“The last nail in my political future” – supporting gay marriage
Yesterday, the president, our first black president, finally took the correct stand on gay marriage- to support it. It’s not about god, the bible or religion, it’s about equal rights. The same equal rights that were so long in coming to the black community, are starting to have a chance for the LBGT community.
On twitter and Facebook- I made some comments- including that this may be the biggest small business stimulus package the president could make- florists, wedding photographers, caterers, DJ’s, tux rentals, limo rentals, event facilities- all could see huge rises in business if we follow through and make it the law of the land- without any federal “stimulus” involved.
A few haters came out on Facebook, including from a friend who happens to be black and a minister.
David watch this. You may be putting a nail in your political future in the city.
a second message
Well you remember you said this when we you are soliciting the ministers I influence. Wrong position to take because I will tell them not to support you! There are more people who oppose this postion (sic) than you think. And yes there are a lot of churchs (sic) that are standing with us in our Moral Majority and Traiditonal(sic) Family Values. You are out
I never knew I was in. I’ve been to the screening committee of the ministers several times- and never once been endorsed.
And, my final answer to him:
I believe “single issue” voters are one of the biggest problems this country faces. Judging candidates on issues that have ZERO bearing on the office they are running for (when I’m running for City Commission for instance) is a huge mistake.
It’s polarizing this county and causing us to ignore the much bigger issues. Gay marriage won’t make one iota of difference to most of the people who will vote against me over it-
it’s like you worrying about your next door neighbor’s back yard flower selection-
the current city commission offers you zero candidates btw- so what now?
There are many white voters who didn’t want to give equal rights to “niggers” either- how do you feel about that?
Yep, I used the “n” word.
Unfortunately for me, I don’t really make decisions based on either my political future- or what’s politically correct for my livelihood either. I run a small business in this town- and have attacked many of the biggest possible accounts in this town and have been turned down even for working with charities because I have attacked the “powers that be.” We once did a project for Caresource- that will never happen again after my post comparing the crimes of their CEO vs. the crimes of a leader of the black ministers. I dug into the Dayton Development Coalition and their hiring of Lori Turner’s firm (wife of Congressman Turner) on a no-bid contract and went after improper campaign donations to Steve Austria by the local poster child for misguided corporate welfare – Qbase (and no, I don’t have time to get you all those links). I’ve had the nerve to go and look for work from Teradata’s COO (former chair of DDC) and look him straight in the eye after mocking their status as a public welfare leach (to his credit- he took the meeting and didn’t have a problem looking me right back in the eye- and yes, Bruce, my firm does better work than what you’ve been buying, but that’s your problem).
Last Saturday night I got called every name in the book by an elected official, because I’d been too hard on him in a post. I’d betrayed our friendship, and he was right- I was too hard and I did a quiet edit of the post (David Lauri, please leave this alone- I know you love to show off your Google cache recovery skills).
It’s not easy sticking your rear end on the broiler over and over. Some would say I’ve cooked my goose by speaking out, and others would say I’m toughening the meat. But unlike the president, I can’t waltz into George Clooney’s mansion and pick up $12 mill the next day. There are a few readers who’ve gone out of their way to send some business my way, despite “the risk”- TP, BW, LW, – I thank you. I hope the work that we at The Next Wave have done has been worth your risk.
I also have to thank the one elected official brave enough to endorse what I do and mean to this community on video: Stacy Thompson of the Dayton Board of Education. When I put the call out asking for support, she was the only one who stepped up.
If my endorsement of equal rights was the last nail in my “political future” I guess I should be writing my obituary now, because I’ve never done any of this for a political future- I’ve done it because I wanted to speak out for truth, justice and to prod our community into thinking beyond the drivel that has passed for a discourse on the future of our region. I don’t do this for me, I do it for us, you included. This site is my hammer, and thanks to the shallowness of some of our loudest voices in this community, I’ve got an endless supply of nails.
And, if you want to see this voice grow stronger, and you need better marketing, I have four employees who would be very grateful for a chance to work with you. The nails, unfortunately, do hurt them.
Sadly, courage is often a trait seen in hindsight by the masses. You, my friend, ooze it.
So then, this group of ministers/churches will NOT be supporting Obama for President or Wagner for mayor then… Correct ?
“…an elected official, because I’d been too hard on him in a post. I’d betrayed our friendship, and he was right- I was too hard and I did a quiet edit of the post”
Solution: Re-read your post/comments multiple times before hitting “Submit”. I’ve suggested this before… maybe one day you’ll consider it as constructive criticism and not negatively.
@Amy in Ohio- that’s the nicest thing anyone’s said in a long time on this site to me. Thank you.
@Hall- I would guess it means they won’t back Leitzell, Whaley or M… either. They may have to dig up one of their own to run. Then they will find out that they aren’t a force in local politics anymore.
And- yep- I know that:
But, isn’t that why so many of my readers come to watch? It’s not easy to do this and keep all of you informed and entertained in my “spare time.”
The Next Wave does beautiful work and at very reasonable prices, my clients are always thrilled by what your team creates, David.
>to prod our community into thinking beyond the drivel that has passed for a discourse on the future of our region.
Amen. Hammer away, my friend.
@Teri- I guess I forgot you and a few others for their support- of The Next Wave- KW, BH, BD or PB, PS, DH etc… I’m sorry if I left any out.
We do appreciate it.
Your black pastor friend might want to read this article by Rachel Held Evans, “How to win a culture war and lose a generation,” in which she says:
She continues:
Christianists who let gay marriage make them crazy really come across as rather un-Christ-like. It’s as if in their Bibles all Jesus did was rant about the queers, rather than preaching that we should give away our possessions and feed the hungry.
Jesus Christ, I could understand it if they were working on constitutional bans on divorce, something on which Jesus is quoted in the Bible, but I can’t understand how queers marrying can be the number one concern of black pastors in Dayton. Give me a frakkin’ (Esrati-approved epithet which really means what we all know it means) break!
David you are truly a brave person! Keep rolling!
Sometimes you have to “do the right thing”, not the political popular thing. Many-a-progessives lost elections because of their stance on racial civil rights. They lost, but the country won. Sometimes winning & losing really is not that important. Marriage & gay equality are on history’s winning tide and bigots will be left behind…eventually.
Onward
Does the average Christian church preach more hatred of gay people than Obama’s church preaches hatred of whites, Jews and the USA? Is gay marriage more “immoral” than two cousins getting married? Is it more “immoral” than someone having 5 wives? Let’s leave all the hypocrites and bigots behind.
In my experience, most people who preach “their beliefs” (read as “push their ideology/opinion on others) are generally the biggest hyprocrites. The funny part is, they don’t see their own hypocrisy.
Well Reality Doug while some of your premise I may agree with specifically
Is gay marriage more “immoral” than two cousins getting married? Is it more “immoral” than someone having 5 wives? Let’s leave all the hypocrites and bigots behind.
This STATEMENT is total bullshit and you lose credibility:
than Obama’s church preaches hatred of whites, Jews and the USA?
You see President Obama never espouses that, never teaches his children that and is by all accounts a good and searching soul…..
So Reality Greg agrees with your conclusion, your premise is bigoted and ignorant. Maybe you did not meant it this way?
…and now we find out a teenage Mitt Romney bullied a fellow gay classmate (up to cutting his hair while held down by other classmates) to the point of traumatizing him.
What…
a….
dick!
Obama’s reverend said this is the U.S. of KKK. If instead his reverend said this is the U.S. of (insert horrible anti gay slur) would the gay community still support him? Obama said his Mom was a “typical white person” and acted certain ways because is was “bred into her experience”? If his Mom was gay and he said she was a “typical gay person” would the gay community support him?
Doug,
I am glad I am not black, but even this whitey sees institutional racism in the US and the Republican Southern Strategy is based on endemic racism in the white community. (I can bash the black community too, but whitey has the power and the money, so standards of evaluation are based on that premise).
So what is wrong with the “typical” in describing a person. I am a typical heterosexual, and I would not take offense at that and I doubt the typical “homosexual” has a problem with typical, unless your use of typical is made as a negative, which you seemingly do.
Keep on with the mental gymnastics, but you dislike Obama and that’s all there is to it.
It appears that Romney was a tool in High School…..I have found that if you are a Tool in HS, you are probably still a Tool. I find it interesting that the possibility that Mr. Lauber died of Cancer…..I keep wondering if drinking, smoking and stress contributed to that condition. If I were Doug, I would say that Romney contributed and caused his Cancer, and maybe he did.
I would have rather glided in Romney’s shoes than toughed out in Obamas, but I would not ever want to be a Tool like Romney, no matter the shoes worn. And yes I can be a Dick, but only after First Blood is drawn…or at least I try :)
One of the greatest peices on gay rights from…Howard Stern! Worth a listen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhVRqxqk7ZU
I’d like to know who this person is, David. I’d hate to make the mistake of taking him seriously in the future.
To state what everyone knows: you’re on the right side of history, and your detractor’s rank bigotry will be an increasingly heavy anchor around his neck going forward. Don’t apologize for your basic human decency.
remember when the “abomination” was inter-race marriage? that wasn’t even that long ago. there’s even a very few who still believe it to be such. fortunately those attitudes have diminished just like negative attitudes toward gay marriage are also diminishing. so, for those who oppose it, how does it feel to once again be a part of a dying breed? how does it feel to be on the wrong side… again? what are you so afraid of? what makes you think you’re so smart that you should have a say in other people’s lives?
I personally am for gay marriage or at least some type of legal union if you don’t want to call it marriage. What I do not support is bigotry and hatred of Christians or conservatives by liberals and gays who voted for a president that has a rich history of being influenced by bigots. Don’t whine about what some reverend says when you line up to vote for a racist black guy that was a member of a disgusting bigoted church and calls a racist scumbag reverend his spiritual mentor.
I have serious questions on what “gay marriage” implies. If the gay couple wants children how do they go about getting the children? If they adopt unwanted children that is one scenario with one set one set of considerations. If they buy children from a foreign country that is another scenario with another set of considerations (applies to traditional couples as well). If they use science and the wealth privileges of this society to get a child via a sperm donor that is another scenario. In the last example you are intentionally depriving the child of a biological parent and I do not support that in any way, shape or form. A child without two involved biological parents is less than ideal for any child and should not be supported or celebrated in anyway. Please don’t use the absurd argument that because some strait parents’ abuse or neglect their kids that it makes it ok to lower the standard for others. Let’s start debating what gay marriage means for children.
I truly thank an unbiased god that I had an involved biological Dad in my life. It would be a great tragedy for me if my Dad was just a sperm donor and my Mom and another woman raised me. There is simply no way around that fact for the responsible parents of this world.
“Reality Doug”
Gay and lesbian couples are forming families, with children, using all the methods you cite, and more (the most common is children from a previous relationship). The question isn’t “what do we think of this” (like it’s any of our business), but rather “should we give these families less rights and lower status than everyone else?”
Your faith that there is something magical about biological parents that make them better is not based in merely an opinion, not supported by current research, and as such is not a proper foundation for public policy.
reality Doug – I am glad that you’re for gay marriage, and yes your different scenarios for children of gay parents have differing sets of circumstances that should be considered in each situation. Your last one about artificial insemination, however, seems to ignore the fact that a biological parent would in fact be involved, the mother whose egg would be inseminated artificially. Maybe that’s only one biological parent and is what you’re intending to rail against, but I’d say two loving (gay straight, whatever) parents is always better than one or no loving parents, biological or otherwise. In this world of uncertainty, it’s the best we can hope for… and I don’t consider it a lowered standard, since the healthily married and loving husband and wife scenario was very uncommon a long time ago (really any time pre-1900), and is increasingly so these days.
I think your opinion on Obama’s relationship to Rev. Wright is perhaps ill-informed, but who’s to say… really no one besides Wright and Obama know the truth there, and certainly Obama’s policies haven’t reflected any sort of hatred toward white people. I would never whine about Wright’s opinions, he grew up in a time where he is very entitled to have negative views toward white people… I know I would if I were in his shoes. (White) People seem to forget that civil rights for black people occurred only a little over 50 years ago, that’s less time than my dad has been alive. There’s lots of black people still around that remember Jim Crow, and they have every right to be skeptical of white America. Slavery itself only ended around 150 years ago, that’s a grandma and a half. When I think about these things I kind of hate white people too… and I’m white as snow. There’s still many people and places in this country that don’t respect civil rights for all. Doug, you and I will never understand what these people went (and in some cases still go) through, so you’re opinions are far less valid about the matter than Rev. Wright’s.
I knew what I’d say about Wright would be unpopular among Dayton’s denialists… your thumbs downs only prove my point further. Try arguing with words though, I know it’ll be hard.
“Political extremeism involves two prime ingredients: an excessively simple diagnosis of the world’s ills, and a conviction that there are identifiable villans behind it all.” John W. Gardner
“The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. the government
lied” Rev. Jeremiah Wright
hey now… i didn’t say i agree with everything Wright has said… nor did Obama, in fact he explicitly has said he totally disagrees with much of what he’s said. I only said he has every right to be skeptical of white America given white America’s fairly recent (and in some cases current) treatment of black people, gays and other minorities.
Good comment on Wright, Dan.
The people who get all worked up about Wright are very selective. Politicians have been kissing the rings of obnoxious, offensive, grenade-throwing religious leaders forever. I’d rather they didn’t, but whatever; that’s the way things work. If you only have a problem with it when it’s a black religious leader, that says more about you than anything else. Romney just spoke at Liberty; I’m sure Falwell could hold his own against Wright in an offensiveness contest. Hell, aspiring national politicians often go speak at Bob Jones University, home of a no interracial dating rule. And you get worked up about Wright? Spare me the phony, selective outrage.
Doug contends that “a child without two involved biological parents is less than ideal for any child and should not be supported or celebrated in anyway.”
Dan Savage recently wrote about this issue in his blog post of May 11, “I Hope Tony Perkins Doesn’t Pray to Jesus With That Mouth,” taking Tony Perkins to task for having claimed, “again and again, that there are ‘studies’ out there that prove children do better in homes with ‘a mom and a dad.'” Savage said:
Savage continued:
You can refer to all the government studies you want to, they don’t pass the common sense test. Ask any reader of this blog that was raised by two biological parents and ask them if they would have been better off replacing one of them with a non-biological parent. Especially people that are middle aged and have some wisdom in life. Any heterosexual male that had an involved biological Dad can especially validate the importance of my claim. Depriving a child of a biological parent should be viewed as a much less desirable situation regardless of the reason in my opinion.
Can you read, Doug? For while you say that I’m referring to “government studies,” had you actually bothered to go to either the second link or the third link in my comment above you’d have seen that neither refers to “government studies.” The first refers not to a government study but rather to a five year review by sociologists Stacey and Timothy Biblarz of the University of Southern California, who conclude: No research supports the widely held conviction that the gender of parents matters for child well-being. Children being raised by same-gender parents, on most all of the measures that we care about, self-esteem, school performance, social adjustment and so on, seem to be doing just fine and, in most cases, are statistically indistinguishable from kids raised by married moms and dads on these measures. The second refers not to a government study but rather to a study by Nanette Gartrell, a professor of psychiatry at the University of California at San Francisco, and Henry Bos, a behavioral scientist at the University of Amsterdam, who were surprised to discover that children in lesbian homes scored higher than kids in straight families on some psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, did better academically and were less likely to have behavioral problems, such as rule-breaking and aggression. Moreover your implication that gay and lesbian couples seek to “depriv[e] a child of a biological parent” shows an incomplete understanding of how many queer couples get kids. While it’s true that some queer couples are able to buy sperm from donors or to hire surrogates, many queer couples adopt kids that heterosexual people are carelessly creating. Just as gay marriage is not the problem with the institution of heterosexual marriage (those really concerned about the sanctity of heterosexual marriage should ban heterosexual divorce), so too is queers having kids not the problem with the 408,425 children in foster care in the United States. Want to fix the problem of kids in foster care? Banning gay adoption won’t fix it — putting birth control in the water so breeders… Read more »
“Reality Doug”– First, what do you mean by government studies? The studies David Lauri linked to were not conducted by a government agency, they were conducted by private researchers and published in non-government, peer-reviewed scholarly journals. I’m not sure why it matters, unless you think the goverment is incompetent to conduct such a study, but this is independent scholarly research we’re talking about here. As for the “common sense” test, our species is inflicted with a condition known as confirmation bias. We have beliefs and worldviews, and we become attached to them. When we confront evidence that supports your worldview it re-enforces it, and when we confront evidence that doesn’t fit, we discount it or waive it away. Your challenge question reveals the cognitive blinders of confirmation bias. You ask: Ask any reader of this blog that was raised by two biological parents and ask them if they would have been better off replacing one of them with a non-biological parent. As it turns out, I’m a reader of this blog, and I can say with some certainty that I would take that bargain. It just so happens that one of my biological parents is a terrible person who has no business raising children. Replacing him with random dude off the street would have improved the quality of my childhood in at least 98% of cases. Now, I’m not normal, but I’m also that unusual–the world has plenty of lousy people, and a good number of them become biological parents. It’s difficult to believe you’re not aware of this, but your question suggests you deny it’s even possible. I expect your conviction comes from the following observation. Most children raised by 2 biological parents are also raised in conditions of stability and consistency. What your observation–most people like their biological parents and appreciate them–can’t tell us is whether it’s the biology that’s doing the positive work, or the consistency. That’s why we have to do the study–our casual observations aren’t reliable. Be honest–how many people do you know who were raised by a stable, consistent family with 2 same sex… Read more »
Esrati.com visitors who like to read (as opposed to those who prefer to rely only on “common sense”) might enjoy two recent articles by Chicago Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg. The first, “A mother’s work is never done (especially with 4 kids under 3),” is a profile for Mother’s Day that he wrote about a stay-at home mom. The mom in question happens to be a lesbian, but she wasn’t chosen because she’s a lesbian, and, while the fact that her partner’s a woman is mentioned in the piece, it steers clear of politics (unless you think that merely talking about lesbian families is political). In the second article, “Gay marriage bans are faith flexing its muscles,” Steinberg talks about how he came to profile a lesbian family and goes on to talk politics. He says: Rep. Joe Walsh, if you recall, made one of the more popular lunges: claiming that gays make bad parents. That isn’t true. But even if it were true — are we now not letting people marry based on what kind of parents they’d be? Because meth addicts and senior citizens can marry. He goes on to say: I believe most people opposing gay marriage are not bigots — they’re just immersed in their own insular worlds and don’t know any better. As I sat in that small house in Skokie, the thought grew: If only those religious folk could see this family living, reading, loving, praying, tickling together, they wouldn’t try to set their faith as a stumbling block before them. That’s inhuman, and it’s changing. Many religious folks have made the leap; the rest will. Or they’ll die off and their kids will. So my dig at the start of this comment about some people preferring to rely only on “common sense” was wrong-hearted. In the end common sense is why marriage equality will prevail. Doug may go to his grave believing that kids need both a mom and a dad, but the longer queers are out and raising families, the more people will realize that queers raising kids isn’t… Read more »
Society should make sure every male child has an involved father. Promoting anything less hurts society and lowers the standards. A male raised by an involved father will look at his father as a role model. The father can pass the wisdom he has learned in life as a man and function as the ultimate roll model for the child. A man raised by two women will not see either as a male role model because they are not men. We can all clearly see what has happened in the black community with 70% of children being born outside of a marriage and lacking fathers. The child will find a role model other than a loving father that can provide the guidance young man needs in society from a man. It is not evil for gay couples to raise children. It is simply far less desirable than two biological parents raising them.
And when he stated that the sun did not revolve around the earth it was the earth that revolved around the sun he was called a heretic so they could silence the truth.
Reality Doug,
The heliocentric vision of the world was developed via the scientific method, and it directly challenged the conventional wisdom/common sense that just seemed right to most people who could see with their own eyes the sun moving around the earth. People have actually studied how kids turn out when raised by gay and lesbian couples. And it turns out they do just fine! (Or as well as the rest of us, anyway). But that can’t be right, according to you, because it doesn’t conform to how you feel. It’s rather ironic you’d bring up Galileo; it’s apt, but in the precisely opposite direction you seem to think.
Reality Doug there are many heteros whom never should have had children, but they do to check the boxes. They rear terrible children. However, most active parents know it takes a village…..so maybe you did not have the village, maybe you were home schooled or lived in a sheltered world. I do agree with these statements…
“A male raised by an involved father will look at his father as a role model. The father can pass the wisdom he has learned in life as a man and function as the ultimate roll model for the child.”
It means your Father was a bigot and you are too.
Ahh right on time, the left always shows its true colors when pressed. You can’t argue the facts so you use slogans and name calling to silence and bully others. You claim someone bullied you so it is then ok to bully others with names and slogans. The Catholic Church did this to people a long time ago, good job on using the same tactics. Liberals and gays are just as ignorant and hate filled as anyone is on the right proved some of the comments we see on this blog. I am glad Esrati allows me to post the truth anonymously on his site or I would live in fear of being harassed or bullied at work or at home just for speaking freely.
We live in a country where the left demonizes firearms blaming them for some of the 12,000 or so firearm murders in the county. They demand restrictions, background checks and bans calling anyone who disagrees ignorant and racist. In the meantime, gay men spread 30,000 new cases of aids every year. In the name of safety of our citizens, where are the calls for background checks on gay men before they engage in sexual activity just like we do with firearms? In the name of safety where are the calls to shut down gay bars because they help promote the aids epidemic in this country just like people on the left call for gun show bans? I personally have never and would never support restrictions on either group on the grounds that it restricts freedom and promotes division.
It scares me that many on the left today might be the same type of people that were so attracted to the last socialist hate movement in the western world. Everyone is capable of hate and ignorance including gay people just like this famous Nazi.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_R%C3%B6hm
Reality Doug, you state “the left” resorts to name-calling, sloganeering, smears, and taunts…and then, a sentence later, you engage in (wait for it) name-calling, sloganeering, smears, and taunts.
I mean really…awwww forget it. Why argue with the hopeless
You can’t argue the facts so you use slogans and name calling to silence and bully others. You claim someone bullied you so it is then ok to bully others with names and slogans. The Catholic Church did this to people a long time ago, good job on using the same tactics. A few thoughts: “You can’t argue the facts” is particularly absurd, coming from someone who casually dismisses actual scientific research as mere “government studies” and gets his facts from how he feels. The problem with the Catholic Church in Galileo’s case was actual legal persecution of those who believed differently, not name-calling. The problem was also the dismissal of science in the name of “common sense” and widely accepted folk wisdom, not the other way around. This particular historical analogy really isn’t helping you at all. I would also add that it’s an easy, cheap way to avoid serious debate to merely assume your opponents are arguing in bad faith, or are merely bullies, name callers and so on. Your second paragraph seems like a fairly clear effort to change the subject–or to invite insults, to prove you right about how mean those liberals are. I’m going to ignore it (I’m actually not a fan of the liberal position on gun control, anyway, so it’s not directed at me I guess. But that’s not the point.) I haven’t called you any names, or insulted you, and I don’t intend to, no matter how much you bait me. I’ll repeat my challenge: actual, peer-reviewed research has suggested that children raised by a stable same sex couple do just as well, developmentally, as children raised by their two biological parents. You are extremely confident that research is wrong, so much so that you’ll waive it off as mere “government studies” unworthy of consideration, without even bothering to check to see if they are, in fact, government studies. I’d like to hear more about why you are able to be so confident. It seems to me you’d need to be personally familiar with a number of children from both groups… Read more »
Doug complains, “You can’t argue the facts so you use slogans and name calling to silence and bully others.”
Doug, we can’t argue the facts because you’re not interested in facts. You’ve been very clear that you care not one whit about studies.
And Doug, you need to learn the difference between bullying and satire. As The Economist pointed out in an editorial, “Christians, gays and bullying: A race to take umbrage,” a few weeks ago when Christianists were whining about Dan Savage’s having “bullied” them:
What power do we homosexuals have against you as a heterosexual? Have we the power to take away your right to marry or to have or adopt children? Use the common sense you claim to love so much, man; we’re a minority, you’re a majority. I can certainly make fun of you, but I cannot bully you or silence you.
Greg Hunter, just FYI. In this society does being called a Nig%$r, a F@g&%t, a racist or a biggot have a more hurtful and damaging impact? If I disagree with gay people should I call them F@g*&ts? If I don’t like what a black person has to say should I call them a Nig%$r? If I don’t like what a woman has to say should I call her a whore or a the “C” word? Everything that you say that you are not is exactly what you are. Liberalism is simply a biggoted hate filled political religion. Free your minds from it. I will show you the way.
Well I guess you are right Doug, I used bigot in the manner you describe, but they way you come off on your statements and you bandy the term Liberalism like it is a stupid thing to be but I will have pity on you because I see that you are challenged, conservative and homophobic, which means you are probably just dumb. May God have Mercy on Your Soul.
A new study finds links between low intelligence and racism, prejudice and homophobia
Here’s a fun CollegeHumor video on Obama’s coming out.
That new study you refer to Greg must explain the large number of black people who attend Rev. Wright’s church and follow Louis Farrakhan that hate gays, immigrants and white people that all vote Democrat.
I see that you are a typical ignorant liberal, that is most likely bitter about being a woman born into a man’s body, that is bigoted towards logical heterosexuals, Christians, good schools, men, the military and the local police and stands along side the pro irresponsible welfare moms, racist black people, Marxists, lazy incompetent teachers, ex cons, Muslims that hate Jews and Christians, illegal immigrants, drug dealers, stoners, bitter gay people and every other hate filled idiot in the country that voted for Obama. Keep on hating it seems to work for you and your “tolerant” and “inclusive” opened minded friends.
Well Doug I have to hand it to you…it took 12 years for my ex-wife to feel the same way you do in a few posts….
Geez…. I have so many options….
For instance… I do like sticking my [deleted for obscenity] of a wonderful, willing woman who chooses not to have another child, so maybe I am a Man born into a women’s body……
I also like a good [deleted] while getting a good [deleted]……
Of course I also believe I got a GREAT Education because the Womens Rights Movement had not depleted my school of OVERQUALIFIED female teachers and the DRAFT Deferment for Male Teachers subject to the Military Industrial Complex’s desire to fight the Vietnam war provided me with the Education required to overcome the bigotry and ignorance foisted upon me by my Southern Baptist upbringing…., so I wish you would have had the same experiences as me because I detect a somewhat intelligent creature lurking behind the rhetoric you espouse……
I know this will be deleted, but I loved writing and thinking about it…..Silence should be the appropriate response to your CRAZY rant ole Dougie boy……but the email will go out prior to the deletion…..
Doug’s frothy ranting about “name calling” and “biggoted hate filled political religion” and “bitter[ness” made me think of another Esrati.commer’s phrase “irony button on” for some reason.
Reality Doug would be the “esrati.com comedian of the year” if all of his comments weren’t hidden due to massive unpopularity. This guy’s managed to out-blue the regular conservative visitors to the board. Reality check reality Doug… you can’t even gain support for your hypocritical views from the non-liberals that visit here. Perhaps it’s time to recognize your own narrow mindedness.
It’s a real shame these kids are being raised by their non-biological parents. The boys, especially, are being horribly deprived by the lack of a male parent. How terrible for them!
What you’re asking us to believe, reality doug, is that these people are inferior parents, in spite of many studies that say otherwise, based on what you feel in your gut is right. You don’t have any evidence–anecdotal or otherwise–that it’s biology rather than stability and permanence that produces good results for children. I understand that you don’t like being called a bigot, and I won’t call you one. (I don’t know you, and people are complicated.) But what is clear is that you’re comfortable holding bigoted views, in the face of disconfirming evidence.
I think gay marriage is awesome. Homosexuals have every right to experience the domestic relations courts for themselves;-). Live and let live….
Today’s Columbus Dispatch has an interesting article, “Gay families struggle to safeguard adopted kids.” Perhaps the funnest quote:
Dayton mayor Gary Leitzell shares some views in the most recent Dayton City Paper on his views on equal rights and on whether states should be allowed to vote to restrict LGBT citizens’ right to marry. I found his comments so interesting that I wrote a blog post about them.