Just need to avoid association with a certain other show about Heroes...

.

.

.

Look I don't live in CA and can't vote for/against Prop 8, but I have noticed which side acts like a bunch of thugs.

Let's characterize more things as hate and then fight hate with hate. What a terrible idea!

Before we get the hating started (because I criticized hate) I am neither Black, Mormon, gay nor Christian.

I voted against Prop 8 here in CA, but I am shocked at the response to it passing. I'm not shocked that it passed, I'm shocked at the response to said passing. My very liberal friends have taken such a radical stance against Pro-8ers, that my other friends that voted for 8 are scared to say that they did. Instead of respectfully disagreeing and saying that this prop is unfair to a portion of the population, they have adopted a thug-like presence, and have come out against the whole idea of VOTING.

Though I am personally for gay marriage, I liked what Prop 8 meant. Instead of our state being in the control of radical courts, we the people have a choice. And Californians chose...

Such racism and christian-bashing that is currently coming from that side is disgraceful. It really goes a long way to unravel their own argument against "hate."

However, I understand where you are coming from, and how hard it is to put a percentage or quota on how many people of a certain ethnicity are depicted. It opens a very bad can of worms.

Homosexual unions should, nay... must have equal representation. All the same rights must be afforded to such couples. However, one of the two words in the phrase "gay marriage" has already been hijacked by political correctness to such extent that the word is no longer used in the original context. The other word will likely suffer the same fate. There are already many heterosexual couples that refer to themselves as "life partners."

Homosexual unions would garner way, way more support if it wasn't called "marriage" ...since, well, it isn't. Not because I think it isn't, but because of the word's definition.

How many states has an Op-8 ballot failed in? All of them. The only states that have homosexual "marriage" are the ones that shoved it down the throats of their residents by judicial fiat. And in MA, the legislature didn't even allow a ballot question despite overwhelming petition that earned more than 3-times the required signatures. Not a good way to make your case.

Again, just don't call it what it isn't -- marriage -- and you'll have everything you want. Legalese, equal standing in society, tax disadvantages, etc. Everything, that is, except what you want (those that oppose you) to call it.

...

Now, as an analogy, I've handed a huge sack of marbles off to the other side, withholding only one single marble. I'm interested to see how this TB will unite against me as a homophobe, religious zealot, zion, right-winger, neocon, etc. I just don't want you people to call a hamburger a sandwich, but you'll doubtless find a way to tear my words apart.

The reason I voted No was because I honestly don't care what others do with their lives and feel that we're better off without government deciding what we can and can't do. The only reason why I would have voted Yes was to show that the majority of Californians aren't in line with radical judges.

And, what do you know? The majority of Californians are not in line with radical judges.

Fact is I have yet to hear an argument against equal rights to marry that doesn't have something to do with religion. Gays and straights deserve the same rights to marry. Period. Anything else is UNAMERICAN.

Loving Vs. Virginia anyone?

Personally I think this sounds a cool premise and will be checking it out. But thats a given as I am a shirt lifter too lol ;)

And yeah, Prop 8 sucks, but you may have had more sucess if you werent so hung up on the word "marriage". As long as there is a legal framework to gve you all the rights of a marriage, then call it whatever you like, ie Civil Partnership, and the jobs a good un. You can still refer to yourselves as "married" and your "husband", but the nutty rightwing christians might not get so hung-up about a word.

What might be cool and subversive in print form usually doesn't work in other media. For instance, Veitch's Brat Pack and Maximortal are great subversive takes on the superhero mythos. But they would absolutely suck on TV of film.

Don't get your hopes up for the gay superhero on Showtime, guys.

Look, you can go on and on about the sacred definition of marriage, but who says what it means? We do. It's not like humans evolved out of the jungle to find an instruction booklet on the ground telling us how to be sentient beings. We decide what the definition of marriage is. The concept has been around longer than recorded history, and has manifested in every human culture, sometimes in radically different ways. In this culture, in our society, we believe that there is only one kind of equality, You simply can't have two definitions- that some people are more equal than others. Marriage should be the right of any human adult.

Given your political leanings, doesn't the constitution mean anything at all to you? Just because you, yourself, believes something one way or the other, shouldn't the established methodology take precedent? The rule of law? Infrastructure, as it were? Should four people be allowed to decide the fate of the populace of an entire state? And, if so, why should the opinions of only four judges trump the will of the people on a ballot question?

Example -- I'm a vicious anti-smoker. Not a non-smoker; ANTI-smoker. Despite that, I was totally against the smoking bans in restaurants and bars. Why? Because I believed the federalist, free market should decide. THAT is the American way. Yet we had the decision of one side decide the fate of the other, with no chance of repreive. It is THAT that is unamerican.

Look, certain words apply to certain people because of who they are, whether or not they are to blame for who they are. As a man, the word menstruation will never mean anything to me. There have been scientific studies as to the effects of the moon on men and the parallels to menstruation. And efforts to equate them in legalese will be met with my consternation at the very least, I assure you.

Let me put it this way -- Can any white person ever be a victim of a hate crime in US law? No, they can't. If a gang of minorities raced after a sole caucasian screaming "Kill whitey!" it wouldn't be considered a hate crime. Whites enjoy a majority, therefore only they can be the perpetrators of hate. Please don't believe me. Look it up. Name me one hate crime perpetrated on a white by a minority.

Clearly, there is an imbalance as to how definitions are applied. From my perspective, they are all painted with a left-handed brush. But you should agree, since, after all, you're a self-described conservative.

Careful Snake Foreskin, these public pronouncement may attract the attention of the Gay Mafia.