They also showed the clip of the local DC talking head Doug McKelway, who threatened Mike and said "I'd like to take you outside and punch you across the face."
Interestingly, Joy Behar, as you might imagine, is four-square for outing the headcase hypocrite homobigots, but Whoopi is much more conflicted about outing. And the defenses from the usual suspects of these anti-gay pols keeping their closets padlocked were standard, predictable fare.
As Mike noted, this is about hypocrisy -- these people, who are closet, or even worse, socially out and professionally closeted, have no business making laws that affect all of us who are out of the closet. That cannot stand. If you are gay and vote anti-gay, own it and publicly explain the logic behind your anti-gay vote in that context as a FOD.
If Oregonian Gary Randall & his bumbling Washington operative Larry Stickney have finally formed an official Referendum 71 Ballot Committee called Protect Marriage Washington, why is Oregon Gary still diverting funds to his Faith & Freedom PAC?As of May 22, 2009, Gary Randall was still directing donations into his Faith & Freedom PAC. Why, Gary? On his May 22, 2009 radio broadcast and in his email of May 23rd, Larry Stickney talked a lot about the referendum, then directed people not to the Protect Marriage Washington website, but to his Washington Values Coalition website to donate money. Why, Larry?
The fundraising widget on the Protect Marriage Washington website is finally functional, so there is no excuse to continue diverting money to your personal cash cows other organizations. And why haven't the two of you publicly launched your Protect Marriage Washington website yet? You have no intention of following through with the referendum, do you?
My prediction for the future, below the fold.
Here is my prediction: Gary and Larry will continue to funnel contributions to their separate organizations until the day arrives when they can start collecting signatures. At that point they will finally admit that it's impossible to get enough signatures in the limited time left, and then they'll throw in the towel crying that the "Seattle-based homosexual lobby and their left wing media allies & enablers" played so dirty (we used the letter of the law, lol) that they were effectively forced from the public debate and silenced. Silenced! they'll cry, silenced! It'll be a win-win for them: they get to milk the cash cow but good, then bow out in what they see as a face-saving way as Christian martyrs.
But just in case I'm wrong, click this graphic if you haven't already (is there anyone left in Washington who hasn't?)
Cross-posted at Washblog.
From the Kennebec Journal, Susan Cover's column today included this bit regarding intentional voter fraud:
The online edition of the Kennebec Journal draws quite a few comments every time we run a story about gay marriage. Sometimes there's good debate. Sometimes there's not.In a recent serieseries of postings, some commenters -- nearly all of whom are anonymous -- said they were planning to sign fake names on the people's veto petition that seeks to overturn the new gay-marriage law.
Those who support gay marriage (and therefore oppose the veto) seemed to think this would fool the gatherers into believing they had enough signatures. Those who want to overturn the law intimated that they wanted to help get the required 55,087 signatures faster by signing other people's names.
Here's the problem. It's a misdemeanor crime to put a fake signature on a petition. And, even if you sign your spouse's name -- with his or her permission -- it's likely to get thrown out by city clerks who check the petitions or the Secretary of State's Office.
Melissa Packard, director of elections for the Secretary of State, said it's just not legal to knowingly sign an initiative "with a name other than your own."
She said that, in general, fraudulent signatures are not a widespread problem. But, she added, not too long ago, a paid petition circulator was prosecuted for making up signatures.
What's the punishment? Up to six months in jail, a $1,000 fine and one year of probation.
So, no matter where you come down on the issue, it's probably not worth it to scribble someone else's name.
That people would be stupid enough to do this, as well as announce it publically, does not surprise me one whit. My own aunt sent me an online petition to sign a few years ago and under her name I saw that of one of her younger brothers, my uncle.
Thing is, he was hospitalized and in a coma at the time- his sister decided to put his name on the petition for him. He never had internet access ever in his life and while he survived and came out of his coma after a few weeks, he now resides in a long-term care facility in Boston with permanent brain damage.
Goodness knows how many more petitions Uncle John has signed in the past 2 years... and be assured, I plan to look for his name and hers on the list submitted to the state.
More Maine news gleanings below the fold.
From the Lewiston Sun Journal, the following letter to the editors:
In regard to gay marriages, cheers to our state representatives for doing the right thing in allowing gays to have the same rights as everyone else. I thought that in America we were supposed to have separation of church and state, and yet the Catholic church wants to undo what our state officials have voted for in a majority.I was taught in Catholic schools to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. I find it hard to believe that the church would do this w hen they harbored pedophiles for years and tried to keep it a secret and when it was discovered, they used church members money to pay for the damage done to our children.
I believe that Bishop Richard Malone should not be throwing stones while living in a glass house.
There is ALOT of anger towards the Bishop up here.
From the Bangor Daily News:
Opponents of gay marriage are missing some obvious points.
The current marriage law in Maine doesn't require any religious official to perform any marriage they or their religion objects to. The law doesn't force any individual in Maine to marry someone they don't wish to. The law simply says that the state doesn't care whom you wish to marry as long as they are outside of the fourth degree of consanguinity.
Simply put, ast, as long as the person you wish to marry is not your sibling or related to you as a first cousin, you may marry them. Furthermore, the law allows that if an individual has an objection to a marriage they have been asked to perform, they can refuse with no legal consequence; this includes judges, priests and public notaries.No one in this state is being forced to do anything against their will in regards to this law, except accepting all individuals and couples in this state as being equal. Perhaps if some people cannot accept that everyone can be equal regardless of sexual orientation, sex, or age, they should perhaps close their heart and minds to the concept that love can exist anywhere.
As the Apostle Paul said: "Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil; cling to what is good." (Romans 12:9)
If the opponents to gay marriage cannot accept that two individuals can love regardless of gender, how can they say that they're defending anything having to do with love in God's name, including their own marriages?
Gonna be a long summer of waiting...
No comments:
Post a Comment