Comments on: Mass keeps gay marriage

By: vjp

vjp — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 16:03:49 +0000

I must have missed the memo on the Gay Agenda.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 15:58:32 +0000

Virginia Voter:

I’m sorry, I’ve been out of press long enough that I’ve stopped writing for the reading comprehension of high schoolers. Let me help you out by putting this very clearly: you won’t have to have sex with a homosexual. You won’t have to watch the homosexuals have sex. You won’t have to live with a homosexual or any member of the same sex if you don’t want to. You won’t have to go to a gay bar after work, and your children will not learn about gay sex in school. The gays are not going to start going at it in your front yard–but they are going to have sex whether you want them to or not, and that in itself is not a political agenda anymore than it’s a political statement when you have sex with your wife.

Unless you DO think it’s a political statement when you have sex with your wife, in which case, ohmigod that poor woman….

By: Virginia Voter

Virginia Voter — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 02:53:30 +0000

Anonymous, First I find your post hard to read and understand. Secondly, I am a transplant from Massachusetts having lived there for some 30 plus years. I know that the Democrats in Massachusetts are corrupt and that back room dealing goes on all the time. As for the behind closed doors comment, I do not care what people do behind closed doors. But, the Gay agenda is not about behind closed doors. The Gay agenda is about pushing a sexual lifestyle or behavior upon the rest of society without allowing society to have a say as to whether or not they agree with such behavior or lifestyle.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:40:41 +0000

Virginia Voter–you know, just like a lot of West Coast and North Eastern Democrats make the profound mistake of thinking Virginia is just like their state, I suspect you’re likewise forgetting that not every state is as filled with people who are as deeply concerned with what their neighbors are doing behind closed door as in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Lest we forget that both John Kerry and Ted Kennedy were both to represent the state in the Senate for a reason, please bear in mind that the Democrats who adequately represent the views of their more-liberal-than-most-Virginians constituencies don’t have to bother rigging anything.

But thanks for playing Evil Left Wing Conspiracy Theory.

By: Virginia Voter

Virginia Voter — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 01:05:05 +0000

Actually, I hope you’re right, Sean Holihan. Because that would mean the implication of a lot of high ranking Democrats in Massachusetts working together to fix the elections of fellow democrats and a lone republican for political favors. That would make my day, and we could finally cleanse the Massachusetts political system of all the sleaziness of the Democrats. I live for that day.

By: Sean Holihan

Sean Holihan — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 19:32:44 +0000

Virginia Voter—their reelection, that’s what.

By: Anon E. Mouse

Anon E. Mouse — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:59:58 +0000

Nonsence, Virginia Voter. It’s much better to let the judges make the laws than have ignorant voters decide what is right.

Drip…..
Drip…..
Drip…..

No, that’s not your sink dripping, it’s the sarcasm.

By: Virginia Voter

Virginia Voter — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:38:36 +0000

The MA Legislature should have allowed the people to decide whether they want gay marriage or not. I hope that this decision by the MA polititcans stimulates the residents into voting and putting people into the legislature that represents them and not the special interest groups. Also, I want to know what the nine legislators were promised for changing their votes from the previous session.

By: Sean Holihan

Sean Holihan — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:46:16 +0000

Thanks anonymous, but perhaps not unknown, friend.

Unfortunately. I may have to land myself into another tax braket first.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 05:13:29 +0000

added: Once it does happen, you’re welcome to come up here and crash while you look for housing in an officially-gay-friendly District of Columbia. Can’t promise the Mets, but I do have a share of our season tickets for the Nats.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 05:10:00 +0000

I couldn’t give you a specific timeframe, Sean, but I’m thinking that it’s going to wait until after DC gets its vote in Congress. Republicans already did a pretty good job surpressing the right to Congressional representation for a half-million mostly-black urban voters using a rider on one gun rights ruling, and pursuing gay marriage at this point in time will push that objective even further out of reach.

However, once that vote in the House is secured, I think civil unions would be pretty achievable.

By: Sean Holihan

Sean Holihan — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 04:57:56 +0000

Congrats to Massachusetts residents.

Any bets on when DC is going to follow suit? With either civil unions or gay marriage?