Couple May Be Arrested For Marrying
This story is relevant to some things that are going on in our county, where a certain group of "people" are trying to promote a referendum to repeal a law that prevents discrimination on the basis of gender identity.
My first thought when I read this was -- wha? They're going to arrest these people for getting married? That's a crime?
Your Tax Dollar At Work.
I'm going to skip down a little bit -- you might want to follow that link and see the stuff in between.
Here's a something for you. Before the Citizens for a Responsible Government decided to try to re-legalize discrimination, the same exact group of people were called the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, and they wanted to keep information about sexual orientation out of the Montgomery County Public Schools' sex-ed curriculum. The president of the CRG, you might know, is Ruth Jacobs, that is Doctor Jacobs to you. I mention that because I am going to quote something from the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum web site. Dr. Jacobs was a member and spokesperson for that group, too, of course, source of many memorable moments at the school boards' public comments sessions.
I'm not saying she was the "Dr. J" who posted this statement in 2005 at the CRC blog. Whoever it was, they have the perfect solution to this complicated legal problem. Here's how they put it:
Whoa! Why didn't I think of that? Call the judge! Tell him the problem's been solved!
All questions about your life can be instantly answered by your genitalia. Just look down, there's your answer to everything. Whatever you see, that'll tell you who you are, whether you should act like a lady or a gentleman, what kind of person you should fall in love with and marry, what kind of clothes you ought to wear.
Look how easy life is when you're stupid.
It makes you long for the good old days, doesn't it, when life was simple and good. For some people. Let's keep moving forward, let's see if the future can't be good for everybody.
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — The couple walked into a Norfolk courthouse on a spring day, exchanged a few words, and within 10 minutes, were seemingly husband and wife. It was an unremarkable ceremony — except that several weeks later, officials realized the shapely bride might not have been a woman.
Now authorities in Virginia, where same-sex marriages are illegal, are weighing whether to file misdemeanor charges against the couple, Antonio E. Blount, 31, and Justin L. McCain, 18. An announcement is expected this week.
A prosecutor says the decision to press charges could turn on whether the pair knowingly misled officials when they applied for a license and later, traveled to a courthouse for a ceremony. If the bride was transgender, and identified as a woman, it is unclear whether the marriage would be considered illegal.
The pair went to Newport News Circuit Court on March 24 to obtain a marriage license — McCain appearing as a woman and saying the name "Justine" before a deputy, said Newport News Circuit Court clerk Rex Davis.
McCain produced a Virginia driver's license, but a design quirk — the 'm' or 'f' for male or female appears directly against a darkened state seal — meant nobody noticed McCain's gender, Davis said. Va. says groom and 'bride' deceived officials
My first thought when I read this was -- wha? They're going to arrest these people for getting married? That's a crime?
Your Tax Dollar At Work.
I'm going to skip down a little bit -- you might want to follow that link and see the stuff in between.
Activists say the case highlights the difficulty in trying to fit transgender individuals into rigid legal definitions of what makes one male or female. Less than one percent of Americans is transgender, a fluid term that can apply as much to a person who has had gender reassignment surgery as to those who take hormones or wear clothing to resemble another sex.
Most state courts have been silent on the issue of whether marriages involving a transgender person are valid, transgender rights advocates say. Most case law involving transgender rights, meanwhile, surrounds discrimination, not marriage.
Transgender people are increasingly recognized by courts as matching their "gender identity," or internal sense of gender, said Cole Thaler, an attorney with gay rights legal group Lambda Legal, a gay and transgender civil rights group.
That means "it's not deceptive for a transgender person who lives their life as a gender different from the gender they were assigned," said Thaler.
Complicating the issue is a confusing system for how a transgender individual changes gender on legal documents. All but Tennessee, Ohio and Idaho typically change one's gender on their birth certificate following gender reassignment surgery, according to the National Center for Transgender Equality. But local, state and federal agencies have their own standards for defining male or female, according to Paisley Currah, founder of the Transgender Law and Policy Institute. The result: One person's sex may vary from birth certificate, to passport, to doctor's office.
"You could have a driver's license in New York state that says you're a male and have a birth certificate from New York City that says you're female — there's no simple answer to the question of someone's legal gender," Currah said.
Here's a something for you. Before the Citizens for a Responsible Government decided to try to re-legalize discrimination, the same exact group of people were called the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, and they wanted to keep information about sexual orientation out of the Montgomery County Public Schools' sex-ed curriculum. The president of the CRG, you might know, is Ruth Jacobs, that is Doctor Jacobs to you. I mention that because I am going to quote something from the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum web site. Dr. Jacobs was a member and spokesperson for that group, too, of course, source of many memorable moments at the school boards' public comments sessions.
I'm not saying she was the "Dr. J" who posted this statement in 2005 at the CRC blog. Whoever it was, they have the perfect solution to this complicated legal problem. Here's how they put it:
Same sex attraction does exist, and people have a choice as to whether or not they act out on those attractions or not, but there are only two genders, male and female.
Oh and by the way, here's a hint: if you have a question about your gender, look in the mirror after getting out of the shower next time.
Whoa! Why didn't I think of that? Call the judge! Tell him the problem's been solved!
All questions about your life can be instantly answered by your genitalia. Just look down, there's your answer to everything. Whatever you see, that'll tell you who you are, whether you should act like a lady or a gentleman, what kind of person you should fall in love with and marry, what kind of clothes you ought to wear.
Look how easy life is when you're stupid.
How a court might view the case isn't clear. In 1999, a Texas court threw out a wrongful death lawsuit a transgender woman filed after the death of her husband, ruling that while the plaintiff had undergone a sex-change operation, she was actually a man and her marriage invalid. But in 2004, a Kansas court ruled in favor of a male-to-female transsexual who identified as a woman to apply for marriage.
Newport News investigators will decide whether there was false information on the marriage license application, said Newport News Commonwealth's Attorney Howard Gwynn. Though Davis said applicants must swear to the truth of the information on their marriage license, the application mentioned "groom" and "bride," not male and female.
That has been changed to say "male applicant," and "female applicant," Davis said.
It makes you long for the good old days, doesn't it, when life was simple and good. For some people. Let's keep moving forward, let's see if the future can't be good for everybody.
posted by JimK at 6:26 AM
52 Comments:
"where a certain group of "people" are trying to promote a referendum to repeal a law that prevents discrimination on the basis of gender identity"
Apparently, a bunch of chimpanzees are trying to obscure reality here. The referendum is not whether to repeal a law. There is no law banning discrimination against guys who dress like girls. People are free to not like that and not be associated with it.
What the referendum does is give the voters an opportunity to approve the enactment of such a law. As of now, it is not and never has been law.
The voters are unlikely to approve such a law. We're a generally tolerant county. If some guy wants to dress like a girl, c'est la vie. Still, we're not going to require everyone else to participate in the fantasy by treating them like whatever they've dressed up like for the evening. It's basically a matter of freedom of association and property rights.
"they wanted to keep information about sexual orientation out of the Montgomery County Public Schools' sex-ed curriculum"
Obscuring reality again. Actually, they wanted to keep inaccurate and unsubstantiated assertions about sexual orientation out of the curriculum.
"Look how easy life is when you're stupid."
Oh, yeah. The sun's always clear and good, Clarabelle the cow always smiles, MC is a cool place to live...
I really don't think this couple will be arrested unless they try something like this again. The state can just annul the marriage and maybe the Virginia Mental Health Department can get these guys into a reparative therapy program.
"What the referendum does is give the voters an opportunity to approve the enactment of such a law."
Hi, my name’s anonymous, and I say things like "give the voters an opportunity," without mentioning that that opportunity is to vote on the rights of OTHER VOTERS. That’s because I’m a spineless coward who’s too ashamed to say what I really mean. I certainly wouldn’t want people to think of me as the deceitful lying hypocritical bigot that I am...I have much too much self esteem for that.
Emslob
The only "rights" we don't vote on in our society are those enumerated in our founding documents.
Sorry, it sounds like someone confused you.
Did you have chicken pox the week they went over the Bill of Rights in school?
We're definitely going to want to vote whether to approve any extra rights for those with deviant sexual desires.
Just to be clear here. An antidiscrimination bill was passed unanimously by Montgomery County's elected Council. It was signed into law by MoCo's elected Executive.
The shower-nuts went into action to repeal the law by referendum, telling people that the law would lead to perverted men hanging out in ladies locker-rooms so they would sign the petitions. The Board of Election's verification of the referendum petitions resulted in suspension of the law until a referendum has been voted on in November. There is a suit in court challenging the Board's verification of the petitions, and a ruling will be coming shortly.
There is a law banning discrimination against transgender people. It cannot go into effect until we see if the majority of MC voters wish to repeal it.
JimK
Sorry, Jim. There is no law.
In our county, no action of the Council is official until it clears a review period by the citizens. This bill didn't clear. Discrimination against deviance remains legal.
That's the law!
we're not going to require everyone else to participate in the fantasy by treating them like whatever
What about the golden rule? Your fantasy is that some supernatural being lives in the heavens and tells you how to behave so you can earn life everlasting after you die. Seems only fair if you can have your fantasies, others can have fantasies of their own, especially when that couple's marriage (a real event, not a fantasy) has no bearing on your existence.
The only "rights" we don't vote on in our society are those enumerated in our founding documents.
When did we-the-people vote on any of our Civil Rights Acts? Never, that's when! It was our elected officials in Congress, just like our elected officials on the County Council, who voted to enact non-discrimination laws to protect minorities. That's why we elect them to be our leaders, we expect them to lead.
Emproph is right about the tryanny of the majority and we all know that is not the American way. Americans believe all people are equal and have equal rights.
Tyranny of the majority issues are covered in the Constitution. Deviance is not a constitutional right. I personally don't want the government enforcing a sexual morality code but it's still not a basic human right.
As far as our "way", here in MC laws must pass the scrutiny of the public before becoming official. In a representative democracy, we vote when we have to because the represenatives didn't follow our wishes. They had to be checked this time.
You should read up on this governmental theory stuff, Bea.
It's fascinating!
"My first thought when I read this was -- wha? They're going to arrest these people for getting married? That's a crime?"
The contempt these two guys showed for society is appalling. A couple of months in the slammer would teach 'em some respect for the law.
After that, put 'em in a rehab halfway house to help them learn to control themselves!
Dear Anonysnert,
Anonymity on the internet allows people to set aside some aspects of their identity in order to safely express others. Snerts need someone to react to and affirm their offensive behavior. This need is a bit different than simply catharting their frustrated drives, as the "eros-ridden" idea suggests. Snerts are trying to express some unresolved and warded-off feature of their troubled identity in an (often desperate) attempt to have it acknowledged. Unfortunately, they do it in a way that abuses other people. Under ideal conditions, they may be able to accept and work through those inner feelings and self-concepts that torture them. If not, they will continue to vent that ooze through their online snert identities, while safely dissociating it from their "real world" identity.
The higher prevalence of misbehavior among anonymous users may be more than just a "disinhibiting" effect. Rather than the anonymity simply "releasing" the nasty side of a person, the person may experience the anonymity - the lack of an identity - as toxic. Feeling frustrated about not being known or having a place in the group, the new user acts out that frustration in an antisocial manner. They need to feel that they have SOME kind of impact on others. It's not unlike the ignored child who starts acting "bad" in order to acquire attention from the parent, even if it's scolding and punishment. The squeakiest wheel. Humans, being humans, will almost always choose a connection to others over no connection at all, even if that connection is a negative one. Some snert guests may think (perhaps unconsciously) that their misbehavior is a justified retaliation against a community...
A fascinating theory, Frist. Does it apply to the pro-gay anons here too or, when you say "offensive", do you simply mean offensive to the gay agenda?
What about your anti-life, pro-war, pro-hate and pro-redneck agenda, AnonBigot?
(P.S.- Hello from the Virgin Islands to everyone!)
oh, OK
let's not call it the gay agenda
let's call it the gay risky scheme
The gender identity arguments that I hear on this site are fascinating. The one thing that strikes me again and again is the fact that when the issue of whether to allow a person who is claiming a gender other than his or her "assigned sex at birth" into the restroom of his or her perceived gender....there are vociferous arguments which state that women, for instance, are already sharing their restrooms with those who self identify as female (even though their assigned sex at birth was male). The argument goes 'round and 'round, stating that women are already sharing their bathrooms and locker rooms with this population, so what's the big deal?
Thus, we are led to believe that this population is basically "invisible" inside of restrooms and locker rooms, blending seamlessly with the facility's other users.
Then, the same people that argue the above....turn around and say that Bill 23-07 is desperately needed to allow this population the ability to receive basic restaurant and cable service. At this point, we are told, in no uncertain terms, that this population needs this legislation in order to obtain these basic rights.
So this brings me to the fascinating point....why, according to these arguments, are these people virtually INVISIBLE inside the restrooms, but when they emerge from the restroom, waiters and waitresses can routinely pick them out of the crowd and refuse them service? From these arguments I've heard, it appears that even cable employees take one look and run away with their cables.
Could someone please explain the paradox here? To rephrase...why is this population apparently INVISIBLE in bathrooms and locker rooms, but VERY VISIBLE to restaurant and cable companies? I know that the County Council holds the key to this answer (which is why they passed this legislation, of course) but they're refusing to share it with the public.
For that reason, I turn to TTF for clarification.
Anonymous said:
“The state can just annul the marriage and maybe the Virginia Mental Health Department can get these guys into a reparative therapy program.”
I went to the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse Services (http://www.dmhmrsas.virginia.gov/) and was unable to find any evidence of a reparative therapy program. Doing a search for “gay” ended up finding mostly references to two people who happen to have the surname Gay. The other most common occurrence was in surveys requesting if providers accommodated “gay / lesbian” clients.
It seems Virginia does not subscribe to the reparative therapy program either, in spite of your vociferous support for it. I don’t know if this is because of the APA stance on reparative therapy or not. (From “APA Council of Representatives Passes Resolution on So-Called Reparative Therapy”: Homosexuality is not a mental disorder and the APA opposes all portrayals of lesbian, gay and bisexual people as mentally ill and in need of treatment due to their sexual orientation; ) Interesting how they refer to it as “So-Called.” (http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/HTML/resolution97.html)
Of course, other people have pointed this out before, but apparently the conclusions of one of the largest professional organizations focused on mental health is inconsequential to your opinion on the efficacy of such programs. However, they don’t seem to be listening to you much either. Here are some items you might want to address when trying to persuade the APA to come over to your side of the fence on this argument: (From Wikipedia)
Major medical organizations and others do not accept the anecdotal evidence offered by conversion therapists and ex-gay groups for reasons including:
results are not published in peer-reviewed journals, but tend to be released to the mass media and the Internet
random samples of subjects are not used and results are reliant upon the subjects' own self-reported outcomes or on the therapist's own evaluations which may be subject to social desirability bias
evidence is gathered over short periods of time and there is little follow-up data to determine whether it was effective over the long-term
the evidence does not demonstrate a change in sexual orientation, but merely a reduction in same-sex behavior
the evidence does not take into consideration that subjects may be bisexual and may have simply been convinced to restrict their sexual activity to the opposite sex
conversion therapists falsely assume that homosexuality is a mental disorder
conversion therapists' research focuses on gay men almost exclusively and rarely includes lesbians
Once you address these issues satisfactorily, you will have a much better case to take to the school board about the sex ed curriculum as well.
Otherwise, you run the risk of looking ever more like this guy -- pathologically obsessed with precious bodily fluids:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY
Peace,
Cynthia
Anonymous asked:
“Could someone please explain the paradox here? To rephrase...why is this population apparently INVISIBLE in bathrooms and locker rooms, but VERY VISIBLE to restaurant and cable companies? I know that the County Council holds the key to this answer (which is why they passed this legislation, of course) but they're refusing to share it with the public.”
Finally! A new question!
I was asked a tangential question by a guy at one of the town hall meetings – I’ll get to that later.
The fact of the matter is that it doesn’t matter how well you pass – I went to my back to my employer the week after they laid me off (as well as 22% of the rest of the company due to investor money running out) and visited my old office mate. For several minutes he was cordial to me but not particularly talkative. I was chatting with him as if we were old friends, but it turns out, he spent several minutes quietly wondering “who is this and why are they here?” After a while he finally recognized me.
The fact of the matter is, had I still been an employee, I could have been fired -- and many trans people are when they come out, no matter how “invisible” they can be. Some of my friends have had to move to new states to find new jobs with their new identities. One of my college professor friends with 5 degrees is now in school again for nursing, because she’ll never find another job teaching accounting law – all of her published papers are in her old name – she can never be “invisible” unless she jettisons her entire career history, which is basically what she has to do. Starting nursing school in your mid-fifties isn’t easy, but it’s better than never working again in a field that can keep your interest, challenge your intellect, and pay above minimum wage.
Other trans people are working in Montgomery County ARE invisible and are not contributing to our blog, nor did they counter petitioners, or go to the gala earlier this month. They are too busy hiding their medical history to ensure they keep their jobs. It doesn’t matter how well you pass or how long you might have been working somewhere, if someone finds out your medical history, you can be fired for that alone – and it has been done before.
After my first visit to my dentist as the “new me” (I called them up the day before to warn them), the receptionist thanked me for keeping my business with them, telling me that I “could have gone to another dentist and not have anyone know.” My 19-year old friend “A.” wasn’t quite so lucky when she needed dental help. She won’t be going to that dentist again (a different one from mine), even after his written apology for his behavior and that of his staff.
I have a bunch more to write on this topic, but it will have to wait ‘till later – I’m way overdue for bed time and I’m lucky enough to have a job to go to – I don’t want to put that at risk.
Peace,
Cynthia
"From “APA Council of Representatives Passes Resolution on So-Called Reparative Therapy”: Homosexuality is not a mental disorder and the APA opposes all portrayals of lesbian, gay and bisexual people as mentally ill and in need of treatment due to their sexual orientation"
Cynthia, the APA doesn't really have a gripe with any type of sexual deviance. They also have nice things to say about bestiality and sado-masochism. Problem is, most people go into that field because they have mental problems and want to cure themselves.
"I went to the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse Services (http://www.dmhmrsas.virginia.gov/) and was unable to find any evidence of a reparative therapy program."
Oh, don't worry, they have them in Virgina. A judge would generally refer someone who uses homosexuality to commit a crime to a church-run program.
"Doing a search for “gay”"
They're not going to use that type of gay agenda propaganda term. Search for "deviance" or "perversion".
Thank you Cynthia. I hope you got enough sleep before going to work today.
The point is, Theresa, as long as transpeople blend in and are INVISIBLE, they are safe. You have probably encountered transmen and transwomen over your lifetime and have never known it, and more importantly, you were never harmed by it. But as Cynthia has pointed out, the moment a transperson's medical history is known, or in the case of trans people who never manage to look as feminine or as masculine as society expects them to (maybe they can't afford facial surgery along with the rest), they are at risk for becoming targets of bigoted haters like you. No matter how masculine a transwoman or a "biological" woman might appear to someone else (and I'm recalling that very mannish looking photograph of you, Theresa, in front of the Arliss Road Giant), she's still entitled to being treated with decency rather than derision.
"The fact of the matter is that it doesn’t matter how well you pass –"
Your "stories" about employment history dodge the question. If you say these transgenders pass so well, why do we need laws covering businesses and public facilities?
We all know the truth: you can tell a guy is a guy even after all the surgery and hormones and drugs.
Letting them use the ladies' room is creepy.
"I have a bunch more to write on this topic, but it will have to wait ‘till later"
Try to restrain yourself. We'll cope.
Well, thank you for the morning filth Anon. Let's see, morning coffee followed by "deviance...bestiality...sado-masochism...perversion." Is "sexual deviancy" all you can think about? How long have you been obsessed with this topic? Since you are so well versed in VA mental health programs, I suggest you avail yourself of their services.
"she's still entitled to being treated with decency rather than derision"
The government's job is not to force people to treat others with decency.
It is an employee's obligation to accomodate the desires of their employer. Employers shouldn't be forced to hire someone who willfully presents themself in a freakish manner. Transgenders should look for employers who are comfortable with their appearance and, barring that, should act their gender at work.
"How long have you been obsessed with this topic?"
Since the deviants started trying to make laws for the rest of us.
Anon also said:
“We all know the truth: you can tell a guy is a guy even after all the surgery and hormones and drugs.”
Some you can, some you can’t. Truth is, some “biological females” have trouble passing as women… just go to my Wal-mart! It’s considered rude to tell them to shave that thing on their upper lip though.
I can’t claim to pass 100% of the time myself. However, the guy holding the “Liberty Lost” sign at the gala did tell me he “wouldn’t have known” unless I had told him. I can’t claim to be the prettiest or even most passable t-girl around. (You can judge pass- ability for yourself with a few trans-women here:
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TSsuccesses/TSgallery1.html )
I’m 40 years old, and like a lot of women my age, I try to do the best I can with what I have. As best as I can tell, I pass about 98% of the time – the remaining 2% have had first-hand experience with trans folk before and are more attune to subtle differences that can “clock” someone. Fortunately, all the people like this I’ve met so far realize this is just me being me… not some sexual deviant out to steal people’s precious bodily fluids.
Anon also said:
“Transgenders should look for employers who are comfortable with their appearance and, barring that, should act their gender at work.”
Good point – I’ll be running late for work again if I don’t put on my make-up and hose right now. I’ll have to chat later.
Peace,
Cynthia
Ralphie's playing hardball, trying to the Dem VP nomination:
"Speaking with Colorado's Rocky Mountain News, Ralph Nader accused Obama of attempting to both "talk white" and appeal to "white guilt" in his quest to win the White House.
"There's only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate. He's half African-American," Nader told the paper in comments published Tuesday.
"I haven't heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. What's keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn't want to appear like Jesse Jackson?"
Nader also said Obama is making a conerted effort not to be "another politically threatening African-American politician."
"He wants to appeal to white guilt. You appeal to white guilt not by coming on as black is beautiful, black is powerful. Basically he's coming on as someone who is not going to threaten the white power structure, whether it's corporate or whether it's simply oligarchic. And they love it. Whites just eat it up."
Nader formally entered the presidential race last spring, expressing disappointment with both remaining Democratic candidates at that time."
This election is going to be a barrel of monkeys. The only thing that could make it funner is if Hillary got the VP nomination.
After all, the Clintons were trailblazers in the field of political entertainment.
Throw in Lieberman or Huckabee as the Republican VP choice and the hilarity will be endless! I'm not sure we could take it.
"Well, thank you for the morning filth Anon. Let's see, morning coffee followed by "deviance...bestiality...sado-masochism...perversion." Is "sexual deviancy" all you can think about?"
Frist, you're a disgusting bigot. Sado-masochists and beasties have no choice about who and how to love. Even, the APA says so. Trying to cure these people just causes stress and leads to negative self-image. Look at the scientific evidence for once and drop your pro-hate stance. You'll feel better about yourself.
"They're going to arrest these people for getting married? That's a crime?"
Number 1, they didn't get married. They are two guys and so, by definition,they can't get married to each other.
Number 2, remember these two are criminals. They lied to the authorities to pull off this charade.
This is one of those unfortunate instances where a lengthy incarceration is called for in order to maintain social order.
It doesn't have to a solely punitive experience. They could be given sensitivity training in prison to help them learn more positive ways to relate to other members of society.
yeah, that would be a win-win for everyone
Barr's presidential bid makes solid GOP states competitive
Stephen Dinan THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Bob Barr's Libertarian presidential campaign is poised to play a serious role in this year's election, with early polls showing him taking enough votes from Sen. John McCain to give Democrats a chance to win states that should be safely Republican.
Polls in Georgia and North Carolina over the past two weeks show Mr. Barr winning 8 percent and 6 percent, respectively, of the presidential vote. That would help keep presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama within striking distance of Mr. McCain in those states, which together account for more electoral votes than Florida, Pennsylvania or Ohio.
"Barr does throw a monkey wrench in Republican plans in states people otherwise take for granted as Republican states," said Matt Towery, chief executive officer of InsiderAdvantage, an Atlanta-based polling and political analysis firm that conducted the Georgia poll, and one-time political adviser to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
Ralphie can play all the hardball he wants; he doesn't decide who will be Obama's running mate. Obama decides that himself and you can rest assured it will not be Ralphie.
This election is going to be a barrel of monkeys.
Careful Anon, your racist complexion is showing. You just don't like anybody who's different than you do you?
traditional liberals are racist
Nader is a traditional liberal
it's going to be fun to see trraditional liberals exposed for what they are
I'm not racist in any sense
Take off your hood.
"Anonymous" said: "This is one of those unfortunate instances where a lengthy incarceration is called for in order to maintain social order...It doesn't have to a solely punitive experience. They could be given sensitivity training in prison to help them learn more positive ways to relate to other members of society." Couldn't have been spoken better by Goebbels, Himmler, Streicher, or Hitler in Germany in the 1930's. You should be more careful about what you say...you may unwittingly be exposing your true agenda!
Diogenes
I see, you suspect all the things I say are really a cover for anti-semitism? Interesting. Keep developing your baseless scenarios. It really helps our side to show what a bunch of shameless nuts you are.
Hate to break it to you, Dio, but this whole idea of sensitivity training is common in areas with laws banning discrimination against sexual deviance. What happens is some gay group sues and then as part of the settlement the company being sued is required to let a bunch of fringe lunatics come in and conduct a gay propaganda program that all employees are required to go to.
Always amusing when androgynuts play the Nazi card, btw. Many of the atrocities committed by the early Nazi party were initiated by a couple of gays who ran the military wing of the party and got nasty whenever anyone disagreed with them. This all-out no-limits approach to those who disagree seems an always present element of gay psychology.
Andrea- not anon
My new agenda- 1. worry about my marriage because gay people can marry in California 2. Try to see what genitalia other bathrooms users have so I can be sure only people with the "right" sort are using the stall next to mine 3. Be grateful that I am not connected in any meaningful way with people like MN anon and the showernuts.
Uh, Andrea, in order to have an agenda, you have to be able to remember where you parked the car.
"Many of the atrocities committed by the early Nazi party were initiated by a couple of gays who ran the military wing of the party and got nasty whenever anyone disagreed with them."
Ah yes, a clear link between same gender attraction and the desire to commit genocide. This coming from a person who bases their "Christian morality" on a Biblical death threat.
"This all-out no-limits approach to those who disagree seems an always present element of gay psychology."
Such hypocrites. Don’t they also believe this is a “Christian nation,” and want to teach intelligent design in schools, and throw themselves in jail for “committing” the act of sodomy?
One wonders where they were for the lesson on projection.
"Ah yes, a clear link between same gender attraction and the desire to commit genocide."
Well, Auntie Em, you know I wouldn't have brought it up except one of your gay friends here had the nerve to compare traditional social mores with Nazism.
Therefore, we must point out that facts are facts. Nazism arose in the first society in modern times to completely tolerate open homosexuality and a couple of gays were among its earliest founders and the architects of some of the nastiest policies.
That's the facts.
This blog has as its mission teaching the facts.
“one of your gay friends here had the nerve to compare traditional social mores with Nazism.”
Why the nerve of some people to compare traditional death threat social mores with the traditional death threat social mores of Nazism!
You sad fellow.
To you, anyone who disapproves of you has issued a "death threat".
Do you wonder why some suspect homosexuality and mental illness are linked? This kind of delusion is not a healthy response to societal disapproval.
“You sad fellow.
To you, anyone who disapproves of you has issued a "death threat".”
Correct. Anyone who approves of Leviticus 20:13 as even part of their Biblical basis against “homosexuality,” has issued a death threat.
Hmmm..I see what you mean. They're all out to get you.
How have you managed to elude all these people who have issued a death threat against you, Em?
Do you put on glasses to disguise yourself whenever you leave the house?
What does your psychiatrist say about all this?
Hate to break it to you, Dio, but this whole idea of sensitivity training is common in areas with laws banning discrimination against sexual deviance. What happens is some gay group sues and then as part of the settlement the company being sued is required to let a bunch of fringe lunatics come in and conduct a gay propaganda program that all employees are required to go to.
Oh what's the matter Anon? Did your big bad boss make you take some tolerance training? It's clear you're still projecting as a result of your internalized homophobia.
What does your reparative therapist quack have to say about all this?
"Anonymous" - Just what is your purpose for posting here? Are you trying to convince us that you are intelligent? that you are not a bigot? that you are not homophobic or transphobic? Do you think we find your snide, rude, and ill-tempered (and definitely Anti-Christian) comments and personal attacks against other bloggers here funny? attractive? arguable? You speak nothing but dreck and have not one important or significant or meaningful comment to ever make here.
You are pitiful and at your core, a very, very sad person. Take your toys and play in your own trash-strewn yard with others of your ilk! WE are SO TIRED of you.
RT
"Just what is your purpose for posting here?"
In this specific case, I was originally refuting Jim's attack on the state of Virginia's position that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman.
I defended Virginia's right to enforce their laws when a couple of guys defrauded the state and the reaction I get from the bizarre people who side with TTF is that I'm a Nazi. This absolutist mindset is so typical of gay radicals: you're either an anarchist or a fascist and there is no neutral ground.
These two guys in Virginia committed fraud. They need to get acquainted with a jail cell.
The CRG committed fraud when they told Montgomery County citizens that Bill 23-07 is about bathrooms. They need to get acquainted with jail cells.
The judge disagreed.
Should he go to jail, too?
You gays are nuts and liars.
Thanks for making the case for us!
"This absolutist mindset is so typical of gay radicals: you're either an anarchist or a fascist and there is no neutral ground."
If the shoe fits…
that's for confirming the obvious validity of my point, slob
"that's for confirming the obvious validity of my point"
Except that there’s a fundamental difference between your fascism, and what you perceive to be fascism on my part.
This seems to be something that you are either unwilling to acknowledge, or are incapable of understanding.
"This seems to be something that you are either unwilling to acknowledge, or are incapable of understanding."
That is the question, isn't it? Do people like Anon not recognize their own belief system as classic fascism, or are they trying to draw our attention away from the fact?
Post a Comment
<< Home