Comments

101
@87: "What's bad for the left politically is good for the country"
And now we arrive at the crux of the biscuit.
Seattleblues, the Vietnam War presented such a distraction to LBJ that he neglected more important programs on the home front, leading to his widespread unpopularity and to a weakening of the Democratic Party. The Vietnam War was quite bad for the Left, politically, but was it good for America?
Here's my take on it. Seattleblues believes America to be so awesome and special that it can't POSSIBLY run into trouble of her own accord. No sir, if America is doing poorly, someone must be sabotaging her from within! And you just KNOW it's those no-good liberals. See, all we have to do is get rid of the liberals and America will be right as rain again.
He lives in a fantasy world where everything will fix itself so long as you don't try to change anything, where conservatives are always right and liberals hate everything that America stands for. He is the man sitting in his broken car, screaming abuse and accusations at the mechanic who is trying to fix it, convinced that if the mechanic just puts the hood back down and leaves the car to its owner it will start running again. He doesn't care how many lives or how much money has to be sacrificed so long as it gets the liberals out of power so that conservatives can step back and let everything proceed as planned.

@89: You claim (without providing any evidence) that countries which have legalized same-sex marriage have seen declines in the rate of marriage among young persons. You say that like it's a bad thing. I think it's jolly good if young adults complete their education and establish themselves before settling down to raise a family. Or would you rather that everyone be married and a parent by the time they reach 20?
Also, please provide a mechanism to explain how gay marriage causes young adults to be less likely to marry. And while you're at it, you might want to provide evidence of such a correlation instead of just expecting us to take your word for it.
@91: Actually, suburbs tend to have similar political orientations to their cities. The divide lies between suburban and rural, not urban and suburban. Don't try to cover your ignorance of American demographics with a batshit-spun tale about people going liberally nuts from overcrowding.
102
Congratulations, homosexuals!
103
There are two ways this could go....After the Bills pass both the House and Senate and the Gov. signs them into law, the "Christian Reich" could begin to attempt to gather 120,000 signatures in order to place a referendum onto the November ballot ( the Presidential Election Ballot) and hope that the 57% of voters who, when polled, said they would support a marriage equality law actually do NOT vote in the election, (Presidential Election!!! Highest voter turnout) OR....risk bringing this to a referendum and having the signatures released publicly- as determined by a Judge is legally O.K.- and STILL having the voters reaffirm the law and having to accept the fact that, by bringing this to the voters, actually HELPED the Marriage Equality discussion by allowing Washington State to become the FIRST state to approve same-sex marriage by a popular vote-virtually assuring a positive reaction in Oregon, California, and many other state currently considering marriage equality. Either way, it sure looks stupid for them to consider challenging the law!
104
Could we all agree to not reply to the pitifully ignorant person (I won't even identify him by name) who makes a hobby of posting hateful comments here? Perhaps eventually (without all the attention he's been receiving and which he obviously craves) he will give up posting here and we'll all be better off.
105
@104: I agree. It's evident to me there's some mental illness at work in the person of whom you speak but the people who respond to him can't see it. Maybe they have special illnesses of their own.
106
@105: Madness is liberating; you should try it!
107
@105 Arguing with trolls is one of Slog's primary raisons d'etre (see also: Charles Mudede.) All part of the fun.
108
104 &105, I never want Seattleblues to go away. He's endlessly entertaining. A "straight" guy who can't stop thinking about gay sex...priceless! He's a Slog treasure.
109
@105

Well, if this be madness there's method in it.

See, while all of you have bought the most preposterous of the fringe leftwing lunacies hook line and sinker most Americans haven't. In discussions with this most bizarre fringe of leftist thought I find two things. First, most people I speak to are appalled by the kinds of notions you people espouse. The dissolution of the family and morality and the work ethic and personal responsibility in any form whatever is your clear aim. You clearly despise this country and everything it stands for. You hate any kind of decency or honor or integrity. You loathe and fear the Christian faith that sustains the majority of your countrymen. And this genuinely angers most that haven't slipped into the insanity of the far left loony bin you have. So it gives me a bit of ammunition in discussing politics with real Americans. I mean, reading about the poor deluded mentally ill people you folks call TG or trans the other day I found the most amazingly idiotic statements. 'Having a vagina doesn't make you a woman' for instance. Um, yes, in fact it does and every sane person knows this. Airing this kind of pure applesauce for those not aware of the dangerous lunacy of the left has been very helpful in convincing many independents of how unfit you poeple are for this great nation.

But mainly I you're free entertainment. Some, like VL, have a brain buried beneath the septic layers of progressive dogma. I don't agree with him or Ken Mehlman or a number of others very often, but at least they sometimes think about what they write. Some like Rob and others are amusing in their insistence that everyone must be gay since they've themselves chosen to be. Some like Kim amuse me in their one sided humility. She'll call foul on anyone but those who agree with her for their polite disagreement, but when you do happen to agree with her any mean spirited vulgarity is just fine. Curiously, I have yet to see her condemn Savage for his obsession with Rick Santorum and the personal nature of those attacks. But to say that Savage is the piece of filthy depraved garbage he in fact is gets immediate pious mouthings from Ms. Portland about how MEAN you are.

I've been remiss in my manners though. I haven't thanked you folks for the free freak show you've provided me. So thank you very much for the view into the dark underbelly of leftist American, well for lack of a better word, thought. Who'd have thought it would be so unintentionally doggone funny?
110
@109: Kim is what they call a "good Christian". She's kind-hearted, understanding, and keeps her faith without trying to impose it on others. She gets on your case because you claim to be a Christian while acting in a very un-Christ-like way and trying to shove this attitude to the forefront of what is, despite your delusions, a secular and diverse country. Dan doesn't claim to be one of those morally-superior-by-sole-virtue-of-being-Christian types, and his campaign against Ol' Frothy Mix was simply retaliation in kind. Stop trying to paint yourself as the victim.
If having a vagina makes one a woman, then both postoperative MTF and preoperative FTM transsexuals are women, and it is genuinely possible to change genders. Also, we all have uteri; true fact.
Seattleblues, your state of denial is actually rather dangerous. You have convinced yourself that liberalism is a mental illness, that conservatives are always right, that your personal opinions objectively determine reality. At this rate you will end up living inside your own head, because the world is not black and white, or even greyscale. To run a country like ours requires both liberalism and conservatism working in balance to select the best ideas and implement them. Unfortunately, our conservatives have broken down and gone into wacko mode, but you scrubs seem to think they're the answer to all our problems.
111
'Kim' claims not to be a Christian, which is just as well. If the majority hold a view that doesn't conflict with the Constitution or other laws, they have the right to impose that view in law. This would be true if the majority were Buddhist or Christian or Atheist. We can't have an established state church or deny others the right to practice their faith, but we can and should elect those who share our values Christian or otherwise.

Rick Santorum neither serves in public office nor has the slightest chance of doing so. The only reasons Savage carries on his shameful crusade against him? Because he's a bully, happy to use his influence to demean someone else. And because he's got some weird sick obsession with the man.

While political disagreement with him while he was a Senator would have been as truly American as the First Amendment is, attacking the man and his name was never either appropriate or warranted. Nor was lying about what he said, since he never once equated bestiality with homosexuality except in the syphilitic recesses of what Savage calls his mind. Once he left office that strange sick twisted piece of trash that is Dan Savage should have left him alone, or been asked to leave him alone by anyone halfway rational.

Any doctor performing a surgery physically transforming a man to a woman or vice versa should be criminally prosecuted. Any person seeking such a surgery should be involuntarily hospitalized as a danger to themselves. But for your literal mind- Born with a penis, you're a guy. Born with a vagina, you're a woman. My kids knew it by about 4. Why it's so difficult for a seemingly intelligent person like you escapes me.

Absolutely we require a conservative electorate to maintain stability and order and a liberal one to agitate for needed change. What we don't require is those who despise this nation but refuse to leave it trying to destroy what decent men and women created over 2 1/2 centuries. We don't require self selecting minorities insisting that their idea of social or legal structures should trump that of the vast majority of their fellow citizens.
112
@ 111, wow. Putting Kim in single quotation marks? Are you saying she's a liar and that her name isn't really Kim?

Hey, since you're here, why don't you head back over to this thread and answer some questions?
113
Hey no worries, Seattleblues.

You could just ask? I see no reason to call people names on Internet threads when there is a more direct means available to communicate with. I think it is folly to think that someone who defines himself as an atheist to follow a biblical command of loving ones enemies, loving ones neighbors as oneself. It seems that I am foolish to expect that someone who defines themselves as a devout Christian, such as you define yourself, to obey those biblical commands that claim to believe are true. Unlike others, I don't have an e-mail address, phone number, or a means to text you and ask as to why you can't just choose to walk away from your computer and refrain from calling people names, or as to ask why you keep choosing to act in an unbiblical manner. With you I have learned that it is unreasonable to expect you to act kindly, even when you are biblically commanded to, as you will not accept any criticism and don't seem to care that you are giving the Slog audience an example of a nasty and malicious Jesus. My opinion does not matter, but it seems a shame that you actively promote a very non-Christ like persona to others. I think it is a rather odd way to express the reason for the hope that you have. I think it sad.

I thought you would be happy that know that I don't call myself "Christian". I don't hold to the 12 tenants of Christianity, that I get the impression that you are referencing when you demand that you get to define what a 'real', 'right', or 'correct' Christian is. I find ample evidence to prove that some of the tenants are man made constructs. So it seems intellectually dishonest and hypocritical to call myself "Christian". Now that doesn't stop me from doing everything within my power to help my neighbors get their needs for food and clothing met, and if I can shelter as well. But, I would think that you'd be happy that someone like me is not sullying up your definition and example of "Christian". No-one will confuse me with you. I'd call that a win-win.

It is 22:56 where you state you're at. I'll leave you with buona notte. Dormi bene.
114
@111: Enacting laws that espouse ideas particular to one religion, in the absence of secular reasons for enacting such a law, constitutes an endorsement of that religion. If persons with the last name Cohen were banned from marrying divorcees, that would be a law regarding a certain religion, as Judaic law forbids the priestly class from marrying divorced women. If the slaughter and consumption of cattle were banned, that would similarly be an endorsement of Hinduism.
Rick Santorum categorized homosexuality alongside pedophilia and zoophilia. He claimed that marriage has no room for homosexuality, but that it wasn't anything against gays in particular because marriage has no room for pedophilia or zoophilia either. It doesn't matter what Santorum's chances of election are; the important bit is that he is seeking elected office.
Ah, so gender is so simple to you? Well, very little in this world is simple, except to the simple. Gender has two components: physical and neurological. For most people, those two are in alignment. For some, however, one or both are indeterminate (intersex) or the two are in opposite states (transgender). The former is fairly tricky, as cases tend to vary widely, but there are two basic ways to fix the latter. Either you bring the physical genitalia in line with the neurobiochemical sense of gender identity, or vice versa. Altering the brain via medication or surgery has been tried many many times, but has an incredibly low success rate; nearly all patients subjected to such treatment continue to suffer from gender dysphoria and rates of depression and suicide are sky-high. Altering genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics (such as breasts, facial hair, musculature, fat distribution) is far more often successful. Are such surgical treatments perfect? No; we cannot create new genitalia in a lab, but must instead reshape existing tissues into a facsimile of such. However, it is the best treatment medicine has to offer at present, and is therefore recognized and endorsed by the relevant medical organizations.
What you want to do is subject those suffering from GID to a lifetime of depression and uneasiness because of your own delicate sensibilities. Bitch.
And again with your pretty little narrative that liberals these days hate the country and are trying to undo everything good in it. It is the Republican Party (note that there are decent sensible conservatives among the Democrats, and a precious few left in the GOP) that is trying to hamstring unions and slash the tax rates of those who can most afford to pay. The positions of the Republican Party are no longer even consistent with conservatism, but rather with Christian Evangelical religious dogma, political power-seeking, and corporate greed.
115
@114 - Thank you.

    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


    Add a comment
    Preview

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.