Burnt Orange Report

Look at this - the Baylor school paper has an editorial in support of the SF mayor's actions.

http://www3.baylor.edu/Lariat/editorial.html

Why is it that you libs have only one issue to run on, sex? Gay rights, lesbian rights, transgender rights, abortion, etc., etc., etc. It is all about "ME" and not about serving the wider community.

Horace Bunce

Bush only has one issue to run on.... and that's about dividing America on social issues. He can't run on the economy or the war because he's failed so badly. So he's running on opposing gay marriage. Bush made this fight a national one and as John Kerry would say... I have three words for him... "Bring it on".

A question is raised by the issue of constitutional ammendments. If an ammendment is passed and ratified, but in fundamental conflict with the spirit and principles already set in legal precedence, can the court not then declare the ammendment unconstitutional? If we legislate bias and unfairness, ultimately it will just lead to more court battles. All our laws and principals have the objective of giving everyone the same equal rights.

When will you girls get a life? Kerry is more liberal than Ted Kennedy. At least he can drive better! Liberals do not care for liberty and freedom. They just want to tell us how stupid the common man is and how they have all the answers to run their lives. Do they think people are stupid?

Only one issue? Gay marriage isn't it, bud, er, I mean, Horace. The crap about weapons of mass destruction is much higher on my list than marriage. The projected 2.75 trillion dollar deficit we're going to experience because of Bush's extreme positions on taxation is so much more important to me than Gay marriage. But Gay marriage is important to me as well. I'm sorry you seem to be so unconfortable with the idea of Gays that you seem to think that's the only thing being discussed. Think about that for a few minutes.
Cheers.

Do they think people are stupid?

No, just far right yokels like you.

Dear Tim Z,

An ad hominem argument is an informal fallacy which argues that some claim is false because of some disqualifying characteristics of whomever has made the claim. The basic form of the argument is:

There is something objectionable about person X. Therefore, person X's claim is false.

This fallacy is a mirror image of the appeal to authority, which argues that a claim should be accepted because of some positive characteristics of whoever is making the claim.

Hope you are learning something while in college.

Try a more mature approach.

Regards,

Horace

And with regard to WMD, Mr. Bridges, I guess all those children in Norther Iraq died of the bird flu virus.

Regards,

Horace

Please, call me Houston. Horace, you said in your earlier post that we libs were single issue, and I took exception to that by explaining to you quite succintly, I thought, that I had plenty of other issues, two of which I mentioned, but I questioned aloud why you seemed to focus on that particular one. Rather than answer that, you answer with a reference to a horrid event a decade ago. I reiterate my point: as a Gay man, I have dozens of issues that are critically important to me, Gay rights, or as conservatives and christian extremists like to say, the Gay "Agenda," is only one among many.

Equal rights is not about SEX. The bigoted try to change the subject by characterizing human rights as all about sex, thereby trivializing them. DO NOT LET THEM.

Choosing your own destiny, whether it be to choose with whom you care to make a life together, or to choose to reach your full potential by receiving equal pay for equal work, is what we Democrats and progressives advocate.

It is the bigots, voyeurs and mischief makers of the Right(remember how lurid Starr's report was?) who try to lower the level of political discourse because, by changing the subject, it is the only way they can hope to compete in the marketplace of ideas.

An ad hominem argument is an informal fallacy which argues that some claim is false because of some disqualifying characteristics of whomever has made the claim.

"Ad hominum?" I am familiar with the concept from a recent post...

"When will you girls get a life?"

"Why is it that you libs have only one issue to run on, sex? Gay rights, lesbian rights, transgender rights, abortion, etc., etc., etc. It is all about "ME" and not about serving the wider community."

No, sir--that applies to conservatives. The conservatives are making this an issue to distract everyone from the real problems at hand. the conservatives are the ones obsessed with women and their pregnancies; with pornographers, with abstinence ed. You are all a lot of closeted perverts who like to talk about sex as forbidden and dirty. If you all want to talk dirty, stop making these things into issues while hiding behind the Bible to vent your hatred! BTW, when Bob Barr, (after he forced his wife to have two abortions and left her for his mistress), licked the whipped cream off the breasts of those two young women, did he go home and write more moral majority crap? who's the pervert now?

Also, Ken Starr was offered a lucrative position as acolumnist at Hustler, b/c apparently, the Starr Report was the best porn Larry Flynt had ever read.

Yes, as Leo indicated, it's the far right, more than anybody, which has politicized gay issues in the past few months.

We suddenly hear sanctimonious utterances about "the sanctity of marriage" from an administration whose approval ratings are on the decline. The Bushies needed to draw attention away from the stagnating economy, the mess in Iraq (wasn't there supposed to be a provisional constitution by now?), and the astronomical deficit.

Maureen Dowd put it nicely in a recent column:
If the president is truly concerned about preserving the sanctity of marriage, as one of my readers suggested, why not make divorce illegal and stone adulterers?
Our soldiers are being killed in Iraq; Osama's still on the loose; jobs are being exported all over the world; the deficit has reached biblical proportions.
And our president is worrying about Mars and marriage?
[...}
When Bushes get in trouble, they look around for a politically advantageous bogeyman. Lee Atwater tried to make Americans shudder over the prospect of Willie Horton arriving on their doorstep; and now Karl Rove wants Americans to shudder at the prospect of a lesbian — Dick Cheney's daughter Mary, say — setting up housekeeping next door with her "wife."

When it comes to the Bushes' willingness to stir up base instincts of the base, it is as it was.

You libs are all about rights, but never talk about responsibility. Your agenda is about one thing, ME. Selfish, spoiled, ME. Then libs use terms like, "for the children" to invoke sympathy for their cause while acting the pick-pocket with the common man's hard earned money. I guess he could be responsible and support the poor and infirmed himself, but libs think he is too stupid to think for himself. Talking about elitist snobs! Sorry to interrupt your reading your Sunday New York Times.

. . . and Mr. Horace whines about ad hominem attacks. The collective name-calling of liberals as "stupid," "pickpockets, "selfish," "spoiled," "etc." does nothing to advance political discourse.

However, do not blame him, it's his mother's fault for not raising him properly.

However, do not blame him, it's his mother's fault for not raising him properly.

You are assuming he has not yet graduated from middle school. There may still be time.
; )