Obama Files USELESS Prop 8 Brief

And here it is.

I was a little bit surprised that the White House has decided to file a brief against the California ban on gay marriage. One reason is that Obama, like so many other "liberal democrats" believed that marriage is a state issue. This notion is obviously wrong due to the fact that Obama is fighting a legislation in the same court, in the same week that dealt with a federal regulation of marriage - I am referring of course to DOMA. The federal government has indeed regulated marriage throughout its history from tax regulations to banning Mormon polygamy and spousal slavery. For this and many reasons I wholly reject the Democratic party's dumb uneducated assumption that the states are the only ones to regulate marriage.

I was thinking before reading the brief filed today at 6:30pm at the Supreme Court, that Obama is now going to reverse himself and yet again contradict himself "evolve" on this issue once more by saying that gay marriage is now a federal question and that the 14th amendment does apply to this issue not the states.

Wrong.

Now Obama is just pandering and doing a really clumsy job.

In this, now what I would call useless brief, Obama is saying that, yes, the federal government can intervene but that Ted Olson, Judge Walker, and the 9th Circuit are all wrong. Obama shoots this ball right out of left field by basically pulling a new flawed stupid horrible idea directly out of his ass. In order to appease the democratic party and other figures, and the gay base, Obama, now it seems, wants it all: Gay marriage is a 14th amendment question that should be applied but states rights also prevail and so the 14th amendment only applies to states who have civil unions because these states are creating a 'different class' of people. This is totally absurd. People in civil partnerships or civil unions are NOT being discriminated against under equal treatment and having such 'status' is not a characteristic that is even recognized by case law. The basis of the whole lawsuit was, and still is, that the states are discriminating based on sexual orientation (not legal status), a characteristic that has been found to be protected by case law.

Basically Obama is saying that any state that has civil unions is now and forever obligated to legalize gay marriage, which can have several negative effects. One of them being that many reactionaries would point to this brief and say "see if you give gays any form of recognition the state will have to legalize gay marriage." In fact any state, like Wyoming or Utah for example, that might consider even the most essential rights like hospital visitation and burial assignation will have to think twice - meaning gay people in these states are in jeopardy of getting no rights at all.

This new quack theory that only eight states with civil partnerships or civil unions are the only ones subjected to the 14th amendment is a totally crazy idea that should be laughed off in its entirety. Who cares about the sugar that is coated around the edges of this brief, what should be the most important part of any court brief is the essential legal argument, Obama's is one that should be rightfully rejected. But since segments of the gay community are totally in for this guy I will hardly expect anybody to actually read the damn brief but instead they will jerk off to it saying "how wonderful our dear leader is."

Anti-Gay Buster Wilson Admits That Homophobia Will Bring Down The Boys Scouts

Oh the irony.

Anti-gay ringmaster Buster Wilson at Big Homophobia Inc. (aka American Family Association) makes an interesting yet unintentional admission that homophobia will bring down the Boys Scouts and not gays themselves if they rescind the gay ban.

During his foaming at the mouth dither he barks:

"If they wilt under the pressure of the Human Rights Campaign and they fold like a cheap tent they will cease to exist. Let me tell you what the Boy Scouts of America will become, if they change their ruling and they give into the pressure and the extortion of the Human Rights Campaign this is what’s going to happen: the Boy Scouts of America will falter and fall and become nothing in the end but the ‘Boy Scouts of Gay America’ because that’s the only folks that’ll support them."

 Translating that last phrase we see what he means: the Boys Scouts of America has homophobes, and if you allow openly gays admission our homophobia is too intense, so perverse, so ingrained that we will pack up and leave, leaving only those liberal gay loving tree huggers who most likely will be a dwindling small number and this will lead to their downfall.

So it isn't gays themselves that are the problem. It is, and always has been, their relentless homophobia. Got it?

"Free Speech" Anti-Gays Now Want to Slience Brendon Ayanbadejo

This is one of many reasons why I, nor should anybody with common sense, do not believe the anti-gays genuine claim that their homophobia is a sacred free speech right immune from any criticism.

It appears that Tony Perkins from the anti-gay hate group Family Research Council doesn't believe in freedom of speech at all. Here he is having a fit because the Ravens' Brendon Ayanbadejo dared to use the Super Bowl as an opportunity to express his free speech in support of gay marriage, how dare he!:

  

And yet anti-gays still complain that their free speech is being infringed upon whenever some other anti-gay goes on a homophobic rant during their employers' time, and of course said employers do not like that kind of shenanigans going on on their watch. Case in point: an Alabama teacher was suspended for doing just that. And like clockwork his hypocritical supporters, like Tony, are foaming at the mouth for free speech while at the same time telling people like Brendon to shut up and "stop shoving it down our throats":

 

Well Dar to answer your question it appears that your pal Tony Perkins does think that people should be punished for what they say.

HYPOCRITES.

Anti-Gay Reactionaries Hate Their Own Stupid Rhetoric

First I would like to inform you all that I've not been posting lately or doing the podcast because I been busy with other work and as of late I came down with a severe case of Labyrinthtitus, a condition which affected my inner ear and basically incapacitated me for a whole week. But now all is good and my other work has been completed and now I am back, although still slowly recuperating from my condition.

Maybe its the sedation drugs speaking but I am fucking sick and tired of these whiny pesky homophobic reactionaries from the right wing. It is time to expose their naked stupidity and illogical dribble.

I have a lot catching up to do since my absence but I have been reading the papers and all the news from the 49ers flak to a lesbian couple being denied a wedding cake from a self righteous fascist evangelical. And the typical reaction from the homophobes is the same: gay haters are the real victims and the gays that we discriminate against are the Nazi, Commie, Maoist, fascists for DARING to engage in commerce by trying to buy wedding cakes of all things.   

The most interesting response from these bigots, particularly in the 49ers fiasco, is that those who espouse prejudiced anti-gay comments should be immune from the consequences of said vitriol. A football player has a right to state that he hates fags and that's that. You queers just take it! However, say anything bad about Israel and BAM! you are a target of the right wing crazies. However, attacking gays is a noble act of "bravery" to these knuckleheads. And such bravery should be protected, meaning a football player who says "I hate fags" should not get reprimanded from his employers, such disciplinary action is a so-called infringement on said player's First Amendment right to free speech and that homos are nothing but the thought police engaging in Nazi-like persecution against an "innocent" football player. But these yahoos are forgetting something though: their own rhetoric approved by the Supreme Court in the form of Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000) and the pivotal central argument in that case in which the Boy Scouts won the right to discriminate against gays:

"The Court holds that the lower court's decision unconstitutionally violated the rights of the BSA, specifically the freedom of association to exclude a person from membership when the presence of that person affects in a significant way the group's ability to advocate public or private viewpoints."

In other words, the 49ers have a constitutional right granted by the right wing court to discriminate against homophobic players and fire them from the team because of who they are and what they represent (homophobia) is contradictory to the "viewpoints" of a team that is based in a city well known for its gay culture.

Yet homophobic right wingers will vent and foam at the mouth even against their own central rhetoric all in the name to oppose teh gays.

To hell with this is about "free speech" blah blah empty argument. This is about reactionaries and their homophobia and trying to mask it with cliches like freedom of speech. Sorry reactionaries, you are being caught red handed in your hypocritical stupid nonsense.