I am so glad we finally agree on gay marriage

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Ok, Reading Comprehension 101 is on. I responded to AJ's comment. I didn't direct the act to AJ personally.

Reminder to make a larger contribution to literacy programs. They need help.

Nah, I think the message was clear.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Nah, I think the message was clear.

Clear as mud for you.

[Peikko 1,575]

Celebrate by spreading your cheeks . . . then, drop your soap.

Why do you claim innocence of the homosexual intent behind this post to Steven? Really? What point is served by protesting your innocence of something that is so blatently obvious? That's the sort of thing a 6 year old does, who hasn't yet learned how to manage the feelings of guilt that are natural when one does something that one knows to be wrong.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[Wyld Blu 35]

Clear as mud for you.

Much like your explanations on how gay marriage will negatively affect society...but that boat has sailed. I think I can say, most of us have come to the conclusion you won't or can't provide this.

-Blu-

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Why do you claim innocence of the homosexual intent behind this post to Steven? Really? What point is served by protesting your innocence of something that is so blatently obvious? That's the sort of thing a 6 year old does, who hasn't yet learned how to manage the feelings of guilt that are natural when one does something that one knows to be wrong.

More evidence of transference and amateur mind reading.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Much like your explanations on how gay marriage will negatively affect society...but that boat has sailed. I think I can say, most of us have come to the conclusion you won't or can't provide this.

-Blu-

All anyone has to do is show up and be anti-gay marriage and it's clear to see that no matter what we post, you libs will disagree with it, so why bother to give you more ammunition to snipe at? I have also come to the conclusion that none of you really know why you support gay marriage except that it doesn't affect you personally and makes you feel superior to those who don't.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

i'm not sure aj wants to discuss his sarah palin fantasies.

That would be entertaining, though.

[Peikko 1,575]

More evidence of transference and amateur mind reading.

No there isn't. I haven't claimed to know why you do it, I even asked you to explain your denial. You prefer not to, instead you are trying to demonstrate once again that you are smarter than I am. VW, I don't care. I don't think anyone else does either.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[Wyld Blu 35]

All anyone has to do is show up and be anti-gay marriage and it's clear to see that no matter what we post, you libs will disagree with it, so why bother to give you more ammunition to snipe at? I have also come to the conclusion that none of you really know why you support gay marriage except that it doesn't affect you personally and makes you feel superior to those who don't.

Interesting, but inaccurate. I haven't disagreed with anything you have said, because you haven't really said much in regards to your arguments or support for why you feel the way you do. Not only does it not affect me personally, but I would love to entertain your explanations on how it would affect society. But we all know, that argument from you is not forthcoming. We have, and I have personally, explained why I feel it wouldn't be a negative thing, but your part of the argument is noticeably missing. You just go on and on about how we are all sniping at you and that we all feel superior. I don't feel superior to anyone, never have and never claimed to be.

-Blu-

[one...two...tree 2,762]

All anyone has to do is show up and be anti-gay marriage and it's clear to see that no matter what we post, you libs will disagree with it, so why bother to give you more ammunition to snipe at? I have also come to the conclusion that none of you really know why you support gay marriage except that it doesn't affect you personally and makes you feel superior to those who don't.

Civil rights...this a circular argument and fruitless, but at least try and accurately characterize the opposition's POV when referring to their reason(s) for supporting gay marriage.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Interesting, but inaccurate. I haven't disagreed with anything you have said, because you haven't really said much in regards to your arguments or support for why you feel the way you do. Not only does it not affect me personally, but I would love to entertain your explanations on how it would affect society. But we all know, that argument from you is not forthcoming. We have, and I have personally, explained why I feel it wouldn't be a negative thing, but your part of the argument is noticeably missing. You just go on and on about how we are all sniping at you and that we all feel superior. I don't feel superior to anyone, never have and never claimed to be.

-Blu-

I went back to the closed thread and pulled all your posts. Not one of them gives anything other than an idealistic and unrealistic view of how gay marriage won't affect anything, most of them demand I explain myself.

Why is it so difficult to go beyond "gay marriage doesn't affect me and I'm sure it won't affect you either", but I'm supposed to believe that that argument, deeply held, is the type that inspires me to believe the pro-gay crowd here is capable of more if I give them another chance? Sorry, I don't see it.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Civil rights...this a circular argument and fruitless, but at least try and accurately characterize the opposition's POV when referring to their reason(s) for supporting gay marriage.

I have. And, it's not about civil rights; there is a demonstrable lack of understanding about what civil rights entails that makes me long for the 60's when people actually knew what they were fighting for.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Sofiyya

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I have. And, it's not about civil rights;

Constitutional experts disagree with you as does the Supreme Court - they tend not to hear a case that has no merit on the surface. But of course, both these constitutional experts as well as the judges on the Supreme Court clearly lack your superior analytical skills and intellectual capacity. And historical perspective and the long view, of course.

Get over yourself.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Constitutional experts disagree with you as does the Supreme Court - they tend not to hear a case that has no merit on the surface. But of course, both these constitutional experts as well as the judges on the Supreme Court clearly lack your superior analytical skills and intellectual capacity. And historical perspective and the long view, of course.

Get over yourself.

Curb your fantasy. You explained what happened after Loving like it was a fairy tale your mama told you at bedtime, but you think you know about this. I'm done with Constitutional amateurs. Bring red meat next time you want to discuss this.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Sofiyya

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

After a long thread, often acrimonious but always educational, it was heartening to me to see the VJ community coalesce around a consensus position on gay marriage. Steve may have requested his thread closed, seeing how it had achieved it's purpose, but the issue itself has not died. Today we here on VJ have all agreed on a position and if we can do it, everyone can!

Good job, people.

Whats interesting is that this isn't really a new discussion. There are records of same sex marriages as early as the 13th and 14th century.