Comments on: Perry v. Schwarzenegger: day five summary

By: BobN

BobN — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 02:16:55 +0000

All the dumping on men as alcoholic, violent oafs is just going to push more and more women into lesbian marriages, no?

On the plus side, though, there’s all the breast-feeding potential for the kids…

By: LukasP

LukasP — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:34:49 +0000

Thompson’s own history as a researcher is worth pointing out. He began his analysis with one set of assumptions, and the data showed those assumptions were unfounded. Instead of abandoning the what the research was pointing to, his mindset changed and his further analyses have contributed greatly to the data-basesd understanding of how being raised by same-sex couples affects childrens’ development.

Research contradicting those findings has been dealt with extensively. With the evidence being front-and-center in this case, Prop 8 defenders have to rely on bad data that doesn’t meet the rigorous standards of peer-reviewed and replicable/valid research.

The Prop 8 advocates appear desperate.

By: Neon Genesis

Neon Genesis — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:33:25 +0000

Wait, I’m completely lost here. The Prop 8 supporters claim being gay is something you choose but at the same time, gay parents will make their children gay? If gay parents make their children gay, how is that a choice? If they want people to believe that gay parents make their kids gay, didn’t the Prop 8 supporters just disprove their whole argument that being gay is a choice? They can’t have it both ways. Either it’s a choice and gay parents can’t make their kids gay or if they want us to believe gay parents make their kids gay, then it’s not a choice and they should admit the ex-gay movement is a sham.

By: Ben in Oakland

Ben in Oakland — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 23:36:16 +0000

Quo is not, by the way ex gay, though he is a victim of the mindset. He has admitted to fighting the Gay Menace onSaturday afternoon on his way t the baths on Saturday night.

By: Ben in Oakland

Ben in Oakland — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 23:22:12 +0000

I agree with you, eric. I also feel sorry for its victims, On the other hand, quo is as addicted to his self hatred the way a strung out junkie is addicted to smack.

At what point does someone stop destroying his life in order to further someone else’s goals? at what point do they start taking responsibility? My own brother suffered from the same homo-loatho disease.

Quo is obviously reasonably bright, though he has a major blind spot. How much better would his life be if he stopped posting here and started dedicating his life, energy, and intelligence to his own happiness, and the happiness of his brothers and sisters?

By: Eric in Oakland

Eric in Oakland — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:35:28 +0000

Thanks, Ben. I have read enough of Quo’s comments to know that he believes the pseudoscientific faith-based claims that are being put forth by the Prop-8 crowd. I also suspected that he was a member of the Ex-gay movement.

However, it is hard for me not to feel sorry for people in that position. They are in many ways victims themselves. That is why I consider it so important to expose the misinformation, lies, and hateful motives that abound. I find it profoundly sad that anyone can hate himself so much that he feels the need to pretend to be someone else and to suppress his nature, cutting himself off from love and fulfillment.

This spiritual and psychological abuse has gone unchallenged for far too long. I have hopes that no matter how this case plays out legally, it will go a long way toward exposing the antigay agenda for what it is.

By: Désirée

Désirée — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 20:56:34 +0000

While a lot of this testimony seems odd or irrelevant, we have to remember why this is being done. Our side has to show there was no reason other than animus for passing Prop 8. That is, we must prove there are no other valid reasons for it. The Prop 8 people want to say there are valid reasons – gays molest, straight parents are better, gay marriage would cost the state money, on and on. What Boiles et al. are doing is systematically destroying every possible other reason the Prop 8 people might give for supporting it. It seems self evident to us that these things are untrue but they need to establish these facts to the court.

By: Eric in Oakland

Eric in Oakland — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 04:33:33 +0000

First, let me say that I am very greatful to Boxturtle, Courage Campaign, and others for providing continuing coverage of this case. I hope that

Quo said “I find it just a little odd that the idea that gays and lesbians are more likely to be child molesters is criticised in the same sentence as the idea that their children are likelier to become gay.”

Why would he find that odd? For the anti-gay crowd the two are often linked and they are both considered equally negative. The same body of evidence strongly proves both superstitions to be definitively wrong. If they are brought up together, why not refute them both?

I have seen that Quo is willing to distort the evidence and cherry pick publications to support his presumptions, but I wish that he would not insult the scientific community in general by assuming they are as unprincipled as he is. If he would educate himself on the scientific method and peer review process before commenting, he would not make such embarassing statements.

By: Eddie89

Eddie89 — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:48:39 +0000

If gay parents make gay children, where did the gay parents get their gayness?

As a gay man myself, I am the product of a heterosexual couple.

I was totally immersed in a straight world growing while growing up. Straight parents, straight friends, straight cartoons, straight television shows, straight movies, straight magazines, straight schools.

And since the age of 4 until today, I know that I’m gay and have always been gay.

By: Burr

Burr — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 23:59:33 +0000

Well in the opening statements they did mention the following:

“In California, even convicted murderers and child abusers enjoy the freedom to marry.”