"...outdated and bigoted notions about families..."-Howard Dean
The DNC just lost the Christian vote. Howard Dean is the gift that keeps on giving to Republicans.
Posted by: Freedom1 at July 7, 2006 03:06 AM
Freedom,
Indeed - I can think, right off the top of my head, of a half dozen ways to use this against the Democrats after Labor Day...
Posted by: Mark Noonan at July 7, 2006 03:46 AM
Your logic here appears to be: "If a majority of people are for something, then that's what we should do." By your logic, civil rights should never have been granted to women or blacks, since a majority of people did not want it. Whatever happened to right and wrong, and standing up for what you believe in?
All your talk about morality, straight-talk, and not following polls is just that: talk. The first thing you think when reading this story is: how can we capitalize politically from this? For me, I will continue to support what I believe is right: equal rights for all.
By the way, if you're going to look at this politically, at least look at in the long term. No one under the age of 30 gives a s**t about who marries whom. (After all, we come from a generation of divorced parents.) Just like immigration, you Repubs have latched on to a dying cause in a vain attempt to win a couple more elections.
Posted by: steve at July 7, 2006 08:29 AM
I read an article several years ago that kind of put the whole gay marriage controversary in perspective. I can't find an internet link to it -- I Googled "homosexual + statistics" and all that came up were porn links.
Anyway, the gist of the article was the incompatibility of the homosexual (in this case, male) lifestyle with the institution of marriage. I'm going from memory here, but my recollection is that the average straight male has around 7 lifetime sexual partners while the average homosexual has well over 100. I don't remember what the average length of committed straight male-female relationships was, but IIRC, the average length of homosexual relationships was around 2 years.
The clamor in the homosexual community for marriage rights is really nothing more than a giant smoke screen to obscure the main thrust of the homosexual agenda: that it be perceived by the public at large as being normal. There are, of course, some homosexuals in long-term, committed relationships who desire legal and medical rights, something that could be achieved through civil partnership (probably not the correct term) legislation. But the fact is that the vast majority of, at least male, homosexuals have no desire to be joined in holy matrimony.
Posted by: Retired Spook at July 7, 2006 08:50 AM
Retired,
You speakin from experience?
Are you a homosexual male, and were you elected to speak for the entire community as to what they do and don't want?
So you're saying that because a group is promiscuuous, that is a threshold for denying them the right to do what 95% of the rest of the country can do? Black marriage rates are dropping, and infidelity rates are going through the roof, does that mean that marriage should be taken from them?
Speaking from experience, this won't last another 20 years, kids today have already come to terms with homosexuals, there will be marriage for them in your lifetime, and there isn't anything you can do but sulk, whine, and repress your own fears about them in your sad little soul. LOL
Posted by: Third Eye Open at July 7, 2006 09:06 AM
So, does this mean Howard Dean has a secret "life partner?"
Posted by: Bret Helm at July 7, 2006 09:26 AM
No one under the age of 30 gives a s**t about who marries whom.
Steve, this is one of the few things I've ever seen you write that was true. My daughter and son-in-law, who are in their 30's, don't understand what the big deal is. They've fallen into the same moral equivalence trap that you have: that granting homosexuals the right to marry is the same as granting women or blacks the right to vote. Voting didn't have to be redefined in order to allow everyone to vote, and being black or being a woman is not an abnormality. In order to allow two people who cannot biologically procreate to join in the union of marriage, one has to completely redefine marriage to accomodate an abnormality. Besides, as I said in my previous post, it's all a giant smokescreen anyway, and, if homosexual marriage becomes legal, it opens up a pandora's box that most rational people think is best left closed. I guess when all of us old farts are gone, you and your generation can make it legal and suffer the consequences. Unfortunately, once you've gotten toothpaste out of the tube, it's difficult to put back in.
Back to the actual topic of the thread: Howlin' Howie has been on record saying some pretty stupid things, but this has to rank right up near the top. The RNC couldn't find an ad agency that could come up with anything this good if they tried. I've often criticized Liberals because of their intellectual dishonesty in not saying what they really believe and what their real agenda really is for fear of losing votes. Dean, for all his faults, is a truly honest Liberal, in that he's not afraid to say what he believes. Politically, though, it's not very smart.
Posted by: Retired Spook at July 7, 2006 09:32 AM
Im ok w gay civil unions but marrage is a sacrament & Lord knows we already need enough forgiveness w/o adding this to the list.
Posted by: OhioOrrin at July 7, 2006 10:05 AM
Spook,
Voting didn't have to be redefined, but the term "person" did have to be redefined, to include blacks.
being gay isn't an abnormality. Homosexuality has been around far longer than this country, Christianity, and civilization as a whole, and will continue to be with us. The toothpaste is already out of the tube, and the stains of inequity will be washed away by the peroxide-goodness of justice. LOL!
Posted by: Third Eye Open at July 7, 2006 10:23 AM
being gay isn't an abnormality.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Homosexuality has been around far longer than this country, Christianity, and civilization as a whole
I can think of lots of things that have "been around" since time immemorial -- doesn't make them normal.
Posted by: Retired Spook at July 7, 2006 10:57 AM
PLEASE CONFINE YOUR GOOFY IDEAS AND ACTIVITY TO THE PRIVATE AREA OF YOUR RESIDENCE...BUT STAY AWAY FROM MINE AND MY GRANDKIDS.
Posted by:
JEA at July 7, 2006 12:45 PM
Abnormal:
deviating from the normal or average ; UNUSUAL
Based on your own best estimates, homosexuals make up 5% of the population. They are indeed unusual and in that respect different from the normal or average person.
You may dislike the negative connotations associated with the term abnormal, but the term does fit the situation. Whether or not there have been such abnormalities throughout the ages does not keep them from being different from the norm.
Posted by: LNC at July 7, 2006 12:48 PM
"Howard Dean: Family is "Outdated and Bigoted""
Nice try Mark.
Conservatives spend $400 million a year on media and message think tanks that school you guys on "framing" the left. Want to talk about "elite" left; I'd say that was a pretty elite number to me. I'm sure that you, like most conservative politicians, have received your fair share of training from these organizations in the art of "framing”. That's why I'm so astounded when I see such a ham handed and clumsy attempt as your headline there. Completely misrepresents what he said and it isn't even hard to find that out. I suggest you return to "school" for more training.
Posted by: Leftorium at July 7, 2006 01:03 PM
Howard just keeps on giving, doesn't he?
Posted by: Scott at July 7, 2006 01:13 PM
Spook,
Guess that all depends on how you define normal.
Homosexuality may not be the same as you, but I would argue that since it has been around for time immemorial it is granted a status of normality within the context of being a part of the historical fabric of humanity.
For instance, murder may not be accepted, but when taken in the context of human actions, it's just as normal as walking the dog or ordering pizza.
Posted by: Third Eye Open at July 7, 2006 01:22 PM
The server error gremlin is working overtime today. I posted this several hours ago and suspect that it is drifting around in cyber space somewhere. My apologies if it double posts.
You speakin from experience?
Are you a homosexual male, and were you elected to speak for the entire community as to what they do and don't want?
No, TEO, my wife (the only one I've ever had) and I will celebrate our 40th anniversary next month.
You're right, though. I should not have stated as a fact that "the vast majority of homosexual males have no desire to be joined in holy matrimony". That is my opinion based on everything I've read, and based on conversations with friends who are homosexual. I've never heard or read anything to contradict that statement, however.
Speaking from experience, this won't last another 20 years, kids today have already come to terms with homosexuals, there will be marriage for them in your lifetime, and there isn't anything you can do but sulk, whine, and repress your own fears about them in your sad little soul.
You're probably right about this happening during my lifetime. When it happens, however, it will, IMHO, not be looked back on as a shining moment in history. The rest of your statement is just nasty and condescending, and presumes to know things about me that you can't possibly know but speaks volumes about the kind of person you are.
For instance, murder may not be accepted, but when taken in the context of human actions, it's just as normal as walking the dog or ordering pizza.
I guess it clearly does depend on how you define normal, and you and I are obviously on completely different pages.
Posted by: Retired Spook at July 7, 2006 01:37 PM
Steve, TEO, Maffie, teenie weanie, etc
Gays can marry today. They are NOT stopped from being married.
A gay man can marry a gay woman or a straight woman...today...right now.
A Lesbian can marry a gay man or a straight man...right now...today.
Their marrying rights have not been denied. A gay man can marry any legal consenting woman he chooses and vice versa.
I don't understand what the issue is? Man + woman equals marriage and those rights are available to gay and lesbian men and women right now.
Posted by: Warriornation at July 7, 2006 01:38 PM
Voting didn't have to be redefined, but the term "person" did have to be redefined, to include blacks.
TEO, are you suggesting that prior to the The Voting Rights Act of 1965 that blacks were not considered people?
Posted by: Retired Spook at July 7, 2006 03:06 PM
"...my wife (the only one I've ever had) and I will celebrate our 40th anniversary next month."- Retired Spook
Congratulations, Retired Spook! That's quite an accomplishment in this day and age!
:)
Posted by: Freedom1 at July 7, 2006 04:59 PM
Thanks, Freedom. And what's interesting is that most of our married friends have also only been married once and most for at least as long as we have. Must be something in the water in the Midwest.
Posted by: Retired Spook at July 7, 2006 05:26 PM
Leftorium,
Slice and dice it any way you want, but what Dean said is that those who are defending traditional marriage are defending something outdated and bigoted...I'm an old-fashioned bigot, says Dean, because I don't believe that marriage can be constituted by two males.
He is the gift that keeps on giving...
Posted by: Mark Noonan at July 7, 2006 07:55 PM
Spook,
redefine: v 1: give a new or different definition to
When we ratified the 15th amendment we gave a new definition to our constitution, we redefined what it meant to vote, since there were differences when it came to blacks and whites performing this action.
Posted by: Third Eye Open at July 8, 2006 09:15 PM
"...outdated and bigoted notions about families..."-Howard Dean
The DNC just lost the Christian vote. Howard Dean is the gift that keeps on giving to Republicans.
Freedom,
Indeed - I can think, right off the top of my head, of a half dozen ways to use this against the Democrats after Labor Day...
Your logic here appears to be: "If a majority of people are for something, then that's what we should do." By your logic, civil rights should never have been granted to women or blacks, since a majority of people did not want it. Whatever happened to right and wrong, and standing up for what you believe in?
All your talk about morality, straight-talk, and not following polls is just that: talk. The first thing you think when reading this story is: how can we capitalize politically from this? For me, I will continue to support what I believe is right: equal rights for all.
By the way, if you're going to look at this politically, at least look at in the long term. No one under the age of 30 gives a s**t about who marries whom. (After all, we come from a generation of divorced parents.) Just like immigration, you Repubs have latched on to a dying cause in a vain attempt to win a couple more elections.
I read an article several years ago that kind of put the whole gay marriage controversary in perspective. I can't find an internet link to it -- I Googled "homosexual + statistics" and all that came up were porn links.
Anyway, the gist of the article was the incompatibility of the homosexual (in this case, male) lifestyle with the institution of marriage. I'm going from memory here, but my recollection is that the average straight male has around 7 lifetime sexual partners while the average homosexual has well over 100. I don't remember what the average length of committed straight male-female relationships was, but IIRC, the average length of homosexual relationships was around 2 years.
The clamor in the homosexual community for marriage rights is really nothing more than a giant smoke screen to obscure the main thrust of the homosexual agenda: that it be perceived by the public at large as being normal. There are, of course, some homosexuals in long-term, committed relationships who desire legal and medical rights, something that could be achieved through civil partnership (probably not the correct term) legislation. But the fact is that the vast majority of, at least male, homosexuals have no desire to be joined in holy matrimony.
Retired,
You speakin from experience?
Are you a homosexual male, and were you elected to speak for the entire community as to what they do and don't want?
So you're saying that because a group is promiscuuous, that is a threshold for denying them the right to do what 95% of the rest of the country can do? Black marriage rates are dropping, and infidelity rates are going through the roof, does that mean that marriage should be taken from them?
Speaking from experience, this won't last another 20 years, kids today have already come to terms with homosexuals, there will be marriage for them in your lifetime, and there isn't anything you can do but sulk, whine, and repress your own fears about them in your sad little soul. LOL
So, does this mean Howard Dean has a secret "life partner?"
No one under the age of 30 gives a s**t about who marries whom.
Steve, this is one of the few things I've ever seen you write that was true. My daughter and son-in-law, who are in their 30's, don't understand what the big deal is. They've fallen into the same moral equivalence trap that you have: that granting homosexuals the right to marry is the same as granting women or blacks the right to vote. Voting didn't have to be redefined in order to allow everyone to vote, and being black or being a woman is not an abnormality. In order to allow two people who cannot biologically procreate to join in the union of marriage, one has to completely redefine marriage to accomodate an abnormality. Besides, as I said in my previous post, it's all a giant smokescreen anyway, and, if homosexual marriage becomes legal, it opens up a pandora's box that most rational people think is best left closed. I guess when all of us old farts are gone, you and your generation can make it legal and suffer the consequences. Unfortunately, once you've gotten toothpaste out of the tube, it's difficult to put back in.
Back to the actual topic of the thread: Howlin' Howie has been on record saying some pretty stupid things, but this has to rank right up near the top. The RNC couldn't find an ad agency that could come up with anything this good if they tried. I've often criticized Liberals because of their intellectual dishonesty in not saying what they really believe and what their real agenda really is for fear of losing votes. Dean, for all his faults, is a truly honest Liberal, in that he's not afraid to say what he believes. Politically, though, it's not very smart.
Im ok w gay civil unions but marrage is a sacrament & Lord knows we already need enough forgiveness w/o adding this to the list.
Spook,
Voting didn't have to be redefined, but the term "person" did have to be redefined, to include blacks.
being gay isn't an abnormality. Homosexuality has been around far longer than this country, Christianity, and civilization as a whole, and will continue to be with us. The toothpaste is already out of the tube, and the stains of inequity will be washed away by the peroxide-goodness of justice. LOL!
being gay isn't an abnormality.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Homosexuality has been around far longer than this country, Christianity, and civilization as a whole
I can think of lots of things that have "been around" since time immemorial -- doesn't make them normal.
PLEASE CONFINE YOUR GOOFY IDEAS AND ACTIVITY TO THE PRIVATE AREA OF YOUR RESIDENCE...BUT STAY AWAY FROM MINE AND MY GRANDKIDS.
Abnormal:
deviating from the normal or average ; UNUSUAL
Based on your own best estimates, homosexuals make up 5% of the population. They are indeed unusual and in that respect different from the normal or average person.
You may dislike the negative connotations associated with the term abnormal, but the term does fit the situation. Whether or not there have been such abnormalities throughout the ages does not keep them from being different from the norm.
"Howard Dean: Family is "Outdated and Bigoted""
Nice try Mark.
Conservatives spend $400 million a year on media and message think tanks that school you guys on "framing" the left. Want to talk about "elite" left; I'd say that was a pretty elite number to me. I'm sure that you, like most conservative politicians, have received your fair share of training from these organizations in the art of "framing”. That's why I'm so astounded when I see such a ham handed and clumsy attempt as your headline there. Completely misrepresents what he said and it isn't even hard to find that out. I suggest you return to "school" for more training.
Howard just keeps on giving, doesn't he?
Spook,
Guess that all depends on how you define normal.
Homosexuality may not be the same as you, but I would argue that since it has been around for time immemorial it is granted a status of normality within the context of being a part of the historical fabric of humanity.
For instance, murder may not be accepted, but when taken in the context of human actions, it's just as normal as walking the dog or ordering pizza.
The server error gremlin is working overtime today. I posted this several hours ago and suspect that it is drifting around in cyber space somewhere. My apologies if it double posts.
You speakin from experience?
Are you a homosexual male, and were you elected to speak for the entire community as to what they do and don't want?
No, TEO, my wife (the only one I've ever had) and I will celebrate our 40th anniversary next month.
You're right, though. I should not have stated as a fact that "the vast majority of homosexual males have no desire to be joined in holy matrimony". That is my opinion based on everything I've read, and based on conversations with friends who are homosexual. I've never heard or read anything to contradict that statement, however.
Speaking from experience, this won't last another 20 years, kids today have already come to terms with homosexuals, there will be marriage for them in your lifetime, and there isn't anything you can do but sulk, whine, and repress your own fears about them in your sad little soul.
You're probably right about this happening during my lifetime. When it happens, however, it will, IMHO, not be looked back on as a shining moment in history. The rest of your statement is just nasty and condescending, and presumes to know things about me that you can't possibly know but speaks volumes about the kind of person you are.
For instance, murder may not be accepted, but when taken in the context of human actions, it's just as normal as walking the dog or ordering pizza.
I guess it clearly does depend on how you define normal, and you and I are obviously on completely different pages.
Steve, TEO, Maffie, teenie weanie, etc
Gays can marry today. They are NOT stopped from being married.
A gay man can marry a gay woman or a straight woman...today...right now.
A Lesbian can marry a gay man or a straight man...right now...today.
Their marrying rights have not been denied. A gay man can marry any legal consenting woman he chooses and vice versa.
I don't understand what the issue is? Man + woman equals marriage and those rights are available to gay and lesbian men and women right now.
Voting didn't have to be redefined, but the term "person" did have to be redefined, to include blacks.
TEO, are you suggesting that prior to the The Voting Rights Act of 1965 that blacks were not considered people?
"...my wife (the only one I've ever had) and I will celebrate our 40th anniversary next month."- Retired Spook
Congratulations, Retired Spook! That's quite an accomplishment in this day and age!
:)
Thanks, Freedom. And what's interesting is that most of our married friends have also only been married once and most for at least as long as we have. Must be something in the water in the Midwest.
Leftorium,
Slice and dice it any way you want, but what Dean said is that those who are defending traditional marriage are defending something outdated and bigoted...I'm an old-fashioned bigot, says Dean, because I don't believe that marriage can be constituted by two males.
He is the gift that keeps on giving...
Spook,
redefine: v 1: give a new or different definition to
When we ratified the 15th amendment we gave a new definition to our constitution, we redefined what it meant to vote, since there were differences when it came to blacks and whites performing this action.