Home of the Whopper.

Feb 24, 2010 Erick commented on Who Wants to Stop Gay Marriage?.
Loveschild-
@70 you said that R-71 was "hardly a real legitimate electoral victory." I recall that it passed by more than 110,000 votes. By your standards, I-960 (limiting the Legislature's ability to increase taxes) would "hardly be a real legitimate electoral victory" since it won by less than 40,000 votes in 2007. By your standards of legitimacy, G.W. Bush's election in 2000 would not be a "real legitimate victory" as a result of less than a thousand votes in Florida.

Oh, I forgot - a different standard applies when it comes gay rights. Sorry, my bad.

@77 you said "I was just expressing my desire to see that happen without any questionable tactics employed to change the real outcome." You were alleging "questionable tactics" on part of the proponents of R-71. What about Sen. Val Stevens' letter saying "Are the homosexuals finally going to take control of our culture and push their depraved lifestyle on children and families?" and "pushing the lifestyle through public schools, beginning with elementary school-aged children." In California during the Prop 8 campaign, proponent Hak-Shing Tam wrote in campaign literature addressed to Chinese-American church groups, claiming that the gay rights agenda included sinister goals: "on their agenda list is: legalize having sex with children" and warning that other states would "fall into satan's hands" if Prop 8 was defeated.' Are these tactics not questionable?

Oh, sorry again. I forgot that it's OK to use inflammatory rhetoric when you speak against the gays, but not when you speak against righteous people who oppose them. My mistake again.

As for wanting "the people to decide" rather than "letting unelected judges and unaccounted politicians" make decisions about social policy....I assume you took issue with the legislature's decision to pass SB 5688? In the past, conservative groups have filed legal challenges to prevent, or slow down, the signature gathering process for I-1000 (death with dignity), and filed more legal challenges after the voters approved it.

Oh, I forgot, I different standard applies when you have God on your side. My bad again.

As for your claim that "We are going to win completely in the end..." I actually think you may be right, because, after all, you have God on your side. The Nazis, after all, said God on their side (See Martin Luther's "On the Jews and their Lies", 1543). They lost the war, but largely succeeded in their goal of erradicating Jews from Europe. White southerners claimed biblical justification for slavery, then their decendants claimed biblical justification for laws mandating segregation and prohibiting mixed race marriage. I have no doubt that what is happening now in Uganda is but a trial run for the Christian right's future plans for dealing with the homosexual problem here in the U.S.

With God on your side, how can you lose?

More...
Jan 11, 2010 Erick commented on City Attorney's Office: Breaking Up Is Hard to Do.
Does anyone the names of the other attorneys in the City Attorney's office who were shown the door?
Oct 14, 2009 Erick commented on Radio Stations Yank Bogus Anti-R-71 Ads.
The ads got me riled up also. Star 101.5 used to be one of my favorite stations. But I'm not sure how effective complaining to the stations will be. We might ourselves be portrayed as intolerant for trying to suppress other people's free speech rights. The state supreme court said years ago that telling deliberate lies in a campaign ad is constitutionally protected free speech protected by the First Amendment. See Public Disclosure Commission v. 119 Vote No! Committee, 135 Wash.2d 618 (1998). I kid you not. Justice Sanders wrote the opinion for the majority. Neither the person making the deliberate false statements, nor the paper/station that prints/airs them can be held liable. This wasn't even a close case for the court - so a slightly different fact pattern will not likely make a difference. I'll bet a month's pay that the ACLU (which donated generously to the Approve 71 campaign, but has also defended the free speech rights of Nazis and the KKK) will agree with me. I hate to say this, but the stations are on firm ground when they say airing the ads falls squarely within "free speech".

It might seem more effective for the Approve 71 campaign to run counter-ads on the same radio stations that call the opposition on their deception.
More...
Jun 4, 2009 Erick commented on God Is All-Powerful.
Never mind about Larry making it to their protests. Rev.Phelps and gang believes that anyone who marries after divorce is committing adultery and therefore is going to hell. Larry Stickney has two divorces and is on his third marriage. Maybe Rev. Phelps and gang can be persuaded to carry signs promoting R-71 - while the TV stations are shooting video. I'm sure Gary and Larry wouldn't mind the support.
Jun 4, 2009 Erick commented on God Is All-Powerful.
Why don't we invite Referendum 71 promoters Gary Randall and Larry Stickney? It would make for a great photo op.
May 21, 2009 Erick commented on Time Running Out for Bigots.
I'm with Mason - if the attorneys for the equality movement don't file a legal challenge - I'll drive to Olympia and file one myself. Wanna carpool Mason? I can think of a challenge - that part of the bill that deals with benefits doesn't go into effect until 2014. That's an important qualification to "equivalancy" omitted by the ballot title and ballot summary. Besides, not filing a legal challenge gives Larry and Gary about 1-2 more weeks to collect signatures. To give you an idea of how important this could be, the Oregon referendum attempt fell short by only a few hundred signatures. One extra day could have made the difference there. Tim Eyman's R-65 could have qualified for the ballot if he had another two weeks.
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy