Nationwide protest against Proposition 8 tomorrow.

[MrFun]

So were blacks wrong about their concern on civil rights in 50s and 60s because they were not impartial?

[DRoseDARs]

Thank you, Mr. Fun.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


You are angry at me for pointing out the obvious?

You pointed out an imagined obvious: You stated we supported those who "attacked" her.

It doesn't matter what she has done in the past, and digging up dirt to obfuscate the issue is just downright dirty. I find it hilarious that whenever someone makes the news, the very next articles try to dig up dirt on that person to say, hey they are evil, so she deserved what she got.

Yes, it does matter. She was painted as some random counter protector, she's not. The media f*cking recognized her from before and she has a history of being at gay events harassing gays. Like the Westboro Baptist Church.

The point, and this is what wasn't addressed, is that the gay folks here haven't stepped up to say, this is not right. We all have sinned in the past, but that doesn't justify us hurting another person.

She wasn't hurt, dumbsh*t. Someone grabbed her styrofoam cross and it was smashed. She isn't even pressing charges.

Here was your opportunity to stfu and you didn't take it. The OBVIOUS point was no one here supported any attack on anyone else. Even the larger online gay blogging community roundly condemned on the bigger name blogs. Of course, that doesn't matter because gay blogs aren't impartial...

That's like asking every single Muslim to apologize for being Muslim and thus responsible for the actions of a very few. Conservative bloggers have ACTUALLY demanded this and it's patently retarded.

She was wrong to hurt a disabled person. Now, let's see y'all step up and call out the haters at the prop 8 rally.

Duh, dumbsh*t, that's what people are doing: Calling out the haters who supported Prop 8.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by MrFun
So were blacks wrong about their concern on civil rights in 50s and 60s because they were not impartial?

Maybe I didn't express myself well or maybe you choose not to understand. This has nothing to even do with the issue itself. I was questioning the story that was reported here. I said the blogger at the gay website's take on what happened when a little old lady with a cross was assaulted at a Prop 8 rally in front of City Hall might not be an impartial take. Furthermore, his take has only been produced here from his blog.

That is like going to an NRA blog, getting a unique pro-NRA take on video that on the surface looked bad for the NRA. I would question the partiality of the source.

Or it's like asking Karl Rove for his take on the Bush Administration.

If that is the "stupidest comment of the week" or something you can't understand I'm sorry.

[MrFun]

I never went so far to say yours was the "stupidest comment of the week" - in fact, someone else said that.

And thank you for clarifying; I understand the context of your impartiality remark now.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Imran was condoning it earlier.

So you think people that talk about Darwin Awards are condoning people dying? If so, that explains a lot about you.