So, are you saying you are a good citizen (against gay marriage) while I am not (not my business or anyone else’s)?

Backhanded compliments are better than none at all, I suppose. But, if I may point out, I did receive a classical education so I’m not some punk that can be impressed by someone who can pull out a copy of Bartlett’s.

There’s nothing to say. In one fell swope, you conflated gay marriage with bestiality which is a predictable right-wing move. And, you pulled out the “child predator” canard. Nice. Classy, too?

Very well put! Your missive puts things clearly into perspective in a way that I have rarely seen, to be quite honest.

Thanks for the paternal reassurance that we lesser minds need not cower in fear. “Curtailing the civil rights of my fellow citizens” is an amazing assumption on your part.

The government does not possess the power to anoint anyone in dealing out the vaunted “civil rights.” That power resides exclusively with “We the People.” Should “We the People” elect and maintain representatives that “give” a civil right to marriage between people who identify themselves as practioners of sex between members of the same sex, then Guy and Helio with just have to lump it. But, as of today no gay is denied a right to marry; they just can’t marry each other.

If you can step out of your zone of bias and become a disinterested party in the matter of marriage between gays, you will find there are several significant points to ponder.

1) What compelling interest dictates that the state should regulate marriage in any manner?

2) Would those interests apply equally to marriages between people of different races? More than one spouse? Those sharing the same mother and father? Large groups? Children and adults? Those of the same sex? A human and a loved non human? Parent and child? Man and sports car? Ear and ear wax?

Please give us your advice. We are eagerly awaiting an epiphany.

If the Anna Nicole Smith turdblossom proved nothing else, it clearly showed the bankruptcy of moral relativism.

Obviously, the marriage between a man and woman of different religions, race or social class is a relatively easy puzzle to solve under our Constitution. But when you shift to the concept of same sex marriage, marriage to a child or between children, marrying pets or plural marriages, marriage between siblings or a parent and off spring you have embarked on a voyage into the darkest depths of enigma.

Being a responsible citizen requires one to be more than a bleeding heart for those less “empowered”. It requires the sharp introspection of a logical and informed mind.

My gay neighbors may consider themselves married and I may choose to let them live in their fantasy world. After all, they can adopt children and conduct business and find a church to attend. But my doleful interest will suddenly be aroused if they essay to open a day care business or enter into teaching sex education at the public high school.

I humbly suggest you get with the program of enlightened citizenship. Passing out “rights” is chump work and the love child of elitists and oligarchies. Defending the framework of logic and reason means that you must take uncomfortable stands.

You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

Pleasure to meet someone versed in both scripture and history — and not pop culture!

Angel, history is real. The meme that all of history is a lie because it was written by the victors is not entirely true, to put it mildly.

Pop Culture, on the other hand, is entirely delusional and fictitious drivel.

The Machine finds Angel to be both intelligent and able to communicate well in the writing genre, I invite Angel to do some extended study of history.

A very good way to find much food for thought is in the study of the quotations of the movers and shakers throughout all of history.

Quite often the discovery of a quotation that resonates with you is the jumping off point to find out more about a subject.

Don’t draw conclusions until you have devoured the writings from both sides of any argument.

Always keep the eyes and ears peeled for the “ring of truth”.

A natural consequence of this will be lax enforcement of the law in these communities. And, like so many other things sadly, the kids will be to blame. And, somewhere a record executive and his stable of gangsta rappers quell their consciences with millions.

That constitutes an ad hominem attack? Semantics? The Angel is at a loss.

Comment by Angel — 04.29.07 @ 11:44 am

Here I stand in 100% agreement with Angel.

Would also mention Dr. Bill Cosby while on this subject.

Comment by batyah — 04.29.07 @ 11:31 am

It is called, “terrorism”.

We can’t even get members of the black community to finger the killers when their own children are the ones killed.

And now the rappers wear “Don’t snitch” T-shirts and it is a fullblown campaign.

“Men fight for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again, poor fools. And their grandchildren are once more slaves.” –D.H. Lawrence

Comment by Angel — 04.29.07 @ 11:27 am

Angel, you have changed the conversation in order to take issue with yourself.

Here is what I wrote about the subject:

“The lack of mature MEN among the present-day Black community has meant that… “

“A lack of” NOT “there are no”.

This is an example of a phenomenon that is far too prevalent in these times.

Use of the extreme circumstance as a means of denigrating what someone else has not even said in the first place is not debate.

It does border on the ad hominem, though.

Guy and Helio,

Don’t believe the hype! Nobody is ever going to go to jail for preaching against gays especially in a country where a major political party has made denying gays the right to marry a major plank in its’ platform. When do you start crying about the media stopping you from getting your message out?

Yuck.