I'm not making anything up. I'd bet money you are gay or bi or something like that. Like I said... There is no way a normal guy would defend this deviance with such veracity.

This is not an issue of equal rights. You perverts package it that way. It's an assault on traditional American family values.

Moby... It can also be argued that liberals want to force their immorality on the population.

Issues like this should be voted on by the population at large. Not decided by special interests and deviant politicians.

Need a little help here.....

I read the transcript of the interview and I didn't see any specific reference or comment by Santorum that singled out gays...he seemed to be directing his comments against all groups which don't fall into the traditional "family unit" definition. Which is hardly unusual for a member of the GOP.

TRANSCRIPT
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030422/ap_on_go_co/santorum_gays_excerpts_2

It's not like he said "GAY = EVIL". Personally, I don't know what the fuss is about. At least he's being consistent, unlike NOW who originally was against charging the Peterson bastard with double murder b/c it would hurt their arguments with respect to abortion.

http://www.dailyrecord.com/news/03/04/22/news2-lacifolo.htm


-D

I'm curious how a gay couple next door could damage your family. I want to understand how the deviant hordes of gay men and women living peaceful lives will cause a catastrophic meltdown.

Please explain. Pretend I am just as dumb and backward and gullible as you like to think I am.

Stop giving me fucking rhetoric you pulled off another Website, and spell it out for me. Point form if you don't want to type, I understand how difficult it can be . . .

I want to know just how it is an assault on American family values.
Is it the fear that little Johnny might grow up gay?

Come on, smart-guy . . . give me something to think about . . .

But that's just it...they *aren't* forcing it. They are saying each should live as they see fit. Nobody is telling you that you have to refrain from religious activities. Nobody is telling you that you HAVE to consider abortion if you have a pregnancy.

As far as the congressman... he said what he said, however he meant it. I'm just amused by how he's trying to justify it (regardless of what he meant). Should he apologize? Maybe he should just say he's disappointed that some people may have taken it wrong, but that he won't apologize for actually saying it.

Gay couple. That's a fucking laugh. You make them sound like Ozzie and Harriet. I guess outside of the bath houses they may ride home together.

Maybe a tiny percentage of them live "coupled" monogomous lives. The rest are deviant hordes. They deserve no more legal protection then a man who wants to marry his adult sister. It's wrong regardless of the propaganda your kind endlessly pushes on the public.

You are wrong again Moby. Did you read this link:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/04/22/BA248780.DTL

I would say there is a lot being forced on the public. California today...everywhere tommorrow. Sen. Kennedy has a similar bill in committee. Don't hire a deviant .. you pay $150,000.

It is fucking WRONG.

"I want to understand how the deviant hordes of gay men and women living peaceful lives will cause a catastrophic meltdown."

Okay.

So skip the "couple" reference. It obviously makes you uneasy . . .

You still didn't answer my question:

How does the lifestyle of homosexuals threaten the American family?
Is it that they make you uneasy? They offend you and your moral sensibilities? Offending you can't really damage your life unless you're so morally bankrupt that you will let it . . .

How do homosexuals threaten the American family?

Come on, you can do better than rhetoric . . . can't you?

"Landlords and businesses that intentionally discriminate face fines up to $150,000 imposed by the Fair Employment and Housing Commission or unlimited damages if a civil lawsuit is filed, just as in race and sex discrimination cases."

Just as in race and sex discrimination cases . . .

Should employers also avoid hiring women and blacks?

So, the cure for this seems not to live in Boston.

HAHA, you just said it, equal rights for everyone. Therefore, there should be no "hate crime" laws written. Being gay doesn't justify you having special laws written.
I don't like women with tatoos across their back, should they be supported under the hate crimes law if someone did something evil to them?

I think there are about a dozen different points being argued back and forth.

I agree with offhisfuckingrocker, hate crimes are a waste of time and energy. Any crime is essentially a hate crime. I don't think anyone should have special rights, and I don't think gays want "special" rights.

Every homosexual I've ever met has wanted equal rights, nothing more. That means they want to be able to have spousal benefits. What the hell is wrong with that? My wife will have excellent healthcare when we tie the knot, we are happy about that. Why can't two homosexuals do the same?

offhisfuckingnut is right--equal rights for everyone.

Now, we get to argue about what really is "equal" . . .

This should be entertaining . . .

I'm not real familiar with what the SF group is doing. I'm not saying there are instances where it might go too far. HOWEVER, it goes both ways. Do some research on Cincinnati and what happens there. There's a reason it has the nickname "Censornazi." The extreme right is in control there.

Let me quess, you're off the med's today. How did "hate crimes" get into the conversation? Homosexuals want EQUAL rights, meaning they want the states to reconize their marriage, and be eligible for the benefits that straight couples receive. As for hate crimes per se, are you saying no additional penalty should be given to someone who kills because the victim was black, Jewish, or gay?

Their lifestyle does not.

Legislating special rights certainly does.

Every organization, religious and private, would be open to attack regardless of the values held by their members.

Every religion (including Islam which is the liberals current favorite and rabidly anti-homosexual) would have to comply with this so-called acceptance designated by law.

Legally protected access to children regardless of the parents values.

Deviants will be adopting children.

Private Health Care companies will be under financial assault with legal gay lovers being covered for AIDS expenses.

Institution of marraige would further crumble.

Hate crimes lawsuits crippling government and business.

More Gay Civil rights lawsuits given teeth with new legislation.

These are just a few. The damage would be much greater on society.

Are you a gay like Sean?

You come off as a classic closet case yourself. Only someone insecure with their own manhood would vigorously denouce homosexuality like you do.

Again...it's not special rights they want. It's EQUAL rights.

Why is it that religion can be protected? It is a choice no matter how you cut it.

If it's their own children, they should have every right to access to them (aside from child abuse).

Can you give examples where it has been *proven* that gays having children has been detrimental to the kids? Not your opinion...but proof that has been accepted by the medical establishment and anyone else who has the authoritative knowledge of it?

Nice try fancy boy. There has never been a liberal, left wing or deviant issue discussed on XOC that you did not favor.

I feel sorry for your son. I would think it's rough being a kid in a house with two mothers without a real man to look up to.

*Every organization, religious and private, would be open to attack regardless of the values held by their members.

--Like these same organizations aren't facing attack by a thousand splintered special-interest groups as it is?

*Every religion (including Islam which is the liberals current favorite and rabidly anti-homosexual) would have to comply with this so-called acceptance designated by law.

--Well, I couldn't give a fuck what happens to any religion. Let 'em suffer . . .

*Legally protected access to children regardless of the parents values.

--Ever heard of private schools? All kinds of assholes already in the Public School System. If you think kids are safe now, you don't care much for children . . . cool, Johnny won't learn what a homosexual is. Good. Just hope he isn't shot on the playground . . .

*Deviants will be adopting children.

--Hell, Susan Smith and Andrea Yates had theirs legally, the old-fashioned way.

Worked out well, eh?

*Private Health Care companies will be under financial assault with legal gay lovers being covered for AIDS expenses.

--Not like those thousands of heterosexual AIDS victims dying across the country weekly . . .

*Institution of marraige would further crumble.

--Nope. The institution of marriage will crumble because men cheat on women, women cheat on men. If you can't make a marriage work, don't blame someone else . . .

*Hate crimes lawsuits crippling government and business.

--As opposed to lawsuits over hot coffee? Fat-making hamburgers? Damn those gays, they'll damage the court system . . .

*More Gay Civil rights lawsuits given teeth with new legislation.

--How about that?

These are just a few. The damage would be much greater on society.

Are you a gay like Sean?

--Don't think so. Maybe I'm gay like you?

Do yourself a favor Capote, just admit you prefer the company of men. I'll bet money the only man you ever looked up to had his balls on your chin.

It isn't a right to be married. It isn't a right to have benefits. These are all privileges. And yes, gays are covered under the hate crime laws. I am not covered under such laws. Where is the equal rights you were talking about?

Why should the states recognize their marriages? It is the vast majority of the population that thinks choosing to be gay is immoral. The needs and wants of the many outweigh the needs and wants of the few, unless you are a liberal.

All men are created equal. It is what you do after being created that brings about deserves and deserves nots.

i wasnt gonna chime in here till i saw this(leave it to madman)

I support gay rights... who are you to say that your values are the only values... ego-maniacal prick

Graham.. you are an idiot. I'm not even going to quote your whole pile of bullshit.

You don't care about about anybody's religion?

The whole argument is all about religion and morality. You have neither.

There is no point in arguing the question any further with you.

Yes you are. Religion. (*note* - I don't disagree that hate crimes might be getting a little out of hand. Murder is murder, regardless of who the victim is. Along the same lines (and I might get flak for this), why does someone who murders a police officer made worse than someone who murders a civilian? I'm not saying they shouldn't...but doesn't this belittle the common citizen who was murdered?. Just a thought.

Quote:

Why should the states recognize their marriages? It is the vast majority of the population that thinks choosing to be gay is immoral.

That is highly suspect. The *vast* majority? I'd say a large number (maybe not a *vast* majority) don't have issues with other people being gay. Sure, they are afraid of it...but they also know it's not their lives.

Quote:

All men are created equal. It is what you do after being created that brings about deserves and deserves nots.

That's all fine and dandy. But since when was it up to *you* to decide who deserves and who doesn't?

You got married, right? Your wife get's your medical benifits, right? If a black man killed you because you're white or Catholic, that's a hate crime, right?

Our founding fathers had the "minority" also in mind when they wrote the consitution, one just has to look at a jury trial for instance.

I agree. Even if you're gay, if you're not hurting anybody, you deserve equal rights too.