-
Anyone Still Believe Me?
May 21, 2013 | 38 comments
-
What Those Who Boycott Israel Really Want
May 14, 2013 | 143 comments
-
Mitt on Marriage
May 8, 2013 | 38 comments
-
The One Constant
May 1, 2013 | 118 comments
-
Trudeaus and Terrorism
April 22, 2013 | 15 comments
A Further Perspective
Does the Left Really Care About Gay Marriage?
Only if it’s a white conservative Christian who opposes it. Otherwise…
It has been almost exactly four years to the day since Barack Obama attended Pastor Rick Warren’s Saddleback Forum. You may recall that during this forum, candidate Obama said, “I believe marriage is the union between a man and a woman.”
Remember the hue and cry that followed from outraged liberals and progressives?
Well, of course you don’t.
The reason you don’t remember is that there wasn’t any outrage from the Left concerning Obama’s position on gay marriage. If anything, the Left loved Obama even more. Ellen DeGeneres didn’t see fit to question Obama on gay marriage during an October 2008 appearance on her show via satellite. Instead, Ellen grilled him on such pressing matters of state such as Halloween, George Clooney, and dancing. Let’s just say that Ellen didn’t give John McCain the kid glove treatment even though his position on gay marriage was exactly that of Obama’s. And if not for Vice President Biden’s loose lips, Obama’s public position on gay marriage in 2012 would have been the same as it was in 2008 and, for that matter, the same as it was during much of 2012. I submit that if President Obama still maintained that marriage was between a man and a woman that he would not lose a single liberal or progressive vote. Did the Left ever give Dick Cheney props for supporting gay marriage before his distant cousin President Obama? When push comes to shove, the Left doesn’t really care about gay marriage all that much.
This, of course, isn’t to say the Left doesn’t care about gay marriage at all. The Left certainly cares about gay marriage when it’s a white, Christian conservative who says marriage is between a man and a woman. If said white, Christian conservative happens to own a successful chicken restaurant franchise, then the Left sees fit to deploy tar and feathers. This tarring and feathering has taken the form of liberal mayors telling Chick-fil-A not to come to their town, Chick-fil-As being defaced with graffiti, and Chick-fil-A employees being berated by customers with an insatiable appetite for liberal tolerance.
Yet in the midst of all this tarring and feathering of Chick-fil-A, a campaign in favor of traditional marriage was launched with little fanfare at the National Press Club last week. This campaign was launched by the Coalition of African American Pastors (CAAP). Its president, Reverend William Owens, stated, “The time has come for a broad-based assault against the power that be that wants to change our culture to one of men marrying men and women marrying women.”
If you think about it, Reverend Owens’s remarks aren’t all that different from those of Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy. Yet you don’t see liberal mayors telling black churches they aren’t welcome in their towns for opposing gay marriage. You don’t see black churches being defaced with graffiti nor do you see supporters of gay marriage accosting parishioners with phone cameras in tow for belonging to houses of worship that oppose gay marriage. I mean, how many same sex couples who kissed in front of a Chick-fil-A tried to pull the same stunt in front of a church in Compton after African-Americans voted overwhelmingly in favor of California’s Proposition 8 in 2008? Or what about kissing in front of a mosque? The Islamic Society of Boston built a mosque with money from Sheikh Yusuf Abdullah al-Qardawi and has been inspired by his teachings. Amongst the Sheikh’s teachings are that homosexuals should be burned or thrown from a high place. It could explain why same sex couples wouldn’t be inclined to public displays of affection in front of a mosque.
As committed as the Left is about gay marriage; it is far more committed to maintaining appearances and not wanting to be accused of racism. When it comes down to it, race trumps sexual orientation (and everything else). This explains why the Left gives a pass to African-American pastors who oppose same sex marriage. This is why the Left gave a pass to Barack Obama for opposing gay marriage in 2008 and would have done so again in 2012 if not for his “evolution.” The Left doesn’t care as much about gay marriage as it does about re-electing President Obama.
About the Author
Aaron Goldstein writes from Boston, Massachusetts.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (78) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Aaron Goldstein
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/08/does-the-left-really-care-abou
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi| 8.8.12 @ 6:29AM
We should welcome the Black pastors, Sikhs, and Muslims, who are against gay marriage. That includes Lois Farrakhan who has been very outspoken on the subject and has criticised Obama heavily for his support on the subject. The more the issue is attacked by everyone the better, in my opinion. Romney lost a great opportuity to bond with the base of the party when he refused to get behind Chick Fil. He also lost a huge oportunity to define Obama as a anti-Christian bigot. Who doesn't know about the laws of God and nature which most religions respect. That includes Catholic and Orthodox Christians, Evangelicals, both black and white, and all the others, Musslims, Sikhs, Orthodox Jews, and even sane atheists and agnostics.
JD| 8.8.12 @ 11:05AM
Due to the left's heavy media saturation, a stand for marriage would hurt Romney. Period.
Maybe someday we'll see the first gay character on a TV show who isn't considered a flawless paragon. As it is, though, it seems Hollywood exists just to make gays look wonderful.
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 8.8.12 @ 5:12PM
You guys know v. well Romney is sympathetic to gays.
Why don't you get it over with and admit that Mittens is a Rockefeller liberal?
DTOM| 8.8.12 @ 7:23AM
Jack,
If you are referring to Louis Farrakhan, I wonder at your wanting to include such a profound and prolific anti-Semite as Farrakhan.
Pardon me, Jack, your id is showing.
Go back to bed.
And gay marriage is a side show erected to distract voters from the disaster that has been inflicted on America in the form of Obama and his economic and domestic policies regarding business.
And by focusing on gay marriage to the exclusion of the Oconomy - you, Jack, are acting as either a useful idiot or an unrepentant socialist OBamaite.
Again, your id is showing!!
DTOM
Jack in Wi| 8.8.12 @ 10:20AM
Farrakhan knows the laws of God and nature on the subject of homosexuality. On the subject of Israel and the Jews he can go off the rail but in the main he is a lot of fun if you watch him on U-Tube. He isn't afraid to express his opinion and I like that about him, even if it is about someone like Obama. Meanwhile DTom you are a dirty shill for every bad action done by the Zionists.
Frank Drackman| 8.8.12 @ 10:55AM
its "You" Tube, You Dumbass,
Seriously Jack, if you don't watch it, they'll stop letting your kind work at Wal-Mart.
I know, its not your fault your 21st chromosomes didn't line up right during metaphase, and the Nurse cut off your billi-lights cause you were as nasty at one week as you are now, and I know, Jerry Lewis dropped you for those other Spazzes, and yes, I have a big nose, own a pawn shop, and my Great Great Great (however many it was) Granddaddy sold out your so called "Saviour" for 30 pieces of Silver,
WHAT ELSE YA GOT? BIG GAY,
I mean, ummm, no Big Gay is pretty accurate
Frank
Doctor Right| 8.8.12 @ 12:07PM
Dum da dum dum DUMB!
Doctor Right| 8.8.12 @ 11:56AM
You really ARE a sick man, Jack...
CJW| 8.8.12 @ 3:52PM
So you find Calypso Louie a "lot of fun" for expressing his anti semitic opinions about Jews?
Doctor Right| 8.8.12 @ 4:01PM
Jack thinks "Triumph of the Will" was a light-hearted comedy...
CJW| 8.8.12 @ 5:03PM
Jack also thinks "Springtime for Hitler and Germany" from the Producers is a serious song.
Alan| 8.8.12 @ 5:02PM
Does that surprise anybody? Jew haters of a feather stick together. Maybe Louie can save you a spot on the mother ship Jack@ss.
Appleby| 8.8.12 @ 7:30AM
Mitt Romney also missed a big chance to try to convince the American people that Mormons are Christians, by the way, when he refused to stand with the Christians on this very important day. When will somebody ask him "What is the Mormon position on Gay Marriage?" They have one -- it was strongly in evidence during the Prop. 8 free fight -- but Duck and Cover appears to be Romney's position when it comes to standing up for either his church or the Christian church. It's my opinion that he is afraid to answer any questions about his church's positions on anything, and hopes that everyone will forget he's a Mormon and never ask what they believe.
MK48| 8.8.12 @ 10:29AM
Applebag..............what does religion have to do with running for president ? Right now we need to focus on voting this POS out of office.
Every time you post this "mormon" thing seems to surface.
You have been asked this question before who would be YOUR choice....not that you have any skin in the game.
So how's Jane's retirement home treating you.
Everyday it's the SOS here on TAS the informed and the morons........no I didn't say mormons.
The black jesus is in panic mode everyday "they" stoop to a new low (Charles K.)
Right now they are runnig out of anything they can use to sidestep the truth HE HAS NOTHING. It's like pissing into the wind and they are running out of dry clothes.
We have to be careful that the magic negro doesn't steal the election.
CJW| 8.8.12 @ 3:54PM
We know you prefer four more years of Obama, but now it is clear you are bigot against Mormons.
Shiori| 8.21.12 @ 10:24AM
Mormons aren't Christians. I don't say that as an insult, it's just a statement of fact. While the Mormon faith observes some of Christ's teachings, they do not believe Jesus is the Son of God. Nor do they accept that Jesus was a Jew. The Mormon faith is more about 'Latter Day Saints'. So they are not Christians. Heck, even some Atheists respect Christ as a man and appreciate His wisdom as a philosopher but, like Mormons, they do not acknowledge His divinity. So, while Mormons call themselves 'The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints', they lack the singular, fundamental belief which would make them Christians. In any case, I don't believe Mitt makes political decisions based upon Mormonism. He is not being elected to stand for any faith - our gov't must remain neutral in matters of religion. Obama, conversely, forces his religion on the rest of us because that's what Leftists do. They think because Marxism, etc., has no Creator God that it is not a religion. In truth, it is the bloodiest totalitarian cult in history, eclipsing even radical Islam in death toll and overall ability to recruit billions. It should be declared a religion, with Environmentalism, Feminism, etc., as denominations. Their actions are based solely on ideology, not facts or historical lessons learned - but purely on 'belief', no matter how often it fails. Only a fanatical cult can be that committed to a Lie. So don't worry about Romney's religion. Worry about the hate cult of the Left.
JimH| 8.8.12 @ 8:15AM
The left does not really care. They are only trying to throw a monkey wrench in the workings of society. If you look at any totalitarian state, Marxist and other stripes, you find the LGBT crowd being suppressed if it is acknowledged to exist at all. These societies often define gay and lesbian behavior as decadent western deviancies, which under the local enlightened rule do not exist and are executed if found.
Von Mises Jr| 8.8.12 @ 8:36AM
Hey Jim, I have been reading more Von Mises and in "Omnipotent Government" he readdresses the same issues he discusses in "Theory and History." His point is that the socialist since about 1850 display "Polylogism." It is throughout "Theory and History" in discussions of Positivism, Historicism and clearly discussed by Marx in his Dialectical Materialism. These early schools of socialism denied history and economics, and finally Marx expounded further in his teachings of "bourgeoisie" versus "proletariat" economics.
These confused fools promulgated that there is different logic for all times and places. But we know that people from every corner of the earth have innate logic and understand right from wrong, negative versus affirmative and cause and effect. But according to socialist, every peoples and even every topic has its own logic, or lack thereof.
This illustrates the ignorance and delusion of the socialist. They are clearly not the sharpest knife in the drawer or brightest bulbs. Keep it in mind whenever you listen to a contemporary liberal, progressive or social democrat.
They were never taught how to think, or perhaps they are socialist because they are too ignorant to think like Mises and Hayek. Or they are just corrupt want-to-be tyrannical despots.
DRed| 8.8.12 @ 10:28AM
socialists
Von Mises Jr| 8.8.12 @ 10:54AM
Here is an article about socialism by Dr. Walter E. Williams at Jewish World Review today: http://jewishworldreview.com/c.....80812.php3
Since Dr. Sowell is black and he writes for a Jewish website, I posit that you are both a racist and an anti-Semite if you disagree, Dredful.
Von Mises Jr| 8.8.12 @ 10:54AM
I meant Dr. Williams, but Dr. Thomas Sowell could have written this as well.
Al Adab| 8.8.12 @ 11:38AM
The Left doesn't "care" about any particular issue beyond what identifiable interest group it might purchase in order to retain power. They would sell out the entire American theory of government and free economy if need be in order to retain their position.
CJW| 8.8.12 @ 3:59PM
Al Adab
Obama and the left have sold out the American theory of government and a free economy. Government by executive orders, selective enforcement of the Voting Act, governemnt handouts to campaign contributors, etc.
Al Adab| 8.8.12 @ 4:53PM
Es verdad. The list is endless.
DRed| 8.8.12 @ 11:56AM
Socialists is the plural form of socialist.
I agree with Dr. Williams that it's odd that communist iconography doesn't carry the stigma that Nazi iconography does. The rest of that column is an intellectually lazy bashing of a number of strawmen. I (and many liberals) don't believe in the primacy of the state over individual rights. The Nazi state was not concerned with 'social justice'. The horrors of Nazi Germany pale in contrast to those of Communism because the third reich lasted for 12 years.
Von Mises Jr| 8.8.12 @ 12:13PM
The USSR lasted from 1917 to 1991, or 74 years. So do you hate Obama's mentor Frank Marshall Davis six times more than Hitler.
See what I mean about polylogism, not that you understand troll.
DRed| 8.8.12 @ 12:26PM
Did Frank Marshall Davis lead a state that murdered millions of people? Did he play an active role in murdering anyone? I think it's logical to harbor more animosity for Hitler.
Von Mises Jr| 8.8.12 @ 1:38PM
Ron Bloom, Anita Dunn and STORM trooper Van Jones love Mao. Mao killed somewhere between 40M to 70M. Hitler killed about 15M.
So do you hate Mao and Obama's Czars 3-5 times as much as Hitler? By extension you must also hate Obama 3-5 times Hitler.
Hillary loves Stalin, He killed 30-40M. Two to three times Hitler. Do you hate Hillary and Stalin twice or triple Hitler?
Or are you a polylogism non sequitur?
DRed| 8.8.12 @ 1:52PM
How many people have Ron Bloom, Anita Dunn and Van Jones killed?
CJW| 8.8.12 @ 4:02PM
They support an ideology/system, Communism, that killed over one hundred million. What would you say if members of the Romney administration say they love Hitler and Nazism?
JD| 8.8.12 @ 1:23PM
You're right, you don't believe in the state's supremacy over "individual rights." You've redefined "individual rights" to mean something that is often opposite true rights, and you believe that the state must enforce your new animal.
That's why all modern debate boils down to misinformation and misuse of terminology. Until we clarify that a "right" is something that need not be provided, only protected, we on the right will be frustrated by conversations with the leftists who use the term "rights" to describe government oppression in the name of redistribution.
Oh, and the Nazis DID care about social justice. They simply thought that justice meant claiming the due superiority of the Aryan race, which was being unjustly denied them, and punishing guilty races. They had the same types problems with definitions that we see today from the Left, which defines "justice" as Affirmative Action, et al.
Von Mises Jr| 8.8.12 @ 3:39PM
JD, the Nazis were proceeded by Wilhelm II/Bismarck/Weimar Republic that was a socialist cabal that set the stage for the Nazi movement under Hitler. It was a nationalist movement dependent upon aggression and pan-Germanism due to socialist policies. The people, like DRedful were behind the movement for socialism instead of free market capitalism and free trade.
Hitler did not kill 6 million Jews and 8 million Catholics. He was the leader of people such as today's Ron Bloom, Anita Dunn, Van Jones and DRedful. Our little troll is too ignorant to understand that atrocities did not happen because of a few monsters, but because of pan-Germanism and support of the Nazis from people like him and his heroes.
So he can whine about his "fair" share and "social justice." But he cannot blame the misery and aggression on others that necessarily follows from his ignorance and greed.
The Aryan race concept was bought into by the German people at the time just as DRedful and Perp line up behind Obama to take from others through aggression what is not theirs. If there is a G-d, I am glad I won't be facing Him with the background of our socialist greedy comrades such as DRedful.
DRed| 8.8.12 @ 5:26PM
hahahahaha. Otto von Bismark was part of a socialist cabal! Thank you, Von. That's one of the funniest things I've read in a long time.
Hitler did certainly not kill 8 million Catholics. The Nazi's killed millions of Poles, but they were killed for being Polish Slavs, not because of their religion. You do come up with the oddest 'facts'. I really wouldn't go around accusing others of being ignorant right after accusing Bismark of being a socialist. ah. I'm still chuckling at that one.
Simon Templar| 8.8.12 @ 6:22PM
Bismark has been quoted as saying that he saw no difference between his welfare state and socialism. He has been credited as being the first to create the modern welfare state and the concept of a cradle to grave big government, a pattern and system copied by liberal progressives and "socialist" democrats worldwide. Yes, he was not a socialist in the Marxist sense of the word but he adopted much of the central ideas and tenets of socialism. So, one could make the argument that he sent much of Germany and Europe on the course towards socialistic and centralized powerful government that set the foundation for even later experiments with leftist socialistic economics and politics.
As far as killing Catholics or catholic poles or whatever, the fact remains that the national socialist hated religion particularly Christianity and sought its eventual eradication despite everything your liberal left wing confused teacher told you in public school. The fact remains that anything that stands in the way of left wing "social justice" is mowed down and that which contradicts its objectives and goals will be eradicated one way or another.
That is your legacy, comrade....
CJW| 8.8.12 @ 7:37PM
welcome back, Simon. Good post.
W
Simon Templar| 8.9.12 @ 9:27AM
Thank you, CJW.
Von Mises Jr| 8.8.12 @ 7:54PM
Simon, exactly what you said is available on Wikipedia. That is where I found the information to augment Ludwig Von Mises "Omnipotent Government" that takes one through the history and economics.
I hope our comrades can laugh when they face the blue tunnel. I will rest that I never covet my neighbor’s goods. That is exactly what socialism is and why it always leads to war and misery.
Perhaps that is why liberal/progressives are so miserable.
Catholics estimated murdered by the Nazi range from 3M+ with estimates of 11M to 17M total including 4-6M Jews.
Interesting that socialist can laugh about it while they defend the Soviets and Mao's China. Very sick indeed. And very Nazi-like.
DRed| 8.8.12 @ 10:14PM
no, no, no, Von. I'm not laughing at the Nazis. I'm laughing at you. You still can't even manage to use the plural form of socialist.
Anyhow, I see you've managed to misplace 5 million Catholics. Not bad. Anyhow, those murdered Poles were killed because they were Polish, not Catholic, obviously. It's important-it sheds light on the murderous race based nationalism that fueled the Nazis. Saying the Nazi's killed 3 million Catholics in Poland erases the meaning of why they died.
Did you ever manage to come up with a definition of socialism? I'd love to see come up with something that could link Otto von Bismark with Karl Marx.
DRed| 8.8.12 @ 10:21PM
I'd venture to say that the Nazi's hated Judaism just a little bit more than they hated Christianity.
Nick| 8.9.12 @ 12:31AM
I would say that the nazis hated everyone who didn't meet their delusional view of what constituted an "Aryan," DRed.
How much does it really matter to those who were killed which group they hated with more vehemence?
Does it matter more that they murdered Jews because they were Jews or that they murdered Poles, Czechs, Serbs, Croats, Ukrainians, & Russians, etc., because they were all Slavs?
As someone who is part Croatian, part English, and mostly Polish, I think we should remember and honor all of the nazis' victims, ya' know?
Von Mises Jr| 8.9.12 @ 7:29AM
Don't waste your breath Nick. He loves Lenin and Stalin too. DRedful is a POS that supports war socialism and Marxism full throated and then tries to blame a couple leaders such as Hitler and Stalin for all the deaths his ideology results in. Sorry, but if you belong and contribute to a cause, you are complicit.
DRed| 8.9.12 @ 10:39AM
Yeah, of course it didn't matter to those they killed. But it does matter that the Poles were not murdered because they were Catholic.
Nick| 8.9.12 @ 12:02PM
This is simply not true, DRed.
Tens of thousands of priests, Poles and otherwise, were killed because they were Catholic.
Here is a quote from Martin Borman's secret decree on how the nazis should deal with Christian churches:
"More and more the people must be separated from the churches and their organs the pastors . . . Just as the deleterious influences of astrologers, seers and other fakers are eliminated and suppressed by the State, so must the possibility of church influence also be totally removed . . . Not until this has happened, does the state leadership have influence on the individual citizens. Not until then are the people and Reich secure in their existence for all time."
And, then, there is this interesting tidbit:
"In February 1933, Hermann Göring banned all Catholic newspapers in Cologne on the claim that Catholics were illegally engaging in politics. The ban was lifted soon after, but Catholics had been sent a message."
Gee, doesn't Barry Lynn and the ACLU say the same thing about Christian pastors who dare speak about politics from the pulpit?
These quotes come from this rather long article, but one that is well worth the read, DRed:
http://www.catholic.com/magazi.....-holocaust
DRed| 8.9.12 @ 1:22PM
Yes, you're absolutely right-the Nazis murdered some Poles because they were Catholic. I should have been more clear. What bothers me about what Von originally said is (aside from the fact that his numbers were wildly off) is that referring to all the non-Jewish victims of the Nazi occupation as Catholics implies that's why they were killed. The Nazi's killed thousands and thousands of other Poles because they were lawyers, or school teachers, members of the nobility, trade unionists, former army officers, doctors, or communists or socialists. I'm sure many of those poor people were Catholics (and likewise, some of their murderers were also Catholic), but that's not why they were killed. The killings in Poland weren't to destroy all Catholics-they wanted to remove any sort of leadership so that they could have a controllable group of laborers in their new reich.
Nick| 8.9.12 @ 2:34PM
"[...] but that's not why they were killed."
Did you read the whole article, DRed?
Please do, it is very informative. The author makes a good case that many were killed because they were Catholic, whether Germans, Poles, Czechs, etc.
The nazis feared the Church, especially the schools. They closed 10,000 in Germany. This is all in the article.
I see what you're saying, though. It kind of goes to my first comment. The nazis looked at anyone who didn't support them, for any reason, as anti-Aryan. And, therefore, an enemy to be exterminated.
I find it important to learn as much as I can about this period, because these people, the victims as well as those who fought, deserve to be remembered. Or, else, we will most assuredly go through these horrors again.
DRed| 8.9.12 @ 3:13PM
Yes, I did read your article. Do you understand what I'm trying to say? If the Nazi's killed a Polish nobleman who was a Catholic, they weren't killing him because he was a Catholic-they were killing him because he was part of the educated elite.
Nick| 8.9.12 @ 4:41PM
Yes, I completely concur.
But, when they killed tens of thousands of priests, monks, brothers, and nuns, it was usually because they were Catholic.
And when the nazis invaded Belarus and Ukraine, they would also kill the Jewish elite first, i.e., city officials, professors, writers, etc. They were deemed more dangerous than regular Jews, who could be worked to death.
It's very hard to speak in broad generalities when it comes to the Holocaust, I'm afraid. There are just too many stories to learn about and digest.
TinaB| 8.10.12 @ 8:06AM
Oh Nick, I always love your writing, now that I know your mostly Polish, as well as British, like me, I can nod and give you thumbs up with even more enthusiasm. Simon T and VonM, I always learn from you two, and where is Timmie? I read TAS to follow you all, Al Adab, and OT, and a few others bring me great comfort since my brilliant hubby is gone just over two years. He has gone straight to the top with his questions now. I will too someday soon, but for now, I read my responders at TAS for the dirty lowdown, as Boz Scaggs puts it. Keep it coming fellas, and gals too, probably.
Simon Templar| 8.9.12 @ 9:26AM
They hated Jews, not Judaism per se. National Socialism like many socialistic movements centered around ethnic and racial identity politics. As far as Jews were concerned, it mattered nothing what your religious beliefs were or were not, you were a Jew by blood and therefore instantly inferior and a threat to society and the state. Christianity was particularly hated as it was seen as a "weak" religion that fostered a mindset and values exactly opposite of what a "strong" national socialist Aryan should possess and was also seen as having corrupted the German civilization and its natural historical course.
As usual you peddle in half truths, comrade.
Tom Kyba| 8.9.12 @ 7:00PM
Sorry man, no way you put that one by. Liberals believe in the primacy of the state wholeheartedly when it coincides with their desires. When the cause is one they believe in then it's freedom, freedom, freedom. When the cause is something they don't like, it must be proscribed, preferably by government coersion.
Woodstock was a long time ago. Liberals are no longer the brave radical dudes, man. They are now the establishment, just as totalitarian as they imagined(somewhat) conservatives were prior to the 60s.
Frank Drackman| 8.8.12 @ 8:33AM
Jack, first of all I'm sorry for your loss.
I'm sure the late Mr. Page and you were very close, not that there's anything wrong with that*.
And you're right, that Lois Farakhan is a fire-cracker, and a credit to her race besides....
And did you know the Sikh's your boyfriend shot aren't Muslims? The things you learn after a pointless mass murder...
Next thing you'll be telling me the President's not Muslim...
And Aaron, thanks for not annoying us with boring Redsox Anecdotes, who cares that Ted William's toenail went for $500,000 at auction...
But hey, the Bosox have a magic # of 62!!
Of course with only 51 games left in the season, may be alittle problematic...
Frank
*But there is, and if you're reading this footnote, you really need to find better ways to spend your time.
Jack in Wi| 8.8.12 @ 11:11AM
Page was one of your followers, an ignorant rube who doesn't know a Sikh from a Muslim He was influenced by all you and your ilk trash talk about Muslims not being human beings. He had a 9/11 tatto and thought he had to kill a lot of Muslims, just like you and all the other callers for mass murder and genocide against millions of innocent Muslims. You and Occam are a disgrace with your endless shilling for murder and hate in the Middle East against the native peoples there, just because of their religion.
Frank Drackman| 8.8.12 @ 12:21PM
Pretty Big talk from a Small Man...
And you're right, I didn't know Sikhs werent Muslims, next thang you'll be tellin me Iranians aren't A-rabs...
and next time I'm on "U" tube, I'll check your comments on your latest Crush, GOTYE's videos, I heard he gets Nekkid in one,
"U" might wanta get one of those pocket protectors
Frank
Al Adab| 8.8.12 @ 12:32PM
Jack:
You are of course right here, Sikhs are not Moslem and Frank is right Iranians are not Arabs, they are Aryans.
You however go too far in attributing a desire for genocide on the part of Occam or Frank. It is another example of your sad tendency toward hyperbola rather than engagement in the debate. We had that conversation yesterday so this will be it for today. To tacticly attempt to brand policy disagreements as "hate" is beneath an otherwise intelligent person such as yourself.
Doctor Right| 8.8.12 @ 12:36PM
Why do you think Jack is intelligent, as opposed to an anti-semite, anti-intellectual prig?
Al Adab| 8.8.12 @ 1:59PM
One can be intelligent without holding correct beliefs or adhering to good policy. Have you not known many who, while bright, had no common sense?
Doctor Right| 8.8.12 @ 2:47PM
Other than myself?
A few...
Al Adab| 8.8.12 @ 4:56PM
Dr.R:
...and many thanks for the comic relief.
Fredx| 8.8.12 @ 8:48AM
First of all, for the last time, it's not "gay marriage." There is nothing in the concept to suggest that either or both parties be "gay" or homosexual. It's awkwardly but more accurately referred to as "same-sex" or "gender-neutral" marriage, terms as tortured as "marriage equality," as the left struggles to make the ridiculous not sound ridiculous.
As far as the left "caring" about "gay marriage," it was never so much about "caring" as it was about destroying the other side, namely, as you suggest, white, Christian, patriotic, conservative heterosexuals. These unfortunates, for whatever unfathomable reason, have come to represent to the left the most despicable, most unworthy, most disgusting, downright Evil segment of American society. Everyone else--that's everyone else--gets a pass. This has never been about "caring" for "gay marriage" or "caring" for anything else. This is all about HATE. They can disguise it as "equality" and "fairness," but the left hates the aforementioned group, ironically, even though many of them are themselves members of said group. We are not dealing with sanity here, folks. We're dealing with raw, unadulterated Hate.
Teflon93 | 8.8.12 @ 8:50AM
The difference is the Democrats knew Obama was lying.
Just like Republicans know Mitt is lying.
Derek Leaberry| 8.8.12 @ 9:14AM
Wrong. The Left desperately wants homosexual marriage because it wishes to tear down Christianity and Western Civilization. The Left hates both.
Fredx| 8.8.12 @ 6:12PM
Bingo.
Mike G| 8.8.12 @ 10:32AM
"When it comes down to it, race trumps sexual orientation (and everything else)."
This explains why the was no outcry from the left when Justin Gatlin dropped the hammer on his finger pistol before his 100m quarterfinal race.
JD| 8.8.12 @ 11:08AM
No, votes trump everything else. They don't criticize black churches because they want their votes, and they (correctly) see that they will not lose gay votes just because they don't condemn the black churches. The gay vote is in their pocket even if they don't always toe the line.
Stick| 8.8.12 @ 12:16PM
What better way could you concieve of changing the short term popular memory from "You Didn't Build That" to something else than by shaking down a chicken shack for the benefit of gays? Oh look, a cuddly puppy.
JD| 8.8.12 @ 12:21PM
The popular memory doesn't need changing, because to this day Leftists who aren't active readers of non-left commentary still have no idea Obama even said that. Liberal media never reported it.
Stick| 8.8.12 @ 12:46PM
JD, they are very aware. The campaign muzzled Obama for a week and then launched the "my words were taken out of context" ads. BTW, the put Mr. Eloquent Orator back on his diet of teleprompter. They are aware and very afraid. Tossing the chicken shack was part of the remessage campaign.
Slacker| 8.8.12 @ 1:13PM
Mostly this is about a desire to relive the 1960’s. This is the era that defines the left, it is what they are proud of, and they can’t move on. They so desperately want to fight the man.
Real bigotry is in short supply so they are reduced to these absurd causes and ceremonial fights. Traditionalists should just laugh at their desperation and confusion. Gay marriage is such a ridiculous concept that I seriously doubt it has the substance to damage society. This is a low point for the left.
JD| 8.8.12 @ 1:18PM
Fight the man? They ARE the man!
Bill8472| 8.8.12 @ 5:51PM
Anybody who wants to re-live the political upheaval of the 1960s was CERTAINLY not there. Even if they lived through the time, they weren't there. If they didn't, they're kidding themselves.
Kids, it was a TERRIBLE time! Everybody was in a bad mood. Their moods got so bad that eventually they started bombing and shooting each other. I promise you, you don't want to re-live that. You really don't.
Bill8472| 8.8.12 @ 5:26PM
I've been aware of the fake offense that people falsely claim to feel about the things that people who are white, Christian, who like and support mainstream values in general, say they like. It's all so contrived.
What is most frustrating is that they actually sue (which is sort of understandable if silly); but then the courts ACTUALLY TAKE THEM SERIOUSLY, as if their manufactured concerns are serious.
My favorite example is the high-school kid who moved to Salt Lake City. She joined her high school glee club there, and they were going to participate in their high school Christmas festivities by singing Christmas songs that -my God!- actually have Christian content. Well, you might say, she's a Jew, not a Christian, so maybe she could not attend the festivities if she didn't want to be part of a Christian celebration, but noooo, that would be too civilized. She sued.
Well, when the case went to court, they actually took her claim of offense seriously. She couldn't show any damage that the law would recognize, just offense that a group that's predominately Christian, in a highly Christian atmosphere, would actually participate as a group in a Christian festival by singing Christian songs WITHOUT TAKING HER EXQUISITE NON-CHRISTIAN SENSIBILITIES INTO ACCOUNT! And it was a public school to boot! Yah!
Nick| 8.8.12 @ 7:07PM
I see that, with the exception of DRed & Jackboot from WI., the resident liberals haven't commented in this thread.
Doesn't Rev. Owens deserve to be called a "bigot," "hater," and "homophobe" for his views? Does his skin color have anything to do with this double-standard?
Or, is it because they were afraid that they would be forced to defend their hypocrisy on same-gender counterfeit marriage?
Come on, liberals.
Why is it okay for you guys to discriminate against a father/mother who wishes to "marry" his/her adult daughter/son if they are "in love"?
Why is it okay to deny them so-called "equal rights"?
Mike in N.C.| 8.8.12 @ 10:18PM
Aaron Golstein,
The first part of article is simply untrue. I refrain from using the word lie because I believe you are intellectually honest. We all make mistakes.
Abu Nudnik| 8.9.12 @ 5:13PM
They need all colors of the "rainbow coalition" until it's time to flush them down the toilet.
Abu Nudnik| 8.9.12 @ 5:14PM
A quibble: didn't the DoJ not answer the bell when the conviction was appealed? Just checking the facts are straight... I think your basic argument is sound though.