Posts archived in Gayness

0 comments

August 17, 2010 by amglolz

AMGers fail at basic reading comprehension. Again.

Apollo just got back from vacation on Mt. Olympus (Greece is lovely this time of year) and had this to say about the ongoing California gay marriage lawsuit: “Gay Marriage Backers Suffer Humiliating Defeat in California.” He is referring to the appeals court placing a stay on Judge Walker’s ruling, which of course found the right to marry could not be withheld by the state of California based on the gender of the two parties.

As a gay marriage backer myself I don’t feel very humiliated. We still won? The effect of the ruling is on hold but the 9th Circuit didn’t make any decision on the merits of the case or even whether or not the proponents of Proposition 8 have the right to appeal. If that is a humiliating defeat, I guess I am embarrassed at how un-humiliated I feel.

AMGer “WV_Republican” showed his complete inability to, say, read, by completely misunderstanding the news in a totally basic way when he wrote this:

Also, it seems that Walker’s “opinion” that traditional marriage supporters don’t have “standing to appeal” was shot down. Now that could be “humiliating…..”

Really? Where the heck did you pull that from? The Wrongington Post? The Learn To Fricken’ Read Times? The supporters of “traditional” marriage were actually ordered to argue why they should be allowed to appeal. The issue is very much undecided at the moment.

In fact, it looks increasingly likely to me that this case will be decided on the standing issue. Therefore, gay marriage would exist in California only, and would not be decided on the merits at either the 9th Circuit or Supreme Court level. This seems like the probable scenario to me because it allows the 9th Circuit and Justice Kennedy to kick the controversial social issue can down the street a few more years. Furthermore, the conservatives on the Supreme Court probably don’t mind avoiding this particular case as well, because if you actually read Judge Walker’s decision you will find that the Proposition 8 proponents barely argued anything at all. I mean really, their presentation was somewhere between amateurish and negligently bad.

If you’re Justice Scalia, you’re reading the Walker decision and thinking to yourself about the Prop 8 legal team: “What the hell? Don’t these morons know how the system works?” Even if you think you’re going to lose the case at the first level, you need to present a factual basis for the Justice Scalias of the world to cite something in the record later on. But there’s nothing. The conservative Justices would need to make up everything from scratch. I truly believe they will happily avoid this one and wait for an appeal coming from somewhere with a good traditional marriage supporting lawyer who knows what he is doing and actually builds a case based on, you know, those fact thingeys. Hint to gay marriage opponents: Call witnesses that actually agree with you on key points.

Apollo continues with this strange idea that the “right to appeal” issue was decided in a further post, writing:

For the 9th Circus to vote against gay marriage the backers must have had a very flimsy argument. But yes I agree, the liberal activist gay judge who said “they weren’t allowed to appeal” just got slapped down pretty badly. What an idiot.

Riiiiight… The Federal Judge appointed by Reagan and having served about 20 years is the idiot. The guy that can’t understand a pretty clearly written piece of news is not. Uh huh.

Leave a comment.
0 comments

August 13, 2010 by amglolz

LOL!

Tom C has long felt that homosexual “culture” is bad, while heterosexual “culture” is good. This utterly unsupportable view of the world leads to some pretty funny statements by him. Like this one, found in a longer discussion about a gay bar in Ogunquit where the bartenders were serving drinks while shirtless:

There is plenty of sleaze in hetro culture – but it’s the fringe.

This type of blatant sexual behavior tends to be mainstream for gay culture.

Hetero sleaze is just a few fringe weirdos! And by sleaze, he means men doing stuff without their shirts on.  You can’t get more sleazy than that. Luckily for the rest of us, heterosexuals would never stoop to such lows as serving drinks while shirtless.

In case you’ve ever wondered when you drive by PT’s Showclub on Riverside Street (formerly “Platinum Plus), those hundreds of cars filling the parking lot at all hours of the day are NOT sleazy heteros. They are, in fact, concerned hetero citizens like Tom C stopping by to inform the operator of the establishment that his incredibly successful business model is deleterious to the hetero culture. These concerned hetero citizens then surely approach the young women inside and offer them money to please put their clothes back on. Yes, I am sure that is how it works.

Oh, and hetero movies, books, tv, car advertisements, beer advertisements, advertisements in general, clothing, bars, and everything else are absolutely NOT sleazy, save a few fringe wackos who insist on putting breasts on everything. And once we heteros find out who those people are, we will surely confront them and put a stop to it once and for all.

Leave a comment.
0 comments

August 7, 2010 by amglolz

Crazy is fabulous!

AMGer Andrew Ian Dodge posted video of the rare North American Gay Tea Partier in its natural habitat, which is of course on YouTube holding signs.

I don’t see these two staying together long. The guy on the left has chosen to support one of Paul LePage’s three distinct positions on marriage equality (Position Number One, if you’re keeping track at home), while his sinful sodomy spouse-to-be thinks they should just sit down and hammer out a contract. No government intervention needed.

There is this conservative fairy tale that marriage should really just be a civil contract, like the one you have with your cell phone company or bank. SHOCKING FACT: You can do this already! Yes, tea partiers, you could abstain from getting that evil government marriage license and just sit down with your partner, a pen, and some paper and write out a contract. What? You cant afford a lawyer but you want to be together anyways? Don’t worry about it, your partner loves you so I’m sure all the clauses will be fair and above-board. Look into his eyes deeply. Don’t you trust him? With everything you own? Of course you do, you’re in love.

Let me know how it works out. After a few of you try it out for a couple decades then you can have the credibility to try and foist this massive change to America upon the rest of us. Until then, I’ll stick with what works.

Leave a comment.
1 comments

June 11, 2010 by amglolz

A Great Moment in AMG History: The Distributist on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

This guy doesn’t have a clue how repulsive he is.

Listen here. Taken from two nearby posts in this thread.

Gays are not “gay” at all, just angry. And mentally unstable. Sorry, no link for that fact.

….

Not to stray too far from the thread, I’ve yet to meet a homosexual I would want in the foxhole, humvee, or tank alongside me. And I’m not talking just for prurient self-protection. I find them to be completely nice people, but emotionally unstable each one. War is no environment for an emotionally unstable platoon in pink. War protests, nowthere is a much more suitable environment for your average sufferer of gender perception disorder.

I find absolutely nothing wrong with “discriminating” against homosexuals in the military. I am somewhat contented hearing that they might still.

- The Distributist, 2007

Leave a comment.
0 comments

May 17, 2010 by amglolz

Why does Fox News hate marriage?

Fox news publicizes the work of Jenny Block. She writes a column titled “Fox on Sex.”

She wrote an autobiographical book about the joys of open marriage.

Let’s face it: the destruction of traditional marriage is perfectly okay with Fox News as long as they don’t have to think about two guys kissing.

Leave a comment.
0 comments

May 3, 2010 by amglolz

Apollo: Government Should Decide Who You Date, What You Wear

[AMGLOLZ note: Yes, this post is out of date. I started this draft a while ago but didn't finish it. Nevertheless I think it might be worthy of throwing out there now.]

Another day, another gay thread on As Maine Goes.

This one is about the school in Mississippi that actually cancelled their prom because some girl planned to bring her girlfriend. The school also said she couldn’t wear a tux.

Apollo titled the thread, “Lesbian Forces Cancellation of High School Prom.” I noticed that the word “liberal” is not in the title. I guess everyone has an off day once in a while.

Notwithstanding the  lack of the word “liberal,” the title does sufficiently fulfill Apollo’s mission to be as factually inaccurate as possible. The poor girl, who happens to be named Constance McMillan, did not force the school district to do anything. You see, Apollo, thousands if not millions of gays and lesbians attend school dances each year in America. Those schools aren’t “forced” to cancel anything. When only one school cancels the prom, it is pretty clear who is forcing the issue.

Apollo remained outraged. He says:

They wouldn’t have had to move the prom at all if the ACLU wouldn’t have come in with threats of bankrupting the school. Yep, this whole episode will do wonders for gay rights in that community.

And your righteous callousness does wonders for the Greek deity community.

On a separate thread, Apollo explained why he chose to be named Apollo and how all my picking on him just isn’t funny:

[AMGLOLZ] always makes greek God jokes when he refers to my posts. I don’t quite understand how that is supposed to be cute or funny, but I took my name after the space program, which incidently, was one of the greatest accomplishments of the United States until the liberals destroyed it.

Blaming liberals? Check. Not understanding the awesome irony of his moniker given that 80% of his posts are anti-gay? Check. Not understanding the second level of irony given that he, a thoroughly monotheistic Christian, chose the name of a pagan god as his handle? Check.

And Apollo loves rockets? Hmm. Is it possible that “Apollo” is the secret online identity of this man:

Leave a comment.
6 comments

March 22, 2010 by amglolz

Ha!

From Augusta Insider, via As Maine Goes. Paul LePage flip flops on civil unions. He supported them before he didn’t.

Said the old Paul LePage:

…I go one step further than many because I say if you’re going to get married by the State, its a civil union, period.  Whether you’re a homosexual, lesbian, heterosexual.  Everybody.  That way everybody gets the same legal standing.”

“New” Paul LePage no longer feels it is important for everyone to have the same legal standing.

I might understand why he would switch because it would seem that the newer position would be more endearing to his base, but to be honest no one on the very conservative side seemed to care much about what LePage said. They really seemed to assume that it was a liberal plot or something to make it seem like Paul LePage said he wanted to equalize gay and straight relationships under the law, but they knew deep down in their heart that a guy like Mr. LePage could never really mean it. If no one was giving him any flack, why bother changing his position? Yet another mysterious move by the Mardens’ man.

Leave a comment.
2 comments

March 10, 2010 by amglolz

Henry Clay… WHAA?


Henry Clay further defends the indefensible decision of a certain Catholic archdiocese to not allow the child of lesbian parents to attend a daycare open to everyone else. Henry writes:

Questioning the morality of the decision of the church is a false argument because it is an argument where you feel that their morality should match your own rather than looking at what the organization’s position on the issue is in the first place.

Huh? What? Questioning the morality of other organizations is bad? What sort of America does Henry live in? My hypothetical Henry: “Oh, I noticed your drinking fountain only accepts white kids. That seems wrong to me, but it isn’t my place to question your morality, since that is your organization’s position on white drinking fountains after all.” Yea, sure Henry, that’s how it works.

The point is, Henry, that if you’re going to defend this Archdiocese’s decision then you’ve got to actually defend it. Questioning the morality of an immoral decision is never a false argument. The problem you’re having is that the it is very difficult to argue the Church’s position here without looking like someone that likes to single out gays and discriminate against them. Hmm.

The Archdiocese’s official statements aren’t much better:

It’s also true that some of our schools exist as a service outreach in largely non-Catholic communities.  Many of our schools also accept students of other faiths and no faith, and from single parent and divorced parent families.  These students are always welcome so long as their parents support the Catholic mission of the school and do not offer a serious counter-witness to that mission in their actions.

[....]

If parents don’t respect the beliefs of the Church, or live in a manner that openly rejects those beliefs, then partnering with those parents becomes very difficult, if not impossible.  It also places unfair stress on the children, who find themselves caught in the middle, and on their teachers, who have an obligation to teach the authentic faith of the Church.

The problem here is that the Archdiocese doesn’t reject everyone that lives in a manner openly rejecting Church beliefs, just lesbian’s children. How many children of unmarried parents go to these schools? Unmarried, cohabiting parents? How many children of parents on their second or third marriage? How many children of parents that openly support the death penalty, which the Catholic Church is against? How did the Archdiocese deal with children whose parents openly supported invading Iraq, which was unequivocally in violation of Catholicism’s “just war” policy? My guess: the Archdiocese didn’t care. It doesn’t care unless it is about homosexuality.

The Archdiocese has one set of standards for issues of homosexuality, and another set of standards for everything else. That is discrimination, plain and simple.

Leave a comment.
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »