Friday, October 12, 2007

Radical Republican Press Release


Earlier today, the Radical Republican party was criticized in a formal post. Not foreign to such accusations of stubbornness and narrow mindedness, the Radical Republican is once again subject to defending their beliefs that marriage between two sodomites is intrinsically evil.

Defending the Radical Republican movement at WHS is two of the leaders: Atulya Prateek and Glen Maganzini.

Radical Republican Movement: Narrow minded? It is called standing up for and backing your beliefs. So, believing in anything wrong or right is stubborn? That doesn't make too much sense. Deep prejudice? Gay marriage is heretical. You can not say that we are being heretics, look at the sodomites! Opinions will be opinions. Thoughts will be thoughts. The path of moral correctness has no gays in it.

Religion, yes, is based on interpretation, but only to some extent. Religion and marriage are intertwined to a very deep extent. The prophets who wrote the Bible were intellects; they were the most brilliant.

Celebrating love? What celebration does a married couple achieve if they don't reproduce?

Gay marriage is gross and disgusting; it should be banned. Grown men displaying affection (holding hands, kissing) is wrong.

Why do we bother with such an issue as gay marriage? It is actually quite simple. We are vehemently against it!

"Marriage does involve very personal feelings, but this does not mean that it is merely a private matter. Whether it succeeds or fails, a marriage has a huge impact on the couple, their children, those around them, and the entire society. As an institution, marriage is the business of everyone in society. It takes more than emotion to hold a marriage together, as we have seen. - Catholic Answers"

And I leave you with two other quotes that sum up our views on gay marriage from the same source:

The institution of marriage is precious. It enhances the health, longevity, and well-being of married couples. It increases the health, vocational success, and emotional well-being of children. In providing all these benefits, heterosexual marriage contributes to the happiness and prosperity of society. Marriage must, therefore, remain limited to one man and one woman who strive to keep their marriage exclusive, unconditional, permanent, and life-giving. Nothing less will ever meet the needs of the human person, because nothing less satisfies.

Because it is intrinsically disordered, we must not recognize homosexual activity as legitimate, and we must not give public approval to homosexual marriage because of the harm that will do to the institution of marriage and because of the social harm that will result from emptying marriage of its meaning. Perhaps the most serious social harm would be to children: the children of divorce and the children of same-sex couples, who will suffer all the ills we have discussed.
On a final note: name calling does not win arguments. Calling us stubborn bigots and homophobes only proves that you are dismissing the argument at hand.

29 comments:

  1. ....Uh, is this some kind of joke? I didn't think it was possible for someone to have such failing logic...

    ReplyDelete
  2. The least you can do is have the balls to say your name and stand up for what you believe in.

    ReplyDelete
  3. i didn't think it was possible for someone to be so manipulative.

    ReplyDelete
  4. To clarify an underlying issue: we aren't violently against people who are gay. We don't believe that beating up gays will have any positive influence on ending the lifestyle. While their actions are wrong and sinful, we must never give up hope that they can break their habit of homosexuality.

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071013
    /ts_afp/vaticanreligiongay_071013130129
    Apparently even religious people can be homosexual. If it was a choice, why would they choose to be something that God is supposedly against?

    ReplyDelete
  6. You know, your namesake really had nothing to do with your cause. It actually supported civil rights for all, i.e. the opposite of what you support. History is important.

    This video shows exactly the kind of craziness spawned by the Religious Right and their ideas: http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popu
    p/?rn=49750&cl=4491740&ch=61492&src=news

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Apparently even religious people can be homosexual. If it was a choice, why would they choose to be something that God is supposedly against?"

    Free will. I don't know why they chose to be gay. However, the Vatican is properly dealing with serious matter and staying true to the beliefs set by the Bible, natural law, and moral absolutism.

    -------------------

    I don't see how that video has anything to do with politics. All it did was show evangelical and pentecostal child preachers.

    -------------------

    Our namesake has to do with 21st century Radical Republicanism. Our beliefs are radical as you can attest. And they are conservative. We aren't associated with the Radical Republican Party of the 19th century. We aren't trying to be.

    ReplyDelete
  8. yeeah! radical republicans are soo right. There are countless reasons that gay marriage will rain destruction across our cities:

    1) Being gay is not natural. Unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning are a grave threat to society.

    2) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

    3) Legalizing gay marriage is the first step of a slippery slope. People will soon be marrying their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

    4) Marriage has existed unchanged for centuries: women are still property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorce is illegal.

    5) Marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage is allowed. Relationships like Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage will no longer be sacrosanct.

    6) Marriage is meant to produce children. Infertile couples and old people are not allowed to marry because the world needs more children.

    7) Gay marriage is forbidden by our universal religion. Society would collapse without a strong theocracy. That's why we have only one religion.

    ReplyDelete
  9. http://www.latimes.com/news/science
    /la-sci-politics10sep10,0,5982337.story?
    coll=la-home-center

    Thought you'd like to know.

    ReplyDelete
  10. a) There is no such thing as the 21st century "Radical Republicans." Call yourselves the Radical Right, because that's the correct term. Your beliefs (flawed as they are) agree with the Constitution Party, so call yourselves that. I can't believe I have to tell you what party you belong with. You don't even know for yourselves.

    b) Your "group" is made up of three bigots and homophobes, like it or not. You are bigots because you are intolerant of an entire group for no real reason. Being homophobic is in no way different than being sexist, ageist, or racist. You discriminate based on something that a person cannot control. A homosexual can't "turn off" their sexuality any more than an Indian, say, could "turn off" his race.

    c) You argue that homosexuality is a choice, even though it has been observed in thousands of animal species. It seems like it's more natural than you think. Even if it is a choice, who cares? Your religion is your choice, and I'm not going to say you're gross or unnatural for being Christian. Also, religion is something much less natural than homosexuality. Animals don't make shrines or gather to praise a divine being, do they?

    d) All of your arguments are backed up by Christianity. Not that there is anything wrong with religion, but it is a belief. It is not fact. Citing the Bible as a source for a definition of marriage makes no sense. The Bible advocates slavery, sexism, racism, murder (contradicting its own 5th Commandment, whoops). Also, Leviticus prohibits absurd things such as eating pork, eating shellfish, or trimming one's beard (crazy, I know). Deuteronomy advocates divorce just because a wife "displeases" her husband. Should a book with such strange ideals be used to define all social and civil liberties in the 21st century? No.

    e) I know you're doing this to get a rise out of people, and you've obviously gotten what you wanted. So why don't you stop now and believe what you want on your own time without pushing your beliefs on others? At least, if you want to make a point and have a civilized debate, make valid points and stop using flawed logic. Saying, "Gay marriage is gross and disgusting" does absolutely nothing for your argument and just makes you sound stupid. So stop.

    -Kerri

    ReplyDelete
  11. I pity the fool.

    ....and by "the fool" I of course mean Glen.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Responses to Kerri

    a) Thank you. We know there is no such thing as 21st century "Radical Republicans" but why can't we unofficially create our own party? We are the Radical Right; we also do happen to agree with both the Constitution Party and the Republican Party on the one subject of homosexuality (marriage). Rather than supporting myriad issues of both of those parties, we created a one issue platform.

    b) I can't say I didn't know this was coming. A homophobe is somebody who fears homosexuality. Since when is disagreeing the same thing as fearing? I never knew that a racist was defined as somebody fears a particular race. Last time, I checked it was the belief that some races are superior to others. Now, I am not saying that gays should turn off their sexuality, but I am saying they can control their actions i.e marrying a member of the same sex.

    c) Killing is just as much a choice as "being gay". "Being gay" here is used as an action.

    d) The whole Bible advocates slavery and racism, etc doesn't quite work out. I've gotten into this discussion on other websites, but to say the least, I don't think you are interpreting the Bible correctly. Timothy lists slave trading as much a sin as murder. Not eating pork, etc stuff that you listed there are all O.T practices that are no longer obliged to Christians of the New Testament. This is similar to our stance against the death penalty. (O.T encouraged eye for an eye, N.T encourages loving of the neighbor)
    What a shock! The N.T condemns divorce.

    e) Saying Gay Marriage is gross and disgusting is the truth. The facts behind your arguments are flawed just as much as mine supposedly are. Social progressives like you are just ignorant to traditional morality. Unfortunately, change isn't always correct.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Glen, appearantly you missed the day in school when we discussed the difference between fact and opinion. Your OPINION is that gay marriage is disgusting, and that's fine. You are more than entitled to your own opinion.

    However, the fact of the matter is that our country ensures liberty and justice for ALL. As much as you may not like to acknowledge it, gay people are just as much people as the rest of us. Who are you to say that they aren't entitled to the same rights as the rest of us?

    You are doing such a disservice to our generation. We should be bringing a new wave of revolution and tolerance instead of remaining stuck in the dark ages of bigotry that have come before us.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Your OPINION is that gay marriage is right. Gay people are people, yes that is right. However, gay marriages are not legal.

    I am going to compare gay marriage to murder. You have the liberty and justice to murder somebody. You will penalized as a result. You have the liberty and justice to be gay. However, as a preventive act to you being punished, we are just making gay marriage illegal. Both practices are harmful and rebellious. Now rebellion is okay in small doses, but look at our own state! Look at the bigotry of modern society put on by the gay rights activists on Beacon Hill! What a shame, what a shame.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Glen, welcome to Massachusetts. Gay marriage is legal and had been legal since 2004 in this state. Which rock have you been living under? I know you're going to argue that it's not federally legal. Fantastic. Federal law allows the state to decide on that issue.
    How are gays bigots against you at all? Give me 5 good reasons why any gay person getting married will affect you in a negative way (breaking your idea of "Christian law" is not a valid reason). I am going to compare the gay rights issue to the persecution of Christians in Northern Ireland today. Hundreds of Christians were persecuted and tortured for no reason other than the fact that they were Christian. Unjustly punishing someone on the basis of who they are and what they identify with is bigotry.

    We live in America. "All men are created equal." Until you can prove that gays are no longer people, they are entitled to the same rights and safeguards under the law as you or I. We also have two things called "freedom of religion," and "separation of church and state," meaning that laws should not be based on one religion, and that anyone can practice his own religion without persecution. Just because the Bible is against gay marriage, doesn't mean that there should be laws against it to please the Christians.

    Your point "d" earlier pretty much proved my point, albeit in a different way. You basically said, "the Bible contradicts itself." If the New Testament and the Old Testament contradict, which one do you believe as a Christian? You believe both, and that doesn't work. Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  16. 5 reasons? I will you give you 10.

    "...the demise of families will accelerate this type of decline dramatically, resulting in a chaotic culture that will be
    devastating to children."

    "Given that unstable legal climate, it is certain that some self-possessed judge, somewhere, will soon rule that three men and one woman can marry."

    "With the family out of the way, all rights and privileges of marriage will accrue to gay and lesbian partners without the legal entanglements and commitments heretofore associated with it."

    "...every public school in the nation will be required to teach that this perversion is the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. "

    "Children will be placed in homes with parents representing only one sex on an equal basis with those having a mom and a dad."

    "[Foster parents] will have to affirm homosexuality in children and teens."

    "How about the impact on Social Security if there are millions of new dependents that will be entitled to survivor benefits?"

    "[Countries are] carefully monitoring the United States to see where it is going. If we take this step off a cliff, the family on every continent will splinter at an accelerated rate."

    "The family has been God's primary vehicle for evangelism since the beginning."

    "Tampering with [God's] plan for the family is immoral and wrong."

    Source: NoGayMarriage

    Gay Marriage as you can see from the arguments listed above is not based solely on religion. Law can and will be created that reflects the good of American society (we need an amendment banning gay marriage)

    How did I say the Bible contradicts itself? The Old Testament law was intended for the infant nation at the time, Israel. New Testament law is two-fold: spiritual and civil. Israel was going to be nation for which the Messiah was to come from, so God had to promptly set up some laws. Things changed....

    ReplyDelete
  17. Glen, before you take this any further I must point out the fact that there is not a single shred of evidence that gays are not good parents. In fact, I can more than assure you that you could turn on the news and find hundreds of straight parents who are unfit.

    I take personal offense to these comments because I personally know gay parents who are excellent with their children. Being gay does NOT make you less capable of doing things that any straight person can do.

    And Glen, do not even attempt to give us the argument of children needing equal male and female parenting. If that was the case, children would be taken away from every single mother or father in the country.

    On another note, gay marriage is not the same thing as polyamy. They are not at all related, nor will one lead to the other. Also, gay marriage is not any more perverse or immoral than marriage between a heterosexual couple. It's just two human beings (all of which are created equal) expressing their love through the cerimony of marriage. Just because it's something you're unfamiliar with doesn't make it a negative thing.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Okay, Glen. I really have tried. Here you go.

    1) Divorce can be seen as the "demise of families," yet it is perfectly legal. Should divorce be illegal? Would you want to stay in an abusive relationship to help keep the picture of a "perfect family" instead of getting divorced and risk "the demise" of your family? I hope not.

    2)Okay, so you want to define marriage as two people, fine. Two gays are two people. If two gays love each other and will be happily married, why deny them? Gay marriage is different than the "traditional" view of marriage, but it will still be between two partners who love each other and are loyal to each other. And even if they're not, a lot of heterosexual couples cheat or divorce, too. Marriage now is hardly religious. It's pretty much a piece of paper with a big ceremony based around it. Also different than the "traditional" view.

    3) What is this point trying to say, anyway? That gays can't have kids, so they're just getting married to get benefits? I'm sure that no gays want to get married because they love their partner. Right. And even if they can't have kids, do you know how many heterosexual couples abandon their kids? Does that make them any better parents than a gay couple? Gays can adopt and have a family that way.

    4) Again, bias. Calling gay marriage a "perversion" shows a negative preconception of the idea. Once you can get over that bias, maybe you can accept it for what it is: a union between two devoted partners. Also, schools don't teach a definition of marriage now, anyway. Gay marriage is legal in MA, but the day it became legal, teachers didn't throw out their textbooks and preach that gay marriage is an absolute truth, did they? It won't happen in the rest of the country, either.

    5) Glen, single parents. A house with just a mom raising a kid is no different than a house with two moms raising a kid. Only female influence, yes, but it's the same in both cases. Should single parenting be illegal? (see anonymous' post above)

    6) So, foster parents will have to accept their foster child for who they are, no matter what they believe or identify with? All the better. There is nothing wrong or unnatural about being gay, so why would it be so bad to "have to accept" that fact? You make it sound like gay kids are equivalent to serial killers.

    7) This is true, but it's the same with heterosexual couples. If all of a sudden, a movement appears, and 1.000.000 couples want to marry, no one will stop them, and the same Social Security benefits will have to be applied. Seems a little unfair to me.

    8) Wrong. Which countries are waiting on the US's decision on this topic to decide their own? Canada, Belgium, The Netherlands, Spain, and South Africa already recognize gay marriage. Over a dozen other countries recognize civil unions. Many regions of other countries (including MA) recognize civil unions, as well. I'm sure once gay marriage is legalized in the US, all of these countries will reverse their decisions immediately. The US is important and influential, but we aren't idolized to that extent. Maybe the sacred institution of marriage will crumble in Antarctica.

    9)Gays can be Christian, and spread the Christian message. Many gays are Christian. I don't know why they would be, since Christianity is so intolerant and oppressive toward their lifestyle, but they are. And again, they can adopt. Or does adoption contribute to the "demise of family"?

    10) Maybe God's plan isn't the best plan these days? The Bible is anachronistic in many ways. Times have changed, laws have changed, morals have changed. The Bible (NT) says it is shameful for a man to have long hair. Many men have long hair. It also prohibits women from teaching or holding authority over men. That's pretty backwards thinking. These ideas worked back in the first century, but they don't hold today.

    I'm not even going to go into the fact that these views aren't your own and were copied from a website titled "NoGayMarriage." It is also an evangelical site, with religion as it motivating factor.

    We need no such amendment. There is no valid reason to ban gay marriage that does not tie into religion. Any other reason can be applied to a heterosexual person or couple (divorce, single parenting, social security, etc). I asked you to give me five good, non-religious reasons why gay marriage would personally and negatively affect you, and you gave me ten bad, mostly religious points that really don't have much to do with your everyday life at all. If marrying will make someone happy, why deny them that right?

    You are Republican, yes? Republicans take the Constitution for what it's worth. The Constitution allows states to decide on marriage independently. Again, we live in MA and MA allows gay marriage, if you hadn't noticed. Times change, and maybe the Constitution needs to be amended to allow gay marriage. That's why it wasn't set in stone when it was written. Some of it doesn't apply to life today, and that's why it can be amended (women's rights, African American rights, etc). With homosexuality becoming more acceptable (and rightly so), maybe it's time to change the laws to reflect that.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Glen, you're being ridiculous. And Steve is right, Kerri completely owned you. Have you ever even attempted to get to know someone of the homosexual persuasion? I know many gays personally, and you are being both insulting and demeaning towards them, and I take it as a personal insult.

    ReplyDelete
  20. First of all, Glen- this is probably the most offensive and discriminatory blog post I have ever read. I am not offended, because I feel every word you say is garbage.

    For example, consider last year, when you told an English class that you believe that all gay people should move to one state and be kept there while everyone else moves out. Now, Glen. You are a Republican, are you not? Are Republicans not opposed to a loose interpretation of the constitution? IS IT CONSTITUTIONAL TO FORCE PEOPLE WITH A CHARACTERISTIC FROM BIRTH TO BE RESTRAINED IN A GROUP CONCENTRATION-CAMP STYLE???

    "You can't reproduce if you have two penises going at each other." Sure, sure. You can't. We know. However, you seem to believe that two adults who are in old age and unable to have any children to marry. In addition, a woman who cannot bear children may also be married.
    "Celebrating love? What celebration does a married couple achieve if they don't reproduce?" SO, Glen, you believe that there are cases in which a man and a woman can not be married.

    Your political beliefs are almost as bizarre as your rap lyrics.

    This next part really angers me. In other posts you have made, you claim to enjoy The Velvet Underground and Lou Reed. Really, Glen. Lou Reed is very openly bisexual, and many of his lyrics with both VU and his solo career blatantly allude to his sexuality. Take the song "Lady Godiva's Operation" a song about a transsexual undergoing a lobotomy. Or the famous "Walk on the Wild Side" : "Holly came from Miami F.L.A./Hitchhiked her way across the USA/Plucked her eyebrows on the way/Shaved her legs and then he was a she/She says, "Hey babe, take a walk on the wild side." Reed was alluding to his close friend Holly Woodlawn, a transvestite prostitute. In the next verse, he tells about Candy Darling, another friend, who came from Fire Island (google it, Glen!) and gave oral sex in the backroom of a bar. My friend tells me you really enjoy his song "Heroin". There is one line "I feel just like Jesus' son." You say, "The prophets who wrote the Bible were intellects; they were the most brilliant." If they were intellectuals, wouldn't they have included information about his son? I'm sure you believe that Christ was celibate, making Reed a heretic. Why would you listen to a man who has sex with men? AND calls himself the son of Christ? And hangs around with transvestites? You do the math, Glen.

    Also, I read an earlier post IN WHICH YOU HAVE THE AUDACITY TO COMPARE GAY MARRAIGE TO MURDER. I will not say anything. Instead I would love to leave any reader to interpret such a ridiculous comparison as they so choose.

    Gosh, just do some research, Glen, and don't do things just to hurt. We're all hope you're a good person. Get laid or something. Please just don't make us submit to this.

    ReplyDelete
  21. While I am a strong believer that the legality of gay marriage is not a question of religion, God's words continue to be the basis of your viewpoint. Therefore I have found some quotes you might like.

    "God is interested in our relationships with ourselves, others, the things in our lives, and with God. (Matt. 23:36-40). There is nothing in the mind of God that could be against a loving, sexual relationship, freely entered into, without coercion, among sincere adults whether gay, bisexual, or straight." - Rev. Stayton

    "Findings indicate that homosexuality is a given fact in the nature of a significant portion of people, and that it is unchangeable." - Bishop Spong

    "The God I worship endorses loving, committed, monogamous relationships, regardless of the gender of those involved." - Rabbi Marder

    "God does not regard homosexuality as a sin any more than heterosexuality. Sin is a lack of respect or love for God; it is lack of love or respect for other persons." - Rev. Edwards
    (perhaps this makes you, Glen, the greatest sinner of all for disrespecting the many gay people you know.)

    "Since I also believe that all God creates is good, I conclude that human sexuality (not a matter of choice for anyone) is good, whether that sexual expression be heterosexual or homosexual." - Rev. Holfelder

    "What God DOES regard as a sin is oppression, injustice, persecution, disrespect for persons. This sin, then, is homophobia, gay-bashing, discriminatory legislation toward lesbians and gays, refusal to include lesbian/gay/bisexual people into our churches and communities." - Dr. Lebacqz

    "Homosexuality is an authentic condition of being with which some persons are endowed (a gift of God, if you please), not an optional sexual life-style which they have willfully, whimsically, or sinfully chosen." - Bishop Wheatley

    "I regard the blessing of gay or lesbian couples by the church to be inevitable, right, and a positive good. We must be willing to relinquish prejudice and turn our attention to loving our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, supporting them, and relating to them as a part of God's good creation." - Bishop Spong

    And as far as you are concerned with gay parenting...

    "God's concern must be that we are good and loving parents, whether gay or straight, and that we bring our children up to be independent of us, loving individuals with a value system that strives to accept, understand, and love all that is good." - Rev. Stayton

    "The image of relationships God seeks for us is clear: self-giving, caring,faithful." - Bishop Wood

    "If the home and family they seek to create is a place of love, sacrifice, fidelity and mutual respect, it is surely a fit place for the raising of children." - Bishop Olson

    "Love between two individuals should encourage them to share that love with others. Biological or adopted off-spring are one means for same-sex and heterosexual couples to share that love with the human family." - Sister Gramick

    ReplyDelete
  22. "First of all, Glen- this is probably the most offensive and discriminatory blog post I have ever read. I am not offended, because I feel every word you say is garbage."

    How can you be not offended and be offended at the same time? Please advise.

    "You are a Republican, are you not? Are Republicans not opposed to a loose interpretation of the constitution?"

    No, I am not. I have my own interpretation of the constitution. Looking back on that statement I made, I apologize. Although I do believe you are being unreasonable in comparing it to a concentration camp. It bears more of a resemblance to something gays prefer.

    That statement concerning reproduction, I was chiefly speaking about married couples who are ABLE to reproduce.

    Right now, as I am writing this reply I am listening to some V.U -- Femme Fatal and Here She Comes. I know that Reed is bisexual and I know that some of his songs are morally offensive, but that does not mean I can not like them. As Chris Decarlo, who is pro-gay marriage and anti-censorship, says: "I'm not a white supremacist Austin, but if i had to read Mein Kempf for history i would do it" and "I don't rape girls either and I listen to my fair share of GG Allin numbers."

    Finally, I like to be blunt in my arguments. Don't worry, Austin, I am not the only one who equates gay marriage with murder. Millions are in agreement with me here.

    Oh yeah and Kerri didn't own me in any way. I decided to create a new post which summed up all my opinions instead of responding in a similar manner as a my previous comments.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Glen, can I first say that I am not completely shocked by what I read here. I would not expect it from anyone from you to try to get attention for your Christian and anti-gay beliefs. And before I get to the issue of gay marriage, I would like to say that, Prateek, I am completely and utterly confused by your "dicussion topic" on your facebook group. You say "Why does she have to yell to voice her opinion about gay marriage.." First of all, you cannot "yell to voice." That is just absurd. And second of all, you are being a complete hypocrite when you say that she is voicing her opinion on gay marriage. Sorry to let you know, but making a facebook group about bashing gay people is voicing your opinon. Sorry to burst your holy bubble.

    Finish the comment later.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Yeah, Glen, Kerri owned you, just as Steve and Sara said. You had completely religious based ideologies.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Glen, don't take this too far. Seriously. And if you are to bash gay marriage, do it with logic that doesn't include sinning and religion. I am against it (as you know), but I support my reasons without deep religious meaning, just scientific meanings that I think are logical. You can't outwardly say that being gay is wrong, I thought the argument was about gay marriage. If somebody wants to be gay, fine. I have no problem with it. Just because I am opposed to gay marriage does not mean I am all about religiously disproving people and being extremely radial. I really thought that the group was a joking thing and not something that would be out to totally piss people off. Also, it is the 21st century, religion no longer really qualifies as justifiable logic for being against or for something. And by the way, you are not a biggot if you are anti-gay marriage. So, if you would like to clarify with logic why you are against gay marriage and why you think it is gross, then all power to you. You cannot just outwardly oppose it without reason. Believe me, I am on your side about the issue, but you need better facts to support the issue. Also, I really did think the whole RR thing was just a joke-ish thing, not a full out extreme right-wing party. I may be to the right, but I am not that extreme about it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Its prateek

    I feel that the people that are against gay marriage are getting hit hard on this site.

    to be factual. more people are against gay marriage than for.

    don't let this site fool you to think gay marriage advocates have the uppper hand. most students have no clue about what this site is/have better things to do.

    I hate it when people say that we have no motives. of course we do. We belief in religion. and gay marriage is against it.

    I'm not going to go around and harass gay people. i'm just saying that i don't really like them because they don't really parallel my views./

    i know eveyrone is going to say that oh I'm such a bigot this and that and also discrimination against gays is like discriminating against another race.

    gay marriage is wrong, because it doesn't agree with religion, and moral views.

    I hope you see the truth in the near future. many people are against gay marriage because its just WRONG.

    I don't think I can sway you to my side. its hard to be persuasive on such a matter. But I will try to talk things out. i don't see why everyone has to offend glen or I for thinking something.

    also don't call us bigots and what not. We aren't. We just have opinions that oppose yours. If that happened constantly then we would be in a state of war right now, throughout the whole world. Don't hate us for backing our opinions.

    ReplyDelete

Your comments are valued greatly. Please adhere to the decorum on the "First time here?" page. Comments that are in violation of any of the rules will be deleted without notice.

3/11 Update - No Moderation

*Non-anonymous commenting is preferred to avoid mix-ups. Anonymous comments are, at the behest of management, more likely to be deleted than non-anonymous comments.