Currently
41°
Clear

Advertisement





Opinion

CLASSIFIEDS


Advertisement


Free Ad

Place an ad
in print and online, 24/7 for free, select the Clean Sweep option. Unable to submit Real Estate, Services, and Business Investements at this time.

Get a Subscription


Map the Valley


Subscriber/
Reader Services

Subscribe Now
Contact Customer Service



Another View: 'No Gays for a Day' day

You wouldn't think gay people would need tips on staging a splashy event from Mexican immigrants. Yet since they lost the right to marry in California, gays appear to have no game plan, marching around West Hollywood and Silver Lake, near downtown Los Angeles, with their old "No on 8" signs, which makes about as much sense as holding a John McCain rally next month at John McCain's house.

That's why I'm declaring Dec. 10 "No Gays for a Day" day. Patterned after the 2006 Great American Boycott organized by Hispanic immigrants, on that Wednesday, gays should stay home from work, school and do no shopping, to prove how crucial they are to American society. "No Gays for a Day" will demonstrate what it would be like if -- as so much of the non-coastal U.S. seems to desire -- gays just disappeared. You may not even know who all your daily gays are, so there's no predicting the effect. It probably won't shut down the restaurant industry like the immigrants did, but know this for certain: Dec. 10 will be a day that fashion does not move forward.

To gauge this strategy's effectiveness, I called Sonja Eddings Brown, the spokesperson for the Protect Marriage coalition that put Proposition 8 -- which defined marriage as exclusively heterosexual -- on the ballot. Brown, to my surprise, sounded defeated. I reminded her that Proposition 8 passed, so maybe she should pep up a bit. "Did we win?" she asked. "It doesn't feel like it." When I ran "No Gays for a Day" by her, Brown said, "I have so many dear friends who are such invaluable parts of this city and California who are gay." It was the boldest use of "some of my best friends are ..." I had ever heard.

My main concern about enacting my plan is that I'm not gay. And my previous attempt as an outsider to rally folks to a cause was a miserable failure: Right before I applied to college, I suggested Asian students protest being stereotyped as overachievers by skipping the SAT.

Also, I'm really lazy. So I called Amy Balliett for help. Balliett is a lesbian in Seattle who, just last Friday, created JoinTheImpact.com, which has organized an expected 250,000 people nationwide to march Saturday in protest of Proposition 8. Balliett immediately embraced "No Gays for a Day" as JoinTheImpact's second event. We worked out some kinks, like "pretending you are sick" for people who aren't out of the closet at work. For economic effect, we picked one of the big shopping days before Christmas. We also decided that because this is a general strike, not a directed boycott, even gay-owned, gay-patronized businesses should shut down. "I hate to say this, but we should even say, 'Don't even go out to the bars,'" she said. "I just don't know if the community can stick to that."

To get media attention, Balliett -- a search-engine marketer -- is going to use the social networking sites she used for Saturday's march. Although that sounded promising, I decided to hunt for a "No Gays for a Day" celebrity spokesperson. I chose Kathy Griffin because she's so well-connected to the gay community and because it's hard to get Ellen DeGeneres on the phone at 10 p.m. when you're drinking and coming up with ideas like "No Gays for a Day."

Griffin -- who is a spokesperson for the Foundation for AIDS Research, AIDS Project Los Angeles, Aid for AIDS and, I'm guessing, AIDS, AIDS, AIDS -- was thrilled to get the official celebrity spokesperson job. And she thought our influence would be significant. "Forget Pinkberry. It's over for them. They could go under in one day," she said. "If you do two days without gays, Bravo would go under too." People, we figure, will have no assistance at libraries or gym class and will madly butcher their hair. Subaru dealerships shouldn't bother opening. Entertainment journalism will take such a hit, TMZ will have to report hockey scores.

Griffin was getting more excited about our plan until I mentioned this might slow up the remodel of her house. "My remodel? What about the audience for my shows? I'd never do this if I had a show that day in Palm Desert," she said. Then -- and you'll have to trust me that this actually happened -- Griffin got quiet for a few seconds. "If my assistants don't go to work," she said, "who's going to go to the bathroom for me? I'm screwed on a day without gays. I've made a huge error in judgment. Me, Cher and Bette Midler are going to be the three most screwed Americans. We all might actually die that day. And what if Ryan Seacrest doesn't go to work? The state will collapse. This will wake up California."

But Griffin decided "No Gays for a Day" is a cause worthy of her suffering. Now the rest of the world will find out what Griffin has known all along: We need our gays. If it turns out I'm wrong, and we don't miss them, then as a married man, I can tell you this: The best way to keep them at home is to let them get married.

E-mail Stein at jstein@latimescolumnists.com.

(Nov. 15, 2008)

POST A COMMENT

 

Hanfordsentinel.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed, particularly if they are posted after normal office hours.

We reserve the right to remove comments in total that violate our code of conduct. If you want to report a violation, please e-mail editor@HanfordSentinel.com

For more information please read our Terms of use, and Rules of the Road.

 


Please log in to post comments
*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
If you don't have an account you can create one for free by clicking the link below.
CREATE ACCOUNT
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the views of the Hanford Sentinel

Alihandero wrote on Nov 15, 2008 3:39 AM:

" Ryan Seacrest is GAY?

Who knew? "

Cammy wrote on Nov 15, 2008 7:37 AM:

" I was getting alittle upset until i read the whole article. I thought it was going to be one of those gay bashing articles that we keep seeing these days. I do have to say that i am quite impressed with having a 'No Gays for a Day' day. I think it would be a good idea to show California just how many of us are out there. Also, it will show everyone that er are doctors, lawyers, judges, firefighters, police officers,co's,retailers, and so many more that the list goes forever. People need to wake up and realize that we are not living in the 19th century anymore. I do encourage peace in everything we do to show the state we want our equal rights. It makes me sad to see people being hateful on both sides, We need to keep the peace and remember that there is a right way to go about things and we need to stick to the right way. Please remember to all my gay and lesbian people, we don't want to leave a bad impression so becareful cuz they will pick at every little thing we do. "

Devil's Advocate wrote on Nov 15, 2008 4:54 PM:

" Now, if I were an employer that might be harmed by this event, I might be tempted to require that they bring in doctors notes. Maybe I'd even review their union contract to see if there is anything prohibiting unauthorized work stoppages, And if they couldn't do the first, and were prohibited by their agreement from doing the second, I'd fire their butts and hire the someone from the record number of unemployed. Same for any hetero trying to take advantage of the situation, for y'know, "solidarity". It wouldn't be discrimination; it would be holding them to their contract. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 16, 2008 9:54 AM:

" ToDevil's Advocate wrote on Nov 15, 2008 6:54 PM:

I'm at a dilema here, how do we know the difference between a poser and a really gay person? How can we tell between someone who just wants another unauthorized hoiday and someone who is sincerely protesting? How do we know the difference between a hair dresser who schedules all his/her appointments at home rather than at work? Should there be additional penalties for those who stayed home and stole work from their bosses at the same time and what would they be? Should we include BTQ's as well in this boycott? Do you think we could get Jerry Brown to convince the govenator (straight hater) to opt to make it a legal holiday? I think an immediate recall petition for the govenator is in order for all the professionals on the gay hit list they are protesting to have removed from their positions. Let's start at the top and work our way down the list, next after Arnold comes Jerry Brown, until finally Pee Wee Herman is outed. Works for me! "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 16, 2008 9:55 AM:

" To: Alihandero who is Ryan Seacrest? Isn't he the one who sucks up to Simon on let's make a deal? "

Melissa wrote on Nov 17, 2008 2:08 AM:

" hmmm that is a brilliant idea! Maybe it will make some people open their eyes to the fact that we are just as big a part of this states society as anyone else, If we stop buying for one day, I wonder what is going to happen. Our community is a rather large one in this state and even those who are still in closet can take part in this protest.
This is the type of protest that really would bring results if everyone participates. In a state where there are people who think our money is good enough for the economy, and our paychecks are good enough to be taxed but we are not good enough to get married a protest like this is what I believe is called for. I for one will not be buying anything that day, as well as encouraging all my friends and family to do the same. I will be spreading the word about this protest and hopefully it will make the statement it is meant to. "

jeff wrote on Nov 17, 2008 9:05 AM:

" Fred,

“I'm at a dilema [sic] here, how do we know the difference between a poser and a really gay person? How can we tell between someone who just wants another unauthorized hoiday [sic] and someone who is sincerely protesting?”

It’s almost as if you are saying there really isn’t much of a difference. That gay people are just like straight people and so much so that you can’t even tell the difference between them. Doesn’t this kind of invalidate your entire argument? "

jacks_mom wrote on Nov 17, 2008 11:54 AM:

" OK, I just want to know what all the people out there that said "NO" to prop 8 would do if it had not passed and the others "supporting" prop 8 were doing what you are planning? most likely you would tell us to just except it and get on with life! this is the second time California has voted regarding same sex people getting married. and this is the second time California ha said "NO" so it is obvious there are more people that do NOT want it than those who supports it :-) "

gees wrote on Nov 17, 2008 2:42 PM:

" ...I don't show up for work, it's just more work...Count me out on that nonsence, besides It would be a sick day or Vacation day provided by my hard earned hours...NO WAY... I take the day off i'm heading to the coast! "

Cammy wrote on Nov 17, 2008 3:07 PM:

" To: jacks_mom wrote on Nov 17, 2008 1:54 PM:
" OK, I just want to know what all the people out there that said "NO" to prop 8 would do if it had not passed and the others "supporting" prop 8 were doing what you are planning? most likely you would tell us to just except it and get on with life! this is the second time California has voted regarding same sex people getting married.

Don't assume what YOU think we would do if prop 8 had passed. I can't speak for all of my population but i know my friends and everyone that i associate with would never throw in the face of the face of otheres UNLESS WE GET HARASSED. It's called defending ourselves, by which we have been doing for foever in time. We would simply just marry our devoted partners and be happy and continue to live our lives peacefully.The only way if there would be contraversy is those who were against us caused us harm.Need i remind you that it WAS APPROVED once before and it can be APPROVED AGAIN. You denied us the right to be a1st class citizen such as yourself. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 17, 2008 5:46 PM:

" To: Melissa wrote on Nov 17, 2008 4:08 AM:

Take a step further don't buy food of any kind for six months and really show us what you are made of, no fast food no groceries don't intake nothing for a six month period. Boy that will show all us Yes on 8 people.

She probably thinks I am serious. LOL "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 17, 2008 5:47 PM:

" To: Melissa wrote on Nov 17, 2008 4:08 AM:

Travel to Iraq and only drink water when the camels do, that will show us a thing or two. "

Melissa wrote on Nov 17, 2008 6:32 PM:

" jacks_mom guess what I have no doubt that if it had failed there would be all this and more really. The hate crimes have already gone up 6% against us, had it failed I am sure it would have been even worse. Guess what when it comes to equality, justice will prevail as it always have, you can not treat one group of people differently cause you do not like them. Prop 8 will be overturned because the Supreme Court already ruled for us once, I am sure they will not back down from their original decision just because a bunch of religious fanatics can not take defeat. Remember this Prop only exsisted because a certain group of people could not take defeat. Funny how those same people are saying the same thing to us. "

Tony wrote on Nov 17, 2008 7:50 PM:

" My goodness. We live in 'The Land of Fruits and Nuts' so what are we to expect?
I believe in tolerance but I have difficulties when the voters lose their power.
The No Gay for a Day idea is not the right answer
I think we should instead look at it as a 'Accept the Election Results Day'
Less hate with half the calories.
Ryan Seacrest?
How about Lindsay Lohan? Whay can't we have more lesbians look like her?
Me-ow. "

Tony wrote on Nov 17, 2008 7:52 PM:

" To Melissa......
I haven't heard u say that u were a proud lesbian lately.........
Please don't take that away from us. "

nevadaguy wrote on Nov 18, 2008 1:04 AM:

" Gee, now that California has taken away a civil right from gays what's next? banning gay bars? banning gay magazines? banning gays from working? banning gays from teacing kids? banning gays from owning property? If you follow the logic from Christian REICH wing, gays are evil horrible people that should be stoned to death, so what's next California? "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 18, 2008 11:32 AM:

" MELISSA WROTE:

Guess what when it comes to equality, justice will prevail as it always have, you can not treat one group of people differently cause you do not like them.

THEN WHY ARE YOU DOING IT TO THE MORMONS? "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 18, 2008 11:36 AM:

" To: Cammy,

Need i remind you that it WAS APPROVED once before and it can be APPROVED AGAIN. You denied us the right to be a1st class citizen such as yourself. "

NOT BY THOSE SAME FOUR JUSTICES IT CAN'T, THAT'S WHY IT IS AN AMENDMENT! "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 18, 2008 11:38 AM:

" To: Melissa wrote on Nov 17, 2008 4:08 AM:

" hmmm that is a brilliant idea! Maybe it will make some people open their eyes to the fact that we are just as big a part of this states society as anyone else,

Now look, you can't have it both ways, are you a minority or not? "

chuck21 wrote on Nov 18, 2008 3:32 PM:

" Well my fellow heterosexual folks, I guess we are the ones who have everything wrong. I guess rights don't belong to us they belong to people with messed up thinking. I guess the rights belong to illegal immigrants, child molesters , murderers, felons, homosexuals and anyone else with messed up agenda's. Maybe all the folks registered with megans law should protest their rights by not buying anything or not going to work for a day or what have you. What about our brave men and women in serving time in prison maybe they should riot because life is just unfair to the way they think. It seems that issues that used to be common sense issues aren't that way anymore. I know one thing, my rights to free speech is being violated because I can't use certain words on this blog, as a matter of fact im going to the streets right now and gather signatures and protest this issue. "

Melissa wrote on Nov 18, 2008 6:53 PM:

" Ohhh Watchdog do I need to remind you of the definition of minority again? We are a big part of society, but by definition we are a minority, stop looking for some way to contridict me it will not work. We are doctors, lawyers, teachers, firefighters and police officers, we are military, we are store clerks, we are medical assistants, we are ... well the list can go on and on.,..

Tony I am a proud Lesbian, does it not show in the way I defend my community? Guess you should look a little harder, I do not have to wave my rainbow flag all the time to show my pride in being who I am. "

Tony wrote on Nov 18, 2008 8:09 PM:

" To Nevadaguy....
Propositions go on the ballot. They get voted on. Results from elections either cause the proposition to 'pass' or 'not pass'.
It's simple. Wickipedia it.
Also Wickipedia 'teacing'.....what a horrible thing... "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 18, 2008 10:43 PM:

" To: Tony wrote on Nov 18, 2008 10:09 PM

While they take the day off and don't buy anything or go anywhere is time for us to go to the coast, Disneyland, Universal Studios, Magic Mountain, six flags, Lego Land and all that good stuff. Heck yeah! Give 'em a day where we don't have to worry about them being the in crowd at any local events. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 18, 2008 10:44 PM:

" To: Alihandero wrote on Nov 15, 2008 5:39 AM:

" Ryan Seacrest is GAY?

Who knew? "
Simon, Paula, Randy just about everybody but me and you looks like. Why doesn't he do a Rainbow Radio Show? "

Dandre wrote on Nov 19, 2008 6:34 AM:

" Hey Chuck21...not all heteros got it wrong, just the biggotted ones. "

RobertD wrote on Nov 19, 2008 11:28 AM:

" Nevadaguy wrote: "now that California has taken away a civil right from gays what's next? banning gay bars? banning gay magazines? banning gays from working? banning gays from teacing kids? banning gays from owning property?" The answer is NO, California would not do any of those things because those things really are CIVIL RIGHTS! Marriage is not a civil right as guaranteed by the US or California Consitutions. It is a social construct and can be defined however the majority chooses to define it. "

jeff wrote on Nov 19, 2008 3:13 PM:

" RobertD,
Are you asserting that gay bars, gay employment, gay magazines and gay land ownership are explicitly stated in the Constitution? Your whole argument is that nowhere in the Constitution does it state that gay people have a right to marry. Well it doesn’t say that straight people do either so it seems to me that you have no legal right to get married using your own logic. On the other hand if you somehow find that the Constitution does uphold the right for gay people to own land, find employment, start magazines and open gay bars you would have to logically assume they have a Constitutional right to get married as well. Logic does not cease to work when it stops working your way. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 20, 2008 12:28 AM:

" dandy dre' and his one liners, him and Shecky Green what class acts. "

jacks_mom wrote on Nov 20, 2008 8:32 AM:

" ATTENTION: ALL: --Personal life
Seacrest reportedly earns $32 million a year, according to Forbes.[6]

Seacrest dated actress Shana Wall from 2001-06 [7] and Sophie Monk in 2008.

In March 2006, he was photographed kissing actress Teri Hatcher, who later told Access Hollywood that she was "not attached."[8] Seacrest also stated on the May 2, 2006 episode of The Ellen DeGeneres Show that he and Hatcher "went out a couple times, but that was it."[9]

In a 2003 interview, Seacrest answered gay rumors in an interview with the weekly entertainment magazine Steppin' Out, "I'm trying to think of the best way to describe the feeling I get when I hear that particular rumor. I am a certain way. I am relatively clean cut and I do like to shop for clothes. If I had to break it down stereotypically, that would be a gay male habit. Well for me it's not. It's a straight male habit."
SO NO HE IS NOT GAY! "

WitchOne wrote on Nov 20, 2008 8:41 AM:

" The reason Prop 8 passed is because the world is full of self-rightious, bible-thumping, hallelujah hypocrites who can't stand the thought of anyone who isn't just like the clones they go to church with. Now, I have no problem if they all want to be alike. Fine by me. I'm married to someone of the opposite sex but I don't feel it's my right to tell someone else that they can't marry the person they choose to, anymore than I feel it's my right to tell someone they can't attend a church of their choosing. I'm just asking that people stop saying what wonderful christians they are and then spewing hate....and doesn't it say somewhere in the bible....JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED?????? "

jacks_mom wrote on Nov 20, 2008 12:30 PM:

" WitchOne : I am tired of all you saying that "CHRISTIANS" are "PASSING JUDGMENT" because we are giving our thought on the homosexual life style, I have yet to see one paragraph from one Christain stating to any one that"THEY ARE GOING TO HELL" for any thing! THAT would be JUDGMENT...because we post our personal believes is not is not passing judgment. so what you are saying are the gays can state their feelings and what that is just freedom of speech BUT let a Christain post theirs and LORD AND BEHOLD we are a judging some one~ and for your information I have friends that are gay and they know my feelings on them getting married and I know their feelings regarding it. we just agree to disagree!!!! so go ahead and you keep Judging Christians as "self-rightious, bible-thumping, hallelujah hypocrites . you need mental help! "

RobertD wrote on Nov 20, 2008 1:09 PM:

" Jeff--Insightful comment but the 1st Amendment and various Civil Rights Acts (1865, 1964, etc.) do address the issues of freedom of press, property ownership, job descrimination, etc. Making the claim that the, in Nevadaguy's words, "Christian REICH wing" is going to target any of the rights he lists is pure fear mongering and intellectually dishonest. Once again, marriage is not a right. Ironically, Elton John may be the only homosexual to get it right. Today he said, "The word ‘marriage,’ I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships." "

SuziQ wrote on Nov 20, 2008 1:21 PM:

" I find it odd that Witchy1 can blame the religious people of passing Prop 8 when the facts show whites were equally divided, but 70% of blacks (who came out to vote for Obama) voted Yes and Obama agreed with the Yes vote. "

Melissa wrote on Nov 20, 2008 9:38 PM:

" jacks_mom if you were only stating your beliefs it would be things like "I believe your lifestyle is wrong" however even you in your writings have said things like "you are immoral", "your are deviants", "you are mentally ill" those are judgements, maybe before you blog if you do not want to get called out on your judgements, reword what you have to say, make it about your beliefs not telling us what we do wrong,

Judgment-Merriam Websters Dictionary

1 a: a formal utterance of an authoritative opinion b: an opinion so pronounced
6: a proposition stating something believed or asserted

these are two of the definitions, the others applied to law, look it up yourself. So if you are writing your opinion on the authority of God would that not be a judgment? You base your opinion on your religion, I base my opinions on facts and laws of this country. I have never stated anything that I did not research. Tell me what law says I am immoral, or deviant, or mentally ill or wrong. Find that law and we can talk. "

jeff wrote on Nov 21, 2008 9:58 AM:

" RobertD,

What are you talking about? The gay population in this country is said to be around 10%. If we already view “Marriage” as a constitutionally protected right – Which you know you do for yourself – how is granting this to the remaining 10% a “special” right? If you’re going to argue that “Marriage” is not a constitutionally protected right how is it straight people are allowed to get married every day? All civil rights laws in this country assume that all people are “Equal” therefore gay people have the “Right” to get married. What you are doing is most certainly subtracting rights from people. Allowing gays to marry is not granting anything to anyone, it’s simply how the laws are. "

jeff wrote on Nov 21, 2008 9:58 AM:

" "We cannot accept the view that Amendment 2's prohibition on specific legal protections does no more than deprive homosexuals of special rights. To the contrary, the amendment imposes a special disability on those persons alone. Homosexuals are forbidden the safeguards that others enjoy or may seek without constraint"

-Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court in the decision overturning Colorado's Amendment 2 referendum "

jeff wrote on Nov 21, 2008 9:58 AM:

" SuziQ,
What does 70% of blacks voting Yes on Prop. 8 due to make the argument that religious people voted for it invalid? Are you saying black people can’t be religious? Who cares if they voted for Obama, what does that have to do with it? "

Devil's Advocate wrote on Nov 21, 2008 10:57 AM:

" Learned something new the other day: Did you know that Prop 8 is actually LESS disciminatory than statutes governing registered domestic partners?
Apparently, in registerered domestic partnerships, opposite sex couples can only participate if one of them is 62+ years old - there is no age requirement for same-sex couples. This could be called discriminatory based on both age AND orientation.
It follows then that prior to the passage of Prop 8, homosexuals actually had more rights that heterosexuals!
Does this mean that certain vocal groups are actually hypocritical, as they were responsible for their own double standard?
To head off the logical response, I'd like to point out that the age provision could have been left out if all the "oppressed" were interested in was expanding their OWN rights, and not limiting someone else's. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 21, 2008 12:59 PM:

" To: WitchOne wrote on Nov 20, 2008 10:41 AM:

The real reason it passed and will continue to pass is because there are more of us than there is of you. Simple mathematics. "

Melissa wrote on Nov 21, 2008 2:31 PM:

" Devil's Advocate I have said this before and I will say it again, if you want your right to a partnership instead of being able to get married and all the SECOND class right that go with it by all means I will support you in that. I will get a rally together right now. The fact is, however, that you do not, you want the right to marry. Why is it you think youi are so entitled? Maybe we should fight for all to have domestic partnership, that would be equality too huh? As for it being discriminatory, I do not see how, domestic partnership is still open up to homosexuals and heterosexuals alike, but marriage is for a man and a woman only. Domestic Partnership is not even close to having all the same rights , respect and dignity that a marriage has, so if you want to complain you can not be a second class citizen let me stand by you and rally everyone up, I will help you fight for your right to be second class, I am willing to fight for anyone in the name of equality. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 21, 2008 4:09 PM:

" To: Melissa wrote on Nov 21, 2008 4:31 PM:

O.K., here is what we will do we will tie you and Devil's Advocate up and maybe Carl Spackler as well by the wrist and give you each a knife like the Indians use to do and the three of you can have a fight to the death and the winner wins. How is that for fair and equitable? "

jacks_mom wrote on Nov 21, 2008 4:09 PM:

" MELISSA, I have never used the words" "you are immoral", "your are deviants", SHOW ME where I have used those words! and I stated he was mentally ill because by his words every one on here gay or straigt can see he acts that way! we have been called ~ morons, self-rightious, bible-thumping, hallelujah hypocrites and oh so much more, aside from our not agreeing with your life style what names have you been called? if they are there POINT them out I have not seen one that seemed out of line.. there are a few names rude people call homosexuals but i have yet to see any one be called one of them on this blog! "

jeff wrote on Nov 21, 2008 4:52 PM:

" D. A.,

No it doesn’t mean that vocal groups are hypocritical. They are not the ones who set the age requirement and they are not the ones who can change it. I highly doubt any gay people could care less if straight people wanted to change the age requirements on domestic partnerships. That is the difference between you and them, they don’t want to tell you how to live your life.

http://www.sos.ca.gov/dpregistry/dp_faqs.htm#question2 "

Melissa wrote on Nov 21, 2008 7:25 PM:

" jacks_mom here are a few derogatory comments, you can find more on the other blogs that have anything to do with gays, or Prop 8. Also Look up comments by such bloggers and B. or NotHomeGrown or even in some cases Watchdog Fred, although Watchdog tends to phrase his comments as opinions not judgements.

We live in 'The Land of Fruits and Nuts' so what are we to expect?~Tony

you need mental help! "~jacks_mom

Now as I have said, there have been alot of blogging on this subject and we have all spent alot of time on here. There are at least four blogs on here right now, over the course of election there have been several, all of which people who claim themselves to be Christians saying things like we are mentally ill, sexual deviants, immoral, you yourself said that our love is unnatural. I have been clumped with people who are violent just because we are all homosexual. My community as been called cowards on one blog simply based on the act of one individual. Talk about tired of things. You called Witchone mentally ill, do you know this person? Judgment? "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 2:58 AM:

" To: Melissa wrote on Nov 21, 2008 9:25 PM:

even in some cases Watchdog Fred, although Watchdog tends to phrase his comments as opinions not judgements.

Thanks, for pointing that out and recognizing the difference, I am here to judge no one. Although our beliefs may differ and I am not strictly talking religion, we can still show respect and not attack one another. I seldom attack anyone, who hasn't made the first swipe of the sword. Intelligent, articulate discussion with facts, always trumps a tirade of ranting, raving and name calling, in my opinion.

With the exception of a few on here, who have previously demonstrated they are incapable of the above and immediately want to call names and make smeared remarks toward an individual for stating their opinions once they have ran out of substance to discuss a subject calmly and with solutions. "

SuziQ wrote on Nov 22, 2008 9:00 AM:

" Jeff, I know you're not very smart, the polls had different categories and they compared religious groups and blacks. Because of the black turn out to vote for Obama, they voted by 70% Yes on 8 and therefore passed it. It's just common sense. It reminds me of the fact that oil prices dropped like a lead balloon when Democrats decided to allow off shore drilling. With the national average down under $2.00 and expected to be $1.50 by Chrismas. "

Devil's Advocate wrote on Nov 22, 2008 4:53 PM:

" Watchdog - I have no desire to even get into a battle of words with anyone over this subject, let alone a knife fight!
Whenever possible, I'll do my best to reinforce the idea that these issues should be dealth with according to the laws of our Country and State. This whole issue should have been addressed in the legislature first and foremost as set forth by the Constitution. But Newsom decided he didn't have to follow the charter fo the City of San Francisco (requiring adherence to State law). The backlash resulted in the previous Prop ? defining marriage. Its being overturned by a simultaneously overreaching & underreaching State Supreme Court (marriage limited by gender is only one protected class) resulted in a backlash via a Constitutional amendment. It would have been easy if the gay lobby had simply pushed for a different definition through the legislature, instead of unlawfully using Newsom/State Supreme Court to push their agenda instead.
Whatever. Regardless, I'll continue to vote my conscience. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 6:17 PM:

" To: SuziQ wrote on Nov 22, 2008 11:00 AM:

It reminds me of the fact that oil prices dropped like a lead balloon when Democrats decided to allow off shore drilling.

Not now Mr. President Elect Obama states one of his first acts as President will be to wrtie an Executive Order banning offshore drilling again.

Thank You Mr. Shell Answer Man, remember to check your air pressure and keep your vehicles tuned and in proper running condiiton. Do we all remember those tid bits of Intellect in how to solve the shortage of cruide oil? Wow he is only two decades behind and several commercials out. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 9:39 PM:

" To: Devil's Advocate wrote on Nov 22, 2008 6:53 PM:

Well I sense your frustration and after watching a special program aired on Dr. Phil last night you could see the problem. The exact one's behind this in the forefront are none other than Gavin Newsome and Gloria All Red. No wonder this is tied up in litigation and politics the front runners in both have their hands in it.

When a woman on the Yes on 8 side said; that regardless of the differences between us we must first stop the attacks on the LDS church and on each other. All Red didn't want to hear that and continuously tried to speak over her, being very rude and so did Gavin.

That;s the problem when they have rallies and discussions to try and resolve the issues the No on 8 side won't listen to any form of rhyme or reason. It is all or nothing with them.

The Civil Rights groups won't even add any validity or associate theirselves with the LGBTQ's complaints and denounce the comparisons vehemently as not being civil rights issues. But rather choice issues. "

Melissa wrote on Nov 24, 2008 1:36 AM:

" Watchdog Fred
Its almost like we were watching two different shows! That woman was loud, did not want to address questions directly, kept pointing the finger at the No on 8 campaign and would not take responsiblity for any of the actions on the Yes side. Did you see the way they tripped over themselves when they were confronted with the blackmail letter for funding from those who donated to the No on 8 campaign? That woman and that man on the end were ridiculous, the only one I had any respect for, even though I do not agree with him on many issues obviously, was the Rev. While he and I do not see eye to eye, he was respectful to all there, as was the mayor and Gloria Allred. What you do not like is that those two actually stand up for the rights of LGBTQ community. If you notice, the Yes side was so busy talking neither the mayor or Gloria could get an answer out without imput from them. "

Melissa wrote on Nov 24, 2008 1:39 AM:

" Watchdog Fred..cont

Also they skirtted around the issue of the lies they spread. They had not one solid piece of evidence that what they claimed could happen in California. All they kept saying was it happened in Mass, it COULD happen in California. Face it, Yes on 8 was full of lies, and those people on Dr Phil showed it, they were not prepared in anyway for any of the questions thrown at them, they only wanted to respond to what the No on 8 said. "

jeff wrote on Nov 24, 2008 9:21 AM:

" SuziQ,

1.Using your logic black people are not religious, do not believe in God and therefore religion had nothing to do with Prop. 8 being passed. If this is the case then please stop using God as a reason to ban gay marriage and also please tell the rest of your cohorts to stop this practice as well less you look like a liar and a hypocrite.

2.Congress had nothing to do with oil prices. If you believe this then you have no understanding of how the world and the global economy operate. Can you also please explain to me what oil prices have to do with gay marriage? "

NotHomeGrown wrote on Nov 24, 2008 12:47 PM:

" to Mellissa, you yourself are guilty of what you accusse me of, you put me in as a person that posts derogatory comments, show me one. If you are referring to a statement that to me homosexuality is a mental illness, than show me where that is derogatory, other then a statement of a belief. There are many mental illnesses, but does then mean that I am derogatory to all of them too? I make examples of possibilities of a Pandora's Box that Prop 8 could have opened, but I have never made any derogatory statement of you, yet many of your side has called me a bigot, a hypocrite, etc. I try to use facts to hold up my beliefs, yet I am ridiculed for believing in God. Show me some scientific evidence to support that homosexuality is not a mental illness, such a schizophrenia or a sociopath. continued "

NotHomeGrown wrote on Nov 24, 2008 12:55 PM:

" to Mellissa, continued. I am presuming that you believe murder is not right, I know that I do. Did you know that there has been some scientific evidence that shows that some sociopaths brains are wired a bit different, and therefor do not consider murder to be the crime that we do? So isn't it possible that some of the wiring on some homosexuals could be the cause of their deviant (I am using this word as meaning different than the norm and not calling the person the derogatory meaning of deviant) behaviour? Like some others have asked for, show the scientific evidence that supports the "gay" gene. I will also state here that there are some people who are physical a different gender than their chromosones represent (i.e. a female in a male body). But are you willing to test to confirm that you are one of those? Don't hate me for who I am, just as I don't hate you for you are. Anyone who uses derogatory terms on either side of this fence are wrong. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 24, 2008 4:43 PM:

" To: Melissa wrote on Nov 24, 2008 3:39 AM:

We did watch two different shows, Dr. Phil put his input and the No on 8 crowd geered and cheered so loudly you couldn't even here the response. What the Yes on 8 people tried to explain is the letter in question although not having been written correctly was a letter to those businesses asking the question do you support just the No side or do you support us as well and if you do give us $10k, if not then stand up and admit you support the no side and the businesses didn't respond either way. So are we protesting in their storefronts and demanding resignations over their corporate donations, no we are not.
But your side called for the resignation of many people who donated as little as $200 because they happened to work in businesses that served gays as well as straights. That's the biggest form of protectionism this country has seen since the Capone era. It is not right and not just and until it is stopped their should be no discussion on this subject it should be a mute point. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 24, 2008 4:50 PM:

" To: jeff wrote on Nov 24, 2008 11:21 AM:

Name calling, inuendo, presumption of the facts, distortion of facts, about the only thing you haven't accused the right of is failing to recycle. Yet you stand atop your moral issue of never doing any of these things. You pompous a@@, you don't have the right to even go there with Suzie Q.
She stated fact the black vote is what put this Proposition over the top. I don't see your brave honorable demonstrators marching on harlem or watts because of it. You know why, because they know if they try to take on the blacks like they are trying to torment the LDS Church, the response will be leaps and bounds a different outcome. So they prey like many cowards have done before on a religous minority. Come on Jeff even you have to be seeing what is happening? I guarantee you, you can put this issue before the voting public a thousand times and still get the same result, it will not pass. Do you recall me telling you about the senior vote. 75% in Kings County. "

jeff wrote on Nov 25, 2008 9:27 AM:

" Fred,

Wow way to show your maturity. Like I said before it is no surprise how two women knew they could do better than you. The LDS is not a victim like you try and say. They enacted and funded the Yes on 8 campaign. They are not benign in the passing of that law. You and SuziQ still haven’t answered my question. You state that black people came out in record numbers to vote for Obama (This is most likely true) and that they are the ones that passed Prop. 8 and that religion had nothing to do with it. Apart from that being completely false and obviously false - religion had everything to do with it - if you are saying that the responsibility lies on black people and not religion you are saying that black people are not religious. I imagine most of them would disagree with you. Black people are among the most religious people in this country. You bring up seniors, are seniors not religious? You only show your ignorance when you regurgitate percentages from Kings County. California is a huge state Fred, there is more to it than Kings County. "

Pete wrote on Nov 26, 2008 10:54 AM:

" SuzieQ, you are absolutely correct! These particular blacks did not come out to vote as religious people, they came out to vote as black people voting for Obama. Big difference and one that Jeff just can't understand. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 26, 2008 9:42 PM:

" jeff wrote on Nov 25, 2008 11:27 AM:

" Fred,

"Wow way to show your maturity. Like I said before it is no surprise how two women knew they could do better than you".

So much for not attacking people and making disparaging remarks, talk about showing your maturity level.

"The LDS is not a victim like you try and say. They enacted and funded the Yes on 8 campaign."

Did the LGBTQ's not start their own rebuttal to this and lose in a fair & square election process? Do you see people protesting Ellen Degenerate, Brad is the Pitts, Rosie I got my last chance at a show Odonel for their contributions of 100's of thousands of dollars to the no on 8 campaign? Do you see any of them being fired for their participation in the campaign from their jobs? No you don't so don't tell me about what is fair and what is mature, because quite obviously you suffer from a mental block on those two possibilities.
If you were setting on a teter-totter, you'd fall off due to ignorance. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 26, 2008 9:49 PM:

" jeff wrote on Nov 25, 2008 11:27 AM:

Once again you totally ignore the question asked of you several blogs back, why don't the demonstrators for the LGBTQ community demonstrate against the black church's?

You agree the black vote put this issue over the top but fail to transfer the blame to them, is it because you fear them? Is it because you know they wouldn't stand for your nonsense in their communities. Pick a reason I listed them for you.

They have singled out the LDS because they know they are traditionally non violent and their numbers are lower than the LGBTQ communities numbers unlike others in this state.

The LBGTQ community is going to be remembered as the minority who picks on another minority to prove their point. Is that the headlines and vision you have for this non-violent community that never tries to take anothers rights away? Sorry Jeff but they have blown their image simply because of who and what they focus their anger on.

You better hope after this behavior there is never another vote in California. Because straight supporters you claimed are AWOL. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 26, 2008 9:55 PM:

" jeff wrote on Nov 25, 2008 11:27 AM:

"You only show your ignorance when you regurgitate percentages from Kings County. California is a huge state Fred, there is more to it than Kings County. "

As long as Kings County has a vote and they can generate a 75% Yes on 8 Vote they matter Mr. Jeff. That resounding number of ballots cast count in the overall picture and don't think they don't.

You told me once the senior vote didn't count either because they were a dying breed, well this is one more in the bank for the seniors all throughout the state Jeffy. We may not survive but our influence on our families will live on forever, upstart.

You remind me of the little boy who didn't pay attention in school and then upon the rest of the class graduating finding out he had failed and wondered why?

We seniors haven't failed Jeff we have done our part and continue to do our part as responsible citizens. Next time you see a senior thank them for the contributions they have made to preserve what you now enjoy. "

Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 27, 2008 2:29 PM:

" To: jeff wrote on Nov 25, 2008 11:27 AM:

" Fred,

Wow way to show your maturity. Like I said before it is no surprise how two women knew they could do better than you. The LDS is not a victim like you try and say.

We certainly see this issue differently, I don't recall any LDS demonstrators attending the same sex marriages in San Franciso. If they aren't the victims then leave them alone to celebrate their belief in God at their chosen place of worship.

This on Thanksgiving Day we are discussing the denial or religous freedoms to a minority of devout Mormons, how ironic. "




Advertisement


HOT TOPICS

> More Hot Topics


MORE LOCAL NEWS

Lemoore:

    Selma:

    Kingsburg:



    PHOTO GALLERIES

    "More Photos

    Sentinel Photos (134) Albums

    Hanford Luminaria
    Hanford Luminaria
    Friday, November, 20 2009
    (6) Photos
    Hanford High vs Dinuba Waterpolo Final
    Hanford High vs Dinuba Waterpolo Final
    Wednesday, November, 18 2009
    (13) Photos
    Fire on Hawk Street
    Fire on Hawk Street
    Wednesday, November, 18 2009
    (11) Photos

    Reader Submitted (7) Albums

    Vintage Hanford
    Vintage Hanford
    Monday, December, 15 2008
    (1) Photos
    Vacation Photos
    Vacation Photos
    Thursday, November, 20 2008
    (37) Photos
    Events
    Events
    Thursday, November, 20 2008
    (38) Photos

    More



    EMAIL UPDATES

    Sign up today to get all your local headlines delivered to your home or work e-mail address, so you don't miss the latest in breaking and local news.
    E-Mail:
    Daily News Updates
    Breaking News Alerts