Owen expresses some disappointment that "Fair" Wisconsin is running deceptive advertising about The Amendment:
But I have to take issue with Ingrid’s group, FAIR Wisconsin, for launching this new rhetorical front.
The second sentence will not only deny civil unions and other legal protections for loving and committed gay families but it will jeopardize legal protections for ALL unmarried couples, gay or straight:
Health Care Benefits
Right to Make Medical Decisions
Hospital Visits
Pensions
That is just false. I would call it a lie, but I know not whether this claim is based on malice or ignorance. Nothing in the marriage amendment would jeopardize any of these things - at all.
The slide into deception (or worse) makes it clear: "Fair" Wisconsin has no case against The Amendment which is, ah, fair.
This should damn near decide the question for Charlie Sykes and Jenna. If the opponents must resort to these tactics, it is clear that their agenda is propaganda.
You are an idiot.
ReplyDeleteYou're late with that post, anony.
ReplyDeleteUsually you impress us with your intellectual firepower much faster.
Busy rump-ranging yesterday?
Doris, you are wrong.
ReplyDeletePOA relationships have NOTHING to do with marriage, however it is constituted.
I do not know, nor care, how Ohio interprets its Constitution.
I DO know that POA relationships in Wisconsin do not imply "family."
The thing I love about dad29 is his overt homophobia. If this coward ever posts his real name, I'd love to see his reaction when people, not characters on a screen would confront him. Just another coward with a keyboard. But then - so am I! I'm glad so many people who have him on their blog-rolls do - it really shows their agreement with his hateful views. I mean, come on - rump-ranging? I haven't heard that one since third grade. How about something more sophisticated?
ReplyDeleteThere's little that is "sophisticated" about jamming things where they don't belong.
ReplyDeleteYou might be very surprised at the number of homosexuals I know and get along with (very well.)
But that is none of your business, now, is it?
YOUR business is to call names, which you do very well. That's really "sophisticated."
Dad29 also calls names. That's my point in another post. There's a serious double standard here.
ReplyDeleteDoris, it is legitimate to refer to an African-American as an African-American. If that person plays football, he can be called an African American football player.
ReplyDeleteWith me so far? Good.
If one is a homosexual of the male variety, they sometimes engage in fudge-packing or rump-ranging.
I know this is hard to understand, Doris.
Daddy-Zero, you seem awfully fixated on the mechanics of homosexuality. You're putting so much thought into the subject as to suggest a latent interest.
ReplyDeleteAs a practicing heterosexual happily married to a woman for 20+ years, these thoughts don't ever pass through my mind.
Frankly, if I were related to you, I would be a bit concerned...
Anony, I think you're lying about your "marriage." But there are a lot of liars who oppose The Amendment. It's a big crowd, but bad company, as your Mommy used to say.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you don't touch the central point of the post. What with all your scatalogical references to homosexual acts, you appear to be perversely interested. You're confirming the thesis.
ReplyDelete