|
|
|---|
"Let’s be honest, the left doesn’t hate me because I am mean or brash or too aggressive – the same label can be applied to many of my critics. No, the left hates me because I have the audacity to stand up to them. They hate me because I am a conservative who happens to be gay. They hate me because I won’t be bullied by them. They hate me because I have dared to wander off the liberal plantation, because I refuse to play the victim card, and because I have rejected their failed big government agenda. So if the left is looking for an apology for things I say on twitter or the things I write on my blog or for statements I make on TV, they won’t get one. Indeed, they can expect more of the same." - GOProud chairman Chris Barron, writing on his personal blog.
"One of the things that I thought makes the United States special is that we can disagree and still get along. Unfortunately, the growing hatred of many people in New York's homosexual community toward me does not demonstrate that. It makes no sense to me as a minister and as a Senator because I have never preached hatred toward anyone, and I denounce those who do. My strong position against homosexual marriage is the very same as the positions held by rabbis, ministers, imams and priests. I'm not sharing this information to appear to be a victim for sympathy sake, but I do want to put this in perspective. I feel a great sympathy for the people who are targeting me with so much hatred. They will all be in my prayers." - NY Sen. Ruben Diaz, in a press release quoting numerous anti-Diaz blog comments and tweets.
RELATED: Diaz may claim to denounce anti-gay hatred, but I was right fucking there in the front row at his massive anti-gay rally in 2009 where thousands of his supporters waved signs about Sodom and Gomorrah, eternal damnation, pedophilia, etc. As he did two years ago, Diaz cleverly scheduled his coming protest on the day of the AIDS Walk, a move which decimates the potential number of counter-protesters. In my 2009 slideshow below, note that the barricaded area for marriage equality supporters was practically empty.
"Today’s politically correct America would have seemed like a paradise to the homosexual activists of a quarter-century ago but today’s activists have become frustrated with the pace of change. Since neither research, persuasion nor politics have been effective in implementing the full homosexual agenda, which seeks unqualified celebration and subsidization of homosexual conduct in every realm of society, some in the homosexual movement have turned to brute force, using censorship to trample on freedom of speech and freedom of religion. [snip]
Supporting the natural definition of marriage as the union of male and female (as 45 of the 50 states do) is not 'hate,' and supporting the personal freedom and autonomy of those who seek sexual orientation change 'demonizes' no one. There can be legitimate debate about these issues - but Apple, as one of the gatekeepers of today’s information technology, should be doing everything it can to facilitate that debate, not stifle it." - Family Research Council spokesbigot Peter Sprigg, once again riding the waambulance in the Moonie Times.
RELATED: For their part, the Moonie Times illustrates the above-linked story with a rainbow-colored Apple infested with worms.
"With a pro-marriage majority in the new Congress we will explore a number of avenues to force the District to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to voters. As the four Court of Appeal justices who dissented in this case made clear, the District of Columbia owes it to the voters to allow them to decide the critical issue of marriage which has existed since before there was a District of Columbia. In order to curry favor with the same-sex marriage special interest group, members of the City Council have turned their backs on their own constituents. It is ironic that these same council members champion the right of District votes to be heard in national elections but then deny those same residents the right to vote on the definition of marriage. We will press our belief with Congress that the constitution of the District requires that voters be allowed to decide this important issue." - NOM president Brian Brown.
"The DOJ brief amounts to collusive litigation, failing to even offer to the court, much less vigorously defend, the reasons Congress laid out in the statute when it passed DOMA, especially responsible procreation. This is an attack not only on marriage, but on the prerogatives of Congress. The Executive branch should not attempt to exercise this kind of retroactive line-item veto over a bill passed by Congress.
"All the parties to this litigation want the court to strike down DOMA; this is clear from their behavior, no matter what President Obama and his politicized DOJ pretend to convey to the public. If Obama’s DOJ had merely honestly refused to defend the law, the court would likely have permitted another party to intervene to defend the law. Obama’s DOJ is trying to retain control so it can lose this case." - NOM president Brian Brown.
