RECENT  POSTS:  » Joseph Farah still clueless about nondiscrimination law » Hobby Lobby president to join extremely anti-gay activists at 'Star Spangled' event » FRC's Sprigg admits his side put up 'weak defense' in 7th Circuit » Photo: The latest totally convincing, in no way silly attempt at a meme from anti-gay Ruth Institute » AFA's Fischer: Time for Christians to 'get up in somebody's grill' like Jesus would » GLAAD: The World Congress of Families sparks protests in Australia. Let's examine why. » GLAAD: NOM cofounder: 'Hard to see... the logical stopping place' between gay-affirming, murder-affirming Christians » 'Nonpartisan' NOM's entrenched Republicanism again showing » GLAAD: His other tactics failing, NOM president turns to anti-trans fear-mongering » AFA's Bryan Fischer: Diversity is 'most sinister and dangerous lie'  

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

10/15/2009

We've hit a 'yes on 1' nerve

by Jeremy Hooper

Remember yesterday when we showed you that Facebook comment from a Stand For Marriage Maine supporter who went after someone solely because they claimed to be both a Christian and a "No on 1" supporter? Well that same Facebooker saw what we had to say, and she and her supporters all kinds of fired up. But the funny thing: They are not insulted by our suggestion that they see the world as being solely Christian and solely anti-gay. No, no -- they are insulted by our suggestion that one can be both Catholic and gay supportive (esp. see fourth comment):

Screen Shot 2009-10-15 At 1.54.38 Pm
StandForMarriageMaine [F'book]

Yes, folks: You can absolutely comment on our site without an email. And unlike you all, we approve every single comment that comes here, regardless of viewpoint. So there ya go. Have at it! With comments that put this civil issue so much on faith, and hostility that pus faith into such a narrow box, we actually think it's your side who's gonna be wary of your choice to publicly air your thoughts, not ours.

**UPDATE: Mysteriously, the "Stand For Marriage Maine" comment has now been pulled. Probably because they realized that by letting us know that they just commented, they also let us know who moderates SFMM"s Facebook page, and so they wanted to delete their F'book wall comment before we saw it/linked it to the comment. Too late, Josh.

**UPDATE 2: Oh and Syliva: We didn't "cherry pick" anything. When we went to the site yesterday, only your one comment was up. But since you let us know that the thread went past that one comment, our old post has now been updated with the full exchange. You're welcome for that.

**UPDATE3: Okay, now there is someone claiming to know me:

Screen Shot 2009-10-15 At 3.14.06 Pm-1

Uh, Marie: (a) No, you don't know me. (b) I wouldn't turn to something as nichey as the SFMM F'book page to "drum up popularity hits." (c) You all really have to get over the idea that our side's push back against your side's unprovoked assaults on our liberties somehow equates "harassment." (d) Yes, Go Maine. Go forward rather than backwards!

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


Your thoughts

Remember when the bathtub falls through the floor in The Money Pit?

HA!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

"We will see if the comments are allowed and approved." What a bunch of nimrods.

Posted by: DN | Oct 15, 2009 2:20:46 PM

AWESOME!!

Posted by: WTFBLOG | Oct 15, 2009 2:22:48 PM

For a while the moderator of the group seemed ignorant of the discussion board, but finally he/she found it, and absolutely purged it of any posts that were remotely critical of the yes on 1 campaign.

I managed to save the HTML of a long discussion I was having with someone, a very civil one at that, and when you look at the same discussion now it's as if the other person is having a conversation with himself.

Posted by: Christopher Eberz | Oct 15, 2009 2:30:33 PM

Haha, the "Stand For Marriage Maine" moderator has a bit of nerve criticizing perceived censorship on other forums.

Posted by: Christopher Eberz | Oct 15, 2009 2:53:37 PM

I put up 10 comments yesterday. on different notes: All were down w/n 5 minutes.
And every true Roman Catholic knows that the Pope's statements are not determinated policy that needs to be followed.
e.g. " Catechetical Catholics are often unaware that the infallibility of the Pope and his universal episcopacy was promulgated at Vatican One in 1869-70, when the Church lost control of the Papal States, when Italy unified. The Pope is infallible ONLY when he officially teaches "ex cathedra fidei"
..... and the last pope to do so was Pius PPXII, in 1954, when he declared the Bodily Assumption of the BVM."

Posted by: LOrion | Oct 15, 2009 2:58:17 PM

FACT: 50 years ago all 'true christians" opposed interracial marriage, the statistic in the 50s was like 98% of white people opposing it. These current bigots are not different in any way.

Posted by: penguinsaur | Oct 15, 2009 3:11:10 PM

The thing about some of the most vocal amateur anti-gays is that (a) they readily delete statements that oppose their viewpoints and (b) refuse to comment on LGBT blogs claiming to fear harassment (see above, regarding Marie's comment about the newfangled ability to "capture" their IP addresses).

I think they just like echo chambers.

Posted by: fannie | Oct 15, 2009 3:24:36 PM

Well, it is true that to be a "good" Catholic means you cannot accept homosexuality. You also cannot accept heresy, blashphemy, or adultery, which makes it interesting that the Catholic Diocese has joined up with Protestant heretics, Mormon blasphemers and adulters (those who remarry after divorce).

Posted by: CPT_Doom | Oct 15, 2009 3:27:55 PM

What really drives home the level of hypocrisy they have is the statement "they only pick and choose what they like out of the Bible." Hello?!! I think Sylvia better go back and read ALL of Leviticus if she wants to get literal!!!

Posted by: Scott | Oct 15, 2009 3:44:03 PM

I find the accusations of picking what you want out of the Bible and forgetting the rest comical because Christians are equally as guilty of doing this.

1. Protestants have the highest divorce rate out of all religious demographics. Just ask Larry Stickney fighting to Reject Ref. 71 in Washington State. He's on his 3rd wife!
2. Eating shellfish and where polyblend clothes is an abomination, but I know, I just KNOW I remember going to Sizzler after church when I was a kid in the 70s and seeing many church members wearing polyester.
3. Adultery. Where's the stoning?

Must I go on?

Posted by: Unite the Fight | Oct 15, 2009 3:55:41 PM

I meant WEAR polyblend clothes. I hate when I have typos.

Posted by: Unite the Fight | Oct 15, 2009 3:57:09 PM

Marie has a picture now. Recognize her?

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000261733517

Posted by: Matt Algren | Oct 15, 2009 4:36:24 PM

Okay, how about EVANGELICAL Christian. "Brent Childers used to call himself a “Jesse Helms Republican” who justified his homophobic beliefs through biblical interpretation. But last weekend, as he marched in the Equality March in Washington, D.C., he stood alongside his lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender friends in support of their full human rights.
As executive director of Faith in America, Childers works full time to incorporate an inclusive message of LGBT human equality into the Christian dialogue. His organization’s mission is to educate the public about the emotional and physical harm cased by “religion-based bigotry.”

Childers’s change of heart isn’t unique, either.

Posted by: LOrion | Oct 15, 2009 4:49:48 PM

And WE'RE the ones threatening religious freedom by demanding our civil rights? We should let Maine know that these theocrats want to tell them how they must view their faith and civil rights. Disgraceful.

Posted by: Matthew | Oct 15, 2009 6:01:18 PM

These people are morons. I hate name calling, but honestly, what else can you say when people are this blatantly ignorant? They like, literally steal pro-equalitiy sides' legitimate arguments and try to use them against us. Like, they call people who believe you can be pro gay and still religiously catholic ignorant. THe people who are claiming there is only one way to be Catholic, otherwise you aren't a "real" Catholic, are calling others ignorant.

They accused Jeremy of cherry picking things. 95% of these people haven't even read the entire Bible, let alone follow it. I'd like to know how many of them stone their neighbors to death for mowing the lawn on Sunday. Or avoid their wives when a box of tampax is floating around in the bathroom. Like, these people have no concept of their own religion, yet they claim to be the END of all Catholicism and Christianity in general. Do they realize that basically every other Christian denomenation, especially Evangelicals/Baptists, look at Catholics like devil worshipers and (as Shirley Phelps-Roper likes to say) idoletors? Do they not know the actual political history of Catholicism? They have no concept of anything in their own religion other than the useless bantor they hear when they go to Sunday mass. None have them have ever picked up a Bible and read it word for word straight through, and not one of those people comments have any concept of the history of their own religion. It's ridiclously frightening that you can be SO devoted to something you don't even understand. It's like Being devoted to race car driving and trying to use a bike at Nascar because that's the only way you know how to do it. Dangerous and stupid.

The hypocrisy of their comment about whether Jeremy would allow their comments is so pathetic is hilarious. I had multiple comments removed from the SFMM Facebook wall, none of which were derogatory in ANY way, simply ivilly questioning the motives of those who supported it and commenting about my own belief in equality. They were up for no more than 15 minutes. So I love how these people act like they are the model for ethical debate that we all should be so lucky to follow. The reason they won't post here is because they will get SHELLED in an actual intelligent conversation, and there won't be any anti-gay moderators to remove the posts that make them look like morons.

THIS is why I left the Catholic church. And what I'd love to say to that lady who commented on "I didn't get a call from God saying he hanged the rules about homosexuality" or whatever the fudge she said, here's a great story about the "righteousness" of the Catholic church:

My uncle was married in a Catholic church in Brooklyn in the early 1970's. He was divorced in the late 1970's and remained close friends with his ex wife (they had a child together and just knew they were better off as friends rather than husband and wife, and to this day are still friends). My uncle met someone in the early 80's and they wanted to get married. The Caholitc church would not allow him to get married by a priest in their church because he had been divorced (a big no no in the Catholic church. I hope that woman is as big of an advocate for not hanging he rules for divorcees as she is not changing the rules for the gays. I hope she stands outside the church doors every Sunday playing Catholic bouncer to all the people who have been divorced who think it's okay to be a divorced person and a good Catholic. ANYWAY). My aunt really really wanted to get married in that church. So the church and my uncle came to an agreement. If my uncle paid $5k (in that day and age, a lot) to the Catholic diocese. He agreed, because it meant so much to my aunt.

Did that 5 grand go straight to God? Or did those priests deposit it into their bank account and wire the money to heaven?

It's all a sham. I hate to say it, because there are so many good people of faith, and I hate insulting THEM, but the majority of people who buy into the religious BS, particuarly Catholics, deserve to be ridiculed for being such ignorant morons. UGH.

Ok, I'm done.

Posted by: Stef | Oct 15, 2009 6:08:07 PM

The censor must be asleep, I have had comments on the wall for over 30 minutes.

Posted by: Patrick Smith | Oct 15, 2009 6:52:28 PM

Even if I DIDN'T feel that this fight were important for the progress and improvement of our nation, I'd still be eager to see this fail...just to see the reaction from all these arrogant, ignorant haters.

Posted by: Rachel Snyder | Oct 15, 2009 7:19:51 PM

The thing that gets me is that this is all so unconstitutional. I, for one, am not a Christian. I don't have any desire to be a Christian. According to the constitution, that should be just fine. The only arguments that can be made for keeping rights from me are religious.

I shouldn't have to live in a theocracy.

Posted by: Em | Oct 15, 2009 7:21:04 PM

And here I thought "popularity hits" are what uncool highschool kids did with pot...

Posted by: DN | Oct 16, 2009 12:37:06 AM

I'm a Christian gay man and I'm against 1. If radical anti-gay activists don't like it, they can take it up with our Constitution (and/or God!) I have the right to believe what I want and unlike NOM and other large pro-homophobia advocacy groups, I'm not trying to take away the religious liberty of pro-equality churches and Americans.

Posted by: Michael | Oct 16, 2009 1:29:05 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails