<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Atlanta mayor-elect finds his election to be confirmation of anti-marriage position</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/06/17459/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/06/17459</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:03:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/06/17459/comment-page-1#comment-56363</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:57:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=17459#comment-56363</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;&quot;I have an unmatched track record on legislation that supports the LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered] community.&lt;/i&gt;

Like hell you do.  Check the voting record for John Lewis, a civil rights giant and a fellow legislator for the Atlanta area.  There you will see a legislative record on gay rights that is truly unmatched.

&lt;i&gt;&quot;I would like to ask them if they would be willing to throw aside a whole career of voting supportively for the gay community because of one issue.&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

That&#039;s because marriage equality is not just &quot;one issue,&quot; it is 1,138 issues (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.equalitymatters.org/equality_matters/static/full_reasons&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;link&lt;/a&gt;).  It is disingenuous to dismiss marriage equality as being just about the word marriage, because it is so much more than that.  When you stand against marriage equality, you are saying that you believe that gay people are not deserving of the same civil rights guaranteed by the state as straight people are.  That, sir, makes you a bigot and not an ally of the GLBT community, regardless of what your voting record says.

&lt;i&gt;&quot;My position on this issue is exactly where Jim Martin was when he ran for the U.S. Senate. The LGBT community supported him.&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

And who else would we have supported?  Saxby Chambliss?  ROFL!

I personally voted for Martin because he was significantly the lesser of the two evils, not because he wowed me with his platform on gay rights.  His support from the GLBT community was received only because the alternative was so much worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;I have an unmatched track record on legislation that supports the LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered] community.</i></p>
<p>Like hell you do.  Check the voting record for John Lewis, a civil rights giant and a fellow legislator for the Atlanta area.  There you will see a legislative record on gay rights that is truly unmatched.</p>
<p><i>&#8220;I would like to ask them if they would be willing to throw aside a whole career of voting supportively for the gay community because of one issue.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>That&#8217;s because marriage equality is not just &#8220;one issue,&#8221; it is 1,138 issues (<a href="http://www.equalitymatters.org/equality_matters/static/full_reasons" rel="nofollow">link</a>).  It is disingenuous to dismiss marriage equality as being just about the word marriage, because it is so much more than that.  When you stand against marriage equality, you are saying that you believe that gay people are not deserving of the same civil rights guaranteed by the state as straight people are.  That, sir, makes you a bigot and not an ally of the GLBT community, regardless of what your voting record says.</p>
<p><i>&#8220;My position on this issue is exactly where Jim Martin was when he ran for the U.S. Senate. The LGBT community supported him.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>And who else would we have supported?  Saxby Chambliss?  ROFL!</p>
<p>I personally voted for Martin because he was significantly the lesser of the two evils, not because he wowed me with his platform on gay rights.  His support from the GLBT community was received only because the alternative was so much worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cole</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/06/17459/comment-page-1#comment-56313</link>
		<dc:creator>Cole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 23:48:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=17459#comment-56313</guid>
		<description>Kasim Reed wasn&#039;t the best choice for gay people and Atlanta.  Mary Norwood was.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kasim Reed wasn&#8217;t the best choice for gay people and Atlanta.  Mary Norwood was.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lindoro Almaviva</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/06/17459/comment-page-1#comment-56223</link>
		<dc:creator>Lindoro Almaviva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 03:45:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=17459#comment-56223</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;I would like to ask them if they would be willing to throw aside a whole career of voting supportively for the gay community because of one issue.&lt;/i&gt;

To answer Mr. Reed:

YES, I would. Why? 

1. Because your words have proved that you do not believe that I am your equal. 

2. Your words have proved that your support is nothing more than political opportunism, and one thing that I have learned about opportunists is that they are as steadfast as a fart in a wind storm. 

3. Your words have proved that inherently you believe that I am a 2nd class citizen; that should be happy with the crumbs you, in your infinite mercy, throw at me. 

4. Your words have proved that you are incapable of supporting me for &lt;b&gt;who I am&lt;/b&gt; and your support is entirely based on &lt;b&gt;what I can do for you&lt;/b&gt;

5. Your words have proved that somehow you believe that you hold a moral high ground over me and that gives you a free pass in treating me with condescension and insult my intelligence and above all insult ME.

See? For me it would be very easy to drop you and not look behind. 

I do not want someone who votes for my causes because they are popular or because it is politically correct, or advantageous. I want someone to vote with me because &lt;b&gt;they are convinced&lt;/b&gt; it is the right thing to do. You do not get that. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>I would like to ask them if they would be willing to throw aside a whole career of voting supportively for the gay community because of one issue.</i></p>
<p>To answer Mr. Reed:</p>
<p>YES, I would. Why? </p>
<p>1. Because your words have proved that you do not believe that I am your equal. </p>
<p>2. Your words have proved that your support is nothing more than political opportunism, and one thing that I have learned about opportunists is that they are as steadfast as a fart in a wind storm. </p>
<p>3. Your words have proved that inherently you believe that I am a 2nd class citizen; that should be happy with the crumbs you, in your infinite mercy, throw at me. </p>
<p>4. Your words have proved that you are incapable of supporting me for <b>who I am</b> and your support is entirely based on <b>what I can do for you</b></p>
<p>5. Your words have proved that somehow you believe that you hold a moral high ground over me and that gives you a free pass in treating me with condescension and insult my intelligence and above all insult ME.</p>
<p>See? For me it would be very easy to drop you and not look behind. </p>
<p>I do not want someone who votes for my causes because they are popular or because it is politically correct, or advantageous. I want someone to vote with me because <b>they are convinced</b> it is the right thing to do. You do not get that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

