Activism Change

OT – Same-sex marriages voided

Question:

I couldn’t agree with you more. Ann

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/12/samesex.marriage.ap/index.html I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American.  As far as Bush trying to change the constitution to outlaw same-sex marriages, I think that is outrageous – our constitution is supposed to protect our freedom, not restrict it. Sorry for the OT gripe, but some things just make no sense to me – such as some people trying to tell other people how they should live their lives (and condemning them for daring to be different from themselves!).  If what someone else is doing has absolutely NO effect on me or mine, then it’s NONE OF MY BUSINESS!  Whatever happened to live and let live, or different strokes for different folks (no pun intended . Hugs, CatNipped CatMom to: Bandit, (a.k.a. "Bitch Cat From Hell"), 14, DLH Tabby Demi, (a.k.a. "Ghost Cat"), 5, DLH Pure White Beauty Jessie, (a.k.a. "Jet Ski"), 4, DSH Tortoiseshell Samantha / Sammy, (a.k.a. "Mini Me"), 4 months, DLH Tabby http://www.gcmensa.org/Cats.html (Jessie, Demi, Bandit) http://www.gcmensa.org/Sammy/ (Sammy and Bandit) http://www.gcmensa.org/Sammy2/ (All my fur babies) http://www.gcmensa.org/Sammy3/  (Sammy and Jessie) http://www.gcmensa.org/Sammy4/  (Sammy and Jessie)

Response:

…. I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.

I’m not going to echo everything ‘Catnipped’ said, just her sentiments. Regards and Purrs, O J

Response:

At least in many states now there are legal papers that can set up a domestic partnership.  (And for the record gay couples aren’t the only ones to avail themselves of this)

Yes there are. It will cost a couple of thousand dollars worth of lawyer’s fees though. — Victor Martinez Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)

Response:

I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American.  

  I agree with you 110%!!!   Little raises my ire quicker than hearing the assinine reasoning some idiots come up with for discrimination, not only on the marriage issue, but in other areas as well.    Jeanne

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/12/samesex.marriage.ap/index.html I think this is sad. It is very sad indeed. Why can’t they concentrate on legislating against hate and violence and let people love each other in peace? — Marina, Frank and Nikki Email marina (dot) kurten (at) pp (dot) inet (dot) fi Pics at http://uk.f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/frankiennikki

Absolutely agree with this 100%. Ginger-lyn

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. Seems like they waited until there was less attention on the issue and people had more or less forgotten about Gavin Newsom (the mayor of SF) before they made this decision. And before anyone calls me a "conspiracy nut", politicians generally choose their time and place for making controversial decisions, in order to try to control the outcome the best they can. Back in February, Newsom was a hero, not just to the gay community, but to a lot of people who supported the marriages. It was a huge act of civil disobedience and there was a lot of excitement about it. But people’s attention is on other stuff now, such as the election. Not to say there aren’t activists still working on the marriage equality issue, but it’s not in the news every day the way it was 6 months ago. So if the CA Supreme Court had voted on this back in February, I don’t think they would have gotten away with voiding the marriages. There would have been a big uproar. Oh, I’m sure there will be demonstrations against the decision now, but they will be much smaller than they would have been then. As far as Bush trying to change the constitution to outlaw same-sex marriages, I think that is outrageous – our constitution is supposed to protect our freedom, not restrict it. Even people who don’t support gay marriage are against that, because of the dangerous precedent it would set. I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American As TV talk-show host Bill Maher said, "…what business is it of the state how consenting adults choose to pair off, share expenses and eventually stop having sex with each other?" LOL. Joyce

I agree, part of the difficulty with this issue that politicians are so divided. Here in Mass. several Mayors are very in favor of gay marriage so they allow it, our Govener is very opposed. He (Romney) keeps trying to get them invalidated despite the Court’s saying they’re legal. Luckily our legislature is equally divided so all Romney’s attempts at a banning ammendment have failed. Suz  Macmoosette Thank Heavens There’s Only One =^..^=   =^..^=   =^..^=   =^..^=  =^..^=  =^..^= Waiting for inspiration. Please hold while I contemplate my navel. |__/| (=’:'=) (")_(")

Response:

I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been It is. However, it is the only reasonable conclusion the court could have reached. The executive branch of government does not get to interpret law, that’s what the courts are for. Luckily, they did not rule on the constitutionality of gay marriage itself, so there is still hope for California.

Is there ever, truly, hope for California?

Response:

There’s also the fact that if a gay person is in intensive care, his or her partner would not be allowed to visit because they aren’t married. Joy

Yes! That is precisely the situation with my friends. On top of that, the partner could not make end-of-life decisions because at that time they did not have the "guardianship" papers drawn up by a lawyer or power of attorney either. After that health crisis, they had it done. Sherry

Response:

  SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on   Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San   Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped   his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. Seems like they waited until there was less attention on the issue and people had more or less forgotten about Gavin Newsom (the mayor of SF) before they made this decision. And before anyone calls me a "conspiracy nut", politicians generally choose their time and place for making controversial decisions, in order to try to control the outcome the best they can.

Yeah – the U.S. Congress generally waits until some late-night session, when there are no TV cameras around, to vote themselves raises and hikes in their "job benefits"!

Response:

There’s also the fact that if a gay person is in intensive care, his or her partner would not be allowed to visit because they aren’t married. Joy Yes! That is precisely the situation with my friends. On top of that, the partner could not make end-of-life decisions because at that time they did not have the "guardianship" papers drawn up by a lawyer or power of attorney either. After that health crisis, they had it done. Sherry

At least in many states now there are legal papers that can set up a domestic partnership.  (And for the record gay couples aren’t the only ones to avail themselves of this) There are plenty of "couples" who cannot or do not wish to be married that do have a caring relationship and want to avail themselves of these rights. Jo

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/12/samesex.marriage.ap/index.html I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American.  As far as Bush trying to change the constitution to outlaw same-sex marriages, I think that is outrageous – our constitution is supposed to protect our freedom, not restrict it. Sorry for the OT gripe, but some things just make no sense to me – such as some people trying to tell other people how they should live their lives (and condemning them for daring to be different from themselves!).  If what someone else is doing has absolutely NO effect on me or mine, then it’s NONE OF MY BUSINESS!  Whatever happened to live and let live, or different strokes for different folks (no pun intended . Hugs, CatNipped

Another ditto post here – I agree. —— Krista

Response:

I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been It is. However, it is the only reasonable conclusion the court could have reached. The executive branch of government does not get to interpret law, that’s what the courts are for. Luckily, they did not rule on the constitutionality of gay marriage itself, so there is still hope for California. Is there ever, truly, hope for California?

I would like to think so.  ;-) Joy (native Californian)

Response:

I agree with you completely! Joy That makes 3 of us! I’ve known some gay couples and they’ve seemed to be just as committed to each other as Nancy and I are to each other. The close-mindedness of some people never ceases to amaze me. Dan

Me too!  I almost walked out of a church service on Sunday.  I was visiting my mother in Alaska, and she attends a Baptist church.  She isn’t a member, but she has many friends there.  The minister went into a diatribe against gays and gay marriage, and if I’d been alone, I would have walked out.  My mother would have done so too, but she didn’t want to upset her friends. Joy

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American That’s the crux of the whole thing, IMO. It’s not the "marriage" per se; although I’m sure that means a great deal to people too. But the shameful part is, our laws have no provisions to protect either partner in the event of divorce, and in order to  make life/death decisions for your life’s partner in the event she can’t, legal documents have to be drawn up beforehand. Where if they were married, the partner would already have that right. There’s difficulty sometimes getting group insurance coverage for a partner. There’s a whole set of legal problems that gay people have to deal with that we just take for granted. I have several lesbian friends who have encountered legal problems I never even thought of. Sherry

There’s also the fact that if a gay person is in intensive care, his or her partner would not be allowed to visit because they aren’t married. Joy

Response:

I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been

It is. However, it is the only reasonable conclusion the court could have reached. The executive branch of government does not get to interpret law, that’s what the courts are for. Luckily, they did not rule on the constitutionality of gay marriage itself, so there is still hope for California. — Victor Martinez Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)

Response:

SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/12/samesex.marriage.ap/index.html I think this is sad.

It is very sad indeed. Why can’t they concentrate on legislating against hate and violence and let people love each other in peace? — Marina, Frank and Nikki Email marina (dot) kurten (at) pp (dot) inet (dot) fi Pics at http://uk.f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/frankiennikki

Response:

I agree with you completely! Joy That makes 3 of us! I’ve known some gay couples and they’ve seemed to be just as committed to each other as Nancy and I are to each other. The close-mindedness of some people never ceases to amaze me. Dan

I agree completely.  Makes no sense to suddenly declare these marriages illegal or to allow further ones.  Stupid people. Jill

Response:

I agree with you completely! Joy

That makes 3 of us! I’ve known some gay couples and they’ve seemed to be just as committed to each other as Nancy and I are to each other. The close-mindedness of some people never ceases to amaze me. Dan

Response:

I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American

That’s the crux of the whole thing, IMO. It’s not the "marriage" per se; although I’m sure that means a great deal to people too. But the shameful part is, our laws have no provisions to protect either partner in the event of divorce, and in order to  make life/death decisions for your life’s partner in the event she can’t, legal documents have to be drawn up beforehand. Where if they were married, the partner would already have that right. There’s difficulty sometimes getting group insurance coverage for a partner. There’s a whole set of legal problems that gay people have to deal with that we just take for granted. I have several lesbian friends who have encountered legal problems I never even thought of. Sherry

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American That’s the crux of the whole thing, IMO. It’s not the "marriage" per se; although I’m sure that means a great deal to people too. But the shameful part is, our laws have no provisions to protect either partner in the event of divorce, and in order to  make life/death decisions for your life’s partner in the event she can’t, legal documents have to be drawn up beforehand. Where if they were married, the partner would already have that right. There’s difficulty sometimes getting group insurance coverage for a partner. There’s a whole set of legal problems that gay people have to deal with that we just take for granted. I have several lesbian friends who have encountered legal problems I never even thought of.

Here in Virginia, the legislature went beyond simply banning same-sex marriage. They enacted something that I suspect will be thrown out as unconstitutionally vague when tested, but it shows a mindset. The law says that any contract that is intended to give the equivalent of rights of a banned same-sex marriage can be challenged to see if it is an attempt to circumvent the ban.  In other words, if I, a heterosexual male, gave a durable medical power of attorney to a trusted male friend, that could be challenged by somone suggesting we were covertly trying to arrange the equivalent of a same-sex marriage.  They haven’t gotten far enough, I suppose, to say that if I were married to a woman and gave such a power of attorney (e.g., because the man happens to be a physician), it might be construed as an attempt at polysexual bigamy (or whatever some decides to call it). Virginia, whose legitimately favored founders include Thomas Jefferson, who said "I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/12/samesex.marriage.ap/index.html I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American.  As far as Bush trying to change the constitution to outlaw same-sex marriages, I think that is outrageous – our constitution is supposed to protect our freedom, not restrict it. Sorry for the OT gripe, but some things just make no sense to me – such as some people trying to tell other people how they should live their lives (and condemning them for daring to be different from themselves!).  If what someone else is doing has absolutely NO effect on me or mine, then it’s NONE OF MY BUSINESS!  Whatever happened to live and let live, or different strokes for different folks (no pun intended . Hugs, CatNipped

I agree with you completely! Joy

Response:

<snip Sorry for the OT gripe, but some things just make no sense to me – such as some people trying to tell other people how they should live their lives (and condemning them for daring to be different from themselves!).  If what someone else is doing has absolutely NO effect on me or mine, then it’s NONE OF MY BUSINESS!  Whatever happened to live and let live, or different strokes for different folks (no pun intended .

I agree. — Steve Touchstone, faithful servant of Sammy, Little Bit and Rocky Home Page: http://www.sirinet.net/~stouchst/index.html Cat Pix: http://www.sirinet.net/~stouchst/animals.html

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/12/samesex.marriage.ap/index.html I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American.  As far as Bush trying to change the constitution to outlaw same-sex marriages, I think that is outrageous – our constitution is supposed to protect our freedom, not restrict it. Sorry for the OT gripe, but some things just make no sense to me – such as some people trying to tell other people how they should live their lives (and condemning them for daring to be different from themselves!).  If what someone else is doing has absolutely NO effect on me or mine, then it’s NONE OF MY BUSINESS!  Whatever happened to live and let live, or different strokes for different folks (no pun intended . Hugs, CatNipped

Completely agree with you. Tweed

Response:

  SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on   Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San   Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped   his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. Seems like they waited until there was less attention on the issue and people had more or less forgotten about Gavin Newsom (the mayor of SF) before they made this decision. And before anyone calls me a "conspiracy nut", politicians generally choose their time and place for making controversial decisions, in order to try to control the outcome the best they can. Back in February, Newsom was a hero, not just to the gay community, but to a lot of people who supported the marriages. It was a huge act of civil disobedience and there was a lot of excitement about it. But people’s attention is on other stuff now, such as the election. Not to say there aren’t activists still working on the marriage equality issue, but it’s not in the news every day the way it was 6 months ago. So if the CA Supreme Court had voted on this back in February, I don’t think they would have gotten away with voiding the marriages. There would have been a big uproar. Oh, I’m sure there will be demonstrations against the decision now, but they will be much smaller than they would have been then.   As far as Bush trying to change the constitution to outlaw same-sex   marriages, I think that is outrageous – our constitution is supposed   to protect our freedom, not restrict it. Even people who don’t support gay marriage are against that, because of the dangerous precedent it would set.   I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for   longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as   loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay   as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges,   and protections under the law as any other American As TV talk-show host Bill Maher said, "…what business is it of the state how consenting adults choose to pair off, share expenses and eventually stop having sex with each other?" LOL. Joyce

Response:

SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped his authority by issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/12/samesex.marriage.ap/index.html I think this is sad.  I’ve known gay and lesbian couples who have been together for longer than I’ve been with my husband.  I think they are just as loving and devoted as any mixed-sex couple – they certanily pay as much in taxes – so they should have the same rights, privileges, and protections under the law as any other American.  As far as Bush trying to change the constitution to outlaw same-sex marriages, I think that is outrageous – our constitution is supposed to protect our freedom, not restrict it. Sorry for the OT gripe, but some things just make no sense to me – such as some people trying to tell other people how they should live their lives (and condemning them for daring to be different from themselves!).  If what someone else is doing has absolutely NO effect on me or mine, then it’s NONE OF MY BUSINESS!  Whatever happened to live and let live, or different strokes for different folks (no pun intended . Hugs, CatNipped CatMom to: Bandit, (a.k.a. "Bitch Cat From Hell"), 14, DLH Tabby Demi, (a.k.a. "Ghost Cat"), 5, DLH Pure White Beauty Jessie, (a.k.a. "Jet Ski"), 4, DSH Tortoiseshell Samantha / Sammy, (a.k.a. "Mini Me"), 4 months, DLH Tabby http://www.gcmensa.org/Cats.html (Jessie, Demi, Bandit) http://www.gcmensa.org/Sammy/ (Sammy and Bandit) http://www.gcmensa.org/Sammy2/ (All my fur babies) http://www.gcmensa.org/Sammy3/  (Sammy and Jessie) http://www.gcmensa.org/Sammy4/  (Sammy and Jessie)

Response:

Leave a Comment

From St. Thomas, Dallas

Question:

Great idea…maybe we’d lose some of these bishops with delusions of granduer? Instead of drawing lots, maybe one hand of five card stud, winner take all?

Strip poker? Andreas

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The following message is from Stephen Waller, rector of St. Thomas, Dallas, TX.: We either believe God’s truth to be a living reality which unfolds anew in every generation or we think, as many in The Network appear to, it is a fixed, immutable block not subject to change of any kind. As I understand Anglicanism, we have always remained open to God’s new truth for new ages. Anything else freezes revelation and, in my humble opinion, does the same to the Living God who moves among us still as Spirit, enlivening, sanctifying and bringing forth new life. Yes, I confess, such an understanding leaves everything up for grabs. Surely God cannot be contained by our understanding of God or by our formularies. Surely God must always be "up for grabs," not limited to our definitions. I must "disobey" the elected clergy and lay leadership of this Diocese and say that I will not paticipate in some limitation of God’s ability to bring into being something new in God’s Church. I want no part of pretending to be the faithful remnant of true believers in America. Such is the highest sort of hubris. I will not draw the circle tighter to exclude people who are on the margins of society and tell them that they can be baptized but most of the other sacraments of the church are not theirs to enjoy and celebrate. I will remain faithful to my vows as a priest of the Episcopal Church and strive to make this parish community a place of true welcome to all who cross its threshold.

Do you believe in the biblical casting of lots for for an office in the Church (see Acts 1)? On our district synod tonight we had to vote for a new deputy of the dean. (Church district: i. e. 25 parishes with ca. 46.000 members, to give you an idea.) Two candidates stood up and one of the delegates made their position on the blessing of same-sex unions an issue. The pastor who spoke in favour of it missed the absolute majority by one vote, so two more ballots followed in which both candidates tied. After that third ballot lots had to be cast according to church regulations for such an unlikely case. The pro-blessings candidate won – with the deciding vote from above? What think ye? Andreas

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The following message is from Stephen Waller, rector of St. Thomas, Dallas, TX.: We either believe God’s truth to be a living reality which unfolds anew in every generation or we think, as many in The Network appear to, it is a fixed, immutable block not subject to change of any kind. As I understand Anglicanism, we have always remained open to God’s new truth for new ages. Anything else freezes revelation and, in my humble opinion, does the same to the Living God who moves among us still as Spirit, enlivening, sanctifying and bringing forth new life. Yes, I confess, such an understanding leaves everything up for grabs. Surely God cannot be contained by our understanding of God or by our formularies. Surely God must always be "up for grabs," not limited to our definitions. I must "disobey" the elected clergy and lay leadership of this Diocese and say that I will not paticipate in some limitation of God’s ability to bring into being something new in God’s Church. I want no part of pretending to be the faithful remnant of true believers in America. Such is the highest sort of hubris. I will not draw the circle tighter to exclude people who are on the margins of society and tell them that they can be baptized but most of the other sacraments of the church are not theirs to enjoy and celebrate. I will remain faithful to my vows as a priest of the Episcopal Church and strive to make this parish community a place of true welcome to all who cross its threshold. Do you believe in the biblical casting of lots for for an office in the Church (see Acts 1)? On our district synod tonight we had to vote for a new deputy of the dean. (Church district: i. e. 25 parishes with ca. 46.000 members, to give you an idea.) Two candidates stood up and one of the delegates made their position on the blessing of same-sex unions an issue. The pastor who spoke in favour of it missed the absolute majority by one vote, so two more ballots followed in which both candidates tied. After that third ballot lots had to be cast according to church regulations for such an unlikely case. The pro-blessings candidate won – with the deciding vote from above? What think ye? Andreas

Great idea…maybe we’d lose some of these bishops with delusions of granduer? Instead of drawing lots, maybe one hand of five card stud, winner take all? Terry

Response:

The following message is from Stephen Waller, rector of St. Thomas, Dallas, TX.: 15 March 2004 Monday Beloved in God and Thomas the Apostle: "Provisional" membership in The Network! The Executive Council of the Diocese voted last week to make us "provisionally" a part of The Network. Any decision about this could have and should have waited until the Convention of the Diocese in October, but pressure has been brought upon the Executive Council to take a stand at this juncture. They did. And we are now "provisionally" connected to The Network. Sounds like partially pregnant to me. One either is a part of something or one is not part of that same something. We are now a part of The Network. A couple of diocesan clergy have asked me what I think about this turn of events. What pops into my mind immediately are the words, "civil disobedience." Except that a more correct version of that phrase in this situation would be "ecclesiastical disobedience." I think it is time to disobey. The decision of the Executive Council is not like the law of the "Medes and Persians" which can never be changed. Even if it cannot be changed come October…and I suspect it will stand in this Diocese…the time for some sort of "loyal oppostion" to this decision and this direction of the Diocese has come. The clergy and laity of the Diocese of Dallas who believe The Network and its intentions wrong must say so and find ways to offer faithful members of the Episcopal Church in the Diocese some opportunity to explore other ways forward during this time of trial in God’s Church. I do not choose to be a part of any group the purpose of which is to purify God’s Church or any group whose function is to claim to be some sort of faithful remnant of "right" believers in America seeking to remain in communion with Anglicans across the sea. Pure Churches and right belief both smack of strains of Christianity foreign to the Anglican ethos. Anglicans have never sought to strain out the sinners among us or to claim certain truths essential to believers or else they do not belong. The Network wants to be a place where Anglicans in other parts of the world may plug into the pure, righteous American Anglican remnant and avoid the rest of the American Episcopal Church now sullied by the mere presence of a bishop who is openly gay. They will tell you that the problem is greater than this and it is. They will tell you it has to do with Biblical interpretation. And it does. They are attempting to change the way Anglicans in America and in the West have interpreted Holy Scripture for centuries. Such a change would be fundamental to our Communion’s faith, life and understanding of the Gospel. We either believe God’s truth to be a living reality which unfolds anew in every generation or we think, as many in The Network appear to, it is a fixed, immutable block not subject to change of any kind. As I understand Anglicanism, we have always remained open to God’s new truth for new ages. Anything else freezes revelation and, in my humble opinion, does the same to the Living God who moves among us still as Spirit, enlivening, sanctifying and bringing forth new life. Yes, I confess, such an understanding leaves everything up for grabs. Surely God cannot be contained by our understanding of God or by our formularies. Surely God must always be "up for grabs," not limited to our definitions. I must "disobey" the elected clergy and lay leadership of this Diocese and say that I will not paticipate in some limitation of God’s ability to bring into being something new in God’s Church. I want no part of pretending to be the faithful remnant of true believers in America. Such is the highest sort of hubris. I will not draw the circle tighter to exclude people who are on the margins of society and tell them that they can be baptized but most of the other sacraments of the church are not theirs to enjoy and celebrate. I will remain faithful to my vows as a priest of the Episcopal Church and strive to make this parish community a place of true welcome to all who cross its threshold. Excellent. Terry

Response:

Leave a Comment

Cats' and dogs' intelligence

Question:

The question of the intelligence of dogs came up today in a comic strip newsgroup about that excellent comic strip, Get Fuzzy, which features Satch the dog, Bucky the cat, and Rob their human. In yesterday’s strip Satch gives an extra-long speech, which prompted "Sydney" to write: Does anyone else think that Satchel seems unusually eloquent in 3/12’s Get Fuzzy?

Another poster, "Carl" replied I noticed that too.  It might have worked better from Rob’s mouth. Satchel’s intelligence varies depending on the needs of the strip (as does Bucky’s).

And this prompted me to write this (the cat part is a personal observation!): – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – True. I’m also convinced that dogs’ and cats’ intelligence vary day to day. Kelsey Grammer says that  Moose (now semi-retired and replaced by his son Enzo) who portrayed Eddie, the dog on TV’s Frasier, was brilliant and could do just about any trick he was programmed to do for the show. But there were days that he’d lose it and revert to being any old dog, running around the set and wasting Panavision film in front of a live audience. As for cats – "You know, I think she’s finally stopped scratching the sofa." (Next day:) "Hey, get away from that sofa!" As for people…   ???

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – …I’m…convinced that dogs’ and cats’ intelligence vary day to day. Kelsey Grammer says that  Moose (now semi-retired and replaced by his son Enzo) who portrayed Eddie, the dog on TV’s Frasier, was brilliant and could do just about any trick he was programmed to do for the show. But there were days that he’d lose it and revert to being any old dog, running around the set and wasting Panavision film in front of a live audience. As for cats – "You know, I think she’s finally stopped scratching the sofa." (Next day:) "Hey, get away from that sofa!" As for people…   ???

This reaction to my post from someone named Mike Beede just popped up over at that comic strip newsgroup. There’s a lot of truth in what he says, and it’s what I also find attractive about cats! ______ I don’t know how you’d tell with a cat, since their agenda doesn’t involve doing things people want them to do.  They might be smarter than Steven Hawking and I’d never know because my wishes are totally irrelevant to them.  Actually that’s what I find attractive about them.  A dog puts his head in your lap because *he has to*.  A cat sits on your lap because *he wants to*.  [Note: pronoun trouble here given most pets are radically sterilized--do we ever find if that's the case with the GF animals?]

Response:

I like to think our cats are fairly smart, but they sure can play dumb when they want to. Fez in particular is quite good at pretending he doesn’t know he’s not supposed to jump on the cutting board when I’m preparing dinner. — Victor Martinez Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)

Response:

I like to think our cats are fairly smart, but they sure can play dumb when they want to. Fez in particular is quite good at pretending he doesn’t know he’s not supposed to jump on the cutting board when I’m preparing dinner.

Yeah, it’s that darned kitty Alzheimers, where they completely forget their housecat manners. (Or they forget you’re watching!) Sherry

Response:

As for cats – "You know, I think she’s finally stopped scratching the sofa." (Next day:) "Hey, get away from that sofa!"

You confuse "intelligence" with "willfulness".  Cat’s are intelligent enough about the things that matter to them, they just don’t much care whether they please their humans or not.  You can’t "train" a cat not to do something it WANTS to do – about the best you can manage is to teach it not to let you CATCH it doing it!

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The question of the intelligence of dogs came up today in a comic strip newsgroup about that excellent comic strip, Get Fuzzy, which features Satch the dog, Bucky the cat, and Rob their human. In yesterday’s strip Satch gives an extra-long speech, which prompted "Sydney" to write: Does anyone else think that Satchel seems unusually eloquent in 3/12’s Get Fuzzy? Another poster, "Carl" replied I noticed that too.  It might have worked better from Rob’s mouth. Satchel’s intelligence varies depending on the needs of the strip (as does Bucky’s). And this prompted me to write this (the cat part is a personal observation!): True. I’m also convinced that dogs’ and cats’ intelligence vary day to day. Kelsey Grammer says that  Moose (now semi-retired and replaced by his son Enzo) who portrayed Eddie, the dog on TV’s Frasier, was brilliant and could do just about any trick he was programmed to do for the show. But there were days that he’d lose it and revert to being any old dog, running around the set and wasting Panavision film in front of a live audience. As for cats – "You know, I think she’s finally stopped scratching the sofa." (Next day:) "Hey, get away from that sofa!" As for people…   ???

Oh, people – definitely!  One day I may come up with a flash of brilliance or compose an eloquent speech for a Toastmasters meeting. Other days – well, probably the worst was a few weeks ago.  I go to a movie almost every week.  I use a wallet that hangs around your neck, so I don’t take my purse (handbag).  Sometimes I automatically take it along, and if that happens, I lock it in the trunk (boot) of the car before going into the movie.  I always lock my car when I leave it, except when it is in my own garage.  A few weeks ago, I came out of my movie and noticed that I had forgotten to lock the car.  Then I saw my purse on the front seat!  I was not only incredibly stupid, but incredibly lucky that day. Joy

Response:

As for cats – "You know, I think she’s finally stopped scratching the sofa." (Next day:) "Hey, get away from that sofa!" You confuse "intelligence" with "willfulness".  Cat’s are intelligent enough about the things that matter to them, they just don’t much care whether they please their humans or not.  You can’t "train" a cat not to do something it WANTS to do – about the best you can manage is to teach it not to let you CATCH it doing it!

You say I confuse intelligence with wilfulness. Actually, our kitties frequently leave me confused! But you’re right of course. Our little brat-cat Emily has been told – loudly – many times not to chase her little step-sister Sophie under the cedar chest, and, if we’re close enough,  has even been squirted occasionally with a water spray bottle. Emily seems to look apologetic as she escapes under some piece of furniture herself. But it’s all for show. She’s biding her time until we’re not around to see her do it again. She never hurts Sophie who’s too quick for her, and every day Sophie is growing bigger and more assertive. Some day she’ll solve the problem herself, feline-to-feline. In situations like ours, I guess our role as human serfs is simply to love ‘em and let ‘em be cats.

Response:

As for cats – "You know, I think she’s finally stopped scratching the sofa." (Next day:) "Hey, get away from that sofa!" You confuse "intelligence" with "willfulness".  Cat’s are intelligent enough about the things that matter to them, they just don’t much care whether they please their humans or not.  You can’t "train" a cat not to do something it WANTS to do – about the best you can manage is to teach it not to let you CATCH it doing it!

Oh yeah. I just have to think of how I know Sammy acts when we go outside. There are limits to how far I want Sammy to go. When she starts to go outside the accepted boundaries, I’ll call her back. If she feels like it she’ll turn around and come back. Of course, at least 50% of the time she tries to extend the boundary. She’ll either stop and lay down where she is, or just keep walking, pretending she doesn’t hear me calling. Of course her lashing tail and ears cocked back at me sort of give it away. If I threaten to get the bottle, one of the words she knows, she looks back to see if I’m actually getting up. She’ll watch, and once I pick up the bottle she almost always starts sauntering back. Course sometimes I actually have to head in her direction, but she knows the exact range of the spray bottle, waits until I’m "almost" in range, and then takes off running home. — Steve Touchstone, faithful servant of Sammy, Little Bit and Rocky Home Page: http://www.sirinet.net/~stouchst/index.html Cat Pix: http://www.sirinet.net/~stouchst/animals.html

Response:

Oh yeah. I just have to think of how I know Sammy acts when we go outside. There are limits to how far I want Sammy to go. When she starts to go outside the accepted boundaries, I’ll call her back.

Cherokee used to push the boundaries, and when I’d go to pick him up and carry him back, he had this odd trick. He would lie on the concrete, and somehow press hiimseelf down, making it almost impossible to squeeze your fingers under him. He’d look for all the world liike a big fat black bowling ball with a head. Sherry

Response:

I like to think our cats are fairly smart, but they sure can play dumb when they want to. Fez in particular is quite good at pretending he doesn’t know he’s not supposed to jump on the cutting board when I’m preparing dinner.

Heh.  Mike isn’t the brightest of cats, but I think he’s smarter than he usually lets on.  When DH and I were dating, he saw me short-circuit Mike’s intended leap into the china cabinet; I shouted "NO" and Mike immediately sat down and started innocently bathing.  DH said "Oh, he *does* know that word!"  Mikey had completely faked him out.   —— Krista

Response:

Cherokee used to push the boundaries, and when I’d go to pick him up and carry him back, he had this odd trick. He would lie on the concrete, and somehow press hiimseelf down, making it almost impossible to squeeze your fingers under him. He’d look for all the world liike a big fat black bowling ball with a head.

A former GF told me that when cats go flat, they’re actually utilizing suction.

Response:

  I use a wallet that hangs around your neck, so   I don’t take my purse (handbag).  Sometimes I automatically take it   along, and if that happens, I lock it in the trunk (boot) of the car   before going into the movie.  I always lock my car when I leave it,   except when it is in my own garage.  A few weeks ago, I came out of my   movie and noticed that I had forgotten to lock the car.  Then I saw my   purse on the front seat! I did something just as bad myself the other day. It was kind of the opposite of what you did. I carry a backpack around with me – it’s my version of a purse, except that it leaves my hands free. Anyway, I went grocery shopping the other day, and I decided to leave my backpack in the trunk of my car while in the store, since all I needed was my wallet, and I put that in my pants pocket. When I was done shopping, I got back to my car and searched my pockets for the car keys. They weren’t there. Then I noticed that the keys were in the ignition. The car was completely locked. Oh, sh*t. I do have a spare car key that I carry around, because I have been known to do this sort of thing before – but guess where that was? In my backpack, locked in the trunk! Real useful. Not only that, but *I had left the engine running*! How stupid is that?? My cell phone was also locked in the trunk inside my backpack, so I had to go back to the store to call AAA (my auto club, which provides emergency road service). I only had to wait about 20 minutes for them to show up, and when the guy arrived, it took him about 20 *seconds* to break into my car. Scary. I think I used up my quota of bonehead mistakes for the next 6 months with that one… Joyce

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Cherokee used to push the boundaries, and when I’d go to pick him up and carry him back, he had this odd trick. He would lie on the concrete, and somehow press hiimseelf down, making it almost impossible to squeeze your fingers under him. He’d look for all the world liike a big fat black bowling ball with a head. A former GF told me that when cats go flat, they’re actually utilizing suction. It’s true. It’s the weirdest phenomenon and hard to explain. It’s funny to me that other people know what I’m talking about. I thought this was a Cherokee-exclusive stunt!

Oh no, I think all cats do it on occasion.  (Even where you’d think it wasn’t possible, on soft surfaces like carpets and beds.) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sherry

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Cherokee used to push the boundaries, and when I’d go to pick him up and carry him back, he had this odd trick. He would lie on the concrete, and somehow press hiimseelf down, making it almost impossible to squeeze your fingers under him. He’d look for all the world liike a big fat black bowling ball with a head. A former GF told me that when cats go flat, they’re actually utilizing suction. It’s true. It’s the weirdest phenomenon and hard to explain. It’s funny to me that other people know what I’m talking about. I thought this was a Cherokee-exclusive stunt! Oh no, I think all cats do it on occasion.  (Even where you’d think it wasn’t possible, on soft surfaces like carpets and beds.) Sherry

It’s passive resistance.  They learn it in their kitty civil disobedience teach-ins. Theresa alt.tv.frasier FAQ: http://www.im-listening.net/FAQ/ Single-mindedness is all very well in cows or baboons; in an animal claiming to belong to the same species as Shakespeare it is simply disgraceful. (Aldous Huxley)

Response:

It’s passive resistance.  They learn it in their kitty civil disobedience teach-ins. Theresa alt.tv.frasier FAQ:

LOL! I have  a back page in my Franklin planner reserved for funny or weird quotes from people at work, family, etc. Your post just made an entry!! Sherry

Response:

It’s true. It’s the weirdest phenomenon and hard to explain. It’s funny to me that other people know what I’m talking about. I thought this was a Cherokee-exclusive stunt! Oh no, I think all cats do it on occasion.  (Even where you’d think it wasn’t possible, on soft surfaces like carpets and beds.) It’s passive resistance.  They learn it in their kitty civil disobedience teach-ins.

My cat Betty has pulled passive resistance stunts on me before, but when it comes to being picked up, she’s usually surprisingly cooperative.  Even when she’s really afraid, like when I’ve brought out the vacuum cleaner, I can chase her down, and she’ll freeze immediately when I grab her butt, and then go entirely limp when I pick her up.  Then, I can put her in a room that I’m not vacuuming. This was one of the things that made me think that Sherry’s Biskit must be a lot like Betty.

Response:

I’m surprised more people don’t seem to agree that cats are way beyond dogs. I came across findings that say cats have the 3rd hightest IQ of all land animals, topped only by the monkey and the chimp. A lot of people aren’t very fond of cats and therefore just notice it laying around. I totally agree with all the cartoons I have seen in how the dog is no match for a cat.. not even close! poor dummy of a dog

Response:

I’m surprised more people don’t seem to agree that cats are way beyond dogs. I came across findings that say cats have the 3rd hightest IQ of all land animals, topped only by the monkey and the chimp. A lot of people aren’t very fond of cats and therefore just notice it laying around. I totally agree with all the cartoons I have seen in how the dog is no match for a cat.. not even close! poor dummy of a dog

Humans have the fourth highest intelligence of any land animal… Pam S.

Response:

I’m surprised more people don’t seem to agree that cats are way beyond dogs. I came across findings that say cats have the 3rd hightest IQ of all land animals, topped only by the monkey and the chimp. A lot of people aren’t very fond of cats and therefore just notice it laying around. I totally agree with all the cartoons I have seen in how the dog is no match for a cat.. not even close! poor dummy of a dog

I don’t agree. .  I kept dogs before I kept cats and I think dogs are more intelligent. Cats are crafty and self-interested and that’s an entirely different thing. They do things only if it benefits themselves. I love my two, don’t get me wrong, but cats are in the kindliest possible way "parasites"  They take all, and give not much. Now, when you can tell me you can train a cat do a mountain rescue, lead the blind, act as a hearing cat, herd sheep etc, etc then tell me cats are best. I don’t wish to be contradictory, but there is no comparison in intelligence, as far as I am concerned. My dogs understood a lot of language. My cats understand only a little.  "Out or in" when they are standing in the doorway.  If they didn’t make their minds up, the door would push them outside, so they soon learned that one. "Do you want anything?"  they know that one too, and also "Grub up!" "Pack it in" they haven’t quite got the hang of (this when Kitty is spitting at Boyfriend (she’s very jealous) or vice versa when he is trying to stick up for himself. Kitty boxes his ears regularly and sometimes – only sometimes – he retaliates. Cats have a very different sort of intelligence compared with dogs. Tweed

Response:

Cherokee used to push the boundaries, and when I’d go to pick him up and carry him back, he had this odd trick. He would lie on the concrete, and somehow press hiimseelf down, making it almost impossible to squeeze your fingers under him. He’d look for all the world liike a big fat black bowling ball with a head. A former GF told me that when cats go flat, they’re actually utilizing suction.

It’s true. It’s the weirdest phenomenon and hard to explain. It’s funny to me that other people know what I’m talking about. I thought this was a Cherokee-exclusive stunt! Sherry

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –   I use a wallet that hangs around your neck, so   I don’t take my purse (handbag).  Sometimes I automatically take it   along, and if that happens, I lock it in the trunk (boot) of the car   before going into the movie.  I always lock my car when I leave it,   except when it is in my own garage.  A few weeks ago, I came out of my   movie and noticed that I had forgotten to lock the car.  Then I saw my   purse on the front seat! I did something just as bad myself the other day. It was kind of the opposite of what you did. I carry a backpack around with me – it’s my version of a purse, except that it leaves my hands free. Anyway, I went grocery shopping the other day, and I decided to leave my backpack in the trunk of my car while in the store, since all I needed was my wallet, and I put that in my pants pocket. When I was done shopping, I got back to my car and searched my pockets for the car keys. They weren’t there. Then I noticed that the keys were in the ignition. The car was completely locked. Oh, sh*t. I do have a spare car key that I carry around, because I have been known to do this sort of thing before – but guess where that was? In my backpack, locked in the trunk! Real useful. Not only that, but *I had left the engine running*! How stupid is that?? My cell phone was also locked in the trunk inside my backpack, so I had to go back to the store to call AAA (my auto club, which provides emergency road service). I only had to wait about 20 minutes for them to show up, and when the guy arrived, it took him about 20 *seconds* to break into my car. Scary. I think I used up my quota of bonehead mistakes for the next 6 months with that one…

Several years ago, my mother and I stopped at a local Dairy Bard for some soft-serve cones, .  When we got back to the car, not only had we left the keys in the ignition, the engine running, but the car was NOT locked! — The ONE and ONLY lefthanded-pathetic-paranoid-psychotic-sarcastic-wiseass-ditzy former-blonde in Bloomington! (And proud of it, too)

Leave a Comment

***SCREW YOU*** ## BIGOT-in Thief ## G.W. Bush !!!!

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –     Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.     NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!     Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:         "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"     Organize vocal rallies and marches!     SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.     Always REFER to it as *just* that:                      "The BIGOTRY Amendment"     …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.     GLRB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.     Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!     On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would give 4 more years to our hateful Bigot-in-Thief!

Sounds like the bigot is the one who can’t allow heterosexuals to have a single institution unscathed by your militant homosexual agenda.

Response:

    Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.

Blah, blah, blah. Bigot: Someone that disagrees with a liberal. — Increase the likelihood that your child’s school will be car-bombed—Vote Kerry 2004!

Response:

Ya know – if I were a Black American and became aware that fudge-packers like you were comparing the Black Civil RIghts Movement to …. well, fudge-packing — I think I’d be a little offended. I can tell you normally don’t say "black american". Why don’t you use the term that you’re comfortable with?

You seem to be more familiar with it than I am.  After all – you’re a fucking liberal and they are ALL a bunch of bigots. Regards, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Regards, snipped…    It’s CIVIL RIGHTS all over again — 40 years later! snipped…

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –     Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.     NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!    Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:        "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"    Organize vocal rallies and marches!    SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.    Always REFER to it as *just* that:                       "The BIGOTRY Amendment"    …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as   the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.    GLTB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.    Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!    On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would give 4 more years to our hateful Bigot-in-Thief!    Bigot:  Someone that disagrees with a liberal.

    True… but that is NOT what **makes** him a bigot.     That which **makes** him a bigot is his irrational and hateful desire to unfairly discriminate against other people for absolutely NO valid reason, and ignorantly impose hardship and misery upon them.     And social liberals sensibly KNOW better.  Which is *why* they disagree with bigots.

Response:

Ya know – if I were a Black American and became aware that fudge-packers like you were comparing the Black Civil RIghts Movement to …. well, fudge-packing — I think I’d be a little offended. I can tell you normally don’t say "black american". Why don’t you use the term that you’re comfortable with? You seem

No, you’re just another uneducated bigot who fears his own homoerotic impulses.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –     Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.     NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!    Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:        "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"    Organize vocal rallies and marches!    SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.    Always REFER to it as *just* that:                       "The BIGOTRY Amendment"    …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as   the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.    GLTB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.    Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!    On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would give 4 more years to our hateful Bigot-in-Thief!     Bigot:  Someone that disagrees with a liberal.     True… but that is NOT what **makes** him a bigot.     That which **makes** him a bigot is his irrational and hateful desire to unfairly discriminate against other people for absolutely NO valid reason, and ignorantly impose hardship and misery upon them.     And social liberals sensibly KNOW better.  Which is *why* they disagree with bigots.    "Liberals…know better." sounds like liberal bigotry to me.

    JUST the sort of INANE comment we can expect from a person who OMITS everything but the last two sentences of the above post.  (Needless, to say, ALL of it has been restored, to shine a spotlight on his discrepency.)

Response:

    And social liberals sensibly KNOW better.  Which is *why* they disagree with bigots.

"Liberals…know better." sounds like liberal bigotry to me. — Increase the likelihood that your child’s school will be car-bombed—Vote Kerry 2004!

Response:

"Cleopatra"/"Marie," etc., etc.,etc. spewed…     …nothing but MINDLESS hate-tripe, as usual. <Flushed.  Nothing of substance lost. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –     Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.     NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!     Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:        "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"    Organize vocal rallies and marches!    SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.    Always REFER to it as *just* that:                       "The BIGOTRY Amendment"    …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.    GLRB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.    Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!    On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would give 4 more years to our hateful Bigot-in-Thief!

Response:

   Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.

If you are attempting to refer to the marriage amendment, I told you so.  And I will make a point of posting here to say I told you so when it becomes part of the constitution. You wanted to use activist courts and fruitcake mayers to force your agenda on the american people in blatent opposition to their clearly expressed will.  A couple of kooks in two cities decide to take it upon themselves and pur every state, even their own states, in the position of forcing the unwilling citizens of their states to accept "fudge packing" as a marital activity, spend tax dollars inforcing the laws legislated for the whole nation by a couple of city officials, and force businesses and property owners to treat a mentally disturbed subset of fringe group perverts as a protected minority group with special rights to infringe on the constitutional rights of all. Did you expect the sheep to just obey dictatorial edicts handed down by the unelected without a fight? I oppose such an amendment to the constitution because it’s frivilous and silly to amend the constitution to state the obvious.  If we had sane rational judges, such nonsense wouldn’t even be an issue.  But you insisted on making it an issue and you have a few judges and lunitic city officiials who don’t respect or acknowlege reality, so the people are put at risk of such nonsense, but they are forced to amend the constitution if only to tell the judges what it already says. What’s next?  When some judge decides that cats are persons under the constitution, will we have to amend the constitution to make "Person" refer to a human? You asked for it, and now look what you got. 1) You are losing a lot of support even for the "civil union" nonsense. 2) You are making enemies of people who really just wanted to live and left live. 3) You have handed George Bush an issue he can perhaps win with.  Not that it matters, the president can’t amend the constitution anyway. Neither can the courts do it, and neither the president or the courts can prevent it.  But people will vote accordingly anyway. Are you happy now?    NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!

The only hate I see is from people like you directed toward anyone who dares to disagree with you.    Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:        "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"    Organize vocal rallies and marches!    SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.    Always REFER to it as *just* that:                       "The BIGOTRY Amendment"    …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.

By all means!  Do all of the above!  Entertain the world.  Everybody loves a clown.  And you will only make yourselves look goofier.    GLRB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.

Yeah, do that.  ROTFLMAO!  :)    Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!

Nobody cares about apathy!    On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would give 4 more years to our hateful Bigot-in-Thief!

Yawn… Read the constitution.  And then come bck and tell us all how important the job of the president is in amending the constitution. William R. James

Response:

     Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.     If you are attempting to refer to the marriage amendment, I told you so.  And I will make a point of posting here to say I told you so when it becomes part of the constitution.

     LOL!!!  Don’t hold your breath.  You will NEVER see that happen, and neither will anyone else.  FORTUNATELY!      If you think that such a HATE Amendment will get through 2/3 of the Senate, much less 3/4 of the states — in the face of the HUGE outcry from ** millions ** fair-minded and sensible egalitarians who will stand up for personal liberty as this country hasn’t seen since the equally-bigoted and moronic agenda of segregarion was properly crushed, you’re living in a dream world.  It’s NOT gonna happen, ignorant bigot.      And a decade or so from now, we will look back on this opposition to same-sex marriage on the part of the mindless bigots of the RRR cult with the SAME derision that we held for the segregationists, by 1975.    You wanted to use activist courts…

    Thanks for this proof that you…     (1)  Don’t know DIDDLY about the checks-and-balances system           of the U.S. Constitution which makes JUDICIAL LAW 100%           legitimate.     (2)  Probably are stupid enough to be an RRR cultist, since you           have their nonsensical hate-jargon down pat!   …and fruitcake mayers…

      (otherwise known to SENSIBLE people as HEROIC defenders       of individual liberties)…   …to force your agenda…

     Defending individual liberties is not an "agenda," any more than Civil Rights for *tacial* equality was, 40 years ago.  It is COMMON SENSE.   …on the american people in blatent opposition to their clearly expressed will. …

    Really?  Have you noticed WHICH side your the proposed passage of your beloved HATE Amendment the *majority* of Americans comes down on, *consuistently*, in the polls?     A couple of kooks…

    Nope.  HEROES.  Just like Rosa Parks, and Martin Luther King, Jr., all over again.  History is repeating itself, and an unjustifiably-persecuted group of people is once AGAIN on the threshhold of completely winning its Civil Rights!  It’ll be an exciting and exhilrating process in which to participate and obverve, and victory will be JUST as sweet again this time as it was 40 years ago.  (And I’m *still* savoring THAT victory!)   …in two cities decide to take it upon themselves and put every state, even their own states, in the position of forcing the unwilling citizens of their states to accept [Civil Rights], …

    Yep.  JUST as happened to the equally-mindless and hateful segregationists, who ALSO had that coming.   …spend tax dollars inforcing the laws legislated for the whole nation by a couple of city officials, …

    Study the history of the RACIAL Civil Rights Movement to learn YOUR ultimate fate, in advance.     …and force businesses and property owners to treat [an unfairly discriminated-against minority]* with [EQUAL] rights to [be in line with] the constitutional rights of all.

    * I have substituted HONEST terminoloigy for your hate-       propaganda and lies.  Spew such ignorant garbage to       your heart’s content in YOUR putrid posts, but you won’t       see me REPEATING it in mine.    Did you expect the sheep to just obey dictatorial edicts handed down by the unelected without a fight?

    LOL!!!!  You are about to see just how much UNLIKE sheep we egalitarians really are!    I oppose such an amendment to the constitution because it’s frivilous and silly to amend the constitution to state the obvious.  

     Wrong outlook.  The proposed amendment is utterly worthless, and doomed from the start, because it is an expression of ignorant HATE, and nothing more.     If we had sane rational judges, such nonsense wouldn’t even be an issue.  

    We DO.  As the U.S. Supreme Court PROVED in 1973 when it emancipated all of America’s women with Roe vs. Wade, and when it struck down ALL of the ludicrous and hateful "sodomy" laws last June.  As as the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has proven TWICE in the last few weeks, with regard to legalizing same-sex marriage.  Those judges were all LIGHT-YEARS more intelligent than ALL of you ignorant loons put together. <redundant nonsense snipped     You asked for it, and now look what you got.

    No. Look what we are going to GET:  the END of the mindless and loathsome bigotry that YOU and your ignorant ilk subscribe to.     1)   You are losing a lot of support even for the "civil union"         nonsense.

    ROTFL!!!!  Yeah.  Just as the Blacks "lost" support for THEIR Civil Rights.  Uh-huh.  Right.     2)   You are making enemies of people who really just wanted          to live and left live.

    Wrong.  Most of THOSE people are our ALLIES.    3)    You have handed George Bush an issue he can perhaps         win with.  

     He’ll win nothing but the support of his tiny collection of frothing-at-the-mount RRR cult control-freaks, and the ENMITY of all FAIR-minded people.     Not that it matters, the president can’t amend the constitution anyway.

     FORTUNATELY.  But he *can* formally propose legislation.   And THIS time, in doing that, he just made a monumental fool of himself.     Neither can the courts do it, and neither the president or the courts can prevent it.  But people will vote accordingly anyway.

    The people DON’T vote for Constitutional Amendments.   Congress and the state legislators do that.  And THIS sorry notion won’t make it past the nearly 50% of U.S. Senators who are Democrats.     Are you happy now?

    Very!  Because if you think that the gays and their millions of straight allies were **energized** BEFORE Bush’s act of abject stupidity today, you haven’t seen ANYTHING yet.  THIS will catalyze egalitarians across the land to *ensure* that these Civil Rights are WON, decisively!    NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!     The only hate I see is from people like you directed toward anyone who dares to disagree with you.

    Wrong.  But people like me very properly LOATHE the bigotry that people like you exude, and ensure that such mindlessness is ended. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –    Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:        "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"    Organize vocal rallies and marches!    SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.    Always REFER to it as *just* that:                       "The BIGOTRY Amendment"    …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.     By all means!  Do all of the above!  Entertain the world.   Everybody loves a clown.  And you will only make yourselves look goofier.

   LOL!!!  Nice attempt at spin.  But look back at the end of the Civil Rights era.  The segregationists were, and will forevermore be remembered, as being nothing BUT clowns.  JUST as will be the case with YOU ludicrous and ignorant bigots.    GLRB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.     Yeah, do that.  ROTFLMAO!  :)

    That’s just one of the *many* steps that will **destroy** your bigoted agenda against personal liberties.  COUNT on the fact that we egalitarians are laughing ten times as hard as you are.    Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!    Nobody cares about apathy!

    ROTFL!!!!  You certainly do!  Because apathy on the part of fair-minded people like me is the ONLY thing that could save your loathsome agenda of hate.  And that’s NOT gonna happen!    On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would give 4 more years to our hateful Bigot-in-Thief!     Read the constitution.  And then come bck and tell us all how important the job of the president is in amending the constitution.

     YOU read it, and start with the section that provides us with the system of checks-and-balances.  Which makes JUDICIAL law possible… and **spares** America from *ever* being tyrannized by wannbe theocrats like the RRR cultists, or by anyone else who would be that mindless.

Response:

Ya know – if I were a Black American and became aware that fudge-packers like you were comparing the Black Civil RIghts Movement to …. well, fudge-packing — I think I’d be a little offended. I can tell you normally don’t say "black american". Why don’t you use the term that you’re comfortable with?

"Smoked Irishman"?   William R. James

Response:

Ya know – if I were a Black American and became aware that fudge-packers like you were comparing the Black Civil RIghts Movement to …. well, fudge-packing — I think I’d be a little offended. I can tell you normally don’t say "black american". Why don’t you use the term that you’re comfortable with? "Smoked Irishman"?  

ROTFLOL – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – William R. James

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I expect both Kerry and Edwards to back this. So your only real option is to back Nader. Both Kerry and Edwards have said they oppose the FMA. So they are for same sex marriage? You may be right. Kerry was one of the 14 Senators who voted against DOMA in 96. Edwards voted for DOMA in the house. Didn’t Kerry say that marriage should be only between a man and a woman? How does he intend to see that this remains so?

Kerry is a fraud.  Like everything else, Kerry is on both sides of this issue. BTW, the thread title is quite apt – the Left is mentally living back in their heady hippy days of the 60’s, just as Kerry is trying to do with his Vietnam War Protestor crap.   The Left hasn’t made any personal mental progress whatsoever since the 60’s.  The Left is essentially a bunch of graying hippies (Kerry is over 60 years old) even if they are in their 20’s, as some Leftists are.

Response:

Ya know – if I were a Black American and became aware that fudge-packers like you were comparing the Black Civil RIghts Movement to …. well, fudge-packing — I think I’d be a little offended.

I can tell you normally don’t say "black american". Why don’t you use the term that you’re comfortable with? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Regards, snipped…    It’s CIVIL RIGHTS all over again — 40 years later! snipped…

Response:

I expect both Kerry and Edwards to back this. So your only real option is to back Nader. Both Kerry and Edwards have said they oppose the FMA.

So they are for same sex marriage? You may be right. Kerry was one of the 14 Senators who voted against DOMA in 96. Edwards voted for DOMA in the house. Didn’t Kerry say that marriage should be only between a man and a woman? How does he intend to see that this remains so? "I suspect that the problem is not with those that believe that there is a heaven above but with those that believe that there can be a heaven here on earth." — Captain Compassion "Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life. –Will Durant "Madmen reason rightly from the wrong premisis" — Locke   You can never redistribute wealth only poverty. Because of the natural inequities of man and the nature of wealth it is impossible for all men to be rich. It is possible for all men to be poor. Just ask any Socialist they can tell you how. — Captain Compassion Joseph R. Darancette

Response:

    Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.     NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!

Just ignore it and it’ll go away. It’s just a political ploy.

Response:

I expect both Kerry and Edwards to back this. So your only real option is to back Nader.

I wouldn’t bet on it. Amending the constitution is pretty extreme if you ask me. If I were the nominee (LOL) then I’d use this as a way of bashing how silly AWOL is – he’ll say anything to change the subject. The trick is get the debate on your turf (Two Americas, We Need Jobs, etc.), not fight it on the other guys turf. No serious person should even think about this silly proposal other then to milk it for a few laughs. BTW, I’d agree for an amendment barring the dressing up dogs like people and/or marrying them to eachother.

Response:

I expect both Kerry and Edwards to back this. So your only real option is to back Nader. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –    Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.    NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!    Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:        "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"    Organize vocal rallies and marches!    SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.    Always REFER to it as *just* that:                       "The BIGOTRY Amendment"    …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.    GLTB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.    Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!    It’s CIVIL RIGHTS all over again — 40 years later!    REMEMBER what they taught us, to prevail and WIN!! —        NON-violent resistence.        REASONABLE civil disobedience.        MAJOR marches.        MAJOR rallies.        WITHOUT being "outrageous."    We WILL win — but **only** if we LOSE the *apathy,* *throughout* the GLTB Community *and* its egalitarian straight allies.  There are tens of MILLIONS of us.  JUST as there were tens of millions of Blacks and *their* allies of other races.    On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would disastrously hand 4 more years to our hateful and loathsome Bigot-in-Thief!

"I suspect that the problem is not with those that believe that there is a heaven above but with those that believe that there can be a heaven here on earth." — Captain Compassion "Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life. –Will Durant "Madmen reason rightly from the wrong premisis" — Locke   You can never redistribute wealth only poverty. Because of the natural inequities of man and the nature of wealth it is impossible for all men to be rich. It is possible for all men to be poor. Just ask any Socialist they can tell you how. — Captain Compassion Joseph R. Darancette

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –    Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.    NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!    Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:                   "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"    Organize vocal rallies and marches!    SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.    Always REFER to it as *just* that:                       "The BIGOTRY Amendment"    …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.    GLTB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications in doing this.    Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!    It’s CIVIL RIGHTS all over again — 40 years later!    REMEMBER what they taught us, to prevail and WIN!! —        NON-violent resistence.        REASONABLE civil disobedience.        MAJOR marches.        MAJOR rallies.        WITHOUT being "outrageous."     We WILL win — but **only** if we LOSE the *apathy,* *throughout* the GLTB Community *and* its egalitarian straight allies.  There are tens of MILLIONS of us.  JUST as there were tens of millions of Blacks and *their* allies of other races.     On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would disastrously hand 4 more years to our hateful and loathsome Bigot-in-Thief!     Ya know – if I were a Black American and became aware that [gays] like you…

   Grow a brain, you moron.  You’ve read my posts, and you KNOW that I am a straight ALLY of the Gay Community in their quest for EQUAL tights.  But bigoted losers like you just can’t stand the thought of the MILLIONS of straight egalitarians who are JOINING the gays in this drive for Civil Rights.       …were comparing the Black Civil RIghts Movement to [the Gay Rights Movement] I think I’d be a little offended.

    Thus showing LACK of intelligence on your part.  Because the Blacks have BEEN there.  40 years ago, *they* were the ones who had a collection of loony and hateful bigots forcing 2nd-class-citizen status upon them.  Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that most Blacks would be among the *STRONGEST*  ***allies*** of the gays in their quest for EQUAL rights and the END of all forms of discrimination.     You INSULT the Blacks with your insensitive and hateful comments.

Response:

Ya know – if I were a Black American and became aware that fudge-packers like you were comparing the Black Civil RIghts Movement to …. well, fudge-packing — I think I’d be a little offended. Regards, snipped…    It’s CIVIL RIGHTS all over again — 40 years later!

snipped…

Response:

I expect both Kerry and Edwards to back this. So your only real option is to back Nader.

Both Kerry and Edwards have said they oppose the FMA.

Response:

    I expect both Kerry and Edwards to back this. So your only real option is to back Nader.

    Bullcrap!!!  Backing Nader gives us BUSH again!   Neither Kerry nor Edwards could be anywhere NEARLY as loathesome as Bush! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –    Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.    NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!    Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:        "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"    Organize vocal rallies and marches!    SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.    Always REFER to it as *just* that:                       "The BIGOTRY Amendment"    …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.    GLTB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.    Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!    It’s CIVIL RIGHTS all over again — 40 years later!    REMEMBER what they taught us, to prevail and WIN!! —        NON-violent resistence.        REASONABLE civil disobedience.        MAJOR marches.        MAJOR rallies.        WITHOUT being "outrageous."    We WILL win — but **only** if we LOSE the *apathy,* *throughout* the GLTB Community *and* its egalitarian straight allies.  There are tens of MILLIONS of us.  JUST as there were tens of millions of Blacks and *their* allies of other races.    On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would disastrously hand 4 more years to our hateful and loathsome Bigot-in-Thief!

Response:

    Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.     NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!     Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:         "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"     Organize vocal rallies and marches!     SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.     Always REFER to it as *just* that:                        "The BIGOTRY Amendment"     …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.     GLRB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.     Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!     On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would give 4 more years to our hateful Bigot-in-Thief!

Response:

    Our bigoted MORON-in-Thief just called officially for the BIGOTRY AMENDMENT.     NOW is the time for every egalitarian in the land to pull out ALL the legal stops to ensure than Congress does NOT do such a mindless and utterly HATEFUL thing!     Print bumper stickers and distribute them far and wide:         "NO *Bigotry* Amendment!!"     Organize vocal rallies and marches!     SWAMP your representatives and Senators with e-mails, letters, and phone calls OPPOSING the Bigotry Amendment.     Always REFER to it as *just* that:                        "The BIGOTRY Amendment"     …so that anyone who supports it can be regarded as the LOATHSOME people that they truly are.     GLTB Community:  Contact and support ALL of your organizations and publications to do this.     Above ALL!!!   *****LOSE***** the APATHY!!     It’s CIVIL RIGHTS all over again — 40 years later!     REMEMBER what they taught us, to prevail and WIN!! —         NON-violent resistence.         REASONABLE civil disobedience.         MAJOR marches.         MAJOR rallies.         WITHOUT being "outrageous."     We WILL win — but **only** if we LOSE the *apathy,* *throughout* the GLTB Community *and* its egalitarian straight allies.  There are tens of MILLIONS of us.  JUST as there were tens of millions of Blacks and *their* allies of other races.     On Nov. 2nd — VOTE for the Democratic candidate… and NOT for **Nader** — who would disastrously hand 4 more years to our hateful and loathsome Bigot-in-Thief!

Response:

Leave a Comment

War declared on Americans today by court-appointed Leader

Question:

Tony Miller <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote: > The Mayor of SanFrancisco should be arrested.  If you are going to civilly > disobey, you need to take the hit.

Arrested?  What crime has he committed?  Not all civil disobedience constitutes a crime.

Response:

"Emma Anne" <m…@earthlink.net> commented on Tony Miller’s <t…@cigardiary.com> reply to me: > > The Mayor of SanFrancisco should be arrested.  If you are going to civilly > > disobey, you need to take the hit. > Arrested?  What crime has he committed?  Not all civil disobedience > constitutes a crime.

Conservative MSNBC commentator Joe Scarborough equated Mayor Newsom’s defiance of the law to that of removed Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who was supported by religious conservatives when he defied courts to place and to not willingly remove a Ten Commandments monument from his courthouse.  A publicly elected official who chooses which laws to obey is acting questionably. I see the couples getting married as engaging in civil disobedience and that the licenses issued to them probably will not have legal force. They are changing the public’s image of gay people, to one more like mainstream heterosexual families.  (My church’s pastor did similar actions when she got arrested in SF years ago to protest a lack of resources for the homeless.) But Mayer Newsom did more than participate in a protest as an individual.  He used the power of his office to promote such a cause. Although this cause is one I completely believe is right, Scarborough’s comparison hit home to me. Civil disobedience has historically included a willingness to pay the legal consequences of ones acts of protest.  It is reasonable that there be greater consequences for exercising government power beyond the current laws than for protesting them as a citizen. I would let Mayor Newsom’s actions so far off with a symbolic repremand.  I responded to Joe Scarborough that if he defied a direct court order, that the equation with Moore and thus his deserving removal from office would have my support.  Tony is going a step beyond my judgement, but he has a good reason to object here. — Tsam

Response:

"Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message

news:slrnc3q1nk.6bn.tony@home.cigardiary.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 19:22:37 GMT, Tsam Nami > <tsam-n…@tidal.wav> wrote: > > "Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message > > news:slrnc3og3u.5gd.tony@home.cigardiary.com… > >> This is not an attack.  This is not changing a thing.  You can’t marry > >> before the amendment and you won’t be able to marry after the amendment. > >> The only difference is that it bitch slaps the activist judges who don’t > >> understand that the judicial branch of government *interprets* law.  It > >> doesn’t *make* law. > > I agree with Andrew Sullivan that the amendment proposed by Rep. Musgrave > > would rule out civil unions as well as marriage for gays, > > and that it would constrain legislatures and well as courts. > Your concern is valid.  And in the case of "civil unions" I’d like them to > be able t obe applied to any two citizens regardless of gender or familial > relationship.  That means that a dad and his daughter living together > could get a civil union, and a brother and sister living together (as my > wife’s aunt and uncle did for over 30 years) could get one two.  Two > straight spinsters could, and two priests living in the same rectory could > also.

If only "civil unions" had the same "benefits" that "marriage" did. -"Katie" (who doesn’t like it "when" people "arbitrarily" "put" things in "quotes")

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Tsam Nami <tsam-n…@tidal.wav> wrote: > "Emma Anne" <m…@earthlink.net> commented > on Tony Miller’s <t…@cigardiary.com> reply to me: > > > The Mayor of SanFrancisco should be arrested.  If you are going to > civilly > > > disobey, you need to take the hit. > > Arrested?  What crime has he committed?  Not all civil disobedience > > constitutes a crime. > Conservative MSNBC commentator Joe Scarborough equated Mayor > Newsom’s defiance of the law to that of removed Alabama Chief Justice > Roy Moore, who was supported by religious conservatives when he defied > courts to place and to not willingly remove a Ten Commandments > monument from his courthouse.  A publicly elected official who chooses > which laws to obey is acting questionably.

So?  Did Judge Moore go to jail?  I think not.  He just had his rock removed. (snip) > Civil disobedience has historically included a willingness to pay the > legal consequences of ones acts of protest.  It is reasonable that > there be greater consequences for exercising government power > beyond the current laws than for protesting them as a citizen.

Agreed.  But the legal consequence is not arrest unless a crime has been commited. > I would let Mayor Newsom’s actions so far off with a symbolic > repremand.  I responded to Joe Scarborough that if he defied > a direct court order, that the equation with Moore and thus his > deserving removal from office would have my support.  Tony > is going a step beyond my judgement, but he has a good reason > to object here.

I suspect the mayor can be recalled – if that’s what his constituents want.

Response:

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 04:42:33 GMT, Tsam Nami – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -<tsam-n…@tidal.wav> wrote: > "Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message > news:slrnc3q1nk.6bn.tony@home.cigardiary.com… >> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 19:22:37 GMT, Tsam Nami >> <tsam-n…@tidal.wav> wrote: >> > "Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message >> > news:slrnc3og3u.5gd.tony@home.cigardiary.com… >> >> This is not an attack.  This is not changing a thing.  You can’t marry >> >> before the amendment and you won’t be able to marry after the > amendment. >> >> The only difference is that it bitch slaps the activist judges who > don’t >> >> understand that the judicial branch of government *interprets* law.  It >> >> doesn’t *make* law. >> > I agree with Andrew Sullivan that the amendment proposed by Rep. > Musgrave >> > would rule out civil unions as well as marriage for gays, >> > and that it would constrain legislatures and well as courts. >> Your concern is valid.  And in the case of "civil unions" I’d like them to >> be able to be applied to any two citizens regardless of gender or familial >> relationship.  That means that a dad and his daughter living together >> could get a civil union, and a brother and sister living together (as my >> wife’s aunt and uncle did for over 30 years) could get one two.  Two >> straight spinsters could, and two priests living in the same rectory could >> also. > Sounds reasonable. > But do you believe that the conservative voters > that this is intended to motivate are as temperate as you are?

I really don’t think it matters.  The issue will go to Congress to be hammered out.  They might hammer it into that particular shape by the time they are done.   I believe with Constitutional amendments, the President has nothing to do with it.  He doesn’t sign it, he can’t veto it.  It happens whether it’s in the form he wants or not. If it isn’t in a form that is palatable to 50% of the people in 3/4 of the states, it won’t happen. >> > The activism of judges is a valid concern, >> > as is civil disobedience by elected officials. >> > (Joe Scarborough raised a good point that SF Mayor Newsom >> > and former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore >> > were engaging in similar behavior.) >> The Mayor of SanFrancisco should be arrested.  If you are going to civilly >> disobey, you need to take the hit. > Okay, if he can get out on bail or work release > to get back to his legitimate duties.

A hefty fine works for me. >> > The Musgrave amendment appears to be an attempt >> > to prevent a change in policy in the future, >> > when the dramatic shift in public opinion on gay partnerships >> > reaches a majority. >> If the country wants to repeal the definition of marriage act, they are >> welcome to in the future.  They did that with prohibition. > That’s how I feel about the federal and state "defense of marriage" > acts (DOMAs)  A Constitutional amendment is upping the ante. > And before the DOMAs are challenged in court, it’s preemptive.

I agree with you on this one too.  The problem is "full faith and credit".   We are expected to honor marriages in other states (and other states drivers licenses, etc.) Do you think Utah or Montana is ready for a gay spouses from SanFran moving there?  Do you think their businesses are ready to be forced to extend family benefits to gay partners? Moreover, do you think that gays will accept "marriage" in their own state and not have it extended should they move? Also, look how well the DOMA in California is working > Amending now is not cautious. > It seems to be a fearful act by nominal "conservatives".

Not really.  I think it’s a show of strength of purpose.  The activist judges are being told that they CAN be trumped by the will of the people.   Something that lately they ahve forgotten. >> > The real crisis here is that civil disobedience by the couples in SF >> > is changing many minds in the nation as a whole. >> Also, the media isn’t helping.  They are the ones who cover not people >> like David and his "husband", but two men dressed up in wedding gowns with >> Dykes on Bikes for groomsmen. > I haven’t seen media focusing on weird couples. > What sort of couples did you see the coverage emphasizing? > (If I missed this on old ASM threads, it’s not intentional.)

NP, but just wait a bit.  You’ll get all kinds of coverage. >> > The dire predictions before Vermont established gay civil union >> > were not observed.  If the Massachusetts gay marriage law >> > is established and gays marry there, >> > the real political risk is that the public >> > will realize that this is not a threat to them. >> But what happens when those gays who are married in Mass. decide they’d >> like to move to, say, Utah.  Or maybe they want to move to Montana?  How >> about Lancaster PA. maybe? > Little attempts like this came after Vermont began civil unions. > Maybe less will happen than you expect.

I don’t know.  Maybe less, but I figure probably not.  The activists are loud and insistent.  They won’t be content to sit back and let homosexuals enjoy "marriage" in a couple of states.   Those are the people who will be directly responsible for a CA.  David and his ‘husband’ probably don’t understand how dangerous their loud and bizarre bretheren are to their cause. > Probably the DOMAs will be upheld in court, > with any out-of-step lower court rulings > stayed from being effective.

But then again, there are a lot of activist judges who are really creative.  They enumerate "civil rights" every day that don’t exist, but that they think ought to exist. >> > In order to prevent this outcome, >> > contrary to conservative beliefs, >> > we need to betray a few more women >> > as Robert Bauman’s wife was betrayed. >> I don’t get the analogy. > He was a slightly notable 1970s conservative Republican > Congressman who was in total denial about his gay side, > trying and failing at heterosexual marriage. Before his > private life fell apart, he was partisan but widely respected.

What you call "total denial" I call "seeking help".  Maybe he thought he could lick his gay impulses (no pun intended).  I feel bad for his wife, but no worse than for women who are betrayed every day by their husbands… Like husbands who get blow jobs in the Oval Office from fat interns ) >> > "Kill just a little to save a lot more" — indeed. >> You’ll have to explain. > An Indigo Girls lyric on the worse battle that’s coming — > the one that will rend churches apart. > http://www.allthelyrics.com/lyrics/indigo_girls/come_on_now_social/ph…

Ya think? -Tony — "If the grass appears to be greener on the other side of the fence, it’s time to fertilize your lawn!" Want to jump start your marriage?  Consider a Marriage Encounter weekend. Check out http://www.wwme.org for more information.

Response:

"Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message

news:slrnc3qvou.7it.tony@home.cigardiary.com… > On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 04:42:33 GMT, Tsam Nami > <tsam-n…@tidal.wav> wrote:

[snip the less contentious (IMO) points] > >> If the country wants to repeal the definition of marriage act, they are > >> welcome to in the future.  They did that with prohibition. > > That’s how I feel about the federal and state "defense of marriage" > > acts (DOMAs)  A Constitutional amendment is upping the ante. > > And before the DOMAs are challenged in court, it’s preemptive. > I agree with you on this one too.  The problem is "full faith and credit". > We are expected to honor marriages in other states (and other states > drivers licenses, etc.)

No, DOMAs excuse gay marriages or civil unions in other states from demanding "full faith and credit".  (Provided courts uphold them.) Just as interracial marriages were not recognized in other states when that law was in flux. > Do you think Utah or Montana is ready for a gay spouses from SanFran > moving there?  Do you think their businesses are ready to be forced to > extend family benefits to gay partners? > Moreover, do you think that gays will accept "marriage" in their own state > and not have it extended should they move? > Also, look how well the DOMA in California is working

That’s completely different. DOMAs are not used control your own courts. The California initiative will be reevaluated in the context of Lawrence and probably upheld. (This is not being decided under the Massachusetts state constitution.) > > Amending now is not cautious. > > It seems to be a fearful act by nominal "conservatives". > Not really.  I think it’s a show of strength of purpose.  The activist > judges are being told that they CAN be trumped by the will of the people. > Something that lately they ahve forgotten.

Hunh? Above you seemed to choose the current acts, not a Constitutional amendment. [snip more] – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >> > The dire predictions before Vermont established gay civil union > >> > were not observed.  If the Massachusetts gay marriage law > >> > is established and gays marry there, > >> > the real political risk is that the public > >> > will realize that this is not a threat to them. > >> But what happens when those gays who are married in Mass. decide they’d > >> like to move to, say, Utah.  Or maybe they want to move to Montana? How > >> about Lancaster PA. maybe? > > Little attempts like this came after Vermont began civil unions. > > Maybe less will happen than you expect. > I don’t know.  Maybe less, but I figure probably not.  The activists are > loud and insistent.  They won’t be content to sit back and let homosexuals > enjoy "marriage" in a couple of states. > Those are the people who will be directly responsible for a CA.  David and > his ‘husband’ probably don’t understand how dangerous their loud and > bizarre bretheren are to their cause.

The side of rejection is largely losing young people. My daughter confirms this — she may be liberal herself on this issue, but the suburban Catholic high school she attends is a representative mix. You’re standing athwart history. (WFB quote intentional). > > Probably the DOMAs will be upheld in court, > > with any out-of-step lower court rulings > > stayed from being effective. > But then again, there are a lot of activist judges who are really > creative.  They enumerate "civil rights" every day that don’t exist, but > that they think ought to exist.

These judges still stand for election, and their decisions can be appealed. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >> > In order to prevent this outcome, > >> > contrary to conservative beliefs, > >> > we need to betray a few more women > >> > as Robert Bauman’s wife was betrayed. > >> I don’t get the analogy. > > He was a slightly notable 1970s conservative Republican > > Congressman who was in total denial about his gay side, > > trying and failing at heterosexual marriage. Before his > > private life fell apart, he was partisan but widely respected. > What you call "total denial" I call "seeking help".  Maybe he thought he > could lick his gay impulses (no pun intended).  I feel bad for his wife, > but no worse than for women who are betrayed every day by their > husbands… Like husbands who get blow jobs in the Oval Office from fat > interns )

In Bauman’s biography, he stated that he did not believe he was homosexual until the Church gave his wife an annullment. Calling this "seeking help" is pure spin. But I guess you would have disrespected Bill Clinton a lot less if he had chosen a more slender intern? — Tsam

Response:

"Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message

news:slrnc3q1nk.6bn.tony@home.cigardiary.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 19:22:37 GMT, Tsam Nami > <tsam-n…@tidal.wav> wrote: > > "Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message > > news:slrnc3og3u.5gd.tony@home.cigardiary.com… > >> This is not an attack.  This is not changing a thing.  You can’t marry > >> before the amendment and you won’t be able to marry after the amendment. > >> The only difference is that it bitch slaps the activist judges who don’t > >> understand that the judicial branch of government *interprets* law.  It > >> doesn’t *make* law. > > I agree with Andrew Sullivan that the amendment proposed by Rep. Musgrave > > would rule out civil unions as well as marriage for gays, > > and that it would constrain legislatures and well as courts. > Your concern is valid.  And in the case of "civil unions" I’d like them to > be able to be applied to any two citizens regardless of gender or familial > relationship.  That means that a dad and his daughter living together > could get a civil union, and a brother and sister living together (as my > wife’s aunt and uncle did for over 30 years) could get one two.  Two > straight spinsters could, and two priests living in the same rectory could > also.

Sounds reasonable. But do you believe that the conservative voters that this is intended to motivate are as temperate as you are? > > The activism of judges is a valid concern, > > as is civil disobedience by elected officials. > > (Joe Scarborough raised a good point that SF Mayor Newsom > > and former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore > > were engaging in similar behavior.) > The Mayor of SanFrancisco should be arrested.  If you are going to civilly > disobey, you need to take the hit.

Okay, if he can get out on bail or work release to get back to his legitimate duties. > > The Musgrave amendment appears to be an attempt > > to prevent a change in policy in the future, > > when the dramatic shift in public opinion on gay partnerships > > reaches a majority. > If the country wants to repeal the definition of marriage act, they are > welcome to in the future.  They did that with prohibition.

That’s how I feel about the federal and state "defense of marriage" acts (DOMAs)  A Constitutional amendment is upping the ante. And before the DOMAs are challenged in court, it’s preemptive. Amending now is not cautious. It seems to be a fearful act by nominal "conservatives". > > The real crisis here is that civil disobedience by the couples in SF > > is changing many minds in the nation as a whole. > Also, the media isn’t helping.  They are the ones who cover not people > like David and his "husband", but two men dressed up in wedding gowns with > Dykes on Bikes for groomsmen.

I haven’t seen media focusing on weird couples. What sort of couples did you see the coverage emphasizing? (If I missed this on old ASM threads, it’s not intentional.) > > The dire predictions before Vermont established gay civil union > > were not observed.  If the Massachusetts gay marriage law > > is established and gays marry there, > > the real political risk is that the public > > will realize that this is not a threat to them. > But what happens when those gays who are married in Mass. decide they’d > like to move to, say, Utah.  Or maybe they want to move to Montana?  How > about Lancaster PA. maybe?

Little attempts like this came after Vermont began civil unions. Maybe less will happen than you expect. Probably the DOMAs will be upheld in court, with any out-of-step lower court rulings stayed from being effective. > > In order to prevent this outcome, > > contrary to conservative beliefs, > > we need to betray a few more women > > as Robert Bauman’s wife was betrayed. > I don’t get the analogy.

He was a slightly notable 1970s conservative Republican Congressman who was in total denial about his gay side, trying and failing at heterosexual marriage. Before his private life fell apart, he was partisan but widely respected. > > "Kill just a little to save a lot more" — indeed. > You’ll have to explain.

An Indigo Girls lyric on the worse battle that’s coming — the one that will rend churches apart. http://www.allthelyrics.com/lyrics/indigo_girls/come_on_now_social/ph… .

Response:

"Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message

news:slrnc3q1nk.6bn.tony@home.cigardiary.com… > Your concern is valid.  And in the case of "civil unions" I’d like them to > be able t obe applied to any two citizens regardless of gender or familial > relationship.  That means that a dad and his daughter living together > could get a civil union, and a brother and sister living together (as my > wife’s aunt and uncle did for over 30 years) could get one two.  Two > straight spinsters could, and two priests living in the same rectory could > also.

Makes sense to me.  For income tax and insurance purposes it might be even more practical to define it as a "household unit" – it doesn’t carry the sexual connatation in the name that "civil union" does, and it should allow a dad and couple of adult kids, or a brother and two sisters, etc, to file income taxes together, cover each other on health insurance, etc.

Response:

Tony Miller <t…@cigardiary.com> writes: > On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 18:48:41 -0500 (EST), Timothy and/or David – Harrisburg > <TimHarrisb…@webtv.net> wrote: > > Thank you Mr. Prejudice. > > I believe that this attack on Americans created like us will backfire > > now that the court-appointed alleged Leader has proposed invading the > > sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution. > The Constitution is designed to be amended.  

It is also designed to _protect_ rights, not to restrict them. > > snip > > Today’s low water mark in U.S. history is a symptom of a politician who > > is in deep trouble. He is also in deep denial about how anti-prejudice > > most Americans really are at heart. > You really think?  With 38 states having some sort of defense of marriage > statute including CALIFORNIA (that the Mayor of SinFrancisco is > violating), you really think most people are "anti-prejudice"

Unfortunately, you are right here.  Prejudice remains popular.

Response:

Timothy and/or David – Harrisburg <TimHarrisb…@webtv.net> wrote: > Mr. and Mr. Timothy & David > Legally married in Canada > September 3, 2003 > after 27 years together in love!

Congratulations.  :-)

Response:

"Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message

news:slrnc3og3u.5gd.tony@home.cigardiary.com… > This is not an attack.  This is not changing a thing.  You can’t marry > before the amendment and you won’t be able to marry after the amendment. > The only difference is that it bitch slaps the activist judges who don’t > understand that the judicial branch of government *interprets* law.  It > doesn’t *make* law.

I agree with Andrew Sullivan that the amendment proposed by Rep. Musgrave would rule out civil unions as well as marriage for gays, and that it would constrain legislatures and well as courts. The activism of judges is a valid concern, as is civil disobedience by elected officials. (Joe Scarborough raised a good point that SF Mayor Newsom and former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore were engaging in similar behavior.) The Musgrave amendment appears to be an attempt to prevent a change in policy in the future, when the dramatic shift in public opinion on gay partnerships reaches a majority. The real crisis here is that civil disobedience by the couples in SF is changing many minds in the nation as a whole. The dire predictions before Vermont established gay civil union were not observed.  If the Massachusetts gay marriage law is established and gays marry there, the real political risk is that the public will realize that this is not a threat to them. In order to prevent this outcome, contrary to conservative beliefs, we need to betray a few more women as Robert Bauman’s wife was betrayed. "Kill just a little to save a lot more" — indeed. — Tsam

Response:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 19:22:37 GMT, Tsam Nami <tsam-n…@tidal.wav> wrote: > "Tony Miller" <t…@cigardiary.com> wrote in message > news:slrnc3og3u.5gd.tony@home.cigardiary.com… >> This is not an attack.  This is not changing a thing.  You can’t marry >> before the amendment and you won’t be able to marry after the amendment. >> The only difference is that it bitch slaps the activist judges who don’t >> understand that the judicial branch of government *interprets* law.  It >> doesn’t *make* law. > I agree with Andrew Sullivan that the amendment proposed by Rep. Musgrave > would rule out civil unions as well as marriage for gays, > and that it would constrain legislatures and well as courts.

Your concern is valid.  And in the case of "civil unions" I’d like them to be able t obe applied to any two citizens regardless of gender or familial relationship.  That means that a dad and his daughter living together could get a civil union, and a brother and sister living together (as my wife’s aunt and uncle did for over 30 years) could get one two.  Two straight spinsters could, and two priests living in the same rectory could also. > The activism of judges is a valid concern, > as is civil disobedience by elected officials. > (Joe Scarborough raised a good point that SF Mayor Newsom > and former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore > were engaging in similar behavior.)

The Mayor of SanFrancisco should be arrested.  If you are going to civilly disobey, you need to take the hit. > The Musgrave amendment appears to be an attempt > to prevent a change in policy in the future, > when the dramatic shift in public opinion on gay partnerships > reaches a majority.

If the country wants to repeal the definition of marriage act, they are welcome to in the future.  They did that with prohibition. > The real crisis here is that civil disobedience by the couples in SF > is changing many minds in the nation as a whole.

Also, the media isn’t helping.  They are the ones who cover not people like David and his "husband", but two men dressed up in wedding gowns with Dykes on Bikes for groomsmen. > The dire predictions before Vermont established gay civil union > were not observed.  If the Massachusetts gay marriage law > is established and gays marry there, > the real political risk is that the public > will realize that this is not a threat to them.

But what happens when those gays who are married in Mass. decide they’d like to move to, say, Utah.  Or maybe they want to move to Montana?  How about Lancaster PA. maybe? > In order to prevent this outcome, > contrary to conservative beliefs, > we need to betray a few more women > as Robert Bauman’s wife was betrayed.

I don’t get the analogy. > "Kill just a little to save a lot more" — indeed.

You’ll have to explain. -Tony — "If the grass appears to be greener on the other side of the fence, it’s time to fertilize your lawn!" Want to jump start your marriage?  Consider a Marriage Encounter weekend. Check out http://www.wwme.org for more information.

Response:

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 18:48:41 -0500 (EST), Timothy and/or David – Harrisburg <TimHarrisb…@webtv.net> wrote: > Thank you Mr. Prejudice. > I believe that this attack on Americans created like us will backfire > now that the court-appointed alleged Leader has proposed invading the > sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution.

The Constitution is designed to be amended.   > He will end up in a greater quagmire than his invasion of Iraq.

No he won’t.  Listen to what everyone is saying… He having such problems that he’s concentrating on this non-issue.  (Yup, David, many of your defenders are saying that your inability to marry in the US is a non-issue ) > Fair-minded Americans who love equality will come to understand this > outrageousness of this attack.

This is not an attack.  This is not changing a thing.  You can’t marry before the amendment and you won’t be able to marry after the amendment.   The only difference is that it bitch slaps the activist judges who don’t understand that the judicial branch of government *interprets* law.  It doesn’t *make* law. > They will then become much more afraid of the attacker than they could > ever be of any average loving couple that simply wants to marry.

Like the Rolling Stones said: "You can’s always get what you want…" > Today’s low water mark in U.S. history is a symptom of a politician who > is in deep trouble. He is also in deep denial about how anti-prejudice > most Americans really are at heart.

You really think?  With 38 states having some sort of defense of marriage statute including CALIFORNIA (that the Mayor of SinFrancisco is violating), you really think most people are "anti-prejudice" (sorry, pro-homosexual).   > If I am wrong and we become Unconstitutional soon (probably by next > year?) then, at least, no amount of American-style prejudice can undo > our  awesome Canadian marriage.

Expect it to take at least 7 years. Why don’t you move to Canada? -Tony — "If the grass appears to be greener on the other side of the fence, it’s time to fertilize your lawn!" Want to jump start your marriage?  Consider a Marriage Encounter weekend. Check out http://www.wwme.org for more information.

Response:

Actually, that’s not off topic, your point about finding Bin Laden just before the election in the autumn to bolster GWB’s campaign hopes. The entire attack on Americans who are created non-heterosexual is a diversion from his administration’s failure to find the villans of 9/11/01 (remember those villans?). So the ‘new’ villans are people like my husband and I who simply want our Canadian marriage reciprocated here in the USA, our homeland. Of course Hitler tried this tactic successfully (at first) with Jews, Gypsies, then Catholics, Lutherans, etc……until nobody was left to blame for his own failed war against the world. Then he self-destructed along with the rest of his reich. David Bye4now from Mr. and Mr. Timothy & David Legally married in Canada September 3, 2003 after 27 years together in love! http://www.pennlive.com/news/expresstimes/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-10/…

Response:

"Timothy and/or David – Harrisburg" <TimHarrisb…@webtv.net> wrote in message news:22588-403BE2D9-582@storefull-3251.bay.webtv.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Thank you Mr. Prejudice. > I believe that this attack on Americans created like us will backfire > now that the court-appointed alleged Leader has proposed invading the > sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution. > He will end up in a greater quagmire than his invasion of Iraq. > Fair-minded Americans who love equality will come to understand this > outrageousness of this attack. > They will then become much more afraid of the attacker than they could > ever be of any average loving couple that simply wants to marry. > Today’s low water mark in U.S. history is a symptom of a politician who > is in deep trouble. He is also in deep denial about how anti-prejudice > most Americans really are at heart. > If I am wrong and we become Unconstitutional soon (probably by next > year?) then, at least, no amount of American-style prejudice can undo > our  awesome Canadian marriage. > David > Bye4now from > Mr. and Mr. Timothy & David > Legally married in Canada > September 3, 2003 > after 27 years together in love!

http://www.pennlive.com/news/expresstimes/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-10/… It’s terrible that he said what he said, but I think he’s only advocating the amendment because it’s something the majority of Americans (sadly) seem to support. It’s supposed to avert our attention from the fact that he’s put the budget into a bighuge deficit and he started a war with lies and deceit. He’s trying to focus on trivial things, and it’s working–the media’s front stories are all about the marriage amendment and stuff, and the secondary stuff is about the lies and the Iraq war… and now Bush is trying to bring Bin Laden back into the picture.. wouldn’t it be "convenient" if they "found" him in October, right before the election? wow that got off topic. oh well

Response:

Thank you Mr. Prejudice. I believe that this attack on Americans created like us will backfire now that the court-appointed alleged Leader has proposed invading the sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution. He will end up in a greater quagmire than his invasion of Iraq. Fair-minded Americans who love equality will come to understand this outrageousness of this attack. They will then become much more afraid of the attacker than they could ever be of any average loving couple that simply wants to marry. Today’s low water mark in U.S. history is a symptom of a politician who is in deep trouble. He is also in deep denial about how anti-prejudice most Americans really are at heart. If I am wrong and we become Unconstitutional soon (probably by next year?) then, at least, no amount of American-style prejudice can undo our  awesome Canadian marriage. David Bye4now from Mr. and Mr. Timothy & David Legally married in Canada September 3, 2003 after 27 years together in love! http://www.pennlive.com/news/expresstimes/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-10/…

Response:

Leave a Comment

The LANDMARK Event!! Mayor Gavin Newsom : Gays :: Rosa Parks : Blacks

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Gay, lesbian couples line up to marry Judge delays challenges to San Francisco until Tuesday SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) — Hundreds of gay and lesbian couples ringed San Francisco’s City Hall on Saturday to be married, before a judge hears a challenge Tuesday from two groups opposed to same-sex marriage. Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered City Hall be opened from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. during the weekend and Monday — which is President’s Day, a federal holiday — to accommodate as many couples as possible before Superior Court Judge James Warren hears the challenge Tuesday. Newsom ordered the county clerk to begin issuing marriage licenses for lesbian and gay couples Thursday. Californians filled the ranks for the most part, but gay couples from other parts of the country were beginning to join the line for marriage licenses in San Francisco, which does not require a blood test or proof of residency. = = = = = = = = = = = = =      Rosa Parks’ civil disobedience was the beginning of the end for segregation.  Mayor Newsom’s civil disobedience is the beginning of the end for second-class-citizen status for gays in America.

What makes gays second class citizens? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Mark my words:  Friday, the 13th of February, 2004 was THE Landmark Date!!  And it will go down in history as such!  From that point on, the RRR Cult’s ignorant and hateful bigots *LOSE* — ***big***-time!              (*So much* for Friday, the 13ths being unlucky!!)

Response:

In talk.abortion, Chris  wrote – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Gay, lesbian couples line up to marry Judge delays challenges to San Francisco until Tuesday SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) — Hundreds of gay and lesbian couples ringed San Francisco’s City Hall on Saturday to be married, before a judge hears a challenge Tuesday from two groups opposed to same-sex marriage. Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered City Hall be opened from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. during the weekend and Monday — which is President’s Day, a federal holiday — to accommodate as many couples as possible before Superior Court Judge James Warren hears the challenge Tuesday. Newsom ordered the county clerk to begin issuing marriage licenses for lesbian and gay couples Thursday. Californians filled the ranks for the most part, but gay couples from other parts of the country were beginning to join the line for marriage licenses in San Francisco, which does not require a blood test or proof of residency. = = = = = = = = = = = = =      Rosa Parks’ civil disobedience was the beginning of the end for segregation.  Mayor Newsom’s civil disobedience is the beginning of the end for second-class-citizen status for gays in America. What makes gays second class citizens?

A homosexual can’t marry the person s/he loves. Mark my words:  Friday, the 13th of February, 2004 was THE Landmark Date!!  And it will go down in history as such!  From that point on, the RRR Cult’s ignorant and hateful bigots *LOSE* — ***big***-time!              (*So much* for Friday, the 13ths being unlucky!!)

Oh yeah, that’s right.  The only thing unlucky was that I had to work that day…

– It’s still legal to go .sigless.

Response:

"Neither can a bigamous person. Are they too second class citizens? And how about someone who loves a child? Guess they too are second class citizens. I love my dog, but they will NOT allow me to marry my dog. Looks like I am a second class citizen. Lots of second class citizens around." You are comparing homosexuals to pedophiles and people who screw dogs? Are you nuts?

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In talk.abortion, Chris  wrote Gay, lesbian couples line up to marry Judge delays challenges to San Francisco until Tuesday SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) — Hundreds of gay and lesbian couples ringed San Francisco’s City Hall on Saturday to be married, before a judge hears a challenge Tuesday from two groups opposed to same-sex marriage. Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered City Hall be opened from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. during the weekend and Monday — which is President’s Day, a federal holiday — to accommodate as many couples as possible before Superior Court Judge James Warren hears the challenge Tuesday. Newsom ordered the county clerk to begin issuing marriage licenses for lesbian and gay couples Thursday. Californians filled the ranks for the most part, but gay couples from other parts of the country were beginning to join the line for marriage licenses in San Francisco, which does not require a blood test or proof of residency. = = = = = = = = = = = = =      Rosa Parks’ civil disobedience was the beginning of the end for segregation.  Mayor Newsom’s civil disobedience is the beginning of the end for second-class-citizen status for gays in America. What makes gays second class citizens? A homosexual can’t marry the person s/he loves.

Neither can a bigamous person. Are they too second class citizens? And how about someone who loves a child? Guess they too are second class citizens. I love my dog, but they will NOT allow me to marry my dog. Looks like I am a second class citizen. Lots of second class citizens around. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Mark my words:  Friday, the 13th of February, 2004 was THE Landmark Date!!  And it will go down in history as such!  From that point on, the RRR Cult’s ignorant and hateful bigots *LOSE* — ***big***-time!              (*So much* for Friday, the 13ths being unlucky!!) Oh yeah, that’s right.  The only thing unlucky was that I had to work that day… — It’s still legal to go .sigless.

Response:

Gay, lesbian couples line up to marry Judge delays challenges to San Francisco until Tuesday SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) — Hundreds of gay and lesbian couples ringed San Francisco’s City Hall on Saturday to be married, before a judge hears a challenge Tuesday from two groups opposed to same-sex marriage. Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered City Hall be opened from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. during the weekend and Monday — which is President’s Day, a federal holiday — to accommodate as many couples as possible before Superior Court Judge James Warren hears the challenge Tuesday. Newsom ordered the county clerk to begin issuing marriage licenses for lesbian and gay couples Thursday. Californians filled the ranks for the most part, but gay couples from other parts of the country were beginning to join the line for marriage licenses in San Francisco, which does not require a blood test or proof of residency. = = = = = = = = = = = = =      Rosa Parks’ civil disobedience was the beginning of the end for segregation.  Mayor Newsom’s civil disobedience is the beginning of the end for second-class-citizen status for gays in America.  Mark my words:  Friday, the 13th of February, 2004 was THE Landmark Date!!  And it will go down in history as such!  From that point on, the RRR Cult’s ignorant and hateful bigots *LOSE* — ***big***-time!              (*So much* for Friday, the 13ths being unlucky!!)

Response:

Californians filled the ranks for the most part, but gay couples from other parts of the country were beginning to join the line for marriage licenses in San Francisco, which does not require a blood test or proof of residency.

They don’t test for homoglobin?  :) Oh well… they don’t call it the "left cost" and "the land of fruits and nuts" for nothing. William R. James

Response:

Leave a Comment

Had enough of Rachel Corrie, TorresD?

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nice going, Israel. Rachel’s grieving mourners couldn’t even have her memorial in peace in "democratic" Israel. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm Rachel Corrie’s Death in Pictures http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,917178,00.html Activist’s memorial service disrupted Chris McGreal in Jerusalem Wednesday March 19, 2003 The Guardian Israeli forces fired teargas and stun grenades yesterday in an attempt to break up a memorial service for Rachel Corrie, the American peace activist killed by an army bulldozer in Gaza on Sunday.

As usual, only half the story. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0319-02.htm "An member of the ‘International Solidarity Movement’ holds a portrait of Rachel Corrie and a wreath of flowers as he stands in front of an Israeli army armored vehicle in the Rafah refugee camp in the southern Gaza Strip (news – web sites), Tuesday, March 18, 2003." In other words, it wasn’t just a memorial service, it was disorderly conduct and civil disobedience at the very least. Police in many countries use tear gas to break up such activities. Commondreams.org is a leftist site that is not even friendly to Israel. –Bill http://www.omdurman.org/

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well, Mr descendant of White Supremacist murderers of indigeneous tribes on the North American continent, you, the "lucky" economic benificiary of past slave traders Actually, you got that backwards. The descendants of slaves brought to the US are far better off (in terms of economics and political freedom) than their descendants who remained in Africa. Not that what happened to the slaves was right, but at least civilized nations like the US and UK put an end to it on their own, long before the rest of the world had any great pangs of conscience about it. BTW, I seem to recall that the same US and UK had to intervene in your country back in the 1940’s to keep your people from trying to enslave the rest of the world (including some of my relatives), but that’s a story for another day… Yep, they all got it good down in the ‘hood.

Funny, but the African students I met at when I went to Cal were all amazed at how much prosperity black people had in this country, and how they didn’t see much racism at all – and most of them were talking about Oakland and Berkeley.

Response:

Knowing that you aren’t going to deliberately inform us of anything bad the Pallies do, there’s probably another side to the story…

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nice going, Israel. Rachel’s grieving mourners couldn’t even have her memorial in peace in "democratic" Israel. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm Rachel Corrie’s Death in Pictures http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,917178,00.html Activist’s memorial service disrupted Chris McGreal in Jerusalem Wednesday March 19, 2003 The Guardian Israeli forces fired teargas and stun grenades yesterday in an attempt to break up a memorial service for Rachel Corrie, the American peace activist killed by an army bulldozer in Gaza on Sunday. Witnesses including several dozen foreigners and Palestinian supporters say Israeli armoured vehicles tried to disperse the gathering at the spot in Rafah refugee camp where Ms Corrie was crushed to death. The 23 year-old activist with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) was trying to prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes by the Israelis when she was hit by the bulldozer. Joe Smith, a young activist from Kansas City, said about 100 people were gathered to lay carnations and erect a small memorial when the first armoured personnel carrier appeared. "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. After a while it got hectic so we sat down. Then the tank came over and shot in the air," he said. "It scared a lot of Palestinians, especially the shooting made a lot of them run and the teargas freaked people out. But most of us stayed." Another witness said the army failed to break up the service. "People were laying carnations at the spot where Rachel was killed when a tank came and fired teargas right on them. Then a core group of the peace activists took an ISM cloth banner to the fence and pinned it up. "The tank chased after them trying to stop them with teargas but the wind was against the army," she said. Tensions rose further when a convoy of vehicles, including the bulldozer that killed Ms Corrie, passed the area. "I don’t think it was deliberate but it was pretty insensitive," said Mr Smith. "I think they had been destroying some buildings elsewhere and had to pass by to get back to their base." The army said it was investigating the incident. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

Response:

Nice going, Israel. Rachel’s grieving mourners couldn’t even have her memorial in peace in "democratic" Israel. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm Rachel Corrie’s Death in Pictures http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml

The latest aerial raid by Israeli planes in the Gaza strip killed one of the leaders of Jihad (Aziz Chami) and a 12 year old kid and wounded nine other Palestinians. Up to date 2798 Palestinians and 875 Israeli have been killed since the start of Intifada in September 2000. It looks to me like the Palestinians are slacking. Initially, the ratio was about two Palestinians killed for each Jew, while now it exceed 3 to 1. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -"They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,917178,00.html Activist’s memorial service disrupted Chris McGreal in Jerusalem Wednesday March 19, 2003 The Guardian Israeli forces fired teargas and stun grenades yesterday in an attempt to break up a memorial service for Rachel Corrie, the American peace activist killed by an army bulldozer in Gaza on Sunday. Witnesses including several dozen foreigners and Palestinian supporters say Israeli armoured vehicles tried to disperse the gathering at the spot in Rafah refugee camp where Ms Corrie was crushed to death. The 23 year-old activist with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) was trying to prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes by the Israelis when she was hit by the bulldozer. Joe Smith, a young activist from Kansas City, said about 100 people were gathered to lay carnations and erect a small memorial when the first armoured personnel carrier appeared. "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. After a while it got hectic so we sat down. Then the tank came over and shot in the air," he said. "It scared a lot of Palestinians, especially the shooting made a lot of them run and the teargas freaked people out. But most of us stayed." Another witness said the army failed to break up the service. "People were laying carnations at the spot where Rachel was killed when a tank came and fired teargas right on them. Then a core group of the peace activists took an ISM cloth banner to the fence and pinned it up. "The tank chased after them trying to stop them with teargas but the wind was against the army," she said. Tensions rose further when a convoy of vehicles, including the bulldozer that killed Ms Corrie, passed the area. "I don’t think it was deliberate but it was pretty insensitive," said Mr Smith. "I think they had been destroying some buildings elsewhere and had to pass by to get back to their base." The army said it was investigating the incident. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

Response:

Well, Mr descendant of White Supremacist murderers of indigeneous tribes on the North American continent, you, the "lucky" economic benificiary of past slave traders

Actually, you got that backwards. The descendants of slaves brought to the US are far better off (in terms of economics and political freedom) than their descendants who remained in Africa. Not that what happened to the slaves was right, but at least civilized nations like the US and UK put an end to it on their own, long before the rest of the world had any great pangs of conscience about it. BTW, I seem to recall that the same US and UK had to intervene in your country back in the 1940’s to keep your people from trying to enslave the rest of the world (including some of my relatives), but that’s a story for another day…

Response:

Well, Mr descendant of White Supremacist murderers of indigeneous tribes on the North American continent, you, the "lucky" economic benificiary of past slave traders Actually, you got that backwards.

No, I actually have the correct perspective here. Then one that takes its meaning from the proper progression of historic events. You are the one engaging in a dishonest attempt to portray the US slave trade as a beneficial political and economic project engaged in by the US in order to "help" Africans. Hypocracy! If you can’t see that’s pure racism, I’m afraid you’re lost to reason and and further arguments will be in vain. The descendants of slaves brought to the US are far better off (in terms of economics and political freedom) than their descendants who remained in Africa. Not that what happened to the slaves was right, but at least civilized nations like the US and UK put an end to it on their own, long before the rest of the world had any great pangs of conscience about it. BTW, I seem to recall that the same US and UK had to intervene in your country back in the 1940’s to keep your people from trying to enslave the rest of the world (including some of my relatives), but that’s a story for another day…

"My country"? Have you lost your marbles? I’ll happily admit to any crime that the nation with which I’m temporarily affiliated as a citizen has been engaged. But what’s that got to do with anything? Isn’t a crime a crime whoever commits it? The US+UK were NEVER civilized while they engaged in slave trades. They hardly are so today, since this degrading, exploitative, and human rights violating practise in its many possible variants is still a great economic boon to both nations. Nes

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well, Mr descendant of White Supremacist murderers of indigeneous tribes on the North American continent, you, the "lucky" economic benificiary of past slave traders Actually, you got that backwards. The descendants of slaves brought to the US are far better off (in terms of economics and political freedom) than their descendants who remained in Africa. Not that what happened to the slaves was right, but at least civilized nations like the US and UK put an end to it on their own, long before the rest of the world had any great pangs of conscience about it. BTW, I seem to recall that the same US and UK had to intervene in your country back in the 1940’s to keep your people from trying to enslave the rest of the world (including some of my relatives), but that’s a story for another day… Yep, they all got it good down in the ‘hood. Funny, but the African students I met at when I went to Cal were all amazed at how much prosperity black people had in this country, and how they didn’t see much racism at all – and most of them were talking about Oakland and Berkeley. I live in the east bay.  Try walking down the streets of Oakland at night. Over 100 homicides last year.

And I lived off of Broadway and West Mac when I went to Cal. From what I hear, however, compared to Lagos (Nigeria) it’s pretty tame.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well, Mr descendant of White Supremacist murderers of indigeneous tribes on the North American continent, you, the "lucky" economic benificiary of past slave traders Actually, you got that backwards. The descendants of slaves brought to the US are far better off (in terms of economics and political freedom) than their descendants who remained in Africa. Not that what happened to the slaves was right, but at least civilized nations like the US and UK put an end to it on their own, long before the rest of the world had any great pangs of conscience about it. BTW, I seem to recall that the same US and UK had to intervene in your country back in the 1940’s to keep your people from trying to enslave the rest of the world (including some of my relatives), but that’s a story for another day… Yep, they all got it good down in the ‘hood. Funny, but the African students I met at when I went to Cal were all amazed at how much prosperity black people had in this country, and how they didn’t see much racism at all – and most of them were talking about Oakland and Berkeley.

I live in the east bay.  Try walking down the streets of Oakland at night. Over 100 homicides last year. http://www.redding.com/news/state/past/20040102state030.shtml And these are only the ones reported.

Response:

How brave do you have to be to detonate a suicide vest at a wedding? Don Wagner Very, I would imagine. –John Baglow

Sure couldn’t be a coward and do it

Response:

How brave do you have to be to detonate a suicide vest at a wedding? Don Wagner

Very, I would imagine. –John Baglow

Response:

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm Rachel Corrie’s Death in Pictures http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades.

Answered elsewhere in this thread. http://www.omdurman.org/ism.html –Bill http://www.omdurman.org/

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nice going, Israel. Rachel’s grieving mourners couldn’t even have her memorial in peace in "democratic" Israel. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm Rachel Corrie’s Death in Pictures http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml The latest aerial raid by Israeli planes in the Gaza strip killed one of the leaders of Jihad (Aziz Chami) and a 12 year old kid and wounded nine other Palestinians. Up to date 2798 Palestinians and 875 Israeli have been killed since the start of Intifada in September 2000. It looks to me like the Palestinians are slacking. Initially, the ratio was about two Palestinians killed for each Jew, while now it exceed 3 to 1. "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,917178,00.html Activist’s memorial service disrupted Chris McGreal in Jerusalem Wednesday March 19, 2003 The Guardian Israeli forces fired teargas and stun grenades yesterday in an attempt to break up a memorial service for Rachel Corrie, the American peace activist killed by an army bulldozer in Gaza on Sunday. Witnesses including several dozen foreigners and Palestinian supporters say Israeli armoured vehicles tried to disperse the gathering at the spot in Rafah refugee camp where Ms Corrie was crushed to death. The 23 year-old activist with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) was trying to prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes by the Israelis when she was hit by the bulldozer. Joe Smith, a young activist from Kansas City, said about 100 people were gathered to lay carnations and erect a small memorial when the first armoured personnel carrier appeared. "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. After a while it got hectic so we sat down. Then the tank came over and shot in the air," he said. "It scared a lot of Palestinians, especially the shooting made a lot of them run and the teargas freaked people out. But most of us stayed." Another witness said the army failed to break up the service. "People were laying carnations at the spot where Rachel was killed when a tank came and fired teargas right on them. Then a core group of the peace activists took an ISM cloth banner to the fence and pinned it up. "The tank chased after them trying to stop them with teargas but the wind was against the army," she said. Tensions rose further when a convoy of vehicles, including the bulldozer that killed Ms Corrie, passed the area. "I don’t think it was deliberate but it was pretty insensitive," said Mr Smith. "I think they had been destroying some buildings elsewhere and had to pass by to get back to their base." The army said it was investigating the incident. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm Which planet you been on?   IT’s been 3:1 for a long time. Right now the jooze are just trying to raise their ratio for children killed?    Doing a great job killing unarmed kids, huh? Aren’t those IDF brave?

How brave do you have to be to detonate a suicide vest at a wedding? Don Wagner

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nice going, Israel. Rachel’s grieving mourners couldn’t even have her memorial in peace in "democratic" Israel. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm Rachel Corrie’s Death in Pictures http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml The latest aerial raid by Israeli planes in the Gaza strip killed one of the leaders of Jihad (Aziz Chami) and a 12 year old kid and wounded nine other Palestinians. Up to date 2798 Palestinians and 875 Israeli have been killed since the start of Intifada in September 2000. It looks to me like the Palestinians are slacking. Initially, the ratio was about two Palestinians killed for each Jew, while now it exceed 3 to 1. "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,917178,00.html Activist’s memorial service disrupted Chris McGreal in Jerusalem Wednesday March 19, 2003 The Guardian Israeli forces fired teargas and stun grenades yesterday in an attempt to break up a memorial service for Rachel Corrie, the American peace activist killed by an army bulldozer in Gaza on Sunday. Witnesses including several dozen foreigners and Palestinian supporters say Israeli armoured vehicles tried to disperse the gathering at the spot in Rafah refugee camp where Ms Corrie was crushed to death. The 23 year-old activist with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) was trying to prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes by the Israelis when she was hit by the bulldozer. Joe Smith, a young activist from Kansas City, said about 100 people were gathered to lay carnations and erect a small memorial when the first armoured personnel carrier appeared. "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. After a while it got hectic so we sat down. Then the tank came over and shot in the air," he said. "It scared a lot of Palestinians, especially the shooting made a lot of them run and the teargas freaked people out. But most of us stayed." Another witness said the army failed to break up the service. "People were laying carnations at the spot where Rachel was killed when a tank came and fired teargas right on them. Then a core group of the peace activists took an ISM cloth banner to the fence and pinned it up. "The tank chased after them trying to stop them with teargas but the wind was against the army," she said. Tensions rose further when a convoy of vehicles, including the bulldozer that killed Ms Corrie, passed the area. "I don’t think it was deliberate but it was pretty insensitive," said Mr Smith. "I think they had been destroying some buildings elsewhere and had to pass by to get back to their base." The army said it was investigating the incident. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

Which planet you been on?   IT’s been 3:1 for a long time. Right now the jooze are just trying to raise their ratio for children killed?    Doing a great job killing unarmed kids, huh? Aren’t those IDF brave?

Response:

Can’t stand up to real opposition, can you? We haven’t heard your strident outcries about Rachel Corrie for the past couple of days. (I’m reminded of the exchange between Rupert Hentzau and Harry Flashman in "Royal Flash." Hentzau: "Stand and fight!" Flashman, squealing in terror: "Why should I?") Well, I just sent the following little missive to opinion "at" seattletimes.com, and it should settle the hash of the remaining ISM sympathizers at Evergreen College. You really should NOT have gotten my attention because, as you know, my political doctrine is offensive as opposed to defensive. (See http://www.omdurman.org/ism.jpg) I am not interested in trying to make excuses for the bulldozer driver, I am interested in exposing ISM and/or its Palestinian handlers for setting up Rachel to be killed. To the Editor; People are asking that Congress investigate the tragic death of peace activist Rachel Corrie, and indeed it should. Congress (or perhaps Homeland Security) should look into the activities of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). Despite ISM’s own nonviolent posture, it approves of Palestinian violence. Israel has made credible allegations that ISM members have provided material support to suicide bombers. It’s quite possible that ISM’s Palestinian handlers may have set up this well-meaning young woman to be killed so they could use her innocent blood to write anti-Israel propaganda. "’Her death serves me more than it served her,’ said one activist at a Hamas funeral yesterday.’ …Her death will bring more attention than the other 2,000 martyrs’" ("Making of a Martyr" by Sandra Jordan, Guardian Newspapers). That is a very good motive for murder and Hamas is in the business of murder. Opportunity (setting up Rachel’s death so as to blame Israel) is a little more problematic. A bullet in the back at the right moment during a confrontation with the Israeli Defense Forces would have worked. As it was, this impressionable young woman was encouraged or allowed to play chicken with a military bulldozer whose armor limits its driver’s range of vision. One account, in fact, has her sitting in front of it. This would have placed the blade between the driver and herself. Anyone who is thinking of getting involved with ISM should consider the following: people who consider you far more valuable dead than alive, as Hamas considered Rachel Corrie, are not your friends. –Bill http://www.omdurman.org/

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can’t stand up to real opposition, can you? We haven’t heard your strident outcries about Rachel Corrie for the past couple of days. (I’m reminded of the exchange between Rupert Hentzau and Harry Flashman in "Royal Flash." Hentzau: "Stand and fight!" Flashman, squealing in terror: "Why should I?") Well, I just sent the following little missive to opinion "at" seattletimes.com, and it should settle the hash of the remaining ISM sympathizers at Evergreen College. You really should NOT have gotten my attention because, as you know, my political doctrine is offensive as opposed to defensive. (See http://www.omdurman.org/ism.jpg) I am not interested in trying to make excuses for the bulldozer driver, I am interested in exposing ISM and/or its Palestinian handlers for setting up Rachel to be killed. To the Editor; People are asking that Congress investigate the tragic death of peace activist Rachel Corrie, and indeed it should. Congress (or perhaps Homeland Security) should look into the activities of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). Despite ISM’s own nonviolent posture, it approves of Palestinian violence. Israel has made credible allegations that ISM members have provided material support to suicide bombers. It’s quite possible that ISM’s Palestinian handlers may have set up this well-meaning young woman to be killed so they could use her innocent blood to write anti-Israel propaganda. "’Her death serves me more than it served her,’ said one activist at a Hamas funeral yesterday.’ …Her death will bring more attention than the other 2,000 martyrs’" ("Making of a Martyr" by Sandra Jordan, Guardian Newspapers). That is a very good motive for murder and Hamas is in the business of murder. Opportunity (setting up Rachel’s death so as to blame Israel) is a little more problematic. A bullet in the back at the right moment during a confrontation with the Israeli Defense Forces would have worked. As it was, this impressionable young woman was encouraged or allowed to play chicken with a military bulldozer whose armor limits its driver’s range of vision. One account, in fact, has her sitting in front of it. This would have placed the blade between the driver and herself. Anyone who is thinking of getting involved with ISM should consider the following: people who consider you far more valuable dead than alive, as Hamas considered Rachel Corrie, are not your friends. –Bill http://www.omdurman.org/

You must enjoy have rooms full of people in Seattle laughing at you.

Response:

Bill, The person that cannot face reality is you and people who think like you. http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Famous-Zionist-Quotes/Story69… Ben-Gurion was dismayed by the large "mass robbery" of Palestinian properties by the citizens of the "Jewish state", he said in a Cabinet meeting: "The ONLY thing that surprised me, and surprised me bitterly, was the discovery of such moral failings among us [Jews], which I had never suspected. I mean the mass robbery in which all parts of [the Jewish] population participated." (1949, The First Israelis, p. 69) .

Response:

Bill, The person that cannot face reality is you and people who think like you.

SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP! Don’t change the subject to an alleged quote by Ben Gurion, TorresD, this thread is about how the International Solidarity Movement and/or its Palestinian handlers probably set up Rachel Corrie to be killed so they could make propaganda (http://www.omdurman.org/ism.html). I don’t have to change the subject in threads that you start but then again I actually have reason and right on my side. I suppose that is an unfair advantage. :^) –Bill http://www.omdurman.org/

Response:

[old stuff deleted] You must enjoy have rooms full of people in Seattle laughing at you.

Yes, just the way the Dauphin of France was laughing when he sent the tennis balls to King Henry V. And tell the pleasant prince this mock of his Hath turn’d his balls to gun-stones, and his soul Shall stand sore charged for the wasteful vengeance That shall fly with them; for many a thousand widows Shall this his mock mock out of their dear husbands, Mock mothers from their sons, mock castles down, And some are yet ungotten and unborn That shall have cause to curse the Dauphin’s scorn. The International Solidarity Movement’s political/ public relations "castle" rests on a foundation of sand and people like me will have it down very, very soon. Ask what’s left of the anti-Second Amendment Million Mom March if you don’t believe me. –Bill http://www.omdurman.org/

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can’t stand up to real opposition, can you? We haven’t heard your strident outcries about Rachel Corrie for the past couple of days. (I’m reminded of the exchange between Rupert Hentzau and Harry Flashman in "Royal Flash." Hentzau: "Stand and fight!" Flashman, squealing in terror: "Why should I?") Well, I just sent the following little missive to opinion "at" seattletimes.com, and it should settle the hash of the remaining ISM sympathizers at Evergreen College. You really should NOT have gotten my attention because, as you know, my political doctrine is offensive as opposed to defensive. (See http://www.omdurman.org/ism.jpg) I am not interested in trying to make excuses for the bulldozer driver, I am interested in exposing ISM and/or its Palestinian handlers for setting up Rachel to be killed. To the Editor; People are asking that Congress investigate the tragic death of peace activist Rachel Corrie, and indeed it should. Congress (or perhaps Homeland Security) should look into the activities of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). Despite ISM’s own nonviolent posture, it approves of Palestinian violence. Israel has made credible allegations that ISM members have provided material support to suicide bombers. It’s quite possible that ISM’s Palestinian handlers may have set up this well-meaning young woman to be killed so they could use her innocent blood to write anti-Israel propaganda. "’Her death serves me more than it served her,’ said one activist at a Hamas funeral yesterday.’ …Her death will bring more attention than the other 2,000 martyrs’" ("Making of a Martyr" by Sandra Jordan, Guardian Newspapers). That is a very good motive for murder and Hamas is in the business of murder. Opportunity (setting up Rachel’s death so as to blame Israel) is a little more problematic. A bullet in the back at the right moment during a confrontation with the Israeli Defense Forces would have worked. As it was, this impressionable young woman was encouraged or allowed to play chicken with a military bulldozer whose armor limits its driver’s range of vision. One account, in fact, has her sitting in front of it. This would have placed the blade between the driver and herself. Anyone who is thinking of getting involved with ISM should consider the following: people who consider you far more valuable dead than alive, as Hamas considered Rachel Corrie, are not your friends. –Bill http://www.omdurman.org/ You must enjoy have rooms full of people in Seattle laughing at you.

It is not out of the realm of the possible.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well, Mr descendant of White Supremacist murderers of indigeneous tribes on the North American continent, you, the "lucky" economic benificiary of past slave traders Actually, you got that backwards. The descendants of slaves brought to the US are far better off (in terms of economics and political freedom) than their descendants who remained in Africa. Not that what happened to the slaves was right, but at least civilized nations like the US and UK put an end to it on their own, long before the rest of the world had any great pangs of conscience about it. BTW, I seem to recall that the same US and UK had to intervene in your country back in the 1940’s to keep your people from trying to enslave the rest of the world (including some of my relatives), but that’s a story for another day…

Yep, they all got it good down in the ‘hood.

Response:

Nice going, Israel. Rachel’s grieving mourners couldn’t even have her memorial in peace in "democratic" Israel. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm Rachel Corrie’s Death in Pictures http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,917178,00.html Activist’s memorial service disrupted Chris McGreal in Jerusalem Wednesday March 19, 2003 The Guardian Israeli forces fired teargas and stun grenades yesterday in an attempt to break up a memorial service for Rachel Corrie, the American peace activist killed by an army bulldozer in Gaza on Sunday. Witnesses including several dozen foreigners and Palestinian supporters say Israeli armoured vehicles tried to disperse the gathering at the spot in Rafah refugee camp where Ms Corrie was crushed to death. The 23 year-old activist with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) was trying to prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes by the Israelis when she was hit by the bulldozer. Joe Smith, a young activist from Kansas City, said about 100 people were gathered to lay carnations and erect a small memorial when the first armoured personnel carrier appeared. "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. After a while it got hectic so we sat down. Then the tank came over and shot in the air," he said. "It scared a lot of Palestinians, especially the shooting made a lot of them run and the teargas freaked people out. But most of us stayed." Another witness said the army failed to break up the service. "People were laying carnations at the spot where Rachel was killed when a tank came and fired teargas right on them. Then a core group of the peace activists took an ISM cloth banner to the fence and pinned it up. "The tank chased after them trying to stop them with teargas but the wind was against the army," she said. Tensions rose further when a convoy of vehicles, including the bulldozer that killed Ms Corrie, passed the area. "I don’t think it was deliberate but it was pretty insensitive," said Mr Smith. "I think they had been destroying some buildings elsewhere and had to pass by to get back to their base." The army said it was investigating the incident. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can’t stand up to real opposition, can you? We haven’t heard your strident outcries about Rachel Corrie for the past couple of days. (I’m reminded of the exchange between Rupert Hentzau and Harry Flashman in "Royal Flash." Hentzau: "Stand and fight!" Flashman, squealing in terror: "Why should I?") <snip What outrageous nonsense. You ought to dig into history a bit further before http://www.omdurman.org/ " The Battle of Omdurman (2 September 1898) marked the defeat of the followers of the slave trader Mohammed Ahmed (1843-1885), also known as the Mahdi ("Expected One"). "Born in Dongola province, he was for a time in the Egyptian civil service, then a slave-trader, finally an inspired religious revivalist and successful rebel"  (John Keegan and Andrew Wheatcroft, Who’s Who in Military History). Militant "Muslims" continue to persecute, enslave, and even crucify Christian Negroes in the Sudan today. This Web domain is devoted to exposing the truth about militant "Islam," a blasphenous and evil ideology that perverts Islam to promote oppression, war, violence, and terror." [End quote] Why don’t you mention that the upright heroes of Aryan origin who slaugtered the Mahdi’s conventionally men with machine gun fire were under the command of white supremacist, land grabbing, rapacious, racist colonizers who were all slave traders (or of slave trading family) themselves, participating in the greatest crime ever against humanity, the trans-Atlantic Triangular Slave Trade or in the multitudes of other similar Occidental crimes against the dignity of man?

BZZZZZZT! England abolished slavery long before 1898 and English ships were actively involved in suppressing the slave trade. Charles Gordon, "Khartoum Pasha" (martyred in 1885 by your Islamofascist friends at Khartoum) actually executed slave traders. You also left out the African and especially Arab slavers who sold other Africans to the white men when the slave trade did thrive as you describe. Thanks for playing, please try again. –Bill http://www.omdurman.org/

Response:

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm Rachel Corrie’s Death in Pictures http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,917178,00.html Activist’s memorial service disrupted Chris McGreal in Jerusalem Wednesday March 19, 2003 The Guardian Israeli forces fired teargas and stun grenades yesterday in an attempt to break up a memorial service for Rachel Corrie, the American peace activist killed by an army bulldozer in Gaza on Sunday. Witnesses including several dozen foreigners and Palestinian supporters say Israeli armoured vehicles tried to disperse the gathering at the spot in Rafah refugee camp where Ms Corrie was crushed to death. The 23 year-old activist with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) was trying to prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes by the Israelis when she was hit by the bulldozer. Joe Smith, a young activist from Kansas City, said about 100 people were gathered to lay carnations and erect a small memorial when the first armoured personnel carrier appeared. "They started firing teargas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades. After a while it got hectic so we sat down. Then the tank came over and shot in the air," he said. "It scared a lot of Palestinians, especially the shooting made a lot of them run and the teargas freaked people out. But most of us stayed." Another witness said the army failed to break up the service. "People were laying carnations at the spot where Rachel was killed when a tank came and fired teargas right on them. Then a core group of the peace activists took an ISM cloth banner to the fence and pinned it up. "The tank chased after them trying to stop them with teargas but the wind was against the army," she said. Tensions rose further when a convoy of vehicles, including the bulldozer that killed Ms Corrie, passed the area. "I don’t think it was deliberate but it was pretty insensitive," said Mr Smith. "I think they had been destroying some buildings elsewhere and had to pass by to get back to their base." The army said it was investigating the incident. http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

Response:

Well, Mr descendant of White Supremacist murderers of indigeneous tribes on the North American continent, you, the "lucky" economic benificiary of past slave traders Actually, you got that backwards. No, I actually have the correct perspective here. Then one that takes its meaning from the proper progression of historic events. You are the one engaging in a dishonest attempt to portray the US slave trade as a beneficial political and economic project engaged in by the US in order to "help" Africans.

I didn’t say it was a "beneficial political and economic project engaged in by the US in order to "help" Africans", scheisskopf. What I DID say is that the NET result was that the present generation of DESCENDANTS of those slaves (and I made it clear – at least to people with a room temperature IQ – that I wasn’t defending slavery) received an unintended BENEFIT of being born as American citizens. You doubt that? All you need to do is look at the economic situation of American blacks vs. those in present-day Africa to see the difference. Hypocracy!

How it is HYPOCRISY (correct spelling), given that you insinuated that the reasons white American were well off was because of slavery (in fact, evidence points out that the South was in reality economically impeded by slave labor which minimized the incentive for necessary industrialization, resulting in the fact that the south has a lower per-capita income than the rest of the country even to this day)? Since you clearly don’t get it, let me try to explain to to you S-L-O-W-L-Y. You made the following comment: Well, Mr descendant of White Supremacist murderers of indigeneous tribes on the North American continent, you, the "lucky" economic benificiary of past slave traders

Suggesting that I was a beneficiary to the actions of those in the past. Given that (1) I don’t own a plantation or anything remotely connected to assets of people who died over a century ago, (2) The 2 or 3 ancestors I had that MAY have owned slaves were FAR outnumbered by those who did NOT own slaves and even fought AGAINST slavery (there is actually a strong record of civil rights advocacy in my family, including ancestors on my mother’s side who participated with John Brown in the raid on Harper’s Ferry, VA), that some of my ancestors arrived in the US AFTER the end of the Civil War, I certainly didn’t benefit from slavery. On the other hand, most of the black people in the US were direct descendants of people who were taken to America and slaves, and while (ONCE AGAIN, for clarification’s sake) I never said slavery was a good thing, these people in fact are FAR better off than they would have been if they were born in modern-day Sub-Saharan Africa. SO, if there’s debt to be settled, who pays who? Do I owe some black person money because I was a descendant of some slaveholders, and they were descendants of slaves? Do they owe ME something because they benefitted as descendants, and I did not? Because some of my OTHER ancestors fought for THEIR freedom? Do I owe MYSELF reparations because some of my ancestors fought other of my ancestors? Or perhaps YOU owe ME something because your Nazi relatives persecuted, enslaved, and stole property from some of MY relatives who were German and Polish Jews? See where this goes? If you can’t see that’s pure racism, I’m afraid you’re lost to reason and and further arguments will be in vain.

How is pointing out a self-evident truth "racism"? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The descendants of slaves brought to the US are far better off (in terms of economics and political freedom) than their descendants who remained in Africa. Not that what happened to the slaves was right, but at least civilized nations like the US and UK put an end to it on their own, long before the rest of the world had any great pangs of conscience about it. BTW, I seem to recall that the same US and UK had to intervene in your country back in the 1940’s to keep your people from trying to enslave the rest of the world (including some of my relatives), but that’s a story for another day… "My country"? Have you lost your marbles? I’ll happily admit to any crime that the nation with which I’m temporarily affiliated as a citizen has been engaged.

You’re "temporarily affiliated as a citizen" but it’s NOT your country? What type of weasel statement is that? Or are you merely someone who has no sense of pride or loyalty to your country, but signs up for the welfare-state handouts? If so, that’s truly pathetic. But what’s that got to do with anything? Isn’t a crime a crime whoever commits it?

It’s a crime for those who actually COMMIT it, not their descendants or an entire nation. In speaking about the "native Americans", you forget to acknowledge that they had no great moral qualm about killing and enslaving each other well before white people even showed up on the scene… The US+UK were NEVER civilized while they engaged in slave trades.

They were civilized enough to change it on their own, WITHOUT foreign intervention. Remember that the Germans didn’t suddenly develop a conscience one day and stop enslaving Jews, Poles, and the rest of Europe – we had to kick some serious Kraut ass to get them to stop. On the other hand, the UK did so on it’s own, while the US in essence WENT TO WAR AGAINST ITSELF to stop it – something you aren’t willing to acknowledge. They hardly are so today, since this degrading, exploitative, and human rights violating practise in its many possible variants is still a great economic boon to both nations.

How so? Examples? Didn’t think so.

Response:

Can’t stand up to real opposition, can you? We haven’t heard your strident outcries about Rachel Corrie for the past couple of days. (I’m reminded of the exchange between Rupert Hentzau and Harry Flashman in "Royal Flash." Hentzau: "Stand and fight!" Flashman, squealing in terror: "Why should I?")

<snip What outrageous nonsense. You ought to dig into history a bit further before http://www.omdurman.org/ " The Battle of Omdurman (2 September 1898) marked the defeat of the followers of the slave trader Mohammed Ahmed (1843-1885), also known as the Mahdi ("Expected One"). "Born in Dongola province, he was for a time in the Egyptian civil service, then a slave-trader, finally an inspired religious revivalist and successful rebel"  (John Keegan and Andrew Wheatcroft, Who’s Who in Military History). Militant "Muslims" continue to persecute, enslave, and even crucify Christian Negroes in the Sudan today. This Web domain is devoted to exposing the truth about militant "Islam," a blasphenous and evil ideology that perverts Islam to promote oppression, war, violence, and terror." [End quote] Why don’t you mention that the upright heroes of Aryan origin who slaugtered the Mahdi’s conventionally men with machine gun fire were under the command of white supremacist, land grabbing, rapacious, racist colonizers who were all slave traders (or of slave trading family) themselves, participating in the greatest crime ever against humanity, the trans-Atlantic Triangular Slave Trade or in the multitudes of other similar Occidental crimes against the dignity of man? But, oh no, when you spot a person from another cultural or historic tradition than your own, you find it eminently just to blame that particular person for the crimes and injustices of his past or contemporary societies, while offering indestinct and unspecific invective and no real understanding of issues. Well, Mr descendant of White Supremacist murderers of indigeneous tribes on the North American continent, you, the "lucky" economic benificiary of past slave traders and mass murderers for profit, if you can play the blame game so can everyone else. But since you are a white "man", your crimes will be that much more severe and recent than those of anybody else, won’t they? Nes

Response:

Leave a Comment

American woman hogtied by U.S. Military

Question:

"B military base in a time of war is a smart idea, you are an idiot. "B "B War against whom? Good call — the way things are going, politically, it may well be that in the future, this attack in Iraq will be known as a "police action"! Your friend, <+]::-{(} ("Cyberpope," the Bishop of ROM!) Ask me how to connect with me in any of 5 Instant Messengers         (Please quote with "gapope wrote…") -=- In essentials, unity; In non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.  – Baxter quoting Augustine -=- — . from gapope(at)vcn(dot)bc(dot)ca << Official Reply Address for Usenet Post .

Response:

Well, if you protest, you take your chances.  If you think trespassing on a military base in a time of war is a smart idea, you are an idiot.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – | |          -( reposted )- | | |Newsgroups: alt.gossip.celebrities,alt.politics.greens,soc.culture.usa | | |Why was this never reported in the national media? | |I thought they were all a bunch of "liberals". | | |Hogtied and Abused at Fort Benning |by Kathy Kelly | | |On Sunday, November 23, I took part in a nonviolent civil disobedience |action at Fort Benning, GA, to protest the U.S. Army’s School of the |Americas (SOA, now called the Western Hemisphere Institute for |Security Cooperation — WHISC) | |Shortly after more than two dozen of us entered Fort Benning and were |arrested, US Military Police took us to a warehouse on the base for |"processing." I was directed to a station for an initial search, where |a woman soldier began shouting at me to look straight ahead and spread |my legs. I turned to ask her why she was shouting at me and was |ordered to keep my mouth shut, look straight ahead, and spread my legs |wider. She then began an aggressive body search. When ordered to raise |one leg a second time, I temporarily lost my balance while still being |roughly searched and, in my view, `womanhandled.’ I decided that I |shouldn’t go along with this dehumanizing action any longer. When I |lowered my arms and said, quietly, "I’m sorry, but I can’t any longer |cooperate with this," I was instantly pushed to the floor. Five |soldiers squatted around me, one of them referring to me with an |expletive (this f_ _ _ er) and began to cuff my wrists and ankles and |then bind my wrists and ankles together. Then one soldier leaned on |me, with his or her knee in my back. Unable to get a full breath, I |gasped and moaned, "I can’t breathe." I repeated this many times and |then began begging for help. When I said, "Please, I’ve had four lung |collapses before," the pressure on my back eased. Four soldiers then |carried me, hogtied, to the next processing station for interrogation |and propped me in a kneeling position. The soldier standing to my |left, who had been assigned to "escort" me, gently told me that soon |the ankle and wrist cuffs, which were very tight, would be cut off. He |politely let me know that he would have to move my hair, which was |hanging in front of my face, so that my picture could be taken. I told |him I’d appreciate that. | |I was then carried to the next station. There, one of the soldiers |who’d been part of pushing me to the floor knelt in front of me, and, |with his nose about two inches from mine, told me that because I was |combative I should know that if I didn’t do exactly as instructed when |they uncuffed one hand, he would pepper spray me. I asked him to |describe how I’d been combative, but he didn’t answer. | |After the processing, I was unbound, shackled with wrist and ankle |chains, and led to the section where other peaceful activists, also |shackled, awaited transport to the Muskogee County jail. | |At our bond hearing on Monday, Nov. 24, a military prosecutor told the |federal judge that the military was considering an additional charge |against me for resisting arrest. I explained my side of the story to |the judge, grateful that there are at least sevreal witnesses upon |whom I could call. | |The federal judge determined that most of us were "flight risks" and |increased by 100% the cash bond required before we could be released, |from last year’s $500. to $1000. | |Today I have a black eye and the soreness that comes with severe |muscle strain. Mostly, I’m burdened with a serious question, "What are |these soldiers training for?" The soldiers conducting that search must |have been ordered not to tolerate the slightest dissent. They were |practicing intimidation tactics far beyond what would be needed to |control an avowedly nonviolent group of protesters who had never, in |thirteen years of previous actions, caused any disruption during the |process of arrest. Bewildered, most of us in the "tank" inside the |Muskogee County jail acknowledged that during the rough processing we |wondered, "What country do we live in?" We now live in a country where |Homeland Security funds pay for exercises which train military and |police units to control and intimidate crowds, detainees, and |arrestees using threat and force. | |This morning’s aches and pains, along with the memory of being |hogtied, give me a glimpse into the abuses we protest by coming to |Fort Benning, GA. As we explore the further invention of nonviolence |in our increasingly volatile time, it’s important that we jointly |overcome efforts to deter our determination to stand together against |what Martin Luther King once called, "the violence of desperate men," |– and women. | |Kathy Kelly is the founder of Voices in the Wilderness, a human rights |group based in Chicago that worked to lift the economic sanctions |784-8065, or visit www.iraqpeaceteam.org or www.vitw.org. | |http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1127-01.htm | So U have received a lot of flack on this! Although I may not agree with your personal interests, I find you quite Brave for the moment on some acts against the Big Gangsters! It never seems to amaze me what these Armies, Gangs, really add up to at the end of the day with a gun, badge, and territory. They all remind me of a bunch of queers who have never seen past their nose, or like some Al-Qieda, past their occipital lobe!   I have been, seen Military Armed bases "Canadian National Guards 1963 Reserve Major/Crown, age 14", they don’t know for one day that civilians exist, they have a mindset on a collective self arrogance, and are nothing but a bunch of beasts of burden and  useless targets for all intents and political importance! It’s not their fault, it’s some inherent Human Nature, that is as obvious a as Pavlov’s Dog, military and police ego is a big HI for non drug users, although Drugs reign supreme, and the military are like a sex kick or something! I been stomped on by these Gov’t gangsters too, broken nose, the works at the time for having long hair and a beard, at the time that mean’t penitentiary time, 7can years actually=300us years maximum security! Also, dead cornered animals and humans act in a very super aggressive way, and these "Soldiers" were bucking for stripes by showing that they can follow the designated orders and procedures! The Operative Triad Productions-Fantalla(tm)~EZine~ParaNovel WWWeb  http://conspiracy.at/r_lacasse offnethttp://pages.istar.ca/~vampire/contact.html

Response:

Well, if you protest, you take your chances.  If you think trespassing on a military base in a time of war is a smart idea, you are an idiot. War against whom? —

against the evil illuminati shapeshifter zionist qabballah numerology mammon demons and their chemtrails – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –             Henrik Bengtsson            Armchair Mercenary Illuminati(Retired),  A.T.V. Inf.(Retired)    Political Maverick and Loose Cannon

Response:

Well, if you protest, you take your chances.  If you think trespassing on a military base in a time of war is a smart idea, you are an idiot.

War against whom? —              Henrik Bengtsson             Armchair Mercenary Illuminati(Retired),  A.T.V. Inf.(Retired)     Political Maverick and Loose Cannon

Response:

| |          -( reposted )- | | |Newsgroups: alt.gossip.celebrities,alt.politics.greens,soc.culture.usa | | |Why was this never reported in the national media? | |I thought they were all a bunch of "liberals". | | |Hogtied and Abused at Fort Benning |by Kathy Kelly | | |On Sunday, November 23, I took part in a nonviolent civil disobedience |action at Fort Benning, GA, to protest the U.S. Army’s School of the |Americas (SOA, now called the Western Hemisphere Institute for |Security Cooperation — WHISC) | |Shortly after more than two dozen of us entered Fort Benning and were |arrested, US Military Police took us to a warehouse on the base for |"processing." I was directed to a station for an initial search, where |a woman soldier began shouting at me to look straight ahead and spread |my legs. I turned to ask her why she was shouting at me and was |ordered to keep my mouth shut, look straight ahead, and spread my legs |wider. She then began an aggressive body search. When ordered to raise |one leg a second time, I temporarily lost my balance while still being |roughly searched and, in my view, `womanhandled.’ I decided that I |shouldn’t go along with this dehumanizing action any longer. When I |lowered my arms and said, quietly, "I’m sorry, but I can’t any longer |cooperate with this," I was instantly pushed to the floor. Five |soldiers squatted around me, one of them referring to me with an |expletive (this f_ _ _ er) and began to cuff my wrists and ankles and |then bind my wrists and ankles together. Then one soldier leaned on |me, with his or her knee in my back. Unable to get a full breath, I |gasped and moaned, "I can’t breathe." I repeated this many times and |then began begging for help. When I said, "Please, I’ve had four lung |collapses before," the pressure on my back eased. Four soldiers then |carried me, hogtied, to the next processing station for interrogation |and propped me in a kneeling position. The soldier standing to my |left, who had been assigned to "escort" me, gently told me that soon |the ankle and wrist cuffs, which were very tight, would be cut off. He |politely let me know that he would have to move my hair, which was |hanging in front of my face, so that my picture could be taken. I told |him I’d appreciate that. | |I was then carried to the next station. There, one of the soldiers |who’d been part of pushing me to the floor knelt in front of me, and, |with his nose about two inches from mine, told me that because I was |combative I should know that if I didn’t do exactly as instructed when |they uncuffed one hand, he would pepper spray me. I asked him to |describe how I’d been combative, but he didn’t answer. | |After the processing, I was unbound, shackled with wrist and ankle |chains, and led to the section where other peaceful activists, also |shackled, awaited transport to the Muskogee County jail. | |At our bond hearing on Monday, Nov. 24, a military prosecutor told the |federal judge that the military was considering an additional charge |against me for resisting arrest. I explained my side of the story to |the judge, grateful that there are at least sevreal witnesses upon |whom I could call. | |The federal judge determined that most of us were "flight risks" and |increased by 100% the cash bond required before we could be released, |from last year’s $500. to $1000. | |Today I have a black eye and the soreness that comes with severe |muscle strain. Mostly, I’m burdened with a serious question, "What are |these soldiers training for?" The soldiers conducting that search must |have been ordered not to tolerate the slightest dissent. They were |practicing intimidation tactics far beyond what would be needed to |control an avowedly nonviolent group of protesters who had never, in |thirteen years of previous actions, caused any disruption during the |process of arrest. Bewildered, most of us in the "tank" inside the |Muskogee County jail acknowledged that during the rough processing we |wondered, "What country do we live in?" We now live in a country where |Homeland Security funds pay for exercises which train military and |police units to control and intimidate crowds, detainees, and |arrestees using threat and force. | |This morning’s aches and pains, along with the memory of being |hogtied, give me a glimpse into the abuses we protest by coming to |Fort Benning, GA. As we explore the further invention of nonviolence |in our increasingly volatile time, it’s important that we jointly |overcome efforts to deter our determination to stand together against |what Martin Luther King once called, "the violence of desperate men," |– and women. | |Kathy Kelly is the founder of Voices in the Wilderness, a human rights |group based in Chicago that worked to lift the economic sanctions |784-8065, or visit www.iraqpeaceteam.org or www.vitw.org. | |http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1127-01.htm |         So U have received a lot of flack on this!         Although I may not agree with your personal interests, I find you quite Brave for the moment on some acts against the Big Gangsters!         It never seems to amaze me what these Armies, Gangs, really add up to at the end of the day with a gun, badge, and territory. They all remind me of a bunch of queers who have never seen past their nose, or like some Al-Qieda, past their occipital lobe!         I have been, seen Military Armed bases "Canadian National Guards 1963 Reserve Major/Crown, age 14", they don’t know for one day that civilians exist, they have a mindset on a collective self arrogance, and are nothing but a bunch of beasts of burden and  useless targets for all intents and political importance!         It’s not their fault, it’s some inherent Human Nature, that is as obvious a as Pavlov’s Dog, military and police ego is a big HI for non drug users, although Drugs reign supreme, and the military are like a sex kick or something!         I been stomped on by these Gov’t gangsters too, broken nose, the works at the time for having long hair and a beard, at the time that mean’t penitentiary time, 7can years actually=300us years maximum security!         Also, dead cornered animals and humans act in a very super aggressive way, and these "Soldiers" were bucking for stripes by showing that they can follow the designated orders and procedures! The Operative Triad Productions-Fantalla(tm)~EZine~ParaNovel WWWeb  http://conspiracy.at/r_lacasse offnethttp://pages.istar.ca/~vampire/contact.html

Response:

Leave a Comment

Shopping list

Question:

When I get my next social security check, I plan to buy these on Half.com: 1. Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau 2. Samson and Delilah (DVD) 3. City of God by St. Augustine 4. Any CD with Selena’s song "Tu, solo tu" on it

Response:

I got an over-used DVD of Terminator 3 (to keep) at the Supermarket for $7 last night, but I don’t have a DVD player yet. I got a haircut for $19 today. I got three $28 shirts for a total of $33.43 today. I borrowed 4 cd’s from a library 20 miles away and they have to be returned in 3 days…well, Monday. I got some RainX windshield wiper fluid for $2 yesterday, but my windshield fluid reservoir needs to be depleted before I can use it. The price of gasoline has gone up 12 cents a gallon this past week. The county bus purposely strands potential passengers dozens of miles from their home. It might get down to 5 degrees tonight, nearly 30 below freezing.

Response:

"City of God" has some interesting comments and accounts in it concerning the repetitive sackings of Rome. St Augustine was on the African Mediteranean coast when he wrote "City of God". And of course, he wrote during the time of the multiple rapings and plundering of Rome.

Response:

Leave a Comment

Bogus Terror Threats and Bush's Police State

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bomb Las Vegas, America’s gambling Mecca and glittery playground built on desert sands by mobsters such as Bugsy Siegel, Meyer Lanksy, and Frank Costello? Only al-Qaeda, we are assured, would contemplate such a depraved act — and it stands to reason because those varmint Muslims hate our way of life. They are envious of our freedom to play the nickel slots and idle away carefree hours perched over blackjack tables — or get no fuss, no muss marriages at Circus Circus. As it turns out, the ubiquitous al-Qaeda harbored no such plans to bomb Las Vegas — or, for that matter, any other target in America over the most cherished and commercialized of holidays. Apparently, the whole thing was idle speculation on the part of the Washington Post. I would not put anything past the depraved terrorists. & I would not put anything past the depraved Bush administrstion!

It seems the administration are the terrorists.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bomb Las Vegas, America’s gambling Mecca and glittery playground built on desert sands by mobsters such as Bugsy Siegel, Meyer Lanksy, and Frank Costello? Only al-Qaeda, we are assured, would contemplate such a depraved act — and it stands to reason because those varmint Muslims hate our way of life. They are envious of our freedom to play the nickel slots and idle away carefree hours perched over blackjack tables — or get no fuss, no muss marriages at Circus Circus. As it turns out, the ubiquitous al-Qaeda harbored no such plans to bomb Las Vegas — or, for that matter, any other target in America over the most cherished and commercialized of holidays. Apparently, the whole thing was idle speculation on the part of the Washington Post. I would not put anything past the depraved terrorists.

& I would not put anything past the depraved Bush administrstion!

Response:

Bomb Las Vegas, America’s gambling Mecca and glittery playground built on desert sands by mobsters such as Bugsy Siegel, Meyer Lanksy, and Frank Costello? Only al-Qaeda, we are assured, would contemplate such a depraved act — and it stands to reason because those varmint Muslims hate our way of life. They are envious of our freedom to play the nickel slots and idle away carefree hours perched over blackjack tables — or get no fuss, no muss marriages at Circus Circus. As it turns out, the ubiquitous al-Qaeda harbored no such plans to bomb Las Vegas — or, for that matter, any other target in America over the most cherished and commercialized of holidays. Apparently, the whole thing was idle speculation on the part of the Washington Post. Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman took umbrage, chastised the paper for "picking these rumors out of thin air and writing a major story about them. This could have a major effect on our quality of life here. We depend on people coming here and feeling safe. If I were the enemy, Vegas would be on the bottom of my list." Mr. Goodman, however, is missing the point — that’s precisely what the Machiavellian Bushites want the American people to do: agonize over irrational and unsubstantiated claims of vicious terrorists lurking out there under cover of mistletoe, plotting radiological attacks and who knows what other evil deeds, determined to destroy our "quality of life," as well as our way of life, and imperil our sense of inviolability. In the week following last year’s now largely forgotten holiday season terror alert — recall five Arab men who supposedly crossed into the country via Canada — the Bushites were rightfully accused of manufacturing hysteria (resulting in the shut down of New York’s harbor) for political gain. But when no al-Qaeda sleeper cells blew up the Statue of Liberty or mowed down Christmas shoppers in Times Square, the Bushites blamed the whole thing on a perfidious informant, Michael Hamdani, an accused forger of passports and traveller’s cheques. As if to underscore the fact there’s little difference between Tweedledee and Tweedledum, Democratic strategist Russ Barksdale said at the time fake terror alerts make prefect sense. "Of course the White House is going to exploit the terrorism threat to the fullest political advantage. They would be fools not to." But when you scratch below the surface it becomes obvious there are far more tangible and ominous aspects to Bush’s manufactured terror alerts. After Tom Ridge went before the nation with his nebulous claim of impending doom and destruction, six casino-hotels owned by the MGM Mirage conglomerate wasted little time cross-referencing the names and Social Security numbers of guests and job applicants against those on law enforcement wanted lists. "We also now have a hotel security directors association in Las Vegas," MGM Mirage spokesman Alan Feldman revealed. "They used to focus on passing information on pickpocket rings, things of that nature. But since 9/11, their mandate has become so much more serious." The USA PATRIOT Act rushed on a whirlwind through Congress now forces businesses to snoop on their customers. Retail businesses, the telecommunications industry, and financial institutions are required to violate customer privacy. Section 215 of the act removes probable cause and allows federal law enforcement to subpoena any "tangible thing" — including customer records, library check-out lists, medical records, and bank account information. All of it now may be shared with the CIA and other intelligence agencies. Even before 9/11 and the passage of PATRIOT, the government was determined to use terrorism as a crowbar to pry into the private lives of citizens. For instance, in June of 2000 the bipartisan National Commission on Terrorism recommended the FBI and CIA be allowed to "bend the rules to gather information on terrorist groups," CBS reported at the time. Even before this, in 1996, the Clinton administration proposed and Congress passed so-called anti-terrorism legislation that seriously endangered constitutional and statutory due process protections. PATRIOT has now opened the floodgates and allows the government to further erode constitutional protections. Earlier this month, the FBI implemented guidelines allowing the agency to "conduct many more searches and wiretaps that are subject to oversight by a secret intelligence court rather than regular criminal courts," an official told the Washington Post. In other words, the FBI no longer need worry about your civil liberties, specifically privacy and due-process. Civil libertarians worry the new guidelines will be used in cases not related to terrorism, such as civil criminal cases. "By eliminating any distinction between criminal and intelligence classifications, it reduces the respect for the ordinary constitutional protections that people have," Joshua L. Dratel, a New York lawyer who has filed legal briefs opposing government anti-terrorism policies, told The Washington Post. "It will result in a funneling of all cases into an intelligence mode. It’s an end run around the Fourth Amendment." But it’s not simply the Fourth Amendment under assault by the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Bushites — the First Amendment is under attack as well. In November it was revealed that the FBI has meticulously collected extensive information on the tactics, training, and organization of antiwar demonstrators. In October the agency sent a memorandum to local law enforcement agencies sharing this information prior to demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco. "The FBI is dangerously targeting Americans who are engaged in nothing more than lawful protest and dissent," Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, told the New York Times. "The line between terrorism and legitimate civil disobedience is blurred, and I have a serious concern about whether we’re going back to the days of Hoover" and COINTELPRO. "If COINTELPRO had been a short-lived aberration, the thorny problems of motivation, techniques, and control presented might be safely relegated to history," reported the Church Committee in 1975. "However, COINTELPRO existed for years on an ‘ad hoc’ basis before the formal programs were instituted, and more significantly, COINTELPRO-type activities may continue today under the rubric of ‘investigation.’" Continue on an "ad hoc" basis they surely did — as intrusive FBI activities directed against the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, Earth First! and Judi Bari, the General Union of Palestinian Students, the antiwar activist Brian Wilson and others after Hoover presumably shuttered COINTELPRO in the early 70s demonstrate. For as former FBI director Clarence M. Kelley testified before the Church Committee, when the government believes it is "faced with sufficient threat, covert disruption is justified" — and the Constitution be damned. Bush’s fraudulent terror alerts endeavor to convince America that "sufficient threat" exists to such a perilous degree from a largely mythical al-Qaeda that not only is "covert disruption" necessary — as the FBI memorandum sent to local law enforcement alludes — but a wholesale decimation of the Bill of Rights is also in order. PATROIT II — with its specification that troublemakers shall be deported — wasn’t craft on a whim by legal clerks with nothing better to do at the Justice Department. It will be enacted and used in due time. Sooner or later there will need be a real "terrorist event" in America, lest Bush earn the same reputation as Aesop’s wily sheep herder who cried wolf. No telling when exactly, but chances are it will go down late next summer, about the time usually obeisant Democrats get desperate about the idea of taking back the White House, not they actually stand a snowball’s chance in hell of doing so. Gen. Tommy Franks was not talking through his helmet — these guys actually believe democracy is a "grand experiment" that has exceed its shelf life. So stay tuned for a "casualty-producing event… that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event." Martial law is rarely kind to dissenters. Kurt Nimmo is a photographer, multimedia artist and writer living in New Mexico. To see his photo work and read more of his essays, visit his excellent "Another Day in the Empire" weblog: http://www.drmenlo.com/nimmo/

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bomb Las Vegas, America’s gambling Mecca and glittery playground built on desert sands by mobsters such as Bugsy Siegel, Meyer Lanksy, and Frank Costello? Only al-Qaeda, we are assured, would contemplate such a depraved act — and it stands to reason because those varmint Muslims hate our way of life. They are envious of our freedom to play the nickel slots and idle away carefree hours perched over blackjack tables — or get no fuss, no muss marriages at Circus Circus. As it turns out, the ubiquitous al-Qaeda harbored no such plans to bomb Las Vegas — or, for that matter, any other target in America over the most cherished and commercialized of holidays. Apparently, the whole thing was idle speculation on the part of the Washington Post.

I would not put anything past the depraved terrorists.

Response:

Leave a Comment