Another flagrant and inexcusable exercise of ‘raw judicial power’ threatens to enflame and prolong the culture war ignited by the courts in the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade…
We are not surprised. Judge Walker has made this a circus trial, and has repeatedly shown his personal bias. I think everyone who watched this case closely expected him to rule in this way.
The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today decried the decision of U.S. Circuit Court Judge Vaughn Walker to invalidate California’s Proposition 8, an amendment which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman:
“Big surprise! We expected nothing different from Judge Vaughn Walker, after the biased way he conducted this trial,” said Brian Brown, President of NOM. “With a stroke of his pen, Judge Walker has overruled the votes and values of 7 million Californians who voted for marriage as one man and one woman. This ruling, if allowed to stand, threatens not only Prop 8 in California but the laws in 45 other states that define marriage as one man and one woman.”
“Never in the history of America has a federal judge ruled that there is a federal constitutional right to same sex marriage. The reason for this is simple – there isn’t!” added Brown.
“The ‘trial’ in San Francisco in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case is a unique, and disturbing, episode in American jurisprudence. Here we have an openly gay (according to the San Francisco Chronicle) federal judge substituting his views for those of the American people and of our Founding Fathers who I promise you would be shocked by courts that imagine they have the right to put gay marriage in our Constitution. We call on the Supreme Court and Congress to protect the people’s right to vote for marriage,” stated Maggie Gallagher, Chairman of the Board of NOM.
“Gay marriage groups like the Human Rights Campaign, Freedom to Marry, and Equality California will, no doubt, be congratulating themselves over this “victory” today in San Francisco. However, even they know that Judge Walker’s decision is only temporary. For the past 20 years, gay marriage groups have fought to avoid cases filed in federal court for one good reason – they will eventually lose. But these groups do not have control of the Schwarzenegger v. Perry case, which is being litigated by two egomaniacal lawyers (Ted Olson and David Boies). So while they congratulate themselves over their victory before their home-town judge today, let’s not lose sight of the fact that this case is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court, where the right of states to define marriage as being between one man and one woman will be affirmed—and if the Supreme Court fails, Congress has the final say. The rights of millions of voters in states from Wisconsin to Florida, from Maine to California, are at stake in this ruling; NOM is confident that the Supreme Court will affirm the basic civil rights of millions of American voters to define marriage as one man and one woman,” noted Gallagher.
Ooooooh, Liberty Counsel, slinging it at the Alliance Defense Fund. This is awesome:
Although Liberty Counsel has defended the marriage laws in California since the battle began in 2004, the Alliance Defense Fund, representing the Prop 8 initiative, opposed Liberty Counsel’s attempt to intervene on behalf of Campaign for California Families. The California Attorney General did not oppose Liberty Counsel’s intervention, but ADF did. Liberty Counsel sought to provide additional defense to Prop 8 because of concern that the case was not being adequately defended. After ADF actively opposed Liberty Counsel, ADF presented only two witnesses at trial, following the 15 witnesses presented by those who challenged the amendment. Even Judge Walker commented that he was concerned by the lack of evidence presented by ADF on behalf of Prop 8. Liberty Counsel will file an amicus brief at the court of appeals in defense of Prop 8.
The California Supreme Court previously stated, “The right of initiative is precious to the people and is one which the courts are zealous to preserve to the fullest tenable measure of spirit as well as letter.” Moreover, the U.S. Constitution cannot be stretched to include a right to same-sex marriage.
“Judge Walker’s decision goes far beyond homosexual ‘marriage’ to strike at the heart of our representative democracy. Judge Walker has declared, in effect, that his opinion is supreme and ‘We the People’ are no longer free to govern ourselves. The ruling should be appealed and overturned immediately.
“Marriage is not a political toy. It is too important to treat as a means for already powerful people to gain preferred status or acceptance. Marriage between one man and one woman undergirds a stable society and cannot be replaced by any other living arrangement.
“Citizens of California voted to uphold marriage because they understood the sacred nature of marriage and that homosexual activists use same-sex ‘marriage’ as a political juggernaut to indoctrinate young children in schools to reject their parent’s values and to harass, sue and punish people who disagree.
“CWA stands in prayer for our nation as we continue to defend marriage as the holy union God created between one man and one woman.”
CWA of California State Director Phyllis Nemeth said:
“Today Judge Vaughn Walker has chosen to side with political activism over the will of the people. His ruling is slap in the face to the more than seven million Californians who voted to uphold the definition of marriage as it has been understood for millennia.
“While Judge Walker’s decision is disappointing it is not the end of this battle. Far from it. The broad coalition of support for Proposition 8 remains strong, and we will support the appeal by ProtectMarriage.com, the official proponent of Proposition 8.
“We are confident that Judge Walker’s decision will ultimately be reversed. No combination of judicial gymnastics can negate the basic truth that marriage unites the complementary physical and emotional characteristics of a man and a woman to create a oneness that forms the basis for the family unit allowing a child to be raised by his or her father and mother. Any other combination is a counterfeit that fails to provide the best environment for healthy child rearing and a secure foundation for the family. It is this foundation upon which society is – and must be – built for a healthy and sustained existence.”
“This is a tyrannical, abusive and utterly unconstitutional display of judicial arrogance. Judge Walker has turned ‘We the People’ into ‘I the Judge.’
“It’s inexcusable for him to deprive the citizens of California of their right to govern themselves, and cavalierly trash the will of over seven million voters. This case never should even have entered his courtroom. The federal constitution nowhere establishes marriage policy, which means under the 10th Amendment that issue is reserved for the states.
“It’s also extremely problematic that Judge Walker is a practicing homosexual himself. He should have recused himself from this case, because his judgment is clearly compromised by his own sexual proclivity. The fundamental issue here is whether homosexual conduct, with all its physical and psychological risks, should be promoted and endorsed by society. That’s why the people and elected officials accountable to the people should be setting marriage policy, not a black-robed tyrant whose own lifestyle choices make it impossible to believe he could be impartial.
“His situation is no different than a judge who owns a porn studio being asked to rule on an anti-pornography statute. He’d have to recuse himself on conflict of interest grounds, and Judge Walker should have done that.
“The Constitution says judges hold office ‘during good Behavior.’ Well, this ruling is bad behavior – in fact, it’s very, very bad behavior – and we call on all members of the House of Representatives who respect the Constitution to launch impeachment proceedings against this judge.”
Oh, the tears!
Those tears are useful, though, because, as Zandar reminded us on Twitter, those tears actually “sustain the same sex cake figurine manufacturers.” Thanks for helping, wingnuts!
UPDATE: It wouldn’t be complete if we didn’t include Dan Blatt of GayPatriot among the gay-hating wingnuts. He is just not happy about this, because he doesn’t think gays have earned it yet! (Or something. You never really can tell what the hell he’s on about:
While I’m happy for the couples who can now have the state recognize their unions as marriages, I fear that this decision will further divide the nation on gay marriage and embolden social conservatives.
(…)
I find some things I like and some I dislike. First, the dislike, the judge has a very hostile attitude toward the Proponents of Prop 8, adopting a condescending tone when addressing their points.
Why wasn’t the judge nice to bigots?! Those are the people whose favor Dan needs in order to feel truly affirmed as a major league gay!
Whoah, this guy is given more to popular jargon that to constitutional interpretation: ”the evidence shows that Proposition 8 harms the state’s interest in equality, because it mandates that men and women be treated differently based on antiquated and discredited notions of gender.” Antiquated and discredited notions of gender? Discredited by whom? Sociologists writing in the 1970s, inventing a social construct out of thin air?
Dude. Dan. Why don’t you just enroll yourself in a program at JONAH? Because you’d be a tad more credible if you were pretending to be “ex-gay.” Right now, it’s just sad.
I’ll update with more wingnut tears later. Now I’m going to celebrate.
While 2009 will be remembered for the worldwide economic recession, for the ex-gay industry, it will be known as The Great Moral Depression. It was a dreadful year for such programs, as they showed themselves to be a global menace run by reprobates, such as Exodus’ Randy Thomas and Alan Chambers, who combined a dangerous dose of arrogance and incompetence. Much like the Roman Catholic Church, these men ignored a credible allegation of abuse for more than six months and engaged in a dangerous game of denial.
Whatever shard of credibility this industry had was stripped away in 2009. It was a year where such programs were harshly rebuked by the mental health establishment. An important new study showed that their retrograde methods of shame and blame harmed LGBT people. The old, outdated research that they stubbornly latched onto for dear life seemed to betray them and then vanish into thin air.
Several “ex-gay” heroes turned out to be zeros and slithered away into the mist. The past 12 months, if anything, unmasked the facade of “love” this industry cynically showers on potential clients and an often gullible media. In 2009, the world saw ex-gay programs for what they are: A sugar coated excuse for homophobia.
Exodus was revealed as a front for international hate groups, who used the group’s credulous leaders as pawns in an international struggle for theocracy. PFOX stepped forward and showed, time and again, that it was just plain nuts.
NARTH put out an embarrassingly shoddy “study” that was so pathetic it was virtually ignored by the media. By the end of 2009, NARTH had solidified its place as a cabal of embittered and irrelevant quacks on the far outer fringes of psychology. Homosexuals Anonymous was, well, anonymous. The Catholic ex-gay group Courage also had a meager profile and had little impact on popular culture. And, JONAH, the Jewish ex-gay group, continued to humiliate itself through its affiliation with crackpot Born Again sexual reorientation coach Richard Cohen.
May 2010 bring the same abundance of truth and light regarding the ex-gay fraud we had in 2009. Here are the Top 10 ex-gay related stories of the year. Please feel free to comment on any major items I may have missed.
10) The Passing of The Old Guard
Focus on the Family co-founder James Dobson announced that he was stepping down. He was an arch-homophobe who once claimed allowing gay people to marry would end the earth. Under Dobson’s leadership, this mega-ministry started the ex-gay roadshow Love Won Out. Dobson’s retirement represents the winding down of the old guard. This includes the passing of other ex-gay proponents or anti-gay preachers such as Rev. Jerry Falwell, D. James Kennedy and Oral Roberts. A new generation of Evangelicals will hopefully join the reality-based community and break with the past. However, there is reason to be skeptical, considering the leader of the pack is Rick Warren, who isn’t too much better than his predecessors.
9) The Fizzling Out of Michael Glatze and Stephen Bennett
Michael Glatze (left) was formerly co-editor of XY Magazine and YGA Magazine, publications directed at LGBT youth. He and his partner of ten years, Benjie Nycum, also co-authored the book XY Survival Guide.
Glatze’s ventures went belly-up and he seemed to disappear from LGBT activism. He reemerged in July 2007 with a disgusting op-ed on the extremist website WorldNetDaily, where he announced he was “ex-gay” (although he had no experience with women)
Glatze alleged sexual conversion seems, in part, to have come from a sort-of nervous breakdown. He reported that he suffered from frequent panic attacks and that he obsessed about death.
In late September, Glatze contacted me, hoping that I would interview him and reinvigorate his flagging career as an “ex-gay”. I refused to oblige his publicity stunt, and so did LGBT advocates at other sites.
Glatze’s downfall came when he opened an incoherent vanity blog and wrote:
“Have I mentioned lately how utterly *disgusting* Obama is? And, yes, it’ because he’ black. God, help us all….It’ a shame Obama is black. He could end up setting back race relations decades.”
Condemned for his idiotic comment about President Obama, Glatze sent out a rambling e-mail announcing his career as an ex-gay spokesperson had fizzled and he was retiring. Chalk Glatze up to a pitiful flash in the pan.
Similarly, 2009 was the year that big haired ex-gay activist Stephen Bennett (left) completely vanished from the scene. And, Anthony Falzarano’s (founder of PFOX) attempted return to the spotlight also petered out.
8) The Lisa Miller Kidnapping and Abduction Case
Lisa Miller broke up with partner Janet Jenkins (Right) after becoming a born again “ex-gay”. In a fit of holier-than-thou zeal, Miller went on the lam and absconded from Vermont with their child, Isabella, that the couple was raising together after having a Civil Union.
As a result of Miller’ poor parenting and criminal behavior (she was cited for contempt of court), a Vermont court transferred custody to Jenkins (after a five year legal ordeal that will surely leave emotional scars on their child Isabella) and refused a motion to delay transfer, as requested by Miller’ law team.
People for the American Way’ Right Wing Watch reports that the location of Miller and 7-year-old Isabella Miller are presently “unknown”. This is highly problematic because the court order takes effect on New Year’ Day.
Janet Jenkins filed a missing person report in Virginia on Wednesday in hopes of finding her 7-year-old daughter, according to her lawyer. Unfortunately, Miller’s outlaw behavior has been cheered on by ex-gay activists who want to pretend they are martyrs, rather than criminal miscreants.
7) The Caitlin Ryan Study
The January 2009 issue of Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics reported on a new study by San Francisco State researcher Caitlin Ryan. Her research concluded that, “Teens who experienced negative feedback (when they came out as LGBT) were more than eight times as likely to have attempted suicide, nearly six times as vulnerable to severe depression and more than three times at risk of drug use.”
This definitive study was hugely important because it contradicted the claim by “ex-gay” activists that homosexuality was the root cause of such problems. Indeed, it was ex-gay programs – the epitome of negative feedback – that led to the destruction of LGBT people.
Exodus International officially cut ties with its Lansing affiliate Corduroy Stone after charges were made by an ex-gay survivor that the sessions included harmful and bizarre therapy.
In August, Patrick McAlvey made the charges against Corduroy Stone’s Mike Jones in a Truth Wins Out video. At the age of 19, McAlvey, who came from a religious background, was terrified that he might be gay. Feeling vulnerable and desperate to change, he placed his trust in Mike Jones and Corduroy Stone.
“He asked how large my penis was,” McAlvey explained of Jones’ therapy. “He asked if I shave my pubic hair. He asked what type of underwear that I wore.
He wanted me to describe my sexual fantasies to him and the type of men I’m attracted to. On one occasion, he asked me to take my shirt off and show him how many push-ups I could do, which I did not do.”
Tragically, it took Exodus until December to take action and cut ties with this renegade ministry. Exodus’ dithering in the face of scandal cost precious time and may have placed additional youth in harm’ way. This was a key episode in 2009 because it underscored how Exodus has little control over its satellite ministries and each one is an independent fiefdom with its own rules and techniques. Exodus is no more than a Wild West and an unprofessional hodgepodge of fundamentalist pop-psychology combined with spiritual warfare and efforts to pray away the gay.
5) Ex-Gay Charlatan Matthew C. Manning Unmasked As A Fraud
A report by the website, “Ex-Gay Watch” cast a dark cloud of skepticism over “ex-gay” activist Matthew Manning’ tale of being “delivered” from homosexuality and AIDS. According to the report, Manning has been repeatedly dragged into court for allegations of inappropriate behavior and was even banned from a popular gym after improper sexual advances were made on a 22-year-old heterosexual male. Manning, a frequent television guest and the founder of Lighthouse World Evangelism Inc., based in Santa Rosa, California, has yet to comment on the allegations made in the investigative report.
Jeremy at Good As You highlights an interesting piece in Mother Jones about Esther Fleece, the new hire at Focus on the Family tasked with bringing young people into the fold, and with tailoring a younger, hipper message to reach these folks. What’s strange, though, as Jeremy points out, is that Esther acknowledges and understands the reasons that FotF-style religion repels younger people (e.g. the gay hate just doesn’t fly with the younger set), and her superiors seem to understand this, but yet they refuse to correct the problem!
You see, the younger generation has grown up, for the most part, knowing gay people, and when you know us, it’s a lot harder to accept the parallel-universe lies propagated by the Religious Right against the LGBT community. So when Gary Schneeberger says something like this…
As for revising the positions that are alienating youth, though, that’s not really in the cards. “The things we stand for, especially in the policy realm, are things that are rooted in our understanding of the Scripture,” says Schneeberger. “So when we say we think we believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, that’s not going to change.”
it becomes abundantly obvious that Focus on the Family, and by extension, the entire Religious Right, simply doesn’t get it. Their “ideas” about the supposed threats posed to society by the Ever Present Gay Menace are laughable to a generation which has grown up with out [of the closet] gay parents, aunts, uncles, friends, neighbors, teachers, etc. Focus and Pals simply aren’t going to win that argument, ever.
So the choice for Focus et al. seems to be either A. Change or B. Become resigned to the gradual onset of irrelevance. For the moment, it seems, they’re sticking with B.
UPDATE: Now, this is interesting. A reader pointed me to Esther’s “fan page” on Facebook (it’s public, obviously), so I decided to check it out, and saw an update from last month that caught my eye, in light of Esther’s acknowledgement that the demonization of gays is part of the problem faced by Focus on the Family in recruiting new, younger followers. Consider first, this passage from the above referenced MoJo piece:
But Fleece hopes that at some point, gay people will feel welcome at Focus. “I have biological family that are gay. I mean, let’s be honest–who doesn’t?” she says. While she doesn’t endorse their lifestyle, Fleece thinks there is no reason to single out gays for more moral censure than, say, men who cheat on their wives. “We’re all sinners.”
Okay, aside from the fact that she’s wrong, that statement does reflect the conflict experienced by many Evangelicals between actual reality and the reality they’ve been taught. She seems to be striving to move forward, in some way. Ready for the status message that caught my eye?
How interesting! Would that be the same Manhattan Declaration written by self-important hack “philosopher” Robert George, he of the circular logic and “because-I-said-so” definition of “natural law”? The one signed by all the greatest luminaries of bigotry, bias and discrimination, wherein they pledge to defy any law that recognizes equality in the United States and abroad?
It would seem that this self-styled modern-day Queen Esther is talking out of both sides of her mouth.
Nathaniel Frank, author of “Friendly Fire: How The Gay Ban Undermines The Military And Weakens America” demolishes Princeton professor Robert George’s idiocy disguised as “reason” in today’s Huffington Post. “If we’re going to use reason,” writes Frank, “let’s use real reason, and not lean on our ivy-league credentials to pass off homophobia as genuine rationality.” According to his post:
For years now a culture war has raged between liberal rationalists and religious dogmatists over whether homosexuality should be treated equally by civil law. Having lost ground in recent years as young people grow up in a world far more familiar with the banalities of what it really means to be gay, the right wing has begun taking careful steps to re-brand its homophobia as a rational, secular position, instead of the sectarian prejudice that it is.
This is the latest project of the Princeton professor, Robert George, profiled in this Sunday’s New York Times magazine. It’s a dangerous trend, and a starkly immoral one, as credentialed, highly educated people who should know better lend their social science credentials to the sloppy thinking and outright bigotry of those who are unable or unwilling to challenge their own dogma.
As I wrote yesterday, (and Evan too) George is sophistry disguised as scholarship. He basically has religious hang-ups with LGBT people. Instead of exploring his own poor morals and personal issues, he has created a career out of justifying prejudice – all on Princeton’s dime.
A feature article in this week’ New York Times Magazine refers to Princeton professor Robert P. George as the “intellectual architect” of the extreme right. This is hardly an honor, considering the main competition for “Values Valedictorian” is Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter and Mike Huckabee. One also has to consider admiration comes from the likes of George W. Bush and FOX instigator Glenn Beck, who calls George “one of the biggest brains in America.”
George’ primary accomplishment has been denying gay couples the right to marry, by forming an unholy political union between conservative Catholics, like himself, and Evangelical Christians. He is the chairman of The National Organization for Marriage, the group that most recently worked to strip marriage rights from LGBT couples in Maine.
Quite frankly, I’m hardly impressed with George’ cognitive abilities. If one looks at the numbers in Maine, his allegedly intellectual arguments against same-sex marriage failed miserably in cosmopolitan Portland and in Orono, home of The University of Maine. His primary talent, it seems, is to trick the unschooled and easily fooled. Given this reality, George is more back woods propagandist than deep professorial thinker.
Indeed, one of the simplest ways to succeed in America is to rabble rouse and scapegoat. It takes no brains to peddle belligerence and play the gay card by pandering to people not playing with a full deck. George exploited an undereducated constituency and fed them red meat, which is no more than a cheap shortcut for those incapable of the more difficult task of bringing Americans together. In a diverse nation paradoxically frightened by diversity, demagogues such as George are a dime a dozen and unworthy of praise.
“Sexual relations outside the marital bond are contrary not only to the will of God but to the good of man,” said Rigali. “Indeed they are contrary to the will of God precisely because they are against the good of man.”
The “good” of which men (and women) might Rigali and George be referring to?
Is it the teenage boys who were molested in the Catholic Church because such conservative ideologues insisted on turning gay men into sexually repressed and emotionally stunted shells and then placing them in the priesthood?
Is it “good” for the gay youths who commit suicide in disproportionate numbers because men like George and Rigali tell them their love is inferior?
Perhaps, they can illuminate how such “practical reason” was “good” for Welsh rugby legend Gareth Thomas who came out of the closet this weekend after hiding his sexual orientation for two decades.
“Sometimes I felt so alone and depressed,” said Thomas. “I’ve stood on so many cliff edges. I used to go to the cliffs overlooking the beach near our cottage in St Brides Major and just think about jumping off and ending it all…I was like a ticking bomb. I thought I could suppress it, keep it locked away in some dark corner of myself, but I couldn’t. It was who I was, and I just couldn’t ignore it any more.”
Maybe George can explain how his philosophy was somehow “good” for Gareth’ wife Jenna, who is about to be divorced?
If “practical reason” has proven one thing, it has shown the closet, particularly for the Catholic Church, to be destructive on so many levels. George has demonstrably failed to articulate how openly gay people harm heterosexuals or how living a lie helps homosexuals be more productive members of society. His entire presentation is a ruse meant to rally the rubes.
Interestingly, George believes in restricting marriage because, in his view, only a husband and wife can experience, “comprehensive unity” and become a “one-flesh union.” He blatantly ignores that millions of people can achieve this state only through homosexual relations. By forcing GLBT people to conform to his views and presumably marry the opposite sex, he is creating the conditions to achieve the polar opposite of what he claims is necessary for a healthy marriage.
George is equally disingenuous in claiming that marriage is based on procreation. These days, the vast majority of people marry for love. Many couples choose not to have children, while others are unable to. To suggest otherwise is to proffer an incoherent and intellectually dishonest view of modern marriage.
George is an intellectual lightweight without an original idea in his head. His claim to fame is organizing like-minded conservatives and providing a veneer of education to mask his goal of discrimination. This is not the pride of Princeton, but a paean to prejudice.
The second step is more complicated, and more graphic. George argues that only vaginal intercourse ‚Äî “procreative-type” sex acts, as George puts it ‚Äî can consummate this “multilevel” mind-body union. Only in reproduction, unlike digestion, circulation, respiration or any other bodily function, do two individuals perform a single function and thus become, in effect, “one organism.” Each opposite-sex partner is incomplete for the task; yet together they create a “one-flesh union,” in the language of Scripture. “Their bodies become one (they are biologically united, and do not merely rub together) in coitus (and only in coitus), similarly to the way in which one’ heart, lungs and other organs form a unity by coordinating for the biological good of the whole,” George writes in a draft of his latest essay on the subject. Unloving sex between married partners does not perform the same multilevel function, he argues, nor does oral or anal sex ‚Äî even between loving spouses.
Oh, hi. I’m just sitting here reading this long profile from the New York Times Magazine of Robert George, author of the now-infamous bigot manifesto known as the “Manhattan Declaration,” and the largely behind-the-scenes brain* of the right-wing religious industrial complex. You might read the above quote and ask yourself, “What kind of pseudo-intellectual self-congratulatory wankfest is this? And shouldn’t a tenured professor at Princeton (how embarrassing for them) be able to see that he’s arguing that only couples with biological children are actually mar…”
Infertile couples, too, are performing this uniquely shared reproductive function, George says, even if they know their sperm and ovum cannot complete it. Marriage is designed in part for procreation in the way a baseball team is designed for winning games, he says, but “people who can practice baseball can be teammates without victories on the field.”
Oh, you have to be kidding me. Okay, so, infertile couples/olds who still do the dirty-dirty are still technically playing the World Series even if they know their balls, er, baseballs, don’t work? All you need is a team that’s willing to practice?
Well by that logic, even though my (nonexistent — taking applications) husband and I know that our parts aren’t extremely likely to create a baby, it’s the thought that counts, and as long as we practice a whole bunch, and we both love being on the team, then it’s just as valid as any other loving, committed marriage.**
Q.E.D., loser.
Read the whole thing if you have nothing better to do with your life than read the convoluted musings of a quasi-philosopher with far too much education for his intellect and a Mommy complex.
**And don’t give me that arbitrary B.S. from the first quote about how it has to be a vagina. If you know it’s a reproductive dead-end, then it really doesn’t matter. That’s merely Church Lady Robert failing to grasp the epic fail of his 13th century thinking.
Peter Hargmier: He talks of a youtube clip of Mayor Cory Booker responding to a question about gay marriage.
He nails it!
Enjoy! :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4Z7tl7Vy8U...
Michael: "But to protest the teaching of these facts is little different from protesting their very existence; it is like opposing...
Gary (NJ): Dr. Coldfinger? as Joy Behar says. >:P...
Priya Lynn: Mark said "The summation of their entire psychology: If I hate myself in the same way that you hate me,...
Steve: Also popular among libertarians: it's ok to deny people their rights as long it's a state doing it (as opposed...
