Comments on: That “Maine Teacher” Is No Stranger To Anti-Gay Lies

By: Danielle

Danielle — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:30:42 +0000

I just received an automated call from this group. The phone number was blocked, and there was no way to connect to a live person, so that I could tell them, emphatically, that their message of prejudice and intolerance was not appreciated in my home. I wish there were a way to contact them back…But, like the cowards that they are, they have no interest in an open dialogue; they prefer to preach hate from their soapbox while providing no opportunity for rebuttal.

By: Christopher Waldrop

Christopher Waldrop — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:43:08 +0000

Priya hits on the lack of logic in YesOn1′s argument by saying, “No one is trying to change the law to prevent men and women from marrying.”

Granting same-sex couples the same rights and responsibilities enjoyed by heterosexual couples isn’t taking rights away from anyone. It’s simply recognizing that same-sex couples are equal under the law. And yet over and over I hear this claim that allowing same-sex couples to marry is somehow an “attack” on the rights of heterosexual couples.

No church that doesn’t want to will be forced to perform same-sex wedding ceremonies. No person will be forced to marry someone they don’t want to. Right now the only people whose rights are being denied are the same-sex couples who can’t marry.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:17:55 +0000

Yeson1 said “Charla Bansley is a great christian Woman, she stands tall for God and the values this country was founded on.”.

So, great christian women lie to hurt others? Your country was founded on dishonesty?

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:14:04 +0000

Yeson1 said “Lastly, the definition of marriage is: the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law, so their i’m not trying to take away fundamental laws, I am trying to protect them.”.

No one is trying to change the law to prevent men and women from marrying. Your sole act is to try to prevent gay couples from marrying. You lie when you say you are trying to protect marriage, you are attacking it.

By: Emily K

Emily K — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 05:19:31 +0000

I suggest that YesOn1 read the Book of Ruth and discover that 2500 years ago it took a village to raise a family, and today, it STILL takes a village to raise a family. And spoiler alert: at the end of the book Naomi is declared to be a second mother to Ruth’s child.

By: Richard W. Fitch

Richard W. Fitch — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:49:44 +0000

I liked to have the bible thumpers show me just one text in ‘that book’ that discusses same-same activities other than in relation to ‘pagan worship’. Oh, of course there is the story of Sodom (and Gomorrah), which had to do with an attempted xenophobic gang rape by all the men and women of the town.

By: Burr

Burr — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:48:08 +0000

YesOn1 your silly worries about parenting are no different than when a single mother and her mother or sister are raising a boy alone, or two uncles with a daughter. Children have been in those situations for centuries and civilization did not collapse, and the kids turned out fine.

You really are a mental simpleton.

And sorry but there is no universal definition of marriage that applies for all time. Marriage is already defined to include same sex couples for many years now. That battle has been lost. Time to face facts and join the rest of us in reality.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:20:42 +0000

YesOn1,

Which is more important to you: loving people or hating their sin?

I see you here hating, well, pretty much everything about the life of the sinner, but have you done anything to get to know that sinner? Have you bothered to learn why they want to marry, what difficulties they might be experiencing from an administrative definition?

For example, are you aware of the tax differences? Or the access to family discounts? Or hospital visitation, school administration, or census reports? ANYTHING?

And have you done a single solitary thing in your life to improve the daily living of a gay person or couple? Have you lobbied to have tax equity? Have you reviewed insurance policies at work to make sure they are fair?

Because if not, NoOn1, then I don’t believe you when you say that you don’t hate gay people, just their sin. I think you are lying. And I think that you are using a bogus phrase to try and hide and justify the bigotry you are showing towards gay folk.

But go ahead and prove me wrong. Change your position on Referendum 1.

By: YesOn1

YesOn1 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:10:47 +0000

First off, I do not hate gay people. I hate their sin of being gay. And what the heck do gay animals have to do with the way people act? I guess i’m not seeing the connection. Heterosexuality doesn’t have to be taught in schools because kids know that having a mom and dad is normal, it’s nothing new, nothing they have to comprehend. And what will a teenage girl that was adopted by a gay male couple do when she is facing girl problems? What are the “fathers” supposed to do?
They can’t really help her out. Same with a boy that has two mothers. Pleasure and bonding by the same sex is not Godly, it is the opposite of Godly, it is disgusting. Lastly, the definition of marriage is: the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law, so their i’m not trying to take away fundamental laws, I am trying to protect them.

By: Christopher Waldrop

Christopher Waldrop — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:39:40 +0000

How exactly would homosexuality be “taught in schools”? I don’t recall heterosexuality being “taught” to me in school. Depending on the subject a heterosexual couple married couple may have been presented. While I don’t think this was necessarily “teaching” heterosexuality, I could see same-sex couples being included in the same way. And I’d have no problem with that.