NC Passes Amendment One

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

The Kinsey study, which was conducted in the deeply-repressed* 1950s revealed that 42%(!) of men reported having sexual contact with another man to the point of orgasm.  It's fairly clear that at least partial bisexual tendencies are very common among men and that many men are deeply ashamed of that fact.  That said, the percentage of men who could be described as homosexual or homosexual-leaning bisexuals is still fairly low, probably between 5-10% including closeted ones.

*with regards to homosexuality, in general they wasn't quite as repressed as is the popular image in terms of sex.

On a related subject, as a gay man I'm somewhat uncomfortable with the whole "all you homophobes are just gay!" argument, which concerns me for two reasons:

1. By implication it accepts the homophobe's premise that being gay is an inherently bad thing.

2. It implies that the majority of gay people are closeted self-haters.


Also comparing opposing same-sex marriage to lynching is definitely excessive hyperbole and somewhat offensive.

No, wormyguy.  You took my words completely out of context.

I do not think being gay is a bad thing, I think that pretending to be something you're not and going against your own kind is.  When people vote with this type of thinking, obviously, it affects other people.

I never compared opposing same-sex marriage to lynching.  I was being entirely satirical with that comment.  But again, I don't see why anti-gay attitudes should be viewed any different than racism.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

How about "gay marriage opponents"? You know, something that gives as specific, accurate, objective description possible?

This wasn't just gay marriage. ""Opponents of existing same and opposite sex domestic partnerships" is more useful.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

How about "gay marriage opponents"? You know, something that gives as specific, accurate, objective description possible?

Okay.  And George Wallace wasn't racist or anything, he was just "an interracial marriage opponent."

[Napoleon]

How about "gay marriage opponents"? You know, something that gives as specific, accurate, objective description possible?

Or "if straight, likely to be piss poor fathers". That is specific, accurate and objective about some.

[TJ in Oregon]

How about "gay marriage opponents"? You know, something that gives as specific, accurate, objective description possible?

This wasn't just gay marriage. ""Opponents of existing same and opposite sex domestic partnerships" is more useful.

Even better! Explicit, accurate, something that isn't worded to project a certain viewpoint or advocate something.

[Frodo]

Scott, the reason I'm pressing you on this is your response to every thread about gay marriage and every post against it is to:

1. Call the other person a bigot (or some other personal insult)
2. Call them a closeted homo (thus their opinion doesn't count)
3. Post it in the Ignorant/Absurd/Bad Post Thread

And you just posted something that is totally ridiculous: that at least 30% of NC voters are closeted homosexuals.

Well, what kinder word should I use to refer to people who think we should be denying equal rights to people on account of sexual orientation?

How about 'Traditionalists'? 

[Alcon]

Columbus County, N.C., must be an interesting place...89% Yes on this, and 46% of Democratic votes were for Uncommitted over Obama.

Incredibly disappointing result, though.

[TJ in Oregon]

How about "gay marriage opponents"? You know, something that gives as specific, accurate, objective description possible?

Or "if straight, likely to be piss poor fathers". That is specific, accurate and objective about some.

Napoleon, don't you have something better to do that repeatedly come on here and insult me? Are you this big of a prick in real life too or is this an "it's the internet so I can just throw around insults as much as possible" thing? I know you're position is the popular one around here so you can get away with it and still be held in high regard on the forum, but must you be a jerk at everyone opportunity? You may be against anti-gay bullying but you're the biggest bully on this site.

[Miles]

Columbus County, N.C., must be an interesting place...89% Yes on this, and 46% of Democratic votes were for Uncommitted over Obama.

Incredibly disappointing result, though.

Columbus county is still very Dixiecrat. It usually gives statewide Democratic candidates at least 60%, but Obama actually did worse there than Kerry.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The Left's standard approach to convincing people to support gay marriage:

1. Call those who don't support it homophobes and bigots.
2. If that doesn't work, call them repressed homosexuals.

Maybe this isn't the best strategy.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Left's standard approach to convincing people to support gay marriage:

1. Call those who don't support it homophobes and bigots.
2. If that doesn't work, call them repressed homosexuals.

Maybe this isn't the best strategy.

Again, Amendment One wasn't just gay marriage. North Carolina might be the very last state to ban civil unions or domestic partnerships.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

The Left's standard approach to convincing people to support gay marriage:

1. Call those who don't support it homophobes and bigots.
2. If that doesn't work, call them repressed homosexuals.

Maybe this isn't the best strategy.

Sorry for being realistic.

[Napoleon]

Shua, TJ isn't your regular gay marriage opponent. He is truly malicious about it.

Their partner would not be permitted to enter my house as a partner and my child would not be permitted to see his/her partner.

Anyway the amendment is, as jfern stated, about more than just marriage.

Funny that TJ says he would treat his own child like this, and calls me a bully.

[BaldEagle1991]

Very dissapointing, but is anyone surprised? This is a Bible Belt sate after all.

[TJ in Oregon]

Shua, TJ isn't your regular gay marriage opponent. He is truly malicious about it.

Their partner would not be permitted to enter my house as a partner and my child would not be permitted to see his/her partner.

Anyway the amendment is, as jfern stated, about more than just marriage.

Funny that TJ says he would treat his own child like this, and calls me a bully.

Oh heaven forbid a parent have rules they expect their children to follow!? Imagine that!

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Shua, TJ isn't your regular gay marriage opponent. He is truly malicious about it.

Their partner would not be permitted to enter my house as a partner and my child would not be permitted to see his/her partner.

Anyway the amendment is, as jfern stated, about more than just marriage.

Funny that TJ says he would treat his own child like this, and calls me a bully.

Oh heaven forbid a parent have rules they expect their children to follow!? Imagine that!

Abuse = making rules, now?  Okay.

[tpfkaw]

No, wormyguy.  You took my words completely out of context.

I do not think being gay is a bad thing, I think that pretending to be something you're not and going against your own kind is.  When people vote with this type of thinking, obviously, it affects other people.

I never compared opposing same-sex marriage to lynching.  I was being entirely satirical with that comment.  But again, I don't see why anti-gay attitudes should be viewed any different than racism.

I'm all for exposing closeted hypocrites.  What I'm not for is mocking all people opposed to same-sex marriage as "gay," since there's no solid evidence to support that and that does, in fact, imply that being gay is something worthy of mockery and derision.  I don't find that to be really positive, it's more reminiscent of 19th-century politicians accusing each other of having black ancestors.

Regarding your lynching comment, it wasn't very funny as far as satirical statements go.  I'd suggest you restrict your comedy to jokes that don't involve murder, unless they're real knee-slappers.

[Alcon]

The Left's standard approach to convincing people to support gay marriage:

1. Call those who don't support it homophobes and bigots.
2. If that doesn't work, call them repressed homosexuals.

Maybe this isn't the best strategy.

And by "the left," do you happen to mean "a small portion of vocal ideologues matched by a comparably disappointing sub-section of the right"?

Also, Napoleon, I have no idea why calling someone a closeted homosexual is "punishment" for opposing gay marriage that he would deserve for being "malicious."  As much as I find TJ's position morally disgusting (sorry, man...it is) your response make no sense, and perfectly good people can hold morally reprehensible positions well good intentions.

This thread is a small trainwreck.

[TJ in Oregon]

Shua, TJ isn't your regular gay marriage opponent. He is truly malicious about it.

Their partner would not be permitted to enter my house as a partner and my child would not be permitted to see his/her partner.

Anyway the amendment is, as jfern stated, about more than just marriage.

Funny that TJ says he would treat his own child like this, and calls me a bully.

Oh heaven forbid a parent have rules they expect their children to follow!? Imagine that!

Abuse = making rules, now?  Okay.

Not allowing a kid to have a gay relationship is not abuse that's a rule. If I used to to verbally attack my child or attempt to drive them into depression or lock them in their room indefinitely then it would be abuse. But I refuse to accept that expecting a child to live in sexual chastity under my own roof is abuse. That is not a concession I will ever make and if required you call the police and haul my butt into prison.

[Napoleon]

The Left's standard approach to convincing people to support gay marriage:

1. Call those who don't support it homophobes and bigots.
2. If that doesn't work, call them repressed homosexuals.

Maybe this isn't the best strategy.

And by "the left," do you happen to mean "a small portion of vocal ideologues matched by a comparably disappointing sub-section of the right"?

Also, Napoleon, I have no idea why calling someone a closeted homosexual is "punishment" for opposing gay marriage that he would deserve for being "malicious."  As much as I find TJ's position morally disgusting (sorry, man...it is) your response make no sense, and perfectly good people can hold morally reprehensible positions well good intentions.

This thread is a small trainwreck.

It isn't punishment for anything, it's a regurgitated Marokai meme. The intentions can be good or bad but the actual effect that child would feel is what concerns me.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

No, wormyguy.  You took my words completely out of context.

I do not think being gay is a bad thing, I think that pretending to be something you're not and going against your own kind is.  When people vote with this type of thinking, obviously, it affects other people.

I never compared opposing same-sex marriage to lynching.  I was being entirely satirical with that comment.  But again, I don't see why anti-gay attitudes should be viewed any different than racism.

I'm all for exposing closeted hypocrites.  What I'm not for is mocking all people opposed to same-sex marriage as "gay," since there's no solid evidence to support that and that does, in fact, imply that being gay is something worthy of mockery and derision.  I don't find that to be really positive, it's more reminiscent of 19th-century politicians accusing each other of having black ancestors.

Regarding your lynching comment, it wasn't very funny as far as satirical statements go.  I'd suggest you restrict your comedy to jokes that don't involve murder, unless they're real knee-slappers.

I already said that, didn't I?  I made an excessive hyperbole out of an article that suggests homophobia and closet homosexuality are connected.  I didn't use satire to make humor, I used it to make a point.  I fail to see where you think I implied that being gay is somehow bad, because I clearly did not say that.

[Gass3268]

Gotta give props to the Triangle and Charlotte!

You can still mary your first cousin in North Carolina right?  

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think a lot of people just reflexively voted yes because of their hatred toward gays. That is basically what happened for most of the people in my family. I did manage to change their minds, but not until after they had already voted early on the damn thing. Too Late!

[Napoleon]

I think a lot of people just reflexively voted yes because of their hatred toward gays. That is basically what happened for most of the people in my family. I did manage to change their minds, but not until after they had already voted early on the damn thing. Too Late!

Better late than never.

[Alcon]

The Left's standard approach to convincing people to support gay marriage:

1. Call those who don't support it homophobes and bigots.
2. If that doesn't work, call them repressed homosexuals.

Maybe this isn't the best strategy.

And by "the left," do you happen to mean "a small portion of vocal ideologues matched by a comparably disappointing sub-section of the right"?

Also, Napoleon, I have no idea why calling someone a closeted homosexual is "punishment" for opposing gay marriage that he would deserve for being "malicious."  As much as I find TJ's position morally disgusting (sorry, man...it is) your response make no sense, and perfectly good people can hold morally reprehensible positions well good intentions.

This thread is a small trainwreck.

It isn't punishment for anything, it's a regurgitated Marokai meme. The intentions can be good or bad but the actual effect that child would feel is what concerns me.

You defended it by saying that he was "malicious."  How can you possibly think your behavior in this thread is anything but counterproductive and juvenile?