TimesArgus.com - We Are Vermont

More on bigotry

Toolbox

Print

Email link

Submit a letter

Published: April 10, 2009

Thank you so much for all of your responses to my March 30 letter, "Bigotry, plain and simple." I'm glad I was able to engender so much strong feeling. It's an important topic and I'm glad the debate is so free. Though most of it has been taken care of by others, I wanted to address a few criticisms.

The definition of "bigot" I used is from Dictionary.com. I like to think that I'm pretty tolerant of others' opinions, but I also believe that everyone's right to extend their arm ends at the next person's nose. I don't think that anyone should be able to impose their religious beliefs on others, and I'm getting tired of bigots out there bumping my nose. If you're saying that the gay marriage bill does that to you, then you're wrong. No one is asking anyone to marry anyone they don't want to. And people who aren't Christians shouldn't be limited by what Christians consider proper. We do not live in a theocracy like Iran; this here is the good ol' U.S.A., a republic/democracy. Not that the majority gets to decide what rights we have. Some of our rights are inalienable. That means the majority cannot vote them away. Is marriage a religious issue or a state issue? The argument that marriage is a religious institution is moot. I can get married without going anywhere near a church or priest (any judge or JOP will do), but I can't get married without a piece of paper from the state saying it's okay. Marriage's relationship with the church as far as the legal ramifications, is tangential at best.

A couple of follow-up points. Does gay marriage somehow impose a lifestyle on others? Think about this one – no more than heterosexual marriage imposes on gay folks. And for those who claim that this is not about "equal rights," that civil unions provide everything necessary — you're wrong. As we learned 40 plus years ago, "Separate But Equal" is not equal. All that this is about is equal rights.

Bennett Shapiro

Middlesex

READER COMMENTS

...........Just because something is a "right" does not mean it is an ethical or decent thing to do."..............
Andi your so right,,,and that is exactly how we ended up with a so-called gay marriage, nope its not ethical or decent, but thats where things are coming to, good point

-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Sat, Apr 18, 2009, 12:12 pm EST

report this comment

Reality Check,
You are correct, you do have the right to call gays "fags" because we are a society that believes in freedom of speech.
However, I would hope that most of us would also believe in a common humanity and just plain common decency.
Just because something is a "right" does not mean it is an ethical or decent thing to do.
You hurt some very kind people when you say things like that (although i suspect most gays who read your words probably just roll their eyes and move on). Going out of your way to say hurtful words to someone may be within your rights but it certainly does not seem like the ethical way to live.
I am not sure what you hope to achieve saying things like that. The message could be conveyed just by saying something like, " I disagree with gay marriage". The fact that you feel the need to go out of your way to insult people says to me that you are angry and frustrated because something happened that you do not agree with.
Many times in Vermont and in the U.S. laws have been made that I don't agree with. I am not shy about stating my opinion but I always remain respectful to those i disagree with because I know they are a human being with feelings.
You are the only one who has to live with yourself and if your conscience tells you it is ok to call people hurtful names, then I guess we just see things differently.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Sat, Apr 18, 2009, 12:01 pm EST

report this comment

"I am entitled to my free voice and opinion."

Yeah, you're just not entitled to your own facts. Fact is, you're an ignorant bigot with bupkis and not so much as a nodding acquaintance with reality.

"If I want to call a homosexual a "fag" hat is my right. I love the fact that being against gay marriage and homosexuality makes me wrong."

Nah, I'll wager you were wrong long before ya got to this issue, little factually-challenged fella.

Stuff a sock in it and get yourself a case and a clue.

-- Posted by None None on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 10:55 pm EST

report this comment

RC - That's true, this is America, You can be as ignorant as you want.

-- Posted by walt amses on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 10:20 pm EST

report this comment

I am entitled to my free voice and opinion. If I want to call a homosexual a "fag" hat is my right. I love the fact that being against gay marriage and homosexuality makes me wrong. Go pound some sheep.

-- Posted by Reality Check on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 10:13 pm EST

report this comment

As a christian I do not understand the hate that you are spewing in the name of God. I watched your video , but then I found this one.
This is the loving God that I know,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKmdIdQg3Ks&NR=1
This is God.
I encourage you and other people to watch it, To understand that God is love , not hate.

-- Posted by miss kitty on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 12:19 pm EST

report this comment

"It is harder to crack a prejudice than an atom." A. Einstein

-- Posted by Dick C on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 8:47 am EST

report this comment

People,

I'm beginning to understand. Folks like Ignat and AYK must have been put here by God for a reason. Because if this is the best, most literate, well constructed argument that the Christian right has to offer, I'm surprised more folks haven't converted to ANYTHING else. A Christian friend told me that after reading their hateful postings, she's reconsidering her faith. Congradulations, AYK and Ignat Mologa!

-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 8:36 am EST

report this comment

AYK: So let me get this straight: By your standard, spiteful, hateful namecalling means you are a "big kid". I think I remember you from the playground in elementary school. Thing is, most of us grew up and left.

Times Argus editors: Isn't it time to take this letter down? It seems to have overstayed its welcome.

-- Posted by Black Book on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 8:04 am EST

report this comment

Grow up babies..."Sticks n stones.....but names can never hurt me"

Go change your diapers and come back when your big kids

-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 6:35 am EST

report this comment

Reality - At least you admit you're sick.......that's a start.

-- Posted by walt amses on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 6:09 am EST

report this comment

Reality check,
It seems to me that if you are going to post something hateful like you did, the least you could do is use your real name like most of us (both left and right leaning) here do. How easy to say hate while hiding. Why don't you post your real name?
At least I own up to everything I say by using my real name.
What a coward you are.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 5:15 am EST

report this comment

Adam and Eve, not John and Steve.

You fags make me sick.

-- Posted by Reality Check on Fri, Apr 17, 2009, 12:24 am EST

report this comment

Good job Bennett I could not have said that any better... And I have TRIED... people are rediculous about this whole thing... it is only and ISSUE because they are making it one...

-- Posted by Theresa Duke on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 10:25 pm EST

report this comment

DANG!!!!!!!!!!
Here too?
None none pretty much sums you up don't it?
You're still easy!
(laughing)
(at you)
(Zero)

-- Posted by Say NO to China on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 7:16 pm EST

report this comment

"It is a literate reality of God's Wrath upon evil nation who turned away from His Holy Righteousness."

No, it's psychotic slop cloaked in the guise of religion in a pathetic attempt to legitimize your nitwit nonsense.

-- Posted by None None on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 6:51 pm EST

report this comment

Too bad the old guy can't differentiate between the "sodomites" in New Orleans and the evangelicals of the bible belt.......who get whacked pretty regularly as your dumb video illustrates..............

-- Posted by walt amses on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 6:01 pm EST

report this comment

It is a literate reality of God's Wrath upon evil nation who turned away from His Holy Righteousness.Who worships idols like debased Darwin,abortions,gay agenda,and the rest of the filth that provoke God for anger.This video is not a jock,it is a bitter truth and reality.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 5:15 pm EST

report this comment

Enough with the Topsham Taliban spam sessions, iggy slop.

-- Posted by None None on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 5:13 pm EST

report this comment

Iggy - So these are the God as mass murderer videos?

-- Posted by walt amses on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 5:05 pm EST

report this comment

If it is a mistake,try this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YylIp7Nds0

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 4:39 pm EST

report this comment

The misled fellows,please watch this video.Hopefully God will awaken your souls.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YylIp7NdsO

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 4:37 pm EST

report this comment

I'm astonished and humbled at how reasonable you all are with Iggy; I can't take him seriously enough to be polite or try to apply reason to anything he says; and on the other hand, I think his spew is dangerous and that people who agree with the justification that those not fitting into the narrow criteria of "worthy" are expendable in "gods" eyes pose a threat...... There are inherent risks presented by true believers on a mission.

-- Posted by walt amses on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 4:19 pm EST

report this comment

BlackBook & Andi,
I agree. Since Ignat and others can not have intellectual respectful conversation about this topic lets not indulge them.

I think that I am done with this post also. Let everyone choose to live as they see fit for their own lives. Everyone should worry about being the best person that they can be. I think that we should all live by the old saying treat others as you wish to be treated.

-- Posted by Jill None on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 12:35 pm EST

report this comment

Jill,
Thank you, I knew you would definitely understand how I felt.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 12:19 pm EST

report this comment

Blackbook,
I think you may be right. I was thinking that very thing after i sent my post and re-read many of his. I think you may very well be correct.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 12:18 pm EST

report this comment

Andi,
Thank you for asking Ignat to stop speaking for Jewish people, I feel the exact same way!

Igant,
I read the book King & King and see nothing wrong with it.

-- Posted by Jill None on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 12:15 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat,
I notice you pick and chose the questions you want to answer, while ignoring the rest and then restating your dire predictions again. Maybe you can answer all of the questions I asked? I will restate them.
First though, as far as the fable, do you have evidence that the fable was read only because of gay marriage? Has no other school in a state without gay marriage ever had a story like that? I seem to remember an outcry years ago about a book called (something like)"Heater's two Mommies". That was before any states had gay marriage, I believe. Certainly the book was read in schools in states without gay marriage. You stated that BECAUSE of gay marriage these types of things would be taught in the schools. However, you have no idea how many states WITHOUT gay marriage are also reading books like that. And, you have no idea if Mass. would have had that book in the schools without gay marriage. I have news for you. Whether there is gay marriage or not, some schools will choose to teach their children acceptance of ALL families.
My other questions you did not answer. You stated more than once that gay marriage will cause pedophiles to molest children (????). Have you studied if the rate of molestation went UP after gay marriage in Canada? All states (and countries) unfortuntaly have these things happen with or without gay marriage. Did you study if the rates went up in Mass. and Canada?
Also, you stated that Church's and Synagogues would be prosecuted if they did not perform these marriages. Do you know of one case in Mass. or Canada where that happened? Did it ever happen in Vermont with Civil Unions? (it did not, no Church's were forced to perform Civil Unions, something those against CU's said would happen).
Don't just pick and choose which questions to answer. If you do not answer my other questions then you cannot keep making those accusations if you have absolutley no evidence that it happened in places where marriage equality exists.
And, I would ask you to stop speaking for Jewish people in your posts. You are picking only a small part of Judiasm who does not support marriage equality. All Reform Synagogues do, and most Conservative Synagogues do. It is only the Orthodox who do not at all.
Maybe you should occassionally take your head out of the bible and go outside and see what is really happening in the world. See how society is becoming more accepting and that there are far more people who disagree with you than you think.
Also, I am starting to think you could use the fresh air.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 12:09 pm EST

report this comment

I am 90% certain that Ignat is very creatively yanking everyone around and, I would guess, enjoying it immensely. I will reserve 10% doubt because, well, it does take all kinds, doesn't it?

-- Posted by Black Book on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 12:08 pm EST

report this comment

It's King & King

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_&_King

-- Posted by Captain Obvious on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 11:41 am EST

report this comment

Ignat,
Your posts are like a bad train wreck! No matter how horrific, I can't help but look! Your religious agenda is your own personal belief. Please don't push it on others. Please don't try to brainwash other people into believing what is in the bible is the only way. Those of us that do not share your beliefs are not asking for you and others to come 'save' us.

-- Posted by Kristen None on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 11:39 am EST

report this comment

Ignat,
Do you know the name of the fable? I would like to read it myself so that I can judge for myself how I feel about the fable.

-- Posted by Jill None on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 11:07 am EST

report this comment

Jill,
Story.It was a simple sick story.As one male king met other king from nighbouring castle.They both fell in love and got married.It was written as sane fables were written where prince met pricess,fell in love,and got married.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 10:52 am EST

report this comment

Igant,
I am interested in doing some research about this fable that you say Mass students were forced to learn about. Can you tell me what story this was?

-- Posted by Jill None on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 10:48 am EST

report this comment

Andy Rosin,
You just states the state of Mass.Well hello Andy,here is a case in Mass that you just missed.In Mass elementary schools kids were forced to study a psychotic fable as a lesson which tells about two young kings who fell in love with each others and got married as gays.Angry Christian and also Jewish parents of those poor brainwashed kids filled law suits at Mass court that went against the will of majority who opposed this gay marriage.Parent's petitions were denied.The poor kids get brainwashed.Many of them left filthy public school.
Filthy unconstitutional judicial activism!Not funny:(

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 10:36 am EST

report this comment

whoa........Iggy's got me seein' double

-- Posted by walt amses on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 7:25 am EST

report this comment

Iggy - "Soldier of Messiah".......you can't make this stuff up......By the way, re: God's hatreds - Adultery?......Vast majority of adulterers are heterosexual....so god hates heterosexuals? ..... Pedophiles?........largest pedo demographic = priests.......so god hates priests?........pornography?.......Most internet porn purchased in self righteous, pious, Mormon Utah........so god hates Utah?.....and - if god really hates "workers of inequity"......he hates you bro! Have a nice day in fantasyland.

-- Posted by walt amses on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 7:24 am EST

report this comment

Iggy - Still no response. Why you? .... A "soldier of messiah"?.......you can't make this stuff up. By the way ...god's hatreds: Adultery? Up to very recently that's a totally heterosexual issue......so God hates heterosexuals?.......Pedophilia? Largest pedo demographic is priests......so God hates priests; Porn?....Largest internet port state?.....self righteous, Mormon Utah......so God hates Utah?.......And, if god hates the "workers of inequity"........he hates you bro! Have a nice day in fantasy land.

-- Posted by walt amses on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 7:20 am EST

report this comment

Ignat,
For days not I have been reading your posts with wild accusatiions of what will happen because of gay marriages. Churchs and Synagogues forced to perform these marriages, pedophiles molesting young boys, childrens minds being corrupted, etc....
You have never, not once, posted any non-biased scientific study to back up what you have said. I dont mean a study by a biased group such as groups that either oppose, or support marriage equality. I mean a scientific, non-biased study. Can you find any? If not, maybe you should stop making these accusations because now you are bordering on slander.
In Mass. they have had gay marriages for 5 years. In Canada as well. There has not been one, not one incident where a Church or Synagogue was forced to perfom any marriage that they did not want to. Not one in Mass. or all of Canada in 5 years. Not any more incidences of pedophiles molesting children, not one because of gay marriage. Do you realize how outrageous your posts sound? These people want to get married because they love each other and want to commit. What on earth does that have to do with pedophiles molesting children? It is as ridiculous as saying that because men and woman can marry, that more men will be raping women. It makes no sense, none at all.
Check the statistics in Mass. and Canada and see if all of your wild predictions have come true.
I am asking you to post scientific studies predicting what you say is true. If you cannot produce these, then if you continue to say these things I will consider it slander.
Have you checked out what has happened in Canada and Mass? Do you realize not one Church has been forced or prosecuted for not performing gay marriage? Not one??
And, many Synagogues do perform gay marriages. My families Rabbi happily does them. It is only the Orthodox branch of Judisasm that does not recognize gay marriage, the Conservative and Reform branches do. My UU Church also performs and accepts gay marriages.
Is anyone else getting as tired of reading Ignat's rants as I am? You say horrible things and I think the only people who will go to this h-ll you keep talking about are people who judge and condemn others. Not people living loving lives and respecting everyone around them.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Thu, Apr 16, 2009, 7:16 am EST

report this comment

To Shapiro,
As Christian I do respect other creeds and national cultures,but as a soldier of Messiah I can't respect sin that is homosexuality,adultery,porn,pedophilia,and the rest of evils.Remember that Holy Books in The Old Testament of The Bible like Psalm states clearly that God hates the workers of iniquity,and He deals angry with the wicked every day.Psalm 5:4-5 and Psalm 7:11.This warning is observed in Christianity and Judaism.King David was wise and he feared God.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 11:50 pm EST

report this comment

Dave Erwin,

Thanks for pointing out my theoretical miscount, but personally for me, everyday is the Sabbath. And the whole world is church. As far as the major religions go- Friday, Saturday, Sunday- one religion's Sabbath, may not be another's, but everybody sure seems sure that they're the one's who're right. I'm not sure how much we're helping here, discussing this. I don't expect anyone like Ignat Mologa to respect another culture or religion's beliefs. Sad, huh?

-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 10:28 pm EST

report this comment

TAKE BACK VERMONT...TAKE BACK USA!!!!
tea PArty TAX Day.no.......new taxes,, TAX CUTS...cut welfare benefits repeal all the crazy social agendas....repeal gay unions....prosecute the ACORN nuts for voter fraud ...take away cell phone cameras from teens and they cant send porno photos of each other..parents start taking personal responsibility for the kids they arent jsut a tax deduction or a free ride for welfare!!!!!!!!!!!! Put morals and principles back in their place...I love Vermont and America restore its values

-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 10:12 pm EST

report this comment

I am very sorry of you misguided people who hate to realize what and how dangerous gay agenda is.Don't you know that these militant glbt lobby will force to teach our kids in public schools about this demonic filthy lifestyles that will damage kids' mental systems.Are you not aware that it will give a green light to desparate pedophiles to molest our boys legally.Are you not aware that God fearing Christian pastors and Jewish rabbis will be prosecutes for refusing to accept gay/lesbian couples into their churches,synagogues,and schools.It happens in most states of EU now.Sweden is a perfect example.You build a state of tyranny.Wake up you heathens!

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 9:49 pm EST

report this comment

Oops,
I spent Bennett's last name wrong. It was a typo, sorry Bennett.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 7:00 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat,
Bennett Shaprio posted many things from the bible that God also said were right and wrong. I am curious to hear your explanation of why it is ok to ignore those quotes and only talk about homosexuality.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 6:57 pm EST

report this comment

Iggy - God exists "for you"......that's the way of myths and hallucinations; but that wasn't the question. Does it ever enter your mind why the G-man would select someone as bereft of any redeeming (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) qualities as you seem to be, to be his spokesperson? It's simple, look in the mirror and say: "Why me, God?" ..............And, I'm sure, you'll get the answer and then you can share it with all of us. And if you don't hear back, maybe you should convert to atheism........it's the newest, best thing.......and you don't have to punish your daughters with gang rape or have your children torn apart by wild animals if they disobey.........

-- Posted by walt amses on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 5:45 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat,
You say that you are not imposing your religious views on anyone else but you are. You are against marriage equality for religious reasons. By denying marriage to a group of citizens because of your religious beliefs that is imposing your religious views on other people. Now, if you have a different reason for being against marriage equality please share those with me, I have asked several times and have not gotten an answer yet.

-- Posted by Jill None on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 5:34 pm EST

report this comment

Jill,
I do not impose my religion on anybody.Anybody has his/her own choice for God.I just state as much as I could that homosexuality as itself is immoral and must not be recognized as secondary innocent lifestyle at all costs.It is got nothing to do with hate and violence toward the people who indulge in this immoral lifestyle.
Walt,
God does exists and He punishes the sons and daughters of disobedience.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 5:27 pm EST

report this comment

Iggy - I've asked several times without a response, why - if god does indeed exist - would he pick a dipstick like you as his PR man? Everything you say is utterly vile and your embarrass even the Christians who post here by making Christianity itself obscene. You manage to bastardize a belief that for millions of people is the basis for living a good life..........

And Bennett - If these people understood sarcasm, they'd understand metaphor; if they understood metaphor we wouldn't be subjected to the bible filtered through a bull goose loony........

-- Posted by walt amses on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 5:04 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat,
Why are you so hateful in your posts? Or am I misunderstanding you? You are wrong there are plenty of moral people that do not share the same views as you do. Once again, I do not force or push my religion or beliefs on you, why do you insist on pushing your beliefs on everyone else?

-- Posted by Jill None on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 5:02 pm EST

report this comment

Dick,
Tolerance to what?To sex perverts.Homosexuality is not nationality and not race.It is the same filth as crime,drug use,alcoholism,racism,and other filthy perversion of any kinds.No one moral person whether he/she Christian,Jew,or Moslem will respect filth especially it is against their religions and other moral and social rules.
To homosexuality,abortion,porn,gambling -zero tolerance!

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 4:44 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat,

Your god is seriously no fun! I suggest you return him the used god lot and pick a god out that has a better sense of humor and understanding of tolerance.

Alternatively, you could drop your god off at the used god lot and drive away free of any moronic religious encumbrances or prejudices.

-- Posted by Dick C on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 4:28 pm EST

report this comment

For ignorant sinners of this comment boxes,

The Bible in both testaments strictly prohibits adultery,homosexuality,drunkeness,drug use,whoredom,idolatry,greed,envy.Those are abominations.Homosexuality God never allows to be accepted socially and morally.Bible is enterpreted in the same manner.Do not attempt to justify sin with your rebelious lies that God hates.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 3:54 pm EST

report this comment

Bennett I have learned trying to have a rational discussion with a Bible Literalist (per pick and choosing of) is equal to banging your head seriously hard against the wall.

As you notice, there are people of the Christian faith that don't follow the 'literalist' view that ignat is portraying.

Take Care :)

-- Posted by Melissa B. on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 2:23 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat Molaga,

It is you, not Bennett that is spouting hatred and intolerance.

How about you wire up a few nice IED's and go blow up a few God haters in defense of your precious religious principles? This a familiar modus operendi for religious fanatics the world over, why not get it started here?

-- Posted by Dick C on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 2:16 pm EST

report this comment

People

Just to be clear- I am not preaching any of this Bible stuff. Just because I read it, doesn't mean I believe it. I was quoting it to aid in the employment of SARCASM. I wouldn't ordinarily feel like I needed a disclaimer, but these discussions have me feeling like I'm arguing with people with a limited ability to perceive on more a rudimentary level of understanding. Thanks.

-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 2:05 pm EST

report this comment

"So you must also believe the following verses:

Exodus 35:2 Six days work shall be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.

You've never shoveled your walk on a Sunday, have you? I sure hope not."
-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 1:37 pm EST

Take a look at your calender Mr. Shapiro and you will find that Saturday is the seventh and "blessed" day. So shovel away on Sunday all you want.

-- Posted by Dave Erwin on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 2:05 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat Mologa-

So you must also believe the following verses:

Exodus 35:2 Six days work shall be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.

You've never shoveled your walk on a Sunday, have you? I sure hope not.

Leviticus 25:44-45 As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their clans that are with you, who have been born in your land, and they may be your property.

or

Exodus 21:20-21 When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.

or

You must still own a couple of slaves, right? No? But God says its okay...

Or even rape:

Zechariah 14:1-2 Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city.

or

Judges 5:30 They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera's spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil.

You must approve of rape, right? God says its okay sometimes.....

Ignat, anybody can quote scripture to prove anything they want to... it doesn't make it right. Stoning people because they plant two kinds of crops in the same field (Lev.19:19) isn't right... nor is not letting someone approach the alter of God because they have imperfect eyesight (Lev.21:1). Get over your literal (and weirdly selective) interpretation of the Bible. When you preach some of the Bible and not all of it, you don't just look like a hypocrite, you look hateful.

-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 1:37 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat,
I guess you just proved my point. I asked you how this impacts your life and all you come back with is name calling and your interpretation of the Bible. Please by all means live your life by your bible and your interpretation of it but please do not force me to do so as well.

-- Posted by Jill None on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 1:14 pm EST

report this comment

Jill,
Because you turned away from God and ignore The Law that Moses gave to the Israel,you support wicked filth that was in ancient Sodom and Gomorrah.Those towns were burned to ashes by God for their lusts to gay life.Genesis 19:1-29.
God stays the Same and He never changes.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 1:01 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat,
I don't see anything in Mr. Bennett's post that even remotely insinuates that he is any of the things you are charging him with. When you have nothing else productive to say you just sling negative comments. Do you really think that is productive?

I am still wondering why it matters to you or how it impacts your life who someone else loves and decides to commit their lives too? Why do you think that you get a say in someone else's personal life?

Here is my take on this, clearly I am pro marriage equality. My stance and personal belief on this does not directly impact your life or anyone else's. Your stance of denying marriage rights to a group of citizens directly impacts their life.

Please without quoting the bible tell me how this impacts your life?

-- Posted by Jill None on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 12:47 pm EST

report this comment

Mr.Shapiro,
Shame on you!You are anti-American,also anti-Semite,and anti-Christian.You hate God and love those inhabitans who revive ancient Sodom and Gomorrah of nowadays.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 12:11 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat Mologa and Are You Kidding-

So, now we see it. Thanks for explaining. The founding fathers were being "anti-American" when they created the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Sanctifying Freedom of Religion, as they did in the first part of the first Amendment, these guys are obviously traitors to the American way of life. Thank you for clearing this up. You guys are true patriots.

-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 11:10 am EST

report this comment

Whoever we are
Wherever we're from
We shoulda noticed by now
Our behavior is dumb
And if our chances
Expect to improve
It's gonna take a lot more
Than tryin' to remove
The other race
Or the other whatever
From the face
Of the planet altogether

They call it THE EARTH
Which is a dumb kinda name
But they named it right
'Cause we behave the same...
*We are dumb all over*
Dumb all over,
Yes we are
Dumb all over,
Near 'n far
Dumb all over,
Black 'n white
People, we is not wrapped tight

Nurds on the left
Nurds on the right
Religous fanatics
On the air every night
Sayin' the Bible
Tells the story
Makes the details
Sound real gory
'Bout what to do
If the geeks over there
Don't believe in the book
We got over here

You can't run a race
Without no feet
'N pretty soon
There won't be no street
For dummies to jog on
Or doggies to dog on
Religous fanatics
Can make it be all gone
(I mean it won't blow up
'N disappear
It'll just look ugly
For a thousand years...)

You can't run a country
By a book of religion
Not by a heap
Or a lump or a smidgeon
Of foolish rules
Of ancient date
Designed to make
You all feel great
While you fold, spindle
And mutilate
Those unbelievers
From a neighboring state

TO ARMS! TO ARMS!
Hooray! That's great
Two legs ain't bad
Unless there's a crate
They ship the parts
To mama in
For souvenirs: two ears *(Get Down!)*
Not his, not hers, *(but what the hey?)*
The Good Book says:
*("It gotta be that way!")*
But their book says:
*"REVENGE THE CRUSADES...
With whips 'n chains
'N hand grenades..."*
TWO ARMS? TWO ARMS?
Have another and another
Our God says:
*"There ain't no other!"*
Our God says
*"It's all okay!"*
Our God says
*"This is the way!"*

It says in the book:
*"Burn 'n destroy...*
*'N repent, 'n redeem*
*'N revenge, 'n deploy*
*'N rumble thee forth*
*To the land of the unbelieving scum on
the other side*
*'Cause they don't go for what's in the book*
*'N that makes 'em BAD*
*So verily we must choppeth them up*
*And stompeth them down*
*Or rent a nice French bomb*
*To poof them out of existance
*While leaving their real estate just where
we need it*
*To use again*
*For temples in which to praise OUR GOD*
*("Cause he can really take care of business!")*

And when his humble TV servant
With humble white hair
And humble glasses
And a nice brown suit
And maybe a blond wife who takes
phone calls
Tells us our God says
It's okay to do this stuff
Then we gotta do it,
'Cause if we don't do it,
We ain't gwine up to *hebbin!*
(Depending on which book you're using
at the time...Can't use theirs... it don't work
...it's all lies...Gotta use mine...)
Ain't that right?
That's what they say
Every night...
Every day...
Hey, we can't really be dumb
If we're just following *God's Orders*
Hey, let's get serious...
God knows what he's doin'
He wrote this book here
An' the book says:
*He made us all to be just like Him,"
so...
If we're dumb...
Then God is dumb...
*(An' maybe even a little ugly on the side)*

Frank Zappa

-- Posted by Dick C on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 9:51 am EST

report this comment

One of the characteristics of a good comedian is knowing when they have wrung everything they can out of a joke and then moving on. Enough already with how we should live our lives by a literal interpretation of the Old Testament. Please, no more about the Sodomites. It's not funny; actually, never was.

-- Posted by Black Book on Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 5:03 am EST

report this comment

America as I said before is Judeo-Christian state that was built on Biblical laws from Old Testament given by law giver Moses.Yes,this nation was mastered by Protestant Church and Judaism.Now it is time to bring this back.America is the second Israel.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 9:41 pm EST

report this comment

Jill,
Our Jewish-Orhtodox friends strictly believe in Torah where Moses gave strict laws concerning sexual immorality,especially on sodomites in Leviticus 18:22 as in Old Testament.Many Orhtodox Jewish friends strictly condemn homosexuality and gay rights.They helped us to support Proposition 8 in California.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 9:36 pm EST

report this comment

AYK - While a good majority of this country may be of Christian faith that does not mean that we govern by the New Testament. We live in a state and a country that affords us religious freedoms. We have the freedom and right to believe as we may as long as we do not harm someone else. You forcing your religious beliefs on me is making a direct impact on my life and I would appreciate if you would stop. Please focused your religious beliefs on yourself, your family and in your church. I am not telling you to give up your beliefs so please stop telling me to.

-- Posted by Jill None on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 7:58 pm EST

report this comment

AYK - Not a Christian state; not a Christian nation; and not just Christians working and doing "family things" but Muslims, Jews, Hindus and Atheists as well........this is a secular state and a secular nation - not a theocracy.

-- Posted by walt amses on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 7:17 pm EST

report this comment

Hi Jill,
I am Jewish also, and a Unitarian Universalist.

Ignat, I know in your mind you think you are doing a good thing. You think you are trying to "save" people but in reality that is not what you are doing. As Jill stated, not all of us believe the New Testament. I was born and raised Jewish and we do not follow the New Testement. Unless you wish to dismiss all of Judiasm, you need to have respect on here for others who are of a different faith from yourself.
Matthew Shephard and other gays are not in hell. Both my families Rabbi and my UU minister do not believe that being gay is a sin (neither do I) and they would very much disagree with you.
I would like to ask you to please stop pushing your religion on the rest of us. I respect your belief and am happy that you find meaning in your life through the bible.
However, some of the things you say are highly offensive to many of us on here who have a different faith (or no faith).
You are not God, and though you believe you are speaking for him, the God I know through my Jewish upbringing, and through my current Unitarian Universalist Church is a loving and kind God. Even Miss Kitty (i think it was her, forgive me if i am mistaken) has stated that she is a Christian and that the God she loves is not the God you keep speaking of.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 6:57 pm EST

report this comment

This is a christian state and this is a Christian country. Its just teh Christians are out working and doing family (mom dad n kids) things. You can pass all the laws you want, they are all subject to ammendments and Tax Tea party time is a great way to start. Then pseudo GM next on chopping block, time to take back our country & find some morals and principles and proper conduct.
All good points Ignat

-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 6:53 pm EST

report this comment

I have an honest question for anyone that was/is against marriage equality. Why? How does it personally affect you?

-- Posted by Jill None on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 6:20 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat,
You don't know anything about my religion or myself so please refrain from calling me names such as wicked. I am actually an open minded observant Jewish woman. I just don't define my life by my religion. I am also highly offended that you and other keep quoting the New Testament and asserting that everyone should believe that. I believe that you do not need to be a religious Christian in order to be a good person. There are plenty of religious Christians that are not good people and plenty of good people that are not religious Christians.

If Christianity works for you and makes you happy by all means be a religious Christian. No one is telling you to change your religion or your beliefs why do you insist that everyone else needs to change and believe what you believe?

-- Posted by Jill None on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 6:05 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat - God didn't kill Matthew Shepard, he was killed by thugs and - ever since - God's self righteous Goon Squad has condoned and celebrated his murder. You - through the things you've written - encourage such behavior.......why not? It's "God's will", isn't it?.......But - as I said before - why would God - if there was one - allow an imbecile such as yourself to represent him? Your beliefs are obscene; your obsession with sexuality borders on perversion; and your absolute lack of intelligence or integrity illustrates why fundamentalist Christianity is so appealing to those without the capacity for reason.

-- Posted by walt amses on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 6:03 pm EST

report this comment

None, I have no idea what you are referring to but this is the post that I was answering, honestly I usually skip over yours because you usually have nothing written that is worth the time it would take to read it,

"These posts speak for themselves. The people who wrote them are in an evangelically sponsored contest to see who can best combine idiocy with obnoxiousness. Since they probably don't believe in evolution, they're unaware that eventually - but not soon enough - they will fade away.........like other organisms unable to make adjustments as the world around them changed."
-- Posted by walt amses on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 6:53 am EST
Now as we can see you are the one who has no idea what your talking about...
and thanks for posting about the creation seminar again!!

-- Posted by miss kitty on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 5:52 pm EST

report this comment

Jill.I do not promote violence against the lost souls.Instead I as well as other Christians warn glbt people that God condemns for being gay,and gays must seek Christ and repent of their evil sins.Re.Matt.I said nothing hateful on the term,he got what he deserved.It just means that the wages of sin is death.Matt wanted to rebel and disobey God,so he paid the price for his disobedience against his Master.God truly wished Matt to repent in his lifetime,but Matt chose sin.
America was built on Judeo-Christian principles from the Bible by our founding fathers.Only wicked rebels like you,Jill,removed Christian principles in the 60s.It is still a time to restore America back to her old glory before it will be too late.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 5:42 pm EST

report this comment

"And No Walt , I do not believe in evolution!
And for all that are interested there is a seminar on creation at Spaulding High School Wednesday night,
this is the link for the group that will be speaking http://www.dinopastor.com/"

First of all, Miss Kitty, Walt didn't say it, I did.

Congrats. You not only don't know what the hell you're talkin' about, you don't know who you're talkin' to.

Secondly, if you want to take an Adult Ed course in myths, fables and fairy tales, knock yourself out.

-- Posted by None None on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 5:39 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat, I am completely appalled that you would say or insinuate that Mathew Sheppard got what he deserved. Are you seriously promoting or condoning violence against people that just want to be themselves and love who they want. No one is telling you that you need to lay with someone of your own sex. No one is telling you that you must marry someone of the same sex. If you don't want to or believe that it is wrong for you in your life, by all means do not participate in a homosexual relationship.

Quote your bible all you would like but please remember that you do not live in a Christian state or a Christian country. Christian beliefs should not and do not run our government.

-- Posted by Jill None on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 5:31 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat - You're a sanctimonious blowhard, suffering delusions of sanity; why - if there was a god - would he pick a loony like you to spread the word? And - If you're an example of a "good christian" - than it's completely understandable why people are moving toward atheism in droves.

-- Posted by walt amses on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 5:08 pm EST

report this comment

Andy Rosin.I support our troops and respect innocent victims of 9/11.But I dare not to tell lies that this 21 years old junkie Matthew Shepard is in Heaven.He died in his filthy sin as a sodomite pervert who rejected Christ,so he paid with what he fought for.He is in Hell and you got to deal with it,1 Corinthians 6:9-10.I wish Jesus will change your life and will save your soul from Hell.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 5:02 pm EST

report this comment

Walt.No matter what I said on normalcy.Regarding homosexuality again.It is a vile sin in the first place.
"Thou you must not lie next to a man as with a woman.It is abomination"Leviticus 18:22.
You people got to deal with it,and you never dare to call good Christians as bigots.We instead warn mislead people like you,so you can repent in order to escape Hell.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 4:48 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat - "normalcy".......go back and read what you've written.....you don't even have a handle on sanity, never mind "normalcy".

-- Posted by walt amses on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 4:39 pm EST

report this comment

This is why they tried so hard to keep the bible out of the hands of dingbats and snake handlers........what a vile and obscene religion this flaming ***hole makes Christianity out to be........I don't believe in organized religion and I try to articulate that every chance I get, but I have a level of respect for principal; compassion and supporting those less fortunate.......(Socialism, of course).......It's amazing how the people who claim to know the unknowable are generally too stupid to be embarrassed by themselves.......why would you believe in evolution if you haven't evolved?

-- Posted by walt amses on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 4:36 pm EST

report this comment

Fellows.I do not support WBC's crazy pickets at soldiers' funerals who got nothing to do with those gays.Here pastor Fred Phelps went too far,I strongly agree on that.Again regarding gay agenda.It will never be tolerated as normalcy,period.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 4:16 pm EST

report this comment

Bible strictly warns us that God hates the workers of iniquity and He deals angry with the wicked.Psalm 5:4-5 and 7:11.God loves us,when we turn away from our wicked sins in order to follow Jesus for doing His goodness.God can't take the pleasure with the wicked who ignore His warnings and those who love sins instead of Jesus.God's wrath comes on every sons and daughters of diobedience who hate God and dare to enjoy sinning.Romans 1:26-32.God warned this evil America who turned away from His Holy Commandments and dared to worship the debased communist evolution,secular humanism,and also dares to murder the preborn,plus to ok this evil gay agenda.God sent His curse upon this no longer blessed land on 9/11.The Lord leveled New Orleans by Katrina for her filthiness and daring to bless this filthy Mardi Gras and Southern Decadence feast for sodomites.As it is written that God is not mocked in Galatians 6:7.It is time still for America to repent as people of sinning Nineveh did in ancient days of prophet Jonah,or otherwise this once mighty superpower will meat the fate of old USSR and will fall into the level of third world nation.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 4:04 pm EST

report this comment

p.s.
In my last post I said that Ignat reminds me of the Rev. Phelps who protests and soldiers funerals. I did not mean to imply that Ignat does that, I am sure he does not. I meant that the Rev. Phelps has also said Matthew Shephard is burning in hell, the same thing Ignat said.
Ignat, that post was very hateful.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 4:03 pm EST

report this comment

Miss Kitty,
Thank you for recognizing that Ignat's post are hateful. You are a Christian like him, but you are much kinder. The Matthew Shephard post was way over the top as far as hateful speech. He sounds like the Rev. Phelps who protests at soldiers funerals saying he is happy soldiers are dead because this country deserves it because we "tolerate" homosexuality. I can only imagine how my gay and lesbian friends feel when they read Ignat's posts.
I do support gay marriage but at least you are able to express your oppposition in a way that is not unkind.
I saw the announcement for the lecture about creationism vs. evolution and thought about going. However, unlike you, I know evolution to be a fact. I am an entomologist but my minor in undergraduate and graduate school was evolutionary biology/ecology. I see evolution occur all the time because I work with insects which have a very short life cycle. I have spent the last 30 or so years studying evolution and it is something I believe strongly in.
I respect your view to think otherwise.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 3:59 pm EST

report this comment

As a Christian I have always been taught and believed that you love the person, but hate the act. I do not support gay marriage , but I do not support the hate that some people spew in the name of God.
Ignat- I do not fear God, he is a loving , living God. I try to live the way that shows my beliefs but I know I fall short, thankfully he a forgiving God!
You are the type of person that turns people away from God! I think you need to do some soul searching of your own, and also read what the bible says about judgment before you start to condemn people, only God can do that.

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

And No Walt , I do not believe in evolution!
And for all that are interested there is a seminar on creation at Spaulding High School Wednesday night,
this is the link for the group that will be speaking http://www.dinopastor.com/

-- Posted by miss kitty on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 2:51 pm EST

report this comment

"no no gay is the new evolution, and the rest of us will fade away. cant wait to see that one. wow who is an idiot"

Well, my little margie, since you can neither read nor write and demonstrate no capacity for rational thought, that would be you.

Apart from you, who said anything about evolution?

-- Posted by None None on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 2:14 pm EST

report this comment

Quoting Ignat Mologna - "The Kosher ceremonial laws were abolished by Jesus,but moral natural laws such as Leviticus 18:22 remained and endorsed in Romans 1:26-32."

Amen! Romans 1 contains some of the hardest preaching that this rebelllious world can't stomach!

-- Posted by Frankie Andrews on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 1:26 pm EST

report this comment

no no gay is the new evolution, and the rest of us will fade away. cant wait to see that one. wow who is an idiot

-- Posted by its me again margrette on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 1:11 pm EST

report this comment

Yep, the pick and choose theory from todays christian society.

You don't follow some of the old testament but you follow others like, gays are an abomination and say that Jesus changed everything and the new testament is the law, those contradictions have people walking away, because we all have more sense then to follow so many contradictions.

To have faith in the all, the universe makes way more sense then following the faith of men from 2000 years ago, written by the hand of men, with a political view in all of the writings.

-- Posted by Melissa B. on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 12:57 pm EST

report this comment

The Kosher ceremonial laws were abolished by Jesus,but moral natural laws such as Leviticus 18:22 remained and endorsed in Romans 1:26-32.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 12:38 pm EST

report this comment

Ignat, Leviticus says a lot of things that people do today.. You are probably going to hell for spilling your seed and not cleaning all around you after...

Or for being anywhere near your wife during menstruation, and not putting her away for 7 days...

or wearing mixed clothing.. we are suppose to wear cotton only according to leviticus...

The religious pick and choose what they want from the bible and IS WHY it is falling out of society so quickly.. People are more educated and realize the fables of the bible were written by Ignat men!

-- Posted by Melissa B. on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 12:18 pm EST

report this comment

And one more saying.You readers are not aware that this 21 years old gay student,Matthew Shepard,spends his fiery eternity in Hell for 10 solid years.Think and deal with it.I hope you will repent,before it will be too late for you.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 12:01 pm EST

report this comment

For the ignorant God hating readers,I recomend to open your Bibles and read Genesis 19:1-29,Leviticus 18:22,Romans 1:26-32,and 1Corinthians 6:9-10.Learn to fear God.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 11:23 am EST

report this comment

I am not a bigot who wishes people who got indulged in gay sin,death,curse,and Hell.I wish that they seek Jesus and repent of their wicked filth.Regarding when it comes to the nations who forget God and recognize homosexuality as normal lifestyle as well as abortion in 1973.Giving so-called equality to same sex couples is a strong spit at God's Face.God always dooms any evil civilizations who say that it is ok to be gay and it is ok to murder the preborn.America crosses all lines since the 60s,when God was removed from all American lives.With going against the will of Americans who by ABC gallup poll oppose gay marriages,the despotic judicial activism unconstitutionally crosses lines and gives rights to this immoral minority,glbt.It is sad that America is doomed and faces God's Anger.Shame on Mass,Conneticut,Iowa,and Vermont!California was rescued,but judges continue to do the job of anti-Americanism.America is doomed!

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 11:18 am EST

report this comment

"just because you, the legislature and others think gay is great, others will not. get it through your thick head that this will never change. its just the way its, right wrong or otherwise. you are beating a dead horse"

My dear little margie, I hate to keep confusing you with the facts but the lunatic-fringe likes of you made the same claim about segregation. How'd that turn out for ya?

The hostages have been freed and the change ship already sailed. Get out of the way and get used to it.

-- Posted by None None on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 9:43 am EST

report this comment

"As a Christian,I believe that..."

Good for you, Ignat. As a non-Christian, I don't give a damn and I'm more concerned with protecting our children from the ignorant, intolerant, lunatic-fringe likes of you.

-- Posted by None None on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 9:35 am EST

report this comment

Ignant Mologa,
I support anyones right to disagree with gay marriage. Your posts, however, go beyond gay marriage and say hateful things about gays.
You show ignorance if you believe that gays are coming after your children.
My religion (Judiasm and Unitarian Universalist) does not believe that gays are what you said.
Your posts are very unkind and hurtful. If you cannot post your opinion without resorting to saying hateful things then maybe you should stop posting.
Did you ever stop to think that maybe your words could hurt someone? Doesnt your religion teach you to treat people with decency and kindness? Mine does.

-- Posted by Andi Rosin on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 7:18 am EST

report this comment

These posts speak for themselves. The people who wrote them are in an evangelically sponsored contest to see who can best combine idiocy with obnoxiousness. Since they probably don't believe in evolution, they're unaware that eventually - but not soon enough - they will fade away.........like other organisms unable to make adjustments as the world around them changed.

-- Posted by walt amses on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 6:53 am EST

report this comment

As a Christian,I believe that homosexuality is a vile filthy sin against God.Romans 1:26-32 and Leviticus 18:22.God strictly condemns and punishes those who indulge in this filthy sin and destroys nations who accepts homosexuality as alternative innocent lifestyle.America must say no to those filthy gay marriages.We must to protect our children from dangerous gay activists.

-- Posted by Ignat Mologa on Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 1:47 am EST

report this comment

just because you, the legislature and others think gay is great, others will not. get it through your thick head that this will never change. its just the way its, right wrong or otherwise. you are beating a dead horse

-- Posted by its me again margrette on Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 7:47 pm EST

report this comment

true real

Its clear by the fact that you hide behind a pseudonym that you're afraid. Not just of me, but of the rightness of your thoughts or claims. I think its clear here who's laughing and who's cowering. Did you know that there's a line of psychological theory that states that men with homophobic tendencies, are probably in some part, latently homosexual?

Best of luck with all of your issues.

-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 6:17 pm EST

report this comment

Hey Bennett,

Thanks for the good laugh, i needed it. To hear you try to man up and be all tough trying to call me names and telling me to be an actual man is the funniest thing i have heard. LOL. ROFLMAO.

I too live in middlesex but will spare you the embarassment of the face to face you think you want. THANKS AGAIN, FUNNY STUFF. LOL.

-- Posted by truth real on Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 2:21 pm EST

report this comment

AYK,

I'm not quite sure why the bigotry issue is so hard for some people to understand. I'm going to to try and put it into terms that make it easier for you. This is about freedom and equality- what those patient, stubborn men, who argued and bickered and came up with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were fighting for. That the tree of history is known by its fruit, and that injustice corrupts the tree. Where equality and freedom remain our only choice for wholeness and soundness in both us as human beings or as a nation. That only by fighting discrimination against the minority that can freedom survive for any of us. (I didn't write that; its paraphrased from an old Hollywood flick called Gentlemen's Agreement.) In the movie, they were discussing anti-semitism, but the words and the sentiments ring exactly as true as they pertain to anti-gay bias today. If this were 1940, you would be on the wrong side of the Jewish matter. If this were 1960, you would be on the wrong side of the African-American matter. And today, you're on the wrong side of this.

We're praying for you.

-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 2:06 pm EST

report this comment

What in hell is wrong with Vermont lawmakers>>? What is in the water at the state house..first
1. civil unions
2. state wont accept jessicas law
3. pedophiles get just probation more than jail more often than not
4. homosexuals get an ammended version of civil union, pseudo GM
5. and now legalizing texting porno between teenagers without severe penalties. ( sever penalites are a deterrent)
WHAT IS wrong with these bird brains? Cant they see the breakdown of morals and social decay and then wonder why society is so screwed up>>>>?

-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 1:31 pm EST

report this comment

truth real

I think, like most Americans, I'm overjoyed that Captain Philips is free and safe and sound. What does that have to do with the price of beans in August? That's not what this debate is about. If you really think someone should be slapped, why are you hiding your true identity like a scared little *****? Any time you want to reveal your identity and discuss this in person, like an actual man, please get in touch. I live in Middlesex.

-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 10:23 am EST

report this comment

Mr. Moss,
I don't agree with your starting presumption; that all opposition to the gay marriage initiative is based solely on hatred of homosexuals, therefore all acts of hatred towards homosexuals are somehow related to opposition to the gay marriage initiative. We are talking about different things, my intended point is that acts of uncivil behavior in the discussion of this topic are equal on both sides. I believe both sides are firmly entrenched in their beliefs and instead of considering an opposing viewpoint automatically default to name calling and impugning their opponent. Actual violence against another person, regardless of the reason, is a wholly different topic.
In regards to your comment regarding violence towards homosexuals, "us folks" are just as at risk as anyone else to violence. Heterosexuals are victims of violence also, are threatened also, consider restraining orders also. An act of violence against another person is generally a crime, I personally believe the motivation for the act is irrelevant. An assault "because he was gay" is no better or worse than an assault "because he was there". The ultimate fallacy behind the idea of "hate crimes" is you are free to think any hateful thought you wish, it is only when you physically act on that thought that an actual crime occurs. Since the act is the crime, what was going through your mind at the time should in no way impact our measurement of how grievous the crime was.

-- Posted by Patrick Cashman on Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 12:58 am EST

report this comment

"HEY BENNETT SHAPIRO AND COMPANY,

I am pretty sure you havent noticed the headlines lately about the REAL AMERICAN HERO, CAPTAIN RICHARD PHILIPS, being brave, honorable and a true leader!"

In other words, you don't have a case or a clue so you're gonna try to change the subject in the hopes that nobody will notice what a clueless cretin ya are.

Nice try. I noticed. I always do. I always will.

Is it your contention that people who support the right to same-sex marriage aren't glad to hear that Captain Phillips was finally freed?

If so, you're an even bigger idiot than I thought and I already had ya in the subhuman semifinals.

Just when I think you brain-dead bigots have hit bottom, you manage to drain just a little bit more water from the bottom of the pool.

This thread is about the same-sex marriage vote. One does not cancel out the other.

Get yourself a case and a clue.

-- Posted by None None on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 9:59 pm EST

report this comment

AYK, Truth - You remind me of a roadside ditch full of stagnant water, septic runoff and mosquito larvae.......you labor under the delusion that someone out there cares what you say......other than each other and your soul mates on this site who - as of last Tuesday - are completely and officially irrelevant.

-- Posted by walt amses on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 6:43 pm EST

report this comment

someone needs to take Mr & Mr None None brains mirror away. His self image has been pouring into these pages and i wonder why he never got good use of the Special Ed programs in school.

-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 5:12 pm EST

report this comment

HEY BENNETT SHAPIRO AND COMPANY,

I am pretty sure you havent noticed the headlines lately about the REAL AMERICAN HERO, CAPTAIN RICHARD PHILIPS, being brave, honorable and a true leader!

Believe it or not, this is more important than gay marriage! The self centered nature of the gay community is disgusting. In the current times of poor economics and war, all they can do is focus on themselves. Treating the bad times as a perfect opportunity to change laws. DISGUSTING.

Shap should be slapped and the legislature should be voted out next term. Vermont needs to be rescued from the idiots running montpelier.

ONLY VOTERS HAVE THAT POWER.

I only ask that voters actually look at the issues for once instead of blindly re-electing these fools.

-- Posted by truth real on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 5:03 pm EST

report this comment

At the end of the day, the opponents of same-sex marriage just can't get around the fact that this is a civil rights issue and they're no longer being allowed to deny others their equal rights under the law or impose their bigoted beliefs on anyone else.

The opponents have not lost any rights. No one made same-sex marriage mandatory and no one prevented them from attending their place of worship today or any other day.

They have no case because they've been denied no rights.

The faith-based community can no longer constrain the rights of the fact-based community.

This is representative democracy in action. The system worked as it was intended to work.

There was an election. You lost. Deal with it.

-- Posted by None None on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 2:23 pm EST

report this comment

Cashman, the "bile" and "hatred" you claim to see against marriage opponents is NOTHING compared to that which has been expressed against gay people even here.

Marriage opponents may be called ignorant or bigots, but they are not called an abomination or worse. You would not believe the emails I have received from some people because of my posts to the RH. You folks do not have to fear for your lives or your property or consider getting restraining orders.

Straight opponents of marriage equality are not beaten or killed.

There is no comparison.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20M9ywn7Zgs

-- Posted by Kevin Moss on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 11:35 am EST

report this comment

Some of you need to get more of a life other then posting 1000 word posts, hope you put this much effort into your daily lives.

-- Posted by who cares on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 10:30 am EST

report this comment

What's that got to do with the ignorant, ill-informed, factose-intolerant, lunatic-fringe likes of you, cash?

You have no case, no clue and no reason. Disappear.

-- Posted by None None on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 10:05 am EST

report this comment

None None,
Hush, adults are talking.

-- Posted by Patrick Cashman on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 9:38 am EST

report this comment

"Ms. Olinick and Mr. Amses,
You are probably right, I made a sweeping generalization unsupported by fact when I stated it was likely no one had allowed their mind to be changed in the past decade regarding gay marriage."

Well, since that's essentially the extent of your act, cash, that hardly comes as a shock.

As for the rest of your lunacy, it's not a question of "which side is spewing the most bile", it's purely a question of which side has a case and which side doesn't.

You don't.

The State of Vermont is not required to hold a referendum on the issue of same-sex marriage or any other issue. The majority does not get to decide what civil rights the minority are entitled to.

On the other hand, no one moved to make same-sex marriage mandatory. If you're opposed to it, don't enter into one.

No one prevented anyone from attending their house of worship this Easter morning. No church or sect has been required to perform civil unions against their will nor will they be mandated to perform same-sex marriage.

You have no case. Your arguments have no merit. Let it go.

The only thing opponents of same-sex marriage are being denied is the right to impose their bigoted "beliefs" and worthless "values" on everyone else whether they like it or not. You don't have that right.

We had an election. You lost. Get over it.

-- Posted by None None on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 9:36 am EST

report this comment

Who cares....get on with your lives already and do some good for society.

-- Posted by who cares on Sun, Apr 12, 2009, 8:46 am EST

report this comment

Name another demographic that comes close to Catholic Clergy re: sexual abuse of children - and covering up the sexual abuse of children; and - through reassignment of priests - actually facilitating the sexual abuse of children. Not hyperbole at all...... And regard to the posts, I certainly have been angry at some of them and responded accordingly. Hatred and bigotry bring that out in me. But I also said it was completely inappropriate to provide someone's personal information for any purpose. And Mr. C - whatever you believe, you sound like a pretty smart guy, I can't imagine you really believe that the hatred in this debate is even close to evenly divided...........the anti crowd wins that battle hands down.

-- Posted by walt amses on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 11:20 pm EST

report this comment

Ms. Olinick and Mr. Amses,
You are probably right, I made a sweeping generalization unsupported by fact when I stated it was likely no one had allowed their mind to be changed in the past decade regarding gay marriage. It is possible, and given the accelerating tempo of gay marriage actions across the country is probably likely. I stand corrected.
However in regards to the matter of which side is spewing the most bile, it is an utterly false statement to claim the misbehavior rests entirely with one side. If you examine the comments on this site alone you see equal blame. For those against the measure there is a certain amount of "God hates gays" and some comments regarding HIV. On the pro side, however, the unreasoning hatred is present in equal measure. We had the individual going by "AJ None" who posted an individual's home address and incited people to swing by the individual's home and "hold her accountable" for her anti-gay marriage comments. There is Mr. Shapiro who answers any disagreement to his world view by claiming the opposition are, by definition of disagreeing with him, "bigots". Even yourself, Mr. Amses, crossed the line with your claim that "the majority of pedophiles are heterosexuals and priests." Priests? Really? Do you honestly believe the majority of child sexual abuse in this country is at the hands of the Catholic Clergy? Or was that an unreasonable, anger driven bit of hyperbole meant to strike at people of faith? I think you are forgiving those who agree with you for behavior you damn in those who oppose you.

-- Posted by Patrick Cashman on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 7:45 pm EST

report this comment

In MA the ruling supporting marriage came from a split Supreme Court, which clarified its original position to say that civil unions were not an acceptable substitute for marriage.
A petition for an anti-equality constitutional amendment received enough voter signatures to send it to the legislature where, in a complicated series of votes, it failed to gain enough support in two constitutional conventions to send it "to the people" as a binding referendum.
The anti-equality forces promised a devastating retribution against the legislature, but in fact I believe only one pro-marriage legislator was defeated and several anti-marriage legislators eventually lost to pro-marriage opponents.

-- Posted by Judith Olinick on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 6:51 pm EST

report this comment

AYK - at least you're consistent........consistently wrong. I'm sure your family in Mass. isn't going to swing the issue there anymore than you and your fellow bigots were able to swing it here......and the MAJORITY of residents of the whole bay state, rather than just the AYKers, feel that gay marriage there is no big deal.

-- Posted by walt amses on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 5:48 pm EST

report this comment

PC - It's disingenuous to suggest that no minds have been changed. In fact, civil unions have ironically become the mantra of the far right. And if you look a little south, 80 % of Mass. voters now feel that gay marriage - after five years - has had either a positive effect on the state or no effect at all. Decidedly different than before.
And the "hyperventilating mob" was comprised of the opposition, spewing hate, biblical drivel and transparent misinformation.

-- Posted by walt amses on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 3:03 pm EST

report this comment

Well, I wasn't going to say any more; but since you did raise a new or less frequently mentioned point:
In fact many many people have changed their minds since the Baker decision. Many people who adamantly opposed civil unions came to see that they were harmless and many who said yes to civil unions and no to marriage eventually moved on to support marriage. I have no idea what the numbers are but the personal stories attesting to these changes are numerous and the change is all in one direction: toward support of marriage equality. Progress can also be seen in the changes of opinion of public figures such as former Gov. Howard Dean and NY Senator Charles Schumer. For a growing number of legislators and political candidates, civil unions, once seen as radical, have become a fallback position from which they will move toward support for full civil marriage equality. Obama, Schwarzenneger and Bill Clinton, all professed opponents of marriage equality at one point, all opposed passage of Prop. 8 in California. I think you'll see that by the end of his first term, Pres. Obama will be supporting marriage equality. Of course many members of the legislature have also changed their positions: you can call it giving in to a hyperventilating mob if it helps you but no objective observer would call it that. The hyperventilating was all on the side of the opposition, who are now "blood in the eyes mad" and out to "get even" as their leader Mr. Cable so reasonably puts it. No doubt several legislators felt pressure from both sides, but many listened to the discussion and simply decided that this was a question of rights whose time had come.
And there is a big difference between a "popular" referendum on a civil rights issue and a legislative debate and vote on a law to correct the injustice.

-- Posted by Judith Olinick on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 2:53 pm EST

report this comment

Ms. Olinick,
I suspect your right that there are diminishing returns to continuing, I doubt there is a single voter who has changed his mind as to how he stood in regards to this issue throughout the entirety of the discussion beginning with the Baker decision. People are entrenched and past the point of reason. I realize you would most likely bin me in that group, as would I you. While I understand you believe in your point of view, I see only faulty circular reasoning ("we don't vote on civil rights, but we are going to vote on this, but it would be innappropriate for all Vermonters to vote because it is about civil rights, and we don't vote on civil rights").
As to the harm, it has already been done. We were sold down the river by our representatives so they could appease a small but vocal group. They willfully chose not to apply reason and instead gave into the hyperventilating mob. They chose the easy path, the next step is to hold them accountable for their decisions.

-- Posted by Patrick Cashman on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 12:56 pm EST

report this comment

thihttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIPv9AtZ2zEs one is good too

-- Posted by its me again margrette on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 11:37 am EST

report this comment

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPrQOiS_zLQ

-- Posted by its me again margrette on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 11:30 am EST

report this comment

Yes, you have your ignorant, ill-informed, bigoted opinions with no basis in fact, but you have no case, no clue and no reason.

That's why you lost on civil unions, that's why you lost on same-sex marriage and that's why you'll continue to lose in the courts, in the legislature and at the polls, so get yourself a case and a clue or get used to it.

This is not a theocracy. If you want to live in one, go live under the Taliban in Afghanistan.

-- Posted by None None on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 9:27 am EST

report this comment

There will always be a difference, too bad. Marriage (man and woman) and pseudo gay marriage aka civil unions ( all other pseudo marriages). We all have our own opinions and dont have to change them because some cabal group thinks they want a novelty.

-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 8:35 am EST

report this comment

Mr. Cashman,
You say that civil rights are not up for popular vote but that this issue was. I understand: you don't believe that the freedom to marry is a civil right. We've been past this post on the track several times. The anti-equality faction hung on grimly to their mantra that marriage is not a civil right; but they, including you (or along with you if you don't include yourself with them) are simply wrong.
The fact that the freedom to marry is not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights does not mean that it is not a civil right. Just a quick check of the facts shows that it is:
If a man and woman of legal age, neither legally married, both mentally competent to sign a legal contract and not close blood relatives request a marriage license from a Vermont town clerk, on what grounds can it be denied to them? None. They have a right to it.
And on what grounds can it be revoked by the state? None. Only the spouses themselves can dissolve a marriage, by divorce or the death of one.
How often does a marriage license have to be renewed? Never.
How does one lose the right to marry? One cannot. It's easier to lose your right to vote or even your citizenship than to lose your right to marry.
How could there be a broader, more all-encompassing, less restricted, more irrevocable or more inalienable right than the right to marry? There couldn't.
And who, except perhaps members of the military, who may still need a commanding officer's permission to marry (I don't know, but it doesn't count anyway) is categorically excluded from this right? Only same-sex couples. For what reason are they excluded? None specifically set forth by the state. Religion? God? The Bible? No, that would be unconstitutional. The ability to produce biological offspring? No, this is not a requirement for marriage. The credible threat of some specific harm to any person, the state or any institution? No, none has ever been shown. I don't think a reasonable person can reasonably deny that marriage is a civil right.
There was no need and no reason for a popular referendum on the marriage question. Referendum proponents' only aim was to delay the vote (Or in some legislators' cases to protect themselves, perhaps.) I can't say for sure what the outcome of a referendum would have been but I'm sure it would have been very close. I think marriage equality would have won; but even if it had lost by a couple of points it would have been irrelevant. Civil rights are not up for popular vote. Legal affirmation of the right of interracial couples to marry is an excellent analogy, which of course the anti-equality faction also tries (and fails) to deny.
If you want to amend the Vermont Constitution to provide for citizen-initiated referendum, why don't you get to work on it? I'm sure the secretary of state's office will advise you on how to proceed.
I think that's all I have to say to you on this topic. I feel it's time to move forward and stop going around in circles. You'll see--no harm will come to you. We are all better off because of this excellent decision.

-- Posted by Judith Olinick on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 8:09 am EST

report this comment

Not to derail this discourse, but since morality is no longer at issue in Vermont, when do I get to see more strip joints in this state??

-- Posted by Barre City Resident on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 6:33 am EST

report this comment

Ms. Olinick,
You are absolutely correct, civil rights are not up to a popular vote. This issue, however, was. Unfortunately supporters of the initiative were successful in constraining the definition of the "popular vote" to mean only those voters who were popular with them.
And as has been pointed out several times previously public referendums are legal in Vermont, have occurred numerous times in the past in regards to particularly sensitive issues that impact all Vermonters, and in the particular case of amendment to our Constitution are not only allowed but mandated. Your statement that this law came "more directly from the people" is self serving, there was a readily available option by which this law could have wholly come directly from the people. Supporters of this initiative blocked that route, the only conceivable reason being because they were not confident in result. With the legislature, however, they were quite confident of the result.
I am, unfortunately, not free to ignore the results of this issue. I can and will continue to ignore the marital status of homosexuals, I haven't a dog in that fight and couldn't care less. However the supporters of this initiative have taken a portion of my and your role as citizens because they felt the end justified their means. I am not concerned about gay marriage opening the door to polygamy or any other deviancy. I am however concerned the success of their methods opens the door to all and sundry special interest groups with a boutique issue to short circuit our system of government because they feel themselves entitled to decide what is acceptable in the name of the greater good.
We are all a little less important in our own governance today than we were when the week started, and you aided in your own diminution.

-- Posted by Patrick Cashman on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 2:36 am EST

report this comment

Mr. Cashman
The legislature is not imposing any values on all Vermonters. The new law carefully protects the rights of religious organizations and clergy to handle religious marriage as they see fit. It deals only with civil marriage and those who don't like it are free to ignore it unless their jobs entail direct involvement with marriage.

You don't have to be psychic to predict how the VT Supreme Court would have ruled. You have only to look at the decisions in several other states (which would have furnished eloquent precedent)and the character of our court.
If the court had ruled that the state must issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples there would have been objections about activist judges ruling from the bench (though of course the ruling would have been entirely legitimate, just as the legislators' ruling was.) The importance of having the ruling come from our citizen legislature, as is widely recognized, is that it comes more directly from the people.

We do not legislate by referendum (and, as many people have said countless times, civil rights are not up for popular vote) but through our elected representatives and senators. Our legislative districts are very small and our legislators are extremely accessible by phone, letter, email and for face-to-face conversation. Our legislators did not find it necessary to make a count of opinion for and against marriage equality, it's true, just as they will not take a head count on the many other important issues they deal with in this session. But there is no doubt that they received more than enough constituent input to make an informed decision. The veto override may just have squeaked through in the House, but in fact both the House and the Senate voted overwhelmingly for the marriage equality law.

-- Posted by Judith Olinick on Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 2:08 am EST

report this comment

Ms. Olinick,
I admit to sticking to one message, mainly because the facts remain unchanged. I also am by no means claiming that the law is "illegitimate", it was passed by our legislature and is therefore law. However, I believe our legislators need to be held accountable for over reaching in order to take this issue under their consideration and impose their personal values on all Vermonters while utterly disregarding more appropriate venues that would have taken into account either the wishes of their constituents or the claimed Constitutionality of the civil union legislation. Some of those same Legislators, specifically Mr. Racine, have espoused an intention to run for Governor and I do not want to lose sight of the fact that he will be seeking Vermonters' votes but is uninterested in their opinions.
In regards to what the court would or would not have done, despite your apparent psychic abilities I for one would have rather the question actually be put to them instead of merely predicting what the answer would have been. Our legislators actively prevented this from happening, and despite the approval of people in other regions who are not their constituents and who are irrelevant to this question I can only hope their actual constituents are appropriately offended at being disregarded. While supporters of the initiative may or may not have been in the majority, our lawmakers did not find it worthwhile or in their best interest to actually find out.

-- Posted by Patrick Cashman on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 9:46 pm EST

report this comment

Mr. Cashman
You keep going around and around the same circle. The court could and would have ruled that civil unions did not meet the requirements of the Baker ruling. The marriage equality leaders could have gone directly to the court as happened in MA and CT. They decided tht the legislative route more directly reflected the will of the people. The importance of the fact that VT adopted marriage equality by legislative vote and not by court ruling has been recognized all across the country and abroad.
The anti-equality people loudly claim to be the majority, but there is no evidence that they are and it doesn't matter.
This IS civil rights legislation and it IS entirely proper for a state legislature to pass a civil rights law. I don't know what would have happened had Douglas's veto not been overridden--whether we would have waited and tried again with the next legislature or whether we would have gone to the court. Either route would be acceptable.
This was the right result legitimately arrived at.

-- Posted by Judith Olinick on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 9:20 pm EST

report this comment

Mr. Moss,
The Doyle Poll is hardly a government sponsored assessment, and I suspect your opinion as to its validity as a measurement is based largely on the results obtained. While it certainly could be valid, that validity is somewhat questionable since it was actively promoted by organizations that have a decided view on the topic. The urgent "call to action" from Vermont Freedom to Marry and the organization RU12? for their supporters to "download the poll, mark "yes" on #4 and mail the poll in" calls into question just how much tampering is acceptable before the results becoming meaningless.
I understand your opinion that there was an existing right to marry being denied to homosexuals, I just don't agree. I also believe the route through a complicit legislature taken by supporters indicates that the architects behind this initiative understood their shaky footing in pursuing this issue through the court. Instead they maintained a deceptive narrative claiming this to be a civil rights issue while choosing the path of creating a new privilege. If the civil union legislation was, as you clearly believe, in direct violation of a Supreme Court decision this matter would have been handily and decisively settled in a court, not the legislature.

-- Posted by Patrick Cashman on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 8:38 pm EST

report this comment

The Doyle poll is hardly a private poll.

And marriage is a right that was previously denied to gay and lesbian Vermonters, not a privilege. It is even a "fundamental civil right" according to the Supreme Court. Nothin' new about it.

-- Posted by Kevin Moss on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 7:31 pm EST

report this comment

You really need to get yourself a case, a clue and some new jokes, cash.

Is it really your contention that the legislature doesn't have the right to override the governor's veto if they get a sufficient number of votes in both chambers under the laws of the State of Vermont?

If you want to argue that they're not separate and coequal branches of government under law and as provided for in the Vermont Constitution, knock yourself out.

-- Posted by None None on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 7:27 pm EST

report this comment

Mr. Moss,
I would argue the legislative process showed the will of the legislature, which may not necessarily be the will of Vermont. The Governor, also as an elected official, opposed the measure. Who is to say which elected body more represents the will of Vermonters? As to polling; private polling is hardly a replacement for a government administered referendum. If it were elections themselves would be unnecessary.
All of this would be moot, however, if the point made below that the majority does not get a vote in matters of the civil rights of the minority were true and relevant. The process used was that of a new privilege being created, no matter how loudly supporters claimed it was a matter of an existing right being defended.
All that being said, it isn't my contention that the creation of this new privilege was wrong or right but that the process used was an affront to all of us. Celebrating the endstate achieved is one thing, but to do so blind to the impacts it has on our role in our own governance is to choose denial and willful ignorance.

-- Posted by Patrick Cashman on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 6:15 pm EST

report this comment

Same cash, same trash, different day.

"Mr. Shapiro, Your feeling strongly that this was a civil rights issue does not make it so."

And your refusal to acknowledge the reality that you loons already lost that argument in court when you made it nine years ago with civil unions won't change the fact that you already lost that argument on those grounds and that there's existing court precedent to prove it.

Nice try.

"This issue was voted on by elected representatives, vetoed by another elected representative, then voted on again by elected representatives. If this was a civil rights issue and the majority does not "get to decide what rights we have", then all of those actions were innappropriate."

If you want to mount a legal challenge claiming that the members of the Vermont Legislature weren't elected to represent their districts or that they don't have the right to vote to overturn one of doogie's dimwitted vetoes with a 67 percent majority in both bodies of the legislature and couple that with the same, lame special rights for a special class crap you lost with nine years ago, then by all means, knock yourself out.

You didn't lose any rights. You only lost the ability to deny other people theirs. You don't have that right.

"This issue was decided by a majority of the legislature, and their decision was to create a new privilege for a specific group."

No, again, they moved to ensure equal rights for everyone and to prevent brain-dead bigots from denying them those rights as they're permitted to do under our system of government.

Big difference.

"The unfortunate thing is the lengths supporters of this initiative were willing to go to avoid measuring the actual majority opinion in Vermont. Nobody really knows what that would have been, and through the perverse course by which this law was rammed through we probably never will."

That's the same brain-dead, gay-bashing, bigoted-trash argument the lunatic-fringe likes of Steve Cable used nine years ago when the bigot brigade opposed civil unions legislation and sought to have it overturned by the legislature and the courts.

How'd ya make out with all that?

Again, if you want to mount a legal challenge claiming that the members of the Vermont Legislature weren't elected to represent their districts or that they don't have the right to vote to overturn one of doogie's dimwitted vetoes with a 67 percent majority in both bodies of the legislature and couple that with the same, lame special rights for a special class crap you lost with nine years ago, then by all means, knock yourself out.

That's entertainment.

-- Posted by None None on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 6:02 pm EST

report this comment

Patrick: polls showed a majority of Vermonters favored marriage.

As it is, the legislators were elected by a majority, and those same legislators approved marriage by a SUPER-MAJORITY. That kind of speaks for itself.

We could no doubt have gone through the courts again because it is indeed a question of rights, and I have not a shred of doubt the court would have approved marriage, but the legislative process shows the will of Vermont.

-- Posted by Kevin Moss on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 3:39 pm EST

report this comment

Mr. Shapiro,
Your feeling strongly that this was a civil rights issue does not make it so. This issue was voted on by elected representatives, vetoed by another elected representative, then voted on again by elected representatives. If this was a civil rights issue and the majority does not "get to decide what rights we have", then all of those actions were innappropriate. This issue was decided by a majority of the legislature, and their decision was to create a new privilege for a specific group. The unfortunate thing is the lengths supporters of this initiative were willing to go to avoid measuring the actual majority opinion in Vermont. Nobody really knows what that would have been, and through the perverse course by which this law was rammed through we probably never will.

-- Posted by Patrick Cashman on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 11:58 am EST

report this comment

Well said, Bennett. It's high time these brain-dead bigots get held to account for their nonsense.

-- Posted by None None on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 7:44 am EST

report this comment

Succinctly and well said Bennett,
Thank you!
My only quibble would be that there are BOTH religious and civil marriage and that they are and must remain separate. People who want religious marriages have every right to them, but only civil marriages are legal and carry state-issued benefits.
I was impressed by the woman who testified in the legislature, "Marriage is a religious rite, 'r-i-t-e'." But that was less than half of it. She should have said that while religious marriage is a religious rite, civil marriage is a civil right.

-- Posted by Judith Olinick on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 7:26 am EST

report this comment

Bennett
Get over yourself !

-- Posted by tryto guess on Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 6:45 am EST

report this comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Boy Scout policy on gays faulted

Northfield man charged with growing marijuana

Tritium hot zone expands at Vt. Yankee

Barre man guilty of fourth DUI charge

Marshfield woman injured in car crash

It's 'Woodchuck Day', and we don't mean Punxsatawny Phil

In capital, he was a baker and far more

Feds: State worker in $500,000 rip-off

A grand theft of autos

Vermont parents discover pride (and price) of Olympics