Should Katherine Kersten get the ax?
May 15th, 2008 – 8:16 AMI’m reviled on a daily basis as the poorest excuse for a journalist since…well, since there was journalism. But now I’ve really gone and done it! I’ve made an enemy at the highest reaches of state government, and she’s calling for my head.Rep. Mindy Greiling is Chair of the House K-12 Finance Committee. In a dither over my columns [here and here] about one of her favorite schools, she wrote a letter published in the on-line Star Tribune and demanded that the paper give me a pink slip. In an interview with the Minnesota Monitor, Greiling labeled me “a thug.” Click here to see her web site declaring her mission to be “bringing people together.” Perhaps I don’t qualify as “people.”
Oh well, all in a day’s work. But now, I see with horror that Greiling’s letter seems to have ignited a public campaign for my ouster! An online petition drive is now demanding that I be fired. Folks have signed in droves — from Illinois, Pennsylvania and New Jersey across the globe to Turkey, where “Can Atik” signed. Dozens of Minnesotans, including Coleen Rowley, have added their monikers.
Scott Johnson of Power Line blog has made a valiant stand in my defense, citing fact after fact.
But is it enough to save my skin? Are Strib big-wigs even now drafting an obituary for my brief career?
I yield the floor, as I always do, to the fair-minded members of my jury—Think Again commentators. In a supreme act of fairness, I give those calling for my demise the first word—Rep. Greiling’s letter of indictment — and the last word—the petition’s bill of particulars, enumerating my offenses. Power Line’s spirited defense is sandwiched in between.
Be fair, commentators; be merciful, do justice.
GREILING STAR TRIBUNE LETTER
May 7, 2008
In response to questions prompted by Katherine Kersen’s recent columns on Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy (TIZA), I decided to visit the school myself.
What I learned during a tour late last month is that none of Kersten’s concerns that the charter school is promoting religion in violation of a state law that prohibits public schools from doing so is valid.
What I did see was excellent teachers hard at work in the classroom focused on improving student achievement. I saw engaged students of different religious and cultural backgrounds learning reading, math, government and science. I spoke with parents, teachers and administrators who all stressed their high standards for TIZA students. While an outsider, or someone like Kersten who is trying to validate a predetermined conclusion, might be tempted to brand Tarek ibn Ziyad as an “Islamic School” because it leases space from the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, the school, like other charter schools in Minnesota that lease space from churches, is a separate entity. It does comply with federal law that requires all schools to accommodate a student’s right to practice his or her religion. And unlike other charter schools that have faced financial and other administrative challenges, the school was recognized with a 2008 School Finance Award from the Minnesota Department of Education for its “sound fiscal health and financial management policies.”
Kersten’s reckless journalistic standards have diminished this paper’s credibility. Worse, they have threatened the safety of the children and staff at the school, which has been forced to take extra security measures in the wake of recent death threats. While I value a broad range of opinions from a variety of perspectives, I value the facts even more. Kersten’s gross distortion of the facts in this case should compel Star Tribune management to ask for her resignation.
REP. MINDY GREILING, DFL-ROSEVILLE; CHAIRWOMAN, HOUSE K-12 FINANCE DIVISION POWERLINE:
POWER LINE POST
May 12, 2008 Greiling’s grandstanding, part 2
When a powerful political figure attacks the work or integrity of a reporter, it’s frequently considered newsworthy. Does the politician have a legitimate beef? Is the reporter out of line? Or is the politician full of it? Is he throwing his weight around in a distasteful abuse of his position? The letter to the editor of the Minneapolis Star Tribune by Minnesota state Rep. Mindy Greiling calling for the firing of Star Tribune metro columnist Katherine Kersten raises all these questions.
Greiling is a poltical figure who wields substantial power as the chair of the state House of Representatives K-12 finance division. In her letter to the editor of the Star Tribune, Greiling accused Kersten of “reckless journalistic standards” and “gross distortion of the facts” in Kersten’s two columns reporting facts suggestive of the illegal sectarian practices of the Tarek ibn Ziyad public K-8 charter school in suburban St. Paul. Greiling’s letter, however, fails to cite a single fact on which Kersten erred.
Minnesota Monitor is a left-wing Internet news site. It’s the kind of site that all but calls for moonbats to disrupt the annual dinner of the Center of the American Experiment (the conservative Minneapolis-based think tank on whose board I sit) featuring John Bolton this coming Thursday, as it does in this post. Although the Star Tribune itself doesn’t act as if there is a story here, Minnesota Monitor rightly treats Greiling’s attack on Kersten as newsworthy. Because Greiling’s letter fails to cite any fact that Kersten got wrong, the Monitor asked Greiling where Kersten went astray. In the audio clip in this Monitor post, Greiling responds in her own fashion.
Greiling leveled her attack on Kersten based on nothing more than a Potemkin-village tour of the school by imam and school principal Asad Zaman. Greiling does not note that Kersten sought, but was refused, access to the school by Zaman. On the basis of her guided tour, Greiling calls for Kersten’s dismissal. Although she is the head of a legislative education committee, Greiling has no interest in the legal issues raised by Kersten’s TIZA columns.
Greiling is not interested in the school’s entanglement with religion and with the Muslim American Society Minnesota chapter. She is not interested in the school’s highly problematic endorsement of and support for Islam. She is not interested in the fact that taxpayer funds are used to support a school that may be violating the law.
Greiling takes at face value Zaman’s statements about prayer being student-led and voluntary. Greiling does not dispute that teachers take students to the bathroom for the Islamic washing ritual prior to prayer, that teachers take students to prayer services, that teachers participate in the Friday prayer service, or that the school has recruited parents to help with prayer. Greiling relies entirely on Zaman’s assurances that all is well at TIZA, but a rational person might think that the issue bears a little more scrutiny than Greiling affords it.
Greiling apparently didn’t ask how second-graders could be initiating and leading prayer. She regurgitates Zaman’s reassurance that the prayer services simply constitute the lawful “accommodation” of the students’ religious practices. According to Greiling, “It was clear they were very up on laws what they need to do to accommodate religion as any school would do.”
The constitutional test, however, is not whether prayer is voluntary or student-led. If it were, public schools could have student-led prayers in the classroom every morning, and those who didn’t wish to participate could opt out. The test is whether prayer is student-initiated. At TIZA, the schedule is arranged around religious observance and teachers lead students to ritual washing and prayer. The prayer appears to be school-initiated, not student-initiated.
Greiling claims that TIZA’s relationship with the Muslim American Society of Minnesota is merely landlord/tenant, like that of other charter schools that rent from churches. This does not appear to be true. The two institutions share a building. Their boards and leadership have overlapped. The school building contains a mosque run by MAS Minnesota. MAS Minnesota appears to run the Friday prayers and after-school Islamic Studies instruction. MAS Minnesota initially planned a private Islamic school at the same location.
Greiling does not acknowledge that TIZA leadership presents the school as secular in public documents, but that the MAS Minnesota chapter presents it as religious in its convention program. In one public document, for example, the school boasts of a day care center and a youth center on site. In the MAS convention program, they are both described as Islamic. Greiling shows no interest in the nature of MAS itself.
Greiling states that Zaman is “reputable, has credibility,” in part because he is “not rooted in any [political] party.” In fact, Zaman was a delegate to the 2004 Democratic national convention. He assisted (Democratic) Minnesota Fifth District Rep. Keith Ellison’s campaign. Greiling to the contrary notwithstanding, Zaman is a partisan Democratic activist.
Greiling regurgitates Zaman’s reassurance that TIZA has after-school activities besides religious instruction, such as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. Kersten asked Zaman to list these activities and he refused, though he said there were several. Kersten posted his response on the Star Tribune Web site. Did Greiling think to ask whether the Muslim American Society runs the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts programs?
Greiling purports to take issue with Kersten’s reference to the observation of fasting by all students during Ramadan. Kersten cited a St. Paul Pioneer Press article on the school quoting a parent saying that all students fasted. Greiling says that some students fast and others do not. However, only Muslims over the age of puberty are expected to fast. That some TIZA students fast and others do not is not by itself evidence of choice or secularism.
According to Greiling, Kersten wrote that TIZA students were required to engage in religious activity even if they are not Muslim. The only question raised by this asserrtion is one of reading comprehension on the part of Greiling. Kersten reported that the school is not neutral on religion, but rather encourages and supports Islam.
Even friendly outside observers such as Kevin Featherly have noted that virtually all TIZA students are Muslim (”Despite Zaman’s assurances, a visitor might well mistake Tarek ibn Ziyad for an Islamic school….Headscarves are voluntary, but virtually all the girls wear them….”). Zaman had no dispute with Featherly’s article.
This past Friday morning, I wrote Greiling via her Web site:
Dear Rep. Greiling: I write for the Power Line Web site (powerlineblog.com). I read your letter to the editor of the Star Tribune calling for Katherine Kersten’s resignation based on what you call her “gross distortion of facts” regarding TIZA. I have carefully read her columns and related material as well as interviewed Morgan Brown of the Department of Education. I find your letter itself a gross abuse of power and a reckless assault on the truth. In this post I set forth the facts and call for your resignation.
Please let me know what facts you dispute and on what ground. I will post your response in its entirety on our site.
In this post I characterized Greiling’s letter to the Star Tribune as an act of thuggery. We’ll see if Greiling is up for a fair fight, or if she prefers to hit and run.
JOHN adds: There is a major 1st Amendment issue here. Greiling, a public official, has demanded that the Star Tribune fire Kersten for writing two columns with which Greiling disagrees. Can one imagine the furor if a member of the Bush administration demanded that a columnist be fired for writing something–about the Iraq war, say–of which the administration official disapproves? Or to take an example closer to home, what would have been the reaction (from the Star Tribune and elsewhere) if Governor Tim Pawlenty had demanded that Strib columnist Nick Coleman be fired for absurdly claiming that it was Pawlenty’s fault the 35W bridge collapsed? In either instance, the howls of outrage cannot be imagined. Yet Greiling’s call for Kersten’s firing has been met with an odd silence from all liberal precincts, including the paper itself.
PETITION CALLING FOR KERSTEN’S DISMISSAL
Star Tribune: For irresponsible Muslim-bashing, fire Katherine Kersten
Target:
Katherine Kersten
Sponsored by:
Daniel Lynx Bernard
Katherine Kersten, columnist for the Minneapolis Star Tribune, has made a habit of demonizing Muslims in Minnesota. But in her recent smear of a local grade school, Kersten went further and committed journalistic malpractice. There is no place for her in a newspaper that claims to represent a general audience in a pluralistic society.
Kersten alleged that the school used public funds for religious practices. Her evidence: the word of one substitute teacher who spent a few hours in the school, made assumptions about what she saw, and never got the truth. Kersten failed to mention that her source was a Republican Party activist. More irresponsibly, Kersten used a tenuous and far-fetched guilt-by-association to suggest that these Minnesota educators were connected to terrorism in the Middle East. Those reckless accusations led to death threats directed at the school and sent fear through the Muslim community.
Community members have repudiated Kersten’s attack:
• Wayne Jennings, former St. Paul Schools administrator, member of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, March 12: “The school is not a religious school in any way.”
• Charter school expert Joe Nathan, April 10: “The school is NOT a pervasively sectarian school. I have visited such schools - Lutheran, Catholic, Jewish, etc. Tarek Ibn Ziyad has no similarity to the pervasive religious symbols and promotion of a particular faith in such schools. … The message throughout Tarek is of peace, tolerance and respect for others.”
• Carla A. Bates, Minneapolis School Board candidate, April 14: “I call into question the integrity with which Katherine Kersten levels her complaints. I think it’s Islam that she doesn’t like, and she is going to put a successful school through the ringer because she doesn’t like how it looks, sounds, or behaves. ”
• Mohammad Zafar, a former Marine and parent of a student at the school, April 17: “Star Tribune needs to hold Katherine Kersten responsible for falsifying a story with very little or no research. She has shown her strong bias and false reporting … they need to hold her accountable for breaking the basic ethics and moral obligation that all reporters need to uphold.”
• Rep. Mindy Greiling, K-12 Finance Chairwoman, Minnesota House of Representatives, May 7: “Kersten’s reckless journalistic standards have diminished this paper’s credibility. Worse, they have threatened the safety of the children and staff at the school. … Kersten’s gross distortion of the facts in this case should compel Star Tribune management to ask for her resignation.”
We agree. To the managers and editors of the Star Tribune, we say: You have allowed Kersten’s racist bullying of a religious minority for too long. Now, your lack of oversight of her verification has unjustly damaged the reputation of local educators and placed their students in danger. If you want to reassure the public that the Star Tribune does not endorse her reckless bigotry, cancel her column
And you?
965 Responses to "Should Katherine Kersten get the ax?"
First and foremeost, KK writes an Opinion Column. Does she distort facts? Of course. Does she incite people on the opposite political spectrum? Of course. But no differently than Nick Coleman. It’s “opinion, not reporting”
KK, I’d tell Powerline to “get off your side”. They made one of the weakest, most inaccurate arguments I’ve ever seen. For instance, in the very first sentence, they called you a “reporter”….you are NOT a reporter, but a commentator.
There are very few things I may agree with KK on, that’s why I read her. Do I want to sit around and chat with people who think exactly like I do?
Finally, how does Joe Nathan find the time to be both charter school expert and a dominant closer?
“Should Katherine Kersten get the ax?”
If she was a reporter, yes. But she isnt, she as instigating commentator, so no. She should keep her job until the Strib goes bankrupt then go hat in hand around town begging for change with the rest of the recession effected riff raff.
Considering the criticism is coming from the “Nutjob Community” ( including the first post of today ) I’d wear it as a badge of honor.
No you shouldn’t be fired…but learn from this…and note:
What you are observing is religion and its tenticles masquarading as education. Religions have done their best keeping people stupid. Here is a perfect example of it.
There are two things, IMHO, that should be taken from religion and used in education…One, seek the truth and the truth will set you free. Two, do unto others as you want done to you.
The rest is crap. Phoney history, phoney prophesy, etc…and you’re seeing how crappy it is.
Additionally, religions divide people and as Lincoln said, “A house divided cannot stand.” Simply witness the current state of of affairs in the world to see how true that is. True education, on the other hand, can bring people to concensus.
As much as I usually disagree with Katherine, I don’t think she should get the ax. She is a commentator, not a reporter. I actually like to read her column just because I know it will be a different opinion than my own. She definitely gets me to think hard about my own thoughts and opinions.
“and you’re seeing how crappy it is.”
Is crappy a techinical term?
Wow, Mindy says “they have threatened the safety of the children and staff at the school”.
So Mindy, freedom of speech is not allowed for issues that the public should be made aware of?
Doesn’t matter who would have written about the school, there will always be some individuals that are going to attack, either vocally or physically.
I’m glad KK wrote about the school. I had no idea of this issue until I read it in the Think Again forum.
That’s right KK, wear lit like a badge of honor, just like Tiny wears his white hood.
I don’t think she should get the axe because of this effort–that would be spineless on the Star Tribune’s part. But there might be other good reasons to stop running her columns. She’s a sloppy thinker and a purist partisan. I have never seen her take an unexpectedly thoughtful, independent-minded position on anything. Name an issue and I’ll tell you her position, before she says a word.
I think Katherine is an excellent columnist and blogger. I enjoy her work immensely and think she has a lot to offer to the Star Tribune. It would be a pity if the STRIB bowed to political pressure and asked her to leave.
I don’t think she should be fired, but perhaps the Star Tribune should put a disclaimer up that it’s opinion and not objective news. Selective “facts” and selected omission of facts.
skier_rick - funny you should use that particular Lincoln quote to reinforce your views on religion. Any idea where Lincoln might have been quoting from?
Yep Katherine you should get the axe as soon as we cut all internet/phone lines of communication to the state. Jam radio transmissions and shoot satellites from the sky. Block all forms of dessenting thought by locking up the evil ones who dare to think and ban the pledge of alleigence.
Of course we’ll keep - reality TV, Alternative life style education in grade school, tax dollars for religious schools (Unless they are christian schools), Globull Warming, CFL Bulbs and Bridge.
Yes, they should fire you if they want to hasten the paper’s decent into oblivion. If there’s anyone who should be axed, it’s Nick. He’s biased, predictable AND uninteresting.
GHS, isn’t she on the “Opinion Page”?
“But there might be other good reasons to stop running her columns. She’s a sloppy thinker and a purist partisan. I have never seen her take an unexpectedly thoughtful, independent-minded position on anything. Name an issue and I’ll tell you her position, before she says a word.”
Replace the hers with his, and you have Nick Coleman. In fact, he’s even more predictable and worthless. At least KK has the fortitude to allow comments on her posts–Coleman knows he’d be exposed for the fraud he is if he let people comment.
“GHS, isn’t she on the “Opinion Page”? ”
She is in Metro.
“GHS, isn’t she on the “Opinion Page”? ”
Thats what it says at the top of this page.
It only makes sense to have a semi-insane right winger to offset the semi-insane left wingers who have dominated the opinion pages for a while.
As far as I can tell, Katherine’s job is not to report the news as fact, but to get people riled up (either with her or against her) with her views on the news. And though I am usually against her, I give credit where credit is due - she’s good at her job.
Online, she’s under opinions, blogs.
In the paper, she’s under the Metro section.
i would bet blog quarters that Katherine has more fans among left-leaners than Coleman has among right-leaners.
KK won’t get fired over this. She’s the paper’s token conservative, there to provide a fig leaf over its otherwise hard-left politics that pervade every other space.
Yes. Let’s move into an era where hate-mongering is out of style. She should have a blog like anyone can, but putting her in print is a waste of good paper.
Thus speaks Minnesota.
Gypsy - I canceled my subscription a while back so they may have changed it, but I believe the metro columnists are published in the Metro section - typically a news section - and they really don’t belong there.
I don’t think the Star Tribune should employ any writer, whether commentator or reporter, who consistently distorts or creates facts to further their own agenda. There are other outlets for those people to voice their opinions, such as the Power Line blog. If they want to be considered a trustworthy, legitimate news source, they can’t tolerate this type of journalism from either side of the political spectrum. If that means Nick Coleman should go, so be it.
Power Line is a conservative blog run by three attorneys - two of whom are fellows of the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank. Their opinion on the subject is hardly going to be representative of a vast number of people and free from bias. Greiling may not be entirely accurate either, but she’s at least an elected official which presumably means she represents the views of those who voted for her.
There are better conservative commentators out there. Ms. Kersten is a caricature of a columnist who spews hate in the guise of conservativism. Spreading lies about this school is the last straw. I do not agree with most of her positions, but expect that from a conservative.
Where I believe she crosses the line is when she promotes the worst of hate-mongering. Who are her targets? Educational programs promoting tolerance and forebearance. Schools with racial and religious minorities. If the Strib wants a token conservative columnist, find someone less hateful.
“I don’t think the Star Tribune should employ any writer, whether commentator or reporter, who consistently distorts or creates facts to further their own agenda.”
Bye Bye Colman?
“Greiling may not be entirely accurate either, but she’s at least an elected official which presumably means she represents the views of those who voted for her.”
she represents the views of those who voted for her and screw the rest of you who didn’t vote for her. For those who voted for her, To Bad, So Sad your views are shallow and ill informed.
“If the Strib wants a token conservative columnist, find someone less hateful.”
In other words find someone who isn’t conservative and panders to the liberal mind set. Geez you already have Coleman. What more do you want?
“hateful” is right up there with the other liberal catch phrases “tolerance” and “diversity” bound for the trash heap of history.
Katherine Kersten has a job because her employer believes her opinions add something to the newspaper. She can say what she likes, so long as her employer continues to believe she makes a positive contribution. The people who disagree also have the right to call for her to be removed when they believe she has used her position to spread recklessly false information. If she is confident in the quality, accuracy and value of her work, why is she asking US whether she should keep her job?
Katherine,
You should take a lesson from Imus. Let them sack you, then sue.
Rep. Mindy Greiling is the real thug in this, using a position of power to limit freedom of the press.
The left-wing claims to value critical thinking, but increasingly, that seems to be subject to the condition that those thoughts must conform their own standards of “correctness”. Anyone signing the petition has the option to
a)not read the column, or b)counter any arguments, but that’s not good enough for them, because in their eyes, incorrect thoughts must be punished.
star tribune, please don’t fire the absurdist, leftist hipster who writes these hilarious columns under the pen name “katherine kersten”.
they’re the most entertaining part of the paper.
love,
simon
She is the Strib’s conservative troll, and she is quite good at it. This type of writing is better suited for the blogosphere. Newspaper’s used to pride themselves in being the primary source for information and facts. With the rise of the blogosphere, they need to hire characters like KK to compete.
Should Kersten go? Yes. I appreciate the need for a variety of opinion, and I am not intolerant of opinions that disagree with mine. I don’t think I should have to tolerate Kersten’s brand of journalism. If the right can produce no better columnist than Kersten, it is in more trouble than I thought. She is an embarrassment to the StarTribune, not because she is so ideological and extreme but because she is such a poor journalist. People–good people–have been hurt by her reckless slandering and crude mangling of facts.
“I don’t think the Star Tribune should employ any writer, whether commentator or reporter, who consistently distorts or creates facts to further their own agenda”
Few people are going to spend the money for a blank sheet of paper.
“Should Kersten get the axe?”
By all means! And with haste!
““hateful” is right up there with the other liberal catch phrases “tolerance” and “diversity” bound for the trash heap of history”
Add to that list,
minority (the best way to bring everyone together is to divide them up and slap labels on them)
monger
Bush-and-his-minions
undocumented
dash-American
Even though I find you to be a bigot and a mouth piece for the ultra rich, I believe the hate you preach is protected and the Star-Tribune should keep you on staff.
NO!!! Keep her here. I like her — her thinking reminds me of my grandma’s. My grandma is now passed, but reading things like this keep her alive for me.
“I don’t think I should have to tolerate Kersten’s brand of journalism.”
Awe yes. The intolerant tolerant.
Well you did dangle yourself out there by reporting rather than commentating based on taking the word of one substitute teacher.
I don’t mind you myself, but I don’t care for the over-righteous “This is what’s wrong with Minnesota/the Capitol/our schools/our streets…” preaching without considering any solutions.
Andy123,
First I’m not reinforcing education but speaking to religion as a divisive factor in society. And, yes, I’m standing the phrase on its head.
Second, see this for the context of Lincoln’s speech: Matthew 12:25 Here’s a link: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/mt/12.html
Ok, I admit, maybe there are three things I’d take from the bible.
I read her articles to get a different perspective on things. I am perfectly OK with a strong conservative writing and I welcome the different point of view even if I don’t agree with it. What I don’t care for is the complete lack of logic and her apparent hatred for anyone who does not believe as she does. When I read the blog, I read her in amazement that someone can actually believe what she does based on her writing and then I read the comments to understand what (hopefully) she was trying to say - except it is logically sound (obviously only a portion of the people that post). As a troll though, I guess she does her job. It would be nice if the Strib had a right leaning thinker instead of a right leaning troll.
Can one imagine the furor if a member of the Bush administration demanded that a columnist be fired for writing something–about the Iraq war, say–of which the administration official disapproves?
Hey Powerline idiots, does the name Valerie Plame mean anything to ya?
Andy123m
Why yes, Matt 12:24 I believe.
Its funny, I read a lot of posts about how Katherine’s columns are “hate filled”, “partisan”, “misleading”, “absurdist”, and so on, yet not a single person, including Greiling, has refuted a single fact in either of Kristin’s stories that are at issue. Why? If it is so absurd and misleading tell us why. Cite facts and examples. Instead, we get name calling. Name calling is the last resort of a tired mind. The liberals in this city must be mentally exhausted.
For a sitting member of the state legislature to demand someone get fired for writing something she disagrees with is beyond the pale. It is pure bullying, an abuse of power, and totally unconstitutional (both state and federal I might add. I thought you liberals liked diversity and embrassing other points of view? Instea, you try to silence those you disagree with.
Joseph Stalin would be very proud of Greiling’s behavior.
“Yes. Let’s move into an era where hate-mongering is out of style. She should have a blog like anyone can, but putting her in print is a waste of good paper.”
So, so typical of the farleft. Any opinions other than theirs (and they call themselves accepting) is called hate-mongering. They want to silence opposition speech by getting the person fired, anything to shut them up. They want talk radio shut down, they want KK out of the paper, they want total control, there is no other worthwhile opinions. Sieg Heil!!
“That’s right KK, wear lit like a badge of honor, just like Tiny wears his white hood.”
Or Gypsy wearing his Dunce Cap
Valerie Plame sure Moron isn’t she the one that was driving around with the CIA parking permit on her car.
So, the school wouldn’t let a journalist visit, but allowed the Chairperson of the K-12 Finance Committee visit. Duh- the school knows whose hand to kiss.
If they truly wanted to be honest about their practices, they would have granted Kirsten’s visit right away. It’s too late now- they’re only doing damage control.
I love the comment “intolerant tolerant.” So descriptive of American liberals!
“People–good people–have been hurt by her reckless slandering and crude mangling of facts.”
And where’s your facts for this? I cannot believe you people are so intolerant, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Can’t you see it?
Andy123m,
FYI, I’m atheist but received my undergrad from a conservative religious college…and, ah, er…don’t mean to brag but I got A’s in OT and NT. In fact, that’s what led me to a critical reading of the bible and all its malarkey!
Apparently open-minded liberalism only applies to liberals.
Keep up the good work Katherine!
What happened to the 1st Amendment?
KK SHOULD NOT be fired. Period!
“The message throughout Tarek is of peace, tolerance and respect for others.”…and you want her fired because????
“I don’t think I should have to tolerate Kersten’s brand of journalism.”
What, are you tied to a chair and forced to listen to a reading of her columns? Quit being such a pu55y.
Seems to me, the ones calling for her head are not the usual suspect daily bloggers on her column. So, I say go away, go far, far away. Let the rest of us who have no life continue to debate the issues.
She shouldn’t be fired. She is doing a great job at proving to the world how dumb her and her like are. If anybody believes anything she says then they deserve the damage to their brain from the tripe they are consuming.
Powerline - now THERE’S a an unbiased viewpoint. Well done, sir. And hats off to you, as well, Mr. Hinderacker, for just being you.
Yes, as I’ve said before, Katherine should go. Not because she’s a right-winger, but because she’s a lazy, lower-level political columnist. Should Coleman go for the same reasons? Yes, he probably should. Should the Strib hire better columnists than these two hacks. Yes, it definitely should.
Oh, and “reporter”? HA. She’s a joke, her column should be with the cartoons.
You mean like cartoons of Muhammad, dirtyspeed? Oh boy we’d see a “measured” response to that wouldn’t we.
“Powerline - now THERE’S a an unbiased viewpoint.”
Then post a point by point dispute of powerpoints article or shut the tolerant hell up.
Do I think Katherine Kersten deserves the ax? Yes.
I also think she should lose her job :)
A parking permit?….are you kidding me?…..that’s your argument?….I guess the 3 years you spent in 2nd grade weren’t enough.
“If the Strib wants a token conservative columnist, find someone less hateful.”
In other words find someone who isn’t conservative…
Couldn’t have said it any better. At least there’s no argument about what constitutes the modern conservative mindset.
Katherine Kersten, columnist for the Minneapolis Star Tribune, has made a habit of demonizing Muslims in Minnesota.
Demonizing? So by pointing out Muslims controversy (brought apon themselves by their own actions) I.E., Taxi drivers who refuse service to people with seeing eye dogs or people carrying a bottle of wine. A cashier at Target who refuses to scan a pizza because it’s got pork on it or even the “Flying Imams”, is “demonizing”?
“More irresponsibly, Kersten used a tenuous and far-fetched guilt-by-association to suggest that these Minnesota educators were connected to terrorism in the Middle East.”
Pointing out association with groups that have had, in the past, ties with Hammas and Islamic Jihad is off-limits? Why?
“Those reckless accusations led to death threats directed at the school and sent fear through the Muslim community.”
Really? Where is the outrage that sends fear through the blind community when a Muslim student threatens the life of a seeing eye dog?
“To the managers and editors of the Star Tribune, we say: You have allowed Kersten’s racist bullying of a religious minority for too long.”
First off, being Muslim does not make you a member of a “race”, therefore you can not be “racist” against Muslims - many of whom are white, Asian, African and Middle Eastern. Second, Islam is the #2 religion in the world, hardly a minority.
To be clear, I don’t see this issue as left-wing vs. right-wing. It’s an issue of integrity. College students wouldn’t be able to get away with writing papers that can’t be backed up with facts, so why should a professional writer? I enjoy being challenged with a different viewpoint, but it should be based on something solid. Too many columns have been based on hearsay or information gleaned from biased sources.
Yes, the news items have fallen victim to the same problem, whether it’s the Strib or anyone else. There’s a lack of integrity in all mainstream media. Their sources are usually on the fringes of an issue because it makes a more dramatic story. Unfortunately, it doesn’t make an accurate story.
No. It’s a First Amendment issue.
KK can print her opinions, just as anyone else can. I think that Rep. Mindy Greiling should be ashamed of herself for calling for KK’s resignation. As an elected official, she should have some understanding of the First Amendment.
And, I feel that this school is a religious school. There’s nothing wrong with that but then it should be a private school. Religion does not belong in the public school system.
Perhap KK should write with equal vigor about the agenda of the “Friends of Ascension” and their sponsorship of local charter schools. Do they have an agenda? C’mon KK, there is a story there!
I never cease to be amazed at all the people who only believe in free speech when the speaker agrees with them. And, sadly, I am also surprised by the incredible vitriol exhibited by these people. You’d think I’d learn how many people out there react in such shameful hatred any time they are met with even a slightly differing viewpoint.
Gyp[syBiker: Yes, the name Valerie Plame means something to me: the lady who sent her husband off on a junket to Africa so he could spend the time not investigating anything, only to come back and write a report filled with lies that he had no basis for, and the lady who claimed the protection of a law that plainly didn’t apply to her.
SunMan, if I’m understanding your misspelling of her name correctly, you are WAY out of line. That’s just plain inappropriate.
I heartily dislike Kersten’s polarizing column, and would like nothing more than to have the Star Tribune remove her from their pages. HOWEVER, and this is a huge point, to me, I would not like to see the Strip remove her due to a request from a POLITICIAN. To me, politicians meddling in media is even more frightening than the media posting intolerent, right-wing half-truths.
Why don’t folks like Daniel Lynx Bernard and Greiling pool their money together and give it to the school. Maybe throw in a little Wahabi money and then they can preach whatever they want.
And don’t forget these writers are the same people that would blow a cork if they found someone teaching Christianity in a School that receives Public Funds..
That was the point of the whole article. If they didn’t know then they know now. Lord knows we can’t count on the “Halo People” to judge, because they can’t seen to distinguish between religion from Culture.
“College students wouldn’t be able to get away with writing papers that can’t be backed up with facts, so why should a professional writer?”
Where are Mindy’s facts to dispute KK’s?
Yeah thats what I thought.
Then maybe she’s the one where if you asked her neighbors where she worked they’d say the C.I.A. That “Secret Agent” you mean.
“I guess the 3 years you spent in 2nd grade weren’t enough. Is that the lady you’re talking about.”
GypsyBiker saying stuff like that that still doesn’t erase the fact you are by far the biggest idiot to have every graced the pages of this blog….Hands down.
“In other words find someone who isn’t conservative…
“Couldn’t have said it any better. At least there’s no argument about what constitutes the modern conservative mindset.”
Down-town dan
Read the rest of my post. Don’t intolerantly cherry pick your dingle berries.
zzzzz, whether you agree with her or not, explain to me how the First Amendment prohibits Greiling from doing what she did?
Jeremy A, if KK wrote about the Muslim group supporting the service dog issue, she’d gain a little credibility. Otherwise, she’s just a right-wing hack….which is fine, the Strib employs them on the left-wing side too….but she’s not a reporter, she’s not a journalist, she’s just the Rush Limbaugh of the Twin Cities printed page. It’s not against the law…if it sells papers, then that’s exactly what her employer needs.
Boy I sure feel for all those thousands of ignorant people kill around the world by people who have done it in the name of their religion. RELIGION..the thing all those people who have written today against KK hate the most…
But this religion must be an exception to their rule. You would think just the way they treat woman would be enough..but hey thats culture not religion
Never in my wildest dreams on the day of 911 did I think we would be fighting this battle. I assume that on that day we would have the support of the ant religion crowd. I figured for sure they would see the damage of a Religion that would compel someone to kill themselves and innocent people.
But I was wrong.
This is all irrelevant anyway. By labor day this paper is History. KK is on the titanic and she complaining about the deck chairs.
I thank everyone for todays posts, it is clear to anyone who can read who the real hate mongers are. When someone says something you disagree with, spew hate and name calling. Liberals sound more like Nazi’s!
No! This is another example of how intolerant they are on the left. How ridiculous! How sad!
I agree that she shouldn’t be let go because of a politician. Poor writing and logic? Sure, but there are few out there who write blogs or columns or letters who consistently write thoughtful commentary with integrity. So what’s to be done? If they ST got rid of all the poor writers on staff and didn’t allow poor writing in their paper, they’d have nothing to present. While I don’t always agree with KK and find her writing horrible from a junior high standard, I don’t think of her as news and I enjoy that she riles me up to, god this is hoary, “think again.”
Its a two way street AG. Hard core Conservatives are no different. Look at D2. He’ll be the first one to believe any “scientific” study that points to global cooling but will automatically dismiss out of hand any “scientific” study pointing to global warming. Ideologues are loosers.
G.Biker,
Just in case you forgot what part of the 1st Amendment is pertinent to this discussion, I have posted it below. There are major 1st Amendment issues when a member of a state legislature attempts to silence a member of the press. KK’s best move may have been to remain silent and file a later suit. I suspect there would have been grounds to impeach this representative in question if she would have recieved what she demanded.
Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…
KK’s blog attempts to balance out the remainder of this paper. I have not read one comment in which one person pointed to an actual factual inacurracy with any of KK’s postings. Even if there were, her job is to incite readership, which she does a very good job of.
I have to agree with many of you…KK makes us think…she irritates us, makes us want to pull our hair out…etc. However, I do have a problem with intolerance and bigotry. This is America…the melting pot of the world, conquer and divide and we are lost. History has proven this. 4blahs has it right though…history.
Commentary not Journalism…even if the commentary is ignorant it is commentary. KK does damage and she doesn’t care. Poor practice. However, it seems she is still practicing…sad to say.
the lady who sent her husband off on a junket to Africa so he could spend the time not investigating anything, only to come back and write a report filled with lies that he had no basis for, and the lady who claimed the protection of a law that plainly didn’t apply to her.
We might have a new record for most number inaccuracies per words in a single statement. Bravo sir, bravo!
No. It’s a First Amendment issue.
No. It’s not a First Amendment issue. No one’s calling for laws against what she wrote or punitive legal sanctions against her for what she wrote. Or are you really arguing that the First Amendment grants everyone the right to a job at a newspaper?
I rarely agree with Kersten. I actually do agree about this school. But, I think her tactics and presentation were poor, especially when little kids are involved. And, if we’re going to investigate this school, we need to investigate all charter schools that have any connection with religious institutions or religious leaders.
She shouldn’t be fired for this. There are other local newspaper columnists who write incendiary commentary and I know what’s “news” and what’s “opinion”. It might be good to include the word “Opinion” is included with each of their columns. Then maybe people wouldn’t get so riled up.
Skier_Rick - Thanks for your clarifications. I’m not being argumentative, just seemed odd when I first read your statement. Grades don’t impress me. I seem to recall getting an A in ‘Women in the Economy’ class taught by the campus feminist who didn’t see eye to eye with me….we’re all capable of getting A’s whether or not we agree with the content/agenda of the course.
If Katherine lost her job I’m concerned about what the same few people who spend an inordinate amount of their time posting inane comments do?
Average_Guy…Liberals, Radicals or Conservatives…all are capable of spewing hate and name calling, just as you did by call Liberals Nazi’s…you are not so differant it seems.
A 1st Amendment issue will be found anytime a member of congress or a legislature attempts to pass a law restricting the freedom of speech or press. In this case, the representative in question is extremely close to using her position to quite a member of the press. If she does in fact get her wish, and KK is fired, there may be excellent standing for impeachment proceedings.
Just in case anyone does not know what hte 1st Amd. states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
Downtown Dan-
It’s getting warmer out, you think it’s Gullible Warming?
BOO!
bosshogg…you bring a smile to my face…thanks
She’s averaging a response to this article approximately every three (3) minutes. She’s probably getting a raise for this! Way to sell papers.
When someone says something you disagree with, spew hate and name calling. Liberals sound more like Nazi’s!
Wow! From zero to hypocrite in 0.8 seconds. A banner day for new milestones around here.
KK stirs the mind and sometimes stirs folks who shouldn’t be stirred ..
If anything, her commentary should be more fact driven and if she’s going to use sources then it would be best if they were unbiased or at the very least multiple.
Regardless of where you stand, there have been deep divides driven in the last decade based upon politics and off-shooting to religion, basic values, and the meaning of government. Regardless of your preference, the effects of 9/11 have legitimized some overzealous behaviors on both sides of the isle.
KK just happens to be aligned on the ‘right’ and has a far-reaching voice. That voice if left unchecked to some measure could in fact give direction to folks who’s intentions are less than favorable.
If in fact the threats are real, it may emphasize the above point and demonstrate just how far we’ve gone downhill.
The ‘power’ of the press also comes with great responsiblity - perhaps that’s the greatest lesson of all.
Keep her opinion alive.
Kersten should have been axed long ago. The editors who let her spread misinformation should also get pink slips. Opinion should be clearly labelled as opinion and, while Kersten is a columnist, she can’t be allowed to spread lies on a daily basis.
The newspaper has a responsibility to, at the very least, check Kerstens “facts” before publishing them. If they’re not careful, they’ll end up on the losing side of a defamation lawsuit.
Hi, all,
No, Katherine should NOT get the ax, either literally or metaphorically. I generally agree with the things she writes. That said, though, I find that my greatest interest and enjoyment in reading her opinion blog is the debates I have had with other people here. Those debates make me think, reexamine my own beliefs (which are sometimes not well-grounded), and think again (pun intended).
GypsyBiker: Care to address any of the other things I mentioned?
I’m pretty sure I made a few valid points. Also, I haven’t had the time to scan her previous blogs, but I do recall on a few occasions where she has metioned Muslims in good light.
There are major concerns when a member of congress of a legislature attempts to silence a member of the press by way of enacting a law, or using their position as influence. In this case, the rep. in question is most definately using her position in order to quite a member of the press. The rep. is dangerously close to grounds of impeachment for her behavior.
Since I can not copy the text of the 1st Amd., the meaningful portion in this case is as follows:
Congress shall make no law …abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…
*of congress, or a legislature,
I thank everyone for todays posts, it is clear to anyone who can read who the real hate mongers are.
AG, if Nick Colemen had written the same column and you think the response would be any different, you’re kidding yourself. Hilbillies like Tiny, don’t even need to wait for a liberal blog to spew their garbage.
KK provokes dissention and wins everytime! Look at us…high blood pressure anyone?
“The editors who let her spread misinformation should also get pink slips. Opinion should be clearly labelled as opinion and, while Kersten is a columnist, she can’t be allowed to spread lies on a daily basis.”
Does your anger extend to Chris Coleman too? If not, why not? Chris Coleman does a bang-up job inuendo and slander. Wait, lemme guess, you like what Chris Coleman writes, therefore he’s off limits to you biased hate.
“The newspaper has a responsibility to, at the very least, check Kerstens “facts” before publishing them. If they’re not careful, they’ll end up on the losing side of a defamation lawsuit.”
To lose a defamation suit you have to prove reasonable malice was cunduct by one party to harm another party. I doubt there is a court that would take a case against anything written by Katherine. People who comment here? Thats a different story.
Bosshog,
I’m going to get a real job at Subway Sandwiches and cater to overstuffed mealy mouthed bankers. or not
I am not an avid reader of KK’s blog, but when I do, I find it interesting and enjoyable. However, I am concerned with all of the comments referring to her mis-information and facts. If she were in the habbit of writing opinions not backed by facts, do you not think it would be extremely easy to find such facts in her previous posts? I have not read one post from today exposing such facts. So, where are they? Where is this mis-information? If you are unable to find any, then please stop stating that she is writing non-factual stories.
Downtown Dan…gee…I was quoting someone else….undies in a bundle much?
Opps, I ment the brother: Nick Coleman. I live in St. Paul so I should get a pass.
Sorry Dan….made an error…see I am capable of apologizing…
“Average_Guy…Liberals, Radicals or Conservatives…all are capable of spewing hate and name calling, just as you did by call Liberals Nazi’s…you are not so differant it seems. ”
Dear American Woman, 1. I did not call liberals Nazi’s, I said their comments sound like Nazi’s? 2. I know I am not so differant, but I am different!
PS, are you a Guess Who fan?
Katherine Kersten is a pathological liar who doesn’t live in the world G_d created.
And I’m being far more merciful than she deserves.
Newspaper commentators with divers viewpoints are one thing, as long as they conform to journalistic standards. People who just make stuff up to support their right-wing political agenda are just… typical. The STrib needs look no further than Kersten and other conservatives who don’t bother to check their facts to see why they’re hemorrhaging subscribers.
And yes, the people who let her get away with it should also go. Character matters.
All of the anti-Kersten ranting leads me to believe that a lot of people are reading her column. Many are reading it in order to disagree, sure - that’s why I read, but there’s value in that, too. Diversity of opinion, kids. It’s fun!
(Actually, Tiny is real reason I keep reading. Pure gold, every day. You need your own column, t-lites.)
No, I don’t think that KK should be fired. If you have read her column more than once, you know that she is a complete conservative spouting the party line. I happen to disagree with nearly everything she writes, but I especially enjoy the discussions on the blog - she definitely has guts. Sometimes, it’s like watching a train wreck.
I do miss regular topics on the Big Question blog - Eric Black was an excellent writer and Tice provided an interesting conservative voice to the discussions.
“AG, if Nick Colemen had written the same column and you think the response would be any different, you’re kidding yourself. Hilbillies like Tiny, don’t even need to wait for a liberal blog to spew their garbage.”
Hey Gypsy, Nick’s a close personal friend of mind. I wish he would have a blog to his columns….wonder why he doesn’t? If someone was trying to get him fired because they didn’t like his opinions (and I usually disagree with Nick) I’d like to believe my response would be the same, no do not fire him.
Katherine deserves to stay, if no other reason than she deserves a chance to counterpoint her opponents. I hardly think the ranting and raving that I see listed as comments today as constructive or open-minded. If the issues raised by Ms. Kersten are important, or raise people’s hackles, then let the investigations begin, followed by free and open debate.
For those who requested that “opinion be labled as such” (you forget to label yours….just sayin) If it had been another religion, if,if? Who in the heck bought the licence to pick whom they can silence? Soap box anyone? This is my opinion “Schools should be run by the people who pay for them, if you want to get specific call it a private school and pay for it your self! That holds true for anyone who gets so offended by the ground rules are founding fathers spent more than a day deciding. Freedom is just that…it doesn’t come with “only” “If” “I” “like” “it”! Is that O.k with you Mindy? Some how I feel you’ve made yourself the one to ask.
The axe-definitely!
“Bosshog,
I’m going to get a real job at Subway Sandwiches and cater to overstuffed mealy mouthed bankers. or not ”
Yeah!!!
Easy Mayo means easy jagoff!!
Harry Truman said that “if you can not stand the heat; get out of the kitchen.” What is most amusing about this supposed controversy about whether Katherine Kersten (aka Lady Haw Haw) should be fired from the STAR TRIBUNE is that other than the fact that a legislator has called for her column to end, there is no factual basis for the notion that the STAR TRIBUNE is even considering such a move. This is just more conservative smoke and mirrors by raising a red herring about how badly conservatives are treated. Lady Haw Haw is just fanning the flames to attract attention.
The notion that Lady Haw Haw is a serious journalist is a farce. What Lady Haw Haw does is to provide a place where the Republican Party of Minnesota gets to print its current talking points without having to go through the bother of issuing a press release.
Reference was made earlier to a piece that Nick Coleman made shortly after the collapse of the I-35 bridge calling for Governor Pawlenty to take charge and responsibility for the bridge collapse. The bridge collapse occured on his watch in the sixth year of his tenure as Governor. Governor Pawlenty has never taken any responsibility for the I-35 bridge collapse situation. Even though Governor Pawlenty has set the state’s transportation agenda for six years — nothing is ever his responsibility.
Sort of like the new children’s nursery rhyme:
“Minneapolis bridge is falling down,
Falling down, falling down.
Minneapolis bridge is falling down,
Thank Tim Pawlenty.”
So, Lady Haw Haw should stop her whining and do her job. The management of the STAR TRIBUNE can determine the journalistic merit of continuing her column (which is a business decision and NOT 1st Amendment issue) in today’s newspaper environment.
My brother and I emailed about this the other day. The Star Tribune needs Kersten because she is the only voice that sounds different. The other columnists yammer on in the comfort that their liberal opinions, in a liberal paper will be embraced by the liberal readers. If the Star Tribune wishes to expedite its demise then dump Kersten and any of your right-wing readers and those on the left who actually enjoy a little sense of balance in their daily news will certainly dump their subscriptions as well. Be a turtle and pull your head into your shell if you aren’t comfortable hearing opinions that don’t mirror your own.
KK…you got us all going again! Opinions…who would like KK’s job? You all have so many insightful opinions, fascinating. Whether I agree or don’t makes no real differance because it is simply my “OPINION”. I do have a problem when “opinions” cause people to do harm. Perspective is the key. Facts not fiction is another key. Who knew?
“Governor Pawlenty has never taken any responsibility for the I-35 bridge collapse situation.”
Cause and effect vs correlation @sshole. There is plenty to nail him on, so if thats your goal stick to something you can back up with facts. Both sides are so brain washed and gullable. TrueBlue? God what a joke.
Average_Guy…yes sir, I am a Guess Who fan. I’m also a Grateful Dead, Janice Joplin, Bob Dylan, Jimi…etc..fan. Figured out my age group yet? Does this make me terrible? lol
TruBlue,
It is impressive how you point to no facts or information that may be non-factual. Instead, you make a very loose argument on how T. Pa. is responsible for a 50 year old bridge collapsing. If he is responsible, do you not think that there would be grounds for civil suits? I would like to see you make that connection.
And Yes, as an attorney specializing in Con. Law, this is a 1st Amendment issue. However, the issue will not come to the forefront until the Rep. gets her wish and KK is actually fired. At that point, not only would KK have a civil suit, but there would be an impeachment suit in the legislature for the Rep. in question.
I have a son who converted to Islam so I have learned about the religion, reluctantly at first because I don’t believe in religions. From what I I’ve seen Islam is no better nor worse than other religions and Muslims are just folks. But not to you Katherine. You demonize them every chance you get. What’s worse is your comments are proudly ignorant. Be GONE!
Ummm…guys/ladys the bridge needed repairs done a decade before it came down. I may not appreciate Tim Pawlenty however, I do have to say that the blame lies elsewhere.
“Figured out my age group yet? Does this make me terrible?”
Older than dirt?
HBil,
Where are the facts to your assertion? How is KK demonizing Muslims at every chance she gets? State Facts!
AG, I’m not talking about “be fired or not”, I’m talking about the rhetoric in the comments. Nick would get just as much bile from the Right if he asked the same question KK did.
Jeremy A, I never said some of your points weren’t valid. My issue is whether you consider KK a “journalist” or just a “conservative agitator”. If she’s written a column complimentary of the Muslim community, I missed it.
jmaynard, you kinda missed the point. Powerline suggests that the Bush Admin had never retaliated against a member of the press for writing something negative. Try harder next time. Or spend your time teaching Con Law to Mr. Hinderaker…he could use it.
The best part about today’s column? The fact that so many new commenters have come out of the woodwork!
Sorry for the repeated comments above, my computer was freezing.
This idea that if Roger Moe had been elected as governor, the first thing he would have done would be to repair the 35W bridge is plain stupid. STUPID. That bridge would have fallen anyway. The it would be Roger Moe being blamed not TP. So where would you be then TrueBlue?
“I have a son who converted to Islam so I have learned about the religion,”
HBill,
I have a friend that knows a guy whose cousin slept with this chick when she was dating an NFL Quaterback so i have learned about Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
Hey JonR and EBF - California Supreme Court just struck down CA’s ban on same-sex marriage.
I’m glad to see it… your time is getting closer!
Politicians calling for the heads of journalists is s seamy practice more appropriately assiociated with banana republics and Vlad Putin’s Russia. Perhaps the good people of Roseville need to take a closer look at who they are sending to the statehouse. Maybe KK is not the one who needs to be “fired”.
You are not a journalist and I resent the Strib for placing your column in Metro vs Opinion and Commentary. Your writing is NEVER about news, but how an event or situation supports the culture war issue you wish to inveigh about. In truth, your agenda is always overtly or covertly slanderous. I really wish the Strib would simply list your “topic” of the day with a link to Powerline and let THEM publish your half-baked drivel. I think you’d find a more receptive audience there for your overwrought sense of injury and wingnut gossip that seems to motivate your essay subject selection.
American Woman, yes I pretty much got your age group down. I can therefore consider you an experienced, mature woman of good musical choice. Even though our politics might differ we are of the same generation. Love Janis too!
Janis sucks. SUUUUUUCKKKS.
Melting pot people…America is a melting pot…all different races, religions…figure it out…pitting ourselves against each other doesn’t do any good. Unity is Victory. I am not so blind as to think this will ever happen though. Again…opinions, everyone has a right to them.
4blahs…I’m glad you think so…leaves more for Average-Guy and myself.
“Melting pot people…America is a melting pot”
Actually the PC term is now ball of clay. Get with the program.
“Janis sucks. SUUUUUUCKKKS.”
Naw she blows. She blows chunks and chokes on it.
You can have her. Terrible. Absolutley terrible. That goes for the dead too.
Average_Guy…thank you.
Back off American Woman, AG is a married man.
“Janis sucks. SUUUUUUCKKKS.” Sounds like something my wife would say. 4blahs, you’re too young to even appreciate her, you probably like that rap crap! Joplin got that great voice, like she just gargled with sand!
Oh lord, wont you buy me a mercedes benz ?
My friends all drive porsches, I must make amends.
Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends,
So lord, wont you buy me a mercedes benz ?
Oh lord, wont you buy me a color tv ?
Dialing for dollars is trying to find me.
I wait for delivery each day until three,
So oh lord, wont you buy me a color tv ?
Oh lord, wont you buy me a night on the town ?
Im counting on you, lord, please dont let me down.
Prove that you love me and buy the next round,
Oh lord, wont you buy me a night on the town ?
Everybody!
Oh lord, wont you buy me a mercedes benz ?
My friends all drive porsches, I must make amends,
Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends,
So oh lord, wont you buy me a mercedes benz ?
Thats it!
Katherine, YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
You blew the call on this school, went in with a preconcieved idea on how you wanted the story framed and diregarded the facts. Now that may pass for journalism on FOX News or for research if your Ann Coulter but realistically is not journalism at all, but thinly veiled intolerance poorly disguised as opinion. Your contribution to the paper are to the community are small and mean like politics and frankly if I owned the paper I would spend my money elsewhere. I assume the pay you for the predictable drivel you write.
Yes, fire her. We must eradicate all speech that does not conform with the Liberal Agenda or speaks out against Government Re-Education Centers (aka Public Schools).
Vote Conservative
http://www.wilgeno.com
A_G,
Janis does the best Me and Bobby McGee
4blahs…ball of clay, does that refer to your cranium? Just a little nudge as a word is a word is a word. Nit picking is so boring.
“4blahs, you’re too young to even appreciate her, you probably like that rap crap!”
If you want to talk abotu music Im prepared. I bet I know more about the music from your “era” than you do. Ill bet my nuts on it.
“you probably like that rap”
Only Bone Thugz in Harmony.
4blahs…geez…so am I. This is a blog. Your age is showing.
I would like to see TIZA admit KK for a tour of the school and then see what she has to say about it. I think it’s ridiculous that she is being blamed for some wackjobs threatening the school. There are always going to be wackjobs out there who are going to respond in some sort of extreme fashion. You can’t blame her for that. She wasn’t telling anyone to blow the school up, she just wanted it to be subjected to the same laws as every other public school in the state. Is that too much to ask b/c they are Muslim??
My neighbor is spraying chemicals in his yard right now to kill the dandelions.. should i go inform him of those dandelions’ “right” to live?? Give me a break.
“I bet I know more about the music from your “era” than you do. Ill bet my nuts on it.”
Since I’m not a big music freak you probably do, and no thanks I don’t want your nuts.
However, Janis is in the R&R Hall of Fame so there’s a lot of people who did like her. So there THHHHHHHHHH
“4blahs…ball of clay, does that refer to your cranium? Just a little nudge as a word is a word is a word. Nit picking is so boring.”
In a melting pot the pieces lose all their original charectoristics they originally had and become a part of the whole. In the US we are collection of different types of people all maintianing pieces of our original cultures. Like a ball of clay. You can see the shape, we are all a part of the ball. But you can still recognize the original colors and charectoristics of each piece in the whole. Seeeeeeee?
When I think about Janice I think “Summer Time”, my absolute favorite. By the way I like Slayer also. Lets see Enya, B52’s, John Mayer…tend to be eclectic in my choices….Barry White and a little country…whatever.
4blahs: Please, it’s Bone Thugz ‘N Harmony. There’s no I in “IN”. Bone Thugz would be ashamed at your grammer.
YES! Oh Yes! You’re right! I like that so much better…thank you 4blahs! I have been enlightened…honey, I see the light! Too cool.
“However, Janis is in the R&R Hall of Fame so there’s a lot of people who did like her. So there THHHHHHHHHH”
Yeah, and? A lot of people like to pee on each other too. The Music Hall of Fame is a joke. Lets see….. ZZ Top is in and Rush isnt.
I do believe poor KK got lost in the shuffle here. “What went wrong Auntie Em?”.
Anyhow…my hats off to the few and I mean few liberals on this board who have remained constant in their views on Religion in our society, weather its Christian or Muslim or whatever. There are a few and you are to be commended.
Otherwise you other people………it’s a shameful display of picking and choosing your stance depending on how big you what your diversity Halo to be.
I don’t care who its. I don’t want anybody cramming their religion down my throat weather its Christianity or Islam or Environmentalism
“I would like to see TIZA admit KK for a tour of the school and then see what she has to say about it.”
DJ I agree. But it has to be a drop in visit with no schedule appointment. No staged event like Mindy saw.
“ZZ Top is in and Rush isnt.”
RUSH????? Bruahahahahahahhahha
DJ Grow up!! Quit whining. The article obviously was intended to spark outrage on the part of anyone who doesn’t like Muslims or the fact that this charter school has an Arabic name. And according to several people who are not spokeswomen for the Self Righteous Right it does operate under the same laws as other charter schools. This is more of her gotcha hatemongering opinion trying to be journalism.
DJ - Do you think KK’s opinion would really change with a tour? She’s set her mind. She isn’t objective. She will certainly see only what she wants to see. Nothing would change.
No, she isn’t responsible for other’s threatening the school or the children. She just started the fire, so to speak. It flamed up from there.
“DJ I agree. But it has to be a drop in visit with no schedule appointment. No staged event like Mindy saw.”
I agree completely.
“RUSH????? Bruahahahahahahhahha”
Yep, best musicians Ive ever seen. If you can find a better drummer than Neil Pert Id like to hear about it.
Average_Guy, if you’re still tuned in, thank you for your loyalty to the classics. Hug your wife. Tonight listen to Janice.
“Average_Guy, if you’re still tuned in, thank you for your loyalty to the classics. Hug your wife. Tonight listen to Janice.”
I love the music from that era too with the exceptions of The Grateful Dead and Janis Joplin. Over rated.
What I really want to know is,
In the Strib office, do Nick Coleman and Katherine leave whoopie cushions on each others’ chairs?
Regarding today’s topic,
I don’t think Katherine should be fired for writing her scoop about T.I.Z Academy. She should be fired if no one reads her column, or if she gets convicted of libel by a jury of her peers. I don’t see that happening.
I think Rep. Greiling committed a lot of the same rhetorical sins in her letter to the editor as Katherine does regularly in her columns and blog posts. Additionally, for an elected representative to call for a member of the press to be suppressed is problematic for me.
I think that the principal of the TIZ Academy spins this issue with equal velocity as Katherine, just in the opposite direction.
The 1st Amendment question I haven’t heard anyone raise is the classical ethical question of shouting fire in a crowded theater. If you read Katherine’s writing frequently you can see a recurring theme of distrust of Muslims and suspicion that they are trying to hijack our country. Her report about TIZ Academy fits the pattern but it additionally calls the public’s attention to a place full of children in a social climate where some people may wish to inflict harm. This gives me pause.
I said in a previous post that she should be reprimanded for writing a (sensationalist) article about a topic that would draw the attention of (potentially violent) haters to a place where children are trying to go to school. It’s unfortunate that parents of this school’s students are having to worry that some crank will carry out the threats that the school has received.
Katherine is within her rights to write what she wrote, and the newspaper was within their rights to print it, but both should question their motives and wonder whether they acted recklessly.
I think if Katherine was purely motivated by a taxpayer’s concern to get the school investigated, she has plenty of contacts in state government and could have quietly brought some scrutiny on this school with a few phone calls. But that wouldn’t have sold a newspaper on the same day. Instead she shouted from her bully pulpit and stopped just short of calling on her fellow Christians to head down there with torches and pitchforks. If any of those kids actually gets hurt, Katherine’s burden (and the Strib editors’) will be contemplating what her role was in it.
Star Trib is a weak, weak paper. Anyone who has had the opportunity to read a good city newspaper is likely to feel embarrassed that this is what we have to offer locally. Most of the Star Tribune’s real news is copied and pasted from real newspapers or the newswire. Its really tight, well written commentary is imported from columnists who reside elsewhere. Occasionally I actually wince at the sloppy editing.
I read the NY Times to get informed and get my comics fix from the Star Tribune and am entertained by the Strib’s opinion blogs. It’s a satisfying combination of media for me.
I disagree w/ Kersten about 99 percent of the time and often don’t think her arguments and assertions hold water, but she sure stimulates conversation. A person who generates that much dialogue is at least of some value.
dubble_a_ron
The 1st Amendment question I haven’t heard anyone raise is the classical ethical question of shouting fire in a crowded theater.
The issue or rule you are referring to is speech can only be banned or suppressed when it is directed to and likely to incite imminent lawless action (e.g. a riot).
Her article could never be considered to be even within that rule. Not even close.
Yep, best musicians Ive ever seen. If you can find a better drummer than Neil Pert Id like to hear about it.
Please.
Ed Blackwell
Max Roach
Danny Richmond
Art Blakey
Billy Higgins
Tony Williams
Our own local guys, JT Bates and Dave King.
If you want to limit to rock drummers,
John Bonham
our own local guy Ian Prince.
That’s nowhere near a complete list, but a good start.
Pert Schmert.
Polar bears get legislative speicies protection and Chicago votes out the Foie Gras ban.
At the end of the day everything cancels each other out for a perfect harmonous balance of reality.
Lets Dance.
KATHERINE SHOULD NOT BE FIRED PERIOD!!
newbiz
Power Line is a conservative blog run by three attorneys - two of whom are fellows of the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank. Their opinion on the subject is hardly going to be representative of a vast number of people and free from bias. Greiling may not be entirely accurate either, but she’s at least an elected official which presumably means she represents the views of those who voted for her.
Do you even realize what you are saying? You are advocating that because Greiling is a government elected official, her opinion on censorship should be followed more than a non-elected person. Greiling is using her position in government to advocate the silencing of a view she disagrees with. It’s that simple. Again, do you realize that the type of censorship you are advocating is the type of censorship that the first amendment guards against!!!
GypsyBiker
zzzzz, whether you agree with her or not, explain to me how the First Amendment prohibits Greiling from doing what she did?
The first amendment guarantees the freedom of the press for governmental intrusion. Greiling is a government elected official using her position and stature as a government official in calling for the firing of KK. Look at how Greiling signed the letter. she signed as a congressperson and even cited her roles in government. That’s government censorship…plain and simple.
Downtown Dan says:
No. It’s not a First Amendment issue. No one’s calling for laws against what she wrote or punitive legal sanctions against her for what she wrote. Or are you really arguing that the First Amendment grants everyone the right to a job at a newspaper?
First you are wrong you don’t’ have to only have laws against what someone writes or punitive legal sanctions to violate the first amendment. You only need government trying to abridge the right of the press. Again, a government official calling for the resignation of a person because they printed something the government official dislikes or disagrees with is exactly what the first amendment guard against.
DAR says
Instead she shouted from her bully pulpit
Greiling is the one shouting from her pulpit, as a US elected government official, and bullying KK and the Trib to bend to Greiling’s will. It is a classic freedom of the press issue.
Mthalo has elegantly stated the obvious in his short concise statement…. Rep. Mindy Greiling is the real thug in this, using a position of power to limit freedom of the press.
Conlawhas also elegantly stated the obvious…..For a sitting member of the state legislature to demand someone get fired for writing something she disagrees with is beyond the pale. It is pure bullying, an abuse of power, and totally unconstitutional (both state and federal I might add. I thought you liberals liked diversity and embrassing other points of view? Instea, you try to silence those you disagree with.
zzzzz78759 also has stated the obvious….No. It’s a First Amendment issue. KK can print her opinions, just as anyone else can. I think that Rep. Mindy Greiling should be ashamed of herself for calling for KK’s resignation. As an elected official, she should have some understanding of the First Amendment.
Tracy also posts the obvious…. HOWEVER, and this is a huge point, to me, I would not like to see the Strip remove her due to a request from a POLITICIAN. To me, politicians meddling in media is even more frightening than the media posting intolerent, right-wing half-truths.
J.D. also states the obvious….Just in case you forgot what part of the 1st Amendment is pertinent to this discussion, I have posted it below. There are major 1st Amendment issues when a member of a state legislature attempts to silence a member of the press. KK’s best move may have been to remain silent and file a later suit. I suspect there would have been grounds to impeach this representative in question if she would have recieved what she demanded.
Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…
A 1st Amendment issue will be found anytime a member of congress or a legislature attempts to pass a law restricting the freedom of speech or press. In this case, the representative in question is extremely close to using her position to quite a member of the press. If she does in fact get her wish, and KK is fired, there may be excellent standing for impeachment proceedings.
Just in case anyone does not know what hte 1st Amd. states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
There are major concerns when a member of congress of a legislature attempts to silence a member of the press by way of enacting a law, or using their position as influence. In this case, the rep. in question is most definately using her position in order to quite a member of the press. The rep. is dangerously close to grounds of impeachment for her behavior.
Furthermore, newbiz
To be clear, I don’t see this issue as left-wing vs. right-wing. It’s an issue of integrity. College students wouldn’t be able to get away with writing papers that can’t be backed up with facts, so why should a professional writer? I enjoy being challenged with a different viewpoint, but it should be based on something solid. Too many columns have been based on hearsay or information gleaned from biased sources.
Are you even aware of what you are writing…if reporters were only to report for source that are unbiased then Woodward and Bernstein could have never written about Watergate. They only had one source – Deep Throat – who we know now as W. Mark Felt. He was past over for the directorship of the FBI. He was very incredibly biased YET that didn’t make what he was say any less true!!!
Newbiz, you need to really think about what you are posting before you hit the submit button.
“DJ Grow up!! Quit whining.”
I guess I missed the part where I was whining. And if the school has nothing to hide, she should be able to go into the school and find nothing to complain about. I would think the school would welcome a chance to prove to the taxpayers that they are perfectly within the law.
Gotta run!!
“If you can find a better drummer than Neil Pert Id like to hear about it.”
“If you can find a better drummer than Neil Pert Id like to hear about it.”
bullwinkler and AmericanWoman
Just change the school from Muslim to Christian.
Would you be up in arms if students who were not Christians had to wait 2 hours at the end of each day in study hall while the other students went to Mass before those non-Christian students were taken home in the bus.
If you would think that wrong and a violation, then the TIZA is in violation because that is exactly what they are doing. TIZA officials have admitted it. That is an UNDISPUTED fact.
bullwinkler and AmericanWoman
Just change the school from Muslim to Christian.
Would you be up in arms if students who were not Christians had to wait 2 hours at the end of each day in study hall while the other students went to Mass before those non-Christian students were taken home in the bus.
If you would think that wrong and a violation, then the TIZA is in violation because that is exactly what they are doing. TIZA officials have admitted it. That is an UNDISPUTED fact.
“If you can find a better drummer than Neil Pert Id like to hear about it.”
Gene Krupa!
bullwinkler
You blew the call on this school, went in with a preconcieved idea on how you wanted the story framed and diregarded the facts. Now that may pass for journalism on FOX News or for research if your Ann Coulter
Your bias is showing…the biggest disregarder for facts in the most recent history was DAN RATHER and he was fired for it. Guess you need to have a little more tolerance or pick the log out of your own eye.
The issue or rule you are referring to is speech can only be banned or suppressed when it is directed to and likely to incite imminent lawless action (e.g. a riot).
Her article could never be considered to be even within that rule. Not even close.
I agree, MOI, that’s why I said she shouldn’t be fired and why I concluded that Katherine and the Strib are publishing within their rights. The thing in Greiling’s letter that made me think the most, though, was where she said Katherine
…threatened the safety of the children and staff at the school, which has been forced to take extra security measures in the wake of recent death threats
Is this a little hyperbolic? Sure. that’s why I said Greiling is guilty of some of the same rhetorical sins as Katherine. But I think a person helps focus wrath on children, even if they are justified on some level, may be doing the right thing for the wrong reason, and acting recklessly. But I suppose you could argue that it’s inherently reckless for us all to get in our cars and drive to work every morning too.
JD
I too specialize in Con Law - doesn’t one only need nominal damages?
A_G, I kinda see Gene Krupa on par with Neil Pert.
I am aware this drummer debate is entirely subjective.
I have absolutely no idea on what happened with those posts.
American Woman, I’ll sing “Summertime” tonight to my wife to get her into the mood. No wait…belly laughing will not be the mood I’m looking for.
“Please.”
John Bonham? LAAAAAMMMMEEEEE.
Jazzophiles…..
“That’s nowhere near a complete list, but a good start.
Pert Schmert.”
Thank You Dubble-a-Ron.
DAR
I read your previous post to mean that you did think that her article on TIZA was within the ‘fire in a crowded theater’ rule.
You don’t think it is or you do think it is?
DAR
I read your previous post to mean that you did think that her article on TIZA was within the ‘fire in a crowded theater’ rule.
You don’t think it is or you don’t think it is?
Sorry I am trying to work, post and read the CA decision all at the same time.
I keep double posting and making errors - my apologies to everyone.
moi - Nobody is suggesting taking away Katherine’s little pen and duct taping her mouth shut. It’s just my opinion that her brand of journalism does not belong in a newspaper that wants to be taken seriously. It’s like making Michael Moore a news anchor for ABC.
She can write about her opinion all day long and fill half the newspaper with it if she wants - as long as it doesn’t purposely mislead people.
AG - You honestly think these posts show that liberals are hate-mongers? Which one of my posts today resorted to namecalling or inflammatory statements? I’ll give you some time to research that while I crawl into my Nazi cave to plan the completion of the liberal takeover of mainstream media. We almost have Bill O’Reilly on board, then our dastardly plan will be complete…
“It’s like making Michael Moore a news anchor for ABC.”
I saw the light i saw the light
no more darkness no more night
Now i’m so happy no sorrow in sight
Praise the lord i saw the light.
- Hank Williams
“AG - You honestly think these posts show that liberals are hate-mongers?”
newbiz, you are innocent today of such posts.
“It’s just my opinion that her brand of journalism does not belong in a newspaper that wants to be taken seriously”
Oh now the liberals want to tell the public what should be taken seriously? Is that a tolerant serious or a diverivied serious. Or Maybe it an alternative lifestyle serious.
More news…
Bush’s little comment in Israel this morning comparing an unnamed Obama to an unnamed Senator “wanting to talk to Hitler” when the Nazi’s rolled into Poland in 1939 is causing a small sensation…
newbiz says:
moi - Nobody is suggesting taking away Katherine’s little pen and duct taping her mouth shut.
Did you read Greiling’s letter? Greiling is Calling for KK to be fired, i.e. to be silenced.
Sharon
Quit spreading lies. Tell the truth. The Prez did not refer to Obama, did not mean Obama in his speech and the White House has repeatedly said that the Prez was not referring or mean Obama in his speech.
“…did not mean Obama in his speech and the White House has repeatedly said that the Prez was not referring or mean Obama in his speech.”
How do you know what he ment?
“The president did not name Obama or any other Democrat, but White House aides privately acknowledged to CNN that the remarks were aimed at the presidential candidate and others in his party.”
-CNN.com
I wonder which aides?
“As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history,” he said while speaking to Israel’s parliament, the Knesset.”
“How do you know what he ment?”
4blahs, are you kidding me? MOI knows what everyone is thinking when they write or say something. Isn’t it obvious?
MOI, show me where Greiling has “used her governmental authority” to quash KK’s right to speak. Does the finance committee have some sort of oversight at the Strib?
As far as I can see, she simply signed her letter with her title so as to provide full disclosure. Had she not, you can bet people would have been all over her.
Do legislators lose their first amendment rights simply because they’re legislators? I don’t see any claim that she’s introducing any legislation against KK or the Strib based on her position. Sorry, but I think you and JD are wrong on this one.
Im asking MOI. How does he claim to know what thoughts are in Bush’s head?
4blahs
How do you know what he ment?
Because the White House and Prez told the press what the Prez meant.
@ 4blahs & dubble_a_ron,
blahs is right - jazz drumming and rock drumming is totally incomparable. Ditto with Jazz anything and rock anything.
I’d say that Pert is the best rock drummer of his generation, by far. the bonham comparison is silly - trying to find more the talented of the two would be impossible, and they’re probably about equal in that department in terms of creativity and style. technically, pert is far superior, but Pert came into his prime a good decade+ later, during which time rock drumming technique had evolved substantially.
almost sounds like that idiot on here the other day that was like, “iron maiden couldn’t play the stuff modern metal bands play, they weren’t good enough even in their prime”. impossible comparison.
moi,
White House aides have admitted what was meant.
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid.
“Because the White House and Prez told the press what the Prez meant.”
Holy Sh:t!! And you’re going with that?
MOI,
I was wondering what your opinion is on this charge? If your familiar with it.
“Mom indicted in deadly My Space hoax
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) — A federal grand jury on Thursday indicted a Missouri woman for her alleged role in perpetrating a hoax on the online social network MySpace against a 13-year-old neighbor who committed suicide.
Drew was charged with one count of conspiracy and three counts of accessing protected computers without authorization to get information used to inflict emotional distress on the girl.”
And the White House and our esteemed “Prez” ALWAYS tell the truth, right?
Because the White House and Prez told the press what the Prez meant.
Because the American people can trust that any Administration, let alone this one, really mean what they say they mean?
I’m going to assume your comment is in jest, MOI. I’d have a heart attack if you really believe you can take government officials at their word.
Sharon
And the White House and our esteemed “Prez” ALWAYS tell the truth, right?
What are you saying that the Prez was telling the truth in the speech and not telling the truth later after the speech? Do you see how illogical that sounds?
Wow I bet you objected to the opponents of Obama when they siad Obama said what he meant in San Fran and was just trying to cover up his gaff.
Or do you think Obama was lying too when he changed or explained his meaning of the words he said in San Fran.
“almost sounds like that idiot on here the other day that was like, “iron maiden couldn’t play the stuff modern metal bands play, they weren’t good enough even in their prime”. impossible comparison.”
I thought that was you?
“What are you saying that the Prez was telling the truth in the speech and not telling the truth later after the speech? Do you see how illogical that sounds?”
Its called back pedalling.
Jack
I’m going to assume your comment is in jest, MOI. I’d have a heart attack if you really believe you can take government officials at their word.
No it is not in jest. And no I don’t believe eveything gov’t officials say - but I tend to beleive people when they try to explain what they meant right after they said it unless there has been some intermeddling occurance between the time said and the time it was defined to mean.
In this case, Bush siad it this morning, the media questioned him on it today, and he clarified and explained it today. I don’t see any intermeddling occurance.
If the Prez wanted to mean Obama, he would have said Obama or after he would have said it was about Obama. He did not in either case.
What are you saying that the Prez was telling the truth in the speech and not telling the truth later after the speech? Do you see how illogical that sounds?
Not at all illogical. It’s more like Human Nature 101 -
Make a back-handed insinuation during a speech and then, when confronted about the perceived (and most likely true) meaning of said insinuation, claim that’s not at all what you meant (even if it is), because there’s really no way to definitively prove insinuation.
I’m sure we all recognize this communication technique as a favorite among teenagers.
“If the Prez wanted to mean Obama, he would have said Obama or after he would have said it was about Obama. He did not in either case.”
Well hand this man a cigar….
GSAHA:
With regard to Powerline being unbiased, and telling me to shut the hell up:
I re-read Johnson’s blog entry. No question, Johnson made some valid points. Other parts of his missive were opinions or opinionated interpretations. I’ll read it again, if you want, but that’s my take after a second reading.
But do you really think Powerline is unbiased? If you do, then I understand why you would tell someone you disagree with (in the sightless anonymity of a posting) to shut the hell up. Way to debate an issue.
No question that Greiling’s call for censorship is completely whacked. The point is that KK’s hiding behind Powerline, a very conservative blog, whether you want to admit it or not. A few valid points by Johnson do not change the fact that, once again, KK’s backup or source is someone on her side of the cultural divide.
Take care, and chill out.
Actually, I didn’t comment on whether or not he was telling the truth - your reading comprehension skills are being sorely tested.
I simply think that Bush was, yet again, being stupid.
Do you think that the White House and the President are always truthful, or not? I thought your statement was in jest, also.
If the Prez wanted to mean Obama, he would have said Obama or after he would have said it was about Obama. He did not in either case.
I believe you are assuming, in this case, that the President and his speechwriters are above snarky back-handedness. Personally, I do not believe that to be the case.
MOI, can you address my 3:07 post? I’m not trying to be a samrt@ss, but if I’m mistaken let me know.
DAR
I read your previous post to mean that you did think that her article on TIZA was within the ‘fire in a crowded theater’ rule.
You don’t think it is or you do think it is?
I don’t think Katherine broke the “fire in a crowded theater” Rule no. She merely started down the path into what to me is an ethical gray area.
So what is the standard of scrutiny for determining whether an agent of the government has abridged a citizens 1st Amendment Rights by exercising their own? If Bush had expressed an opinion in a public forum that Dan Rather should be fired, would he have been abridging Rather’s 1st Amendment rights? Has Rep Greiling acted in an official capacity to compel the Strib to sack Katherine, other than including her title in a publicly expressed opinion?
fairandbalanced,
I don’t know anything about powerpoint being reight/left or balanced. But if you have a problum with the point by point issues powerpoint raised then dispute them with facts. Everyone that complained about the article KK wrote will not show which issue she raised to be false and what they see as the truth is. Its all “she’s wrong” with nothing to back it up.
I’ll take care and chill out. Thanks
Unbiased opinions? What opinion is unbiased? I’ve never met anyone that is completely unbiased.
fairandbalanced I should aplogize for telling you to shut the hell up. It was more a general statement and not directed at you specifically although I wass addressing you comment at the time.
I wass school by “Brimn2001″ and “Mark A” in blog etiquette back when I was still a blog pup.
it’s their fault.
GS, on the other hand, if you discard the innuendo and assumptions Powerline makes, I see nothing that shows any of Greilings conclusions were wrong.
Kersten’s column is the best thing at the Startribune. Any legislator in this country that has the gall to suggest that a writer with whom she disagrees should be fired belongs in a fascist state. Is that what we are becoming? The absolute arrogance of that demand is mind boggling.
“I wass school by “Brimn2001″ and “Mark A” in blog etiquette back when I was still a blog pup.”
Those were the days, my friend
We thought they’d never end
We’d sing and dance forever and a day
We’d live the life we’d choose
We’d fight and never lose
For we were young and sure to have our way
I sure am going to miss tiny and gsaha after they move to california. now they don’t have to pretend with their wives and children….
Sharon
You posted
Actually, I didn’t comment on whether or not he was telling the truth - your reading comprehension skills are being sorely tested.
That was in reponse to my response to your comment
And the White House and our esteemed “Prez” ALWAYS tell the truth, right?
I took your comment to be sarcastic and to mean that Bush does not always tell the truth and this is one of those times that Bush was not telling the truth. Are you are telling me that your comment meant that he does always tell the truth?
I just want to make sure I understand the whole point of today; Katherine hates Muslims, says mean and nasty things about Muslims. She insights anger towards anyone with whom she disagrees. Right? Let’s looks at what has been said about Katherine today:
minnesota says:
May 15th, 2008 at 10:08 am - calls Katherine a “hatemonger”. When has she been guilty of that? Just name ONE TIME.
zpgmom says:
May 15th, 2008 at 10:14 am - “Ms. Kersten is a caricature of a columnist who spews hate in the guise of conservativism.” Please show me ONE TIME she has spewed “hate”. You may disagree with what she says, but none of it is hate speech.
s.grooms says:
May 15th, 2008 at 10:32 am - “People–good people–have been hurt by her reckless slandering and crude mangling of facts.” Who are these people she hurt? Can everyone who was hurt by Katherines “reckless slandering” please stand up?
Anyone?
Come on, there has to be someone!
daveharmeyer says:
May 15th, 2008 at 10:47 am - “Even though I find you to be a bigot and a mouth piece for the ultra rich, I believe the hate you preach is protected and the Star-Tribune should keep you on staff.” Gee thanks. Wait… Is that comment… Ummmm. Bigot?
So, it’s not even 11 A.M and shes been caled a hatemonger and a bigot. In the 11th hour someone advocates mameing her with an AX! Nice.
I’d say that Pert is the best rock drummer of his generation, by far.
yeah, of the prog rock era.
I’m glad my tombstone won’t say,
“here lies the best drummer of the prog rock era.” I think appeals to Pert’s technical proficiency are one-dimensional. If your only criteria is the ability to play straight 32nd notes really fast yet precisely, yep Pert’s the king. There’s all sorts of things you can do with the drums requiring different kinds of technique. Pert’s a great drummer but I think he’s a mile wide and an inch deep.
Sharon
Hit the submit button to quickly
Wanted to add.
Or are you saying that this time he was or was not telling the truth?
taaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaanks!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wha…..? Man are you gonna get it.
Come and listen to a story about a man named Jed
A poor mountaineer, barely kept his family fed,
Then one day he was shootin at some food,
And up through the ground came a bubblin crude.
Oil that is, black gold, Texas tea.
Well the first thing you know ol Jed’s a millionaire,
Kinfolk said “Jed move away from there”
Said “Californy is the place you ought to be”
So they loaded up the truck and moved to Beverly.
Hills, that is. Swimmin pools, movie stars.
Well now its time to say good by to Jed and all his kin.
And they would like to thank you folks fer kindly droppin in.
You’re all invited back a gain to this locality
To have a heapin helpin of their hospitality
Hillybilly that is. Set a spell, Take your shoes off.
Y’all come back now, y’hear?.
“There’s all sorts of things you can do with the drums requiring different kinds of technique. Pert’s a great drummer but I think he’s a mile wide and an inch deep.”
Blasphemer.
What are you going to do GO? Take her behind the blog shack and give her a blog spanking?
After all today’s posts, I’m completely convinced that if your screen name also provides a link, you really need to get a life, I’m sorry your parents didn’t pay enough attention to you and you really aren’t as important as you think you are.
But that’s just my opinion…..Now I gotta run!
“What are you going to do GO? Take her behind the blog shack and give her a blog spanking?”
Spankin and shankin
moi,
Mr. Bush has not always been completely truthful. I have not always been completely truthful.
This time, I have no opinion on whether or not he is telling the truth.
CNN does not think so. His aides do not think so. FOX is a bit hard to read.
“I’m glad my tombstone won’t say,
“here lies the best drummer of the prog rock era.””
Did you know Cap Anson, besides being the biggest bigot in the history of baseball next to Tyrus Cobb, had the coolest Epitaph? It says “Here Lies Cap Anson, A Man who Hit .300.”
“I’m completely convinced that if your screen name also provides a link, you really need to get a life,”
Tiny’s favorite is the Tron guy. jmaynerd or something like that
If you are at all questioning if a politician tells the truth…hmmm…it’s in my humble opinion that that is an oxymoron. I’ve never known one to tell the truth, the whole truth, so help them God. Oh, took a risk there didn’t I?
W.C. Fields’ epitaph says,
“I’d rather be in Philly.”
“Spankin and shankin ”
With a shiv? I guess by Newbiz’s standards you’re justified because she teased, er um, bullied you.
I think appeals to Pert’s technical proficiency are one-dimensional.
I don’t disagree. Technical proficiency in music is just one dimension. A lot of my favorite musicians aren’t the most technically amazing, but they’re very creative, great songwriters, etc
That Tron guy is HILLLLLLArius!!! I love the outfit. Nothing wrong with being a nerd if you’re going to do it with some style.
Seems very few think the Prez was telling the truth.
“Technical proficiency in music is just one dimension.”
Obviously. Some drummers keep a beat, that guy actually PLAYS the instrument.
“With a shiv?”
Wtih a skin flute
wow…gsaha…wow…pictoral
wow…gsaha…wow…pictoral
GypsyBiker
Sorry I missed your post until now. I will try to address the 1st amendment more clearly.
Sorry, but I think you and JD are wrong on this one.
Gypsy, first you do realize you are telling two constitutional scholars who have went to school studied the constitution and now practice in that area of the law that they are wrong and you are right. Now I am not saying that we could never be wrong and that you could never be right, it’s just that you are a non-schooled non-expert going up against two established experts.
However, as I do enjoy the first amendment - you are entitled to your opinion and I do appreciate your questions.
MOI, show me where Greiling has “used her governmental authority” to quash KK’s right to speak.
Greiling is part of the government and what she says whether she intends it to or not has the appearance as the authority of the gov’t or in the very least as an opinion or position of the gov’t. She is part of gov’t and she is telling someone they cannot or should not be speaking in a manner that is protected under the first amendment.
Does the finance committee have some sort of oversight at the Strib?
I would not think so but I don’t think that has anything to do with the issue. Although it could call into question her bias, if she is connected to helping pass funding or oversight for the school.
Do legislators lose their first amendment rights simply because they’re legislators?
No not as individual citizens. However, as a gov’t official she is held to a different standard, as a gov’t official they can’t advocate the gov’t infringing on others’ first amendment rights. Courts have ruled that gov’t cannot even have the impression they are trying to stop someone’s free speech or free press rights. (chilling free speech issues) Nowhere in the letter does she re-assure the reader that she is not advocating a formal gov’t opinion or position. Nowhere does she try to explain that this is her personal opinion and not one for the gov’t. In fact, as you even pointed out she signed the bottom of her letter with her full governmental title.
I don’t see any claim that she’s introducing any legislation against KK or the Strib based on her position.
You are right, but that is not the threshold. The courts have ruled that gov’t cannot pass laws, positions, opinions, etc that, in effect, would ‘chill’ free speech or free press. Greiling sending this particular is, in effect, advocating chilling free speech and she has not re-assured us that this is not a gov’t position.
Oops, sorry AmericanWoman.
Sharon,
Do you always believe CNN? Do you always believe annoumous Aides?
I say this because CNN is reporting that some annonous Aides have said that the Prez meant Obama.
Not to worry, you just got me a tad excited there…lol
“Any legislator in this country that has the gall to suggest that a writer with whom she disagrees should be fired belongs in a fascist state. Is that what we are becoming? The absolute arrogance of that demand is mind boggling.”
I agree with this statement.
Wow..lots of new names today. And lots of liberals living up to the hypocrisy of tolerance. Excellent.
All politicians lie to get elected, and then lie and funnel money to their district to stay elected. That is how the cookie crumbles. Sad, but true.
I like how, in the beginning of Obama’s candidacy, people thought he was different. Hilarious.
AmericanWoman is tanks sister.
Dirty Girls. Woof
“I like how, in the beginning of Obama’s candidacy, people thought he was different. Hilarious.”
Yeah, they thought he was white.
If we believe everything the government and the news tell us then we are truly dupes. News wants ratings whether paper or TV, government hides issues under other issues until the issues are muddled. Of course this leads to blogs…
moi,
You’re awfully fixated on whether I ALWAYS believe a source - the President, CNN, anonymous aides…
No, not always - I took a peek at Fox to find out what their opinion was. They tend to ignore flaps like this, though.
Anyway, I USUALLY do believe CNN before Bush, if given the choice. It’s been a bit more reliable.
well it been fun. Hope to see ya all back friday.
Adios Sombreros
G.S.A.H.A. says:
May 15th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
taaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaanks!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wha…..? Man are you gonna get it.
Oh yeah? What am I gonna get?
4blahs says:
May 15th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
What are you going to do GO? Take her behind the blog shack and give her a blog spanking?
I need a good blog spanking.
Sharon - I too USUALLY do believe CNN before Bush myself. I don’t see our Prez. as reliable. Of course, I’m also tired of being screwed and not kissed first by our government.
oops…maybe shouldn’t have been so discriptive. sorry
What about flowers and dinner? I’d like flowers and dinner. Maybe a movie. Of course, I suppose I could use my stimulus check for all those things.
AmericanWoman -
A meeting of like minds.
I have found him to be reliable, though… reliably dumb.
Where the heck are JonR and EBF?
I wanted their take (& celebration) on the California decision.
godhatesshrimp?
I bet KK is reeling over said California decision.
No, she should not be fired.
Reliably dumb…yep, he is. Sad but true.
Stimulus check…nice, many people I know are using it to try to save their homes or pay bills. I’m afraid retailers aren’t going to see much of those stimulus checks.
“What about flowers and dinner? I’d like flowers and dinner. Maybe a movie. Of course, I suppose I could use my stimulus check for all those things.”
If your buying I’m flying.
See Ya
Well…happy blogging to you all…going home to see if my stimulus check is in the mail.
Well, I’m paying off some credit cards with mine and saving the rest. Does that count as stimulating the economy.
!!!Don’t fire KK!!!
Well, I ate an Oreo and scraped out the middle part and for fun threw it at the wall. It stuck and made a nice sound. Entertaining! Also, it came off the wall nicely without leaving much residue.
I’m officially off the clock. I hope Kersten stays with the Strib.
Yo yo yiggety yo - keep it real y’all.
MOI says,
“…but I tend to beleive people when they try to explain what they meant right after they said it…”
Funny. You’re more than happy to give the President a pass, yet you don’t give the people on this blog with whom you argue on a daily basis the same benefit.
I think Greiling’s ire is a little misdirected, anyway.
Sure, Katherine wrote the breathless expose of prayer to Allah in a public school, but it was the editors and/or publisher of the Strib who printed it. If actual wrong was done they should be the first to face the firing squad. Then the new editors could fire Katherine because they don’t want to get into the same trouble. I kinda wonder if there’s ever any times an editor looks at one of her pieces and actually says, “uh, sorry, Kathy. We just can’t print that. A little too over the top.” Seems like half the time they don’t even spot the typos in this paper.
In this case neither the paper nor the author have broken any laws. Rep Greiling may be abusing her position a little. Like I said the one point of hers that I considered was the child safety angle. Publicly calling attention to this school after one conservative activist infiltrated and found something to tattle on is ethically suspect… not because it might be libelous so much as because it gives the nutters a target. If someone firebombed the school, would the editors and “reporter” (like the quotes, Katherine?) not feel just a little culpable for incitement, even if incitement of mayhem was not their intent? At what point does concern for children’s safety trump the desire to sell newspapers with a deliberately controversial topic?
No doubt the story was a scoop. Lots o’people ate it up. Made the main page of the Drudge Report it did.
But what was it a scoop of?
I think it was a tacky story to print and Rep Greiling’s response was equally tacky.
Anyone willing to guess what KK’s topic is for tomorrow?
Anyone willing to guess what KK’s topic is for tomorrow?
Yep…good news, too…This was just posted by CNN: The California Supreme Court struck down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage Thursday, saying sexual orientation, like race or gender, “does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights.” In a 4-3 120-page ruling issue, the justices wrote that “responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual’s sexual orientation.”
“We therefore conclude that in view of the substance and significance of the fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship, the California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples,” Chief Justice Ronald George wrote for the majority. The ruling takes affect in 30 days…The ruling surprised legal experts because the court has a reputation for being conservative. Six of its seven judges are Republican appointees.
JonR…
Happy for you. Been looking for you guys all afternoon!
“Six of its seven judges are Republican appointees.”
It’s good to see people ignore partisan lines and do the right thing.
Now if only congress could get the message…both in MN and at the federal level.
As for today’s topic, the suggestion that KK should be dismissed because some object to her writings…as I do most of time…is wrong.
“The California Supreme Court struck down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage Thursday”
These activist judges are going against the will of the people of California and need to be tossed out.
You’re too funny…and predictable….d2si
If the people of California still will marriage to be between 1 man and 1 woman, they can amend their state Constitution to that effect and the State Supreme Court justices can do nothing about it.
4duhs says:
“Look at D2. He’ll be the first one to believe any “scientific” study that points to global cooling but will automatically dismiss out of hand any “scientific” study pointing to global warming.”
I didn’t believe it the when liberal alarmists warned us of “Global Cooling” and the coming “Ice Age” in the 70’s, and I don’t buy into the “Global Warming” hoax of today. I do enjoy pointing out facts which make the “Global Warming” nazi’s look like fools though (it’s not hard to do).
Yet you’ve never posted a fact that was actually true.
jcf817,
I stated yesterday that the ACLU was founded by communists in 1921. Is that not true?
It’s called hyperbole…
…and I was obviously referring to your post about GW.
Oh I see….
“activist judges” - judges who dare to rule that gays and lesbians should be treated by the government as d2si is treated
“will of the people” Are you referring to the same “will of the people” that supported slavery and opposed womens’ sufferage?
If the people of California still will marriage to be between 1 man and 1 woman, they can amend their state Constitution to that effect and the State Supreme Court justices can do nothing about it.
True, and you can bet that the ignorant Bible-thumpers will do everything they can to get such an amendment passed.
dazzleman says:
“She’s a sloppy thinker and a purist partisan.”
You just described comrade Nick Coleman to a T!
Katherine Kersten is the only shread of common sense left at the Strib, and if they were to let her go, MANY people would immediately cancel their subscriptions including myself.
““will of the people” Are you referring to the same “will of the people” that supported slavery and opposed womens’ sufferage?”
Hey, we went to war to free the slaves and many from the North died doing so. Yet many liberals like the Strib’s Syl Jones are calling for reparations including for himself.
“ignorant Bible-thumpers”
JonR,
You’re not going to get a lot of people to side with you by bashing Christians like this.
He’s not bashing Christians.
He’s bashing Ignorant Bible-thumpers. There’s a difference.
I vote for the Strib to keep Katherine. I rarely agree with what she says, but I defend her right to say it. Silencing people with whose views we disagree is not the answer.
But I don’t think Katherine needs to worry. Her columns and blogs generate too much traffic. Economics tell me that she’ll be around for a while.
“He’s not bashing Christians.”
Yes he is. The Bible doesn’t endorse gay marriage and that pisses him off.
You missed the point.
Where the heck are JonR and EBF?
Sorry, I was indisposed today – and will be again tomorrow – so I’m posting late.
I wanted their take (& celebration) on the California decision.
Obviously, I’m delighted by the decision (and you can go to www.aclu.org/lgbt/relationships/35332lgl20080515.html to read it for yourself). What concerns me is the potential backlash. JonR is right that marriage equality opponents will fight this tooth and nail. In fact, an e-mail I got from the ACLU (because I am a member) tells me that there are likely already enough signatures to put this initiative (constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage) on the California ballot in November. The decision may spur similar action in other states that have not yet amended their constitutions. I do not see this decision making a federal amendment likely.
Here is some of the text of the ACLU’s e-mail; it mirrors my own sentiments:
We won the marriage case in California. No need for hyperbole here; this is big.
Simply having the California Supreme Court say that constitutional principles demand that marriage be open to same-sex couples is an enormous win. This Court has a remarkable history of leadership on civil rights and civil liberties. It made landmark decisions on race and sex discrimination, on freedom of speech and privacy, and on treatment of the disabled and poor people long before the U.S. Supreme Court. No court in America has more authority to say that marriage for same-sex couples is an issue of basic freedom than this one.
And as the New York Times recently pointed out, the California Supreme Court is the most influential state high court in America….The case was brought by the ACLU, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal and the City of San Francisco. The decision is 4 to 3.
Marriage in California will transform the discussion of marriage nationwide. California has one of the largest economies in the world. Given the state’s economic clout, the fact that California is marrying same-sex couples will put considerable pressure on the rest of the country to recognize those marriages.
Even more important, the rest of the country recognizes that California is America’s cultural trendsetter, that cultural change in California is usually a preview of what is to come in the rest of the United States. Most Americans already believe that marriage for same-sex couples is bound to happen sooner or later. I think marriage in California will help persuade many of them that this is an issue of basic fairness, and that the time for it is now.
This was a prize of inestimable value.
Now, of course, we have to hold on to it. It appears fairly certain that anti-gay forces have gotten enough signatures to put on the November ballot an initiative that would amend the state Constitution and overrule the decision.
That initiative is scary. We lost a different vote on marriage only eight years ago. And our opponents, recognizing that marriage in California is a great prize, will fight with all their might. They’ll put everything they have into this. Which means that to win, we’ll have to raise a great deal of money and run a very smart campaign.
While we can’t discount how difficult and nerve-wracking it will be to fight the initiative, we can win. If ever a state was well prepared for a vote on marriage, it is California. LGBT rights work has been going on there since the 50s, and we’ve been establishing rights for same-sex couples since the 80s.
And we can’t forget how much greater the prize will be if we win. If we win the initiative, marriage in California will have a popular stamp of approval. No more will our opponents be able to call marriage the child of “activist judges” or out-of-control local officials. The court has given us the chance to win marriage for ourselves, and push the fight for full equality ahead by years. We’ve got to rise to meet that challenge.
jcf817,
Do you think the term “Bible-thumpers” is any less offensive than “Flaming Fagg*t”? Liberals seem to think they can get away with their offensive language but have a fit if it goes the other way.
You’re not going to get a lot of people to side with you by bashing Christians like this.
I am not “bashing” Christians as a whole. But I am most definately “bashing” so-called “Christians” that cannot tell the difference between the Bible and the Constitution, e.g., Bible-thumpers who want to rewrite the latter to incorporate the former. But I seriously doubt you will be able to discern the difference.
Do you think the term “Bible-thumpers” is any less offensive than “Flaming Fagg*t”?
I know this question wasn’t addressed to me, but I’ll answer it anyway. “Bible-thumper” is not nearly as offensive as “flaming faggot.” Just look at the origin of the terms.
“Bible thumper” refers to a person who is always quoting the Bible to judge others. But the word “faggot” comes from a Middle English word meaning kindling or a “small bundle of twigs used to start a fire.” Cigarettes used to be called “fags” because you burn them to smoke them. Gay men became known as “faggots” because they used to be burned at the stake for their “sin.”
While I can certainly understand someone taking offense at being accused of thumping a Bible, the act of thumping a book is in no way comparable to the execution suffered by gays and lesbians in earlier times. Given a choice, I’d much rather thump a Bible than be burned to death.
JonR,
Your language is offensive.
Why would a Bible-thumper be offended by the term? They hang on every word written in that book.
Why don’t you liberals come up with some offensive statements for Muslims? It seems like you respect all religions UNLESS we’re talking Christianity.
It seems like you respect all religions UNLESS we’re talking Christianity.
Once again you’ve ignored my point, but that is to be expected.
I didn’t think any of you liberals would be able to give a reasonable answer.
Considering that you use the word “liberal” as if you think it’s an insult, are you really one to talk about using offending language?
Also…many of the people you deride as “liberal” are Christians, and no less so than so-called “Bible thumpers”.
jcf817,
Why are you dodging my question? Muslims are more against homosexual marriage than Christians, in fact, the penalty for homosexual behavior in many Muslim countries is death. Muslim immigrants bring the same beliefs with them to America, an example would be Muslim cab drivers not providing service to homosexuals. If this were Christian cab drivers, liberals would file a lawsuit and s**t would hit the fan, but because they are Somali Muslim’s, liberals are silent.
That’s a statement, not a question.
jcf817 says:
Funny. You’re more than happy to give the President a pass, yet you don’t give the people on this blog with whom you argue on a daily basis the same benefit.
I don’t think its exactly the same thing, however, I will be very conscience of that in the future so that you and the others can see that I will treat both equally. Please feel free to call me on it if you see me do it.
I will man up and take personal responsibility if I do.
Offensive statements for Muslims?
Which sect? All Muslims? Extremists? Terrorists who use Islam as an excuse?
Please clarify your question.
I am not Muslim, so it’s not so easy to see the hypocrisy of “Koran-thumpers” as it is to see the hypocrisy of “Bible-thumpers”.
“Why don’t you liberals come up with some offensive statements for Muslims?”
jcf817 says:
“That’s a statement, not a question.”
******************************
No jcf817, a question ends with a question mark.
“Offensive statements for Muslims?
Which sect? All Muslims? Extremists? Terrorists who use Islam as an excuse?”
Please name even ONE Muslim sect in the world which is less than hostile to homosexuals jcf817. Tha vast majority want them dead the same way the want Jews dead.
Again, obviously d2si, I was referring to your post immediately before mine…not your original question, which I had missed.
I thought we were talking about California?
EBF posted this from the ACLU
No court in America has more authority to say that marriage for same-sex couples is an issue of basic freedom than [the California Supreme Court].
They are wrong about that statement. The United States Supreme Court has more authority than the California Supreme Court. Guess they got just a bit too excited in their emailing.
EBF,
Just tell me where to donate and what else I can do to help.
I am a happily married heterosexual that loved my gay cousin (who died of AIDS-related causes at 38 two weeks ago) very much. He lived with me from age 12-19, when he joined the Navy - and was selected “Sailor of the Year”. Funny.
I always supported his wish to marry his partner of 16 years. Looking forward to helping other people now.
DTSI, f-off.
What WAS the ACLU trying to say there? It doesn’t make sense.
Sharon,
I’m sorry to hear about your loss.
Sharon I am sorry for your loss.
DTSI,
Thanks, and sorry about my hostility.
If you ever love someone beyond measure that happens to be gay,I think you’ll find that your opinions may undergo a sea change. Mine sure did.
I’m only sorry that it took a personal love to change me from an idiot into a person that cares about everyone’s happiness and fulfillment.
I sincerely hope that you can find it in your heart - and mind - to accept people’s differences without the personal component being present.
We’re all hoping for the same thing. Joy, love and commitment. For life.
Best of luck to you.
Thanks Sharon,
I wish you the best.
Just tell me where to donate and what else I can do to help.
Sharon, I’m very saddened to learn of your cousin’s untimely death.
The following organizations are accepting donations specifically to help keep same-sex marriage legal in California:
The ACLU at www.aclu.org/getequal
The Human Rights Campaign at www.hrc.org
Additionally, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, at www.thetaskforce.org, has been working for marriage equality in California – but I was unable to find anything on their website about donating to this cause specifically.
I think a donation to any of these organizations in memory of your cousin would be a wonderful tribute to him.
Thanks to you, DTSI.
It’s been hard - he was the closest I’ll ever have to a beloved child. Puts things into perspective.
Sunday was the first Mother’s Day in over 18 years that I didn’t get a call.
I keep remembering a 14 year old kid biking 2 miles in 80 degree heat to buy an ice cream cake for my birthday… and biking back with it.
Yuck - what a mess!
EBF -
I will follow-up tommorrow. Kurt was very involved with the AIDS rides, etc., etc. I agree that he’d be right in there with this…
On Topic, DON’T FIRE KK!
This community of bloggers would miss each other and KK.
Agree or disagree - we’re a community.
As sad as AIDS deaths are, gay marriage is a bad idea and would be damaging to our children in public schools. Under pressure from the ACLU, kids would be forced to accept gay marriage as being as healthy and equal as normal marriage, and this is not the case.
A note on the “Global Warming” lunacy:
Paul McCartney just received an “Eco-Friendly” limosine which was flown in from Asia. This flight used 1000 times more “Carbon Footprints” than if it was shipped by sea.
DTSI,
I certainly don’t want our children in public schools involved in gay marriage - at least until they’re 18.
Jeez.
And, sorry, but the two adults involved in gay marriage are entitled to the SAME rights as others to enjoy their healthy, normal marriage.
So says the California Supreme Court - and me!
I have known Mindy Greiling for many years and has always found her truthful when talking to me. I do not agree with her nor support her on issues but she always tries to explain her position even though I know she is wrong.
I have read only one story that Katherine Kersten wrote. It bothered me so I wrote Mindy and she said she would look into the matter. Apparently she did. I am surprised that Mindy reacted to Katherine Kersten in the manner she chose.
If we can find a true independent person, I suggest he/she looks into the facts of the Muslin school and if he finds Katherine Kersten wrong, then she should resign. If he finds Mindy wrong, then Mindy should resign.
This should be a fair agreement.
So says the California Supreme Court - and me!
And me! :)
Also, DTSI - I don’t want our children in public schools involved in heterosexual marriage either - at least until they’re 18.
Maybe 19!
JonR and EBF
“activist judges” - judges who dare to rule that gays and lesbians should be treated by the government as d2si is treated
JonR unfortunately the judges were partial activists in the majority opinion. I am of the same mind as the concurring and dissenting opinion by Baxter. Here is a quote: The majority relies heavily on the Legislature’s adoption of progressive civil rights protections for gays and lesbians to find a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. Please read his whole concurrence and dissent before commenting. I don’t believe that the right to same sex marriage is in the CA Constitution.
“will of the people” Are you referring to the same “will of the people” that supported slavery and opposed womens’ sufferage?
You are wrong - the will of the people - are what got the amendments to the US Constitution to abolish slavery and grant women the right to vote. I would like to see the ‘will of the people followed in all cases – even with the ones I don’t agree with. By the way, I would define the “will of the people” to be whatever type of majority is needed to have a law or amendment pass.
Another point about the issue:
An amendment to the CA Constitution only needs a simple majority to pass (unlike the US Constitution). That is a tremendous opportunity for the advocates of same sex marriages. There will no doubt be a proposed amendment limiting marriage to a man and a woman. What I would like to see is a choice – why don’t the advocates of same sex marriage put forth an amendment to be voted on that would allow for same sex marriages?. In doing so, that would leave the power to decide where it ought to be – in the people of CA.
Sharon,
You seem like a very nice person and I hate arguing with you, but even extreme liberal democrat Paul Wellstone voted against gay marriage. JonR will argue that he later told a gay rights group that he made the wrong decision, but the vote is really all that matters.
So Sharon, you and the four out of seven on the California Supreme Court, I believe are wrong. Homosexuals will never be able to enjoy a healthy, normal marriage because I believe two people of the same sex cannot have a “normal” marriage but only a sexual marriage by two people who have strong feeling for one another. In no way would or could this be called “normal”. “Unusual” would be a more accurate word.
Before you get overjoyed in having a “right” established by the justice system, the people by a hugh majority do not approve and an amendment to accomplish this will be passed in the elections this fall.
Homosexuals should have the same right as every human being. They do have a right to marry, as long as it is a “normal” marriage.
DTSI,
My sense of equality is not, and will never be, defined by anyone’s failings.
My sense of right and wrong is inherent. The belief that everyone has the right to respect and the same opportunities as others is sacrosanct.
It’s sad that extreme right-wingers can’t be more clearheaded.
Fun fact: His name is spelled Neil Peart. Not Pert. And I would agree that he is probably the most talented drummer i have heard, although not my favorite.
I have a feeling that after today’s posts, KK will not be writing tomorrow about the CA gay marriage issue.
Sharon,
I’ve said before that I’m not against some type of civil union benefit for homosexuals which would deal with the problems they are facing, but calling it “marriage” is a bad idea and like I said, it would create a mess in our public schools.
It’s not nearly as dangerous a topic in our public schools as religion, i.e. creationism, in the science classroom.
jcf817,
I don’t recall myself or my kids ever taking “creationism” in public schools. Please elaborate.
Yes, God forbid(pun intended) that kids learn religion in our schools. What a TERRIBLE thing to learn.
Wow, long posts to read. Trying to catch up from the last couple of days to see whats going on. A few days ago KK did an article on ’shock art.’ Isn’t journalism the ultimate form of performance (shock) art, a creative piece designed to draw attention to the ambiguities of truthiness? Don’t get too cought up in the trivialities of life.
And the pledge question What are you going to contribute to keep it going? Whenever I see our flag I ask myself what have done for my country.
No gay marriage between children in public schools - we agree, OK?
And yes, marriage is the proper term, be it between heterosexuals or gays. It implies a level of commitment that is important to the couple at issue.
Why would a “conservative” want less for a committed couple?
Can’t we all just get along?
Is truthiness a word??
Yep!
With respect,
Sharon
“I don’t recall myself or my kids ever taking “creationism” in public schools. Please elaborate.”
You’re not paying attention, then, to the “Bible-thumpers” who have attempted to get creationism, a matter of faith, to be taught side by side with evolution, which is science.
“Yes, God forbid(pun intended) that kids learn religion in our schools. What a TERRIBLE thing to learn.”
No. Not GOD forbid. The Constitution and the courts forbid. You can’t teach religion in a public school.
DJ,
I was answering DTSI - and I don’t believe that truthiness is a word.
“The Constitution and the courts forbid. You can’t teach religion in a public school.”
Then why are taxpayers funding a Muslim school in the northern suburbs? Like Obama, they reject the American flag and you can’t find one on the school grounds.
Haha, I assumed that was the case Sharon. Although I almost did post something sarcastic about you thinking it was a word. Moving backwords, I am also sorry to hear about your loss. Losing loved ones is never easy.
It would appear that everyone has gone to bed for the night. Disappointing. I just got caught up on all the posts of the day.
A school that muslims attend is not the same as a school that teaches Islam.
“A school that muslims attend is not the same as a school that teaches Islam.”
Don’t be a fool jcf817!
I don’t think any of us are in any position to say exactly what goes on in this school. All we know is what the media informs us, and there are two opposite views.
DTSI,
I would love to see pics of McCain, Clinton OR Obama wearing the flag lapel pins.
It that’s your idea of patriotic behavior, let’s then discuss the trashing of the US economy by the administration’s actions in Iraq. OK… ready?
DJ,
I too am disappointed. Any opinions that you’d like to debate?
I’m a late-nighter, also sorry that the blog is sleeping.
Do you have an opinion on whether or not Republicans go to sleep earlier than (self-confessed) “extreme liberals”?
Sharon,
The war on Islamic terror is here for a while, and it will be an expense. It’s better than ignoring the problem though like Clinton did and getting hit with another 9-11 or much worse. We were attacked by Islamist fanatics more under Bill Clinton than President Bush. Bush’s policies are working despite the liberal’s attempt to take away our terror fighting tools.
KK is perfect against the intolerant, hate-filled, narrow, cultural elites who dislike being put in their place.
Right on KK! Keep it coming. And throw out these judges deciding what our laws should be. What non-sense will they think up next? The descenting opinion say’s it all.
“Don’t be a fool jcf817!”
Look. If there is real proof that Islam is being promoted and taught in a public school, then that school should be “sanctioned” or shut down. No question about it.
Do we have proof?
I love my country, and receive all kinds of benefits by being a citizen. But I don’t fly the flag or wear a pin. Am I less of a patriot?
War on a verb is just too much to take.
I am not terrified.
I choose to live as an American in a global world, taking my chances.
I will fly, I will drive, I will visit foreign countries, I will not bring up the Nazi invasion into Poland, I will look for hope and not fear.
Back on topic, KK should not be fired.
The idea that any of “Bush’s policies are working”, DTSI, is hysterically funny.
Sharon, I can tell you this, I don’t want to discuss the war on Iraq. I am very much on the line about that. I see both good and bad repercussions come from it. I will grant that there hasn’t been another 9/11-like event, but it really hasn’t been that long. So while some people may feel that our country is safer from terrorists, I don’t think our “protective procedures” have make the country any safer. So we stopped a shoe bomber. Let’s not rejoice quite yet.
On the other hand, I think it is a terrible idea let 9/11 go unpunished. And some would argue that the terrorists are in Afghanistan, not Iraq. But they are still being funded from Iraq and we are also in Afghanistan still.
Ok, I realize that I just said I DIDN’T want to debate it, and here I go spouting my uninformed mouth off about it.. ce la vie..
jcf817 says:
“Look. If there is real proof that Islam is being promoted and taught in a public school, then that school should be “sanctioned” or shut down. No question about it.
Do we have proof?”
They don’t let anyone in to check jcf817.
Earache,
Please learn how to spell. It makes my ear hurt.
Oh, and I also don’t think KK should be fired. But I’m also biased.. she’s one of my best friend’s mother.
I am not a major conservative, but I am still far from liberal.
Sharon, are you religious at all??
I thought they were being funded by Saudi Arabia. Why aren’t we waging war in Saudi Arabia? Oh yeah…Bush family friends and oil.
In any case, we ended up discussing topics which only Katherine Kerstin was bold enough to bring up.
More like, “makes your eyes hurt.”
I understand this, but have decided not to critique(is that spelled correctly??) peoples’ spelling. Mostly because people would have a field day just mocking me(Tiny, GO, ect..). And that’s not productive, is it??
“Why aren’t we waging war in Saudi Arabia? Oh yeah…Bush family friends and oil.”
With gas prices at $3.75, are you complaining??
“Should Katherine Kersten get the ax?”
I have the answer.
“With gas prices at $3.75, are you complaining??”
I complain about hypocrisy, which seems to run rampant in neo-con circles. Iraq is not funding terrorists to the extent that Saudi Arabia is, yet we’re not at war with Saudi Arabia.
Since we’re so reliant on foreign oil, does it really matter?
DJ,
Lutheran - Missouri Synod - attend at least every 2 weeks.
The hardest thing for me to understand about the conservative agenda is the lack of compassion for those less fortunate.
OK - My job provides me with an excellent income. Can you explain why I do not have to pay Social Security tax for my entire income, and most people (under $102,000, more or less) do?
Can you explain Pawlenty’s animosity toward an increase in the minimum wage?
Jesus said - to paraphrase - whatever you do for the least of your brethren, you do for me.
I fly 115,000 miles per year - and, it’s different since 9/11. And also different since NWA Flight 437 from Tampa took off on 4/11/08, blew an engine at 21,000 feet, and returned to Tampa. I was scared sh1tless, sitting in first class praying.
I pray a lot. And I don’t believe that our actions in Iraq were appropriate.
Afghanistan, yes. But the Taliban torqued me off way before 9/11.
I’ve spent quite a bit of time in the Middle East. All is not what it seems.
Saudi Arabia is far more of a concern than Iraq - except, Iraq needs to start paying us back!
Wow, bad day to be gone.
Katherine, Keep up the good work! I don’t always agree with you, but you’re by far the most thought provking columnist in this town, by several orders of magnitude.
Mindy Greiling is apparently arrogant and ignorant. The whole, power corrupts thing…
Mixed feelings on the California ruling. I haven’t had time to read it so this may be premature. Glad it went the way it did. Sad it was made against the will of the people. I’m a big states rights guy. I like the idea of 50 controlled experiments.
Anyway EBF, JonR, and others, I think you’re starting to go from, “one step forward and two steps back” to “two steps forward and one step back”.
Vike308,
Great to hear from you. I hope the profit margin is up!
Sharon, you were blessed to know him and love him. Never forget.
Well, I ate an Oreo and scraped out the middle part and for fun threw it at the wall. It stuck and made a nice sound. Entertaining! Also, it came off the wall nicely without leaving much residue
Tanks,
You’re husband is a lucky man!!!!!!!
“I thought they were being funded by Saudi Arabia. Why aren’t we waging war in Saudi Arabia? Oh yeah…Bush family friends and oil.”
jcf817,
You have about the same knowledge of foriegn policy as Rosie O’Donell.
By the way:
“Guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O’Donell fat”
Ms. Sharon,
I was saddened to read earlier of your loss. You are a loving, sensitive person. May God bless and comfort you.
I never claimed to have much knowledge of foreign policy. Perhaps you can tell me why it is that a known terrorist-funding country is not being threatened by the U.S. in our “War on Terror”.
Sharon,
I belong to a Lutheran ELCA Synod. The Missouri Synod you belong to is much more conservative. What gives?
leland8,
Thanks.
Sharon
“I never claimed to have much knowledge of foreign policy. Perhaps you can tell me why it is that a known terrorist-funding country is not being threatened by the U.S. in our “War on Terror”. ”
jcf817,
I’m not a big fan of any of the Muslim countries over there and would prefer to be self sufficient with America’s oil needs, but liberals are preventing us from tapping into our own vast oil reserves. I would love to be able to tell the Saudi’s to GO TO HELL, but we can’t because of liberal policy.
“Guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O’Donell fat”
That’s funny!! I haven’t heard that before, but it cracked me up.
Sharon says: “The hardest thing for me to understand about the conservative agenda is the lack of compassion for those less fortunate.”
I am Catholic and somewhat conservative and I have plenty of compassion for the less fortunate. I think that the word “conservative” has been marred by the extreme conservatives. I view it in the same way that I think Muslims have been given a bad name by those few “extremists” that take up arms against any infidels. Granted, I’m not an ultra conservative, but more so than liberal.
Were you on that flight in Tampa??
I talked to a Marine that was in Iraq and he said that the media spews everything incorrectly. He said that the majority of his time was spent handing out candy to kids and food and water to the people. So I take everything I hear about the situation in Iraq with a bucket of salt.
DTSI,
Life. Life gives. Sh!t happens. People you love die. Planes crash, on 9/11. We learn, we grow, we care.
I, anyway, find a way to come to terms with the limitations of my religious beliefs and my upbringing. I value the rituals of my church, and am extremely grateful for my pastors that have advocated tolerance and acceptance.
My faith is more dependent on its advocates than its tenets.
Thank God.
Sharon,
One of my good friends in high school turned out to be gay. We found out after high school and ended up giving him a hard time about it. I still feel bad about what we did, but I don’t want to see gay marriage.
DJ,
Yes, I was on that flight from Tampa.
It’s making me crazy. I have flown over 4 million miles since 1984 and I am just panicked. The pilot had flown for 25 years and never lost an engine. I have never experienced that before.
I don’t have an option to not fly, and I dam* well need to come to terms with this before 5/31.
Any help would be appreciated. I’m 46 years old, and have never been so freaked.
Sharon says: “The hardest thing for me to understand about the conservative agenda is the lack of compassion for those less fortunate.”
Sharon,
Maybe it’s too late to ask for more specifics, but like DJ, could be labeled conservative (more libertarian actually). I have a deep compassion for those that cannot help themselves because of variuos maladies. We should do all we can to help them.
My problem is with those that look first to the government to solve there problems. We should be teaching them how to fish, and then kicking them out of the nest. Not handing them one.
Sharon,
Are you a flight attendant? Maybe I saw you . I flew back and forth from Mpls. to Tampa most weekends from March-June of last year. I’m the well dressed exremely handsome guy who probably stood out.
Just kidding. Anyway, maybe I saw you?
Any help would be appreciated. I’m 46 years old, and have never been so freaked.
You really have won an unfortunate lottery. Flying is by far, in a number of different measures, the safest form of travel. The fact that the pilot had flown for 25 years and never expeienced this should give you comfort. He had a lot more miles than you will probably ever have.
Your chances of ever expeiencing anything like this again are really low!
tluck,
The Minnesota Republican’s response to the attempt to raise the minimum wage comes to mind.
If T Paw could - and would - live on the minimum wage currently in effect, for a year, then I could - and would - support his veto stance.
Ron Paul is awesome!
DTSI,
No, sorry. Just a miserable, scared Platinum Elite, sitting in first and wihing she was anywhere else.
Unless… during turbulence - did anyone clutch your arm like a maniac?
That would be me. Scary when they throw the trays into the bathroom and you have to listen to them crash together for 15 minutes.
I used to be normal.
Sharon, I don’t know that I can give you any advice that you haven’t thought of already. As everyone learns in life, wisdom comes with age. So as a 24 year old, I don’t know if I can be of much help. I have much to learn. But I can tell you what I do know. There is no reason to fear death. “It is but another adventure.” And if you think about it logically(which is nearly impossible when you are talking about your own life) you have a better chance of winning the lottery than dying on a plane. What are the odds that one person would have TWO near death experiences??
I think Dumbledore puts it best. “There is nothing to be feared from a body, Harry, any more than there is anything to be feared from the darkness. Lord Voldemort, who of course secretly fears both, disagrees. But once again he reveals his own lack of wisdom. It is the unknown that we fear when we look upon death and darkness, nothing more.”
Goodnight everyone,
Sleep well!
tluck,
Thanks. The flight attendant also expressed the same thought - before breaking down in tears, as did I.
I didn’t know that I could be so scared.
The Minnesota Republican’s response to the attempt to raise the minimum wage comes to mind.
I agree with that. That’s been reduced to a political game.
Pandering at it’s best. The vast majority of people that make the minimum wage are teenagers. This will cost them job oppurtunities and puts them where? On the street?
Set the minimum wage. Index it for inflation, and be done with the whole issue.
Ron Paul is awesome!
He’s certainly a step in the right direction. I’m hoping it’s two not one.
dubble sez,
If the people of California still will marriage to be between 1 man and 1 woman, they can amend their state Constitution to that effect and the State Supreme Court justices can do nothing about it.
JonR sez,
True, and you can bet that the ignorant Bible-thumpers will do everything they can to get such an amendment passed.
There may be highly-educated religious people who push for the Amendment too. I’m not one of them. not an ignorant bible thumper either.
Although if you put a contact mike on a big ‘ol family bible and set it up in front of your kick drum pedal, you can get a pretty good kick drum sound out of it. Real dead thud, just the right amount of attack. Good for hip-hop beats. Not that I’d thump a Bible out of animus toward it… just a pure innocent desire to make music. In fact, one could just as easily use a volume of the Oxford English Dictionary. It just needs to be a big dense book.
The thing is, as you gird up for the amendment fight, consider that if you amend the U.S Constitution to have an additional right where marriage is clearly defined as open to same-sex pardners, well,
ya’ll wouldn’t have to slug it out in every state Supreme Court and/or legislature. That’s the path I encourage. You just have to successfully slug it out in 2/3 Congress and 3/4 of the states.
If as I hope you win that fight, your enfranchisement in the institution of marriage will be a lot more legitimate and hard to deny than if you just win it here and there.
Sharon,
I’m glad you made it through everything OK.
Listen to Beatles-a-rama dot com. It will make anyone feel fantastic.
DJ,
Heartfelt thanks. I can’t explain how this panic thing has caused issues.
On topic - KK should not be fired!!!
I used to be normal.
I didn’t know that I could be so scared.
Shows how normal you are.
Board with confidence on your next trip.
Attitude is everything!!
Good night.
Got to go.
Haha.. you always comes back to that. I agree wholeheartedly. sooo.. i’ve got nothin’
DJ,
Talking to me?
Yes. And i realize I said “you always comeS back to that.” Wow.. Anyways, it was in response to your “KK shouldn’t be fired” comment. I think that’s the third time you’ve said that after ending a discussion.
Sharon
Any help would be appreciated. I’m 46 years old, and have never been so freaked.
I wish I could give you help but I can only tell you my story.
My father was a pilot (Vietnam and then NWA) and I learned to love fly at a very early age. He died in a plane crash (small plane only he was in the plane) when I was ten (I am 42 now). After the crash I still loved to fly made me feel close to my dad, I guess. I even worked for United as a time as a baggage handler so I could fly for free.
However about 3 years ago, I became extremely frightened to fly. I was dating my now wife and was traveling back and forth from LA to Mpls every other weekend. (She lived in Mpls. and I lived in LA - Yes I was an elite flyer – got there by only flying one route 1535 miles a crack!) On one of the returns to LA we flew through a storm and experienced what the pilot said later was extreme turbulence (when we landed at LAX they had to take the plane out of service to check it). After that flight, I became extremely afraid to fly.
I am still afraid to fly but it has gotten better over time. I ended up talking to pilots and relearning about how airplanes are overbuilt (like a 757 wing can be bent 27 feet up before it starts to stress crack), Bernoulli’s principle, wind dynamics, etc. That has seemed to help lessen my fear but I am still afraid.
Last week I was on a plane that was flying through a storm there was moderate turbulence and lightening, and I just kept repeating “planes are overbuilt, planes are overbuilt, planes are overbuilt”. It helped.
MOI, that is a great story. My mother died when I was ten. It was cancer, so it wasn’t unexpected. People always express to me how hard that must be, and I always tell them that the people who really suffer are the ones who have their loved ones die unexpectedly. I can’t imagine how that would feel. My father’s mother(my grandma) was killed in a hit and run when I was 8, and I still feel bad for my father b/c of it. I know some people who have only had a couple months of knowing that their loved ones are going to pass away. Fortunately, I had years. Unfortunately, I was only 10 and was too young and ignorant to take advantage of those years.
moi,
Thanks for sharing your experiences.
Planes are overbuilt…
I am so afraid, after my last trip, that I don’t know what to do.
I’ll get on the plane. I think.
Sharon, good luck. I’m going to bed. I hope your next plane experience goes great.
Good night!!
Lutheran - Missouri Synod - attend at least every 2 weeks.
Sharon, my husband was raised and confirmed Missouri Synod Lutheran, too! Did you learn the same things he was taught – such as that black people are cursed by God, and that people who live in mobile homes are evil? He really was taught these things! After they found out that he’s gay, they excommunicated him. He wears that like a badge of honor!
Yes, God forbid(pun intended) that kids learn religion in our schools. What a TERRIBLE thing to learn.
As an atheist, I couldn’t agree more!
I big old cup of coffee and I mean an Alcoholic size cup of coffee and the Meat Puppets at full volume.
Life is good.
Oh Except the fact the press has gone off the deep end. Other then that ROCK ON
Gezzz who had the over/under at 400 yesterday? Would be a rich blog dude today.
Evil Baby Fauvel I learned allot at church to, but then drove out to the sunday after keg party…so whats the point. I knew it was BS. Whats the problem.
Do you really think everybody believes the sh^t they hear in church? ( when they are forced to go. Kind of forced to go..you know)
But Evil I will say this about this topic. You are one of the few who has remained consistent on your views about religion in our society whether is Christianity or Islam.
Evil,
I belong to a Lutheran Church as well, but I think it is too liberal.
“Iraq: Iranian Embassy convoy ambushed”
“BAGHDAD AP- Gunmen ambushed an Iranian Embassy convoy in Baghdad, wounding three Iranians, including two diplomats, and an Iraqi, a spokesman said Friday.”
Finally the bush administration is negotiating with the Iranians the only way the Iranians understand.
“Finally the bush administration is negotiating with the Iranians the only way the Iranians understand.”
This is very true in some respects. History of Persians is they respect strength. It’s the starting point for everything.
People forget these are not Europeans. People around the world think in different ways. Sticking flowers up the guns only works in the Western Culture.
remember in the old days we used to “accidently” bomb someones embassy. What ever happend to that strategy?
“The Minnesota Republican’s response to the attempt to raise the minimum wage comes to mind.”
The correct minimum wage should be $0.00. Market conditions will always prevail. You can set the minimum wage at $20.00/hr if you want, and all that will do is ensure less employment.
“Gay men became known as “faggots” because they used to be burned at the stake for their “sin.””
I never knew that, thanks for explaining it to me EBF. It’s kind of like squaw, always just thought it meant female indian until I heard where it came from. Kind of also like nigger, which is slang for negro which is spanish for black. Or maybe not.
“What ever happend to that strategy?”
Oops. I meant to say-
What ever happend to that diplomatic strategy?
Lizzie Borden took and axe
Gave her mother 40 whacks,
When she saw what she had done
She gave her father 41.
“It’s kind of like squaw, always just thought it meant female indian until I heard where it came from.”
Squaw means “lake”?
“Squaw means “lake”?”
Thats why they are changing the names of all Lakes named Squaw because it doesn’t make semse to call them “Lake Lake”.
“Gay men became known as “faggots” because they used to be burned at the stake for their “sin.””
Sorry, completely wrong.
Look up the word on any Etymology site and it’s explained.
Big Bomber,
Interesting. I did not know that. I thought it was from the english word for cigarettes.
I don’t post much any more, but I still try to read this blog daily.
For those who would like to see Ms. Kersten fired for her columns/opinions, be careful what you wish for.
Your favorite columnist/reporter may be next.
Go-
You are right, the word is actually okay to use in England both the word fag and faggot but EBF’s deal about faggot being applied to gay men becasue they got tossed on the fire is an urban legend, kind of like when their was the upraor about “picnic” and “bar-b-q”
No new topic today?
Hmmmmmm
That’s true most of your columnist types only work 4 days a week. Never mind.
Nevermind?
I feel stupid and contagious
Here we are now, entertain us
A mulato
An albino
A mosquito
My Libido
Yay
Oh by the way folks. MSNBC is now the Fox News of the left. Some nonsense being “spewed” over there at a record pace.
“kind of like when their was the upraor about “picnic” and “bar-b-q””
Big Bomber,
An uproar? I must have missed that one.
But then I just found out a couple weeks ago that it is inappropriate to call Asians, “Orientals”. I guess I’m a little behind the curve.
Maybe “uproar” is overstating a bit but a couple of local college campuses were petitioning to have the words “picnic” and “bar-b-q” banned due to their racist origin. It died down, kind of, when people took a minute, researched and discovered their true, completely unracist, origins.
D2 sez, as only an idiot like him can….
“These activist judges are going against the will of the people of California and need to be tossed out.”
In Mississippi maybe, but in CA, not a chance.
See GO I told you about that “picnic” thing. Trust me I’m not always full of Bull like these guys say I am.
I think we are going to see a sensitivity level that in the end will not be helpful for those who will claim to have their sensitivity violated the most. It is get so out of whack that by the last week in October it will be defined like this; All who vote for McCain are racist. It’s slowly leading up to that. And you can see that, but that’s only if you are paying attention…attention.
KK should NOT be fired!!
Any government official that calls for a reporter to be fired for printing something they do not like is violating the first amendment. Nuff siad!!
But Mark Cal voted ..didn’t they? I though they had a referendum?
Bi Bomber,
Reminds me of the candle light vigil the Vegan Co Op had after the Mac Meat Eating society had a BBQ infront of their building.
“But Mark Cal voted ..didn’t they? I though they had a referendum?”
I heard they need to collect a million signatures to get a referendum on the ballot to change the constitution to ban it.
“See GO I told you about that “picnic” thing.”
Yes you did Tiny but I still find it hard to beleive that Bears take offense to it. Aren’t we showing them how inclusive we are of them with the special species legislation of Polar Bears.
“In Mississippi maybe, but in CA, not a chance.”
California isn’t known as the land of FRUITS AND NUTS for no reason.
Yeah Dumb@ss, exactly why it isnt against the will of the people in CA to legalize gay marriage.
Something Im in favor of by the way fruit cake or not.
I heard a guy say marriage is about having kids. Someone should tell my widower father in law he cant marry his widow fiance say. Im mean they’re both over 60 and arent having kids in this lifetime.
Mark
The horrors of Tee-Ball.
The kid pretending to be the picture gets hammered in the nose with a line drive. A couple seconds of a stun look, then the blood starts gushing out. Then 12 five-year-olds all go crying and screaming to their mommy’s.
My kid who is home from college seeing how much money he can suck out of his old man looks at me with a straight face and says: “There’s no cryin’ in Baseball dad, Jesus Christ”.
That’s my boy!
May 16th, 1970, 88°F (old record high)
May 16th, 2008, 95°F (new record high)
Globull Weather?
“Mac Meat Eating society “?
Is that for real or some plot line from Revenge of the Nerds?
Nothin’ better then getting’ some Denny’s to go and having a picnic, you know.
“Squaw means “lake”?”
Well, story I heard, Squaw is slang for vagina in French. I think
“The kid pretending to be the picture…”
The, ummmm picture?
Tiny,
Picture this “Pitcher”
“Is that for real or some plot line from Revenge of the Nerds?”
When you are the one Jock / Metal head in your dorm, you need to start something or jump off the roof. Know what I mean?
Squaw is slang for vagina in French? Wow. I could take offense AG…however, all I did was laugh at your comment. As I am a “squaw” (at least the non-Scottish side).
Well he was more like a picture..just standing there.
Hey I say pitcher when I say “Hey look at that “pitcher”. Then some smart@ss always has to say…what…what “pitcher” wheres the baseball game.
Hey I wrote a poem about you guys want to hear it.
“Nothin’ better then getting’ some Denny’s to go and having a picnic, you know.”
Denny’s? Dont you guys have a corner bar or a townie cafe to get your to go food way out there in the stix?
Do you guys ever sleep? lol
While we are dipelling myths today, the word squaw doesn’t have the origin that 99% of the population believe it does either.
I hate you guys
I hate you guys
Especially Blah
I hate him the most
Tiny…go ahead make our day.
“Hey I wrote a poem about you guys want to hear it. ”
Here is mine…. It goes like this:
FU Tiny
“Denny’s? Dont you guys have a corner bar or a townie cafe to get your to go food way out there in the stix?”
Sure Mark, to gay guys own a Deli downtown..why you ask?
“When you are the one Jock / Metal head in your dorm”
Mac has athletics?
You poor poor thing…so if you hate everyone so much why you still here? I get it…cheap entertainment…that’s it, right Tiny…is Tiny for tiny winky?
Um…4blahs…short poem, can you take it farther?
“FU Tiny”
Mark that doesn’t even come close to rhyming, Gezzzzzzzzzzzzz
“FU Tiny”
Doesn’t rhyme, however it is pictorial.
“Sure Mark, to gay guys own a Deli downtown..why you ask?”
Buffalo has a downtown? Is that where the city council put the blinking yellow stop light on the main drag and the tumble weed blows through?
AmericanWoman
Don’t come hangin’ around my door
Don’t wanna see your face no more
I don’t need your war machines
I don’t need your ghetto scenes
colored lights can hypnotize
Sparkle someone else’s eyes
“Mac has athletics?”
Played 1 season of baseball, that was enough for me. They also have the NCAA record for most consecutive loses in football at 64. But, and this is a biggie, they won the mens AND womens NCAA Div III soccer or on Mac’s campus Fotbol the same year.
“Buffalo has a downtown? Is that where the city council put the blinking yellow stop light on the main drag and the tumble weed blows through?”
You’re thinkin about Golden Valley you IDIOT!
Tiny…thank you so much! You ARE sooo creative.
Buffalo? Small town central MN…good fishing around the area. Nice antique shops, kinda quaint.
Good hunting also if you know were to go…
“Mark that doesn’t even come close to rhyming, Gezzzzzzzzzzzzz”
And yours did?
Try this one….
FU Tiny Lites
Take advantage of your new gay rights.
Move to cali forn I yeah!!!!
“Hey I wrote a poem about you guys want to hear it. ”
Here’s my poem-
Brimn2001 and Mark A
learned tomriggs the art
of blogging one day
he picked it up real fast
we had a good time
but he knew it would’nt last
Then all of Brimn2001 and Mark A fricken BS got him killed and he wasn’t doin Nothin wrong.
Mark,
I heard they need to collect a million signatures to get a referendum on the ballot to change the constitution to ban it.
I heard that the moon was made of cheese, doesn’t make it so.
Truth, for a statute to be put on the ballot, you need signatures of 5 percent of the voters cast for all candidates who ran for governor in the last election. (411, 345)
For a constitutional amendment, you need signatures of 8 percent of the voters cast for all candidates who ran for governor in the last election. (658,152)
If the proposition is approved by more than 50% of all voters, it becomes a part of the state constitution (if it is a proposed amendment) or the state’s statutes (if it is a proposed law) in the same manner and having the same legal effect as if it had been passed by the state legislature and signed by the governor.
Yeah Dumb@ss, exactly why it isn’t against the will of the people in CA to legalize gay marriage.
Before you start calling people a dumb@ss, you might want to be checking your facts. The will of the people voted in 2000 for Prop 22, it says that a marriage can only be between a man and a woman. It passed with 61.4 % (4,618,673 votes versus 2,909,370 against). That would be considered to be the “will of the people”!
The only reason Prop 22 was struck down is the court found it in violation of the CA Constitution. If it has been a constitutional amendment instead of a statute it could not have been struck down. Considering that an amendment only needs the same amount of majority as a statute it would seem that the will of the people is the same regardless if it is a statute or an amendment.
I heard a guy say marriage is about having kids. Someone should tell my widower father in law he cant marry his widow fiance say. Im mean they’re both over 60 and arent having kids in this lifetime.
The USSC and most other courts do cite procreation one of the major reasons why the people and legislatures support a right for marriage. Until more people, legislatots and courts feel differently, current law is based on that foundation. Please go read Loving v Virginia and many other courts’ opinions. Even the CA opinion admits that the current thinking is marriage is about procreation.
Tatanka!
4duhs says:
“I heard a guy say marriage is about having kids. Someone should tell my widower father in law he cant marry his widow fiance say. Im mean they’re both over 60 and arent having kids in this lifetime.”
Traditional marriage should be encouraged because it’s by far the best way to raise children. Just because some married couples can’t produce children for whatever reason, we shouldn’t use that to throw out the concept. Homosexuals cannot naturally have children.
Okay, looked up Squaw too. Guess it means what I thought it meant before I was told what it meant which it doesn’t mean!! Get that.
So, why is it so offensive if it’s Algonquian Indian for “woman”?
“Buffalo? Small town central MN…good fishing around the area. Nice antique shops, kinda quaint.”
American Woman,
Quaint. Ha. Come around in August at the height of dog days and take a whif.
Tiny,
what did you do to buffalo after i left. Their calling it Quaint. Ha
“Homosexuals cannot naturally have children.” Well, naturally. So…if they adopt is it unnatural?
Nice poem GO..
Yep Markie big change in Tiny..he’s goin’ gay and goin’ green.
A happy guy with a booger problem.
Tiny,
FYI tanks was talkin sh:t about ya yesterday. Something about you and 4blahs movin out of the closet and goin to california.
“NCAA record for most consecutive loses in football at 64.”
I think Prairie View obliterated that record.
“You’re thinkin about Golden Valley you IDIOT!”
Are you still in Golden Valley?
I think she also used the word “Cornholing”
“Squaw is slang for vagina in French? Wow. I could take offense AG…however, all I did was laugh at your comment. As I am a “squaw” (at least the non-Scottish side).”
Oh, I get it (picture CFL bulb going on). You’re part Native American, therefore the handle! Duh!!
“Homosexuals cannot naturally have children”
No matter how hard they try.
“Their calling it Quaint.”
There is a small “Fruitcake Art” Community. Big weaved “Garden Hat” types. They hang out by the bookstore and the deli.
“There is a small “Fruitcake Art” Community. Big weaved “Garden Hat” types. They hang out by the bookstore and the deli.”
Where the goth kids used to hangout?
AG…I’m not offended. I enjoyed the comment. I am very proud of my vagina, thank you very much. My husband kinda likes it too.
Gay marriage? Children? As 4blahs said yesterday America is basically “Clay”, we have all cultures here…who are we to judge. I can see that some of you however, are homophobic.
“So, why is it so offensive if it’s Algonquian Indian for “woman”?”
It’s not offensive but some lamebrain said it was and people just bought it instead of looking into it.
I’ll send Ya a pitcher GO.
I got one of those cameras that are instant. Just take the picture and then shake it around a little bit…and bingo.
Its pretty cool.
I prefer the french translation.
Hey tiny, you old squaw you.
Yes AG…you got it! Native…proud and strong.
“I got one of those cameras that are instant. Just take the picture and then shake it around a little bit…and bingo.”
You got an etch-a-schetch?
“Just because some married couples can’t produce children for whatever reason, we shouldn’t use that to throw out the concept.”
Idiot. It ends the debate that the sole purpose of marriage is to have kids. IT IS NOT.
“Yes AG…you got it! Native…proud and strong.”
Me too, born here! Old and weak!
“Hey tiny, you old squaw you”.
Hey! GSAHA…don’t insult my vagina like that! Tiny is more like a itty bitty winky!
“Hey! GSAHA…don’t insult my vagina like that! Tiny is more like a itty bitty winky!”
That’s the Camel Toe talkin’ right there I’ll tell Ya there.
4blahs
Idiot. It ends the debate that the sole purpose of marriage is to have kids. IT IS NOT.
Wow I guess since you put IT IS NOT in capital letters than it must be so. Considering the answer as to why marriage should or should not only be between a man and a woman is an opinion, you are being incredibly arogant to think your opinion is right and the majority of the courts, legislators and people are wrong.
Old and weak AG? Don’t believe so. The mind is a powerful thing. However, after reading some of these comments I’m not at all sure anymore.
AG…did I get you right? Native?
I pretty much always disagree with KK and half the time I come away from reading her articles really ticked off.
But fired? No. She’s a columnist. She makes a valuable contribution every day to the public discourse. As much as a really despise her opinions half the time, I like how her stories are able to rile up the community like newspaper reporting should do. Censoring KK would be a huge mistake on the part of the Strib and would be a big loss to the public.
Tiny..again I say you poor poor wee thing you….
Did you say you got a Camel Toe? Gender confused there Tiny?
“That’s the Camel Toe talkin’ right there I’ll tell Ya there.”
Ya know I was pondering that camel toe thing again, I mean sence last time and I thought what if you were out on a date with a chick that had a large protruding one and your buddies saw you out with her and the next day they teased ya by saying “dude, you’ve been camel toad”.
tb 77, I agree, she ticks me off the majority of the time however, it does give us a forum to spew from.
Opinion writer is what she is. Even though she irritates me I think I would miss her.
“ender confused there Tiny?”
I got both so didn’t even tell me to go…… tell me to go… I was on Ophra.
Katherine,
Are you out there?
Did they give you the Axe last night?
Is this why we don’t have a new topic today?
Speak to us woman.
Tiny I never knew! How proud you must be.
GSAHA….they won’t let her go…look what she generates…she’s too valuable in her own right. Irritating as she can be.
“Wow I guess since you put IT IS NOT in capital letters than it must be so.”
You got it MOI. On this one I am absolutley correct 100% no doubt about it. Marriage IS NOT only about having kids. People get married ALL THE TIME, and never have and may not want kids. Marriage isnt only about procreation. Only an idiot like you and D2 would claim that it is.
Marriage is so much more and if you guys haven’t figured that out then I feel sorry for you.
OMG! I just agreed with 4blahs!
“GSAHA….they won’t let her go…look what she generates…she’s too valuable in her own right. Irritating as she can be.”
Irritating?
These are the best Psyho Therapy sessions I’ve ever had.
“Marriage is so much more”
Is that true in all cultures? And, for the ones where it’s not, are they wrong and need to be pitied?
BB, the culture that I’m from tells me marriage is yes about children however, it is so more than that. There are other aspects to marriage that make it valuable (not financially) in so many ways. Children are not always produced from these unions due to a variety of reasons. Does this make a marriage bad because it cannot produce children? I don’t believe so.
Mark
Marriage isnt only about procreation. Only an idiot like you and D2 would claim that it is.
You need to go back and read my post. I never gave my opinion, I was only stating that it was the opinion of almost all courts, legislators, and people. Guess you are calling millions of people, including almost all experts in the law, idiots. Well done!
GSAHA, cheaper too!
“Guess you are calling millions of people, including almost all experts in the law, idiots.”
Well arent you?
“Well done!”
My pleasure.
Market…um,I’ve met a few idiots in law…not saying they’re all idiots however, there are some out there that are certainly questionable.
mark
Well arent you?
No I did not.
No, I mean arent all of you idiots? You and millions of others?
“Does this make a marriage bad because it cannot produce children?”
The idea that a marriage that cant produce children (gay marriage according to D2 and the courts) should be invalid and or not allowed should be extended to infertile coupples or those like my father in laws. Other wise using that logic against gay marriage is faulty.
we’ll have to move over the that other papers blog if the old Star goes in the tank. They will welcome us. Won’t they?
We’ll be Blog Orphans. With nooooo shoes.
“Reckless journalism,” Ms. Greiling? Maybe you were thinking about the Gray Lady, which lost its journalistic moorings and integrity decades ago.
What is there about liberals that can’t stand a level playing field? When Cal Thomas had a weekly column in the Pioneer Press years ago, liberals who took umbrage at his opinions regularly howled for his banishment. Perhaps Greiling will one day run for Congress, where she’ll probably champion the reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine.
Okay you guys…when has the political arena and the laws not been faulty. Obviously this arguement was not thought out well when put to the people, and the people did not catch it. Again…political BS colors the issue.
“Oil rises as Saudi Arabia nixes Bush plea”
“NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — Oil prices surged nearly $3, reaching a record high of almost $128 a barrel Friday as Saudi Arabia rejected President Bush’s call to increase production.”
Drill ANWR, drill off coast and build more refineries. Keep all foreign monetary and food aid from these a-holes and pump it into alternative fuel.
Jack up the price of grain for them to equal the cost of oil for them.
And watch civil unrest destroy them
I consider myself to be an Ultra-Idiot
Or a Oba-Idiot
DeGeneres, de Rossi plan to marry, AP is told.
You guys get your invite?
De Rossi could use some “Tiny Time” ..
DeGeneres..Tiny wouldn’t even with Blahs appendage.
Wow,
No post from Katherine today.
I sincerely hope she didn’t get the Friday morning heave-ho.
I figured for sure she would have something to say about the big court case in Cally. Maybe we have to wait for the next installment of her column for that.
Then again we’ve taken up the issue without her so maybe it wasn’t necessary to introduce the topic.
MOI,
Can you point us to some landmark cases where judges actually constructed an argument around marriage rights deriving from the ability to procreate with one another?
“DeGeneres..Tiny wouldn’t even with Blahs appendage.”
Blahs wife put his appendage in a jar on the mantel to taunt him.
Hey 4Blahs does its stare follow you around the room like the eyes in a pitcher?
Oh Katherine, where are you…stop the insanity! Make some of your own…please…come back to us! Tiny, 4blahs and GSAHA seem to need you desperately to give them something new to talk about.
Private Eyes
they’re watching you
they see your every move
Private Eyes
they’re watching you
Private Eyes
they’re watching you watching you watching you watching you
“stare follow you around the room like the eyes in a pitcher?”
Did you mean picture…you IDIOT !
When he has kids he can show them the jar and say; “I use to have those until I married your Mom”
“Did you mean picture…you IDIOT !”
Yes I did tiny nuts. Just checking to see if your paying attention. dufuss
“Tiny wouldn’t even with Blahs appendage”
Tiny is that because you not qualified to operate heavey equiptment? (your welcome $blah)
Would you gus move to California already and leave my junk out of it.
“Tiny, 4blahs and GSAHA seem to need you desperately to give them something new to talk about.”
Topics….sh^t. We can always go back to the discussion about whether you think Steven Seagal runs like a girl or not….Come on
“Would you gus move to California already and leave my junk out of it.”
Mark you’re the guy who brought Tiny up to speed on what “Sack Checkin’” was.
That was kind of weird.
“Would you gus move to California already and leave my junk out of it.”
die
NO…PLEASE….not Steven Seagal!
um…4blahs…they have a point…”sack checkin”….geez
There’s a port, on a western bay
And it serves a hundred ships a day
Lonely sailors, pass the time away
And talk about their homes
And there’s a guy in this harbor town
And he works layin’ whiskey down
They say “Tiny, fetch another round”
he serves them whiskey and wine
The sailors say “Tiny, you’re a fine guy” (you’re a fine guy)
“What a good wife you would be” (such a fine guy)
“Yeah your eyes could steal a sailor from the sea”
“Mark you’re the guy who brought Tiny up to speed on what “Sack Checkin’” was.”
If your going to be picking up hookers Tiny, its a good practice to get in the habit of.
“um…4blahs…they have a point…”sack checkin”….geez ”
And what point is that? You see AW if you check for the sack, you never have to worry about ending up on Inside Edition like Eddie Murphy did.
GO,
Looking glass. I like your version better.
“If your going to be picking up hookers Tiny, its a good practice to get in the habit of.”
Well Im not the worlds most masculine man
But I know what I am and Im glad Im a man
And so is Lola
“You see AW if you check for the sack, you never have to worry about ending up on Inside Edition like Eddie Murphy did.”
Or in the hospital because some chick with a d:ck beat the crap out of ya for resisting.
4duhs,
Why are you being so difficult today?. We normally see eye to eye on everything.
I’m a Sack Checker
I’m a Sack Checker
Watchin’ Sacks go by, hey, my my
I’m a Sack Checker
I’m a Sack Checker
Here comes one now
“Marka and the Bacon Strips” 1995®
Won the public restroom “Wet-Underpants” contest on Spring Break in Ft.Lauderdale this year.
I see guys…thanks for the education. As I’ve never picked up a hooker I wouldn’t know. Always a willing participant in education of the mind though. Thanks for the help.
Come to think of it…in my younger days mind you…never been grabbed for a “sack check” so I must look female enough to pass. As I am female this is a plus. No insult was ever given. Yep, I’m a squaw and proud of it.
Could you imagine if this blog disappeared?? You guys should have a back-up special meeting blog in case one day KK’s column is mysteriously missing…
“Why are you being so difficult today?. We normally see eye to eye on everything.”
Go F@#k yourself.
If this blog goes bye bye look out Big ?.
Ms. Katherine,
Late last night or early A.M., I wrote a long, passionate, carefully crafted defense of you, in response to the question: “Should Katherine Kersten get the ax?” I sent the message, and it then vanished, never to post, and never to be read by anyone.
“Come to think of it…in my younger days mind you…never been grabbed for a “sack check” so I must look female enough to pass.”
That or you dated bi and or gay men and they never knew or didnt care?
Who’s Big?
oopsie- I get it now- you meant Big Question.
“never been grabbed for a “sack check” so I must look female enough to pass. ”
Have you ever looked at someone and thought “dang- is that a man or a woman?” my next thought is always “god, i hope no one ever wonders that about me…..”
I think tiny was a sack checker at cub foods when he was in high school.
No, wait. Maybe that was fudge packer.
4blahs…how boring you become as an a$$hole…seems you need a proctologist to pull your head out of your a$$, soon as possible as the lack of oxigen is causing brain damage.
No GO it was crack gobbler.
gotcha elle…you know what I mean.
Im throwing heymakers today. Everyone in here is subject to it. Sorry, but thems the breaks.
Please Katherine come back so 4blahs gets off our butts and on to yours!
Ms. Katherine,
I learned just yesterday of this organized effort to have you dismissed. I am very upset by this, because you are wrongly accused.
I want very much to help you. I don’t know what to do.
“I want very much to help you. I don’t know what to do.”
I bet it starts and ends with a cane. And bagels.
“Please Katherine come back so 4blahs gets off our butts and on to yours!”
Lets seeeeee? Hmmmmmm….. Where to start?
” bet it starts and ends with a cane. And bagels.”
Isn’t Snoopy a Bagel?
Beagle
“Please Katherine come back so 4blahs gets off our butts and on to yours!”
OOOOla la, tag team
4blahs…whatever nutsack or should I say nutless wonder…your just a lost little a**hole looking for anything to jab at to make yourself feel more like a man…reality check that it would seem would take years at this point.
“Im throwing heymakers today.”
Yeah, I hope people’s psyche will be able to recover from these cutting heymakers you’re throwing …………
Laaaaaaaaame.
No, Mr. 4blahs. No cane or bagels.
This is very serious, we must help Katherine. I have been supportive of Muslim people, but Ms. Katherine has not wanted to hurt anyone. She investigated TIZA, and has spoken out on this and other issues, from an honest heart, wanting what is right. I often disagree with her conclusions, but this attempt to silence her and vilify her is wrong.
GSAHA…read the one I sent for 4blahs, right back at ya.
“4blahs…whatever nutsack or should I say nutless wonder…your just a lost little a**hole looking for anything to jab at to make yourself feel more like a man…reality check that it would seem would take years at this point.”
Add AW to the list of people without a sense of humor on this blog. We already have one NEwbiz AW we dont need another. Lighten up. Its friday Beeaaatch.
BB…yeah!
Americanwoman=tanks
Babe…I’ve got a sense of humor all right…just don’t particularily see you as funny today.
“Yeah, I hope people’s psyche will be able to recover from these cutting heymakers you’re throwing …………
Laaaaaaaaame.”
Your approval means so much to me. Now go get yer shine box.
GSAHA…no problemo
“GSAHA…read the one I sent for 4blahs, right back at ya.”
American Woman,
What crawled up you snatch in the last 5 minutes and sent you off an a PMS induced bukake spin?
“Babe…I’ve got a sense of humor all right…just don’t particularily see you as funny today.”
I bet you’re a big Gallagher fan.
twitchen people you’re twitchen…or is that just beeaaatchin’…..
“Babe…I’ve got a sense of humor all right…just don’t particularily see you as funny today.”
Glory Hole me babe.
“What crawled up you snatch in the last 5 minutes and sent you off an a PMS induced bukake spin?”
I retire.
“I retire”
No don’t bench yourself. the balls still in play
Is tiny taking blog bets on the number of responses to this article?
By the way G….I’m not the only one noticing the attitude change here or haven’t you noticed….I’ve got a sense of humor and I have a willingness to talk topic…as there seems to be no real topic…we’re left with you two…jerkins
“No don’t bench yourself. the balls still in play”
You mean AW’s sack?
How bout it AW, shall we continue?
“Your approval means so much to me. Now go get yer shine box.”
Hey, a movie quote, lame and un-original.
“Is tiny taking blog bets on the number of responses to this article?”
Not anymore. Right now we’re focusing on driving up the number of responses so KK has some numbers to barter with.
Remember folks- its quantity not quality
“I’m not the only one noticing the attitude change here or haven’t you noticed”
Since you’re the newbie, Id dont think you’re qualified to make any statements as to the changing mood of the blog.
dubble_a_ron says:
MOI,
Can you point us to some landmark cases where judges actually constructed an argument around marriage rights deriving from the ability to procreate with one another?
Yes. And to save time….ALL of them.
Start with Loving v. Virginia and go on from there. Even yesterdays opinion gives deference to the issue.
“Hey, a movie quote, lame and un-original.”
Very good. I see you like Goodfellas.
So whats with the name? Big Bomber, are you in the airforce or something, or do you send annoymous packages around the country?
“we’re left with you two…jerkins”
Well said vinegar breath. And may I add your tampoon is especially fragrant today. Is that summer breeze?
“Not anymore. Right now we’re focusing on driving up the number of responses so KK has some numbers to barter with.”
And doing a fine job of it! I’ve only had time to read the posts randomly. It would take all day to read all of them!
“Is that summer breeze?”
I love Seals and Croft. Who would have thought that that song would become the name of a deuche. Did I spell that right?
Oh yeah baby…summer breeze…thanks for noticing!
“song would become the name of a deuche. Did I spell that right? ”
Way off. Its spelled
A M E R I C A N W O M A N
“the name of a deuche. Did I spell that right? ”
Just verify the spelling with how everyone addressed you when they signed your high school yearbook.
You go boys! Do your best work…keep it up. Brings the numbers up right?
BB-yep seems that’s just about right.
“Just verify the spelling with how everyone addressed you when they signed your high school yearbook.”
AHAHAHA - SLAM - Man thats one for the books. HAHAAHHAHAHAHAH
In you face 4blahs. WOOOHOO
“Just verify the spelling with how everyone addressed you when they signed your high school yearbook.”
I didnt realize you spell it S H O R T Y.
Thanks a lot for sending me back to the days I was bullied. I really should have shot some people. I know newbiz would be on my side on this one.
Oh pleeeease…hug your inner child and get over it already! Wawawa….
“If this blog goes bye bye look out Big ?.”
The Strib’s other blog Big Question hasn’t had a comment posted since yesterday at 11:46 AM. Katherine has much better topics, thus almost 600 comments in a day and still counting.
Tell your inner child to stop pawing at its crotch. Its not lady like.
Your the one whining little boy…and by the way…
“Tell your inner child to stop pawing at its crotch…”
Honey its stroken
“Thanks a lot for sending me back to the days I was bullied.”
Has that really changed at all?
Where did all this hostiliy come from?
Im not whinning. I know I was and am still short. Anyway, keep your hands out of your panties for a minute, If you can. On second thought, make sure you get your sack folded back before you quit.
“Your the one whining little boy”
No kidding AW, he really needs to get that prescription for testosterone filled.
You two wanted to play…well BB and I are in the sandbox with you…you threw a little dirt and now it’s coming back…can’t take the heat? Come on…play with us…(smile)
“Has that really changed at all?”
For the most part. I compensated by marrying a hot rich wife. Plus denying credit to people that used to bully you is so theraputic.
Did I hear Buffalo before…hmmm…buffalo chip?
“can’t take the heat?”
Its the smelll AW. Thats the hard part.
Sounds like a personal problem…maybe you should take a bath.
“Where did all this hostiliy come from?”
I’m sorry. I only ask because I LIKE IT!!!!!!!!!
MAKE IT HURT. WHIP ME WHIP ME GOOD. OOOOOOOOHHHH MAKE IT BURN.
“well BB and I are in the sandbox with you”
So thats how you got sand in your pu55y.
“Did I hear Buffalo before…hmmm…buffalo chip?”
Why yes you did ol skanky one. Butt we prefer to call it BUTTHOLE. Ever read the local paper, the “Butthole Urinal Piss”?
“Sounds like a personal problem…maybe you should take a bath.”
Refering to yourself in the third person is so lame. Just stop reusing the deuche and you should be all set.
“well BB and I are in the sandbox with you”
Hey american woman you better get out of there here come the cats. Remember last time how long it took to dig you out.
Actually I have read the local paper…piss ant.
“Just stop reusing the deuche and you should be all set.”
and read the warning. It says not to be taken orally.
Oh come on boys…you can do better than this…I know you can…been reading this blog for a long time now. Get your groove on and motivate the insults a little better.
AW, I guess you think “take a bath” is up to par?
Nope…you just like to brag about you wit and I’m waiting for some of it…seems to be lacking here…
Never said I was any good at it now did I? I’m just trying to learn from the ?best?….
“Nope…you just like to brag about you wit and I’m waiting for some of it…seems to be lacking here…”
I think the deuche has gone to your head. Whan did I brag about our wit?
“Actually I have read the local paper…piss ant.”
Americanwoman your good. you got me laughing soo hard………..
Seriously…I know I’m in for it now…anyway…Buffalo is an alright town and yes I have seen the local paper and actually read it! Yep…there should be some great ammo here for you. I have a brother buried out there, not by a cat either.
Oh please…your ego’s shine here.
But your not from there?
Snorting deuche is much more fun than gargling with it.
What do you think GSAHA?
“Oh please…your ego’s shine here.”
Are you still sore about the Janis Joplin stuff? God let it go.
hey G, 4b, BB and AW
Can you guys give us something with a little more substance. Please.
“What do you think GSAHA?”
I think I want to call you MOM.
Sorry Marketplace….got outta controll here…my apologies.
Awww…GSAHA, that’s so sweet…
“Awww…GSAHA, that’s so sweet…”
And if your not my mom…….can I still suckle.
Hahahahaha…..can you get your lips through the terminal?
“Can you guys give us something with a little more substance. Please.”
How’s this for substance?
I’m rubber, you’re glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.
Ooops…sorry MO…I guess we’re just ignorant fools with no direction since KK didn’t have her usual stuff for us today….
I don’t see you giving any substance MO
“Can you guys give us something with a little more substance. Please.”
Substance? substance? substa…… Nope. I come up blank.
Everyone knows I’m only good for one intellegent….. semi-intellegent…. OK, border line intellegent post per topic and I used my quota up yesterday.
4blahs…Janice Joplin, Billy Holiday, Etta, Ella…
not sore at all…your opinion on the subject has little to no affect on me.
I have an idea. If KK gets the boot we can all go to Dare2’s or Micheal Blaine’s blog. They have good topics.
They won’t give KK the boot. She generates too many opinions. Do you really think they’d ax her?
nope.
“your opinion on the subject has little to no affect on me.”
As it should be. Id be worried if it did.
“I don’t see you giving any substance MO”
I dont know I could see sending some substance your way. If I knew where to find you Id pi55 on your keyboard.
“Billy Holiday, Etta, Ella…”
Okay these I like.
“I don’t see you giving any substance MO”
Hey MO, Nyuck, Nyuck, Nyuck
So…GSAHA…you and Tiny from Buffalo?
4blahs…do you honestly believe I’d tell you where to find me?
“4blahs…do you honestly believe I’d tell you where to find me?”
I wasnt talking to you Deuche Head. I ment MOI. And no I dont think youd tell me.
If you’re looking for me AW, Im in MN and I have blonde hair.
very funny….you were the ones talking about Buffalo previously…so….
“So…GSAHA…you and Tiny from Buffalo?”
do you honestly believe I’d tell you where to find me? You might come out and burn down my trailer :)
But tiny is.
Sooo…you’re not a risk taker, hmmmm.
I grew up there…
Back when Janice was singing…
I’ve only got one trailer girlfiend
“I’ve only got one trailer girlfiend”
Brings a new meaning to the term double wide.
I don’t remember a trailer court out in Buffalo so I would think your safe…besides I’m a squaw…I’m more into giving haircuts. Really really short haircuts.
Homosexuals cannot naturally have children.
d2, I find this statement very interesting, because I know (and have known) many homosexuals who have had children, and quite naturally at that. Many of them were in “traditional” marriages (all of which crumbled when the gay spouse came out).
It is same-sex couples, not individual homosexuals, that cannot have children. As has been pointed out today, there exist many opposite-sex couples that are also incapable of producing offspring. If the right to marry depends on a couple’s ability to procreate, many opposite-sex couples should not be allowed to marry.
“Gay men became known as “faggots” because they used to be burned at the stake for their “sin.””
Sorry, completely wrong.
Look up the word on any Etymology site and it’s explained.
Thanks for the tip, BB. I looked up the word and found this (and I roared at the example given for the use of “fag” as a verb!):
faggot “male homosexual,” 1914, Amer.Eng. slang (shortened form fag is from 1921), probably from earlier contemptuous term for “woman” (1591), especially an old and unpleasant one, in reference to faggot (1) “bundle of sticks,” as something awkward that has to be carried (cf. baggage). It was used in this sense in 20c. by D.H. Lawrence and James Joyce, among others. It may also be reinforced by Yiddish faygele “homosexual,” lit. “little bird.” It also may have roots in Brit. public school slang fag “a junior who does certain duties for a senior” (1785), with suggestions of “catamite,” from fag (v.). This was also used as a verb.
“He [the prefect] used to fag me to blow the chapel organ for him.” [”Boy’s Own Paper,” 1889]
I still think this is more offensive than “Bible-thumper.”
Also, as you noted, my earlier explanation is incorrect. But if enough people think it’s correct, doesn’t the term take on a more sinister meaning? An interesting idea.
Summer breeze makes me feel fine
blowin thru the castles in my mindd….
I’m sure that’s not the correct lyric. Don’t care. I’m glad you’re all having fun because it makes for good reading. I don’t think Katherine got canned. She’s probably scooping up Cub specials. Anyway I”m going to have a dirty beer and a cig and then go home.
Then i’ll eat some oreos, wash ‘em down with some skim milk and cry at a lifetime movie while shopping on QVC.
This is all becuase I gave up golf just in case some woman whose son died in iraq’s war gets offended that I still golf.
“Many of them were in “traditional” marriages (all of which crumbled when the gay spouse came out).”
Do you find this to be very unethical and selfish on their part?
GSAHA=AMERICANWOMAN
Cuz you like to turn yourself on right
cigarettes are also called “fags” in Europe…
EBF…nice history lesson and explanation.
AmericanWoman
we have an ongoing debate about what costitutes living in the country. When you were growing up in buffalo was golde valley and plymouth in the country or did you consider the city.
And was Buffalo living in the country.
GSAHA=AMERICANWOMAN
“Cuz you like to turn yourself on right”
Tanks enough of the gay enuindos. I’m no gayer that Tiny….. No..um… I’m less gay than tiny…….tinys gay not me.
d2, I find this statement very interesting, because I know (and have known) many homosexuals who have had children, and quite naturally at that. Many of them were in “traditional” marriages (all of which crumbled when the gay spouse came out).
You know, and this just makes me so mad. If you know you’re gay, don’t marry and procreate with someone who isn’t. It’s not fair to you and it’s not fair to them and especially not to your (future)children. The whole thing with the gov of NJ or whoever he was - selfish scheming bastard and I hope his boyfriend hath dumped him. Slimeball.
Of course, if gay people were allowed to get married and adopt kids freely without judgement and scorn from society it would probably not happen.
So, thank you, wack job righties, for doing ‘the right thing’ and sticking by your million year old book allegedly written by your deity of choice. Way to go there, really nice.
All that said, I can say if I were gay, I would rather live here with these rules than psychotic radical islamic countries where they murder someone just because they’re gay, or outspoken.
d2, I find this statement very interesting, because I know (and have known) many homosexuals who have had children, and quite naturally at that. Many of them were in “traditional” marriages (all of which crumbled when the gay spouse came out).
You know, and this just makes me so mad. If you know you’re gay, don’t marry and procreate with someone who isn’t. It’s not fair to you and it’s not fair to them and especially not to your (future)children. The whole thing with the gov of NJ or whoever he was - selfish scheming bastard and I hope his boyfriend hath dumped him. Slimeball.
Of course, if gay people were allowed to get married and adopt kids freely without judgement and scorn from society it would probably not happen.
So, thank you, wack job righties, for doing ‘the right thing’ and sticking by your million year old book allegedly written by your deity of choice. Way to go there, really nice.
All that said, I can say if I were gay, I would rather live here with these rules than psychotic radical islamic countries where they murder someone just because they’re gay, or outspoken.
Tanks,
I sense a hint of jealousy.
Lets settle this like adults. You and Americanwoman tear each others clothes off while having a pillow fight and the winner gets me.
4duhs,
Congressman John Kline is on Jason Lewis right now (KTLK 100.3 FM) and explaining the stunt liberal democrats pulled yesterday to try stopping funding for our troops. You should tune in, it might educate a liberal like you.
Golden Valley and Plymouth was country. Buffalo…yep, country. Horse farms, cattle and fields of crops. Used to have keggers in the fields, try to miss the cow pies as we passed out.
lol GSAHA> Keep dreaming. More like you and Tiny tear eachother’s clothes off and the winner gets Mark.
(no offense mark)
4blah,
We have another vote for Golden Valley being country.
Ok I’m getting that dirty beer - have a good weekend all!
GSAHA-Can’t touch dat…
“You should tune in, it might educate a liberal like you.”
Too busy right now saving orphans from a burning building.
“We have another vote for Golden Valley being country.”
If you border Mpls, you’re not in the country.
“Keep dreaming. More like you and Tiny tear eachother’s clothes off and the winner gets Mark.”
Thats just wrong. Tinys like a brother. We grew up together. If we wanted to we would just share Markie.
“Thats just wrong. Tinys like a brother. We grew up together. If we wanted to we would just share Markie.”
Id be happy to kick both yer @sses.
If a gay married someone who knew what their sexual identity was then I don’t see an issue because they married them knowingly. What irritates me is when they “keep it in the closet” then disclose the information when conveinant for them. That’s unethical.
obviously 4blahs is too young to remember the farming community…Golden Valley-country.
“obviously 4blahs is too young to remember the farming community…Golden Valley-country.”
Yeah back in ‘78 it was still a bunch of dirt roads and tractors out in Ol’ Golden Valley.
“Yeah back in ‘78 it was still a bunch of dirt roads and tractors out in Ol’ Golden Valley.”
Try ‘65 you little turd burglar
Well I gotta go. it’s 95°F here and all the slow diving in the passing lane morons will be on the roads soon.
Adios Sombreros
Golden Valley 60’s and 70’s….country
adios…I’m out of here too.
Do you find this to be very unethical and selfish on their part?
It depends on the circumstances.
I have a gay male friend who is in his seventies. He fathered three children with his wife before he came out and got divorced. I asked how he could have heterosexual sex without being grossed out, and he replied that, at the time, getting married and having kids was simply an expectation (societal and familial) that was too powerful to go against. “I just did what I had to do,” he said.
I have another friend (female) who has a son about my age (mid forties). This friend is very religious, conservative and Republican (we’ve been good friends for a long time; we just don’t discuss politics and religion). Anyway, her son fathered three children with his wife before he came out and got divorced. Given the religiosity of this family, I cannot say that this man was unethical or selfish.
In both of these cases – and there are thousands and thousands like these across the country – these men did what they thought everyone else wanted and expected them to do. They bowed to overwhelming societal, familial and/or religious pressure to conform. The disastrous results speak for themselves.
If you know you’re gay, don’t marry and procreate with someone who isn’t. It’s not fair to you and it’s not fair to them and especially not to your (future) children.
Some people refuse to admit that they’re gay, even to themselves, because they fear how others will react. It is only after they have tried to conform and found that they are miserable that they find the strength and courage to be who they really are. It’s sad that others get hurt in the process, but I see it as a case of society reaping what it has sown.
Of course, if gay people were allowed to get married and adopt kids freely without judgement and scorn from society it would probably not happen.
Bingo. As society becomes more accepting of homosexuality, gay men and lesbians will face less pressure to live lies. This should reduce the number of marriages where one spouse is a hiding homosexual.
All that said, I can say if I were gay, I would rather live here with these rules than psychotic radical islamic countries where they murder someone just because they’re gay, or outspoken.
So would I. Of course, there are choices other than the United States and fundamentalist Islamic countries, so this comparison is a bit disingenuous.
Evil,
It’s interesting though how gay marriage supporting liberals attack Christianity, but leave Islam alone. As a commentor stated:
“I would rather live here with these rules than psychotic radical islamic countries where they murder someone just because they’re gay”
“You guys should have a back-up special meeting blog in case one day KK’s column is mysteriously missing…”
Might have to go across the river, maybe?
Obama assails, McCain attacks.
I’m tellin’ Ya the press bias is already palpable. My friends, watch the words used in headlines and lead ins they have meaning. Its almost a don’t dare to question Obama kind of feeling I get. Thats borderline dangerous isn’t it?
And I don’t want to hear any more crying about Fox News…Those clowns over at MSNBC are Lying to you at twice the rate Fox is.
President Bush just asked the Saudi’s to increase oil production, but they said no. How long do you think it will take liberals to admit that they are wrong in banning drilling in OUR OWN vast oil reserves?
But in the end the American people will see the obvious bias and folks they won’t let the press decide who their president will be.
And I believe it’s again another case of the media over playing its hand again. They just can’t help themselves. They are just so that way.
Tiny,
I know what you are saying is true, but WHY is the media so disgustingly liberal? I don’t get it.
“WHY is the media so disgustingly liberal?”
Maybe 4duhs can answer that one.
EBF
In both of these cases – and there are thousands and thousands like these across the country – these men did what they thought everyone else wanted and expected them to do. They bowed to overwhelming societal, familial and/or religious pressure to conform. The disastrous results speak for themselves.
Lookee here, EBF is even excusing other people from manning up and taking personal responsibility. Notice how he gives these guys a ‘pass’ and blames something else instead of holding these persons responsible for their own behavior.
Way to keep standing up for the ‘ain’t got a pair’ and ‘can’t man up’ beliefs system!!
Some people refuse to admit that they’re gay, even to themselves, because they fear how others will react. It is only after they have tried to conform and found that they are miserable that they find the strength and courage to be who they really are. It’s sad that others get hurt in the process, but I see it as a case of society reaping what it has sown.
Again, it was somebody else’s fault. No taken personal responsibility here, oh no, they feared how others would react and society reaping what it has sown. Wow here you are sanctioning hurting people who are completely innocent. Way to show tolerance for others. You are no better than a terrorist who hurts innocent people.
Again, as I have said many many times, you need to grow a pair, man up and take personal responsibility, AND you also need to hold all of your buddies-in-arms also personally responsible for their behavior. Geez, doesn’t someone have a pair over their, doesn’t someone need to be a top??!!
I also noticed that EBF and JonR gave no deference to the ‘will of the people’ because they thought the ‘will of the people’ was wrong!!
It’s easy to see that all EBF and JonR’s talk of being a proud American and loving our democracy, they really only love it if the democracy bends to their own agenda. If the will of the people, i.e democracy, does not agree with EBF and JonR, then they are all for somebody (some court) forcing the people to bend to what EBF and JonR thinks that is right.
That is not democracy; that is a totalitarian fascist dictator type government. Way to advocate turning the US into Cuba or Venezuela or some other country controlled by a fascist dictator.
“Thats just wrong. Tinys like a brother. We grew up together. If we wanted to we would just share Markie.”
4blahs says-
“Id be happy to kick both yer @sses.”
Well Markie to be honest if tiny and I were of that persuasion the only kicking you would be doing is the old bucking bronco kind as we took turns holding you down in the Pulp Fiction kind of way.
G.S.A.H.A.
Don’t you have anyting better to do on a Friday night than post here.
You should know that Mark will not see any of this blog until Monday morning. He only looks at the blog at work.
As for Tiny, can’t you just call him!!! Its not like you don’t know him. I bet you even know him in the ‘biblical sense’ since you grew up together in farm country - where the men are men and the sheep and cows are nervous!!
As for your “Pulp Fiction kind of way” why don’t you invite over EBF, JonR and GHS, at least they would get enjoyment out of the whole thing.
Tanks posts
All that said, I can say if I were gay, I would rather live here with these rules than psychotic radical islamic countries where they murder someone just because they’re gay, or outspoken.
Then EBF respondes:
So would I. Of course, there are choices other than the United States and fundamentalist Islamic countries, so this comparison is a bit disingenuous.
Definition of disingenous: lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere.
Tanks compared the treatment of gays in the US to the treatment of gays in extreme islamic countries.
What makes the comparison disingenous?
I just tuned into PUBLIC TELIVISON (channel 17) and saw the anti-American liberal spew that Bill Moyers is preaching. Why does the liberal message need to be funded by taxpayers?
“Don’t you have anyting better to do on a Friday night than post here.”
MOI,
I could ask you the same thing. It was 6:17 here when I posted so technically it wasn’t Night. And after today who’s to say when Markie might log on.
As far as me and tiny’s relationship is concerned we know each other less in a biblical sense than you and the back of you butt buddies head.
Also Isn’t it disingenous of you to make a sexual slur reference of EBF, JonR and GHS because you know them to be gay when I was makeing a homophobic joke about “Pulp Fiction Sex” at the exspence of 3 heterolsexual individuals, myself included.
I would have included you but I’m still on the fence as to which way you flip.
“It depends on the circumstances.
I have a gay male friend who is in his seventies. He fathered three children with his wife before he came out and got divorced. I asked how he could have heterosexual sex without being grossed out, and he replied that, at the time, getting married and having kids was simply an expectation (societal and familial) that was too powerful to go against. “I just did what I had to do,” he said.
I have another friend (female) who has a son about my age (mid forties). This friend is very religious, conservative and Republican (we’ve been good friends for a long time; we just don’t discuss politics and religion). Anyway, her son fathered three children with his wife before he came out and got divorced. Given the religiosity of this family, I cannot say that this man was unethical or selfish.
In both of these cases – and there are thousands and thousands like these across the country – these men did what they thought everyone else wanted and expected them to do. They bowed to overwhelming societal, familial and/or religious pressure to conform. The disastrous results speak for themselves.”
Im sure the wives who’s lives they help destroy take comfort in the fact that while they were being lied to and decieved, their husbands were just doing what they had to do. Boy talk about passing the buck.
“Anyway, her son fathered three children with his wife before he came out and got divorced. Given the religiosity of this family, I cannot say that this man was unethical or selfish.”
Marriage is about honesty and truth. Being faithful doesnt start with your sex life, its starts with your heart. Marrying a women when you know your gay and lying about it is the ultimate act of selfishness. These men took a trusting person and took advantage of them to hide something they couldnt deal with honestly. That is unbelievabley selfish and Im surprised you’d condone it.
“Some people refuse to admit that they’re gay, even to themselves, because they fear how others will react. It is only after they have tried to conform and found that they are miserable that they find the strength and courage to be who they really are. It’s sad that others get hurt in the process, but I see it as a case of society reaping what it has sown.”
Hey Im gay so I can destroy another persons life. Yeah that makes sense.
“Bingo. As society becomes more accepting of homosexuality, gay men and lesbians will face less pressure to live lies. This should reduce the number of marriages where one spouse is a hiding homosexual.”
It cant believe that you would basically refer to women who have been lied to and had their lives crushed because some one else didnt have the balls to live their own life and had to drag someone else into their charade of decit as collateral damage. All that seems to mater to you EBF is that the gay community is the ultimate victim and that being a heterosexual female, she isnt as important than what the gay male is going through. Her life and asperations are inconsequential to his needs as a gay man. He isnt at fault for his lies. Man thats low. His need to confrom is worth ruining someone elses life or atleast excusable.
Marriage is about honesty and truth. Being faithful doesnt start with your sex life, its starts with your heart. Marrying a women when you know your gay and lying about it is the ultimate act of selfishness. These men took a trusting person and took advantage of them to hide something they couldnt deal with honestly. That is unbelievabley selfish and Im surprised you’d condone it.
Well said Mark. While I understand the pressure that EBF talks about. I do not understand the decision making process.
I asked how he could have heterosexual sex without being grossed out
HELLO!!
4duhs says:
“Hey Im gay
Go figure!
Dare2, Yournot gay. Your to conservatively steriotypicly ignorantly republican in a “We need you to counter weight the other side” way. So if you read ths correctly you will know that I mean no Offense. Its the old fashion good vs evil balance that bleeds into everything
This reminds me of the movie “Humpback Mountain”
It’s very disturbing when grown homosexual men father children just to prove a point.
Thanks Go
Hope you are enjoying the nice warm weather out in OR. It’s beautiful here!
“Dare2, Yournot gay. Your to conservatively steriotypicly ignorantly republican in a “We need you to counter weight the other side” way. So if you read ths correctly you will know that I mean no Offense. Its the old fashion good vs evil balance that bleeds into everything”
So its just a pu55y hair before 8 in OR. Using this past post as a measuring stick Id say 4 beers in.
Dare2, Yournot gay.
Ahhh. We don’t know that.
4blah,
I hope you didn’t take offense to my 8:17 post. You know us homophobic jokesters never get enough.
and on the topic of gay men leaving their wives-
My uncle did this. Very devout Catholic growing up in smallville. It was devestating to all when he left her for another man. I havent seen his X sense but I have heard that she moved to marry again and he is still with the gentleman that broke up their marriage. I don’t know what they went through but I can imagine, knowing the makeup of our familys that it was not pleasent.
Now I must BBG steak and have a beverage for as MOI questioned - I do have something better to do.
“Well said Mark. While I understand the pressure that EBF talks about. I do not understand the decision making process.”
Its the Im a victim and anything I do is excusable thought process. Im pro gay marriage and support gay people getting all the same rights that I have but this idea that gay people can marry and lie to others because of societal preasure is absolute BS.
My best fiend is gay and didnt get married. He chose to be honest. He didnt drag someone else into a life of lies so that his neighbors or parents or co workers wouldnt figure him out. On a spineless person would think that its okay to do that to another person.
“So its just a pu55y hair before 8 in OR. Using this past post as a measuring stick Id say 4 beers in.”
4 beers and one vodka tonic with a splash of OJ, buddy. with 2 rib eyes sitten out for 20 minutes at room temp.
Kind of weird going from running the heat onday to running the Ac today. Oh well. It will be down to 80°F on saturday and we’re going to Astoria for the day.
you guys have a good night and hopefully KK has ajob for us to go to monday. Otherwise I say we all regroup at Dare2 site to plan our escape.
“I don’t know what they went through but I can imagine, knowing the makeup of our familys that it was not pleasent.”
Im sure it was devistating to all concerned. But it could have all been avoided had he made some better choices. The victim list in that one starts with the wife.
I bet 4duhs is only %25 less gay than JonR, and %20 less gay than evil.
“4 beers and one vodka tonic with a splash of OJ, buddy. with 2 rib eyes sitten out for 20 minutes at room temp.”
Pretty close.
“you guys have a good night and hopefully KK has ajob for us to go to monday. Otherwise I say we all regroup at Dare2 site to plan our escape.”
Id rather sleep with EBF. I say shadow blog. How about Jan 1st 08 on Big ?.
“I bet 4duhs is only %25 less gay than JonR, and %20 less gay than evil.”
How did you guess that? You got the % right on the money.
4duhs says”
“Id rather sleep with EBF”
You go girl!
He didnt drag someone else into a life of lies so that his neighbors or parents or co workers wouldnt figure him out. On a spineless person would think that its okay to do that to another person.
Bully for him!
I had a peripheral relative (Godfather’s brother)who was gay. He married a lesbian and they lived together as husband and wife.(no kids) It wasn’t until after she died that he came out.
A much better plan in my book, then what we’ve been discussing.
4 beers and one vodka tonic with a splash of OJ
MAN UP, and pick up the pace!!!!
Marka
I am in awe. Your posts were perfect. I hope they don’t fall on deaf ears.
FC
If you are reading this, do you have an opinion regarding what EBF wrote?
Wow…lots of judgement coming from people who’ve never once had to question their own “being”.
You have no idea what it’s like to feel forced to be someone you are not. Nor do you understand how it can be so far repressed that you don’t even know it’s there.
Wow…lots of judgement coming from people who’ve never once had to question their own “being”.
Liar, you cannot know this.
You have no idea what it’s like to feel forced to be someone you are not. Nor do you understand how it can be so far repressed that you don’t even know it’s there.
Ahhh, you don’t know that either.
If you have, then you’re being a hypocrite by asking homosexuals to disregard it if you had to do it yourself.
Let me clarify that, if I can:
If you’ve experienced such a thing, why would completely disregard another person’s same struggle by saying something such as, “Its the Im a victim and anything I do is excusable thought process.” That would lead me to believe that the person saying it has no comprehension of the real struggle.
If you have, then you’re being a hypocrite by asking homosexuals to disregard it if you had to do it yourself.
What the hell does that have to do with what I wrote? Have I questioned my “being”, sure, but not in a homosexual way.
God, your not the only people that have “questions about their being”
considering homosexuality was the topic at hand, I assumed you could follow. Sorry for not being clear.
“God, your not the only people that have “questions about their being” ”
Then where’s the compassion? If it’s part of the human condition, why the non-understanding of the gay struggle?
Then where’s the compassion? If it’s part of the human condition, why the non-understanding of the gay struggle?
Where do you get the idea that I don’t have compassion for the human condition? Where do you get the idea that I don’t understand the “gay struggle”?
I expect people to be honest. Especailly about their love for another human. If you don’t have the seeds to be what you are, what are you?
How can you be what you are, if what you are is so repressed you don’t know it’s there?
How can you be what you are, if what you are is so repressed you don’t know it’s there?
If you don’t know it’s there. How can it be repressed?
I have no idea. I have not had that struggle. But why do you discount the stories of so many gay people who say they never knew?
If you don’t know it’s there. How can it be repressed?
I should have said.
Where does your responsibility in the repression begin? More importantly, where does it end?
If it starts in childhood, is the child at fault?
But why do you discount the stories of so many gay people who say they never knew?
If you don’t know your gay. How can you be gay!
Some choose to repress those feelings and conform because it’s the path of least resistance. That’s fine, as long as you don’t take anyone else down with you.
What if you’re told your whole life that there is no other path?
What if you’re told your whole life that there is no other path
Happiness doesn’t come from listening to others. It comes from listening to yourself, and making your dreams come true!
Yes, I’m sure the stories of the young men and women in the FLDS compound verify your position.
Anyone out there?? I’ll buy you a blog drink..
___
[ ]
\ /
_{_
“Wow I guess since you put IT IS NOT in capital letters than it must be so. Considering the answer as to why marriage should or should not only be between a man and a woman is an opinion, you are being incredibly arogant to think your opinion is right and the majority of the courts, legislators and people are wrong. ”
I’m not so sure “people” are part of the majority. In fact, it’s highly conceiveable that “people” are getting less and less interested in the ideologies perpetuated during the last eight years than any of us know.
The brand initiating the values driving those opinions has now gone the way of spoiled dog food - as commented by one of the brands own legislators.
Folks wanna get along again.
People should be free to do whatever they choose as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else, but gay marriage would bring society down as a whole.
Forgive my ignorance D2…explain to me why “gay marriage would bring society down as a whole”…please. Just curious about your opinion.
Looking at society from my perspective I see it pretty free and easy with morals. No one person wants to take responsibility for their actions anymore. It’s always someone elses fault.
I like to keep an open mind however, I do have my personal morals and try to stick to them. Not that I haven’t made mistakes in my life.
“Church bars severely autistic boy from mass”
This will bring out the “Church Haters”. Who the hell are you people trying to kid. I’ll bet everyone of the above Fruitcakes will be saying the “Seeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee how those people are” when they read this story.
Pam Louwagie is deliberating trying to cause Hate..get the HATE phone calls going to the church. Harassment Pam, harassment
FIRE PAM
FIRE PAM
FIRE PAM.
You Nutcases you pick and choose what religion your going to attack. If this had been a mosque, well first we would never have hear about it. Second the person complaining would be a “hater”. Third if we did hear about it, it would be…”oh oh oh its a culture thing Tiny you Caveman.”
I may not agree with what this church did or what many church’s do, I don’t go to church. But Damn it I’ve been reading this attack on Christians and leave the rest alone from this paper for the past 10 years or so. And this Pam Louwagie isn’t she the same “hack” who tried to make us feel sorry for the Illegal immigrant killer of those children in the bus accident.
I think maybe Pam has her “create Hate” agenda. I think Pam should be fired.
FIRE PAM
FIRE PAM
I can’t wait until this piece of sh^t paper goes bankrupt and these Nutjob reports get a taste of the real world in the unemployment line.
“People should be free to do whatever they choose as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else, but gay marriage would bring society down as a whole. ”
That’s debateable at the very least. Sky is falling mentality/ideology drives it. ‘Why’ homosexuality exists and how we define it is the big question that alot of folks are not willing to deal with. If they were to understand that more and more the conclusion is biological other than a “choice” we may be able to see past the ideology and accept it as not a ‘condition’.
BTW .. I’m a registered democrat and veteran. MANY of us are not the pascifists you portray and would/have put our butts out there to defend this country. However, the definition of defending this country does not include the current administrations views.
I HATE THIS PAPER…Really I can’t think of one thing that I really hate..I mean deep down really really hate.
BUT I HATE THIS PAPER.
LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS?
***************************
NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams on Monday evening gave credibility to the extremist environmental theory that the Earth is reacting to mankind’s mistreatment by spawning a rash of tornadoes. Williams reported how “this has been one of the most active, deadly tornado seasons in a long time” with more tornadoes so far this year than through August last year. He then forwarded to NBC Weather Plus meteorologist Bill Karins the kind of reasoning he hears during his daily routine: “I talked to three people, casual conversation today, all of them smart, saying ‘I don’t know, we must be doing something to our Earth.’” Karins gently corrected him: “Well, there are correlations that can be made. Global warming not quite one of them. La Nina, more likely.”
“Forgive my ignorance D2…”
No problem.
Tiny-maybe I should invite this boy to my church….we have a saying at my church “we come here in our brokeness and all are welcome”. We do not discriminate nor do we judge because of where we come from. It saddens me when religion is used as a weapon to make people comply. Christians have been attacked over and over again through out history…we shall survive. No, I do not go to an A-typical church however, it is full of Christians.
Now before you go getting all bent out of shape like Tiny just did, ask yourself.
What’s the motivation behind the Startribune and this reporter to print this story?
And do it honestly !
“explain to me why “gay marriage would bring society down as a whole”…please. Just curious about your opinion.”
Is there any question that if gay marriage was imposed on society, the anti-American ACLU would make damn sure that public schools are forced to teach our kids that homosexual marriage is as healthy and equal to traditional marriage? I don’t understand how that would be good for society….
“It saddens me when religion is used as a weapon to make people comply.”
AmericanWoman the story worked on you. The Startribune got you moving in the right the right direction. That line you wrote is what they want.
Trust me this story has NOTHING to do with this church or this kid. NOTHING. It’s a side show that enables this reporter and this paper to continue its Anti-Christian agenda.
Again I’m not a religious, but I’m tried of the obverse bias in this paper.This whole thing with K.K. is nothing but nonsense. If the Muslim school had been a Christian school old Pam would be writing the story and everyone in the newsroom would be giving her high-fives.
That’s how this little Startribune game works…trust me.
D2 - Have you not been in the schools recently? Kids have become more and more open about their sexuality. Hiding it isn’t as common any longer. They wear their sexuality proud. Times are changing. Do I agree with gay marriage…no. Will that change anything? no. Am I a defeatist…not really, I’ve just seen so much BS in my life, I’m tired of the hypocracy. I try to keep an open mind and give others a break. I follow my own morals and theirs are their own. I take responsibility for my own actions.
Tiny, God help me…YOUR RIGHT…I fell for it. You are also right about the bias of this paper…geez.
Well you did AW it went right to your heart. In affect you said; “How could those people do that”
Others will say
“And they call themseleves Christians”
Yet others will say “See how phony those people are”
But you question anything outside of Christianity and the Fruitcake email campaign begins and someone needs to be fired.
Remember this story has NOTHING, NOTHING to do with this kid. The kid is being used to get the reaction that they got from you.
AmericanWoman,
I don’t think public schools are doing a very good job as far as “sexuality” goes. I read in the Strib that over 50% of black teenage girls have some sort of STD? Bill Clinton is responsible for a lot of this, but the schools can be blamed as well.
I agree with you on the extreme liberal bias at the Star Democrat Tribune. Did the church story really need to be the headline?
And I got a 1,000 blog dollars that says Pam Louwagie is at this moment in her yard wearing the biggest goddamn straw garden hat you’ve ever see.
Wearing sandals.
Using only organic top soil with African Buffalo poop in it.
Liberal democrat Amy Klobuchar has a piece in today’s Star Democrat Tribune editoral section in which she blames President Bush for the high gas prices.
She need to pull her head out and admit that she and her liberal friends in Congress are to blame by not allowing us to tap into our own vast oil reserves and not allowing more refineries to be built. Being dependant on the Arabs and leftist dictator Hugo Chavez is a bad idea.
D2 - I wasn’t talking STD’s or pregnancy’s…I was talking sexual orientation. These kids have free will and society as a whole seems to be free and easy with sexual content, tv, mags, movies…so who’s responsible…society. The village raises the children. I myself come from a free love background. I’m not inhibited however I am faithful and true to my husband. It’s not just up to schools and churches to teach the children…it’s up to us. Balance is something that is lacking here.
Have a great day everyone! I have some dead oak trees waiting to be cut down.
I taught my daughter to the best of my ability to respect herself and her body, not to be ashamed of her body. To be proud she is a female. Self-respect, dignity and pride. I taught her about STD’s. I taught her about sexuality. I didn’t depend on others to generate the knowledge and possibly mess my kid up. I took responsibility for my own child.
“It’s not just up to schools and churches to teach the children…”
I agree totally!
She need to pull her head out and admit that she and her liberal friends in Congress are to blame by not allowing us to tap into our own vast oil reserves and not allowing more refineries to be built.
Both parties are to blame for this. Don’t forget that Bush had Republican control of both houses of Congress for 6 years and did nothing.
Yes both parties are to blame and I for one feel “We the People” should stand up and take OUR country back. More protests are needed to get our points across. Instead of sitting on our butts and complaining to each other. Speak out, generate our feelings. Stop using the Constitution as toilet paper. If you’re wondering if I have protested myself…yes.
AW
Stop using the Constitution as toilet paper.
I assume you mean how the gun control lobby and legislators have tried to subvert the 2nd amendment and how “activist” judges have violated the seperation of powers and added to the constitution illegally.
YES
“Don’t forget that Bush had Republican control of both houses of Congress for 6 years and did nothing.”
JonR,
There is a difference between “Republican” and “Conservative”. Too many RINO Rupublicans in Congress have been voting like liberals and hurting our country. They need to be tossed just like the activist judges.
Let me guess…they’re only RINOs when they don’t agree with your interpretation of reality.
This quote from Judge Baxter’s concurring and dissenting opinion from the California Supreme Court’s recent decision regarding gay marriage states precisely the correct problem:
…[T]he majority violates the separation of powers, and thereby commits profound error.
Only one other American state recognizes the right the majority announces today. So far, Congress, and virtually every court to consider the issue, has rejected it. Nothing in our [California] Constitution, express or implicit, compels the majority’s startling conclusion that the age-old understanding of marriage — an understanding recently confirmed by an initiative law — is no longer valid. California statutes already recognize same-sex unions and grant them all the substantive legal rights this state can bestow. If there is to be a further sea change in the social and legal understanding of marriage itself, that evolution should occur by similar democratic means.
The majority forecloses this ordinary democratic process, and, in doing so, oversteps its authority. The majority’s mode of an@lysis is particularly troubling. The majority relies heavily on the Legislature’s adoption of progressive civil rights protections for gays and lesbians to find a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. In effect, the majority gives the Legislature indirectly power that body does not directly possess to amend the Constitution and repeal an initiative statute. I cannot subscribe to the majority’s reasoning, or to its result. [emphasis appeared in original text]…
The People, directly or through their elected representatives, have every right to adopt laws abrogating the historic understanding that civil marriage is between a man and a woman. The rapid growth in California of statutory protections for the rights of gays and lesbians, as individuals, as parents, and as committed partners, suggests a quickening evolution of community attitudes on these issues. Recent years have seen the development of an intense debate about same-sex marriage. Advocates of this cause have had real success in the marketplace of ideas, gaining attention and considerable public support. Left to its own devices, the ordinary democratic process might well produce, ere long, a consensus among most Californians that the term “marriage” should, in civil parlance, include the legal unions of same-sex partners.
But a bare majority of this court, not satisfied with the pace of democratic change, now abruptly forestalls that process and substitutes, by judicial fiat, its own social policy views for those expressed by the People themselves. Undeterred by the strong weight of state and federal law and authority, the majority invents a new constitutional right, immune from the ordinary process of legislative consideration. The majority finds that our Constitution suddenly demands no less than a permanent redefinition of marriage, regardless of the popular will….
I would label a Republican a RINO if they support open borders or prevent us for drilling our own oil.
I would label a Republican a RINO if they support open borders or prevent us from drilling our own oil.
Here’s an example:
Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Larry Craig (R-Idaho) have added an illegal alien amnesty provison to the the Iraq spending bill. Larry Craig should be kicked out of office for this (and other disturbing incidents).
Three cheers for the learned majority of the California Supreme Court for striking down bigoted, anti-gay laws.
Back to the topic of how gay men marry when they know they’re gay.
I know of two gay men at opposite ends of society’s acceptance continuum regarding being gay.
One is in his 50’s. Married a female because it was “expected of him”, had children. Then he decided to inform his family he was gay. To this day, neither his ex-wife, children, or his nuclear family will speak to him. So sad. He is one of the nicest guys you’d want to know. He’s saddened by being outcast from close family, but he still continues to live his life fully, mainly because he is still living. He’s not dead yet.
The second guy is in his late 30’s. Has never married. Doesn’t plan to. He informed his family he was gay when he was in his 20’s. Family accepts him being gay. He’s still himself, just doesn’t date women. I met him just recently and he’s a very nice gentleman. When my friend told me her son was gay, I didn’t think anything of it. He was the last of her 3 kids that I got to meet as he’s lives in California and was home recently because my friend/his mom had a stroke two weeks ago. His being gay does not factor in the big picture of life when I’m interacting with him.
When will homophobic people realize that gay people are just people? Imagine what life would be like if homosexual people were AFRAID of heterosexual people. We wouldn’t like it. At all.
I think youngsters today are more accepting of homosexuals in general due to the exposure that they see on t.v. I loved watching “Will & Grace” and that show with the 5 gay guys that did makeovers on heterosexual men. Can’t remember the name of the show, but they had some pretty good pointers that they gave to the guys. I didn’t watch the shows to pass judgment on them; I watched them because they were good shows.
MOI- I am curious how you feel about gun laws. You have probably talked about it before, but i either missed it or don’t remember. I know you are a “Constitution scholar” and would welcome your opinion on the subject. Namely, should individuals be allowed to own and carry personal handguns. I’m not talking about hunting rifles or anything like that. Just handguns for personal safety.
iamme
I think you have missed the point of why we were all discussing gay men marrying a woman.
We were disgusted at how EBF and others have given a ‘pass’ to gay men when they have hurt others whose only crime was to love and trust them.
DJ
Namely, should individuals be allowed to own and carry personal handguns. I’m not talking about hunting rifles or anything like that. Just handguns for personal safety.
Yes, the second amendment gaurantees the right of indviduals to keep and bear arms. That includes handguns. I do believe in some limitations, however, those limitations would be on the same level as the limitation on free speech, press, equal rights; e.g. strict scrutiny. Obviously a complete banning of all hand guns would fail strict scrutiny.
The USSC has never definitively ruled on the second amendment. This is going to change this June when they are scheduled to release their opinion in Heller
“Namely, should individuals be allowed to own and carry personal handguns.”
We would be safer if more responsible people carried handguns. When I was in Israel I couldn’t believe how many people carried guns, but when you have terrorist lunatics living among you, you have to be armed.
OK, thanks MOI
JonR
Three cheers for the learned majority of the California Supreme Court for striking down bigoted, anti-gay laws.
Just so we are clear, are you saying that only calling a marriage between a man and a woman a marriage is bigoted and anti-gay; even though same sex unions and opposite unions share the same rights?
moi, I just re-read EBF’s 4 pm post and his 5:35 pm post of 5/16 and I’m not seeing where EBF is giving a “pass” to gay men that have hurt others by not informing their loved ones that they are gay.
What I did read was him giving a little bit of history between the two time periods where letting people know that you’re gay was not favorable vs. being honest with yourself and letting the people in your immediate family know that you are gay.
iammeI, 4blahs, and tluck have posted a pretty good autopsy’s of EBF’s posts and how he is giving gay man a ‘pass’ when they hurt others who were innocent.
I will post two quotes, again, on where EBF does not blame the gay man and puts the onous on society; i.e. gives the gay men a ‘pass’.
these men did what they thought everyone else wanted and expected them to do. They bowed to overwhelming societal, familial and/or religious pressure to conform. The disastrous results speak for themselves.
It’s sad that others get hurt in the process, but I see it as a case of society reaping what it has sown.
The decision in the CA case is going to be terrible decision in the long run for gay marriage rights.
Gays and straight unions share the same rights in CA, the only difference is a gay union is called a domestic partnership and a straight union is called a marriage. The court ruled that they have to be called the same thing whether that be a marriage, a civil union, a domestic partnership, or something else.
This is going to feed the monster and have a backlash.
Look at the situation. Prop 22 passed by 61.4% of the vote. Prop 22 said a marriage was only between a man and a woman. However, the people have also gave gay unions the same rights as straight unions. Basically the people have said that everyone enjoys the same rights for a civil union but we want them to be called different names.
The opponents of gay marriage have said that gays want to change marriage and gays have responded that – no they just want equal rights. Well this ruling is going to give the opponents evidence that even when gays get the same rights; they still want to be called a marriage.
This ruling is going to inflame the beast.
moi says:
Lookee here, EBF is even excusing other people from manning up and taking personal responsibility. Notice how he gives these guys a ‘pass’ and blames something else instead of holding these persons responsible for their own behavior.
We were disgusted at how EBF and others have given a ‘pass’ to gay men when they have hurt others whose only crime was to love and trust them.
4blahs says:
Im sure the wives who’s lives they help destroy take comfort in the fact that while they were being lied to and decieved, their husbands were just doing what they had to do. Boy talk about passing the buck.
These men took a trusting person and took advantage of them to hide something they couldnt deal with honestly. That is unbelievabley selfish and Im surprised you’d condone it.
Hey Im gay so I can destroy another persons life. Yeah that makes sense.
Leave it to you two to contort this into my approval of some premeditated crime. I could expect this of moi – I suppose that being a prosecutor would warp someone’s mind to think this way – but you, Mark? The men whose stories I told didn’t do what they did to hurt anyone. When they got married, they thought they’d be making people (including themselves) happy.
Do you deny that societal, familial and religious expectations have no impact on the decisions people make? From the day you are born, your family, church (if your family has one) and society place expectations on you based solely on your gender (and the presumption of heterosexual orientation). Do people with these expectations, when unreasonable or unrealistic, shoulder no blame when they guide (or push) others down paths that, for whatever reason, are not right for them?
My 70-plus year-old friend grew up in a time when societal acceptance of homosexuality was not anything like it is today. People were arrested just for being in a bar presumed to cater to a gay clientele. Their names subsequently appeared in the newspaper, and many lost their jobs. Yes, just for associating with other gay people. The Stonewall riot of 1969 was a backlash against this police brutality and the birth of the modern gay rights movement. By 1969, my friend had already been married and fathered children.
To this day, some gay people are written out of wills, disowned, kicked out of their families and kicked out of their faith communities when they reveal that they are gay. That’s some pretty serious pressure to conform. How can you judge so harshly people who succumb to this pressure? Do you really think that everyone has the personal fortitude to walk away from the societal demands in which they have been steeped since birth?
Wow here you are sanctioning hurting people who are completely innocent.
You are so quick to turn every reason and explanation into some kind of excuse so that you can hold people (especially me, whom you so clearly despise) in contempt. The stories I’ve shared offer but a small glimpse into these people’s lives. There are undoubtedly many more reasons behind the decisions they made, but I don’t know them all. Therefore, it is not my place to judge these people – and it certainly isn’t yours.
In the case of my male friend, he dealt with all of this long before we became friends. In the case of my female friend’s son, I’ve never even met him. In both cases, my opinion would not be wanted, needed appropriate or appreciated.
These men have suffered (and continue to suffer) serious consequences for their choices (and whether those choices were poor or not is something I cannot say because I don’t have the complete context). Isn’t that enough for you? Do I feel badly for these men’s ex-wives and children? Very much so. I do not think it is fair that they suffered from these men’s decisions.
As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. What I am trying to do is to understand why these kinds of things happen because then prevention becomes much easier. How do you propose that we prevent this from happening in the future if we don’t understand why it happens now?
Do I “approve” of this kind of thing? I don’t think “approve” is quite the right word, but no. I do not “sanction” it. I wish these kinds of things never happened. In previous arguments supporting legalized same-sex marriage, I have said that legalized same-sex marriage would help reduce this kind of thing. That I think society is reaping what it has sown does not mean that I like or enjoy the fact that this happens. Seeing it as some kind of justice does not mean that I take delight in it.
Again, as I have said many many times, you need to grow a pair, man up and take personal responsibility
As if I have made a choice similar to that of the men I cited. True to form, moi never misses an opportunity to take me to task, even when it is for other people’s decisions!
My best fiend is gay and didnt get married. He chose to be honest. He didnt drag someone else into a life of lies so that his neighbors or parents or co workers wouldnt figure him out. On a spineless person would think that its okay to do that to another person.
And neither did I, Mark. I came out at the end of my freshman year of college, about six weeks before my nineteenth birthday. I never dated any girl. The only time I kissed one was in a stupid game played at a church overnighter (and that was just a peck on the lips).
AND you also need to hold all of your buddies-in-arms also personally responsible for their behavior.
How am I supposed to do that, moi? Be a good Christian like you and judge these people? What purpose would that serve? Should I tell my friend in his seventies, “Sorry, I can’t be friends with you because you made poor choices before I met you?” Should I tell my female friend, “Sorry, I can’t be your friend because your son made poor choices?” Should I spit on them? Tell them they’re going to hell? Put their balls in Mark’s vice? Tell them they’re bad people? Purse my lips and say “tsk, tsk” as I shake my head in judgment? Send them to you for prosecution? Tell them that they (and their spouses) should stay in an unsatisfying marriage because they made their bed, and now need to lie in it? Kick them when they’re down?
I also noticed that EBF and JonR gave no deference to the ‘will of the people’ because they thought the ‘will of the people’ was wrong!!
Is “the will of the people” always right? Would you be so quick to embrace the “will of the people” if the people voted to repeal the 14th amendment and reestablish slavery? How about if they decided to abolish the constitution and rewrite it to create a theocracy?
What are you, moi, a lemming? You seem content to follow the masses, trusting them to always do the right thing. You seem happy to just drift with the wind of “the will of the people,” no matter where it takes you. Have you no convictions of your own? Are you unwilling to sound a dissenting voice when the majority does something you believe is wrong? It’s astonishing that you think everyone should bend to “the will of the people,” yet when an individual does just that – as in the case of these gay men marrying women and fathering children – you judge and blame that individual!
I will post two quotes, again, on where EBF does not blame the gay man and puts the onous on society; i.e. gives the gay men a ‘pass’.
I believe that society does share some – not all, but some – of the blame. Certainly these men are responsible for their own decisions, but you cannot just dismiss the societal pressures they faced when they made them. I neither “give them a ‘pass’” nor condemn them because it is not my place to do either. I do not judge them; I merely seek to understand their stories and learn from them. I hope others will learn from them as well.
Id rather sleep with EBF.
No thanks, Mark. I have good taste in men.
The Stonewall riot of 1969 was a backlash against this police brutality and the birth of the modern gay rights movement.
Clarification:
The Stonewall riot of 1969 was a backlash against this police brutality and became the birth of the modern gay rights movement.
What makes the comparison disingenous?
Because it is incomplete. The comparison presumes that the United States and fundamentalist Islamic countries are the only choices.
Gays and straight unions share the same rights in CA, the only difference is a gay union is called a domestic partnership and a straight union is called a marriage.
However, the people have also gave gay unions the same rights as straight unions. Basically the people have said that everyone enjoys the same rights for a civil union but we want them to be called different names.
This is incorrect. California domestic partnerships bestow many, but not all, of the state-level (and none of the federal-level) rights, benefits, privileges and responsibilities of marriage.
This ruling is going to inflame the beast.
You are likely correct about this.
EBF
You wrote of many justifications and reason for these men’s action but the most telling quote was, “It’s sad that others get hurt in the process, but I see it as a case of society reaping what it has sown. Despite the many justifications and reason and causes you wrote about you did NOT dole out any responsibility to either of the men in your examples.
I guess you can’t man up and take personal responsibility that you did not post that these men held any responsibilty for their actions.
However, you have taken a step in the right direction when you posted this later:
Certainly these men are responsible for their own decisions
Now that is a true statement (and again one you did not include in your earlier post.)
The person who makes their own decisions that hurt someone else who is innocent are the ones, and only the ones, who should be held responsible. PERIOD. Blaming society or someone else is a cop out.
Didn’t the movie Humpback Mountain have something similar to what you are talking about happen?
What you starin at this ain’t no free show
You gon make me c*ck back hit ya ass in da door
You don’t wanna do dat hear dem thangs clit-clat
Goes in ya thru da front comes out thru da back
Come and make my night love to talk hate to fight
Was you a b:tch I was a b:tch it don’t go away ova night
Man up muthaf^cka man up i told you once before muthaf^cka stand up
EBF posted
This is incorrect. California domestic partnerships bestow many, but not all, of the state-level (and none of the federal-level) rights, benefits, privileges and responsibilities of marriage.
I was citing the Majority opinion who stated they receive basically share the same CA rights. Since you seem to say they don’t share the same rights. Please cite, with references if possible, what CA State rights enjoyed by an opposite sex unions that are not enjoyed by same sex unions.
By the way, no one is disputing that they don’t share the same Federal rights and this case is only about state rights, so any discussion of non-existent federal rights is not pertinent to this discussion.
Please don’t deflect the issue. Please answer my question.
Prove to all of us that you can man up and take personal responsibilty in at least backing up what you post.
If I die before I wake
at least in heaven I can skate
cause right now on earth I cant do jack
without the man up on my back
Man Up!!
I know it’s hard but
Play your part boy
Where your heart at?
Man Up!!
Before your girl be, be up on me
You don’t want that
Man Up!!
C’mon playa, man be a soldier
Fight for what you want
Man Up!!
Cumin’ on me, Man Up!!
You need to Man Up!!
Watching the man up in the window
it always seems to me
that in 10 more years another someone may be watching me.
And do I really know what goes on inside?
As he dances down the street to the music in his mind,
time after time.
Watching the man up in the window
it always seems to me
that I’ll be the one talking to myself as someone sits and watches me.
And do I really know what goes on inside
as I wonder what goes on in their little plastic minds,
time after time.
City of tiny lites
Don’t you wanna go
Hear the tiny auto horns
When they tiny blow
Tiny lightnin’
In the storm
Tiny blankets
Gonna keep you warm
Tiny pillows
Tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny sheets
Talkin’ bout the tiny cookies
That the peoples eats
Well city of tiny lites
Maybe you should know
That it’s over there
In the tiny dirt somewhere
You can see it any time
When you get the squints
From your downers and your wine
You’re so big
It’s so tiny
Every cloud is silver liney
The great escape for all of you
Tiny is as tiny do
Tiny is as tiny do
Tiny is as tiny do
Tiny is as tiny do
City of tiny lites
Hear the tiny auto horns
When they tiny blow
Tiny, lightnin
In the storm
Tiny blankets
Tiny blankets
Are bound to keep you warm
Tiny pillows
Talkin’ bout those tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny sheets
Talkin’ bout them tiny cookies
That the peoples eats
City of tiny lights
May be you should know
Thats it’s over there
Well that is over there
Say that it’s over there
Well it is over there
F.Z. City Of Tiny Lites
Presidential, is how I’m treated on front row
Street Game, are mo’f^ckers getting they do’
This world, I have you tripping scratching your head
Man up, take your lick and go fed
“Hey man, finish this bowl.”
“No dude, I’m baked as it is.”
“Come on pussy, man up.”
To Man Up
“to fulfill your responsibilites as a man, despite your insecurities and constant ability to place yourself in embarrasing and un-manly scenarios.”
EBF and JonR
I posted and you cited:
I also noticed that EBF and JonR gave no deference to the ‘will of the people’ because they thought the ‘will of the people’ was wrong!!
Why did you not include also include the part of my post where I define the “will of the people” to basically mean our democratic process.
Is “the will of the people” always right?
Depends what definition of ‘right’ you are using. Morally right or Constitutionally/democratically right? Constitutionally/democratically the ‘will of the people’ is always right. That is what a democracy is. I believe in democracy. Do you not believe in democracy and following the will of the people?
Would you be so quick to embrace the “will of the people” if the people voted to repeal the 14th amendment and reestablish slavery?
Again depends on the definition of right. Constitutionally/democratically, yes — morally, no.
How about if they decided to abolish the constitution and rewrite it to create a theocracy?
Well then we would not have a constitution anymore would we; but given that I believe in self rule and democracy, I would move because I would have no voice in the gov’t because I would have obviously voted against it and would have no constitutionally way of changing it.
What are you, moi, a lemming? You seem content to follow the masses, trusting them to always do the right thing. You seem happy to just drift with the wind of “the will of the people,” no matter where it takes you. Have you no convictions of your own?
Oh on the contrary, my convictions toward democracy, our form of government and the rule of law runs deep, very deep; so deep that I have to stand behind laws that I don’t personally believe in because I personally believe in something deeper; the constitution, democracy and the rule of law.
Are you unwilling to sound a dissenting voice when the majority does something you believe is wrong?
Of course, and I have. But I will sound and I advocate sounding a dissenting voice in the legal, constitutionally provided manner. I will not advocate circumventing the constitution to achieve my goal.
It’s astonishing that you think everyone should bend to “the will of the people,” yet when an individual does just that – as in the case of these gay men marrying women and fathering children – you judge and blame that individual!
No, that’s a false comparison of our two discussions. I am holding the men responsible for their actions in which they hurt innocent people. “The will of the people” didn’t make them hurt those innocent people. Those men made their own choices on their own, nobody held a gun to their head. It’s called taking personal responsibility and not blaming society for one’s actions.
Didn’t the movie Humpback Mountain have something similar to what you are talking about happen?
Did you even watch the movie? If not, you should, you might learn something. The movie speaks volumes about how a man in the 1960’s would marry, father a child, later discover he is gay, and be afraid to act upon the truth because of societal bigotry and expectations. (And for further edification, read “Advise and Consent,” a Pulitzer winning novel by John Drury.)
I was citing the Majority opinion who stated they receive basically share the same CA rights.
I don’t know if domestic partnerships in California receive just basically (not all?) or all the state rights and benefits that opposite marriages receive. (Just to clarify my understanding for your benefit, MOI.) However, even if domestic partnerships in California receive all the State of California benefits that opposite sex marriages receive, by referring to the former as domestic partnerships and the latter as marriages implies a separate but equal standing under civil law. If I recall correctly, the USSC struck down that idea in Brown v Board of Education.
I don’t care what term the civil government uses for “partnerships,” regardless of sexual orientation, but the government should use the same term for all partnerships. Let the religious establishments deal with the ideology of “marriage.”
The person who makes their own decisions that hurt someone else who is innocent are the ones, and only the ones, who should be held responsible. PERIOD. Blaming society or someone else is a cop out.
I still say society shares some of the blame, and I think that’s just reality, not a cop-out. You are free to disagree.
Please cite, with references if possible, what CA State rights enjoyed by an opposite sex unions that are not enjoyed by same sex unions….Prove to all of us that you can man up and take personal responsibilty in at least backing up what you post.
From Nolo at www.nolo.com/support/detail.cfm/ObjectID/5F8413D8-61FC-417A-B2F09CDC406ABB2F:
Registered domestic partners in California will have many new rights and responsibilities under AB 205, the new domestic partner law that took effect on January 1, 2005.
Under AB 205, registered domestic partners are now entitled to the same legal treatment as spouses in most areas of state law: Community property laws apply, and a lower-earning partner will have the right to seek support from the higher earner after a breakup. (Emphasis mine.)
And from the ACLU at www.aclu.org/getequal/rela/california.html:
California has created a domestic partnership system so that same-sex couples can receive legal protections for their relationships similar to those that opposite-sex couples receive when they marry…
With some important exceptions, AB 205 makes domestic partnerships much like marriage…
Even under California law, same-sex couples are not completely equal. Domestic Partners cannot file joint state income taxes and state employees are not entitled to the same benefits under the states long-term care benefits package. (Emphasis mine.)
Visit the links for more info.
Just a point of clarification -the links don’t work when you add the “:” at the end of it.
EBF
I read your post, quotes and links.
Ok the two differences:
Well its easy to see the tax issue, that’s connected to the federal gov’t taxes probably.
As for the second one, you forgot to include the last line of the quote from the aclu cite. Here is it in entirety:
Even under California law, same-sex couples are not completely equal. Domestic Partners cannot file joint state income taxes and state employees are not entitled to the same benefits under the states long-term care benefits package. (This could be an advantage. See below.) [emphasis added].
So it looks like not having that benefit is a good thing.
The court opined that they were basically equal. And even after reading all that you posted and linked, I am standing by what the court said and I reprinted; they are basically the same in CA. They are equal in substance and that is what is important. But I appreciate the links.
Constitutionally/democratically the ‘will of the people’ is always right.
Then why do judges have the authority to declare a law unconstitutional? That is what the USSC did in Loving v Virginia and the California Supreme Court did in its recent ruling.
I will not advocate circumventing the constitution to achieve my goal.
A judge ruling a law to be unconstitutional is “circumventing the constitution?”
MOI, I do not understand why you appear to have such a problem with a court ruling a law to be unconstitutional.
Evil,
If we allow people to marry their own gender, what will stop obvious the next move for people to demand:
1) multiple wives
2) marriage to siblings and first cousins
3) marriage to animals
Liberal democrat politicians in Minnesota have already tried to allow first cousin marriage in order to cater to the immigrant Muslim community, fortunately common sense prevaled and it was blocked.
JonR
Those are excellent question and I would love to give you my answers, however you will have to wait because I am going out for the evening so I will answer them tomorrow.
Have a good evening.
Wow All the moons and stars and sh^t must be all aligned in the right order or some sh^t…..The battle is engaged.
I wish I could go out for the evening, but we’re having a hard time finding a sitter. There is a somewhat offensive but very funny and talented piano player I would like to see. Kind of like Dr. Dirty if you have ever heard him.
If I had a hammer…
jonR
One thing before I go - it might help you to understand CA Constitutional stuff if you read Baxter’s concurring and dissenting opinion.
Oh and as for the US Constitution, read up on the implied rights issues and constructionist issues.
Those are excellent question and I would love to give you my answers, however you will have to wait because I am going out for the evening so I will answer them tomorrow.
Don’t expect a prompt reply. I have a graduation party and an ordination to attend tomorrow.
One thing before I go - it might help you to understand CA Constitutional stuff if you read Baxter’s concurring and dissenting opinion.
I’ve tried to find a link and can’t find one…it has to be there…grin.
This bears repeating:
Conlaw says:
May 15th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Its funny, I read a lot of posts about how Katherine’s columns are “hate filled”, “partisan”, “misleading”, “absurdist”, and so on, yet not a single person, including Greiling, has refuted a single fact in either of Kristin’s stories that are at issue. Why? If it is so absurd and misleading tell us why. Cite facts and examples. Instead, we get name calling.
____________
It is the fallacy of labelling: label your opponent with a bad label, and hope that nobody notices you have not presented a refutation of your opponent’s argument/evidence.
Do you not believe in democracy and following the will of the people?
Not when the “will of the people” results in laws that I believe are unjust at their core. It wasn’t that long ago that the “will of the people” allowed the enslavement Africans and descendents of Africans, prohibited women from voting, took Native American children away from their families and culture, imprisoned citizens of Japanese descent and made mixed-race marriages illegal.
“But wait,” you protest, “the will of the people also eventually realized that these things were wrong and corrected them in the correct, constitutionally-approved manner.”
And you are right. But these things were not corrected before a tremendous amount of damage was done. We’re still dealing with the aftermath today. In at least one case (that of mixed-race marriages being illegal), it took a court ruling – not the “will of the people” (which seemed very opposed to the ruling) – to correct the injustice.
Perhaps you are content to just let “the will of the people” take its course. I am not. I have learned to distrust a tyrannical majority.
I am holding the men responsible for their actions in which they hurt innocent people.
Really? And exactly how are you doing that? You don’t even know who they are. You still haven’t told me how I’m supposed to hold them responsible; did none of the suggestions on my list appeal to you?
Also, explain how it is your place to judge these men.
Those men made their own choices on their own, nobody held a gun to their head.
Not literally, but metaphorically, yes, society does hold a gun to people’s heads in some cases. Again, it’s not as common today as in the past, but people are still disowned and kicked out of their families and faith communities when they reveal their homosexuality. For someone raised within such a home and faith community – where it is made clear that nonconformance carries severe penalties – a gun may as well be pointed at their head.
I will not advocate circumventing the constitution to achieve my goal.
Aren’t the courts constitutionally established? I disagree that their rulings somehow circumvent the Constitution.
Well its easy to see the tax issue, that’s connected to the federal gov’t taxes probably.
Undoubtedly that’s the justification, but I note that Massachusetts allows married same-sex couples to file joint state tax returns. The financial consequences of not being able to file jointly can be significant, so I am not willing to dismiss this detail and declare California domestic partnerships equal to California marriages.
So it looks like not having that benefit is a good thing.
Irrelevant. They’re still not equal.
And even after reading all that you posted and linked, I am standing by what the court said and I reprinted; they are basically the same in CA. They are equal in substance and that is what is important.
They are not equal in substance. The links point out differences that, although arguably minor, create an inequality. You seem willing to overlook that inequality (which begs the question of how unequal they would have to become before you would not overlook the inequality); I am not.
FOX NEWS:
“Dutch Cartoonist Arrested on Suspicion of Violating Hate Speech Laws”
Liberals in Holland want to silence freedom of speech and a cartoonist for work which seems to offend some Muslims, much like liberals here want to silence Katherine Kerstin.
If we allow people to marry their own gender, what will stop obvious the next move for people to demand:
1) multiple wives
2) marriage to siblings and first cousins
3) marriage to animals
d2, we’ve had this conversation before. I am in no mood to go around in circles with you yet again over this issue. If you want to believe such nonsense, obviously nothing I can tell you will change your mind.
Evil,
My concerns aren’t nonsense. As I stated, liberals in Minnesota already tried to allow first cousin marriage.
“The men whose stories I told didn’t do what they did to hurt anyone. When they got married, they thought they’d be making people (including themselves) happy.”
They could have only been thinking about their friends and families. If they ever thought about what marriage means to BOTH people, they would have entered into the relationship. They may not have had malicious intent but they sure werent taking their spouces best interests into account.
“Do you deny that societal, familial and religious expectations have no impact on the decisions people make?”
No ammount of societal preasure could make me lie to a person in this manner. Abviously you wouldnt either. Only a selfish person would consider this course of action.
From the day you are born, your family, church (if your family has one) and society place expectations on you based solely on your gender (and the presumption of heterosexual orientation). Do people with these expectations, when unreasonable or unrealistic, shoulder no blame when they guide (or push) others down paths that, for whatever reason, are not right for them?”
What the hell does this have to do with the wife? You have an obligation to be upfront and honest from the very start with a person who wants to marry you. If you are gay you need to tell the women that before she gets hurt. Faliure to do so is selfish. You are using and manipulating another person to conceal something you are apparently ashamed of. There are ways to live your life with dignity and lying to a women and marrying her in this way doesnt come close to making the list.
My 70-plus year-old friend grew up in a time when societal acceptance of homosexuality was not anything like it is today. People were arrested just for being in a bar presumed to cater to a gay clientele. Their names subsequently appeared in the newspaper, and many lost their jobs. Yes, just for associating with other gay people. The Stonewall riot of 1969 was a backlash against this police brutality and the birth of the modern gay rights movement. By 1969, my friend had already been married and fathered children.”
The point is was it selfish and unethical. Lying on this level to your spouse IS unethical and for these reasons selfish. You dont need to drag another person into your problems no matter how trying unless they are aware of whats going on. If you dont you are using that person.
“To this day, some gay people are written out of wills, disowned, kicked out of their families and kicked out of their faith communities when they reveal that they are gay. That’s some pretty serious pressure to conform.”
You dotn have to get married to conform. And this is beside the point. The point was is concealing your homosexuality and marrying a women unethical and selfish. It is and shouldnt be condoned under any circumstances. Using people isnt acceptable.
“How can you judge so harshly people who succumb to this pressure? Do you really think that everyone has the personal fortitude to walk away from the societal demands in which they have been steeped since birth?”
Maybe not. Pretend to be strait. Ask a person to pretend to be your girlfriend. Dont lie to an innocent unsuspecting women and use her as a shield.
“These men have suffered (and continue to suffer) serious consequences for their choices (and whether those choices were poor or not is something I cannot say because I don’t have the complete context). Isn’t that enough for you? Do I feel badly for these men’s ex-wives and children? Very much so. I do not think it is fair that they suffered from these men’s decisions.”
Then how can you say it wasnt unethical and selfish. Their fear is a reason for what the did. It should be considered an excuse or defense.
“As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. What I am trying to do is to understand why these kinds of things happen because then prevention becomes much easier. How do you propose that we prevent this from happening in the future if we don’t understand why it happens now?”
I understand why it happens. I just think its a selfish reaction to the problem. We should allow gay marriage. But these men acted in a selfish and unethical manner.
” That I think society is reaping what it has sown does not mean that I like or enjoy the fact that this happens. Seeing it as some kind of justice does not mean that I take delight in it.”
Justice. Are these women getting what they deserve as some sort of payback? What justice?
“And neither did I, Mark. I came out at the end of my freshman year of college, about six weeks before my nineteenth birthday. I never dated any girl. The only time I kissed one was in a stupid game played at a church overnighter (and that was just a peck on the lips).”
Good for you. You acted in a responsible way.
“Should I tell my friend in his seventies, “Sorry, I can’t be friends with you because you made poor choices before I met you?” Should I tell my female friend, “Sorry, I can’t be your friend because your son made poor choices?” Should I spit on them? Tell them they’re going to hell? Put their balls in Mark’s vice? Tell them they’re bad people? Purse my lips and say “tsk, tsk” as I shake my head in judgment? Send them to you for prosecution? Tell them that they (and their spouses) should stay in an unsatisfying marriage because they made their bed, and now need to lie in it? Kick them when they’re down?”
No. But dont deny they made teh mistake. Dont deny they made a selfish and unethical choice to use another person causing them pain for personal gain.
My concerns aren’t nonsense.
Your so-called “concerns” were thoroughly debunked when KK published her outrageous same-sex-marriage-will-lead-to-polygamy article…check the archives.
As I stated, liberals in Minnesota already tried to allow first cousin marriage.
Please provide a link to that statement.
They are equal in substance and that is what is important.
MOI, unless California domestic partnerships have all the rights and benefits under California law as “marriages” do, they are not equal. And please refer to my separate by equal comments.
d2, your concerns are nonsense. As I’ve pointed out to you many times in the past, first-cousin marriage is already legal in more than half of the states. In four of those states, such marriages are allowed without restriction.
Because Minnesota will recognize any opposite-sex marriage legally performed in any other state, Minnesota first cousins can travel to a state that will marry them, get married, return to Minnesota and have their marriage recognized.
Furthermore, nothing is to stop first cousins (married or unmarried) from procreating.
So, if you want to continue running around squawking about liberals and first-cousin marriage, well, you go right ahead if it makes you feel better. But at least realize that the sky has already squashed Chicken Little in that world.
“If you’ve experienced such a thing, why would completely disregard another person’s same struggle by saying something such as, “Its the Im a victim and anything I do is excusable thought process.” That would lead me to believe that the person saying it has no comprehension of the real struggle.”
A lie of this magnitude has no defense. None. I cant believe that you would think doing this to another person is okay. I dont care what society or family does to you. If you cant find the fortitude in your charector to live your life on your terms, using another person as a cover up isnt the answer. I know too many gay people who choose not to live a straight life to think that this is something all gay people agree on. EBF may think this is okay but I can tell you and I think he’d agree that there are gay people who wouldnt do this to an unsuspecting person.
“If you’ve experienced such a thing, why would completely disregard another person’s same struggle by saying something such as, “Its the Im a victim and anything I do is excusable thought process.”
Youre assuming all gay people are going to react to the situation the same way and that there is only one solution to the problem. News flash, beign gay doesnt have anything to do with your charector and not all gay people are going to react to things the same way. Some will lie and marry a women to bend to societal preasure. Others will live alone and face the struggle on their own. Others will find a partner.
For the record-
3 Budweisers and I am now switching to Margaritas, Mamgo Margaritas to be more precise.
“Mamgo Margaritas”
Oops, Mango Margaritas. Must be the heat.
Evil,
Even though first cousin marriage is common in some of the backward cultures, inbreeding is a bad idea. Saddam Hussein married his first cousin, and his sons were nuts.
They may not have had malicious intent but they sure werent taking their spouces best interests into account.
You say this as if 1) these men knew they were gay and had admitted it to themselves, and 2) realized they were committing to a marriage that they shouldn’t have. My 70+-year-old friend says that, to this day, he loves his ex-wife and misses her company. But at some point he realized that he could not give her the spousal love she deserved to have, and decided it was better to let her go.
No ammount of societal preasure could make me lie to a person in this manner. Abviously you wouldnt either. Only a selfish person would consider this course of action.
Mark, these people aren’t selfish. They simply bought into the line that they were being fed by their families and churches. Thanks for showing me that being judgmental isn’t solely within the realm of fundamentalist Christians.
What the hell does this have to do with the wife? You have an obligation to be upfront and honest from the very start with a person who wants to marry you. If you are gay you need to tell the women that before she gets hurt. Faliure to do so is selfish. You are using and manipulating another person to conceal something you are apparently ashamed of. There are ways to live your life with dignity and lying to a women and marrying her in this way doesnt come close to making the list.
Again, you are assuming that these men knew that they were gay, had admitted it to themselves, and made a conscious decision to marry women anyway. Every argument in your post contains these assumptions. Mark, if I remember correctly, you’re about 30 years old. The concepts I’ve tried to explain must seem very foreign to someone of your age. But the pressures I tried my best to explain were enormous for these men.
I understand why it happens. I just think its a selfish reaction to the problem.
Clearly you do not understand. The judgmental tone of your post belies your claim of understanding.
No. But dont deny they made teh mistake. Dont deny they made a selfish and unethical choice to use another person causing them pain for personal gain.
These choices were made in circumstances you do not understand and that I do not fully know. They were made at a time in the past, long before I met the people who made them. I do not believe that they made these choices to cause pain to others or for personal gain, and I don’t understand why you are so quick to judge these actions as such. Perhaps it would have been better had these men made a different choice (although I doubt the children they fathered would agree, since they wouldn’t have been born), but they made the choices they did and are living with the consequences. In any case, there is nothing to be accomplished now by my judging them. I’ll leave that to the fundies. And, apparently, to you, Mark.
I know too many gay people who choose not to live a straight life to think that this is something all gay people agree on.
Do you know any gay people who grew up in the ‘40s or ‘50s? Life was very different then.
EBF may think this is okay but I can tell you and I think he’d agree that there are gay people who wouldnt do this to an unsuspecting person.
Again, you’re making this out to be a premeditated crime. You write as if all of these people were plotting to hurt others. They were not.
Now, if a gay person knew s/he was gay and deliberately set out to marry someone of the opposite sex for the purpose of hurting that spouse with a later disclosure of homosexuality, that I fully condemn. But the men whose stories I shared did not do this.
Even though first cousin marriage is common in some of the backward cultures, inbreeding is a bad idea.
I sure hope you don’t have any Scandanavian blood in your family. You’d be surprised how many of those folks married first cousins, both in their native lands and here in America. And the same is true of just about any European group that immigrated to America. First cousin marriages were very, very common.
I dont care what society or family does to you. If you cant find the fortitude in your charector to live your life on your terms, using another person as a cover up isnt the answer. I know too many gay people who choose not to live a straight life to think that this is something all gay people agree on.
You are talking in the context of today’s society. And even today, many gay men choose to marry a woman to conform to societal expectations. Right? No. But consider the alternatives that man faced…being ostracized by family and church, losing a job, dealing with societal bigotry. And let us not forget all the anti-gay, married Republican politicians who built their political careers with anti-gay rhetoric while they were scréwing their boyfriends.
The situation was even worse in the early part of the 20th century. A gay man could be imprisoned just for being gay.
Have you any idea of what it is like to walk down the street and have a car full of teenagers shout anti-gay slurs at you? I do. It is not pleasant. Have you any idea of what it is like to read KK’s disgusting articles declaring that you and your partner are not entitled to the same governmental rights and benefits that she and her husband enjoy while your partner is dying of cancer? I do.
The point is…don’t criticize these men until you’ve walked in their shoes and experienced the same agonizing choices they had to make.
Even though first cousin marriage is common in some of the backward cultures, inbreeding is a bad idea. Saddam Hussein married his first cousin, and his sons were nuts.
So, twenty-six U.S. states and all of Canada, Japan and Western Europe are “backward cultures?” Good grief, d2, all you have to do is google “first cousin marriage” and you’ll learn a ton about this issue. But learning isn’t really your forte, is it?
I’m going to offer some info from only one site; if you want more, you’ll have to do your own research. From www.cousincouples.com/info/facts.shtml:
26 states allow first cousin marriages; Most people can marry their cousin in the US.
No European country prohibits marriage between first cousins. It is also legal throughout Canada and Mexico to marry your cousin. The USA is the only western country with cousin marriage restrictions.
Children of non-related couples have a 2-3% risk of birth defects, as opposed to first cousins having a 4-6% risk….The National Society of Genetic Counselors estimated the increased risk for first cousins is between 1.7 to 2.8 percent, or about the same any woman over 40 years of age.
The frequency of cousin marriages in the USA is about 1 in 1,000
The frequency of cousin marriages in Japan is about 4 in 1,000
Albert Einstein married his first cousin. And so did Charles Darwin, who had exceptional children.
The first Prime Minister of Canada, Sir John A. MacDonald married his first cousin.
Leviticus 18 lists all forbidden sexual relationships. Cousin relationships are not included.
God commanded many cousins to marry, including Zelophehad’s 5 daughters, Eleazar’s daughters, Jacob (who married both Rachel and Leah, first cousins), and Isaac and Rebekkah (first cousins once removed). All were ancestors of Jesus Christ.
Current studies indicate that cousin couples have a lower ratio of miscarriages — perhaps because body chemistry of cousins is more similar.
d2, say hello to Henny Penny the next time you run into her.
Evil,
I don’t care how you try to spin it, marrying a close relative is NOT a good idea. I can’t imagine my wife and I having the same Grandparents.
I don’t care how you try to spin it, marrying a close relative is NOT a good idea.
I’m not “spinning” it. I simply provided some facts. But don’t let those confuse you more than you already are.
Don’t let facts get in the way of your ideology, d2si.
“Mark, these people aren’t selfish. They simply bought into the line that they were being fed by their families and churches.”
I disagree.
” Thanks for showing me that being judgmental isn’t solely within the realm of fundamentalist Christians.”
Man you are arogant. Get off your soap box EBF. You are as judgemental as anyone Ive ever come across, you just refuse to admit it. You just like to play the victim card to skirt reponsibility.
“Again, you are assuming that these men knew that they were gay, had admitted it to themselves, and made a conscious decision to marry women anyway. ”
Well didnt they? I thought this was all societal preasure. Preasure to conform to something you arent. If you feel the preasure and you know you dont feel a certain way, how is it that you dont know? Sounds like a cop out.
“Clearly you do not understand. The judgmental tone of your post belies your claim of understanding.”
Now you’re assuming EBF. You’ll never admit of course but you are. You’re assuming that if I understood Id condone it. The are two different concepts. I understand people are under preasure. I also understand people have free will.
“And, apparently, to you, Mark.”
But when it’s somtheing you disagree with EBF you have no problem what so ever in judging people. So quit with your sanctimonius Bull Sh:t.
“Do you know any gay people who grew up in the ‘40s or ‘50s? Life was very different then.”
My uncle. He is 70 and has lived a single life the whole time. He grew up in small town MN had republican parents who where chruch deacons. He never came out to them. They died thinking he was straight. he also never lied to and got married to a women. So quit assuming I dont know the situation. Your one arogant SOB.
“Now, if a gay person knew s/he was gay and deliberately set out to marry someone of the opposite sex for the purpose of hurting that spouse with a later disclosure of homosexuality, that I fully condemn.”
You totally miss the point or are delibertly avoiding it. You dont have to deliberatley try and hurt the spouse. Its the decit the leads to the pain of finding out you were lied to and your marriage is a sham. Knowing you are gay and getting married anyway and then coming out to clear your conscience is negligant. You dont have to go into it with the intent of hurting the wife. Its akin to drunk driving, You know your drunk and shouldnt be driving but you do it anyway because you need to get home. You dont intend to crash but maybe you do.
Many states don’t have laws restricting first cousin marriage probably because they don’t think people would actually make a bad choice like that.
4blahs>
If a person doesn’t know that there is more than one path, how would they feel pressure to conform to one path over another?
When I came out to my parents, it became very obvious that it never even occurred to them that there was any other way to be than heterosexual.
Ok, I have a few things to say on the topic.
“The movie speaks volumes about how a man in the 1960’s would marry, father a child, later discover he is gay, and be afraid to act upon the truth because of societal bigotry and expectations”
First off, I thought Brokeback Mountain was a very disappointing movie. Not because I’m a homophobe or hate gays, but I just thought the story line and acting was poor. But I definitely never thought about it in the way you describe it JonR. But the fact that it didn’t convey any of that to me makes me think it was not very well done. And I thought it was disappointing that it got all of those awards(which I assumed were mostly b/c it was the first big “homosexual rights” movie).
As for gays marrying straight men or women and later coming out of the closet: I have to side with 4Blahs on this one. It is like a young black kid in a gang blaming all his illegal activities on peer pressure. Even if all his brothers were in the gang, he should be able to rise above that and do something with his life. I know plenty of people who have lived really tough lives but have risen above it and become great people. Society and the people around you are not an EXCUSE for you choosing what you choose. You are what you choose to be.
Being gay is not the hardest thing in this world. There are many people who have a harder time than you.
Here is an English language Muslim jihadist site for your enjoyment.
h**p://revolution.muslimpad.c*m
“Youre assuming all gay people are going to react to the situation the same way and that there is only one solution to the problem. News flash, beign gay doesnt have anything to do with your charector and not all gay people are going to react to things the same way. Some will lie and marry a women to bend to societal preasure. Others will live alone and face the struggle on their own. Others will find a partner. ”
Although the situation has an explanation, it does not really make it a ‘defense’. 4b’s makes a valid point in that it goes beyond the pain of one person and affects many - including those supposedly loved by the gay person.
I grew up in a small community where our neighbors were in that situation. As it turned out, the entire relationship was awfully abusive. Even as a kid with NO clue of what was really happening, knew something wasn’t right and wondered why the kids in that house acted so strange (they tended to bully and tried using aggressive behavior to determine outcomes or direction).
People need to behave responsibily, but we also have to try and be a bit more accepting of everyone’s differences - it could avoid this type of situation.
D2 -
Define ‘responsible’ when determining who should have C&C.
Owning weapons is a right, but quite frankly, I doubt most of the folks who carry those weapons to the local Cub would really unholster that weapon and use it properly. The converse to the whole issue is - what right do you have to carry that in public when I have absolutely NO idea of your capabilities.
And no, that ‘course’ isn’t giving me one ounce of comfort.
I posted: One thing before I go - it might help you to understand CA Constitutional stuff if you read Baxter’s concurring and dissenting opinion.
JonR posted I’ve tried to find a link and can’t find one…it has to be there…grin.
Wow that is quite telling considering Baxter’s concurring and dissenting opinion is in the same document as the majority opinion. (It starts on page 128 of the PDF document.)
Obviously you did not read any of the court’s opinions whether that be the majority, concurring or dissenting opinions.
Also just as obvious is – EBF didn’t read any of the opinions either. I come to that conclusion because EBF has, on many occasions, provided the links and answers for others on this blog even though he wasn’t asked directly. And when the issue is regarding gay marriage, EBF has done so without fail. Until now. So, the only conclusion one could draw is EBF didn’t read the majority, concurring or dissenting opinions either.
Equally as obvious given that neither of you read any of the court’s opinions, you both are only going off of someone else’s interpretation. (BTW, EBF some would call that a lemming type activity; i.e. you are following someone else instead of formulating your own opinion.)
So with that in mind I write:
First, as to JonR regarding judicial review (declaring a law unconstitutional), without you having some basic understanding of the constitution, the court’s mandate, the separate of powers doctrine, etc as well as a basic understanding of the different schools of thought on constitutional interpretation, it would be extremely difficult to explain, on this blog, why I have difficulty with the majority’s reasoning in the recent CA Opinion. That is why I wanted you to read up on it.
Second, as to EBF and JonR regarding their claims that same sex unions and opposite sex unions are not substantively the same in CA. Had either of you two read at least the majority opinion, you would have read that the majority of the court found that same sex marriages and opposite sex marriages were substantively equal in all aspect except the name. In other words, they were not separate but equal – they were equal. (If you don’t believe me, go check the opinion, its on the third page.) So I am going with the court on this one. As you always say, and now I will I say back to you, but you’re welcome to your opinion. (even thought they are uninformed). So “Nuff Said” on the separate but equal subject.
“D2 -
Define ‘responsible’ when determining who should have C&C.”
I would say that anyone who has a clean record and goes through a firearm safety course should qualify for C.C. if they want it.
“I would say that anyone who has a clean record and goes through a firearm safety course should qualify for C.C. if they want it. ”
And that would make them viable to protect other persons and property? Are there people you know that would pass your resonsibility test however, you’d have a hard time seeing them use a weapon in public effectively? and moreso, properly?
Again, MOI claims to know what other people know and think and have done.
But I guess that’s no surprise to anyone on this blog.
Wow that is quite telling considering Baxter’s concurring and dissenting opinion is in the same document as the majority opinion. (It starts on page 128 of the PDF document.)
I’ve already stated that I can’t find a link for the California decision, so why are you surprised I haven’t read it? I asked you for the link to the decision and instead you make this comment?
Second, as to EBF and JonR regarding their claims that same sex unions and opposite sex unions are not substantively the same in CA.
Moi, I did not make such a claim. In fact, I posted quite the opposite at 5:50 pm yesterday. (Here, I’m adding some emphasis for clarification.) I don’t know if domestic partnerships in California receive just basically (not all?) or all the state rights and benefits that opposite[-sex]marriages receive. (Just to clarify my understanding for your benefit, MOI.) However, even if domestic partnerships in California receive all the State of California benefits that opposite sex marriages receive, by referring to the former as domestic partnerships and the latter as marriages implies a separate but equal standing under civil law. If I recall correctly, the USSC struck down that idea in Brown v Board of Education.
Jeez, JonR-
MAN UP, grow a pair, and take personal responsibility already!
But you knew that was coming.
Potato
JonR
Please accept my apologies.
I did not understand that you did not have the link. I thought you meant you didn’t have the link to the dissenting opinion.
EBF had posted the link to the opinion before so I thought you had it. Here is the link again. (add the www. in front.)
aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file713_35332.pdf
Also, I thought you had said that they were not equal. Obviously I was wrong. You are right - you did say they were equal except in name.
again, my apologies.
So - now that my manning up is out of the way.
Please let me know what you think after reading the opinion.
If you like, feel free to email me directly with questions if you like. My email is jager333 at hotmail dot com. But let me know if you do email me because I rarely check that email.
I posted
Do you not believe in democracy and following the will of the people?
EBF posted:
Not when the “will of the people” results in laws that I believe are unjust at their core. and Perhaps you are content to just let “the will of the people” take its course. I am not. I have learned to distrust a tyrannical majority.
Whether you know it or not, you are advocating for a different form of government then we have now.
What kind of government are you advocating, if the will of people doesn’t determine all the laws? Who then determines what is ‘just’? Are you advocating some form of minority rule? It’s far easier to have a ‘tyrannical’ minority. In fact, every minority that has been in power in the world has been a tyrannical government. It looks like you are willing to go with the majority of 7 judges as it is in the CA Supreme Court, or with the majority of 9 judges, as it is on the Federal Supreme court.
What happens when you disagree with those judges on their ruling? What happens when the majority of those 7 or 9 become tyrannical?
Or what does it say of the strength of the court and its rulings, if the court’s rulings change depended upon the court’s make up of personnel.
Look at what is happening with the court’s rulings with regard to abortion. When abortion was declared constitutional by a majority of the USSC, that majority was not looking at what was actually in the constitution, they were using what was supposedly implied in the constitution. I hope you can see what is wrong with that. Quite simply, who ever is in the majority of the court gets to decide what is implied and what is not implied? And that will change when the make up of the court changes.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her dissenting opinion in Gonzales v. Carhart (a 2007 abortion case) opined that the majority was not following the precedent that was earlier set by the USSC. She said that just because a different make of the court exist today, that should not give the court authority to change a previous courts ruling. However, she, and others like her, that read into the constitution implied rights, are reaping what they have sowed (to use a phrase that you use). Now that she is in the minority, she does not like how the majority reads what is, or in this case, what is not implied in the constitution. Situations like this are exactly why the courts should only interpret laws not make laws.
EBF also posted:
Aren’t the courts constitutionally established? I disagree that their rulings somehow circumvent the Constitution.
First, you may disagree that their rulings circumvent the constitution; you are welcome to your opinion.
Second, as you have shown over time, your opinion on the subject is uninformed and ignorant. You have not studied constitutional law, you have not study the rule of law, you have not studied the separation of powers, and you have not read any of the courts’ opinions.
Lastly, as you have pointed out before you think that Bush has overstep his constitutional authority, well just as Bush could do, the courts can also overstep their constitutional authority. The courts are only suppose to interpret law and protect the rights that are protected by law not create new laws or new rights. According to the constitution, that is left up to the legislative branch.
Remember, our county was founded on the bedrock principle that our government is of the people, by the people, for the people. In other words it is a government ruled by the majority or will of the people; it is not a government ruled by the will or majority of 7 or 9 judges.
While I appreciate your sentiment regarding the time it takes to change the will of the people and it seems like using the courts to do just that would be correct, I would not advocate that because I do not advocate a different form of government than the one we have.
PS. Oh and by the way, you should check your facts and history before you start spouting lines like “not the “will of the people” (which seemed very opposed to the ruling)” Why don’t you go and read Loving, the court found and actually states in their opinion just the opposite.
Also just as obvious is – EBF didn’t read any of the opinions either.
I have not had the time to read it yet. My husband spent a night in the hospital this weekend passing three kidney stones, and life has been pretty busy for me lately. I intend to read the opinion this week when I have a enough time for a thoughtful and thorough reading.
Second, as to EBF and JonR regarding their claims that same sex unions and opposite sex unions are not substantively the same in CA. Had either of you two read at least the majority opinion, you would have read that the majority of the court found that same sex marriages and opposite sex marriages were substantively equal in all aspect except the name.
Yes, the majority of the court found this, but I have already shown that California domestic partnerships and California marriages are not identical. To me, that makes them not equal. So yes, I disagree with the court majority (and you) on this point.
Again I ask, how different must they be before you would find them not to be identical?
Whether you know it or not, you are advocating for a different form of government then we have now. What kind of government are you advocating, if the will of people doesn’t determine all the laws? Who then determines what is ‘just’? Are you advocating some form of minority rule? It’s far easier to have a ‘tyrannical’ minority.
And these are very good points. I don’t really have an answer. Is democracy the ideal? There are many things appealing about it, but there are some unappealing things about it. I can say the same about any other form of government.
Quite simply, who ever is in the majority of the court gets to decide what is implied and what is not implied? And that will change when the make up of the court changes.
Then why have courts at all? Why not just write some sort of constitutional algorithm and put every dispute through it?
Second, as you have shown over time, your opinion on the subject is uninformed and ignorant. You have not studied constitutional law, you have not study the rule of law, you have not studied the separation of powers, and you have not read any of the courts’ opinions.
Not entirely true. I may not be as learned on these topics as you, but I am not completely ignorant. I note – again – that you immediately dismiss any school of thought other than your own strict constructionist school. I understand why you think those other schools of thought are invalid, but there are many people who subscribe to their philosophies.
Remember, our county was founded on the bedrock principle that our government is of the people, by the people, for the people. In other words it is a government ruled by the majority or will of the people; it is not a government ruled by the will or majority of 7 or 9 judges.
Then I ask again, why have courts and judges at all? Some judges are elected; others are appointed by elected officials, so you must admit that there is at least an indirect connection between judges and the “will of the people.”
While I appreciate your sentiment regarding the time it takes to change the will of the people and it seems like using the courts to do just that would be correct, I would not advocate that because I do not advocate a different form of government than the one we have.
So you would have been content to tell slaves, “oh, you’ll just have to live your life as a slave if the people don’t get around to abolishing slavery before you die?” I could give similar examples for the other evils I cited, but I think you get my point.
And that is the rub for me, moi. I appreciate that you believe our form of government, despite its flaws, is the best the world has ever had. But I am not so sure. That doesn’t mean that I’d prefer some opposite extreme, such as a Cuba or Iran or North Korea. I simply harbor many concerns about rule by “the will of the people.” When civilized it can work, but it can easily devolve into mob rule.
PS. Oh and by the way, you should check your facts and history before you start spouting lines like “not the “will of the people” (which seemed very opposed to the ruling)” Why don’t you go and read Loving, the court found and actually states in their opinion just the opposite.
I have read the decision, although it’s been a while. But I must ask, if the “will of the people” was for legalized interracial marriage, why did the court need to make its ruling at all? Why hadn’t the “will of the people” abolished all of the anti miscegenation laws, rendering a Supreme Court case unnecessary? Didn’t the state of Virginia fight to keep the law on the books – and didn’t that law reflect the “will of the people” (at least in Virginia)?
I’m curious, moi – where do you draw the line between what is appropriate law at a state level and at a federal level? What are your beliefs about “state’s rights?”
Don’t let 4.5 BILLION years of a changing earth get in the way of your ideology, jcf817.
You’re going to need to be a bit clearer, tiny.
Please describe my ideology that disregards 4.5 billion years of changing earth.
Speaking of gay marriage, their is a special on show tunes on channel 2 right now.
You say this as if 1) these men knew they were gay and had admitted it to themselves, and 2) realized they were committing to a marriage that they shouldn’t have. My 70+-year-old friend says that, to this day, he loves his ex-wife and misses her company. But at some point he realized that he could not give her the spousal love she deserved to have, and decided it was better to let her go.
EBF,
Do you think your friend be willing to comment on this? Getting a historical context from someone who actually lived through it woud be very interesting.
“these men knew they were gay and had admitted it to themselves”
I dont get this either. How can you not know you are gay if you were born that way. Isnt that one of the arguments people make all the time is that youre born gay? You may have a hard time admitting it but you know. If you didnt know and then all of a sudden discover it, it lends creadence to the argument that its a choice and a behavior. I didnt discover that I was heterosexual and I have a hard time believing people discover in their adult marrying years they were gay.
EBF wrote-
“Also, as you noted, my earlier explanation is incorrect. But if enough people think it’s correct, doesn’t the term take on a more sinister meaning? An interesting idea.”
Interesting idea? No, actually that is a completely ridiculous idea, I’m hoping you weren’t serious.
JonR wrote-
“Have you any idea of what it is like to walk down the street and have a car full of teenagers shout anti-gay slurs at you?”
How did they know, were you wearing your “I’m gay” sandwich board at the time?
“And even today, many gay men choose to marry a woman to conform to societal expectations. Right? No. But consider the alternatives that man faced…being ostracized by family and church, losing a job, dealing with societal bigotry.”
The alternative, JonR, is to not lie to an innocent person because you feel preasure to conform. The women he chose to marry doesnt represent society, and she has value as a human being that he put on a lower level than his need to fit in. He used her for selfish reasons. Thats a fact you’ll have to deal with, or not.
“The point is…don’t criticize these men until you’ve walked in their shoes and experienced the same agonizing choices they had to make.”
I have. Im married to a women. I married my wife for the reason you marry a person. You love them truly and deeply. These men had other motives. Motives that were based on a lie. So being a married man who married his wife for the right reasons, I have walked in their shoes. Getting married on any false pretense is wrong, makes no difference if its to conform to society, money, status or any other reason. I know many gay people, both co workers, family, friends etc who totally disagree with EBF JonR and Jfc on this one. It is never okay to enter into a marriage besed on a lie of this magnitude.
Maybe once Ive walked a mile in JonR and EBFs shoes Ill feel its okay to lie to my wife. If thats the case keep your shoes.
“And even today, many gay men choose to marry a woman to conform to societal expectations. Right? No. But consider the alternatives that man faced…being ostracized by family and church, losing a job, dealing with societal bigotry.”
How old are these gay men you refer to, are they in their teens? Becasue that kind of decision making is on par with junior high kids who need the cool jeans or shoes, it’s wholly irresponsible and inexcusable.
“And even today, many gay men choose to marry a woman to conform to societal expectations. Right? No. But consider the alternatives that man faced…being ostracized by family and church, losing a job, dealing with societal bigotry.”
How old are these gay men you refer to, are they in their teens? Because that type of decision making is on par with junior high kids who need to have the cool jeans or shoes. Difference being, in your example it’s actually just wholly irresponsible and inexcusable.
Whoops, I thought I had stopped my first post from going through.
Obviously, there is no point trying to convince you people that you absolutely do not understand. You say you do, but your language clearly implies that you do not. We will go ’round and ’round in circles on this, but it’s irresponsible for you to judge someone’s “decision” when, for them, there was no decision to make. I know you don’t understand what I just said, but it will just have to be left at that.
“Obviously, there is no point trying to convince you people that you absolutely do not understand. You say you do, but your language clearly implies that you do not.”
This is silly. You make a huge lapse in judgement if you think understanding and condoning is the same thing.
“but it’s irresponsible for you to judge someone’s “decision” when, for them, there was no decision to make. ”
BS. The decision is wether or not to get married. That is a choice you can make. You dont have to get married to live a straight life. No one was ever forced in society to get married. Many men who are straight never get married. You’re belief that there is no way out but to lie to a women and get married on false pretenses is childish. There are alternatives that these men ignored and took an innocent persons life for granted.
As if understanding ment I have to agree with you. How arogant. I understand the preasure, and I understand there are more than two ways to go because I see it everyday. The gay peopel I proove point that fact out. Im not saying these men are terrible people or that the preasure was inconsequential. But the facts are these men lied and did so for selfish reasons.
“you people”?
You mean bloggers?
“Obviously, there is no point trying to convince you people that you absolutely do not understand.”
You’ll have to do a much better job convincing me that getting married to a person based on a lie and not because you love that person in a matremonial way is something that isnt selfish.
In some twisted way a section of the homosexual society feels this is an altruistic non selfish act, that while destroying one persons life, she deserved it because society doesnt accept gay men. Wow.
jcf817
Obviously, there is no point trying to convince you people that you absolutely do not understand. You say you do, but your language clearly implies that you do not.
You are the one who doesn’t understand and whose language clearly indicates that failure to understand. In fact, your language, your original stance, and your continued stubbornness to your original stance show your inability to objectively reason.
Considering that you are gay, it is understandable that you have an affinity toward the plight of these men and how society has ‘pressured’ them into conforming to something they are not. However, it astounds me to no end (although it shouldn’t given your proclivity of not manning up and taking personal responsibility) that you continue to fail to see that these men had the decision to hurt or not hurt these innocent women and children.
We all understand how hard society pressures are but in the end these men made the decision to succumb to those pressures. That act of succumbing (a decision that was solely theirs) is what caused the pain to these innocent women and children.
You seem to have no compassion for the pain caused to these innocent women and children. In fact, you don’t even acknowledge that they were injured. Nevertheless, you steadfastly adhere to the belief that these men were the victims and these men were the only victims. You look at these women and children as collateral damaged caused by society and the men have no responsibility.
Nobody here is saying that these men didn’t have it tough in their struggle, they did. However, they chose to drag other innocent people (yes, they created more victims) into their struggle.
Your obvious biased precludes you and prevents you from seeing these man were not only victims but were also perpetrators that caused even more victims.
The point of marriage is to join your life with that of another. Doing that requires honesty and the willingness to share your self completley with the other. You cant do that if you lie about being gay. The only reason to lie about is to decieve. Do you think the women would marry you if she knew you were gay? Of course she wouldnt. The only reason to lie to her is for selfish reasons. Period.
“As if understanding ment I have to agree with you.”
No. I’m saying you don’t understand. I don’t give a flying **** if you agree with me or not, but you’ve made your opinion on the basis of a complete lack of understanding of the issue.
“You look at these women and children as collateral damaged caused by society and the men have no responsibility.”
And you, MOI, consistently and without care, misrepresent other people’s statements. Shame on you.
jcf817
but you’ve made your opinion on the basis of a complete lack of understanding of the issue.
What part to you think we don’t understand?
I have an idea. Why don’t you ask someone who’s been in that situation. Maybe you’ll learn compassion.
“No. I’m saying you don’t understand. I don’t give a flying **** if you agree with me or not, but you’ve made your opinion on the basis of a complete lack of understanding of the issue.”
You wish. What dont I understand? That its really hard to be gay in America? I get that. I see it everyday. What you dont get is what the basis of a marriage is. Truth and Honesty. YOU DO NOT NEED TO GET MARRIED. What you refuse to admit is these men were looking for relief from preasure and they thought getting married would provide relief. That is a selfish reason to get married.
And a complete lack? More arrogance.
“I have an idea. Why don’t you ask someone who’s been in that situation. Maybe you’ll learn compassion.”
I did. I emailed my uncle and asked him if he ever considered it. He said he didnt because he would be trading one lie for another. He choose to remain single. I asked my friend why he isnt married and he said he choose to come out to his parents regardless of consequence.
“Maybe you’ll learn compassion.”
This is also another ridiculous statement from an arrogant person. I have compassion for them, and I understand they were under preasure. Im not condeming the decission. Im being honest that it was selfish, something the three of you refuse to do because of your own denials.
“What you refuse to admit is these men were looking for relief from preasure and they thought getting married would provide relief.”
And that’s a conscious decision on their part? Always? As if you would know.
Human psychology is a very complicated and complex thing…and you act as if these things are issues of “black and white”, as simple as “yes” or “no”,
jcf817 says:
Maybe you’ll learn compassion.
I have compassion…..for everyone….unlike you who only seems to have compassion for those in your ’shoes’. You are the one who doesn’t seem to have compassion for the truly innocent people who are hurt in the situation.
And you, MOI, consistently and without care, misrepresent other people’s statements. Shame on you.
Thanks but no, you can keep your shame.
I especially love how you chastise me for misrepresenting your statements when I do nothing of the sort and it is actually you who is the one who misrepresents my statements and insinuates that I need to have compassion for the men. My posts express compassion for the innocent women and child AND the men who caused their pain.
I have an idea. Why don’t you ask someone who’s been in that situation.
You would rather just throw out unsubstantiated rhetoric, mistruths, and insults than justify your obvious ignorant, argonant, biased view.
“As if you would know.”
You’re right JCF Ive never been under preasure before. What the F would you know about it?
“And that’s a conscious decision on their part?”
Were the drunk or asleep when they took their vows or proposed to these women? If they knew they were gay and they proposed because of societal preasure they were acting in a selfish manner. End of story. Admit it or not your trying to argue that its okay to lie to someone who wants to marry you about who you truly are.
jcf818
Shame on you.
No you can keep you shame.
Maybe you’ll learn compassion.
I have compassion…for ALL the victims.
Please explain to me how lying to your future spouse about who you are is not a selfish thing? Could you ever love her in the way a wife deserves knowing your gay? How is that not cheating on her?
“If they knew they were gay…”
That’s quite a supposition to make. You’re basing your argument on something that you can’t possibly know.
“That’s quite a supposition to make. You’re basing your argument on something that you can’t possibly know.”
Of course. Now I see the problem. These men were clueless as to who they were. Right. So your argument is these men didnt know, actually loved these women in only the way a man and women who want to marry can, and then later figured out they were gay? Pretty flimsy. All the gay people I know knew very early on they were gay. Now youre trying to tell me adult men of marrying age loved these women and then had an epiphany they were gay and just had to live their own lives. BS.
Thats a cop out for trying to cover a selfish act.
And lets just suppose all these men loved these women to start and then became or figured out they were gay. We’ll give the late bloomers a pass. How about the ones who knew they were gay and buckled like belts to societies preasure. Considering marriage is a requirement in this country for all men over the age of 20. By law.
Did the guys who married for cover act selfishly? At least give me that much. Or is society preasure so bad that they relenquish any responibility for their wilfull actions?
Ill take your answer under consideration next time a person who just has to keep up with societies material preasures steals money from their employer.
“How about the ones who knew they were gay and buckled like belts to societies preasure.”
There is no good excuse for doing that. I never said there was.
“You’re basing your argument on something that you can’t possibly know.”
If thats the case then so are you. There is no possible way you could know these guys didnt know they were gay. But lets examine that. Whats more likely, these guys knew they were gay and got married anyway. Or these guys were straight or A sexual and then discovered they were gay after the fact. Which is more likely?
“There is no good excuse for doing that. I never said there was.”
Thank you. Thats my only point. If its possible for men to not have any idea they are gay and then have an epiphany after they were married to a women they loved as a man and women in a marriage do, then Id consider giving them a pass because they had no idea they were gay when they took their vows.
“Did the guys who married for cover act selfishly? At least give me that much. Or is society preasure so bad that they relenquish any responibility for their wilfull actions?”
In such a case they would be intentionally deceiving their spouse. Why do you think I would condone such actions?
“Thank you. Thats my only point. If its possible for men to not have any idea they are gay and then have an epiphany after they were married to a women they loved as a man and women in a marriage do, then Id consider giving them a pass because they had no idea they were gay when they took their vows.”
Do you think that’s the only possibility…given what we know of human psychology? Have you ever heard of instances where a person didn’t remember being abused as a child until much later in life? Could not the same psychological “event” happen to gay children whose family, friends, society, culture, etc. oppress that expression of sexuality?
I am not a psychologist…it is only a question.
“Why do you think I would condone such actions?”
Because this whole time Ive been saying men who know they are gay and marry a women because their friends family church and the rest of society doesnt accept homosexuality are acting selfishly. Youve been saying I dont understand the preasure. I say preasure be damned, these men made conscious decisions to marry a person based on a lie. You JonR and EBF have been saying I dont get it. Taking into account the several gay men I know by having a gay uncle and a gay best friend, I have some experience that tells me plenty of gay men were able to stand up to the preasure to conform. The ones who couldnt decided it was easier to carry on the lie further and involve others in it. Go back and read the whole thread. Ive been consistent since the start. Of course I was acting under the belief that gay men know they are gay by the time the get to a certain age because thats all Ive ever heard from gay men. That you’re born gay and admission or not you know it.
“Thank you. Thats my only point. If its possible for men to not have any idea they are gay and then have an epiphany after they were married to a women they loved as a man and women in a marriage do, then Id consider giving them a pass because they had no idea they were gay when they took their vows.”
Or maybe human sexuality is fluid, not static. That is not to say that a person has control over the fluctations in sexuality, just that maybe it can and does change?
Again…this is just a thought and question. I don’t claim to know the answer.
“Go back and read the whole thread. Ive been consistent since the start.”
As have I. I have never once condoned the actions of self-aware gay men intentionally entering into straight marriage.
“Have you ever heard of instances where a person didn’t remember being abused as a child until much later in life?”
Yes.
“Could not the same psychological “event” happen to gay children whose family, friends, society, culture, etc. oppress that expression of sexuality?”
Can you forget your sexuality? I doubt it but maybe. But if could Id guess youd probably become A sexual not hetero. Do you think society can make people hetero? If you do that would give a lot of weight to the argument that homosexuality is behavioral.
Anyway to be married to a women you need to be straight. Not all of marriage is sexual attraction but anyone in love and married knows its an important component of marriage. You’d still be being untruthful.
“Of course I was acting under the belief that gay men know they are gay by the time the get to a certain age because thats all Ive ever heard from gay men. That you’re born gay and admission or not you know it.”
It may be true that that’s all you’ve heard from gay men…and it is so in my case, as well. But what percentage of the gay population have entered into straight marriages? It may be a very small percentage.
“Can you forget your sexuality? I doubt it but maybe. But if could Id guess youd probably become A sexual not hetero. Do you think society can make people hetero? If you do that would give a lot of weight to the argument that homosexuality is behavioral.”
Is every person’s psychology the same? I’m lucky, I’ve always known and understood my sexuality. I don’t presume to know that’s the case for everyone.
“just that maybe it can and does change?”
Perhaps. But probably very rarely. Certainly not the majority of cases where a man comes out after being married.
“Is every person’s psychology the same?”
I know straight people, in the middle people and gay people. Ive never met anyone who changed mid stream. It might happen, just never heard of it.
“But what percentage of the gay population have entered into straight marriages? It may be a very small percentage.”
True, but thats not the point. Im not condeming anyone for the action just pointing out its selfish nature. And the real percentage is how many of the marriages entered into by gay men, where done so knowing they were gay. With the statement you and I have both just made admitting that all the gay men we know knew they were gay at a very young age, Id say the percentage is very high.
I just saw Brad Pitt
Oh wow my sexuality changed - he’s hot.
oh wait I just saw Billy Bob Thorton
whew - my sexuality changed back to normal
The point here is that neither of us truly knows the reason that some gay men enter into straight marriages. Clearly, there are men who have done it to try to avoid the pressure. I don’t think that’s always the case. You disagree. Fine.
There is no do doubt that this has caused great pain to many of those families…and it is truly regrettable, no matter the cause.
“I just saw Brad Pitt
Oh wow my sexuality changed - he’s hot.
oh wait I just saw Billy Bob Thorton
whew - my sexuality changed back to normal”
What an ignorant post. Do you have anything useful to say?
jcf817
What an ignorant post. Do you have anything useful to say?
I would say that my post is on the same level as your post.
Or maybe human sexuality is fluid, not static. That is not to say that a person has control over the fluctations in sexuality, just that maybe it can and does change?
My post was intended to show how contradictory your post was if one believes that being ‘gay’ is not a choice but that you are born with it.
You post completely flies in the face of the “born” gay or gay is “who I am” argument.
Its amazing that you don’t realize that you just blew up the strongest theory that could possibly help establish gay rights.
JCF,
I dont have any problems with you. I understand your points. If its possible to become gay later in life or to come out of a psycological disorder I dont know so Ill admit its possible. But it probably isnt the majority of cases. So in the cases where it was a consious choice, Ill stand by my assertion that its a selfish act.
Im still totally at odds with EBF and JonR who think that because of society, these men who do this have no blame and arent acting selfishly. As a husband who takes his marital vows very seriously, I find the statement very troubling.
I suspect EBF and JonR are contemplating saying the same thing to jcf817 as we say to tiny sometimes….GET OFF OUR SIDE!
“Im still totally at odds with EBF and JonR who think that because of society, these men who do this have no blame and arent acting selfishly. As a husband who takes his marital vows very seriously, I find the statement very troubling.”
I don’t mean to speak for them, but I don’t think they are saying that. I think they are saying the same thing I am.
“My post was intended to show how contradictory your post was if one believes that being ‘gay’ is not a choice but that you are born with it.
You post completely flies in the face of the “born” gay or gay is “who I am” argument.
Its amazing that you don’t realize that you just blew up the strongest theory that could possibly help establish gay rights.”
I didn’t blow up anything. I stated a hypothesis. You don’t agree with it. I have no problem with that.
Oh…and what part of “no control over the fluctuations” means that sexuality is chosen?
Do you have any idea what the term immutable means? suspect classification? and why those are so important to the gay rights issue?
dodging the question again?
“I asked how he could have heterosexual sex without being grossed out, and he replied that, at the time, getting married and having kids was simply an expectation (societal and familial) that was too powerful to go against. “I just did what I had to do,” he said.
I have another friend (female) who has a son about my age (mid forties). This friend is very religious, conservative and Republican (we’ve been good friends for a long time; we just don’t discuss politics and religion). Anyway, her son fathered three children with his wife before he came out and got divorced. Given the religiosity of this family, I cannot say that this man was unethical or selfish.”
This is what EBF said. He’s saying these men knew but the preasure was too much. He said they did what they had to do. Id say what they had to do was be honest. He disagrees and says it wasnt selfish.
Are you saying you’ve never done anything you didn’t want to do?
Times are changing, 4blahs. I really believe that this kind of thing will be very rare in the not so distant future…assuming we continue to progress in our understanding and acceptance of the broad range of human sexuality.
“Are you saying you’ve never done anything you didn’t want to do?”
I went to confirmation even though at 14 I new I was an atheist. But then I was only lying to myself. I wasnt entering into a life long relationship with another innocent person who depended on me to be honest. Ive never been preasured to do anything like this, but that doesnt mean as an observer I cant see the fact that its still dishonest.
Oh and I was 14, I wasnt a man yet. Big difference.
jcf817
dodging the question
No, my apologies I guess I assumed you were intelliegent and learned enough to see that my questions were answers to your question.
Here let me slow it down for you -
Constitutional equal right protection for a suspect class is depended upon some factors - one of which is that the trait is ‘immutable’ - if the trait is what you say - changing - (regardless of control or no control) - it is not immutable. Therefore it would not fall under a suspect class.
Ah…but then it is also changing for heterosexuals, see. So…we’re all in this together, just like we’ve always been.
“I went to confirmation even though at 14 I new I was an atheist. But then I was only lying to myself.”
What about God, weren’t you lying to him by pretending to?
jcf817
you are missing the point
But that does bring up a question - is it fluid for you? (not trying to make any innuendos just using the same word you did) Did you change once you were gay? later you thought that you were straight and then you wer gay again?
Big B,
If I dont believe in God, how can I be lying to something that isnt there? I told my parents I didnt believe in God too and I knew i didnt believe in it so I guess I was really only lying to the church. But then again I wasnt really doing that wither because I told the pastor I didnt believe in god. He was really cool about it and always answered my questions.
Does it matter if it’s fluid for ME?
It doesn’t it mean it isn’t or can’t be.
If sexuality indeed changes and is not immutable (which I have never claimed, BTW…it was only hypothetical), then should heterosexual couplings be afforded marriage rights, but not homosexual couplings?
jcf817
And also JonR - I hope you are still around today - did you get a chance to read that stuff.
Here is a link about suspect class
classes.lls.edu/archive/manheimk/114d3/echarts/suspectx.htm
It may be alittle difficult to understand because it is kind of like a cheat sheet for law students but it may help understand what it takes to be a suspect class and receive heighten scrutiny for discriminatory laws.
If sexuality is immutable, it is immutable for everyone. If it is not immutable, it is not immutable for anyone.
Why is it that the favorite debating tactic among liberals is to say that there is no debate?
Katherine Kunst? She writes “hate” speech. We won’t debate her — let’s fire her.
Global warming? The science is settled. No debate.
Abortion? The Supreme Court settled that. No debate.
The Iraq War? Bush lied, people died. No debate. (But think: if Bush lied, he knew ahead of time there were no WMDs. Do you think Karl Rove and Dick Cheney would have missed that little detail? Would they not have stashed a $10 bag of Anthrax in one of Sadam’s dresser drawers to cover the “lie” they knew about ahead of time?)
Etc. etc.
Look, I wouldn’t line a bird cage with Nick Coleman’s columns, but his turtleneck-too-tight, collectivist rants provoke healthy debate. KK is a nice counter-balance to Coleman’s opinions. You know, diversity.
Is it time to peel those “Coexist” bumper stickers off your Volvos or do liberals really mean what they say when they preach diversity?
“Is it time to peel those “Coexist” bumper stickers off your Volvos or do liberals really mean what they say when they preach diversity?”
How about the Jesus fish eating the Darwin fish?
Was there a black hole there for a while with posts?
“Is it time to peel those “Coexist” bumper stickers off your Volvos or do liberals really mean what they say when they preach diversity?”
Don’t you mean Priuses?
Did you all see that TIZA has to change some of its behavior? A little too religious to be a “public school” I guess.
And now Mindy looks even more like a fool. Can we impeach her already?
Kdonmn-I wouldn’t mind Coleman so much if he allowed people to comment on his articles. The only reason I can think of is that he’s just too afraid of what people might say. Apparently, his skin isn’t nearly as thick as KK’s. She’s got rhino hide(metaphorically speaking).
“And now Mindy looks even more like a fool. Can we impeach her already?”
No, she isn’t responsible for her statements, she just expects others to be held accountable.
We’re not going to get to 1000 posts by just sitting here.. any thoughts?? How do you feel about Harry Potter?? The anti-Christ or just a fun read?? :)
hey I posted some interesting stuff - about suspect class - I got no takers.
I think jcf817 is just not sophisticated enought to understand the argument and EBF and JonR are no where to be heard.
A fun read…it’s fiction. Besides I feel a kindred spirit with some of the characters since I feel a bit wicked most of the time.
Shucks, I was hoping someone was going to throw out the anti-Christ argument.. I’ve always thought it was funny that people would take a children’s book so seriously as to claim that it is promoting witchcraft. I could make the same argument about LOTR. Although on a lesser level.
MOI-I barely know anything about suspect class or the gay rights movement, otherwise I would attempt to discuss it with you.
Sorry to dissapoint, I don’t take the rigid view on those type of things…fun is fun.
I would expect nothing less from you AW.
We are not going to make it to 1000 if we don’t talk about something contraversial.
like my poor spelling….:)
Here’s a topic:
Given the fact that so many Muslims have anti-American attitudes, do you think they should be more closely monitored??
Well, I’m a pregnant lesbian on my way to get an abortion and I just informed my husband that I’m divorcing him via text message. Also, I am trading in my car for a bicycle so i can ride in traffic without a helmet and without paying attention to traffic laws. I’m more important than that. Also, while I’m driving I’m going to tailgate, throw my McDonald’s garbage out the window and my cigarrette butts. When I get home, I’m going to not mow my lawn and enjoy the view of my dandelions contrasting my neighbor’s trugreen treatment.
Pick and choose, people! I got some controversy up in there!!!!
Arian Brotherhood For Life!!!
**Just so you all know, I’m making everything up and I don’t want to have people bombing my box or hunting me down because of some JOKES I put on the internet.***
Here’s another one:
How do you feel about the Katherine Bodem situation?? Her child dies b/c of her negligence and she gets half a year in jail??
Yes DJ I do. I forgot to mention that I’m a MUSLIM pregnant lesbian. thank you.
HAHA!! That made me laugh a LOT!! Thanks Tanks
Katherine Bodem should get what she gave her child…no excuse for the behavior at all.
tanks…you go girl! You stalkin’ me…sounds like my yesterday! Think I’ll get a Nazi tat! Ummm…I’m joking too for all you serious minded people out there.
What I don’t like about the media coverage of the Bodem case is that everyone is so keen to point out that she was shopping for shoes at the time. Does it matter what she was doing?? She wasn’t in the bathroom watching her kids. It doesn’t make her any worse to be buying shoes than if she was cooking dinner.
I feel bad for her loss, and they say she is bi-polar. But you still can’t excuse her.
It’s good to see her stand up and not try to fight the law at all. It makes me think she is truly sorry and isn’t being selfish.
Bodem had a history of neglect towards her children, depression…there is help out there so get it, no the woman deserves more.
OK, I posted but it disappeared. Noone’s jumping on the subject, so I feel like it’s not worth it. But I will say this.
Despite the terrible thing that Bodem did, at least she is taking “personal responsibility” for it. MOI should be proud.
And who cares if she was shopping for shoes. I wish the media would stop using that as if it makes her a terrible person. It doesn’t matter WHAT she was doing. She was negligent. She could have been doing laundry or making dinner and I wouldn’t feel any different about it.
Test.. my posts aren’t posting… testing.. one, two.. 10??
Oh sure, that one works.. here’s what i wrote before..
“OK, I posted but it disappeared. Noone’s jumping on the subject, so I feel like it’s not worth it. But I will say this.
Despite the terrible thing that Bodem did, at least she is taking “personal responsibility” for it. MOI should be proud.
And who cares if she was shopping for shoes. I wish the media would stop using that as if it makes her a terrible person. It doesn’t matter WHAT she was doing. She was negligent. She could have been doing laundry or making dinner and I wouldn’t feel any different about it.”
I posted…..
Bodem should get what she gave her child, no excuse, none, for her bahavior.
MOI,
I will not claim to have a complete understanding. But it would seem that homosexuals have never been a Suspect Class, not because the trait is or isn’t immutable, but because homosexuals don’t really fit the Political Powerlessness criteria.
jcf817
Excellent read. You are right. Well almost right. They use to fit the politically powerless criterea, however, there is no doubt they do not fit that criterea anymore.
You may be scared to know that you and Justice Scalia feel the same way.
It doesn’t scare me that we agree on that.
Does that make the current marriage laws not discriminatory?
jcf817
Does that make the current marriage laws not discriminatory?
Under that criterea, Federal Constitutionally speaking, yes, that makes current marriage laws not discriminatory.
So…because someone doesn’t fall in a Suspect Class, it’s not possible to discrimate against them illegally?
This joke was the “joke of the day” on Comedy Central’s website.
Q: What’s the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.
I don’t really get it. Is it saying that rollerblading is gay, or does rollerblading have some sort of sexual connotation to it that I’m unaware of?? And if it’s the former, what’s wrong with rollerblading?? Maybe I’m just missing it completely.
IMHO, KK’s commentary always focuses on either those and/or doings that can be characterized as “the right things for the wrong reasons” or “the wrong things for the right reasons,” and so prompts the reader to determine what is the “right things for the right reasons.” She provides a valuable and rare perspective within the Strib’s aggregation of opinionaters. In regard to the cited charter school’s motives and practises: “re-empathy” comes to mind. The labored and muddled defense of the facts and motives communicates sophistry at our highest levels of public school governance and tells me that the barking individual’s who are calling for KK’s head specialize in labored explanations and muddled logic. KK’s critics and their doings provide a potent illustration of just why “government” should not be in the education business at all.
IMHO, KK’s commentary always focuses on either those and/or doings that can be characterized as “the right things for the wrong reasons” or “the wrong things for the right reasons,” and so prompts the reader to determine what is the “right things for the right reasons.” She provides a valuable and rare perspective within the Strib’s aggregation of opinionaters. In regard to the cited charter school’s motives and practises: “re-empathy” comes to mind. The labored and muddled defense of the facts and motives communicates sophistry at our highest levels of public school governance and tells me that the barking individual’s who are calling for KK’s head specialize in labored explanations and muddled logic. KK’s critics and their doings provide a potent illustration of just why “government” should not be in the education business at all.
jcf817
So…because someone doesn’t fall in a Suspect Class, it’s not possible to discrimate against them illegally?
First it is important to note that the gov’t discriminates all the time. Some people get benefits some do not - like welfare or tax breaks. Some get more rights, some do not - like felons and guns. So there are tests that determine the ‘legality’ of the discrimination.
So yes it is possible to discriminate against a suspect class, however, the level of scrutiny for the law is different. The scrutiny level is what is called ‘ratinoal basis’; it gives deference to the legislature. The standard is the law has to have a rationally related to a legimate government interest. This is a fairly low standard. Laws almost always pass this standard. So although they could be
Take welfare for example - government only gives welfare to some people, obviously it is discriminating - they don’t give it to all, only the poor. Since wealth is not a suspect class, the law only needs to pass rational basis review. It is easy to see, although someone disagree, that helping the poor is seen as a legimate gov’t interest and giving money is ratinally related to that interest.
So under this standard, the current marriage laws would be seen as non-discriminitory because they are rationally related to some legitimate government interest. One could make a fairly persuasive argument that procreation, although some would disagree, is a legimate gov’t interest and marriage benefits are rationally related to that gov’t interest.
Oh crap
I have a major typo. It should have been NON-suspect class not suspect class.
The first sentence of the third paragraph should be
“So yes it is possible to discriminate against a non-suspect class, however, the level of scrutiny for the law is different.”
The question is whether Kirsten should get the ax. She fulfills her function well, as a provocateur, bringing attention to the paper. She is not a reporter, nor should be considered one in any stretch of the imagination even though the paper tries to treat her as if she is. The biggest issue though is that she does not represent Minnesota values. She is part of an extremist movement that has tried to change the face of politics in the United States. This extremist movement has been soundly rejected by not only Minnesota but most of the country now. The owners of the paper are also part of this movement, and are (in part) losing market share because they put forward this rhetoric. So, should she be fired? If her job is to drive people to the Strib website to see what nutty right wing sillyness is being pedeled by the Strib, maybe. But if the Strib wants to survive, it needs to reflect the values of this community and not the values of a cabal of some rich guys from out East. We have too many other outlets for news now to put up with perspectives that do not represent how we see the world.
EBF
You asked me about my theory in interpreting the constitution. I would not classify me as a strict constructionist. I would be better classified as an originalist.
Are you still interested in the other questions you asked?
Also, are you serious as to my thoughts on states rights issues or are you just trying to make a “moi is a racist” argument?
Prairie,
Are you serious? You must be joking. You think that the newspaper is biased to the right?
Please show us some evidence to back up your allegation.
BTW, do you read the other columnists in the newspaper. Have you read Coleman’s column, ever? It is as left as you claim KK is right. Or do you think Coleman’s column is unbiased?
I think you need to put down the koolaid.
Well I think we should use waterboarding for people who drown their kids. And the people who leave their kids in their minivan “I thought I dropped them off at daycare!” should have to sit in a really hot van all day long. Without water. Just like how their kids had to die. Then they should sterilize those people if they don’t happen to die from the waterboarding and the suffocating heat in the vehicle.
tanks - It pisses me off too. I have to agree with you. I won’t even leave my dogs alone in a car with the windows cracked on a hot day why would I even think about doing it to my child.
People! Take responsibility for your children or keep your pants on! If you can’t seem to discipline or nurture your children you shouldn’t procreate.
AW- Thank you!
I have two boys - one’s even made it to six and a half by the grace of a higher power or the fact that I always supervised him in the bathtub, and never left him alone in a hot car.
I think my 10 month old has a death wish though - he has no fear.
“One could make a fairly persuasive argument that procreation, although some would disagree, is a legimate gov’t interest and marriage benefits are rationally related to that gov’t interest.”
But gay people can procreate. Should being able to have sex with someone of the opposite sex, thus creating offspring, give you rights? If you procreate, but are gay, should the government not hold you responsible for those offspring? Maybe the government should give sole custody to the straight partner in such a case. What if a gay man and a lesbian produce a child?
Obviously, I don’t know constitutional law, but it would seem to be a whole lot simpler if everyone were allowed to join into civil contracts with whomever they pleased.
tanks-I have a VERY fearless daughter and she’s made it to 18…there is hope! She’s the type of child that makes your heart stop on a regular basis. I know she’s an adult now and I leave her in her higher powers care. She will always be our girl.
Maybe that’s why I don’t understand abusive parents….I love my child.
You asked me about my theory in interpreting the constitution. I would not classify me as a strict constructionist. I would be better classified as an originalist.
Are you still interested in the other questions you asked?
Also, are you serious as to my thoughts on states rights issues or are you just trying to make a “moi is a racist” argument?
Yes, moi, I am still interested in your answers. I am not asking the questions to try to paint you as a racist, or anything else.
Would you also explain what an “originalist” is? I’m not familiar with that school of thought.
Another question, if you’d indulge me further: do you think that the federal constitution is an appropriate place to either define marriage as exclusively heterosexual or to explicitly state that same-sex couples have the right to marry – or would you prefer the federal constitution be amended with neither of these options (or with a different one)? I suspect that your answer to this question will relate to your views on states’ rights.
Thanks.
jcf817
But gay people can procreate. Should being able to have sex with someone of the opposite sex, thus creating offspring, give you rights? If you procreate, but are gay, should the government not hold you responsible for those offspring? Maybe the government should give sole custody to the straight partner in such a case. What if a gay man and a lesbian produce a child?
Obviously, I don’t know constitutional law, but it would seem to be a whole lot simpler if everyone were allowed to join into civil contracts with whomever they pleased.
Ok lets first start off with describing the landscape because given your comments and questions, you may be under some false impressions.
The potentially unconstitutional discriminating marriage laws we are discussing are not laws that prohibit any behavior type. The gov’t is not stopping anyone from having children. Gay people have just as much right and privileges and responsibility to procreate as a straight person.
Nor is gov’t stopping anyone from entering into civil contract. The laws we are talking about are laws that bestow added benefits on certain types of civil contracts, i.e. opposite sex unions. This is an important distinction when discussing the rationally related legitimate government interest. The gov’t interest in promoting opposite sex unions is that it fosters procreation (whether you agree or not – it is a plausible argument). That is not to say that same sex unions or any other unions or no unions foster children better or worse. It just say that the gov’t (the people) feel that they wish to promote procreation (legitimate gov’t interest) through bestowing benefits on certain civil unions (opposite sex marriages).
Maybe this explanation will help. Miscegenation laws actually prohibited interracial marriages. In other words, people were prosecuted and punished either through fines, jails, or asked to leave the state if they married someone from a different race. Those types of laws were held discriminatory. Now I am not saying that laws bestowing benefits on only same race marriages would fair any better. They would not. But they would be different because they would not be trying to stop behavior through punishment In addition, we are talking about race, i.e. a suspect class.
So with that out of the way; the answers to your questions becomes self evident. Having offspring with someone from the opposite sex does not give you more rights. You get more benefits if you are in an opposite sex union. This is the same thing as you get more benefits i.e. tax savings, when you put your money into a 401K instead of spending it now. Is that discriminatory, yes. Is it constitutionally allowed, yes.
Gov’t should and do hold gay people who procreate just as responsible as straight people. Responsibility is different than what we are talking about. Gay and lesbian having a child have the same rights toward parentalship as a straight couple.
Now before you go an attack the content of these arguments, please understand that I am trying to use these arguments as a vehicle to explain why a non-suspect class designation means a much lower level of scrutiny when it comes to illegal discrimination, (i.e. tougher to find discrimination)
“It just say that the gov’t (the people) feel that they wish to promote procreation (legitimate gov’t interest) through bestowing benefits on certain civil unions (opposite sex marriages).”
How can procreation be promoted through infertile heterosexual civil unions.
Hey EBF
I missed your post until now. I will try to come up with an answer today or tomorrow for you.
Thanks, moi. I look forward to reading it.
KK, keep up the good work, and keep them honest in MN.
Please leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Katherine Kersten writes a weekly column for the Star Tribune's Sunday Opinion Exchange section. The column covers a broad range of topics reflecting her experiences and interests.
In this blog, she will address many of the same issues, albeit in quicker, less formal fashion, along with pointing readers to other sources of interesting online commentary and coverage.
Subscribe to Katherine Kersten
Learn more about RSS
Books I Love
- Underdevelopment is a State of Mind - Lawrence E. Harrison
- The Schools We Need: Why We Don’t Have Them – E.D. Hirsch
- The Closing of the American Mind – Allan Bloom
- The Repeal of Reticence – Rochelle Gurstein
- Political Pilgrims – Paul Hollander
- The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism – Michael Novak
- A Conflict of Visions – Thomas Sowell
- Adam Bede – George Eliot
- The Brothers Karamazov – Fyodor Dostoevsky
- The Lord of the Rings -- J. R. R. Tolkein
Great Minnesota Blogs
Indispensible Think Tanks
Movies You Won't Forget
On Education
- Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
- Center for Education Reform
- Core Knowledge Foundation
- Intercollegiate Studies Institute
On Marriage and the Family
Sites You Shouldn't Miss
Categories
- 2008 GOP Convention (11)
- Abstinence (3)
- ACLU (3)
- ADA (1)
- Adoption (1)
- Adversary Culture (3)
- Affirmative Action (3)
- AIDS (2)
- Airlines (1)
- Airport Taxi Drivers (3)
- Al Franken (5)
- Al Gore (3)
- Al Sharpton (1)
- Amy Klobuchar (1)
- Animal Rights (3)
- Anti-Americans (1)
- art (1)
- Assisted Suicide (1)
- Athletics (1)
- Bikes (5)
- Bill Clinton (1)
- Bin Laden (1)
- Boy Scouts (1)
- Boys (2)
- Brainerd Lakes (1)
- Bridge (1)
- Bridge Collapse (8)
- British (1)
- Canada (1)
- Charter schools (1)
- Children (14)
- China (1)
- Chris Stewert (1)
- Christianity (8)
- Christmas (6)
- Cities (2)
- Clarence Thomas (1)
- Collectors (1)
- Colleges (24)
- Congress (2)
- Conservatism (8)
- Constitution (5)
- Contraception (1)
- Courts (9)
- Courtship (1)
- Crime (12)
- Critical Mass (2)
- Culture Wars (6)
- Cyberspace (1)
- Darwin (1)
- Dating (2)
- Dawkins (1)
- Death (2)
- Death Penalty (2)
- Delta Queen (2)
- Discrimination (8)
- Disneyland (1)
- Diversity (9)
- Divorce (2)
- Don Samuels (1)
- Drugs (5)
- Economics (10)
- Education (32)
- Emperor has no clothes (1)
- Energy Policy (1)
- Environmental Issues (11)
- Ethanol (2)
- Eugenics (1)
- Europe (8)
- Evil (1)
- Experts (1)
- Falwell (1)
- Fathers (4)
- Feminists (3)
- First Minnesota Volunteers (1)
- Flying Imams (12)
- Francis of Assisi (1)
- Free Speech (2)
- free will (1)
- Gambling (1)
- Garrison Keillor (2)
- Gas Prices (1)
- Gay Issues (4)
- Gay Marriage (8)
- George Washington (1)
- Germany (1)
- Global Warming (11)
- government gone wild (2)
- Happiness (4)
- Hate Crimes (3)
- Health Care (10)
- Hillary Clinton (2)
- Home Schooling (2)
- Huck Finn (1)
- Indomitable Human Spirit (6)
- Intellectual Freedom (1)
- Iran (1)
- Iraq (22)
- Islam (3)
- James Lileks (1)
- Jane Fonda (1)
- Joe Lieberman (2)
- John Edwards (1)
- John Kerry (2)
- John McCain (2)
- John Wesley Powell (1)
- Journalists (2)
- Keith Ellison (5)
- Larry Craig (1)
- law enforcement (3)
- Lawyers (3)
- Legislature (5)
- Lori Swanson (1)
- Love (2)
- Main (555)
- Manhood (3)
- Mark Ritchie (1)
- Marriage (14)
- Media (9)
- medical ethics (1)
- Melancholia (1)
- Michael Moore (1)
- Michael Vick (1)
- Michelle Bachmann (2)
- Mike Hatch (2)
- Military (19)
- Mitt Romney (1)
- Monster Houses (1)
- Morality (12)
- Mortgage Crises (2)
- Mother Teresa (1)
- Movies (3)
- Multiculturalism (4)
- Museums (1)
- Music (1)
- Muslims (17)
- Nancy Pelosi (1)
- Navy SEALs (1)
- New Orleans (1)
- Norm Coleman (3)
- Norman Borlaug (1)
- North Korea (1)
- Novels (1)
- Obama (10)
- Oberstar (2)
- Olympics (1)
- Outward Bound (1)
- Overcoming (1)
- Parenting (10)
- Peter Singer (2)
- Peter Swanson (1)
- Political Correctness (3)
- Political Pilgrims (1)
- Politics (68)
- Popular Entertainment (3)
- Pornography (3)
- Poverty (5)
- Princess Diana (1)
- Prostitution (1)
- psychology (1)
- Race (16)
- Rachel Paulose (2)
- Radical Islam (3)
- Rap Music (3)
- Religion (21)
- Rights Talk (7)
- ROTC (1)
- Salvation Army (1)
- Sara Jane Olson (1)
- Sarah Palin (4)
- Science (15)
- Self Esteem (2)
- Sexual Infidelity (1)
- Sexuality (16)
- Single Parents (1)
- Sixties (1)
- Skewering the Author (4)
- Slavery (1)
- Smoking (2)
- Social Security (1)
- Solzhenitsyn (1)
- Somalis (2)
- Sports (1)
- Statistics (1)
- STDs (1)
- Stem Cells (2)
- Suicide (1)
- Sustainability (1)
- Sweden (1)
- Tatoos (1)
- Taxes (6)
- Terrorism (6)
- There for Another (8)
- Think Again Readers (5)
- Thomas More (2)
- Tim Pawlenty (6)
- TIZA (6)
- Tobacco (1)
- Transgender (1)
- University of MN (2)
- Ventura (2)
- Video games (2)
- Vietnam (5)
- Violence and the Media (1)
- Virtues and Values (9)
- Voting (3)
- Wal-Mart (1)
- Wealth and Poverty (6)
- Welfare (4)
- Western Culture (1)
- Woodstock (1)
- World War II (2)
- Young People (18)
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006