June 30, 2010

"Wisconsin Supreme Court upholds gay marriage ban."

"In a 7-0 ruling, the court on Wednesday ruled that the 2006 constitutional amendment was properly put to voters in a statewide referendum. The court rejected a lawsuit that claimed the amendment violated a rule that limits referendum questions to a single subject. The lawsuit, filed by a voter opposed to the amendment, argued that gay marriage and civil unions were two different subjects."

226 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 226 of 226
Gabriel Hanna said...

@Palladian:

Since you're here, I want to go off-topic a bit and apologize for being a jerk to you the last time you and I interacted.

Moose said...

While I endorse Palladin's overall view's regarding invective towards gays, I'll draw the line at "vigorous ass fucking".

Tends to be a bit hard to administer in most social settings.

I said MOST.

Eric said...

Same nonsense here in Maine. What a clever way for the right to keep on alienating small-government social liberals until the Dems turn us into Greece.

I'm not sure you can hang this on "the right". Ouside die-hard liberal circles gay marriage is wildly unpopular. We're talking about Wisconsin, fer Chrissake. How many people are in "the right" there? 20? And Palladian probably voted on the gay marriage side.

Seven Machos said...

I leave here for a moment and this is what happens?

Palladian is the best regular commenter here. I don't know what he said, but I imagine he's right. Dismissed.

traditionalguy said...

@ Palladian...You handled the Shouter well. I just re-read 1 Corinthians 13, and I could not find hating gay men mentioned anywhere in Paul's instructions to Christians. So I will love you, and have no fear of cheap social ostracism for failing to suddenly hate other people, whom I value, just because an anti-gay riot is being incited. My hope is that Gays can forgive Christians for not treating them with respect.

bagoh20 said...

Jeremy,
why do you want rights that I do not have. As a single person, I get none of what you claim gays are denied. If gay marriage passes, I still will be denied them.

Who's the bigot now?

bagoh20 said...

BTW, I was born single.

Seven Machos said...

Why don't I have the inalienable right to be single and have my hot 19-year-old girlfriend see me in the hospital. Why don't intestate laws apply to me and that fine, clean-shaven babe? And don't even get me started about our tax situation.

Seven Machos said...

This hot little number and I have been seeing each other on and off for six weeks. We're going to adopt a pair of twins from Laos.

What really burns me up is that hospitals won't her accept as my next of kin. Also, no immunity from testimony, which is absurd because I am so hot for this broad.

pst314 said...

"AIDS didn't originate with gays, dumbfuck"

AIDS became an epidemic overwhelmingly because of the irresponsible behavior of gay men and intravenous drug users. Not only did they engage in behavior that causes AIDS to spread like wildfire, they militantly, hysterically opposed standard public health measures to contain the outbreak. If it weren't for their grossly, criminally irresponsible behavior the disease would have spread far more slowly and might even have been contained. So if anybody is a dumbfuck it's you.

pst314 said...

"I lived in San Francisco for 10 years... just as gay men ignited the AIDS epidemic with their sexually irresponsible behavior."

Shouting Thomas, what does AIDS have to do with gay marriage? You really need to take your meds before you comment again.

Seven Machos said...

There's little question that gay-marriage advocates have the upper-hand with regard to AIDS. It would likely go down if there were more monogamy among homosexuals (and that's simply because monogamy tends to limit STDs among everyone).

Again, though, there's no reason why gays can't marry now and be monogamous.

pst314 said...

"AIDS didn't originate with gays, dumbfuck...It was and indeed still is spread through specific sexual contact, but it's also spread through blood transfusions, needles, hemophilia treatments..."

The reason the blood supply became contaminated, so that so many hemophiliac patients died, is because so many gay men and drug users sold their contaminated blood to blood banks. In fact, I knew gay men who did this and who later died of AIDS. Making a few bucks was much more important to them than the lives of strangers.

And as for drug users, well, gay men were a much bigger factor in the spread of the disease than were drug users.

Milwaukie guy said...

Ah, nice bike ride. Warm and dry in the NW finally.

Can we at least agree, without bringing same gender marriage into the equation, that HIV is mostly about ass fucking and sharing needles?

pst314 said...

"I was for civil unions in the 80s when all the gay activists were swearing they never wanted marriage. Apparently they were either lying or are now pushing the envelope again."

Ah yes, I remember that well. Back then marriage was an "oppressive institution of the western hetero capitalist hegemony" or something like that, and sexual promiscuity and perversion was "liberating".

Seven Machos said...

Doesn't anybody else find it strange that we had this apparently well-respected taboo that people shouldn't go out and fuck people in the ass and get fucked in the ass indiscriminately for generations -- centuries, millenia. Then, lo and behold, when people started going out and fucking people in the ass and getting fucked in the ass indiscriminately, this crazy new disease popped up.

AIDS is just an especially egregious and terrible part of the Great Relearning.

Methadras said...

Anyone who indulges Jeremy's ideas is only asking to have a fool dictate the terms of the discussion. Jeremy doesn't know a damn thing about anything, like most leftards of his ilk.

What fools like Jeremy do is paint with the charge of bigotry, set up false straw men of tracts of homophobia (btw, this idiot has never, not once answered my question as to whether a real homophobe exists or not. You know, a homophobe, a person who has an irrational fear of homosexuals.), then tries to elevate himself as some sort of moral authority on the 'rights' or lack thereof of homosexuals.

Jeremy (Gene) why are you still trying to advocate that homosexuals receive special rights above and beyond those enumerated to every other citizen of the US as a matter of legal statutes? What should those rights be, Jeremy? Honestly, the only real bigot in this entire discussion is you. You slather your nonsense and pass it off as being some noble defender of liberty and justice for all, when in reality you are a small, petty troglodyte that fancies himself educated, cultured, and highborn. You're a worm.

Palladian said...

Eric said... And Palladian probably voted on the gay marriage side.

I don't live in a place that has had a vote on "gay marriage". If you knew my past comments here on the subject, you'd know that I'm not in favor of legalizing "gay marriage", or indeed any kind of marriage, because I don't think the State has any right to either impede or condone people's religo-personal relationships with one another. I cannot vote in favor of the State granting a "right" over something that it has no power to regulate. Remember those self-evident, inalienable rights? Negative liberty is the foundational principle of our government. If only the government hadn't so quickly forgotten that.

traditionalguy said... My hope is that Gays can forgive Christians for not treating them with respect.

Gay and Christian are not mutually exclusive states of being. The former is existential, the latter a choice of free will. There is no dichotomy.

Seven Machos said... Palladian is the best regular commenter here. I don't know what he said, but I imagine he's right.

Thank you. Unwarranted praise, but appreciated.

Doesn't anybody else find it strange that we had this apparently well-respected taboo that people shouldn't go out and fuck people in the ass and get fucked in the ass indiscriminately for generations -- centuries, millenia. Then, lo and behold, when people started going out and fucking people in the ass and getting fucked in the ass indiscriminately, this crazy new disease popped up.

Does anyone find coincidence strange? Only superstitious, scientifically ignorant losers. I like you, Seven, but we'll have to disagree on this one. Correlation isn't causation. The notion that AIDS was caused by buttsecks is as loony as the notion that Ronald Reagan had it engineered to kill the blacks, the junkies and the fags.

Now, who's up for that ass-fucking? I practice safe sex, by the way. Spread 'em!

Err, not you, Jeremy...

Palladian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
pst314 said...

"The notion that AIDS was caused by buttsecks is as loony as the notion..."

AIDS was not created by that behavior, but the epidemic was caused by that behavior.

Palladian said...

The epidemic was caused by a virus.

Methadras said...

Palladian said...

The epidemic was caused by a virus.


ELUCIDATION!!!

pst314 said...

"The epidemic was caused by a virus."

There would not have been an epidemic if it weren't for irresponsible gay sexual behavior.

Seven Machos said...

Palladian -- I'm not saying that. I'm saying that AIDS and other epidemics have always been around, and have always spread by ass fucking, which is the precise reason why societies have had strong taboos against indiscriminate ass fucking.

Note also that I am always using an adjective in front of ass fucking that suggests frequency, unprotectedness, and injudiciousness. I have no problem with ass fucking per se.

pst314 said...

"There sure are a lot of people here who could benefit from a vigorous ass-fucking."

That's the attitude that caused the epidemic in the first place. :-D

jimspice said...

Is this a law blog or not? The question was whether asking two questions on one ballot is legal?

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 226 of 226   Newer› Newest»