Saturday, August 26, 2006

Gay "Marriage"--The Final Exam

Right off the Shore posted her final question for Owen and Ingrid:

I want you to sum up the strongest reasons why, in your opinion, one should vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on the ban.

If the past is indicative, Ingrid's answers will be laden with feelings; Owen's will be laden with facts.


Owen said...

No pressure there ;-)

Dad29 said...

You're up to it.

Doris said...

Pointing out that real families will be affected by the ban is fact.

Moreover, Ingrid's posts have been full of specific effects in other states, as well as facts about recent rulings in New York and Washington.

The good-versus-evil way in which you've evaluated this debate shows that no argument against the ban would be sufficient, which hardly makes you a believable commentator.

Plus, the past language you've used about gay people -- fudge pack and the like -- makes me surprised that Owen banters with you on such friendly terms. There's a double standard here. Ban opponents are being respectful; some ban supporters such as yourself aren't rising above the level of drunken anti-gay slur.

Other pro-ban bloggers should disassociate with Dad29. To do otherwise is to hold opponents to higher standards than you hold yourself.

Dad29 said...

I understand, Doris, that the last thing the homosexual lobby wants is to be reminded of the un-natural acts they perform.

While the lobby was quite successful in re-directing attention to "individual rights," instead of exactly what those "individuals" actually DO, those facts are part of the reality.

I am certain that pro-ban supporters will abondon this blogsite wholesale based on your advice.


Disgruntled Car Salesman said...

I can't believe for a minute that you would ever refer to homsexuals as "fudge packers."

Shocked. I am not sure knowing this new information that I would be able to visit this site ever again.

Actually, you know what, knowing this new information, I am going to do nothing but light up my site with as many links to yours as possible.