“Why are you posting this meme when it perpetuates the lie that homosexuality is a "lifestyle"? Ridiculous. You should know better than that.”
latinguytony on May 27, 2014 at 16:16:58
“I think that GED you got finally FAILED. Homosexuality is LIFE not a 'lifestyle'. Do you get it ? No I didn't think you would....”
ABron on May 27, 2014 at 13:57:45
“Homosexuality IS the way some people are. They don't choose it. That is just the way it is. I don't really see anything wrong with calling it a lifestyle as long as people know that it is not a choice.”
DianaLynn1967 on May 27, 2014 at 12:50:33
“No one's perfect John. Yes, the pastor did use the dreaded "L" word, which demonstrates his (her?) ignorance. Nevertheless, the pastor's heart appears to have been in the right place.”
JuLeah Willson on May 27, 2014 at 11:58:11
Lifestyle: A way of life or style of living that reflects the attitudes and values of a person or group
How I live my life is my lifestyle
It doesn't have to be yours to be mine. You don't have to agree with it for it to be correct for me. We are different people. Do you see how that works?”
JeremyDykes on May 27, 2014 at 11:34:32
“So a PASTOR says something POSITIVE about gays and you're gonna quibble about his choice of verbage? 5G's...”
madmaddiemim on May 27, 2014 at 10:41:06
You keep on using that word...I do not think it means what you think it means”
“Because the appointments were canceled in accordance with Bachmann & Associates' cancellation policy, which states that the $75-per-appointment no-show fee will only be assessed when appointments are missed or canceled without adequate notice. I followed their policy; the charges were bogus. That's why we disputed them, that's why I didn't pay them, that's why Marcus backed down.
For the record: all the appointments that I captured on camera during our undercover investigation were paid for prior to the start of each appointment, again as per stated clinic policy.”
forestlady on Dec 17, 2011 at 10:45:59
“Thank you for doing the public service of outing Marcus Bachman's "reparative therapy". As a psychotherapist, I am appalled that this practice is even considered legal. It does immeasurable harm to a person; I'd love to know the suicide rate of people who have been through "reparative therapy". It also discredits psychology and makes our job as therapists more difficult; I had several young men come to me wanting me to make them hetero. It was heartbreaking.”
spidermom on Dec 17, 2011 at 08:30:39
“thank you for putting youself out there for the rest of us. Keep at it.”
“I hope that someday you can learn to stop "disapproving" the person that you are and learn to embrace your whole self, including your sexual orientation. Life is much better, richer, fuller, and more meaningful once a person has taken that step.”
Justin Werner on Dec 19, 2011 at 09:57:20
“I knew by twelve that I was attracted to men. At fourteen I had the word for it. At sixteen I knew it wasn't a phase. I was so hoping it was a phase, 'cause I could see how badly gay people were being treated. At eighteen I escaped from the redneck hellhole I was raised in and started discovering who I am. I made many errors and false starts, as young people are prone to do.
I eventually came to an understanding of myself and what I wanted out of life: which was strangely similar to what society wanted out of me, except for the sexual orientation part. I wanted to love someone and be loved in return. I wanted a career and a home. I wanted a family. I found all these things: a fine man that I have been with for the last 18 years, a family in the people we have gathered around us and in those of our blood relations that accept us. I have a solid career. Aside from the details, we are unremarkable in every way. I have found my fulfillment.
Other people's fulfillment may be different than mine. shards91 may simply have different values: may not even *like* sex. And that's perfectly fine. Don't assume that just because he has chosen to be single and celibate that he has not embraced who he is, that he has not found fulfillment. For some people, this really is what makes them happy.”
“You and I clearly have different definitions of the words "respect" and "love" if your definitions are broad enough to include those who oppose your right to form a committed, officially recognized lifelong relationship with the person you love, and for any children you have to be able to access the rights and protections that marriage provides to families. Sorry to burst your bubble, but you can't "respect" someone whose basic human rights you oppose. Saying otherwise doesn't in fact make it so.
And as I've said above, this is *not* a LGBT vs. Christian dichotomy. There are tens of thousands of LGBT Christians, and many faith traditions that fully include them. So "Christian" does not automatically mean "opponent of equality." In fact, some Christian denominations, including Roman Catholics, actually support marriage equality at a higher rate than the general population. (But yeah, I guess you're right, I'm the one who lacks intelligence. ;)
Furthermore, re: "the fact that a lot of you people think disagreement automatically means hatred..." -- You are clearly misunderstanding the situation. Eich doesn't just disagree with LGBT human rights, he actively participated in taking them away from California families and made repeated donations to anti-LGBT extremist politicians. Again, sorry to burst your bubble, but that's not mere "disagreement." That, ma'am, is animus.”
Romulus on Apr 25, 2014 at 12:19:44
“Other than SSM, what rights did Eich actively participate in taking away from California families?”
“"Many who are reading this advocate for violence (via government force) against those who don't support their views."
I wrote the article and have read all the comments. Not a single one has advocated for government-sanctioned violence against those who don't support their views. What exactly are you talking about?”
Angel1999 on Apr 25, 2014 at 17:32:59
“There is a contingent of libertarianism that thinks that any government at all and any action taken by that government is the embodiment of violence. This individual seems to think that unless he is 100% free to disregard all federal laws and all efforts at taxation then violence is being perpetrated against him.”
ExPwner on Apr 25, 2014 at 08:53:26
“They do so implicitly. Ever heard of:
- Federal income tax
- Social Security
- Single-payer system
If you support any of those, you're supporting the use of force against me should I disagree and not comply. It is implicit in the use of government enforcement.”
“I think it's telling that you set this up as an "either-or" scenario. In your worldview, you have people like you on one side, who view marriage as a "sacred, religious covenant that has certain stipulations to it," and on the other side are those other people who view it as "a civil union issued a license by the government" etc. This is actually rather insulting to the thousands and thousands of married LGBT people of faith for whom marriage is a "sacred, religious covenant that has certain stipulations to it", as well as the many faith traditions that choose not to exclude, but fully include LGBT people in all things, including marriage. Whatever your beliefs about marriage, you don't own religion, so please stop pretending this is a religion vs. civil rights dichotomy.
Furthermore, whether or not one views marriage as a religious institution, in our secular society, what matters is the civil marriage license. A religion can call two people married all it wants, but unless the couple has that civil marriage license, that religious designation doesn't really mean anything from a practical recognition standpoint. So as John E. has said, that's the issue here: anti-LGBT people want the marriage policy of our secular, civil government to reflect their own individual religious beliefs. And as the changing tide of popular opinion and the wave of recent court decisions shows, that just isn't constitutional and won't be allowed to continue.”
alieninthecaribbean on Apr 25, 2014 at 09:51:20
“Very good point.
Her assumption is that ONLY heterosexuals take marriage as a sacred act.”
“Thanks Mike! I really enjoyed your article as well. It's so nice to see you and others also resisting the urge to prematurely canonize Francis as an LGBT hero. I'm surprised by how strong that urge is in so much of our community!”
“Yeesh. I appreciate the sentiment and couldn't agree more about the word "tr**ny" (it's hateful and hurtful, never okay, ever, ever -- and I call it out when I hear it), but as a gay man, I could really have done without the condescension towards gay men in this article. Like, really.
Molloy isn't going to win very many friends by insulting a sizable swath of the audience. Because while some gay men throw that awful slur around, many others like me (and many of my friends) will step right up to the plate and call people out for using it. The author tells people not to paint with a broad brush, then proceeds to paint gay men with a broad brush. Color me unimpressed.”
DougInOK on Nov 26, 2013 at 11:46:16
“While I completely agree with you on the author's tone in this toward gay men, I completely disagree with you on the use of the word "tranny" when used in the drag community (even when used by Siriano). The auther doesn't at all go into the fact that tranny, in this sense, is not in any reference to transgender, but in reference to transvestite, which is a synonym for drag queen or cross dresser. The community is very comfortable with this term and does not use it in reference to transgender individuals. I had NO idea that people didn't realize this until reading this blog. Talk about trying to stir the pot...”
“I'm well aware of that, and actually mentioned that same fact in my article. My point is that neither Brian Brown, the rest of NOM's board members, nor the organization itself seems in any way willing to admit that the marriage equality fight is, to use Card's words, "moot," so this would appear to be a case of a board member veering wildly off message in order to preserve his own bottom line.”
“I'm well aware that Card is on NOM's board and mention that very fact in the article. My point is that I haven't seen any similar admission from NOM, so Card's remarks about the marriage equality issue being "moot" would appear to be an instance of a board member veering wildly off message.”
“I completely, completely agree with you, Michael, that LGBT people -- including married couples -- must never for one minute stop talking about the daily injustices we face. Complacency is *totally* the enemy. I couldn't agree with you more, actually, and as someone who devotes my life to talking about equality and issues from an LGBT perspective, I put this into practice every day. But part of calling attention to injustice is asserting our claim to equal treatment, so we can't stop reminding people and companies like the AP that same-sex couples' claim to marital language is every bit as strong and every bit as valid as those of our straight counterparts. We must assert our equal right to terms like "husband" or "wife" and not allow anyone to think for one second that they have a right to redefine our relationships or dictate the terms to which those relationships can be referred. That's why I correct anyone who refers to Michael as anything other than my husband, be it an outspoken homophobe, the well-meaning senior citizen in our building, or the Associated Press. Equality will not come if we continue allowing others to define our relationships for us.”
“Seriously? Tony Perkins, Bryan Fischer, and Scott Lively have all praised Uganda in recent days -- in Lively's and Fischer's case, explicitly because of this bill. Had you clicked on the hyperlink I included, you would have seen just one of many sources that corroborate my statement. Please do your homework and follow embedded hyperlinks before you accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about or making false statements.”
“The links are there, in the previous sentences. It wouldn't make any sense to link to the same article multiple times, would it? Please, do your homework before you accuse me of making unsubstantiated allegations.”
CBinKY on Nov 16, 2012 at 10:11:14
“You know that even if you provide direct quotes people like Dreamer wouldn't accept it. Giving a word for word direct quote would be considered "liberal bias" or the like. Even when they can do a search themselves, they would rather just say "give me more proof" than actually look at the proof they can find themselves out there (i.e. they love to constantly move the goalposts).”
“Funny, because we're not governed under the Declaration of Independence. That document severed our ties with Great Britain and declared the former colonies "free and independent states." Nothing more.
The document that we actually *are* governed under is the Constitution, and it makes literally NO reference to a god or a creator. Sorry, no dice.”
“"Day by day, they are getting all they ask, so what's the complaint?"
Just how long, neverever, should LGBT people have to wait to "get all [we] ask" for? All we're asking for is the same set of civil, human rights that non-LGBT Americans already have (in theory and in law, although not always in practice). How long do you think it's appropriate for us to wait for our basic civil rights?”
neverever on Mar 27, 2012 at 09:26:12
“What basic civil rights are being denied to you?”
jstone360 on Mar 24, 2012 at 22:11:30
“there really is no reason to march in the streets everyday for marriage.no one has died because they couldn't get married.”
“HotelDrama, I agree with you 100%, but with one small correction: there isn't "little to no evidence" to back up the "homosexuality as choice" meme. In fact, *literally every mainstream organization of medical and mental health professionals* (the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, etc. etc. etc.) recognizes that sexual orientation is not a choice and that efforts to change it do not work (and even harm people). They all have published statements, position papers, etc. saying the same.
So, while I *completely* agree with the sentiment of what you're saying, the fact is that there is not "little to no evidence" backing up the "choice" paradigm, but rather, NO evidence whatsoever. :-)”
guamote on Mar 26, 2012 at 16:29:06
“How then can you can account for people who no longer engage in gay relationships? If it is truly not a choice, then no one would be able to change.”
“Regarding your assertion that the "gay lifestyle" is "not exactly the healthiest lifestyle as it has a higher incidence of major health problems," there is absolutely NO CDC data (or data of any kind from legitimate sources) to back that up. In fact, these lies spring from the "research" of a man named Paul Cameron. Here's a bit about Cameron from the Southern Poverty Law Center:
"Paul Cameron is an infamous anti-gay propagandist whose one-man statistical chop shop, the Family Research Institute, churns out hate literature masquerading as legitimate science. Cameron dresses up his "studies" with copious footnotes, graphs and charts, and then pays to publish them in certain journals. Cameron's work has been rejected by both the American Psychological Association and the American Sociological Association, yet his ludicrous statistics are frequently referenced in sermons, news broadcasts, politicians' speeches and even court decisions."
The "homosexuality as a health risk" meme arose out of this one man's junk science and spread throughout the religious right. It is pure bunkum, nothing more.