Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Tweet
Martin O’Malley just sent out the following e-mail, linking here to solicit money for Marylanders For Marriage Equality. He’s not being wishy-washy about this.
43 Responses to “Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality”
Journalist Marie Colvin Killed In Syria
Obama To Congress: Drop Corporate Tax Rate By 7%
Meet Rebecca Williams, The FBI’s Stripper Turned “Trailer Park Mata Hari”
VA Gov. McDonnell Backs Off Support Of Forced Vaginal Probe Law
Santorum A Birther? Got Briefing From Conspiracy Sheriff Arpaio
Billionaire Sheldon Adelson Adds $26 Billion To Fortune Under Obama, Complains Of Socialism
Kardashian – Endorsed QuickTrim Diet Pill May Face Class Action Lawsuit
Virginia Still Within Reach For Obama
Porn Displayed On Best Buy TVs Via Wifi
Latest Entries
VIDEO: Who Doesn’t Need A Gun That Can Take Out A Helicopter?
The Tea Party Loves Socialism, Fakes Otherwise
Conservatives Dead Set On Repeating 2004
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
That is excellent.
It looks like gay marriage is about to legalized in WA. More people don’t give a rat’s ass if gay people get married, we don’t live by rules written by goat herders 2,000 years ago.
Wonder what O’Malley’s stance is on a polygamists “right” to get married? Anyone know? Oliver?
Great. But note how he waited until AFTER he was ineligible to run again…in a deep blue state at that.
I dunno, Grey. I, like every gay person I know, just keep praying Newt won’t fuck up the sanctity of his third marriage.
O’Malley has a bright future ahead of him. As a Marylander, this makes me proud.
Moving on…
Wonder what O’Malley’s stance is on a polygamists “right” to get married? Anyone know? Oliver?
No wonder you dumbshit wingnuts don’t like higher learning in college. Apparently you never took a basic Logic 101 class, did you?
What you just engaged in is called the Slippery Slope argument. You lose, by default.
As in,
If they let TEH GAYS get married now,
Tomorrow they will let polygamy be legal. Next thing you know, cats will be living with dogs…WITH DOGS! Oh the humanity!
Never mind one has nothing to do with the other, it just saves your ten watt pea brain the time from having to actually think and respond with intelligence rather than moronic right wing talking points.
Are all wingnuts this fucking dumb on the issue?
“Never mind one has nothing to do with the other…”
And your surely entitled to your opinion “Burn”, but over 100,000 polygamists in the US may disagree with you–or do you choose who deserves marriage “rights” based on who like? Surely, based on the Left’s definition of “marriage equality” 3 or more people together in a loving, stable relationship deserve the “right” to be married as do people of the same gender.
That’s your GOP – on the wrong side of history once again.
Wonder what O’Malley’s stance is on a polygamists “right” to get married? Anyone know? Oliver?
What about Stupid Marriage? Why should stupid people have the “right” to get married? So they can end up putting their children in the microwave when they mistake them for a bag of popcorn? Also, unlike homosexuality, we know for a fact that stupidity is a choice, and is not a lifestyle that should be tolerated.
In all seriousness, you DO realize that the right of marriage was settled quite a while ago?
Gods, MGG your idiocy is just insufferable. Think, dumbass, just for a second if you are remotely capable.
Does anyone of “TEH LEFT” champion polygamy? Find me one who does. Amuse me with your dittohead reflexes.
We’re talking about two people, you dolt. Be it one man and one woman, or two men or two women. Marriage between two adults, ok?
But keep using the slippery slope fallacy if it makes you feel better, dipshit.
Either way, you’re only bitching because your ‘side’ lost the battle. It’s done with. The culture wars are over, and you lost. Choke on that.
Jesus Christ, Ghost, you are too stupid to live. Kill yourself.
Polygamy has nothing to do with this. At all. You’re wrong, yet again. When I talk to my grandkids in 50 years about this time, they will look at the suppression of gay people’s rights in this time in the same way that the young generation today looks at miscegenation and JIm Crow. As being completely unacceptable, ridiculous, and morally repugnant.
If you’re still around to see that world, I hope that you recognize that you were one of the villains of American history.
First off, this is great news for everyone in Maryland.
second, who the fuck cares if people want to be polygamists as long as everyone involved is a adult?
Aside from the standard arguments which address how the slippery slope argument is ridiculous in the context of legal precedents, I think Ron Reagan, Jr. sums it up nicely here:
Also, to echo Marco: I’ll believe that the right is truly concerned about the effect of gay marriage on the ‘moral fiber’ of our country when an ethically challenged, twice-divorced, serial adulterer isn’t a viable GOP candidate- specifically in the bible belt.
But heck, you can’t become a shining beacon of morality without breaking a few commandments, I guess.
“Also, unlike homosexuality, we know for a fact that stupidity is a choice, and is not a lifestyle that should be tolerated….”
That’s funny because lesbian actress Cynthia Nixon just “came out” (pardon the pun) and said that her gayness wasn’t caused by the mythical “gay gene”.
“Does anyone of “TEH LEFT” champion polygamy?”
So because 20% of Americans who call themselves “liberals” choose to not support something that makes the cause illegitimate? I say the hundreds of thousands of people who practice polygamists would highly disagree with you.
“they will look at the suppression of gay people’s rights in this time in the same way that the young generation today looks at miscegenation and Jim Crow….”
Right! 400 years of chattle slavery, oppression, Jim Crow laws, corporate and criminal justice system discrimination and an unemployment rate that’s doubled the national average is the same fighting laws that go against an abnormal sexual act. Always amazing how white social liberals can so easily spit on the history of black folks in this country while jumping on the civil rights bandwagon at the same time.
“Aside from the standard arguments which address how the slippery slope argument is ridiculous in the context of legal precedents, I think Ron Reagan, Jr. sums it up nicely here…”
Yeah pulling a quote from a failed talk show host, atheist and far-Left loon who disgraces his legendary dad every time he speaks is a sure way to convince someone your right.
Has anyone else here seen the movie The Last Supper? Released in 1995, I think. It applies here to Ghost. The world would be a better place with him gone from it.
Yeah pulling a quote from a failed talk show host, atheist and far-Left loon who disgraces his legendary dad every time he speaks is a sure way to convince someone your[sic] right.
And dismissing something, out of hand, with ad hominem attacks and really odd non-sequitors ( how the fuck is his atheism even remotely relevant to the logical merit of his statement, much less as a detriment? ) is a sure way to convince someone that you have the intellectual prowess to attack something based on its actual substance.
Also, continuously fucking up “your” and “you’re” is a sure way to look smart.
“how the fuck is his atheism even remotely relevant to the logical merit of his statement…”
Right. Because someone’s religious beliefs should never be associated with their worldviews…Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Bill Maher, et al are definitive proofs of that.
“It applies here to Ghost. The world would be a better place with him gone from it….”
Gee Mambo, do you wish everyone who dares to disagree with you dead?!? That doesn’t sound very tolerant of you…sigh.
So because 20% of Americans who call themselves “liberals” choose to not support something that makes the cause illegitimate?
Good lord, do you even think before you post here? You have got to be one of the dumbest fucking trolls to ever grace these pages. Congrats to you.
So, liberals don’t support polygamy, so that somehow invalidates their cause? What? Conservatives don’t support it either, brainiac. Most people don’t support it, nor will they ever. Now that won’t prevent people from living that lifestyle, and honestly I could give two fucks less if some dumpy frigid broad want to share her husband with three other frumpy frigid hags. That’s their business.
Comparing it to gay marriage is such a lame weak ass argument, but I am not remotely surprised you choose that line of attack. You got nothin, chump, and you know it.
Right. Because someone’s religious beliefs should never be associated with their worldviews…Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Bill Maher, et al are definitive proofs of that.
This may be the single stupidest thing I’ve ever seen on this site. Just… wow.
Ok, I’ll play along: Fred Phelps, Hitler, Anders Behring Breivik.
There, I’ve just invalidated the opinions of all 2+ billion Christians in the world.
Ghost, you really, really, really need to invest in an introductory logic course.
Gee Mambo, do you wish everyone who dares to disagree with you dead?!? That doesn’t sound very tolerant of you…sigh.
I have no tolerance for willful stupidity such as yours. Your commentary is vile and idiotic, and frankly isn’t worthy of respect or tolerance in the slightest. The fact of the matter is that the world is worse off with people who share the views that you espouse here. The world would be better if you choked on your food tonight and died of asphyxiation.
Just because it’s a gas, let me pull the stupidest and most vile comments from you in this thread alone. Let’s break it down, shall we?
1) Wonder what O’Malley’s stance is on a polygamists “right” to get married? Anyone know? Oliver?
Polygamy has nothing to do with gay marriage. Nothing at all. Non-sequitur. Strawman. Denying gay people the right to marry is clearly exclusionary. Etc.
2) And your surely entitled to your opinion “Burn”, but over 100,000 polygamists in the US may disagree with you–or do you choose who deserves marriage “rights” based on who like?
Denying people the ability to marry more than one other person is not exclusionary. No citizen of this country can legally marry more than one person. Therefore everyone is subject to the same laws. Equality is good. Besides, who gives a fuck about your strawman?
3) That’s funny because lesbian actress Cynthia Nixon just “came out” (pardon the pun) and said that her gayness wasn’t caused by the mythical “gay gene”.
Yes, and I assert that my tallness wasn’t caused by my genes. Because I have ready access to that information.
4) So because 20% of Americans who call themselves “liberals” choose to not support something that makes the cause illegitimate?
What the fuck?
5) 400 years of chattle slavery, oppression, Jim Crow laws, corporate and criminal justice system discrimination and an unemployment rate that’s doubled the national average is the same fighting laws that go against an abnormal sexual act.
Did I say they were the exact same thing? No, of course I didn’t, but you needed to pretend that I did in order to feign outrage. You fucking idiot. They are of the same kind. Similar to how primates come in various species – humans, chimps, bonobos, capuchins, etc. These are all primates, and in that they are similar; however, there are important and large differences between them. Is the suppression of gay rights in current America as bad as what black people have gone through over the course of history in this country? OF FUCKING COURSE NOT, you fucking idiot. But is there a similarity in the cases? Absolutely. The similarity is that people were denied their rights for absolutely no good moral reason.
6) Yeah pulling a quote from a failed talk show host, atheist and far-Left loon who disgraces his legendary dad every time he speaks is a sure way to convince someone your right.
Is the quote false? Is the argument faulty? Care to make any assertion to that effect? Or do you just want to throw out fallacious attacks and pretend that they are arguments? Also, being an atheist is often indicative of being intelligent and rational, so that’s a big point in Reagan Jr.’s favor.
7) Right. Because someone’s religious beliefs should never be associated with their worldviews…Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Bill Maher, et al are definitive proofs of that.
Goddamn this is dumb. None of those individuals committed atrocities in the name of atheism, or because of atheism. Were they atheists who committed atrocities? Sure. But that doesn’t mean what you think it means.
You are a fucking idiot. Seriously. It’s hard to believe you’re a real person, because I cannot imagine how you managed to learn to type. I repeat: If these statements of yours indicate your true beliefs, then please kill yourself and make the world a better place.
I will also point out that it does not matter if homosexuality is a choice or not. Who gives a fuck if a person “chooses” to be gay? How does that change anything pertinent under the law? If Bob is gay by choice and Steve is gay by genetics, why should it be okay to treat them differently at all?
This is just so much bullshit that I have to believe that Ghost feasts upon cow pies every night. Probably because he thinks it pisses liberals off. Well, I’ve got news for you, MGG. It does. So just keep on eating feces.
“I have no tolerance for willful stupidity such as yours….”
Yet you and your fellow lemmings respond to it every single time Mambo. And if the “born gay” mantra suddenly doesn’t matter anymore, why is that falsehood always propped up by teh gheys when bullying the populace to reverse traditional values/views, much less aligning their “hardships” to black people?
“Conservatives don’t support it either, brainiac. Most people don’t support it, nor will they ever….”
Actually plenty of conservatives (Sowell, Coulter, etc) have spoken aloud concerning reducing marriage to a “right” and thus allowing polygamists to marry.
Yet you and your fellow lemmings respond to it every single time Mambo.
If you can change just one thing, one tiny thing, one thing that does not even matter much in the grand scheme, could you please figure out another insult other than “lemming”?
Also, note that me “responding” to your inane blather in no way constitutes me being tolerant of it. What the fuck are you talking about?
Ghost: “Wishing me dead isn’t tolerant of you!”
mambo: “Yep, that’s right, because you’re a fucking idiot and the shit you say has negative value.”
Ghost: “Yet you and your fellow lemmings respond to it every single time.”
You make absolutely no fucking sense. I’m convinced that you were dropped on your head as a child. Repeatedly.
And if the “born gay” mantra suddenly doesn’t matter anymore
My point is that it shouldn’t matter. It certainly seems to matter to the opinions of some, but I am critiquing that as position as being wrong. Tell me why it should matter. (And an aside: Homosexuality is almost certainly not a choice in most instances. Yeah, that makes sense – let me make a choice that’s going to get me fucking badgered and treated like a social leper in most circles for all my days. Good call. Not to mention that nonhuman animals, including primates, often engage in homosexual behavior.)
Let’s imagine an alternate U.S. for a second, where fishermen are denied the right to vote. Can you tell them, “Well, it’s your choice to be a fisherman, and therefore you have no legitimate complaint regarding suffrage”? Does that make sense? Of course not. Can you really deny someone a legal right because of some arbitrary rule like that? Of course not. That’s fucking stupid. Which is why you agree with it.
why is that falsehood
What falsehood?
always propped up by teh gheys when bullying the populace to reverse traditional values/views, much less aligning their “hardships” to black people?
Dude, haven’t you gotten the memo YET? First off, teh gheys are not bullying anyone. They just want equality. Secondly, “traditional values” is a bullshit smokescreen made of lies and pixie dust. Do you really want traditional values? Great, let’s make marriage a property exchange between men. Because for the love of fuck, Ghost, that was the original use of marriage. The concept of marriage has changed over the years, and it continues to change. You don’t get to just sit there and invoke “traditional values” and have that be a real argument. It’s not. It’s bullshit, and it’s the kind of weak-minded thinking that characterizes social conservatives to a person. Anyone who is a hard-right social conservative is a fucking waste of an otherwise perfectly good human body.
In summary, please shut the fuck up and stop being such a fearful fucking idiot. The gays aren’t going to hunt you down and kill you in your sleep. Though I wish they would.
Actually plenty of conservatives (Sowell, Coulter, etc) have spoken aloud concerning reducing marriage to a “right” and thus allowing polygamists to marry.
And for the record, I don’t give a fuck if polygamy is legal. Bring it on. I’m sure there are some legal issues that would have to be worked out (re: inheritance, divorce proceedings, custody), but nothing insurmountable. My point is that the “issue” of polygamy has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of gay marriage.
Idiot.
Actually plenty of conservatives (Sowell, Coulter, etc) have spoken aloud concerning reducing marriage to a “right” and thus allowing polygamists to marry.
Two conservatives is ‘plenty’ to you? Two is what most of us refer to as a pair.
Not plenty.
I am so sure Man Coulter is such an expert on marriage, huh. Seeing how no man would ever want to spend the rest of their life with some bitchy waxed tranny like her. No wonder she’s so full of rage and anger. She’s a bitter barren harpy who is going to die alone.
by teh gheys when bullying the populace to reverse traditional values/views.
So? Why is this “tradition” so important? What value does it have to society? Seems to me that doing something because it was done before isn’t a really stellar reason to keep doing it.
much less aligning their “hardships” to black people?
Because, of course, homosexuals have never ever been persecuted for who they are.
Ok, I’ll play along: Fred Phelps, Hitler, Anders Behring Breivik.
Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, Scott Roeder. the RCC c. 1480
MGG, be honest, what do you have against homosexuals? Why does the idea of them marrying offend you to your very core? What drives your hatred?
“MGG, be honest, what do you have against homosexuals? Why does the idea of them marrying offend you to your very core? What drives your hatred?…”
Nothing at all. I just asked an innocent question about O’Malley’s views on polygamy and I get all this hate thrown at me…wonder why.
“Homosexuality is almost certainly not a choice in most instances. Yeah, that makes sense – let me make a choice that’s going to get me fucking badgered and treated like a social leper in most circles for all my days…”
Gee, never heard of people making bad choices that would make them get treated by society that way before.
Oliver, your blog needs an ignore feature.
Ghost, that’s an amazing, intelligent, well-researched, thought-provoking link.
Hah, just fuckin’ with ya! It’s garbage- and here’s why:
Here’s what they quote:
Now, first of all, when I see a site quoting something without actually linking to the source, I say: “Hmmmm… why would they do that? What could they possibly be hiding? What’s the harm in providing the full source, since they’re obviously operating in an open, honest manner.
Fortunately, my pal Google helped me find the the original pamphlet online, so let’s get the the bottom of this.
First, let’s deal with that tricky ellipsis. How much, exactly, did they trim?
Wait, what? They put up the entire paragraph, eliminating just one sentence? But… why? What did they trim?
“…most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.”
Well, golly- that must have been an oversight. This honest, reputable, Christian news network couldn’t have possibly been intentionally lying by omission.
I mean, that one line would undermine their conclusion:
An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there’s no homosexual “gene” — meaning it’s not likely that homosexuals are born that way.
…but I can’t believe that they’d be so dishonest! Besides, that’s a pretty ridiculous and non-scientifically accurate way to interpret the pamphlet’s findings all on its own.
Now, are there any other reasons they wouldn’t link to the whole pamphlet?
It couldn’t possibly because it later says that the the conversion therapy they preach on that page is total bullshit, right?
Or that, contrary to stereotypes, gay people enjoy stable relationships just like the rest of us?
(Ellipses for brevity, since this post is getting long; I assure you nothing is being extracted for the sake of deceit)
Or even later, that they can be good parents?
Another swing and a miss, Ghost.
God, I love how you don’t bother to ask the simple questions about so obvious a hatchet job; you just post like the good little simpleton foot soldier that you are, and give the rest of us a good laugh and an even better punching bag.
Someone get this ‘tard a cookie- he’s earned it.
“MGG, be honest, what do you have against homosexuals? Why does the idea of them marrying offend you to your very core? What drives your hatred?”
He doth protest too much, doesn’t he …
Mr Grey Ghost would have thrown rocks at black kids trying to go to school in Little Rock.
I just asked an innocent question about O’Malley’s views on polygamy
Bullshit. You’re just JAQing off and you know it.
“Bullshit. You’re just JAQing off and you know it.”
No actually I’m not. If the anti-God zealots/bullies on the Left can overturn centuries of Judeo-Christian history, reduce marriage to a “right” and open the door for same-sex marriages then there’s no sound argument that says that polygamists don’t deserve the same benefits. None. That said, the bigotry shown here by OW’s resident lemmings against polygamists is just sad to watch.
Silly man.
Ghostie,
Assuming that sexual preference is a choice, & I’ll give you that the “Gay Gene” argument has huge holes with my High School knowledge of evolutionary biology but here is hardly the place to debate that (but I will say that the person who insisted that gay women give birth at a rate greater than traditional women lost me entirely);
By what right do you assert the Gay Choice is inferior to the traditional one?
Do you assert that traditional marriage is God Given?
If so do you wish the State to enforce other religious dogmas?
Do you then argue that polygamy is also a God given right at the original LDS claim? (I will take the opposite)
If you accept polygamy do you also accept polyandry?
Awkward,
Excellent & informative post.
But I think we’ve got to add to nature & nurture something about Societal Norms. Remember the Ancient Greeks viewed homo-sexual love as being the only true love possible & thus it was the Societal normal. It was thus practiced by most, if not all. The censorious Romans found this a reason to look down at the Greeks.
Which leads to another question for “Ghosite”, is the God who ruled against homosexuality Yahweh or Jupiter?
Here’s the argument that perhaps this conservative lemming, MGG, might understand, for gay marriage:
Ghost, prove it’s a choice and blow me.
That said, the bigotry shown here by OW’s resident lemmings against polygamists is just sad to watch.
What an idiot you are. Jump off a building for fuck’s sake.
there’s no sound argument that says that polygamists don’t deserve the same benefits
Well, that’s good enough for me- case closed!
Eugene Volokh- of The Volokh Conspiracy- who isn’t remotely what you’d call a “leftist”- has a lengthy paper entitled Same-Sex Marriage and Slippery Slopes which directly addresses this issue.
Now Ghost, I have to warn you- there aren’t any pictures or puzzles in it- but if you like, you can print it out and draw some crayon doodles in the margins while an adult reads it to you.
To set the stage- It should be noted that he is does not simply wave off the slippery slope arguments as fallacy; he states:
(p.7)
However, in regard to the slippery slope of legalized polygamy, he later suggests that it is not a serious threat:
(p.22)
(p.23)
And in his conclusion- supporting gay marriage- he writes:
(p.47)
Two things to note, which I haven’t sourced here in the interest of space: as far as slippery slopes go, he’s much more concerned about the resulting potential for increased anti-discrimination law than legalized polygamy, and he further goes on to note that he would be more concerned about the risks if he had religious objections.
Anyhow.
the bigotry shown here by OW’s resident lemmings against polygamists is just sad to watch.
Ghost, you should probably drop the Swiftian satire bit because, let’s face it- you’re not remotely clever enough to pull it off.
But as long as you’re pumping the spectre of polygamy for all it’s worth, let’s examine that lil’ slippery slope. Legally, it doesn’t begin with gay marriage and end with polygamy- its antecedents would include, at least:
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), in which the right to marital privacy was guaranteed (specifically in the context of contraception)
and Loving vs. Virginia (1967), which ended race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the united states
So I ask you, Ghost- knowing that these two decisions opened the door for legalizing gay marriage, would the fear of the slippery slope have you rescind them? Do you throw the baby out with the bath water, simply because of what might happen in the future? Or are some decisions worth making because they are just, and because it’s cowardly to deny people equality just because of some perceived legal boogeyman?
Or do you just think you should have the executive decision to decide where this particular slope begins and ends?
One final thought- depending on where you are, the legal and biblical definition of sodomy includes oral sex, so if you’ve ever gotten a blow job- you’ve been part of an “unnatural” sex act!
So don’t act like it’s such a big deal.
DB,
But I think we’ve got to add to nature & nurture something about Societal Norms.
Oh, I totally agree. Dusting off my old biology degree (which hasn’t seen the light of day in over a decade, and isn’t worth the paper it’s written on by this point
) I would say that I’d be shocked if there wasn’t a genetic component, but it likely isn’t a smoking gun- there are certainly other factors, as you’ve mentioned.
Kind of like a large ship in a strong current- it’s going to head in one general direction, but the people scurrying about the deck can directly influence its movements on a smaller scale.
Whether it’s by choice or biologically predetermined, no one’s fucking business.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/opinion/sunday/bruni-gay-wont-go-away-genetic-or-not.html?ref=opinion