Friday, May 16, 2008

New CA judicial campaign sticker, in light of the recent gay marriage decision





...Meanwhile, back at Cone's, the celebration of the CA same sex marriage ruling is proceeding along typical lines: The Usual Suspects are desperate to defend the indefensible activist court decision.

Here's my favorite, from Delirious Dave the Scientist, no less:

"In this case, those rights are paramount. I don't care if the guarantee of those rights happens through the courts, through the legislature, or through amendment to the Constitution. I also don't care what happens in a referendum; the fundamental rights of minorities are not subject to majority rule."

Don't you just love it when people like this can concoct non existent/imaginary "rights" out of thin air?

In Dave's case, it's certainly no more a stretch than inventing a bogus "scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming"that he so clearly (and so wrongly) supports.


Further, I note that all of the drumbeaters for the non-existent "right" reject the concept of marriage defined as a particular relationship between a man and a woman.

What you will NEVER see from them is what their particular definition of marriage actually is.

6 comments:

  1. Marriage is a life-long commitment between two people who love each other. That's not hard.

    What's hard is dealing with the legal benefits and entitlements society grants some married couples but not others. That's where civil rights come in.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Marriage is a life-long commitment between two people who love each other. That's not hard."

    NAMBLA thanks you for your support and understanding.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kind of hard to have a conversation about this if you insist on equating homosexuality with pedophilia.

    ReplyDelete
  4. (sigh)

    No, Dave.

    Your definition of marriage is what equates homosexuality with pedophilia.

    NAMBLA would argue that their specialty would come under your definition.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Children can't make life-long commitments, nor can they enter into romantic love. You know perfectly well child abuse isn't marriage. To argue that is preposterous and ugly, and suggests that you actually just think gay folks are icky.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "You know perfectly well child abuse isn't marriage."

    Not by your definition I don't.

    ReplyDelete