I've seen no signs of her going nuts on gay marraige.  On the contrary, I've seen her coming out swinging in defense of sanity. 

blognroll there you go again trying to rescue the right wing gay hater wacko again... ..............Go to CA.

Where is the hate, gube.  All I see is a strongly stated opinion?  You are the one calling her terrible names.  She's put nobody down or called anybody any bad names, things one would expect from a hate-filled individual.  She's merely had the guts to speak her opinion, and she has a right to speak her opinion.  Where is the hate speech in her article?   Will you, can you, provide an example? 

It all stems from hate......Word it how ever you want .......

Blognroll.  I'm with you. If you disagree with a liberal it is "hate" speech according to them.

I can read between the lines........and I am a moderate.

Amen to that, RoyTullis.   If you are a moderate, gube, and I'll take your word for it, I would suggest reading at the article again, with a moderate mind--one that is open to both sides of the argument, not just the side represented by the far left. 

I would suggest that you refrain from simply calling her names and attacking her character, and begin to figure out just what you find so objectionable about her argument.  Then, and only then can we begin to have a meaningful conversation. 

Apparently the "far" left is now the majority in California,nice try though.

gube.  If you are a "moderate", Ted Kennedy is a far right conservative.

not surprised, Marylee is not know for her support of civil rights or equality.

sfinboston52: "not surprised, Marylee is not know for her support of civil rights or equality."
 

Ah, but she is a strong supporter of people's "right" to discriminate against others.

Or unless the person "discriminated" against is white, rich, or otherwise priviledged. Then suddenly she's Moses screaming, "let my people go" or quoting Thurgood Marshall (in a completely straight and non-ironic way).

This is more of a definition issue than it is an issue of discrimination, but, for the sake of argument, let's say supporting a traditional definition of marraige is discirmination.

When you tell a 14 year old that they can't get a driver's license, you're discriminating against the 14 year old because of his/her age.  We all discriminate every day.  The problem comes when that discrimination results in significant harm to another human being. 

Actually, Matt, I would have to say that you are of the  "privileged class".  (nouveau) 

The  "privileged class"  being defined as  "those who work 8 to 5 and are paid from the largess of the working class"

Ever re-reviewed the book "Animal Farm"??

It is small wonder you want a Carter II POTUS

Can you rebut me, given your status

and mine wherein I pay property taxes in your County (Kern) that amount to thousands  each year?

Seems to me its all a matter of perspective....

What do you think? 

Oh I'm sorry Chico, am I arguing for anything approaching "priviledge" or "exclusive rights"? Or are you simply making personal attacks because you have nothing to contribute to the discussion, and nothing to refute what I've said about Ms. Shrider?
 

I fully realize that my education has provided me with job options not available to less fortunate (educated or smart) individuals. I also realize that the fortune of my birth has provided me with opportunities not available to everyone else in this country. Which is why I constantly argue for greater availability for higher education, better support for primary education, and support for those who need it. I also realize that my "socialist" job is made possible by property owners, and I am grateful for their taxes.

I have a great copy of "Animal Farm", illustrated by gonzo artist Ralph Steadman. I fail to see where this has any bearing on the discussion of Ms. Shrider, but since you asked...... What does that have to do with same-sex marriage? Seems to me that Ms. Shrider's side is the "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" in denying the (equal) right to be married to same-sex partners.

By the way, since we're talking full-disclosure, are any of your properties under the Williamson Act?

Matt, I suppose you believe I'm one of those bitter folk who clings to his Bible and to his guns.  Well, I must admit, if you think that, you are right:

I've Got One Hand On My Bible (the Other on My Gun)

Dr BLT words and music by Dr BLT copyright 2008

http://www.drblt.net/music/...

Matt - of coors

What have you disclosed?

(vestiges of the  "big borther" ala lynch racing whose momma works for County Assessor and is now going to be at doorstep.......)

Are you in you system now looking up my APN's for back taxes, etc......?

Matt -- sf is  "know" for his grammatical skills............

Well  "know"...........

Can we presume these carry forward to his analytical skills as well?

Is he representative of your  "peeps"??

You know, Chico, I've asked you that question several times now, and you refuse to answer it. Makes me think you have something to hide.....
 

And I'm not sure what you mean by sf representing "my peeps". Care to explain?

I am at a veritable impasse here mattloch....

I have answered you over and over ........ yes I have have APN's that happen to fall under the Wiilliamson Act......

Are you  "phishing"  for something here (like a typical ID theft bandit) or what?

One must wonder............

sf is one of the individual posters on here that represents the majority of your posts in their general sentiment.....

Care to rebut??? (or at least veritas)

No Chico, you've never verified that. Not that I care (professionally), but it certainly puts you in a moral bind when you whine and complain about "welfare" and "subsidies" that other people receive from the government.
 

And so what if sf and I happen to fall on the same side of any number of issues? What is your point here? Why did you mention personal information about me? What does any of this have to do with Ms. Shrider's constant attacks on other people's rights while upholding other "rights" of the priviledged class?

What personal info?

A bureaucrat?

Lucky guess

I guess

Not a guess now

I guess............

I could axe Loren ....... ??

sf is woefully lacking in linguistic, albeit only as evidenced hereon, literary skills......... I think you would not refute that.

While that doesn't in and of itself digress-detour from the message (viz superman who has some really valid points hereon), you have to admit it brings in to question his grasp of basic logic and the ability to analyze sitreps as presented.

Would you not agree?

No, I would not agree Chico. Spelling or grammar are typically not indicative of a person's ability to rationalize, or to use reason. I knew plenty of people who had atrocious spelling when I did intercollegiate debate, and they were top notch intellectuals. Haste could play a role (or just not giving a damn), as could other factors such as dyslexia. I've never faulted anyone's poor spelling or grammar, unless of course they did the same thing (to me or someone else) first, and never in "anger" (just to point out their hypocrisy).
 

Your second step is even faultier. Just because one person supporting an issue may not have "basic logic and the ability to analyze sitreps as presented" does not mean everybody supporting that issue is in the same boat. Seeing as how you've made several logical fallacies, I might very well call your "grasp  of basic logic" into question.....

The article has two examples of what the ramifications are and will be for "changing the definition of marraige". . A Methodist association was sued for not allowing a lesbian couple to hold their ceremony on their property   and ---    a Christian wedding photographer was hauled before the states human rights commission for declining to photograph a same sex wedding. 

  I think maybe I've underestimated the seriousness of this issue?

Dsc217...The methodist association leased a pavllion on an ocean boardwalk and had allowed all sorts of marriages to be performced there, Jewish, Muslim, JP etc, and the photograph...he decided last minute, far to late for the couple to find someone else.

Blognroll, tellling a 14 year-old they can't get a license is not the same as teling a gay couple they can't get married.  The 14 year-old will soon be 16, and able to drive.  The gay couple, unless they're "cured" (apologies, sfinboston, but I use that term sarcastically), will never be able to marry.  One is a matter of maturity, they other a matter of "my God, in a part of the bible that is completely rediculous, says that you are evil.  So no marriage for you."

And yes, the State Supreme Court has seemed to go against the will of the majority here, but there have been times when our Government has had to drag us kicking and screaming towards the right thing.  You think Arkansas was happy to desegregate?  If left up to them, how long do you think it would have taken them to do it on their own?