How Gay Marriage Cost Kerry The Election

"Craig Chilton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:24:14 -0500,
"The Dixie Clits" wrote:


WASHINGTON, Nov. 5, 2004 -- When Massachusetts' highest court
legalized same-sex marriages and the mayor of San Francisco began
issuing marriage licenses to gay couples, it ignited a firestorm
across the country.

ONLY among this country's most mindless and haueful BIGOTS.

Meanwhile, America's sensible and intelligent people generally
hailed those praisworthy egalitarian steps toward the extinction of
moronic homophobia.

Come again? In the states where marriage bills were on the ballot, they
passed overwhelmingly, with something like 75% margins. The Presidential
race in those same states, on the other hand, was much closer. Which means
that somewhere around half of those who voted for Kerry also voted for the
marriage amendments. It also means that you consider 3/4 of the American
populace to be "mindless and hateful BIGOTS".

-- Craig Chilton

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.

And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ~*~*~*~*

"Ron Hinds" wrote in message
...
"Craig Chilton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:24:14 -0500,
"The Dixie Clits" wrote:


WASHINGTON, Nov. 5, 2004 -- When Massachusetts' highest court
legalized same-sex marriages and the mayor of San Francisco began
issuing marriage licenses to gay couples, it ignited a firestorm
across the country.

ONLY among this country's most mindless and haueful BIGOTS.

Meanwhile, America's sensible and intelligent people generally
hailed those praisworthy egalitarian steps toward the extinction of
moronic homophobia.

Come again? In the states where marriage bills were on the ballot, they
passed overwhelmingly, with something like 75% margins. The Presidential
race in those same states, on the other hand, was much closer. Which means
that somewhere around half of those who voted for Kerry also voted for the
marriage amendments. It also means that you consider 3/4 of the American
populace to be "mindless and hateful BIGOTS".

Sounds about right tom me.


-- Craig Chilton

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.

And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ~*~*~*~*

"Ron Hinds" wrote in message
...
"Craig Chilton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:24:14 -0500,
"The Dixie Clits" wrote:


WASHINGTON, Nov. 5, 2004 -- When Massachusetts' highest court
legalized same-sex marriages and the mayor of San Francisco began
issuing marriage licenses to gay couples, it ignited a firestorm
across the country.

ONLY among this country's most mindless and haueful BIGOTS.

Meanwhile, America's sensible and intelligent people generally
hailed those praisworthy egalitarian steps toward the extinction of
moronic homophobia.

Come again? In the states where marriage bills were on the ballot, they
passed overwhelmingly, with something like 75% margins. The Presidential
race in those same states, on the other hand, was much closer. Which means
that somewhere around half of those who voted for Kerry also voted for the
marriage amendments. It also means that you consider 3/4 of the American
populace to be "mindless and hateful BIGOTS".

Sounds about right tom me.


-- Craig Chilton

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.

And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ~*~*~*~*

"hal9000" wrote in message
m...

"Ron Hinds" wrote in message
...
"Craig Chilton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:24:14 -0500,
"The Dixie Clits" wrote:


WASHINGTON, Nov. 5, 2004 -- When Massachusetts' highest court
legalized same-sex marriages and the mayor of San Francisco began
issuing marriage licenses to gay couples, it ignited a firestorm
across the country.

ONLY among this country's most mindless and haueful BIGOTS.

Meanwhile, America's sensible and intelligent people generally
hailed those praisworthy egalitarian steps toward the extinction of
moronic homophobia.

Come again? In the states where marriage bills were on the ballot, they
passed overwhelmingly, with something like 75% margins. The Presidential
race in those same states, on the other hand, was much closer. Which
means
that somewhere around half of those who voted for Kerry also voted for
the
marriage amendments. It also means that you consider 3/4 of the American
populace to be "mindless and hateful BIGOTS".

Sounds about right tom me.

Maybe 1/4 of the population are perverts and freaks?

Deep Frayed Morgues wrote:

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 19:40:54 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:
[]
It may be genetic, or learned. But there is a major difference between
ethnicity and lifestyle regards rights. If lifestyle is OK as an excuse,
then a person inclined by genetics or upbringing to be serial killer,
should have that right.

OK, that must be THE worst reasoning I have ever heard in my life!!!!

You hear it frequently though, so it's good to know what the idiots are
thinking.

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

Sjoerd wrote:


Homosexuality is not a "lifestyle".

And would be even less so (in the US - other countries seem
a bit more enlightened) if there were equal protection under
the law.

"chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn"
wrote in message
news:1gnm5xe.i8oj5s1f71hqcN%this_address_is_for_sp ...
Deep Frayed Morgues wrote:

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 19:40:54 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:
[]
It may be genetic, or learned. But there is a major difference between
ethnicity and lifestyle regards rights. If lifestyle is OK as an
excuse,
then a person inclined by genetics or upbringing to be serial killer,
should have that right.

OK, that must be THE worst reasoning I have ever heard in my life!!!!

You hear it frequently though, so it's good to know what the idiots are
thinking.

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

You are an idiot. The problem is that people with other lifestyles will ask
for the same consideration. Research NAMBLA.

Calif Bill wrote:

[]

You are an idiot. The problem is that people with other lifestyles will ask
for the same consideration. Research NAMBLA.

I don't need to. No, you _are_ the idiot. I'll leave aside the whole
nature or nurture issue, because it's fruitless to discuss it with
people like you, but you're gratuitously comparing gays and lesbians
with an organisation that promotes the legalisation of sex between
children and adults.

It was only a matter of time before you brought up something like
NAMBLA- that's what idiots like you resort to after a while.

David

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

"chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn"
wrote in message
news:1gnmcou.fskek4xau58gN%this_address_is_for_spa ...
Calif Bill wrote:

[]

You are an idiot. The problem is that people with other lifestyles will
ask
for the same consideration. Research NAMBLA.

I don't need to. No, you _are_ the idiot. I'll leave aside the whole
nature or nurture issue, because it's fruitless to discuss it with
people like you, but you're gratuitously comparing gays and lesbians
with an organisation that promotes the legalisation of sex between
children and adults.

It was only a matter of time before you brought up something like
NAMBLA- that's what idiots like you resort to after a while.

David

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

No, you are the ignorant one. If you open up one lifestyle, then why would
you not have to consider other lifestyles? Be careful of what you ask for,
you may get it. And most of the USA will support a Civil Union statute,
just do not call it marriage. Most of the country, and world, is religious.
Do not insult them, what ever your feelings on religion. They also have the
right of freedom of thought, at least in your former colony of America.

Calif Bill wrote:

[]
No, you are the ignorant one. If you open up one lifestyle, then why would
you not have to consider other lifestyles? Be careful of what you ask for,
you may get it.

You talk such absolute nonsense.

And most of the USA will support a Civil Union statute,
just do not call it marriage.

If you could point to an example of a country where legalising gay
marriage has caused the legalisation of paedophilia, you might almost
have a point. Please, tell us where this has happened, or ever would? Of
course, no such scenario exists. This is a strawman invented by dim
people.

Most of the country, and world, is religious.
Do not insult them, what ever your feelings on religion.

I don't need to. People who invoke religion as a reason for 'preserving
the sanctity' of marriage do a better job of making themselves look
silly than anyone else ever could.

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk