Comments on Who won the debate and the ? of Gay Marriage?

Go to American loudmouth - Add a comment - Go to Who won the debate and the ? of Gay Marriage?

mordent that was really weak and poorly thought ou

I married my wife because I love her and she is the perfect person for me. I really cannot picture my life without her in it. We avoid her father as much as possible. I will sit with her grandmother, who would be the most likely one to have argument with, but we learned just not to bring up politics because the one time we did it just was not comfortable. I doubt I could ever have nay kind of meaningful exchange with her father, he is a total idiot with no clue at all about life.

While my wife very much hates her father, she married me because she loves me. Many of her friends are jealous of our relationship. We are great together and the only level her family issues come into it all is because my family is healthier than hers was and she needs that.

To go and try to attack my relationship with my wife in such a fashion is really about as sad as it gets. Can you sink any lower?

As for the health of children raised by unmarried parents or by one parent or homosexuals... Where are you getting this from? I have known far to many kids raised by one parent or by unmarried parents who have turned out just fine. I fact all the kids I know who have really been messed up the most have been raised in the more strict, 'traditional' households.

I have already seen for myself that kids raised by homosexuals are just as healthy as any other children out there. They are NOT more likely be gay, but they are more likely to be tolerant of all others. Not judging or generalizing people in childish ways.

Your 'commie' comment makes no sense at all. Where do you get the idea they don't understand 'purpose'. I very much understand 'purpose', although I am not a 'commie'. My guess is that in your pure ignorance, you are going and labeling all that is liberal and being 'commie' though. Of course if all life is suppose to be about is 'purpose' then it is as meaningless as it gets. Just enjoying life for the sake of enjoyment may not have a 'purpose' but it is meaningful. You claim to enjoy sex, yet here you are saying that sex with out procreation is 'chaotic'. So any sex that does not create a child should be viewed as a waste of time by the logic you posted here. I am not about to believe in such stupidity myself. I enjoy sex way too much.

I know you didn't say that black people were white trash. I made the remark I made because I found it hard to take you seriously and it would have been real easy to take what you said that way. In fact I find that harder and harder to do at every turn. You clearly just are unfocused and confused about , well everything.

If we are to take 'white trash' as a whole and the 'blacks' as a whole. I can very honestly say that there is a higher percentage of those I would call 'white trash' who blame society for their troubles than blacks. Hell I don't know of any who I consider 'white trash' who do not blame the problems on everyone else, while I have know a great deal of blacks who do no such thing. I would honestly say that part of being labeled 'white trash' ahs to do with the attitude of blaming everyone else for your problems.

As for suggesting you to be white trash, that was going of the same logic you have presented before about how one should only defend a group that one is part, other wise you are just being 'politically correct'. Since you won't allow me to defend homosexuals because I am not one, then you should not be defending white trash unless you are one.

And the difference between 'white trash ' and 'Nigger' is not a cop-out at all, but a realistic difference in the actual usage of the terms. I can call black people 'black people' and get the needed message across (In fact I have never once found a time when I need to use 'nigger' to get my message across), yet I cannot think of a term that works better for my use than 'white trash' when that is the actual group I am referring to.

And yes, I do know many people who I would view as being 'white trash'. Not all of them live in trailers mind you. But the fact is I know a great many people up and down the spectrum of class. Once more you make yourself look more naive by admitting you do not associate with a larger verity of people, showing just how limited your understanding of humanity really is. I rarely argue with the people I do know however, even if they are the most annoying of the bunch. I have just learn how to get along with people in general, no matter their religious ideas, political views or station in life. I admit, here on Blogit I am more confrontational than in real life. It is easier to do such when you are not face to face with the person.

And you are really as off as you have ever been when you claim I am trying to be 'that poor black kid' or 'that gay guy who can't get married' when I stick up for the rights and freedoms of others. I do such because I like freedom and wish to do all I can to keep freedom alive and healthy in this country. If other groups start having their freedom taken away form them, if they start to get profiled and generalized, then that means it will be easier in the future for others to take away more rights from other groups and sooner or alter some group may try to come after my rights and freedoms. If freedom is to work, then we all have to do all we can to insure that everyone is given their needed freedoms as way to insure that freedom for all gets protected in the long run. I guess you have to understand freedom to begin with before you can grasp how it has to be protected for all at every possible level for it to really work.

I actually find it hard to believe that you deal with people at all, let alone a verity of them. You even said you know of no one who lives in a trailer.

How can you enjoy life without enjoying people? The greatest part of enjoying life is to enjoy it with as many people as possible. Without having people around to share the joy with, there really is nothing to enjoy at all. But then of course I am not selfish nor do I place myself above everyone else.

So for me where you get the idea I am either bitter or hateful. Your views on humanity show you to be such. You seem to only care about yourself and disregard more or less everyone else as being contemptible.

And I know I am not gay. I have liked boobies since I was real young, well before puberty actually. There has never been any doubt at all that I was straight. That is one of the reasons why I am fairly sure homosexuals have to be born gay. The way I know I life women would never allow for me to be attracted to men, so for a guy to fall for another guy it has to be something along that same level. My guess is that this is your attempt at humor though.

So why do you have to argue so much? What is it that keeps you engaging in such exchanges as this one?

posted by kooka_lives on October 22, 2008 at 9:47 AM | link to this | reply

You don't want to make sense out of what I'm saying because then you would have to stop arguing which you cannot do because you are a sick individual.

That is why you married a women who has a Republican father. So you can argue. She married you because you would then fight with him. She married you because she hates her father.

Yes I do believe most homosexuality is inborn and everything else you've repeated a hundred times.

Yes you're right one can have kids without getting married but you can see in general what is normal and healthy. Then again you don't want to perceive what is healthy because you are simply not.

If you look at anything you can see it has a purpose. A vagina is mean't to accomadate a penis. The vagina gets wet so this can happen. You can see this process will lead to pregnancy without the luxuries of modern birth control. You can have anal sex but this doesn't appear to have a purpose. It's ass backwards. But again i don't care who does it.

This is what commie's don't understand. Purpose. They think anything can go anywhere and nothing means anything. Chaos and confusion because they're mentally ill. The more mixed up and dysfunctional they are the happier they are.

You also misread a lot. Probably due to a bad attention span. I never said blacks were white trash. I said the percentages of blacks who blame society for their troubles outweighs the white trash in the trailers.

As for me being white-trash. You don't know that I'm white and I may even be gay and just clowning you. Thats what generalizations get you right?

Your reason for validating white trash and keeping nigger a sacred cow is another politically-correct cop-out. You are one walking rationalization after another.

By the way I'm not offended by white-trash or any slurs because I don't get offended. Unlike you I'm not a brainwashed cultural commie who considers some words sacred cows. Your rulebook applies you. To me everything is fair game.

I can tell you this much. I don't live in a trailer nor do I know anyone in a trailer. Why do you? Why do you know or associate with white-Republican trash in a trailer? The polar opposite of a highly successful progressive liberal like yourself? So you can argue with them I guess.

As for you sticking up for people/groups that aren't you. THis is not because of nobility. You identify with these people. You identify with the downtrodden/disinfranchised of our society. In your deranged mind you think you are that poor black kid or that gay guy who can't get married.

You are trained to be this way by the cultural communist media. You think you're some anarchist or a progressive liberal rebel but all you are is brainwashed by the universities and the media. I've told you that your leftist commie nonsense would never be tolerated by Muslims or any other society outside of the West.

Just for the record. I deal with people of all different backgrounds in business and in fun. That does not mean I will not call the world as I see it.

So you can call me racist, homophobe, say I'm full of it, propaganda, and all the rest of it but this is like firing bullets at a vampire.

I have no guilt in anything I say. Do you understand?

By the way I said I love life but that this had nothing to do with humans. That the two were seperate. You misread this also.

And you can call me bitter and hateful and all this but I think this is much more your state than mine.

You are attracted to this kind of discussion for many reasons. You have to argue because this is to some degree your family dynamic.

But the rest of this comes to my next point.

It's about what you're not confronting. The fact is you're gay. If you admitted this to yourself and started living life the way you really wanted to you'd probably be a lot happier.

posted by mordent on October 14, 2008 at 10:51 PM | link to this | reply

Your still not making any sense here

First off it is not illogical to try and get people who do not understand logic to grasp logic. My guess is that such a poorly conceived statement has more to do with fear of opening one's mind that anything else.

Second, marriage in truth has nothing at all to do with having and raising kids. You can be married and not have kids and you can have kids without being married. The human race would keep on going if no one ever came up with the concept of marriage. We would still be having sex and making babies.

Well, here I agree with you fully. Gays can marry all they want and it will not change the fact that they're gay. Of course making such a claim would almost seem to suggest hat you believe that they are born that way. I am also a little lost as to what your point is there.

The repubs I mostly deal with are my wife's family, and I have no real choice in that. Her father is the perfect example of the generalization I made here. He fits it in every respect. I am far superior to him, but that is all about character and has nothing to do with his political stance. As I also said, I know many who do not fit anything close to that generalization, who are wealthy and doing well. You assumption here just does not work at all, and I would like to know where such an foolish idea came from.

I don't think there is high percentage of blacks who are white-trash. You kind of need to be 'white' first.

Actually the problem with word 'nigger', is that it really does not work in the same way 'white-trash' does. 'Nigger' is usually a degrading term for the whole of the people, while 'white-trash' is a term that while degrading, also refers to a more selective grouping of people with-in the category of white. To say 'nigger' really would not be as effective in giving a good description of who you are referring to. Did that offend you because in truth you are 'white-trash' and just don't want to admit it?

Let's see, I am here standing up for the rights of a group of people that I am not a part of, and you wish to say I only care about myself? Yeah, kind of doesn't really make sense there. Btu it is clear that you see humanity that way and are just unable to get past your own bigotry and what is really starting to seem like some form of self-hatred.

As for you piss poor claim about liberals being mentally ill, that was just one hell of a childish opinion there.

I only call ignorant people ignorant. It is not because I disagree with them ,but because they are ignorant of something. If they disagree with them but show themselves to not be ignorant, I do not call them ignorant. Same with bigoted, full of BS and a-hole. I only use those terms when it is accurate to use them, and not just because I disagree with a person. Basically I show people the same level of respect they show me first.

You need to read more of my posts then. Read my journal and my blog 'raising kids in the Modern World'.

I look at the world view you keep presenting and I find it next to impossible that you enjoy life at all. I mean to see all people as stereotypes and one dimensional... How would anyone who was not fully self obsessed jerk be able to leave his/her house? It must all seem so pointless to you. I very much understand that you don't and never will care about anyone other than yourself. That is just sad and there is no way a person can truly enjoy life to its fullest with such a mindset.

I couldn't find where I talked about your 'love life' in that last comment of mine, so I am unclear as to what you are talking about there.

What " three witches of eastwick" post are you talking about?

While some people do place themselves in the various stereotypes, that does not make it any better to promote such things. More and more however people are not allowing themselves to fall into any stereotypes,making it so that only the truly ignorant use those childish generalizations. If humanity was to mature and grow as a whole stereotyping would vanish because more and more people would see what a waste it is. The type so generalization you have too often made in your posts and comments is degrading to people just for the sake of being degrading. That only helps to display your need to dehumanize everyone to make yourself feel better.

And there is nothing at all for me to confront. I am very much at grips with who I am. Just because I am able to shows that your views are all more or less empty of true value, you need not take it so personally.

posted by kooka_lives on October 14, 2008 at 8:57 PM | link to this | reply

Re: No Mordent, you really don't understand logic in the least

If my points have no logic than why do you keep discussion? Since you're so logical?

Marriage is more than raising kids but that's it's primary purpose or there would be no human race.

Gays can married all they want it will not change the fact that they're gay.

Not all Repubs are christian and white but most are.

The repubs you know are the ones you choose to know because you feel superior to them but you will stay away from the rich ones to keep your self-esteem and deluded thoughts.

Everything you said about white-trash blaming society for their problems sounds like a lot of blacks also. Tell me Mr. facts what do you think the percentages are?

I see you say white-trash but lets see you say nigger. A slurs a slur right? Don't give me any silly double-standards now.

Liberals don't care about anyone but themselves either. That is human nature but they like to mask it with their sanctimonius BS. Greater good for all crap that they preach.

Liberals are mentally ill and your obsessive/compulsion to try to change people is proof of that.

As far as bitter and hateful I see way more of that out of you than myself. All you seem to do is call everyone who doesn't agree with you ignorant, bigoted, full of BS, even ahole.

Sounds like a low-class liberal. Turning venomous and bitchy when people don't see it their way.

I've read your posts and I don't see all this wonderful stuff about humanity. All I see is you attacking people whose politics are different.

You and you alone possess all the facts and everyone else is misinformed.

I enjoy life more than you can possibly imagine, but that doesn't mean I'm going to put on a fascade and think that everyones wonderful. That's your job. You're a commie

My love of life has nothing to do with the human game or politics. You don't seem to get that the two are seperated.

By the way I remember those three witches of eastwick that you once posted. You don't think I can tell they were librerals just by one sight?

In the end it is humans who put themselves into stereo-types and I can only go by what they show me and what comes out of their mouth.

If you think humans are so deep that's great. Goody for you.

You are full of liberal venom and this is probably because you're not coming to grips with who you really are.

Don't you think it's about time that you confronted this?

posted by mordent on October 13, 2008 at 4:08 PM | link to this | reply

No Mordent, you really don't understand logic in the least

Just this rambling of questions and comments you made has no logic in it, just as your post and more or less all your comments I have seen lack logic. You just obviously do not understand how logic works at all. Liberal are much more logical than conservatives, who play much more on relgious ideas and emotional concepts as well as selfish needs, ignoring the bigger picture and throwing logic and reasoning out the window at every turn.

There is a big logic in defending gay marriage, just as I would defend inter-racial marriage, women's rights, freedom in general and so on. Just because an issue doesn't directly affect me, does not mean I should look the other way and ignore it. I defend the ideas of freedom for all. I believe in freedom myself and so when I see someone who does not seem to 'get it', I try to explain it to them.

Of course the bigger problem here is that you just do not understand marriage in general, as is obvious from your other post I have been commenting it. So if you already do not understand heterosexual marriage as any thing more than people raising kids together, there is no chance at all you would grasped homosexual marriage, since marriage just does not make sense to you. I guess the idea of sharing your life with a another person, having that person be there for you as a constant comfort that helps you though the hard times and is there to share the joy of the good times just is too alien of an idea for you. Basically it is about giving a damn about someone other than yourself. Once you are able to understand that, then I might be able to work with you on seeing the bigger picture.

Oh, and I am not highly sensitive. Not sure where you go that from. A person need not be homosexual to defend the rights of homosexuals. I have already dealt with such pure ignorance here on Blogit many times before. I still do find it telling when a person is unable to grasp why someone would defend the rights and freedoms of a person other than themselves of idea that do not have any direct gain for them.

"most Christian-Republicans are white."

Yeah, and most atheist-liberals are white as well. So if you say anything bad about atheist-liberals, you are attacking the values/beliefs/status of whites as well.

Are all republicans white? NO, Are all Christians white? NO. This is really about the weakest, most ignorant generalization you have yet made here.

And wow are you ever wrong in bringing up the intelligence issue of it all.

Do we want to generalize now? Let's see just how it all goes.

Most republicans I know are very unsuccessful in general. They are general white trash, who do none of their own thinking. They blame everyone else for their problems and just are not willing to put in the effort to do anything of value with their lives. Most are overly relgious to the point where they know nothing beyond what the church tells them. They often only focus on one or two key issues, ignoring the bigger picture completely. When talking about politics they just repeat what they are suppose to believe in and really are unable to defend any tough questions. Those who are wealthy most of he time have inherited that wealth and have never really done an honest day's work in their life.

Now the liberal minded people I know are the ones who are well educated and have learned how to think for themselves. They question things constantly and are always looking at the bigger picture, not caring fully about themselves but also about the needs of others and what is best in the long run. They are hard workers who understands the value of money. When they get ahead in life it is because they earned, not from kissing ass or playing games. They accept people for being different than them, understanding that everyone should be able to live their lives they way they need to in order to be themselves.

Now the thing is that in both those cases, I know many, many who do not fit into such a generalization. Since there are more than enough exceptions there, I would never actually use such generalizations. I know better. Only someone who is clueless about reality and people would ever make such ignorant generalizations.

Nothing you said about liberals fits me or the liberals I know. None of us are bi-polar or depressed. We all very much face reality and they love and enjoy life.

Seriously, what you describe here fits many more conservatives I have known than liberals.

And your 'old saying' is pure BS, conservative propaganda that I have heard mostly used by those older people who wish to switch parties and justify it as being something other than selfishness.

And you don't know people at all. Very few of them fit your depressing view of the world. It is those like you who try to fit everyone into a box, not wishing to see people for who they really are. You give them sad little labels so that you can dehumanize them and place yourself as being better.

You are obviously bitter and hateful. You dislike so much in life that the only way you seem to be able to find joy is in bringing everyone else down. You wire it off as you being 'raw' and ' to the point', but the truth is you are just an a-hole who cares only for himself.

I am at peace with myself. In fact I know very few others who are as comfortable being themselves as I am. I argue because I wish to understand humanity better. I like figuring out what makes people act and think they way they do. I am a writer and getting into people's heads is important to me.

For the record I am not a priest, just an ordained minister. There is a different.

As for why we have the problem with priest molesting boys, that is due to the conservative views on sex that are pushed by certain churches that screw up a person's head. You do not get such problems in the churches where the priests can marry. They are not gay, since the motivations of homosexuals and child molesters are NOT connected. This is a proven fact of psychology. These priests are basically fighting against their own natural urges, in a rather sick form of self mental abuse really. In the end they end up having some of the same problems abused children often develop, which sometimes lead to molesting children.

And no, you are not at all thinking for yourself. You keep on presenting load after load of propaganda and BS. I am offended because you're trying to claim that what you are saying here is your own thoughts, when basically it is the same load of BS keep seeing come from the conservatives, with no real change to the view point.

posted by kooka_lives on October 13, 2008 at 2:25 PM | link to this | reply

Re: You need to learn what logic is.

As far as i'm concerned I've got you down about 10 to 1 in the logic department. Liberals are not motivated by logic but be neurotic emotion. Knee-jerking.

Your posts are that of someone whose obsessive and neurotic. Here's some logic for you...what kind of straight guy persists on trying to sell the concept of gay marriage to another straight man?

Doesn't sound straight to me...now that's not an insult as I can see you're highly sensitive. It's just an observation.

Most of what you said in this post was what you've said already.

By the way if you had any logic you would understand that when you criticize Repubs/Christians you are criticizing whites. Do you know why?

Because mr. statistics most Christian-Republicans are white. It is their values/beliefs/status you are attacking.

Between Repubs and donkeys I believe repubs are more intelligent and much more reality based. They're generally more successful and have healthier mental states. Of course you have limousine liberals that want to sound hip and cool. But there's smart and not so smart in both parties.

Also logic would tell you if disagree with someone then in a sense you are criticizing them just not explaining it so much.

Logic would also tell you that when one criticizes they do have a point to make. That's what criticizm is.

No it is not normal for a man to molest a young girl either. She is not a woman yet and should not draw any sexual arousal from a man. Obviously these people are sick. Gay or straight.

As far as me needing to grow up it is libs that need to grow up. They live in a fantasy world. Completely dellusional. Libs are mentally ill. Schizo, bi-polar, and depressed beyond recognition. Probably because they like all those bad-weather cities. San Francisco, Seattle, New-York.

This is why they need constant idealistic, sanctimonius crap to cheer them up. Liberals hate reality as they're too weak to handle it. They live in child-like dream world where everybody's equal and everybody loves each other. They need to quit smoking dope.

You know the old saying....if you're under 30 and you're not a liberal you have no heart. If you're over 30 and are not a Republican you have no brain. He he.

Please check out my old post the Left. The Party of Death. And read in-depth about how twisted and backwards they really are. You've probably never even realized it as you're too busy following your party line.

No I'm afraid I know people much better than you do. You're just too full of false hope. I've seen long and hard what most people are. Boring, predictable, brainwashed, over-sheltered, weak, spoiled. Always trying to look/say whats cool so they're accepted. Always doing whatever it takes to fit in and placing themselves in some sort of box. Be it Christian, Commie, or baseball hat wearing sports-fan or whatever.

I surround myself with absolute true individuals with strong independent character. A vanguard of human to say the least.

I wouldn't say I'm bitter. Just raw and to the point. I don't pull any punches and don't care about the results.

I'm not interested in being cool. I like it intense and brutally honest. I can tell you I love ripping the social tapestry to pieces. Not because I'm bitter, you see it's just sport for me.

Obviously you enjoy arguing so you're not at peace with yourself. Tell me how come so many priests are busted molesting young boys?

Since you're a priest you should know. Is it because these men were gay and decided to hide in the church out of guilt but couldn't help themselves?

Now I'm not claiming to have the answers on this mind you. THis is your field of expertise so I await your theory as I have pitched mine. I'm just thinking for myself so I hope that doesn't offend you.

posted by mordent on October 12, 2008 at 7:37 PM | link to this | reply

You need to learn what logic is.

I can disagree with the homosexual lifestyle and still think it is fine for them to get married. I disagree with the Catholic lifestyle, yet I have no problem with them hitching up. Do I need to make a list of all the lifestyles I disagree with? According to your logic, I better be against most people getting married because I do not like their lifestyle choices. There is no logic at all in your weak assumption there.

I reading on in your comment here... Do you even have clue one about what you are saying? When I see you write those kind of ideas, I have to wonder if there is any value in trying to get you to see the bigger picture. You are very self-limiting person in regards to your world views.

I should have said "I gain nothing from criticizing gays and non-Caucasians just because they do not share my views." Yes, I criticize Christians (And many other religions, including Muslims, since they are a group of believers) and Republicans (Mostly because that has got to be one of the biggest group of numbnuts this world ahs ever seen) although I would like for you to show me where I have ever once criticize 'whites'. But I make no criticize just 'because'. When I criticize it is because there is a point to make. You seem to think just because I disagree with a lifestyle or religion, that I should try and put it down at every turn. There is nothing to gain from criticizing just to criticize.

You need to grow up. That much is really clear me to me. You live in a very closed off world with little understanding of people or reality. You view people as one dimensional and basically have some of the most depressing views about life and love that I have ever seen. None of your arguments hold any weight and are easily shown to be greatly flawed.

Here is a question, do you consider it a normal sexual activity for straight man to molest a little girl?

It is a FACT that most homosexual men are not normally attracted to little boys, just as most heterosexual men are not attracted to little girls. You cannot truly classify a child molester as being homosexual just because it is man molesting a boy. It is NOT the same kind of behavior.

You are very clearly the one who needs to get out into the world to observe 'so you can learn all you need to know about all types of human beings'. Because right now, you are about as clueless to it all as I have seen in someone claiming to be an adult with as much experiment as you claim to have. Although I am also seeing a very bitter person in some of your other posts. Right now I really am getting the feeling that you just don't like people in general.

posted by kooka_lives on October 12, 2008 at 5:14 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Wow, were you trying to insult me at ever turn in that comment?

If you disagree with homo lifestyle then you disagree with marriage.

Being polite is being politically-correct.

I don't believe men who molest boys are straight. I don't care what stats say. They may be worried about offending gays as well.

True anybody can be a bad baby-sitter but you'll never get hetero society to trust gays more than straights no matter how many stats you hold up.

Straights using condoms but gays not as much? What does that say? Uneducated? Low-self-worth? Sounds like a politically-correct rationalization of rabid sexual behavior.

They don't need to be married to be monogomous or so called legitimize themselves. Their marriage desires are also politically motivated.

"THey don't want to be straight they just want to fit in?" Get married and adopt kids so you can fit in?

Here's a concept for you.....Why not go the whole nine yards and just be straight?

Everyone was more cruel to prisoners in the past.

But Euro's more cruel than muslims? THat means we evolved and they went backwards by your logic.

Nope don't believe your so-called history books either. What happened is euros evolved and they stayed in the stone-age.

Liberal history books always blame whitey for everything. This is more rationalizations of failure plain and simple.

Stronger smarter groups conquer and that's all there is to it whether you like it or not.

You say you gain nothing of criticizing gays/non-caucs. But I've read your posts and you have no problem criticizing Christians/whites/republicans.

That's being politically-correct as those groups are open-game.

But you see I don't care who you criticize. My attitude is go-for-it. However you are politically-correct and all of your points are rationalizations that sound good to liberals but fail the rest of us.

posted by mordent on October 11, 2008 at 2:20 AM | link to this | reply

Wow, were you trying to insult me at ever turn in that comment?

I do my own research and do my own thinking. Just because I look at the facts and use them to form my views does not mean I do not think for myself. That has to be one of the weakest ideas I have ever seen presented here.

Are you saying we should not use facts in creating our views?

My views on gays are not there because I want to be 'politically correct'. I have the views I have because I look at the big picture and found they make the most sense. I gain nothing from criticizing gays and non-Caucasians. so why should I? I have openly in the past said I disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, but if that is the way they feel they need to live, then they should be free to live that way. It is not about being 'politically correct', just rational and polite. I guess I like the idea of freedom too much. Basically what you are saying here is people who understand an believe in freedom are just being 'politically correct'. Once more your are generalizing and the generalization does not stand up to the reality of it all.

You seem to try and suggest both sides here. that homosexuals are both born that way and have a choice. While I know for a fact that some have become gay in order to rebel or because of some trauma in their lives, most homosexuals I have known obviously have had no choice in the matter. Talking to them it is clear they are attracted to members of the same sex and have no desire at all to be with a member of the opposite sex. Just sit and talk about how a woman looks more attractive to you than the gay guy you are talking to and see how that affects him. I did that once without thinking about how the guy was gay, and the look on his face made it clear just how his mind was wired.

I don't for one moment believe that they are trying to straight.That just doesn't make sense. Getting married and raising kids is more likely an attempt at fitting in, without having to change who they really are. I can see the need to find a way to be viewed as an acceptable part of society. But that is not the same as wanting to be straight.

The static's show that actual homosexuals are less likely to be child molesters than straight people. The problem comes from the fact that you often get men molesting boys and the criminal gets classified as being a homosexual, when it fact it is far from being the same thing. Men who molest boys most often do it because they boys are famine and they have no interest in adult men at all. While homosexual men are not attracted to boys, but to other men. The facts are out there if you really want to know them.

As a child I was molested by a teenage girl, the ones that every one uses as babysitters. Do you really want to ask me who I am more likely to leave my boys with? The true answer is that sexuality does not play a part in that at all. I leave them with people I trust. My wife's father will NEVER be left alone with either boy, not because he might sexual molest them, but because he was abusive to my wife when she was young and even after all this time she does not trust him. She also has a great-uncle who is straight, but is the one we figure would be a likely person to sexual molest them due to some stuff that came up a few years a ago, and so that part of her family obviously never is alone with our boys. If I knew a homosexual that well and trusted them, then I would have no problem at all letting my boys be watched by them

As for the AIDS issue, the problem there is that straight people are more likely to use a condom. it makes sense to me that at a time where we were not educating our population correctly about STDs and such, that we had such a problem emerge. Now we know better and it is getting under control. If we promote homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle by promoting gay marriage, there will be less sleeping around as they realize the advantages of making such commitments. Of course by helping them feel better about themselves they will be more likely to not take foolish risks and if they do sleep around they will be more likely to use condoms.

As for your final question. Have you really studied history? If we are talking about modern day, then yes you want to be captured by the English. A few hundred years ago, the English were as bad if not worse in how they treated prisoners of war than the Muslims are now. Do you really want me to get into the facts about why some groups of Muslims are the way they are right now? How the 'western world' screwed them over and pushed them into being what we were not too long ago? A few hundred years ago you were more likely to get better treatment from the Muslims than the English. That is pure fact, not political correctness.

posted by kooka_lives on October 10, 2008 at 7:44 AM | link to this | reply

Re: Well, I am not politically correct, of even close to being so

being pro-gay marriage is politically correct. To refrain from criticizing gays and non-caucasions is politically-correct. Read my post Political-correctness the posthumous orgasm of karl Marx.

yes I do believe that gays wanting to have children/marriage is an attempt at feeling straight. It is my belief that most gays would choose to be straight any day over being gay but of course they would never admit this.

You see I have spoken to gays and unlike the christian right believes it is usually pre-disposed. Simply like being right or left handed. Ater all who would choose a life that brings such scorn, ridicule, and prejudice.

There are some things that you can't prove. Some things, many things there are no statistics for. And often facts are constantly debated.

For example you can get 5 so-called experts on the Bible and sooner or later they will all argue something. Whose right? Whose wrong? Where's your proof?

Once and for all you and most leftists are always saying 'this is unfounded, that's unfounded".

Leftists can't think for themselves. They're always waiting for the so-called facts handed down from some leftist university.

Can't you do your own detective work? Can't you do your own psychology?

You should try it sometime you may suprise yourself.

If you're out in the world observing you can learn all you need to know about all types of human beings. try doing that and stop all this "where's your proof, and this isn't reality" etc. etc.

As far as gays possibly being more pre-disposed to molest kids. I have no idea what statistics show and I don't care. How the hell can you ever actually find out one way or another?

What I can tell you is this. Sex dominates gays equilibrium. They are more sexually driven then straights. Perhaps because sex seems to be a huge part of the gay identity.Look at gay males. Look at the AIDS rate.

Oprah Winfrey swore back in the 80's it would catch up to straights. But it never did. Straights are still way behind gays in the AIDS situation.

And how many gays may not admit that they're gay and that throws the stats off.

Personally as I've stated I don't trust statistics all that much. Who the hells agendas behind them anyway?

One day stats say this. Next day they say that. Only someone who refuses to think for themself waits for the stats to come out because they dare not make their own assumptions.

So to answer your question about gays and child molestation I'll ask you....who do you think most parents would leave their kid with if they only had one option? A gay or a straight?

If you had to be a prisoner of war and had to choose between England and Iraq who would you pick? We both know damn well who anyone would pick don't we?

Now lets see how politcally-correct you are?

posted by mordent on October 9, 2008 at 10:48 PM | link to this | reply

Well, I am not politically correct, of even close to being so

I try to be polite and respectful in general. I also look at the big picture, instead of generalizing or making foolish assumptions.

My experience in the theater would suggest that few if any homosexuals in that industry stay in the closet. There is really no need for them to do so. So far from what I have seen what you are talking about is basically a stereotype. I would bet there are many more closet homosexuals in the military, as members of construction crews, in professional sports teams and other areas that you would consider place for 'strong' people to be.

I don't know your life and can only look at what you claim and what you write to make my judgments on you. I can however say that I do know more homosexuals who are in or have served in the military than I do who are in the theater. That is a fact and no amount of stereotyping or generalization can change what I KNOW.

There is reasoning that says that the Bible really is not anti-homosexuality, and so some churches are being open minded and have no problem with homosexuality. Gay marriage should be legal, but the churches cannot be forced to perform gay weddings. That means that is the gay couple wants to be involved with a church, they go and find one that will marry them. It is that simple. I am an ordained minister and I would have no problem at all performing a gay marriage.

And I won't even go into the 'traditional' part there. We do not even come close to practicing 'traditional' weddings in this country.

As for your weak assumption that homosexuals who want to get married or raise children show that they are really not gay... Do you have any reasoning to that at all? I mean that is saying that only straight people want to be in committed relationships. it is saying that only straight people enjoy children (Although you did have some very insulting questions in your post suggesting there is a connection between homosexuality and child molestation, and there is NONE). If a couple gets married and do not have children, does that suggest that both of them are really gay? Does it really matter the sexual orientation of people who wish to adopt children and raise them in hopes of giving them a better life?

You keep making these claims and asking these question that seem to have no reasoning behind them, just generalizations and stereotypes. If you really do know gay people, ask them yourself and see if they get offended or not.

posted by kooka_lives on October 9, 2008 at 4:16 PM | link to this | reply

Re: There is no absurdity with gays getting married

You're always claiming my experiences are unfounded. And I consider you to be politically-correct and you deny this and tell me your experiences are the opposite of mine.

Quite fascinating. Many people in theater/show business are closeted gays but of course everyone knows they're gay. It's just something nobody brings up.

As for the marriage thing of course it's natural for people be they hetero or homo to want to have a resolve of some sort. I didn't neccessarily find gays wanting to be married absurd as much as I find the process of going thru a church, mosque, synagogue which as you know doesn't approve of homosexuality.

And traditionally, I repeat traditionally that is for a man and a women. But don't worry I know some churces are making exceptions.

In the end I still believe that gays wanting to be married with children is a subconscious desire to be straight.

I'm sure you'll strongly disagree, and that's life.

posted by mordent on October 8, 2008 at 7:40 PM | link to this | reply

There is no absurdity with gays getting married

That alone tells me a lot about how you view the world.

You wish to try and claim I am not well traveled and se the world as black and white and so on. Well you are wrong to some degree. I am well traveled enough that I have seen a great deal of this country and a little of Mexico. I am far from seeing the world as black and white, but instead very much understand that shades of gray dominate and in general things are not as simple or clear cut as they seem. The reason I used the 'middle-of-nowhere Mississippi' is because the attitude you are displaying in this post I have only seen in people who have been that isolated or in bigots who just refuse to try and understand other people.

Now I have not gotten the expression that you are a bigot, since you don't seem to be hateful on the issue. You present yourself as one who has just not had much experience with it, which normally in my experience means you have been isolated.

Of course you then admit you see people as one dimensional, which I think is the root of your problem. You have a very limited view when you look at people and you are basically openly admitting that you judge them on the most basic of titles that you give them, making the claim as well that you 'know' a liberal, Christian and so on when you see them. My guess is if we really put this to the test you would be surprised at how mistaken that 'instinct' of your really is.

So why is it not absurd for homosexuals to want to get married? Really for the same reason it is not absurd for heterosexuals to want to get married. You don't need to get married to have kid and have a family. We have gone and attached such an idea to marriage, but marriage is really NOT about having children. I know unmarried people who have children and I know married people who don't want to have children.

Marriage is basically a partnership and a commitment to sharing each other's lives, or at least that is what it really should be if we wanted to make sure it was something of value. That is how is should be viewed first and foremost. The family aspect is unimportant in the reality of it all.

If we look at marriage in that context, then it really doesn't matter who gets married to who. As long as it is two consenting adults, then that is all that is important. Understand I also have no problem with polygamy. If a guy wants to put up with more than one wife, then that should be his right, a long as his other spouse has no problem with it as well.. Same if a woman wants more than one husband.

It is a very pathetic generalization to claim leftists have no sense of humor or that we live in pain. That is nothing but unfounded conservative propaganda. Your post has no humor in it. If you think it does, then you suddenly fall into a generalization just like McCain where you do not understand humor and basically make offensive comments that you find funny and don't understand why the majority of the population doesn't laugh with you.

as for your final comment, I don't care at all what people think of my views. I for a fact know more men who have either been involved in the military or are involved in the military who are gay than I do theater folk who are gay, and I have been much more involved in the theater than I have in any military groups. That to me says your generalization is wrong and out dated. I don't care about the political correctness of it all, just about the facts and what I have experienced in my own life. I have even know a few drag queens, although they have all been straight.

posted by kooka_lives on October 8, 2008 at 8:54 AM | link to this | reply

My claims are all true and if you ever read any of my other posts you would see I mention travel quite a bit.

I would say I have extensive experience with humans of various cultures and lifestyles due to travel and theater.

You fall into the stereotype of believing anyone who isn't a liberal must be some bigot from the South whose never left. Your thinking is very black and white and that is very American. that would lead me to believe you haven't traveled much but that is no concern of mine.

In the end you will generalize just as much as myself. But you will generalize groups that aren't protected because that's safe.

You're a cultural communist and that means certain groups are not allowed to be criticized while others can be.

Again this doesn't matter to me.

As for my question "why don't gays protest hetero marriage." This should've tipped you off as to the absurdist quality to the whole post.

Don't you see the humor? Of course you don't. Because leftists are so sensitive it's painful. Leftist live in pain. Leftists have absolutely no humor and so they cannot grasp absurdist concepts.

I mean can't you for one minute see an absurdity with gays getting married? Does this make someone a hatemonger for viewing it this way?

Do you think it's possible that even some gays might see it as ridiculous? How do you know I'm not gay and completely clowning you?

Here's what i'll give you....you give people a lot more credit than I do. I do see people as one dimensional cartoons brainwashed by a variety of different sources and they're nothing more than pre-recorded messages. That is I usually know a liberal when i see one, a christian and so forth and so on.

Well what can i say I hold my instincts in extremely high-regard. I have no concern of being called racist, generalizer, homophobe, sexist because in my mind I'm calling a spade a spade. I'm calling it what I see it. Plain and simple.

Sure there are gays in the military but there are a lot more gays in theatre and you will never convince anyone differently. If you try you will only be seen as someone who is trying to be politically correct.

posted by mordent on October 7, 2008 at 9:44 PM | link to this | reply

mordent, I find your claims hard to believe

But, since I really don't know for sure, I'll go ahead and give you' the benefit of the doubt, for now. Although I will openly say that by reading your post and just judging you on that, I would say you live in the middle-of-nowhere Mississippi and have not done any traveling outside of there your whole life. The ignorance reflected in the questions you asked in this post do not reflect a world traveler with any sense of the world at all.

While I have not traveled as extensively as you claim to have, I seem to have a better grasp of humanity than you do.

Most people are NOT one dimensional cartoons, anyone who has worked in the theater at any level would now this. My guess is even though you claim to have traveled the world and been involved in the theater and so on, you've not really known anyone very well to have such a view of people.

"What's more liberal, Denver or Colorado Springs?"

Uhh... Boulder? Although to say that a town caters to a more liberal group is not generalizing. My guess is that word must confuse you an awful lot.

I never said this was a 'hate manifesto', just hat you obviously do not understand anything about the group you are putting down for no logical reason. I mean you even just said here that you really don't care about the issue itself. You seem to have no opinion to really state, just a bunch of really piss poor questions to ask.

I have done theater work on many levels at various times, and the strangest thing since you got me think about it all, I know more gay military men than I do gay theater folk. In my experience the generalizations you are trying to make here fall short of the reality of it all. And to try and claim that you know gay people when you ask a question like "Why don't gays protest heterosexual Christian marriage and child-reproduction?" just does not work. If you know them, you must not have spent any real time with them. Of course looking at your earlier comment about how people are one dimensional, maybe all you see is that they are gay and the rest of who they are is meaningless to you.

posted by kooka_lives on October 7, 2008 at 4:09 PM | link to this | reply

I've been to approx 37 countries, and about 1/3 of those several times. I've lived 3 years in europe.

So how many countries have you been to?

Tell me, can you tell when a persons gay? Usually I can. Does this make me a homophobe or observant?

Guess what? Most people are 1 dimensional cartoons. Not because I say so but because they make themselves that way.

So tell me...what's more liberal, Denver or Colorado Springs? Don't be afraid to make a generalization and tell the truth.

Why a post on gay marriage? Why not? I'm sure everyone has an opinion on it. But it was mostly questions not some hate manifesto as you seem to perceive it.

Have I known homos? I did theater in New York for 8 years. Tell me do you think there are a lot of gays in theater? How about in New York? Don't be afraid to stereotype I won't tell anyone.

Do you still think you're more of an expert on gays? How did you become one?

posted by mordent on October 6, 2008 at 11:30 PM | link to this | reply

You still are showing you have no clue on this issue

I find that those who generalize as much as you do, have not gotten out and seen enough of the world yet. Your remarks on that do not defend your claims however. There is a large amount of those who have served time military who have no issue at all with homosexuals and lean to the left politically, more than you might think. As well as Christians and construction workers and so on. The largest anti-war march that took place here in Denver during the DNC was led by men and women who had or are right now serving in the armed forces.The generalizations you are making are insulting and degrading towards those you are referring to. You might as well turn everyone into a one dimensional cartoon character.

The church is not the only group that marries people, the state can do this as well. Also, there is an ever growing amount of churches who are pro-gay marriage now days. it is gaining in popularity. As for major religions, what constitutes a major religion? There are a great deal of off-braches of Christianity which could be viewed as major religions that are accepting of homosexuals.

And you are right, nothing I can say will be able to change the mind of the ignorant and bigoted. If they wish to live their lives filed with ignorance and intolerance, then I can do little to get them to see the big picture. I am well aware that there will be such people in the world always who just are unable to grow up.

And if you don't really care if they can get married or not, then why are you making an issue out of it?

And yes, I am clearly more of an expert on homosexuals than you are. The questions you asked in this post and your replies here make that very clear. I am wondering if you have ever actually met a homosexual (At least to your knowledge), let alone talked with one.

posted by kooka_lives on October 6, 2008 at 7:18 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Okay, so you really don't know what you are talking about then

You can hold up the flag for the exception all you want. Genralizations are based on patterns that repeat themselves. Exceptions only go to prove the rule.

The rule is the military is right-wing in nature, so the few leftists aren't worth mentioning. Just like San Francisco is mostly left in nature so the few right-wingers who may live there aren't worth mentioning.

You can try and explain the roots of marriage and the bible and this is also irrelevant. Church's marry people and no major religion condones homosexuality.

And as for people who think that homosexuality is wrong, nothing you or any liberal is going to say will make them suddenly like them, or make them think gay marriage is cool.

Honestly I could care less about whether they get married or not.

When you say you're not an expert on homosexuality does that mean that you're more of an expert on them then me?

posted by mordent on October 6, 2008 at 5:53 PM | link to this | reply

This is a good post. It is your thoughts and you have a right to them. Don't let bullies put a damper on your self expression.

posted by Justi on October 4, 2008 at 8:59 PM | link to this | reply

Okay, so you really don't know what you are talking about then

First off, at no point does the Bible define marriage, anywhere. Marriage originally was just a simple agreement between a man and a woman, with no ceremony attached to it. This presented problems in that it was easily abused. So the state had to step in and create rules and the church of course wanted piece of that control, so they all went and came up with their own ceremonies and such. But you will find NOTHING in the Bible defining marriage, although there is a whole passage that tells you you can divorce your wife if you find her undesirable. I always thought it interesting that there is really nothing about rules for marriage in the Bible, yet there is a rule for an easy divorce.

As to why cant' gays create their own form of marriage... Wow, that is one stupid question. If you wish to call them 'civil unions', then go for it. It is still gay marriage, no matter what name you wish to put with it. I am always surprised at how much such a simple title matters to some people. If you need a new name for it, then fine by me as long as they get fiar and equal rights. I'll still be honest and call it marriage myself.

Just because in your mind you think you understand a group of people, does not make it so. The questions you asked in this post and the way you ask them clearly shows you lack even the smallest understanding of homosexuals. While I will not claim to be an expert on them, not really ever having lived their lives, I have known a few and I have been able to understand them fairly well. What truth do you think I am evading here? I could try to break down each of the ignorant questions you asked in this post, but I really don't have the time for that.

I know of military men who are 'left of center' as well as athletes and women who have served this country. You are trying to make generalizations here that really do not stand up to the actual facts. Are you trying to say I am not a strong person? Or that my friends are not strong people? What qualities are you claming that 'strong people have?

So far Palin has not shown herself to be very tough, needing the GOP to shelter her and keep a leash on her so she wont'; make a fool of herself too often. Also, it seems like the republicans are treating her as if she was not very tough, by making it clear that she needs to be given special treatment in not going after her like we do the male candidates. Hillary had no problem playing the game at the same level as the guys, but Palin has yet to show she can that.

And yes, she was very much flirting during the debate. Her body language was flirtatious and her whole attitude was more of woman trying to get a guy to buy her a drink than a politician. I am guessing such tactics go over well in Alaska.

posted by kooka_lives on October 4, 2008 at 10:55 AM | link to this | reply

You are a good read,

But now I know why you call yourself "loudmouth". Blog on

posted by muley12 on October 3, 2008 at 6:48 PM | link to this | reply

My faith teaches tolerance. sam

posted by sam444 on October 3, 2008 at 5:39 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Debate Results

Reality is all perception I suppose and that is why some people view things from the left while others view it from the right.

No matter how one percieves homosexualtiy, there are people who will see it a certain way while others will see it completely different.

A quick example: those on the left will always be pro-gay while those on the right, particularly Christians or construction/military guys will always shake their heads and laugh.

Your type may call them "ignorant" while they'll just smile and say "whatever."

And just like those debates no one will change. So I look forward to reading your post. Whether I agree or not.

posted by mordent on October 3, 2008 at 5:10 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Do you know what you are talking about?

Okay since you seem to know where marriage comes from tell me about that. And then tell me how religions are able to claim marriage for themselves and keep homosexuality out of it. All major religions condemn homosexuality or do they not? Tell me?

Why can't gays simply create their own form of marriage if in fact it's a free for all?

"Ignorant" is a huge cliche and a shallow word. "Ignorance" is claiming that I don't know or understand a group of people. Well in my mind I do. In my mind you're evading the truth. "Ignorance" is often used as knee-jerk when someone hates the truth.

Your so called strong men and women are left of center (even though I don't know them). To me the left is only strong when it comes to bickering. Go talk to men in the special forces of the military, go talk to sport-fighters, and women who're in the service. Those are the people I consider strong and they believe in her.

Palin is tough for sure. In fact tougher than Biden and Obama. The left ain't tough and that's all there is to it.

As for her flirting....I don't know. That could be your perception because she's attractive so that's easy to think. However if she was flirting well that's just an attractive women doing her thing and that's just human nature.

Thanks again

posted by mordent on October 3, 2008 at 5:04 PM | link to this | reply

Do you know what you are talking about?

Marriage is NOT a concept of the Bible, if you disagree go and read the Bible. And most of this post was just an ignorant batch of insults directed towards homosexuals.

I am a heterosexual man who has a great deal of friends who are heterosexual men and strong women. NONE of them like Palin. She is a joke none of us can take seriously. Strong women in particular find her insulting. In the debate last night she mostly tried to be 'cute' and flirtatious to win the people over. That kind of act is greatly insulting towards strong women.

posted by kooka_lives on October 3, 2008 at 11:57 AM | link to this | reply

Debate Results

I agree with John Dickerson on Slate Magazine. Palin won. Biden won. McCain lost. As for gay marriage, I think I'll write about that tomorrow. But just for now, I'll say your comments have an absurdist quality that is intriguing, but don't reflect reality.

posted by mousehop on October 3, 2008 at 7:56 AM | link to this | reply