On a side note 8% of North Carolina voters, including 13% of Republicans, think being gay should be a felony.

I never know quite what to do with numbers like that. On the one hand, obviously, yikes, but on the other, extremist tails attach to many polling curves without making society at large seem completely bonkers. See: birthers, truthers, alien probees, et al.

So, yikes, but we're still bending toward justice.

Comments

[justcorbly]

I like the bit that says 55% say they support gay marriage/civil unions although 61% voted for Amendment One.

I'd bet most folks never heard the phrase "civil union" until they started to hear about gay marriage, and haven't a clue what that really is.

[Sue]

How many of them (the felony fools) read this article from "therapy the gay out of you" now-apologist Dr. Robert L. Spitzer, and how many laws were enacted and real people hurt (or suicidal) from his now-disproved 'theory?' It's from bad research like this that hatred ensues. And from stupidity.

[Ged]

Would love to know how many (if any) of the conservative commentators on this blog think being gay qualifies as a felony offense.

[JB]

Given how long homosexuality has been demonized (basically, forever) vs. how long the movement toward tolerance has been on the scene (in the long view, about 5 minutes), and the fact that some sex acts used to be illegal, I'm suprised those numbers aren't much, much higher.

RE: Spitzer, it wasn't his theory and he never engaged in that therapy. He did a small study of people who'd been through de-gayification. The people he interviewed were recommended to him by the people who were doing that therapy.

His findings: those who had been through it self-reported good results at the time that he spoke to them. They wanted to believe it had worked.

The findings were (mis)used by proponents of the therapy. He is now apologizing for that study, which he says was flawed.

Perhaps more importantly, he was involved in the successful fight to de-list homosexuality as a mental illness some 2 decades earlier. Hard to quantify, but he probably helped more gay people than he hurt. And he is trying to make amends for the flawed study.

[Roch]

I would love to know how many (if any) of the conservative commentators on this blog do not think being gay qualifies as a felony offense.

[sittinginthemiddle]

I for one certainly do not believe being gay qualifies as a criminal offense. It is obvious by watching these Homosexuals suffer through all the mental anguish of being cast into the cellar of society, that is punishment enough. Most of them have deep seated emotional disorders or drug and alcohol habits because they struggle so much with their behavioral choices. They are continually looking for an escape from a society that wants nothing to do with them and their sickness. They should be given pity, not incarceration. They are and forever will be looked upon as the lower class, just like the alcoholics and drug addicts. It will make no difference what laws you write, society will never accept them as equals. These are the cold hard facts of living in a world that was designed around the survival of the fittest. You may keep holding onto that fantasy that some day all men and women will walk equally upon the earth regardless of their lifestyle and behavioral choices, but there are hundreds of years of history to prove different. That historical data does not care one iota about your world view and neither does the majority of society.

[David Hoggard]

"They are continually looking for an escape from a society that wants nothing to do with them and their sickness."
...then...
"They are and forever will be looked upon as the lower class, just like the alcoholics and drug addicts...society will never accept them as equals"

Like a chicken arguing with an egg.

I vehemently disagree with both contentions. However, I realize YOUR lamentable 'world view' dictates that you must denigrate others to make yourself palatable to yourself.

Also, in your single paragraph above, I count 10 references to homosexuals as "they, them and their". Those with another 'world view' tend to think in terms of "us". Wonder which is more fit to "survive"?

Here is a better indication of who will survive due to their fitness: My youngest son turned 18 days before the May 8th primary. The repudiation of A1 was of such importance to him (and his peers), that he - an otherwise typical non-political teenager - 'same day' registered (Independent) and voted on primary day and was genuinely shocked and appalled at the state vote count.

"They" - meaning his generation - will turn the tide on this issue somewhere right around the day you go to meet your Maker; who will not be pleased - at all - with how badly you misconstrued and twisted His 'world view'.

[Sean]

^ +1

[Roch]

You're good, sitting. You lack the class of Steven Colbert and you are not quite as sublime as Bob Boudelang, but you are good.

[RBM]

There's nothing good about the stance of justifying inequality due to sexual preference - or bad.

There's also nothing good about framing that topic as a means to an end.

It is however a reflection of that opinion holders state of consciousness/spirit and exemplifies why some other individuals suffer the consequences of such views with there life in the multitude of ways one can find on this globe, in this very moment.

Yes, the probability is the view will be changed to the extent it will be reflected in the political sphere.

Else it won't, as those probabilities also exist, just at lower statistical significances. And wars and subjugation will escalate instead of subside.

That possible consequence is why, 'interesting' is a curse in the Chinese observation.

[sittinginthemiddle]

Thanks Cockroach

[sittinginthemiddle]

Hoggard, I am not surprised that your child shares your world view. A lot of the younger kids who attend the public school system are being brain washed with this liberal insanity. That is precisely why there have been so many private schools sprout up around the nation in the past two decades. The middle and upper classes want to keep their children away from the lower classes at any cost. The divide only gets larger from here forward as the lower classes only get lower thanks to the brilliance of the liberal world view. You can not legislate societal equality, that my lower class friend, has to be earned. But thanks for playing.

[David Hoggard]

Thanks for letting me play.

You must just be miserable. And for that, I am truly sorry.

[Ed Cone]

This is confusing -- are gay rights an effete liberal plot, or an affliction of the masses? Or do we somehow have an upper-class majority, contradiction in terms though that seems?

Also, equality under the law is a foundational American principle. It's not the same thing as economic equality, and it's not some sort of socialist plot.

[bubba]

".....and was genuinely shocked and appalled at the state vote count."

Sounds like an obvious failure on the part of a least one over-protective parent who failed to provide a little common sense alongside the confused "social justice" meme that was obviously routinely provided.

Here's a question for you, Hoggard......did the "intolerable racism" meme stand by itself, or was it a part of the "social justice" meme?

Memo to Cone, and the others: As previously established, same sex marriage is not now nor has it ever been an "equality under the law" matter, at least until your side manages to convince Justice Kennedy to help you invent an imaginary new "right" out of thin air, thus establishing yet another new "right" by judicial activism.

[Ed Cone]

I read somewhere that certain rights are inalienable. Elsewhere, that rights unenumerated may still exist.

Government's job is to protect rights. Our history has been a long, uneven march to extending that protection to more and more people.

I am distressed at the pace of change, but confident that change will come.

And I wonder about the anger some people seem to feel on this subject, and so many other subjects. It makes me want to give them a hug.

[prell]

Memo to Bob: the post had nothing to do with "same sex marriage." It had to do with self-identified/registered Republicans who believe "being gay" should be a felony.

[Ged]

Speaking of being gay and felonies, this Kansas teacher says being gay is the same as "murder", at least in the eyes of God. So much hate done in the name of religion, it really sickens me. Guess the Christian notion of "Do unto others..." is lost on extremists.

[sittinginthemiddle]

"You must just be miserable. And for that, I am truly sorry."

Sorry Hoggard, I am one of the one percenters that the lower classes love to hate. I have a great business, an incredible wife and family and enough money to last through the lives of my great grand children. I have worked hard my entire life and have accomplished much. I am at total peace in this world and wish my life for most people, atleast those who are not to lazy to earn it. I have God, integrity, moral standards and great health. I can not imagine being happier.

[David Hoggard]

Glad to hear that, middle. I was simply imparting my impression of how you come across in these comments. Obviously, to me, a lot of anger and professed intolerance of people not like you in your words ("...wish my life for MOST people", is telling), From my experience, such expressions indicate some real misery and I have nothing else to go by.

Let me put it another way: You SOUND as miserable as bubba.

[SAL LEONE]

I do not know why people are making the gay issue an issue. The state had nonthing better to do then to stir the pot. There have been gays on this planet ever since the T-REX walked the earth but NC seems to just have realized gays are here for some reason. The Amendment One debate only divided this state when it did not have to.
We are becoming a society that judges other groups and passes laws on how they are to live, what race group is next, African Americans,Jews,Asians,or Hispanics.

Lets just slow down with all the hating and just live together. I think this is what this country was founded on, FREEDOM.

[Ishmael]

Good for you, SITM. Just remember that you are one Bernie Madoff from the rest of us.

[bubba]

"Memo to Bob: the post had nothing to do with 'same sex marriage.'"

Memo to Suds-on-the-brain: the comment to which I refered did.

Any questions?

[bubba]

"I read somewhere that certain rights are inalienable. Elsewhere, that rights unenumerated may still exist."

And so.......?

[Ed Cone]

And so repeating "that's not a right!" is not make it a convincing argument.

[sittinginthemiddle]

" Glad to hear that, middle. I was simply imparting my impression of how you come across in these comments. Obviously, to me, a lot of anger and professed intolerance of people not like you in your words ("...wish my life for MOST people", is telling), From my experience, such expressions indicate some real misery and I have nothing else to go by.

Let me put it another way: You SOUND as miserable as bubba." Hoggard

Hoggard, your experience comes from a warped mindset and unrealistic world view. I do not wish success on the Parasites who feed off the backs of the working class. I believe in teaching a man to fish, not giving him the fish that someone else has labored to get.
Obviously, you come from a back ground of looking for someone else to provide for your wants and needs, I on the other hand worked for everything I have. I can see where your world view would see me as angry and non accepting of others, just like mine sees you as one of the Parasites always looking for someone else to pull your weight. Now, if you will excuse me I am going to go take a spin in the Bentley that I EARNED.

[Sean]

haha. this guy's hilarious.

[Ed Cone]

Yeah, Hoggard, do some work for once, that company you built ain't putting fish in the Bentley.

[Kim]

R
We
Shitting
In
The
Middle
Again
?

[David Hoggard]

My Bentley may be old, Ed, but it runs well and gets me to work around 6:30a and then home - most nights - about now.

Sitting, I think you are lying about being a man of such means. Your online personae just doesn't match who you say you are. Uncalled-for obnoxiousness, hatefulness and gratuitous boasting are just not normal characteristic of those who have pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, as you claim. Just doesn't jibe. I'm not impressed. Not in the least.

I know you'll say you don't care what I think, but there it is anyway.

[Andrew Brod]

Besides, what does Shitting's alleged wealth and manifest hatred of "parasites" have to do with his hatred of homosexuals?

[David Hoggard]

Not real sure if it is related, Andrew; but I've only known two people who owned Bentleys during the totality of my parasitic life. They were both gay.

Ever notice how he(she) always capitalizes 'Parasite'? Weird.

[Andrew Brod]

Shitting is the one who pivoted from teh gay to teh socializm. If there's a connection, I assumed he could enlighten us.

[Ed Cone]

SIM posited a contradiction between "upper class" values and support for gay rights.

Class is a vaguely-defined concept in this country, but wealth and education are widely-accepted class markers.

Judging by those standards and the precinct maps for Amendment One, SIM is exactly wrong, because it appears that wealthier and better-educated precincts opposed the amendment.

But as an American, I'm suspicious of that kind of social stratification. I prefer to think of people showing "class" by the way they treat others and carry themselves. By which measures, even owners of non-imaginary Bentleys might not measure up.

[David Hoggard]

SITM is nothing but a walking contradiction. As I said previously, his claims of great wealth and "class" just don't jibe with his online personae, which is more akin to that of a straight-up, rebel flag waving redneck (not that there is anything wrong with that - I claim a similar heritage - but at least I'm honest about it).

But, as most of those who post under pseudonyms know, they can throw flames and incite outrage without consequence and adopt any ignorant fantasy personae they aspire to or fancy. Such is likely the case with the self-described Bentley driving one-percenter who frequents this place. He's a troll and a fake and (she)he's already elicited much more troll feeding than is healthy - most recently from me.

I can't recall that he(she) has ever added anything of substance to any of these discussions.

And after this, I resolve to stop feeding him(her).

[ishmael]

SITM serves a function on this blog as a temptation to the urge to bring someone low. The higher he/she builds the castle, the more tempting it is to find ways to storm it.
Doesn't matter what the true circumstances are, as the words display a heart as black as cinder.