Sore Losers

[Decker]

No, actually since illegals don't have any inherant rights, anytime we vote on them, we are actually voting to grant them SPECIAL rights,

much like we are always voting for with the gays.

Illegal aliens are covered by the Bill of Rights just like you and I.

[Straw Man]

I just think now that we have a precedent of voting away rights we ought to start looking for more targets.

Why not?

[Hereford]

Apparently you have not been paying attention.....

[Straw Man]

putting aside your focus on illegal aliens

Can you think of any other group of US Citizens with existing rights that are offensive to you

How about the handicapped with their damn ramps and excellent parking spaces?

[Dos Equis]

Newt Gingrich Warns of ‘Gay Fascism’

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 12:21 PM

By: Jim Meyers 

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich warns that a “gay and secular fascism” in the U.S. is prepared to use violence to impose its will on the rest of the country.

Appearing on Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor” on Nov. 14, Gingrich and host Bill O’Reilly discussed the recently passed California ballot initiative, Proposition 8, amending the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

O’Reilly cited the protests by gay activists that broke out after the vote and troubling incidents associated with them, including a woman who had a cross knocked out of her hand and a Michigan church invaded by gay activists.

Gingrich responded: “I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion. And I think if you believe in historic Christianity, you have to confront the fact.”

He went on: “For that matter, if you believe in the historic version of Islam or the historic version of Judaism, you have to confront the reality that these secular extremists are determined to impose on you acceptance of a series of values that are antithetical, they're the opposite of what you're taught in Sunday school.”

The Georgia Republican, who left the House in January 1999, added: “I think when the left, when the radicals lost the vote in California, they are determined to impose their will on this country no matter what the popular opinion, no matter what the law of the land. You've watched them, for example, in Massachusetts, basically drive the Catholic Church out of running adoption services, drive Catholic hospitals out of offering any services, because [the radicals] impose secular rules that are fundamentally … sinful from the standpoint” of the church.”

Gingrich had released a video urging Californians to vote for Proposition 8, which overrode a recent California Supreme Court decision that had recognized same-sex marriage in the state.

The Proposition passed by a vote of 52.2 percent to 47.8 percent.
 
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Gingrich_Gay_Fascism/2008/11/18/152539.html

[Straw Man]

Newt Gingrich Warns of ‘Gay Fascism’

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 12:21 PM

By: Jim Meyers 

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich warns that a “gay and secular fascism” in the U.S. is prepared to use violence to impose its will on the rest of the country.

Appearing on Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor” on Nov. 14, Gingrich and host Bill O’Reilly discussed the recently passed California ballot initiative, Proposition 8, amending the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

O’Reilly cited the protests by gay activists that broke out after the vote and troubling incidents associated with them, including a woman who had a cross knocked out of her hand and a Michigan church invaded by gay activists.

Gingrich responded: “I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion. And I think if you believe in historic Christianity, you have to confront the fact.”

He went on: “For that matter, if you believe in the historic version of Islam or the historic version of Judaism, you have to confront the reality that these secular extremists are determined to impose on you acceptance of a series of values that are antithetical, they're the opposite of what you're taught in Sunday school.”

The Georgia Republican, who left the House in January 1999, added: “I think when the left, when the radicals lost the vote in California, they are determined to impose their will on this country no matter what the popular opinion, no matter what the law of the land. You've watched them, for example, in Massachusetts, basically drive the Catholic Church out of running adoption services, drive Catholic hospitals out of offering any services, because [the radicals] impose secular rules that are fundamentally … sinful from the standpoint” of the church.”

Gingrich had released a video urging Californians to vote for Proposition 8, which overrode a recent California Supreme Court decision that had recognized same-sex marriage in the state.

The Proposition passed by a vote of 52.2 percent to 47.8 percent.
 
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Gingrich_Gay_Fascism/2008/11/18/152539.html

Bahahahaha.....what a drama queen!!!!

what you have is a minority group that is protesting because their constitutional rights have been taken away.

Some people are engaging in vandalism which is not a good thing

I've seen worse damage from crowds after sporting events

[gcb]

Newt Gingrich Warns of ‘Gay Fascism’

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 12:21 PM

By: Jim Meyers 

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich warns that a “gay and secular fascism” in the U.S. is prepared to use violence to impose its will on the rest of the country.

Appearing on Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor” on Nov. 14, Gingrich and host Bill O’Reilly discussed the recently passed California ballot initiative, Proposition 8, amending the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

O’Reilly cited the protests by gay activists that broke out after the vote and troubling incidents associated with them, including a woman who had a cross knocked out of her hand and a Michigan church invaded by gay activists.

Gingrich responded: “I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion. And I think if you believe in historic Christianity, you have to confront the fact.”

He went on: “For that matter, if you believe in the historic version of Islam or the historic version of Judaism, you have to confront the reality that these secular extremists are determined to impose on you acceptance of a series of values that are antithetical, they're the opposite of what you're taught in Sunday school.”

The Georgia Republican, who left the House in January 1999, added: “I think when the left, when the radicals lost the vote in California, they are determined to impose their will on this country no matter what the popular opinion, no matter what the law of the land. You've watched them, for example, in Massachusetts, basically drive the Catholic Church out of running adoption services, drive Catholic hospitals out of offering any services, because [the radicals] impose secular rules that are fundamentally … sinful from the standpoint” of the church.”

Gingrich had released a video urging Californians to vote for Proposition 8, which overrode a recent California Supreme Court decision that had recognized same-sex marriage in the state.

The Proposition passed by a vote of 52.2 percent to 47.8 percent.
 
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Gingrich_Gay_Fascism/2008/11/18/152539.html

Christians are the true fascists - all these people want is the same rights as everyone else - they aren't trying to shove anything down anyone's throat (PUN not intended).

[Straw Man]

Newt Gingrich Warns of ‘Gay Fascism’



He went on: “For that matter, if you believe in the historic version of Islam or the historic version of Judaism, you have to confront the reality that these secular extremists are determined to impose on you acceptance of a series of values that are antithetical, they're the opposite of what you're taught in Sunday school.”

Doesn't the historic version of Islam and Judaism include polygamy?

In the historic version of Islam and Judaism marriage is more of a business transaction than some kind of holy sacrament

[240 is Back]

newt is very smart.

he knows this rhetoric is extremist and possibly silly.

but it sits very well with the far-right religious nuts who watch FOX news and stayed home during the 2008 election, as well as the angry palin fans.

He'll ramp this up over the next 4 years to position himself to win those Iowa religious hacks that gave Huckabee the win... then he'll move to center.  He already said he'll seek national office in 2012.

[chaos]

putting aside your focus on illegal aliens

Can you think of any other group of US Citizens with existing rights that are offensive to you

How about the handicapped with their damn ramps and excellent parking spaces?

What makes it their "rights" to get married? And how do you figure they are "existing", since they've been voted down?

[Straw Man]

What makes it their "rights" to get married? And how do you figure they are "existing", since they've been voted down?

the CA Supreme Court

[chaos]

the CA Supreme Court

The one that overrode the publics vote against it the first time?

And now, once again, the people have spoken. Why is this so difficult for some Sore Losers to understand?

[bigkid]

Can you imagine if the gays had won and people against gay marriage were protesting?  The gays would be shouting from the top of their lungs "the people have spoken!!!" 

[240 is Back]

Can you imagine if the gays had won and people against gay marriage were protesting?  The gays would be shouting from the top of their lungs "the people have spoken!!!" 

this point is a good one.

some groups didn't like the outcome of the vote, so they're trying to change what is now law.

If they HAD won, it'd be their biggest tool in defense of it.
Since they lost, they're minimizing its meaning.

I'd do the same if I was trying to win such an argument.  But it's flimsy at best.  You'd think they would have done some polling before pushing this bill, which is now another tool agians their cause, even though it was probably designed and pushed by pro-gay marriage groups.

[bigkid]

this point is a good one.

some groups didn't like the outcome of the vote, so they're trying to change what is now law.

If they HAD won, it'd be their biggest tool in defense of it.
Since they lost, they're minimizing its meaning.

I'd do the same if I was trying to win such an argument.  But it's flimsy at best.  You'd think they would have done some polling before pushing this bill, which is now another tool agians their cause, even though it was probably designed and pushed by pro-gay marriage groups.

It really boils down to the fact that most people aren't ready for gay marriage.  We all know society become more liberal as time goes on, so eventually it will happen.  When, I don't know.  I do believe that the protests aren't helping their cause though.

[240 is Back]

It really boils down to the fact that most people aren't ready for gay marriage.  We all know society become more liberal as time goes on, so eventually it will happen.  When, I don't know.  I do believe that the protests aren't helping their cause though.

there were a lot of Obama voters who said NO to gay marriage.  It's that simple. 

I have no problem with two men having the same right/paperwork/tax benefits as married couple.

But do I want my kid's 3rd grade teacher Mr Johnson having a hubby at home ALSO named Mr Johnson, and talking about the great movie and picnic they had the night before?  No, I'm not comfy with that. 

[Straw Man]

The one that overrode the publics vote against it the first time?

And now, once again, the people have spoken. Why is this so difficult for some Sore Losers to understand?

you mean by doing their job and ruling the that the law violated the CA Constitution?

Don't worry you'll soon get to show us all how to be a gracious loser when the court strikes down Prop 8

[Option D]

LAPD Treat Gay Marriage Protests With Kid Gloves
Posted By Jack Dunphy
November 17, 2008
pamajasmedia.com


The first paragraph of the [1] Law Enforcement Code of Ethics reads as follows: “As a law enforcement officer, my fundamental duty is to serve the community; to safeguard lives and property; to protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation and the peaceful against violence or disorder; and to respect the constitutional rights of all to liberty, equality and justice.”

These are noble ideals, but here in Los Angeles we have seen once again that noble ideals can be trumped by the demands of politics, which are often not so noble.

Witness the furor that has erupted following the November 4 passage of California’s Proposition 8, a referendum that amended the state’s constitution so as to read that “

• nly marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”  In approving the proposition, the voters of California affirmed the meaning of marriage as it had been understood for millennia until May of this year, when four members of the California Supreme Court rummaged through all those emanations and penumbras that only liberals can claim to detect in written documents, miraculously finding therein the right for same-sex couples to marry.

Angered by this expression of the will of the voters and the repudiation of an activist court, advocates for same-sex marriage have taken to the streets in Los Angeles, venting their outrage at what they describe as “hate” on the part of those who voted in favor of the proposition.

The protests thus far have come in the form of impromptu marches down various thoroughfares, disrupting traffic and raising a minor ruckus here and there.  Los Angeles Police Department officers have arrested a handful of protesters, but most of the marchers have been voicing their opinions loudly but peacefully nearly every day since the election.

But even peaceful demonstrations can be disruptive to a community, and it’s been disheartening to witness the lengths to which the management of the LAPD has acquiesced to the disorder engendered by these protests.

Police officers have requested that marchers not block traffic, but when these requests have been ignored, police commanders prohibited officers from taking any action to restore order.  Thus in parts of Hollywood and West Los Angeles, where afternoon commutes can be hellish on the best of days, drivers unfortunate enough to be caught in any of these protests have found themselves helplessly delayed as marchers flooded into the streets, even as dozens of LAPD officers looked on from nearby waiting for orders that never came.

Had the protesters organized a march and sought the proper permits, Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, LAPD chief William Bratton, the city council, the police commission, indeed the entire municipal apparatus, nearly all of whose members are left-leaning and sympathetic to the same-sex marriage cause, would have moved heaven and earth to accommodate them, bringing large sections of the city to a halt if necessary, just as they have done to facilitate large-scale marches on behalf of another politically favored group, illegal aliens.

It’s interesting to note that the Los Angeles protests have been confined to such liberal enclaves as Hollywood and the West Side, where Proposition 8 was [2] roundly rejected by the voters.  If the marchers were intent on truly facing their opposition, they might take their activities to the, shall we say, grittier neighborhoods of South Central and East L.A., where it passed by wide margins.  I suspect that drivers in those neighborhoods would not be so impassive upon finding their cars surrounded by people shrieking at them for being “hateful,” and that the marchers would welcome the LAPD’s assistance in escaping to the more hospitable zip codes whence they came.

The judicial creation of same-sex marriage has thus far been rejected by every American electorate to have considered the issue, but public opinion, at least in California, has been shifting.  In 2000, California voters passed Proposition 22, which enacted a state law defining marriage as between one man and one woman.  That initiative passed by a landslide, with a 61-39 margin.  Proposition 8 passed by only a 52-48 margin, but the continuing antics of the protesters are doing little to change hearts and minds.

The dispute now returns predictably to the courts; three [3] lawsuits have been filed in the hope of seeing the measure invalidated.  The governments of both the city and county of Los Angeles have endorsed this effort, and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Catholic who twice vetoed legislation authorizing same-sex marriage, has demonstrated what is, even for him, an astonishing elasticity of conviction by [4] voicing his support for those hoping to see Proposition 8 overturned.

Until the matter is resolved (isn’t that what the election was for?), be careful where you drive in Los Angeles.  And if you should find yourself impeded in your travels by same-sex marriage advocates roaming willy-nilly in the streets, don’t expect the police to do anything about it.

Article printed from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com

URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/lapd-treating-prop-8-protests-with-kid-gloves/

URLs in this post:
[1] Law Enforcement Code of Ethics: http://iacp.org/documents/index.cfm?document_id=95&document_type_id=1&fuseaction=document
[2] roundly rejected: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/11/prop-8-backers.html
[3] lawsuits: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gaylegal6-2008nov06,0,220763.story
[4] voicing his support: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prop815-2008nov15,0,897834.story

so is it safe to call you a neocon

[Dos Equis]

so is it safe to call you a neocon

How do you define "neocon"? 

[loco]

Illegals have no rights once they cross that border.

But if you murder an illegal, you'll end up in prison just the same as if you had murdered a citizen.

[chaos]

you mean by doing their job and ruling the that the law violated the CA Constitution?

Don't worry you'll soon get to show us all how to be a gracious loser when the court strikes down Prop 8

You mean the law four douchebags in dresses enacted after the people voted it down?

It's alot easier for gays to convince four judges they have certain rights, than it is the entire state......

[garebear]

there were a lot of Obama voters who said NO to gay marriage.  It's that simple. 

I have no problem with two men having the same right/paperwork/tax benefits as married couple.

But do I want my kid's 3rd grade teacher Mr Johnson having a hubby at home ALSO named Mr Johnson, and talking about the great movie and picnic they had the night before?  No, I'm not comfy with that. 

`Like it or not. That's the way things are.

[Straw Man]

You mean the law four douchebags in dresses enacted after the people voted it down?

It's alot easier for gays to convince four judges they have certain rights, than it is the entire state......

Do you even understand the role of the court?

[bigkid]

All I understand is 52 % is bigger than 48%

[chaos]

Do you even understand the role of the court?

Do you understand the role of the voters?


The court shouldn't even be involved. Basically you have the gays trying to "sue" the people in the state that voted against gay marraige, to get what they consider their rights.


So where do you draw the line? Do you stop at gay marraige or keep going into polygamy, gay polygamy, bestiality, pedophilia? Where does it end, after your group gets what it wants, or the next group? Every group will use the same excuse, "It's our right!!!"