Bigots on the prowl in ProJo article on Domestic Partnerships in RI November 15, 2009Posted by truthspew in marriage equality, politics.
Tags: marriage equality
I note that the Providence Journal (ProJo) has been blowing up with the gay rights issues here in Rhode Island for the past couple of weeks.
The lastest is this:
PROVIDENCE –– Governor Carcieri surprised political rivals this week when he told gay-rights activists he would consider comprehensive reforms giving many, if not all, of the rights of marriage to same-sex couples.
But the unexpected announcement from the Republican governor has found little support among Rhode Island’s gay community, reinforcing a division among gay-marriage supporters that could kill Carcieri’s idea before it’s even put to paper.
You can click the above block quote to go to the original article. Be forewarned, ProJo requires registration in order to view some content.
But what I’m really here to comment on is some of the more bigoted response comments in the ProJo survey which asks if DP would be acceptable. You can take the survey here.
You can see all the responses if you take the survey. But I’ll just copy/paste a couple of the more egregious ones:
No, the Governor should NOT consider domestic partnership agreements. The homosexual agenda is not only only marriage, is about FORCED ACCEPTANCE of their deviant lifestyle, UNDER PENALTY OF LAW. To legalize “domestic partnerships” is to legitimize the homosexual lifestyle. Anyone who dares object will be punished. Our freedom of religion will be GONE. Don’t believe me? Look at the many examples of what’s already happening in other states! A Catholic adoption agency CLOSED in Boston because they were being forced under interpretation of Massachusetts law to be required to have same sex couples adopt children out of their Catholic agency, which is completely against the Catholic religion. If we had a “domestic partnership” law in Rhode Island, that law would be used to do the same and similar things!
I went with this one first to demonstrate something. All caps are used to stress a point, or to shout when it comes to text on the net. The above demonstrates proper usage of all caps btw.
Now to take issue, well I’ll do that in video form but first I have to post the other all caps message.
MY FEELINGS ON “GAY” MARRIAGE ASIDE, I THINK THAT ALL THE LEGAL AND FINACIAL TROUBLES THAT THIS MOVE WILL BRING UP WILL MAKE IT FAR TOO EXPENSIVE FOR REST OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PAYING TAXES. IT WILL CLOG UP THE COURTS. COST INSURANCE COMPANIES MORE (GUESS WHO WINDS UP PAYING THAT BILL ULTIMATELY?). YOU KNOW WHAT? JUST GO TO YOUR ROOMS AND DO WHAT YOU LIKE. I DON’T ADVERTISE MY PREFERENCES. IT’S NOBODY’S BUSINESS. AND I CERTAINLY WOULDN’T EXPECT MY NIEGHBORS TO FOOT THE BILL.
Three things on the above. To begin TURN OFF THE CAPS LOCK! Next, spell check is there for a reason. Use it. As to your FEELINGS, civil rights should never be decided on feelings. You need a cold logic when it comes to civil rights something the above commentator fails to grasp.
And now my response to both. Sorry for the annoying UV streak. I’m experimenting with lighting.