« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


Michael Savage's show: Where reasoned civility goes to die

by Jeremy Hooper

This is, according to the YouTuber who posted it, is from yesterday's edition of Michael Savage's syndicated radio show:

You know what? We have nothing to add to this. Sometimes when trying to make a case that far-right homophobia and anti-progression are damaging the world around us, it's best to just shut up and let the proponents of such sentiment dig their own socio-political graves.

Michael Savage Attacks a Dumb Liberal Named Dan on Politics [YouTube]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

Humm...I tend to agree that homosexuality is here to stay but that doesn't make it reasonable to suspend Judeo-Christian beliefs which teaches that it is immorally wrong and being wrong, it should not be legitimized nor sanctioned by the state. Equal status civilly makes sense but not "marriage." 90% of the country is against it. For reason.

Posted by: Ned Allen | Mar 5, 2008 2:01:57 PM

On the other hand, this country IS NOT a Christian nation. And I think the words "legitimized" and "sanctioned" have been used as code words.

What we are talking about here is protecting families and relationships. Don't get it twisted.

And one more thing - where did you get that 90 perscent figure?

Posted by: a. mcewen | Mar 5, 2008 5:40:59 PM

They very telling part is when he starts referring to Obama by his middle name - Hussein. Who cares what his middle name is. There's no reason to emphasize that unless you are trying to bring up racist sentiments.

Posted by: GayMormonBoy | Mar 6, 2008 1:47:36 AM

The whole "Baffel them with bullsh*t" thing comes to mind. Let's just get louder and drown out the voice of reason. Oy vey!

Posted by: | Mar 8, 2008 5:37:22 PM

Defining marriage as only between a man and a woman does not put down or degrade the homosexual relationship in any way. It doesn't take away any rights or demean homosexuality itself. It simply preserves the institution of marriage as it has existed for thousands of years. The fact is that throughout history, the downfall of empires has always begun with alterations in sexual proclivity and the degredation of the family unit.
"Many have been dismissing the fact that once marriage has been redefined away from what it has been for thousands of years, it will continue to be redefined to be 'more inclusive.' Well the process has started." Why not count consenting incestual adults or consenting polygamists into the equation of legal marriage? If they love each other, then why deny them the opportunity to be married? Is there a difference in these situations? Isn't it prejudice to not allow incestual marriage or polygamy and to allow gay couples that opportunity? When and where will we end the 'redifining' of marriage?
Our country has been founded on excellent principles which have been twisted, torn and completely bent out of shape in order to accomodate anyone and everyone under the sun. It's about time we stood up for what we know is right and true. God intended marriage to be between a man and a woman and there's no way around it. Marriage itself was founded upon God, religion and the scriptures. If you believe in those things then you know that God does not accept the union between anyone other than a man and a woman. If you believe in God of the Old and New Testament, then you know that God does not condone homosexuality. An extreme example of this is Sodom and Gomorrah in the book of Genesis. It's also mentioned in The Old Testament (Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Isaiah) and The New Testament (The Epistle to the Romans, 1 Corinthians, 1 Timothy and Jude).
On another note, how do you feel about the fact that four judges were able to overturn the votes of the people? Regardless of the issue, when activist judges are able to overturn our votes, I feel we as a democratic nation should be concerned. Proposition 8 was passed eight years ago by 61.4% of the California voters and should not even be an issue today.
I have nothing against the gay/lesbian lifestyle and I don't want to take any rights away from them. That is not what this proposition is about. It's about protecting what marriage is and what it stands for. The traditional family unit is the building block of society and when you break that down, the society crumbles.

Posted by: Mandy | Aug 23, 2008 3:23:17 AM

Isn;t your side getting tired of these same old lines, Mandy? I mean just for variety's sake -- aren't they getting really stale?

Posted by: G-A-Y | Aug 24, 2008 5:52:01 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails