!

March 12, 2010 3:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Typo -- I meant "I'd RATHER do away with it..."

March 12, 2010 3:52 PM  
Anonymous time to celebrate said...

just think, if Democrats weren't so opposed protecting the innocent, they could pass health care reform today:

"House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Friday that Democrats have unable to broker a deal between pro-life and pro-choice Democrats on abortion language in health care reform.

At issue is the difference between the House and Senate health care bills. The House bill, authored by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), prohibits a woman who gets federal subsidies for health insurance from receiving coverage for elective abortions and from purchasing such coverage with her own money.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said that no member of Congress could consider themselves pro-life if they vote for the Senate's version. Stupak has warned that he and at least 11 other Democrats will vote no on a final health care bill if it leaves the Senate language intact. Without the votes of Stupak and his like-minded colleagues, passing health care reform would be much more difficult.

Stupak said Friday that a key committee chairman told him that Democrats want abortions to be paid by a federally-funded nationalized health insurance system.

Stupak said Rep. Henry Waxman, told him he wants to change current law that bans federal funding for abortion.

Stupak described what he said was a conversation with Waxman about the Senate's version of the health care overhaul.

"I gave him the language. He came back a little later and said, 'But we want to pay for abortions.' I said, 'Mr. Chairman, we disagree. We don't do it now, we're not going to start.'

"'But we think should,'" Stupak said Waxman told him.

"I said, 'Well, I'm sorry but if you want to move health care keep current law,'" Stupak continued.""

March 12, 2010 5:03 PM  
Anonymous bali hai, Spring break no said...

after reading that, I think Barry might as well take the kids to Australia

they've probably already told all the kids at school they're going

and there's nothing Barry can do to pass health care now:

"The president’s international trip had grown into a source of frustration among many House Democrats, who complained privately to the White House that they were being forced to take a quick vote on health care so Mr. Obama and his family could leave on the overseas trip next week.

The president is no longer taking the first lady, Michelle Obama, and their two daughters on the trip, an administration official said. Mr. Obama agreed to delay his departure, an administration official said, shortening the trip to give Mr. Obama more time to win over skeptical House members. (oh yeah, that always works)

The delay set a new timetable for the House vote on the measure.

Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, repeatedly dismissed the possibility of canceling the trip during his briefing on Thursday. But senior administration officials — and the president himself — heard several complaints from House members and leadership that the trip was threatening to be a setback for the very fragile health care deal, aides said.

The trip had coincided with Malia and Sasha Obama’s spring break and was intended to be their first visit to Indonesia. But the White House, mindful of the criticism that the trip was as much a family vacation as an official trip, changed plans after everyone began to realize as much.

Michelle Obama could be heard screaming at the President in their personal quarters this afternoon. "Take advantage while we can," she was heard bellowing.

Oprah has offered to send Dr. Phil to mediate."

March 12, 2010 5:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rush Limbaugh attacks 11 year old orphan who carries on his mother's fight

March 12, 2010 6:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11-Year-Old Fights for Health Care Reform After Mother's Death

March 12, 2010 6:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good for Rush. He exposed the truth. When she HAD health insurance, the boy's mother refused to go to the doctor's office. Her family doesn't know why she refused to go.

Then, when she didn't have health insurance, she went to the Emergency Room twice and was hospitalized for eight days. ALL WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE.

So Rush exposed that the story about the mother dying because she had no health insurance is simply a scam.

March 12, 2010 6:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Correction: She also went to the emergency room once when she did have insurance.

Anyway...if anything -- it's a story which demonstrates that people with NO health insurance can get good care under the current system.

March 12, 2010 6:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rush Limbaugh is despicable. He attacked and orphan and a mother who lost her daughter, and blamed ACORN and then SEIU for Marcelas wanting to continue his mother's fight, before he admitted he had his facts wrong.

Here's another fact Rush got wrong. He never once complained about the FreedomWorks money that paid to bus teabaggers around to various town hall meetings last summer.

March 12, 2010 7:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Send Constance McMillen a message of support

March 12, 2010 7:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, now, "Anonymous"...where to start in this "dialogue" with you (actually more like a monologue on your part)?:

"why shouldn't they be able to get together with those who they have something in common with?"
Again...students mingle with those they have something in common with every day they are in school and these days, plenty of time outside of school, too (e.g. the drinking party attended today by students from Wheaton, J.F. Kennedy, Northwood, and Einstein during school hours).

And...as they go to school with hundreds of other students of every religious, political, economic background...including their GLBT friends...their going to a prom with others who are NOT EXACTLY LIKE THEM is merely a projection of your own discomfort with the realities of their everyday school experience and not something that is of concern to them. Students in Mongtomery County have been going to "mixed" proms for years now without incident.

"actually, proms are indeed a celebration of heterosexual curting rituals" Curting rituals (sic.) take place every day in a teenagers life. Proms are NOT a celebration of heterosexual courting rituals, much as you would like them to be just that...but are really intended to teach students social graces, good manners, decency and respect, and more importantly, the lesson of life: that we share this planet with all kinds of people, some of whom we may not personally like, but with whom common decency and moral integrity requires us to get along with.

If the parents of heterosexual children are so uncomfortable with a situation where every student is welcomed and treated with the respect that is their due, they have every right order their child to stay away from the school-sponsored prom.

"education institutions should prepare kids for life and this is part of it". We actually agree on this statement (even though I suspect you really don't believe this). Schools in Maryland do not categorize and segregate classes or activities that propagate "preparation for life" based on a student's real or perceived sexual orientation. Obsession with sexual activities is more in the realm of some particular religious or private institutions and others who have sex phobia problems.

"social discrimination based on sexual deviance is neither bigoted nor hateful" Finally! You reveal your real feelings and intent...it's ok to be bigoted and hateful.

You believe that discrimination based on characteristics of people that you personally do not like is O.K. You are entitled to that particular narrow viewpoint but you are not entitled to force others to be subjected to your hateful and illegal discriminatory desires...not in any institution that is open to the public and which is supported by public funds.

If you want to protect your child from the realities of life in the 21st century you might, as suggested above, want to consider not allowing your progeny to attend a school dance where there might be a couple of GLBT participants.

Instead of obsessing on the lives of other people and working to remake them in your image (isn't there a Biblical injunction against this? Sermon on the Mount? "Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.
Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, "Let me take the speck out of your eye," and behold, the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye." ), take some time in your life to smell the flowers. You'll be better for it.
RT

March 12, 2010 9:27 PM  
Blogger Emproph said...

“social discrimination based on sexual deviance is neither bigoted nor hateful”

Denial
“Denial is an outright refusal to admit or recognize that something has occurred or is currently occurring.”

When you chose to reduce others to sex acts is when you crossed the bigoted/hateful line.

March 13, 2010 5:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

let the girls go:

"On Friday, the White House announced that Mrs. Obama and daughters Malia, 11, and Sasha, 8 would not be going -- as had been planned -- with Obama to relax in the South Pacific. Obama delayed the trip to remain in Washington and keep pressure on Congress to pass health care reform. The Obama girls were going because the trip was timed to their Spring vacation. The revised dates won't give the girls enough time to recover for school.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said at the Friday briefing "the way now the trip sits in the week, it's not as conducive for them to go."

Asked if the travel experience was worth missing some school, Gibbs said he doesn't know.

Gibbs was asked, "Isn't it more important for the girls to go to this trip and relax with their father and just miss a few days of school?"

He replied, "Well, it's a decision I'd leave to the father, and I think it's -- having a six-year-old -- I think it's important that they also spend some time -- Lord knows we've had enough snow days -- they spend some time in school.

"But again, what does it matter what I think?""

March 13, 2010 9:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

time for a TTF apology to George Bush, who is to Iraqi democracy what JFK was to the Peace Corps:

"That sound you hear is of Conventional Wisdom cracking on the Iraq war.

A few weeks ago Vice President Biden stated that Iraq "could be one of the great achievements of this administration." (That's right; one of the greatest achievements of the Obama administration.) Then last week came the Newsweek cover story, which declared that "something that looks mighty like democracy is emerging in Iraq. The Iraqi election is most certainly a watershed event that represents a whole new era in the history of the Middle East." And then, earlier this week, Tom Friedman of the NY Times weighed in, saying "Former President Bush's gut instinct that this region craved and needed democracy was always right."

Get the new
PD toolbar!

That Iraq has seen a dramatic turnaround in since 2006 is indisputable. A nation that was broken and sliding toward civil war is on the mend and is creating a representative government in the heart of the Middle East.

Whether or not it lasts will be up to the Iraqis themselves. Forming a new government in the aftermath of the recent elections will take time, and the impending drawdown of troops may put additional stresses on Iraq's transfer of power.

Nevertheless, perhaps we can agree that whatever mistakes were made in the early execution of the war, the United States was not "imposing" democracy on the people of Iraq. We might be able to agree, too, that the counterinsurgency strategy announced by President Bush in January 2007 -- a strategy that was fiercely opposed by Messrs. Biden and Obama, by virtually the entire Democratic Party, the political class, and almost all of the foreign policy establishment -- was a wise and politically courageous decision.

It's now clear that the commonly held view that Iraq was "probably the biggest foreign policy mistake in American history" (Joe Klein) was wrong and foolish.

One thing that has gotten almost no attention, though, is how much the military has changed, and in some respects been transformed, in part because of the Iraq war. The Vietnam war badly damaged the morale and the public's faith in the military. Out of the Iraq war, however, the military has made some extraordinary progress, learning some things and building on others.

The military has learned war-fighting tactics and strategies that we're effectively applying in Afghanistan. Our commanders have jettisoned an approach that wasn't working (using a "light footprint" approach in the midst of industrial-strength insurgencies) and replaced it with a much more effective one (a traditional counterinsurgency strategy that relies in part on winning over the population.)

Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have accelerated the advent and development of a host of technological and conceptual advances -- Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) with full-motion video and armaments; breakthroughs in every discipline of intelligence (including imagery, signals, and human); the fusion of intelligence; advanced command, control, communications, and computer systems; precision munitions for virtually all large-caliber weapons; and battlefield medicine advances, to name just a few."

March 13, 2010 9:40 AM  
Anonymous her comes your 19th nervous breakdown said...

in a topsy-turvy world, China suceeds with Reaganomics and the U.S. went back to the Nixon-Ford-Carter era:

"During 2009 there was a lot of smug talk among academic and political liberals of Keynesianism enjoying a triumphant revival. But in the real world of jobs, wages and production--as opposed to the imaginary one of the chattering classes--the evidence shows that John Keynes' notion of being able to spend your way out of recession has not worked this time, if it ever did. It's important to note that ordinary voters are more sharply aware of this idea's failure than are the Western governments that have put their trust in Keynes.

The Obama Administration and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's government both chose to meet the credit crisis and subsequent recession with huge increases in public spending and debt. Brown even boasted that by doing so he had "saved the world."

However, the European Union, led by Germany, proved reluctant to tread the Keynesian road and shoulder vast burdens of government debt. The result of this decision can be seen in the rise of the euro against the dollar and the pound and in the fact that Germany and France are now pulling out of recession.

China and India declined to go for a full-bloodied Keynesian solution. Their economies have continued to expand, if more slowly than before the crisis, and both are in a strong position to exploit the new decade's opportunities. China has notably narrowed the gap between its economy and that of the U.S.

Meanwhile, the U.S. and Britain are still deeply mired in recession, having acquired a vast amount of new government debt to no constructive purpose. No amount of juggling with unemployment figures can obscure the fact that in both countries real jobs are still being lost and that the creation of phony government ones is not altering the drop in family incomes. The public senses the truth, and the signs point to voters taking a fearful revenge on the Keynesian "miracle workers."

Sometime this spring Brown's New Labour government will be forced to hold an election, and it will almost certainly go down in catastrophic defeat. After a dozen disastrous years in power, New Labour will disappear as an experiment in ultraliberalism, with half its MPs losing their seats.

Special Offer

Free Trial Issue of Forbes
Magazine

In the U.S. the Democrats' loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat that had been theirs for more than 50 years is a harbinger of doom. Unless Obama radically changes his approach to government the portents are for the Democrats to be decisively defeated in the midterm congressional elections and for Obama himself to follow the hapless Jimmy Carter as a one-term President."

have no fear

Sarah and the Tea Party are here!

March 13, 2010 10:06 AM  
Anonymous a day without OJ is gay said...

here's a good idea in Florida

even Aunt Bea should like this one:

"A "family-friendly" bill is set to pass in Florida that would deny tax credits to movie and TV productions that feature gay characters. State tax laws already offer a 2% tax credit on production costs of "family-friendly" productions; the bill would raise that credit to 5% and ban productions featuring gays.

The bill, approved unanimously on Wednesday by the Florida House Economic Development Policy Committee, awaits passage into law by the Florida House Finance and Tax Council, and is likely to pass.

The bill's sponsor, Stephen Precourt, a Republican State Representative from Orlando, said at a press conference: "Think of it as like Mayberry," referring to the town on The Andy Griffith Show. "That's when I grew up -- the '60s. That's what life was like....Like it used to be, you know?" Shows with gay characters, Precourt said, would "not be the kind of thing I'd say that we want to invest public dollars in.""

go, F L A !!

March 13, 2010 10:51 AM  
Anonymous hee haw said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

March 13, 2010 2:20 PM  
Anonymous they never wanted to be married said...

"Update, Saturday morning, 143,385 fans"

not that impressive, considering that this story has received so much attention from features on internet default pages to interviews on morning talk shows

the whole idea of folding homosexuality into every aspect of American life is losing steam

the backlash is starting to gel

interesting story in Post this morning about how most homosexual couples have at least one partner opposed to the idea of same gender "marriage"

they think it's "heteronormative, mimicking conventional heterosexual practices"

exactly, that's what I've always said

funny, they've achieved what they wanted in D.C. and they are using their new position to attack conventional marriage

tell us again how gay "marriage" is no threat to tradition

they never wanted to be married

they want to attack heterosexuality

which goes to the heart of why people develop same gender attraction

it's part of a rebellion against society

March 13, 2010 3:10 PM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

Oh for heaven's sake Anone. This Aunt Bea is wise enough to know it's 50 years later now and until every American citizen has equal rights, the American dream has not yet been realized.

"Think of it as like Mayberry,"...Shows with gay characters, Precourt said, would "not be the kind of thing I'd say that we want to invest public dollars in.""

How does Stephen Precourt feel about investing public dollars in shows without black characters in them? Does he hold The Andy Griffith Show up as a shining example of good television only because gay characters are not found in Mayberry or does he find Mayberry to be such a wholesome depiction of American life because there are no black characters either? Do Republicans like him only want to allow white straight people to be on TV shows?

tell us again how gay "marriage" is no threat to tradition

Oh brother Anone, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there's something to be afraid of.

There is no "threat" to marriage by expanding it to same sex couples.

Exactly zero opposite sex marriages have failed as a result of same sex marriage being made legal.

March 14, 2010 11:25 AM  
Anonymous goober said...

"until every American citizen has equal rights, the American dream has not yet been realized"

we all have equal rights, inane

the right to be liked or to have every deviant sexual desire approved of by everyone is not part of the dream

"How does Stephen Precourt feel about investing public dollars in shows without black characters in them?"

Since he has sponsored a bill that gives tax credits to such shows, I assume he feels great about it.

"Does he hold The Andy Griffith Show up as a shining example of good television only because gay characters are not found in Mayberry or does he find Mayberry to be such a wholesome depiction of American life because there are no black characters either?"

I think it's wholesome lack of sexual immorality. I doubt anyone thinks the color of someone's skin has any relevance. Except for fringe leftists, we're a color-blind society.

"Do Republicans like him only want to allow white straight people to be on TV shows?"

Well, he hasn't said anything to make anyone think that. We actually only want straight protaganists. Their skin color doesn't matter.

Homosexuals can be featured occassionally as long as they are portrayed negatively.

"tell us again how gay "marriage" is no threat to tradition

Oh brother Anone, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there's something to be afraid of.

There is no "threat" to marriage by expanding it to same sex couples.

Exactly zero opposite sex marriages have failed as a result of same sex marriage being made legal."

inane, D.C. gave homosexuals the right to "marry" and the first thing we're hearing is that homosexuals are now attacking the institution of marriage

they didn't want to marry, they wanted to be in a position to attack and alter marriage

maybe you and your other personalities should get together and call yourselves a comedy club

March 14, 2010 5:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ignoramus Anonymous: The Post article did not say "how most homosexual couples have at least one partner opposed to the idea of same gender "marriage"."
That is a figment of your warped imagination and, once again, you LIE! (nothing new there)

What studies have been conducted that would support this ridiculous distortion? Which "Christian" minister or priest are you quoting as your source of this lie?

You are a truly sick person...and a liar (very contrary to your so-called religious beliefs).

March 14, 2010 8:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey...what's wrong with attacking an institution that, at its very core, is sick and disintegrating before our very eyes? Have you, the man/woman of a thousand faces and names, done anything to stop the destructive institution of divorce in this country?
I'm beginning to think that you must be a Divorce Lawyer.

James Buchanan

March 14, 2010 9:04 PM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

"How does Stephen Precourt feel about investing public dollars in shows without black characters in them?"

Since he has sponsored a bill that gives tax credits to such shows, I assume he feels great about it.


If your statement is true that he sponsored a bill to give tax credits to shows without black characters in them, that makes him a racist as well as a homophobe IMHO.

March 15, 2010 11:45 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home