Comments on: So What http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/ Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:53:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: Athena The Warrior http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856973 Athena The Warrior Mon, 06 Oct 2008 16:09:53 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856973 me three! me three!

]]> By: karen for Clinton - 2012 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856348 karen for Clinton - 2012 Mon, 06 Oct 2008 13:25:19 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856348 RRRA, right on once again. I am a fellow nature lover, been scuba diving all my life. Glad you got some much needed R&R. 29 days to go, and they are freaking breaking all the roools now and this morning my head exploded when I read my emails...: OFF TOPIC AND URGENT!!! My email address is being used by obamabots to write to my Senator. This morning I got a response from my Senators office saying they got an email from ME and I didn’t send him any mail for months. This is horrible. I sent my Senator a reply asking what I supposedly said. Something happened two weeks ago that made me believe my email was being used but I ignored it. If these thugs are using my name they are using yours too. NOT IN MY NAME I OWN MY VOTE!!! RRRA, right on once again. I am a fellow nature lover, been scuba diving all my life. Glad you got some much needed R&R. 29 days to go, and they are freaking breaking all the roools now and this morning my head exploded when I read my emails…:

OFF TOPIC AND URGENT!!!

My email address is being used by obamabots to write to my Senator. This morning I got a response from my Senators office saying they got an email from ME and I didn’t send him any mail for months.

This is horrible. I sent my Senator a reply asking what I supposedly said.

Something happened two weeks ago that made me believe my email was being used but I ignored it.

If these thugs are using my name they are using yours too.

NOT IN MY NAME I OWN MY VOTE!!!

]]> By: Perry Logan http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856211 Perry Logan Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:27:55 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856211 The belief that gayness is a choice totally boggles me. I can see quite clearly that Brad Pitt and George Clooney are gorgeous guys, and I love them in every movie they're in. But the idea I could somehow will myself to desire them sexually is preposterous. There's no understanding the right. However, I feel I can understand why some of our gay brothers and sisters might still go with Obama, despite Obama's obvious problems on gay issues, simply because the other party wants to pass a Constitutional amendment restricting their rights. Isn't that something? The Republicans wan to pass a Constitutional Amendment that actually RESTRICTS rights! Talk about going against the grain... I'm not gay, so I can't know how gay folks think. But that kind of hostility is hard to overlook. As a hypothetical example, would I vote for the candidate of a party that wants to pass laws against skinny gray-haired white guys? I don't think so. The belief that gayness is a choice totally boggles me.

I can see quite clearly that Brad Pitt and George Clooney are gorgeous guys, and I love them in every movie they’re in. But the idea I could somehow will myself to desire them sexually is preposterous. There’s no understanding the right.

However, I feel I can understand why some of our gay brothers and sisters might still go with Obama, despite Obama’s obvious problems on gay issues, simply because the other party wants to pass a Constitutional amendment restricting their rights.

Isn’t that something? The Republicans wan to pass a Constitutional Amendment that actually RESTRICTS rights! Talk about going against the grain…

I’m not gay, so I can’t know how gay folks think. But that kind of hostility is hard to overlook.

As a hypothetical example, would I vote for the candidate of a party that wants to pass laws against skinny gray-haired white guys? I don’t think so.

]]> By: JudyfromMo http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856166 JudyfromMo Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:08:46 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856166 My partner of 38 years and I, both lifetime democrats, changed to independents and voting straight(gulp) Republican ticket. My partner of 38 years and I, both lifetime democrats, changed to independents and voting straight(gulp) Republican ticket.

]]> By: JudyfromMo http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856131 JudyfromMo Mon, 06 Oct 2008 11:49:28 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856131 me too me too

]]> By: nmp http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856045 nmp Mon, 06 Oct 2008 10:56:05 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856045 Lesbian here for McCain/Palin... as well as my parner, tho still a registered democrat, will vote McCain. Lesbian here for McCain/Palin… as well as my parner, tho still a registered democrat, will vote McCain.

]]> By: Chiten http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856027 Chiten Mon, 06 Oct 2008 10:45:16 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856027 most of my MCC church are all-out obamanuts, but there is a small contingency of us who have some sense. most of my MCC church are all-out obamanuts, but there is a small contingency of us who have some sense.

]]> By: Chiten http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856007 Chiten Mon, 06 Oct 2008 10:31:00 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856007 Count me in Count me in

]]> By: joseyJ http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856001 joseyJ Mon, 06 Oct 2008 10:25:09 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-856001 alQaeda would be infuriated that the U.S. elected a president - BORN A MUSLIM - who later defected to a form of Christianity. btw - why does the MSM omit Obama's middle name? They didn't omit Hillary's. Dems for McCain - NO Hussein! alQaeda would be infuriated that the U.S. elected a president - BORN A MUSLIM - who later defected to a form of Christianity.

btw - why does the MSM omit Obama’s middle name?
They didn’t omit Hillary’s.

Dems for McCain - NO Hussein!

]]> By: NoBamaNoWay http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855818 NoBamaNoWay Mon, 06 Oct 2008 07:53:51 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855818 heh heh. heh heh.

]]> By: JozefAL http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855802 JozefAL Mon, 06 Oct 2008 07:47:17 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855802 I'm pretty certain that "all the conservatives" already KNEW that Cheney has a gay daughter. Edwards was actually trying to acknowledge that he truly believed that not all Republicans are bigots and many are quite happy to accept their own gay family members. (If you recall, it was Mrs Cheney who cried "foul" over the "disclosure", claiming an invasion of privacy.) I believe that John was trying to contrast the Cheneys with such slime as Phyllis Schlafly (who barely acknowledges her gay son) and Alan Keyes (who, of course, later essentially disowned his own gay daughter). I’m pretty certain that “all the conservatives” already KNEW that Cheney has a gay daughter. Edwards was actually trying to acknowledge that he truly believed that not all Republicans are bigots and many are quite happy to accept their own gay family members. (If you recall, it was Mrs Cheney who cried “foul” over the “disclosure”, claiming an invasion of privacy.) I believe that John was trying to contrast the Cheneys with such slime as Phyllis Schlafly (who barely acknowledges her gay son) and Alan Keyes (who, of course, later essentially disowned his own gay daughter).

]]> By: JozefAL http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855785 JozefAL Mon, 06 Oct 2008 07:37:48 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855785 Dude, do you realize how much those "contractual agreements" cost? You're talking thousands of dollars involving various courts (most states will require separate dealings with probate courts, revenue appraisal boards) and, in most cases, these agreements can offer less protection than a simple marriage license. A gay male couple that wishes to buy a house may find that they CANNOT because they are TWO unrelated individuals and some zoning laws prohibit two or more NON-related adult individuals from sharing a single-family dwelling if there's no marriage license involved. (IOW, Bill and his uncle Ted can share Bill's house, but Bill and his "husband" Greg cannot. The former "couple" are related; the latter are not.) A gay male couple that decides to form a "business partnership" can find themselves in far more financial trouble if one should require hospitalization. A "divorce" can create all sort of financial hardships (the need to formally dissolve the partnership--complete with THOSE fees--is the least of the problems). Also, it's worth noting that these "arrangements" of which you speak are often ALSO prohibited by the States which have banned same-sex marriage. Most of those amendments explicitly prohibit the recognition of ANY arrangement that might attempt to pass as "marriage", and a "contractual agreement" would be viewed as an effort to circumvent the law. (Incidentally, hospitals are allowed to ignore any "contractual agreement" that is NOT a marriage license--except where civil unions and domestic partnerships are legal. Just think of it like this: Would you want a court to be the ultimate decider if YOUR significant other were hospitalized and the hospital refused to recognize your "contractual agreement"? Most courts are going to IGNORE a mere "contractual agreement" when it's presented with blood relatives who make a claim that they are acting in your SO's best interest. A number of wills have been challenged in court--SUCCESSFULLY--by gay men and lesbians against their surviving partners simply because the courts were not allowed to acknowledge the same-sex relationship as valid. Even when presented arguments that blood relatives haven't been a part of the deceased's life for decades, the courts still side with the relatives over the partner.) Dude, do you realize how much those “contractual agreements” cost? You’re talking thousands of dollars involving various courts (most states will require separate dealings with probate courts, revenue appraisal boards) and, in most cases, these agreements can offer less protection than a simple marriage license.
A gay male couple that wishes to buy a house may find that they CANNOT because they are TWO unrelated individuals and some zoning laws prohibit two or more NON-related adult individuals from sharing a single-family dwelling if there’s no marriage license involved. (IOW, Bill and his uncle Ted can share Bill’s house, but Bill and his “husband” Greg cannot. The former “couple” are related; the latter are not.)
A gay male couple that decides to form a “business partnership” can find themselves in far more financial trouble if one should require hospitalization. A “divorce” can create all sort of financial hardships (the need to formally dissolve the partnership–complete with THOSE fees–is the least of the problems).
Also, it’s worth noting that these “arrangements” of which you speak are often ALSO prohibited by the States which have banned same-sex marriage. Most of those amendments explicitly prohibit the recognition of ANY arrangement that might attempt to pass as “marriage”, and a “contractual agreement” would be viewed as an effort to circumvent the law. (Incidentally, hospitals are allowed to ignore any “contractual agreement” that is NOT a marriage license–except where civil unions and domestic partnerships are legal. Just think of it like this: Would you want a court to be the ultimate decider if YOUR significant other were hospitalized and the hospital refused to recognize your “contractual agreement”? Most courts are going to IGNORE a mere “contractual agreement” when it’s presented with blood relatives who make a claim that they are acting in your SO’s best interest. A number of wills have been challenged in court–SUCCESSFULLY–by gay men and lesbians against their surviving partners simply because the courts were not allowed to acknowledge the same-sex relationship as valid. Even when presented arguments that blood relatives haven’t been a part of the deceased’s life for decades, the courts still side with the relatives over the partner.)

]]> By: JozefAL http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855745 JozefAL Mon, 06 Oct 2008 07:18:12 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855745 Ever hear of something called the "full faith and credit" clause? That sort of predates the 14th Amendment. Article IV, Section 1: Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof. (Note: This is the reason that you don't need a new driver's license every single time you drive to or through a different state from your own. It's also why heteros don't have to go through the legal necessity of getting REMARRIED every time they move to a different state.) This was part of the ORIGINAL Constitution (even before the addition of the Bill of Rights) that the Founding Fathers agreed to and signed. (The Bill of Rights only came AFTER, in order to guarantee the states would ratify the Constitution.) As to the "civil rights" matter, the Loving decision (which ended the ban on interracial marriages) DECLARED that marriage is a civil right. The actual text reads <em>Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival</em>. Full text appears at http://www.ameasite.org/loving.asp, with the quoted part coming from the final paragraph. Incidentally, the final sentence reads <em>Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.</em> If gay men and lesbians are to be treated AS full citizens, then the ONLY difference should be to remove "of another race" from the Court's original decision. Ever hear of something called the “full faith and credit” clause? That sort of predates the 14th Amendment.
Article IV, Section 1:

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof. (Note: This is the reason that you don’t need a new driver’s license every single time you drive to or through a different state from your own. It’s also why heteros don’t have to go through the legal necessity of getting REMARRIED every time they move to a different state.)

This was part of the ORIGINAL Constitution (even before the addition of the Bill of Rights) that the Founding Fathers agreed to and signed. (The Bill of Rights only came AFTER, in order to guarantee the states would ratify the Constitution.)
As to the “civil rights” matter, the Loving decision (which ended the ban on interracial marriages) DECLARED that marriage is a civil right.
The actual text reads Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival. Full text appears at http://www.ameasite.org/loving.asp, with the quoted part coming from the final paragraph. Incidentally, the final sentence reads Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State. If gay men and lesbians are to be treated AS full citizens, then the ONLY difference should be to remove “of another race” from the Court’s original decision.

]]> By: whoframedrudy http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855724 whoframedrudy Mon, 06 Oct 2008 07:08:14 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855724 Here's the question -- did Ifill try to put Palin on the spot for her veto of anti-gay legislation in front of the radical religious right on national TV? Did Biden do the same when he went out of his way to say, 'our positions are the same.' This is what disgusts me about Obama-Biden. Palin is trying to move her Conservative Party towards tolerance and respect for separation of church and state. When she does this, the dirty used syphillitic scumbag Biden tries to hurt her politically in the Republican base. Biden tried to stop Palin from reforming the Republican Party to stop attacking gays. This is what the LGBT community calls a friend? Remember, John Edwards did the same thing to his slimemate Cheney, making sure all the conservatives listening knew Cheney had a gay daughter. Here’s the question — did Ifill try to put Palin on the spot for her veto of anti-gay legislation in front of the radical religious right on national TV? Did Biden do the same when he went out of his way to say, ‘our positions are the same.’

This is what disgusts me about Obama-Biden. Palin is trying to move her Conservative Party towards tolerance and respect for separation of church and state. When she does this, the dirty used syphillitic scumbag Biden tries to hurt her politically in the Republican base. Biden tried to stop Palin from reforming the Republican Party to stop attacking gays. This is what the LGBT community calls a friend?

Remember, John Edwards did the same thing to his slimemate Cheney, making sure all the conservatives listening knew Cheney had a gay daughter.

]]> By: JozefAL http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855716 JozefAL Mon, 06 Oct 2008 07:03:49 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855716 Incidentally, how cam you support Barr, given HIS longtime opposition to gay rights while serving in the House? One could say that Barr has flipped for political convenience. In order to be considered for the Libertarian nomination, he had to "apologize" for many of his prior House votes and comments. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I really don't believe he would be as supportive of his party's official position if he should manage to win the election. Incidentally, how cam you support Barr, given HIS longtime opposition to gay rights while serving in the House? One could say that Barr has flipped for political convenience. In order to be considered for the Libertarian nomination, he had to “apologize” for many of his prior House votes and comments. I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I really don’t believe he would be as supportive of his party’s official position if he should manage to win the election.

]]> By: JozefAL http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855702 JozefAL Mon, 06 Oct 2008 06:54:19 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855702 Obama also has a close advisor who is very much anti-gay. Do some investigation work on the name James Meeks. (He was also the one who referred to African-American supporters of Chicago mayor Daley as "house n****rs".) Obama also has a close advisor who is very much anti-gay. Do some investigation work on the name James Meeks. (He was also the one who referred to African-American supporters of Chicago mayor Daley as “house n****rs”.)

]]> By: JozefAL http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855696 JozefAL Mon, 06 Oct 2008 06:49:50 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855696 Jackie, you dropped the ball on one point. Marriage, as long as the State is in the "business" of issuing "marriage licenses", is NOT a "religious thing". Marriage has ALWAYS been a STATE matter. (In fact, at one point, marriage was ONLY available to the nobility, because it was the nobles who needed some sort of official recognition of the various property transactions that took place during the process of marriage. The reason that the Church became involved was because the Church was a part of the State.) Also, it should be noted that several religious groups and denominations ACCEPT "marriage" for everyone, regardless of gender of the people who choose to enter the "institution". Gay men and lesbians--even those who accept being "civilly united"--use the "marriage" terms of spouse, husband/wife, married. But, the simple fact remains that heteros who go to a probate judge or a justice of the peace are able to get MARRIED. The LGBT community should have that same RIGHT. (And, it is a RIGHT. When the Supreme Court ruled in the Loving case, the Court DECREED that marriage is a "civil right".) Jackie, you dropped the ball on one point. Marriage, as long as the State is in the “business” of issuing “marriage licenses”, is NOT a “religious thing”. Marriage has ALWAYS been a STATE matter. (In fact, at one point, marriage was ONLY available to the nobility, because it was the nobles who needed some sort of official recognition of the various property transactions that took place during the process of marriage. The reason that the Church became involved was because the Church was a part of the State.)
Also, it should be noted that several religious groups and denominations ACCEPT “marriage” for everyone, regardless of gender of the people who choose to enter the “institution”.
Gay men and lesbians–even those who accept being “civilly united”–use the “marriage” terms of spouse, husband/wife, married. But, the simple fact remains that heteros who go to a probate judge or a justice of the peace are able to get MARRIED. The LGBT community should have that same RIGHT. (And, it is a RIGHT. When the Supreme Court ruled in the Loving case, the Court DECREED that marriage is a “civil right”.)

]]> By: JozefAL http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855673 JozefAL Mon, 06 Oct 2008 06:39:34 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855673 Fuck off jerk. In Canada, gays are FULL equals. In Spain, the Netherlands and Belgium, gays are FULL equals. But, there's no guarantee that a gay man or lesbian in THIS country can live. Ask Matthew Shepard. Ask Angie Zapata. Ask Brandon Teena. These are THREE members of the LGBT community who were MURDERED IN THIS COUNTRY by their fellow citizens. (And those, not surprisingly, are among the handful that actually received some major press coverage. The vast majority of LGBT murders go unreported, even at a local level.) I'm voting for McKinney because the Green Party COMPLETELY supports EQUAL RIGHTS FOR EVERYONE. (Something that SHOULD be a no-brainer and should not need to be part of a party's official platform.) The fact that she's African-American and a woman helps me take an added dig at the Obama camp. It's hard for this gay white man to be a "racist" when I'm supporting an African-American. What worries me the most is that when Obama proves to be the failure that we all know him to be, the Congress in 2010 will become SOLIDLY Republican, and we'll be likely to be stuck with a far right-wing GOPer (the likes of Huckabee and Romney frighten the bejeezus out of me). The far-right Christian nutjobs will complete their control and the GOP will be forced to kowtow to them even more (with the even worse possibility that in 2012, the GOP will solidify their control of Congress--possibly to the levels that the Dems had in the late 1970s). As for your asinine "move away", I'd think you'd realize that not everyone is lucky enough to have the financial reserves to move to a (theoretically) safe LGBT environment. (Gay men and lesbians have also been murdered and bashed in supposedly safe LA and NYC. And, it's a rare circumstance when these gay men and lesbians are just victims of "random" violence. They are STILL targeted. By their "fellow Americans".) Fuck off jerk. In Canada, gays are FULL equals. In Spain, the Netherlands and Belgium, gays are FULL equals.
But, there’s no guarantee that a gay man or lesbian in THIS country can live. Ask Matthew Shepard. Ask Angie Zapata. Ask Brandon Teena. These are THREE members of the LGBT community who were MURDERED IN THIS COUNTRY by their fellow citizens. (And those, not surprisingly, are among the handful that actually received some major press coverage. The vast majority of LGBT murders go unreported, even at a local level.)
I’m voting for McKinney because the Green Party COMPLETELY supports EQUAL RIGHTS FOR EVERYONE. (Something that SHOULD be a no-brainer and should not need to be part of a party’s official platform.) The fact that she’s African-American and a woman helps me take an added dig at the Obama camp. It’s hard for this gay white man to be a “racist” when I’m supporting an African-American.
What worries me the most is that when Obama proves to be the failure that we all know him to be, the Congress in 2010 will become SOLIDLY Republican, and we’ll be likely to be stuck with a far right-wing GOPer (the likes of Huckabee and Romney frighten the bejeezus out of me). The far-right Christian nutjobs will complete their control and the GOP will be forced to kowtow to them even more (with the even worse possibility that in 2012, the GOP will solidify their control of Congress–possibly to the levels that the Dems had in the late 1970s).
As for your asinine “move away”, I’d think you’d realize that not everyone is lucky enough to have the financial reserves to move to a (theoretically) safe LGBT environment. (Gay men and lesbians have also been murdered and bashed in supposedly safe LA and NYC. And, it’s a rare circumstance when these gay men and lesbians are just victims of “random” violence. They are STILL targeted. By their “fellow Americans”.)

]]> By: Ralph Gramazio http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855604 Ralph Gramazio Mon, 06 Oct 2008 06:23:48 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855604 Gay guy here for Mccain/Palin ! As soon as she arrived on the scene, I was crazy about her... and I now about the conservatism too.... but I just wanted he to say " I love my gay hairdresser !" and she could seal the deal with me. in the debate she hinted that she had diverse friends, and I ran with it, done, she's in, go get Obama now girl ! both barrels :) Gay guy here for Mccain/Palin !
As soon as she arrived on the scene, I was crazy about her… and I now about the conservatism too…. but
I just wanted he to say ” I love my gay hairdresser !” and she could seal the deal with me. in the debate she hinted that she had diverse friends, and I ran with it, done, she’s in, go get Obama now girl ! both barrels :)

]]> By: Snickers http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855565 Snickers Mon, 06 Oct 2008 06:16:12 +0000 http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/so-what/#comment-855565 Eurogirl, I, too, think of Anita Hill when Credit Card Joe does his little "I'm pro women" crap. I also think about how he pays his female staff less than his male staff. He's a hypocrite and an ass. And Barry Soetoro is a liar and a creep. Eurogirl,
I, too, think of Anita Hill when Credit Card Joe does his little “I’m pro women” crap. I also think about how he pays his female staff less than his male staff. He’s a hypocrite and an ass. And Barry Soetoro is a liar and a creep.

]]>