Wow, if there ever comes a time when blacks lose their rights again, I will be standing by and laughing! These assholes think they deserve rights but others don't?! Sorry but you have lost all of my respect. I would've thought that people that have experienced discrimination would have compassion toward other groups experiencing the same thing. Apparentely not....
@HepburnFlicks Pfft! Hahahahaha, your a fucking moron if do ever believe minorities ever had rights to begin with?
The Advocate and other GLAAD staff members knew fully well that this was going to stir up controversy, let alone, get a rise out of white suburban america. Yes, all too overly ambitious attempt to greedily hook into the entire demographic groups; Never one to forget about the 2000 election. Don't talk about past pains, exploits etc. etc. those who helped out!
Wake up white liberals, black people don't like you are think your cool. This dike looks so surprised that black people didn't support the gay community. WOW!
I recommend the YT vid "daughter of a gay man speaks". An APA study wrongly & incompetently found that women (in general) do not experience significant emotional repercussions from abortion (s).The findings have been modified, but the point is that there were methodological flaws in the original studies. People who accept conditional findings of studies at face value are very naive. Imagine a study purporting to find that women are not harmed by non-violent rape! That too makes no sense
As relaxed as I am about gay marriage, I find some of the language used by the gay-marriage activists to be misleading. Sexism, racism and discrimination based on sexual orientation are different classes of distinction. They may all be wrong, but, to the extent they are wrong, they are wrong in different ways. For example, gender-segregation in changing rooms is actually encouraged, while segregating changing rooms based on race or sexual orientation would be rightly considered bigoted.
@BrownHawk35 and that's what most white liberals do. They engage in "co-opting" black suffering just for brownie points,and for political points as well. This is one of the reasons why "we" as black people been voting heavily for the democrat party for so long. We think we need them to take care of our problems which is "slave mentality". And the've done nothing. and i'm not suggesting voting GOP by no means, we need to put our OWN money together and stop voting for thease politicians.
@BrownHawk35 I agree. Melissa Harris Perry is nothin but a token for rachel maddow,so rachel can be perceived as "being down",but the real knows what's really going on. Most of thease LGBT groups have no interest in blacks,but they just want the "black experience". They have a reality check coming.
@LiLrick258 "they just want the "black experience". "
Or....maybe LGBT groups are just expecting a little compassion....considering that just a few short years ago a "traditional black marriage" was a jump over a broom with no legal recognition. Is this the "traditional marriage" blacks voted to protect?.......I doubt it.
@LiLrick258 "first of all "sexuality" has nothing to do with race."
I never said it did..........It's a moot point. No matter what irrational excuse (race/religion/sexuality) is attached to bigotry........the result is the same.
"traditional black marriage"?????
Yes......blacks seem VERY invested in protecting a tradition that NEVER traditionally included them.
What I got from this video is opponents of prop 8 didn't do enough to manipulate the dumb "niggers". You expect me to identify with "homosexuals" because I'm Black? You think I'm that gullible? I REJECT the comparison of Blacks and "homosexuals".
@BrownHawk35 You got the wrong impression. They statement was not about manipulation, but involvement. Thy said there was no effort made to inform the casual black voters in communities with a high african american density of the arguments against Prop 8, and due diligence by the campaign was not done. It wasn't about convincing dumb "niggers" but about informing those of the black populous who were uninformed just as there would be other uninformed people of other demographics.
Actually, I believe I got the correct impression. Liberals in politics operate by seeking out “minority groups” and convincing us that we’re victims of some conspiracy to “keep us down”. Therefore, the operating assumption is that I can’t survive without the protection that they promise . This also means that no matter how unnatatural, perverted, and distasteful I find a particular liberal agenda I'd better fall in line because I'm Black(after all, I owe you so much). Its offensive.
@BrownHawk35 There may be potential for the underlying ideas behind this point of view to be of concern, but it is in no way relevant to the topic of this discussion, which only focused on the potential reason that such a large majority of black individuals, in a case directly related to the civil rights of a minority group, would have voted against it, and then stated the campaign not being active in getting the word out in the black community as a potential cause.
@AIReject Am I allowed to determine what I think is relevant? I call into question the comparison that is being drawn between "homosexual rights" and the rights that Black people have to not be enslaved, raped, lynched, beaten, and murdered. Attemting to equate the two "struggles" is offensive.
@BrownHawk35 You're allowed to determine what you think is relevant, and I'm pointing out how you are incorrectly doing so.The comparison drawn is between two fights for civil rights. That is all. Just because one involved more atrocities, that doesn't mean there is no comparison, or that drawing a comparison is offensive. Sure, you're allowed to be offended, and I'm going to tell you it's stupid to be, because it is.
@AIReject "Stupid"? Wow. Do you singlehandedly maintain the standard for intelligence? Those who agree with you are intelligent and those who disagree with you are "stupid"? People normally resort to personal attacks when they've run out of "intelligent" things to say. I have no intention of exchanging insults with you, so this back and forth is over.
@BrownHawk35 Excuse me, but I did not attack you personally or call you stupid. I said it was stupid to be offended by it, just as it would be stupid for a practicing Jew to be offended by a non-Jew eating bacon. It is not an attack on the whole of anyone's intelligence to point out when they are doing one dumb thing. You are clearly an intellectual individual, but you are incorrect in this one instance. I'm not commenting on your entire character. You are simply failing to make a good case.
The comparison is valid. Especially since religion was the basis for both types of descrimination. The bible was used to justify slavery in America during the civil war, and it eventually was used to justify outlawing marraige between a black man/woman and a white man/woman, or any other skin color with white man/woman for that matter.
I got the “wrong impression”. White liberals like to differentiate between themselves and white conservatives, but instead of disagreeing with me outright you call into question my ability to understand. You’re talking down to me because you still think I can be manipulated. What’s next; are you going to call me an “uncle Tom” for not being on board with your agenda?
@AIReject Actually, I believe I got the correct impression. Liberals in politics operate by seeking out “minority groups” and convincing us that we’re victims of some conspiracy to “keep us down”. Therefore, the operating assumption is that I can’t survive without the protection that they promise . This also means that no matter how unnatatural, perverted, and distasteful I find a particular liberal agenda I'd better fall in line because I'm Black(after all, I owe you so much). Its offensive.
@AIReject I got the “wrong impression”. White liberals like to differentiate between themselves and white conservatives, but instead of disagreeing with me outright you call into question my ability to understand. You’re talking down to me because you still think I can be manipulated. What’s next; are you going to call me an “uncle Tom” for not being on board with your agenda?
how do liberals reconcile their love of niggers (who hate buttfuckers) and aids ridden faggots .. truly the dilemma of our time, who is more dysfunctional and worthless and thus more righteous in the liberal theology
@desager1 *tucks u into bed* there there little liberal its gonna be ok, just dream about a glorious multicultural utopia where everyone is a gay vegan transgender black muslim
ATTENTION to all WHITE liberal/Progressives d DO NOT compare the homosexual agenda with Black Civil Rights. We find comparing what happened to us, with what gays want offensive, and will lead to getting your ass whopped, much faster than using the N word.
@coliwood And I as Jew I find any mention of slavery highly offensive. How dare blacks have the audacity to compare slavery to what happened in the Holocaust. You might have done a little work you weren't paid for but you damn sure weren't marched into gas chambers by the millions.
@tbone2872 Progressives, like yourself, often lie to support your argument, So, I am guessing your NOT Jewish, you say that, b/c there is noway to verify it. 2nd No OBSERVANT Jew, having commonality with Blacks, would make such insensitive statements. 3rd Observant Jews follow the Torah, and are not advocates of the Homosexual agenda. If you knew history, you'd know That many of the prejudices that Blacks faced, in the south, were also extended to Jews. So, quite lying and learn History,
@coliwood I actually am quite knowledgeable in the area of social history in the US. If you were you would also know that racial oppresion of Blacks extended far outside the boundaries of the Mason/Dixon as both Malcolm X's and Fred Hampton's assasinations occured in New York and Chicago respectively. You missed my point entirely. I was merely pointing out that the useless practice of guaging oppression of others by using a comparitive scale is obsolete because someone can always legitimately..
@coliwood ...claim to have had it rougher. And as Fred Hampton pointed out the oppression of anyone is constantly furthered by devisiveness created by racial and class martyrdom. As long as people with the same goals of freedom have determined each other to be the enemy rather than blame the oppressor. the oppressor has won. Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and Fred Hampton became dangerous when each recognized that racial issues were surface issues to disguise the real culprit, divisiveness.
@tbone2872 Blah, Blah, Blah, Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. Gays are not oppressed. The are not comparable parralles between gays and blacks and the antebellum south. For one reason. Gay man can conceal himself. I, on the other hand, am a nigga all day everyday, I can't wash this off.
@tbone2872 LOL, that is a good point. But still, you can't just assume someone is gay. Look at "Prince" he looks the part of the stereotypical homosexual, but he CLEARLY isn't. The man gets more Pussy, than a toilet seat. My point is there are a lot of gay men who have successfully remained in the closet or hidden their sexual preference i.e. Rock Hudson. If I venture into the wrong neighborhood, I am in trouble. Where as a gay, white, male will go unnoticed. Unless he wearing Ass-less Chaps
@MamaMario13 What politician or pundit, is advocating a return to slavery? and anti-sodomy laws? I mean legitimate politician or pendent, not those West Boro baptist church dip-shits or the KKK.
@coliwood So they have to conceal themselves to avoid harassment, violence, and discrimination, but the fact that they can pretend to be something they're not means they're not oppressed after all. How very forward-thinking of you. Hey, back in the 50's black people could just say and do whatever white people told them to do and they'd have been fine, I guess that whole civil rights movement was a bunch of blah blah bullshit too, huh?
@BigMikeMcBastard OK you fucking moron.Gays don't HAVE to conceal themselves NO ONE made that argument. What is being said is, Gays CAN conceal themselves "CAN", giving them and advantage that REAL minorities, especially blacks don't, and didn't have in the antebellum south. Which is why there is NO comparison to between gays and blacks. As a black man, there are certain place I cannot go, but a gay white male can, because You cant "see" gay. You should learn to think before you type. DUMBASS
@wutbothersme Just so you know, the irony in all of this really is just too much. I'm sure the white guys in the 50's had some good justifications for why Jim Crow etc weren't really oppressive at all, too. What goes around... really goes around, am I right?
Terrible irony that a minority which struggled so hard for its rights is now all too eager to deny a different minority they're not fond of their own rights. Easy come, easy go, I guess.
Rachel Maddow is an Oxford educated Rhodes Scholar (take note Christine O'Donnell) who has her pulse on what is right in American politics. Her nightly show contains the most well researched information I've ever seen or heard. The difference between the accuracy of her programme and the low brow, muck raking rubbish on the Fox Network is in a word QUALITY. Rachel cares about her audience enough to ensure that she delivers only the best in television journalism. Rachel is an American treasure.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Rachel Maddow is an EVIL ASS and a NUT CASE PERIOD! MSNBC is full of left wing bull crap period! MSNBC is full of anti-semitic bigots and morons period! MSNBC is anti-America, anti- Christian, anti-Capitalism, pro-communism, pro-socialism, pro-marxism, and pro-muslim. MSNBC IS EVIL PERIOD AND SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN ASAP!
this whole thing is ridiculous. . . their biggest rhetoric is "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" but he sure as hell didn't create Adam and Mary J. Blige. . .
The thing that people don't seem to realize is that Marriage isn't "owned" or "exclusively" accorded to one religious faith, like Christians seem to like to believe. Marriage goes back before recorded history, which would mean it would predate the Bible, and since everyone in the world wasn't Christian, then it can't "belong" to Christianity alone, or any religion or culture. This issue should never be put on a ballot. You can't "vote away" the constitution by an ignorant "majority".
These Princeton "law" professors are halfwit bleeding heart leftists. To think this nimrod is "educating" our kids, the future of this country! Scary!
@onetondrumbum Just because u dont agree dont insult her intelligence. Nobody can get to her level in an educational insitituion by being a 'halfwit bleeding heart leftist'. Quite apart from anything else your phrase is grammatically incorrect because leftist is not a real word. It doesnt help your cause when you are insulting someones intelligence if you fail to use English correctly. By why cant you be civilized in your criticism and admit that their may be extremely clever people who disagree
@punkmanjon I fail to use English correctly? lol.
And this coming from someone who thinks leftist is not a real word, (it most certainly is).
A person who doesn't know how to spell the word "institution".
A person who doesn't know how to use punctuation.
A person who thinks letters (u) take the place of words (you).
Now seriously, don't you feel kind of stupid now? Not only was my grammar error free, but in the process of trying to school me your grammar was horrendous!
@onetondrumbum Leftist is not a word in the English language. It is a made up term. My grammar wasnt incorrect I simply shortened some words and left out some punctuation to be able to fit my whole point into one comment. My point still stands though, which is do not inul someone intellect using made up words simply because they disagree with you.
@punkmanjon A sign of true intellect is listening and learning. It's ok to be wrong, we all are at times. To not concede when we're wrong is when ego trumps reason. EVERY word was "made up" at one time. There are hundreds of new words added to the English language every year. Leftist is in every dictionary and has been in use since the 1700's. Someone, please educate this person as there beef with me is only serving to deepen the hole they are already in!
@onetondrumbum If leftist were a real term then you should be able to use its opposite, rightist but you cannot. It is an Americanism and as such not legitimate English.
@punkmanjon Say what? Are you perhaps in grade school? I'm serious. Maybe you are very young and I'm assuming you're an adult. If you are in fact young please forgive me for the tone of my previous messages. If you are in fact an adult, you're not a very educated one. That's not an insult, it's simply the truth. For your information, "rightist" is also a real word in the English language. Come on, wake up and smell the coffee. You're a riot!
@onetondrumbum Hahaha you have made a huge amount of assumptions mate. I am actually a lecturer at the University of London and we would not accept the term leftist (or rightist for that matter) in an essay. The terms might be used by the media in America but they are equivalent to slang and not acceptable in an academic essay. Im aware you werent writing one but you missed my main point which was that you insulted someone's intellect simply because you disagreed with them.
@punkmanjon You can't give it a rest. I could care less what words you would or would not use in as assay in England. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? You lost the argument, just face it. Both are actual words, not slang, but for the record you can include some slang as real words in many cases regardless. To the point you claim you were making. I can and do insult Maddow's intelligence because it's so easy and I'm free to do so. I do not think she's a smart person.
@punkmanjon Once again it's you, shooting from the hip and getting it wrong. I first insulted Maddow's (see below) before I insulted the "good" professor. Since this a a clip of the Maddow show, and since you made no mention of the name of the person being insulted in your original message to me I assumed it was the host of the show. If I assumed wrong, that is your fault as you weren't clear to begin with. I don't think I assumed wrong though, I think you are just pulling a spin job.
@onetondrumbum You said 'These Princeton "law" professors are halfwit bleeding heart leftists. To think this nimrod is "educating" our kids, the future of this country! Scary!' in a clip which has an interview with Melissa Harris-Lacewell. I replied directly to this comment. You were talking about Melissa because A) Rachel is not an educator and B) she did not go to Pincetown. On a seperate note Melissa is a political science prof NOT a law prof. Thats a lot of wrong you have going on there.
@punkmanjon You're right about professor Lacewell, but assuming too much in the rest of your post. When a person responds on youtube it does not quote the exact post they are responding to and since I insulted the intellect of both professor Lacewell and Maddow and you didn't mention which of the two your reply was regarding I could only assume it was Maddow you were referring to, since after all the clip is from her show.
@onetondrumbum Always an excuse isnt there? Youtube puts comments directly above the one they are referring to. Its not my fault if you didnt bother to check. But ONCE AGAIN you havent addressed my main point which is that you have insulted Prof Lacewell simply because you disagree with her. I really dont think you could describe her (or Maddow) as unintelligent. People dont become professors at world renowned universities if they are stupid regardless of their political stance.
@punkmanjon No, I'm not the type to make excuses, as noted when I said "You're right about professor Lacewell not being a law professor. You may not think I can describe them as unintelligent, but I did therefor I could. Intelligence is not all encompassing. Ever hear of an idiot savant? Street smarts (common sense) verses book smarts? The ability to gain vasts amounts of learned knowledge does not in intellectual make.
@onetondrumbum Gaining vast amounts of learned knwoledge is not the be all and end all of being an intellectual certainly, it also requires the ability for original and independent anlysis of information but you cant seriously be saying you think these women dont have any common sense and therefore that makes them unintelligent? What makes you qualified to judge their intellect?
'These Princeton professors by in large are halfwit bleeding heart leftists. To think this nimrod is "educating" our kids, the future of this country! Scary!'
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word “marriage” means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word “spouse” refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.
"A contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought io exist between husband and wife"
Rachel Maddow you vial cretin. Taking away gays rights? Gays have as much "right" to marry as they do to having children. They can't procreate. The very definition of marriage in all the dictionaries and LAW BOOKS!: The state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law!
The LEGAL definition of marriage is that between a man and a woman. Why can't minors marry on their own? Because the law of the land say you're not an adult until the age of 18. Certainly their are 15, 16 ,17 year old kids more mature than 18 year old "adults". Isn't government denying minors the same rights afforded to adults? Nothing in the Constitution that says one must be 18 to be assured of their rights. The law : men and women over 18 can marry the opposite sex. That's Law
What the fuck do white people have to do with the question she asked you? Excuses excuses excuses, what a lame ass. Typical elite; people are just too dumb to understand why they voted and need more college. This professors comments are fascinatingly stupid.
Religion dillutes and often squelches common sense. Most black people are part of a predominately religious subculture. Most blacks have an above-average opportunity to have their common sense or squelched.
Get rid of religion, and good people will become even better under their own power.
the christians are all the same..no matter what color or sex..its funny in alot ways..how blacks..like the one below me say..well gays are racist..they never cared about blacks....goddamn, thats fucking sad ..now this bitch below wants to use the race card to justify from the real fact is that she herself dont like gays or care for equality..now i may be getting but so did she...so i guest we are at a dilema.
be that as it may..these blacks may have completly diffrent views than gays.. and in the the present blacks and gays may be on diffrent sides of the fence ...and yes..there are some gays who never worried about blacks struggles today..and visa verca. but lets be honest we both are still in the same boat today just like the past on fixing inequality. and now blacks that voted yes turn into whites in the past. cause of thier religion...
You can be religious and still vote in favor of gay rights. There is so much mis-information out there. Gay people are fighting for the same MARRIAGE rights under the law as straight people. We are NOT fighting for religious marriage or to challenge anyones view on what their version of a marriage is. Just the same rights :)
People should not intervene with who people marry. I think blacks have been so caught up in the mouths of ministers that they fail to understand this subject particularly. Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. Some verses that discuss it is in Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13. But if you are without an awareness of sinfulness, then that's your problem not others, so they should mind their business about whom you choose to marry and let God handle you instead.
I hate when people compare interracial marriage to gay marriage. It is TOTALLY different. Supporting Interracial Marriage is STILL DEFENDING THE STANDARD DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE because the relationship still has a MALE and a FEMALE in the picture. Gay marriage CHANGES THE DEFINITION by changing the genders involved. It is NOT to be compared.
"I hate when people compare interracial marriage to gay marriage. It is TOTALLY different. Supporting Interracial Marriage is STILL DEFENDING THE STANDARD DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE because the relationship still has a MALE and a FEMALE in the picture"
I can easily sub a;; your "reasons" against gays with interracial marriage. The "standard" and "definition" at one time were blacks and whites with "their own kind".
The standards have already change before this on several points.
fucking ignorant homos. They're too blind sucking cocks and catching HIV/AIDS, bumping coochies and scissoring to know that blacks were kidnapped from their homeland, murdered, raped and are STILL kept economically segregated all on the basis of color and fear of superiority, not because they wanted to rub cocks and kiss a girl but on the basis of SKIN COLOR.
@DistantLover666 You can no more help your sexual preference than you can help your skin color.
Did you CHOOSE to be straight? Did you make a conscious effort? Because I didn't. I just know that I like girls. The same way I can't help that I like certain foods or certain activities.
You're comparing a group of people who have been killed for what they do in bed to a group of people who have been killed for their skin color and you don't see any irony there? Not a surprise.
Fucking dumb niggers. They're too stupid to remember *their* civil rights movement, either because they're too young to have seen it or known anyone who experienced it, or they were just too retarded to pay attention during history class.
If your "group" or whatever during one time had to go through great strife to achieve equal rights, you have no excuse to keep away rights to another group.
All the video description shows is that if they didn't "get" Prop 8, then they were too stupid.
@agoodgirlNOT Well, I probably will some day. Would you care to refute anything I said?
When one group is oppressed, and then is given rights, and then proceeds to help oppress another group, how do you not see a problem with that? How do you not think "Wow, what a bunch of ungrateful fuckheads." ?? Really. Explain it to me. Do you not see the irony there?
lol, talk abt getting a clue, the difference between me and you is I KNOW this is still a racist piece of shit country that wants to see us dead, while you THINK blacks have equal rights/have "made it".U think you can change AmeriKa?hahah, yeah, right after I get my 40 acres &a mule, fool. I never admitted in my post that blacks have it easier b/c of some worthless words on a "Civil Rights" act and a "Constitution". Grow up. The only way to change this cunt-ry is to destroy it.
It sounds like you're angry about bad things people did to others a long time ago that have had no affect on you and you want reparations for suffering that you never went through
It's been a while since I've seen someone so brutally angry with their own country for such a fucking retarded reason. I really doubt you have been through anything that truly counts as oppression or suffering. If you're on a computer, you probably have a job and a home and are already better off than a lot of people
@IAmPhotoBucket i get what your sayin and i apologize for what i said, but why use negative insults against a whole race of people to prove your point? you just alienate people and people dont want to listen to you.
A good indication if someone is a giant retard is if they ignore an argument simply to focus on one word. Be it "nigger" or "faggot" or "hurfdurf" or whatever, it doesn't matter. Chances are they are ignoring the argument because they have no points of their own.
If they're offended by nigger it's simply because they were told they needed to be. The word itself isn't offensive unless you let it be
It's like the gay wizards in HP cowering whenever someone mentions voldemort. Grow a pair, jesus
@IAmPhotoBucket im a girl i dont have a pair . and it offends people because its still used against them as an insult. and people like you can say it its just a word blah blah blah. but if the intent of it is to call someone less of a person. so when you try to prove a point and the people your focusing on you insult them their gonna label you a racist and not care what you have to say. so GROW A BRAIN DICKWAD!
If I call you a cunt, even if that applies more to you as a woman, you're going to be more offended if I call you a nigger, simply because you were taught to feel that way.
@KDubRollerblader Education and income are quite significant factors, as well. Let's not conveniently forget those. If they are factors too, and class (which subsumes largely those two factors in this nation) is heavily raced against people of color, people of color will be among those more likely to vote for things like prop 8. Poverty and poor education didn't MAKE people vote that way, but there is a strong correlation there as well as religion.
@KDubRollerblader and unfortunately blacks are, in general, more religious than their fellow white christians. thats at least what I have seen and I know a pretty decent number of black people.
@AdIgnorantiam um no i'm not prepared to argue that b/c it's not true. most non-religious people are not brainwashed by religion into thinking that homosexuality is unnatural or wrong.. why do you think the trends show that with the younger generations; they are more accepting? b/c they have a better understanding than people did 30 years ago.
This was disappointing. It was also more of a religious issue than a racial one though. Blacks AND Latinos are culturally quite Christian/Catholic. There were also plenty of Whites who voted against gay marriage too. Another consideration: having lived in the SF Bay area when this prop passed, I recall a LOT of confusion around it. Many ppl thought when they voted "yes" on Prop 8 they were voting FOR gay marriage rights, but it was just the opposite.
@fireflygirl246 the way that she is talking about the african american vote is problematic and bias. She states, "the same voters that disproportionately helped to TAKE RIGHTS AWAY." in saying this, she is placing significant blame on African Americans. I hear what you're saying, but she definitely could have phrased her scope better.
People dont realize that most black people are actually conservative democrats, traditional values with some socialist view points. As most black people see themselves as being Christian, they immediately decide anything gay is wrong,so assuming black people would align themselves with anit- prop 8 movements
I really dislike the fact that rachel is generalize this much and speaking about blacks as if they are to blame. i love her, but this is prime example of what ange marie hancock calls the "oppression olympics" -everyone is fighting to be the most oppressed group.
@sofreshsoclean12345 but she didn't speak as if blacks were to blame, she said right off the top that blacks only made up 10% of the vote and if 7 in 10 voted for prop 8 that would be only 7% of the vote so she is not blaming blacks. The story is about why would one group of people that are shown discrimination on a regular basis would then turn around and discriminate against another group of people, its a valid and intresting question we should look into.
Do you think it's a little hypocritical for Harris-Lacewell to criticize white feminism for not making the issues of women of other races central, and then turn around and say to lesbians and gays "well YOU didn't come to US?"
Makes one wonder if a majority of blacks wouldn't treat another minority group exactly the way they were treated and even allegedly still are being treated.
This is a democratic country, if the majority of Americans are against gay marriage then such a union should not be legal. It is very sad that the liberals in this country are taking over and turning this nation on its head, directing it on a course that is in complete contradiction with the spirit of democracy. The support for the destruction of this nation is one defining liberal trait that needs to be eliminated in order for this country to have prosperity.
This USA is actually an indirect democracy, or republican democracy; still a democracy. You are correct that a person has the right to choose to be with a man or a woman, but we are not talking about individual freedoms. We are talking about marriage documents that are made legally binding by a government that, in theory, represents the people. If the majority of Americans want marriage to be defined as a union between man and wife, then that is what marriage should be.
The US is a Republic. That republic is governed today by a parti system, that parti system is elected democratically. That makes it a republic with Democratic instances in certain electoral proccess, but only because they happen to be in the constitution.
@ryi5005 (PART 2) Ur "piece of paper" argument is also false, as there are plenty of government approved, legally binding documents that are a part of our other rights.
Like a Birth certificate, or a pay check, or anything signifying the right of ownership, or any notarized legally binding contract.
Exodus: What point does this prove exactly? Marriage is a union that has been expressly defined. Altering such a definition is the right of the majority.
And the only place where Marriage has been defgined in the way u say is the old testament of the Bible, a document that has no bearing in law, and very little moral bearing, even for christians.
3.)"You are talking about American tradition of the 20th century."
No,i'm talking about the 'traditional concept' of civil unions in the US since the ratifying of our Constitution.
4.)"I am talking about marriage...going back thousands of years...all over the world..."
Are you serious?
There's never been a singular idea of marriage in world cultures in history.Polygamy has been widely practiced throughout history,& even today in Yemen,women are fighting for the right to marry in their youth.
@ryi5005 (PART 3) Marriage is a concept that we are taught as children is part of our own pursuit of happiness, to find the person u love, and to make that person one with u, in a legally binding manner, that is traditional, natural and accepted by all of society.
That is the concept of marriage and denying anyone that concept is a breach of their right to pursuing happiness, as well as an underhanded attempt at denying the normality and elevation the love between to people should have.
Exodus: I think you miss the point, you speak of tradition, yet you ignore the fact that marriage has traditionally been a union between man and woman. I have no problem with gay people being happy or pursuing happiness. The definition of marriage has always been clear to everybody in the world, and has never implied a union between people of the same sex. They can have a legal union, but it is not their right to alter this traditional definition.
I was gonna let you off the hook,but since you want it...
1.)It's well established that in both ancient Greece & Rome same sex relations was commonly practiced and involved ritual ceremonies of marriage.
Infact,if you've ever read Plato's 'Symposium'--which you probably haven't(that's what all them Berkely faggots do)--you find Socrates engaged in such behavior.
And in the case of Rome,it existed formally until Constantine established Chistianity as the national religion...
2.)It wasn't until the Theodosian Codes of 342 AD that same sex unions were outlawed in Ancient Rome(but everyone knows how freaky ancient Romans were.)LOL
Southeast China was also a region were the practice was prevalent.
All of this is irrelevant,though,because even 1st graders know that their judiciary & legislature's traditional attitudes toward gays have nothing to do with the world,or they would've acknowledged many pre-Christian 'traditions' in the world;plus were talking US laws.
You might find it odd but i'm a homophobe just like yourself.
The only difference is that I come real with my shit & don't delude myself by trying to actually sound convincing about something i'm bigotted against with convoluted logic & shoddy facts.
The same sex unions that you speak of are nothing like the concept of marriage that we have, which stems from Judeo-Christianity. You are talking about an tradition practiced by a cult of people. You can probably find some immaterial examples in some other jungle or dessert practiced in the past. I am talking about the general idea of marriage that has been passed on for thousands of years, followed by the majority of humans. Fundamentally, a union between opposite sexes, and nothing more.
I totally agree with you;the Judeo-Christian concept of 'traditional' marriage has proven to be totally irreconcilable with the 1st Amendment,barring religion from the State.
"The definition of marriage has always been clear to everybody in the world, and has never implied a union between people of the same sex. They can have a legal union, but it is not their right to alter this traditional definition."
1. the defintion has changed many times in history.
2. as to "everyone" the Dutch ruled the opposite. they say a civil union is NOT queal to a marriage so they changed the law. Have you ever been out of the country?
You're echoing the exact phenomena that Prof.Lacewell is adressing in the interview;how the argumunts against gay rights are the very same arguments that have always been used to challenge individual freedoms.
It's not even a question of whether this is a democracy,a republic, or a dictatoship;the Declaration of Independence,ratified before the Constitution,granted certain 'unalienable rights.'
Indeed,slavery & Jim Crow didn't end because the American white majority overwhelmingly hated it.
They have the right to all of the freedoms that any other citizen has, they can marry people of the same sex. You are talking about creating rights that nobody else has, altering the law, and transforming the traditional concept of marriage. Please, don't compare jim crow laws to this situation. The gay community is trying to invent a right that nobody else has, and that is fine in my eyes, as long as the majority of Americans agree because this is still a fundamentally democratic nation.
2.)Again,you're rehashing old arguments;no one is speakingof altering the law precisely because the law doesn't have to be altered;we have Constitutional precedent.
3.)It's in obvious violation of the equal protection clause of the 14 Amendment.
4.)The traditional concept argument is laughable because up until '67 the 'traditional' concept of marriage in the country was whites marry whites;blacks marry blacks.
RACHEL MADDOW WILL BE SO HAPPY WHEN WHITES ARE A MINORITY IN AMERICA.
knightschwartz 2 months ago
Wow, if there ever comes a time when blacks lose their rights again, I will be standing by and laughing! These assholes think they deserve rights but others don't?! Sorry but you have lost all of my respect. I would've thought that people that have experienced discrimination would have compassion toward other groups experiencing the same thing. Apparentely not....
HepburnFlicks 4 months ago
@HepburnFlicks Pfft! Hahahahaha, your a fucking moron if do ever believe minorities ever had rights to begin with?
The Advocate and other GLAAD staff members knew fully well that this was going to stir up controversy, let alone, get a rise out of white suburban america. Yes, all too overly ambitious attempt to greedily hook into the entire demographic groups; Never one to forget about the 2000 election. Don't talk about past pains, exploits etc. etc. those who helped out!
Sileni 2 months ago
Every special interest group wants to be black. Sorry faggots you werent dragged around in chains and whipped (involuntarily anyway).
Seaworldexists 4 months ago
Wake up white liberals, black people don't like you are think your cool. This dike looks so surprised that black people didn't support the gay community. WOW!
CrazyBrah21 4 months ago 2
Niggers vs fags and dykes
ebonics4everyone 4 months ago
I recommend the YT vid "daughter of a gay man speaks". An APA study wrongly & incompetently found that women (in general) do not experience significant emotional repercussions from abortion (s).The findings have been modified, but the point is that there were methodological flaws in the original studies. People who accept conditional findings of studies at face value are very naive. Imagine a study purporting to find that women are not harmed by non-violent rape! That too makes no sense
shieldsff 5 months ago
Republicans giving up the black vote, or... doing anything they can to deny the right to vote thru backhanded means. Whether they're legal or not.
fromthehaven94 5 months ago
As relaxed as I am about gay marriage, I find some of the language used by the gay-marriage activists to be misleading. Sexism, racism and discrimination based on sexual orientation are different classes of distinction. They may all be wrong, but, to the extent they are wrong, they are wrong in different ways. For example, gender-segregation in changing rooms is actually encouraged, while segregating changing rooms based on race or sexual orientation would be rightly considered bigoted.
SkullOfYorick 6 months ago
@BrownHawk35 and that's what most white liberals do. They engage in "co-opting" black suffering just for brownie points,and for political points as well. This is one of the reasons why "we" as black people been voting heavily for the democrat party for so long. We think we need them to take care of our problems which is "slave mentality". And the've done nothing. and i'm not suggesting voting GOP by no means, we need to put our OWN money together and stop voting for thease politicians.
LiLrick258 6 months ago
@BrownHawk35 I agree. Melissa Harris Perry is nothin but a token for rachel maddow,so rachel can be perceived as "being down",but the real knows what's really going on. Most of thease LGBT groups have no interest in blacks,but they just want the "black experience". They have a reality check coming.
LiLrick258 6 months ago
@LiLrick258 "they just want the "black experience". "
Or....maybe LGBT groups are just expecting a little compassion....considering that just a few short years ago a "traditional black marriage" was a jump over a broom with no legal recognition. Is this the "traditional marriage" blacks voted to protect?.......I doubt it.
clubindiana4 6 months ago
@clubindiana4 first of all "sexuality" has nothing to do with race. and secondly, "traditional black marriage"?????
LiLrick258 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LiLrick258 "first of all "sexuality" has nothing to do with race."
I never said it did..........It's a moot point. No matter what irrational excuse (race/religion/sexuality) is attached to bigotry........the result is the same.
"traditional black marriage"?????
Yes......blacks seem VERY invested in protecting a tradition that NEVER traditionally included them.
clubindiana4 6 months ago
I was just about to agree with her until but she said somethin i dont agree with..smdh lord have mercy
BXTALE 6 months ago
Is this considered a news program?
BrownHawk35 7 months ago
What I got from this video is opponents of prop 8 didn't do enough to manipulate the dumb "niggers". You expect me to identify with "homosexuals" because I'm Black? You think I'm that gullible? I REJECT the comparison of Blacks and "homosexuals".
BrownHawk35 7 months ago
@BrownHawk35 You got the wrong impression. They statement was not about manipulation, but involvement. Thy said there was no effort made to inform the casual black voters in communities with a high african american density of the arguments against Prop 8, and due diligence by the campaign was not done. It wasn't about convincing dumb "niggers" but about informing those of the black populous who were uninformed just as there would be other uninformed people of other demographics.
AIReject 6 months ago
Actually, I believe I got the correct impression. Liberals in politics operate by seeking out “minority groups” and convincing us that we’re victims of some conspiracy to “keep us down”. Therefore, the operating assumption is that I can’t survive without the protection that they promise . This also means that no matter how unnatatural, perverted, and distasteful I find a particular liberal agenda I'd better fall in line because I'm Black(after all, I owe you so much). Its offensive.
BrownHawk35 6 months ago
@BrownHawk35 There may be potential for the underlying ideas behind this point of view to be of concern, but it is in no way relevant to the topic of this discussion, which only focused on the potential reason that such a large majority of black individuals, in a case directly related to the civil rights of a minority group, would have voted against it, and then stated the campaign not being active in getting the word out in the black community as a potential cause.
AIReject 6 months ago
@AIReject Am I allowed to determine what I think is relevant? I call into question the comparison that is being drawn between "homosexual rights" and the rights that Black people have to not be enslaved, raped, lynched, beaten, and murdered. Attemting to equate the two "struggles" is offensive.
BrownHawk35 6 months ago
@BrownHawk35 You're allowed to determine what you think is relevant, and I'm pointing out how you are incorrectly doing so.The comparison drawn is between two fights for civil rights. That is all. Just because one involved more atrocities, that doesn't mean there is no comparison, or that drawing a comparison is offensive. Sure, you're allowed to be offended, and I'm going to tell you it's stupid to be, because it is.
AIReject 6 months ago
@AIReject "Stupid"? Wow. Do you singlehandedly maintain the standard for intelligence? Those who agree with you are intelligent and those who disagree with you are "stupid"? People normally resort to personal attacks when they've run out of "intelligent" things to say. I have no intention of exchanging insults with you, so this back and forth is over.
BrownHawk35 6 months ago
@BrownHawk35 Excuse me, but I did not attack you personally or call you stupid. I said it was stupid to be offended by it, just as it would be stupid for a practicing Jew to be offended by a non-Jew eating bacon. It is not an attack on the whole of anyone's intelligence to point out when they are doing one dumb thing. You are clearly an intellectual individual, but you are incorrect in this one instance. I'm not commenting on your entire character. You are simply failing to make a good case.
AIReject 6 months ago
@BrownHawk35
The comparison is valid. Especially since religion was the basis for both types of descrimination. The bible was used to justify slavery in America during the civil war, and it eventually was used to justify outlawing marraige between a black man/woman and a white man/woman, or any other skin color with white man/woman for that matter.
NUTCASE71733 1 month ago 2
I got the “wrong impression”. White liberals like to differentiate between themselves and white conservatives, but instead of disagreeing with me outright you call into question my ability to understand. You’re talking down to me because you still think I can be manipulated. What’s next; are you going to call me an “uncle Tom” for not being on board with your agenda?
BrownHawk35 6 months ago
@AIReject Actually, I believe I got the correct impression. Liberals in politics operate by seeking out “minority groups” and convincing us that we’re victims of some conspiracy to “keep us down”. Therefore, the operating assumption is that I can’t survive without the protection that they promise . This also means that no matter how unnatatural, perverted, and distasteful I find a particular liberal agenda I'd better fall in line because I'm Black(after all, I owe you so much). Its offensive.
BrownHawk35 6 months ago
@AIReject I got the “wrong impression”. White liberals like to differentiate between themselves and white conservatives, but instead of disagreeing with me outright you call into question my ability to understand. You’re talking down to me because you still think I can be manipulated. What’s next; are you going to call me an “uncle Tom” for not being on board with your agenda?
BrownHawk35 6 months ago
how do liberals reconcile their love of niggers (who hate buttfuckers) and aids ridden faggots .. truly the dilemma of our time, who is more dysfunctional and worthless and thus more righteous in the liberal theology
puntme 10 months ago
@puntme Well arn't you the backwoods sister fucking redneck. Must be nice having your sister also being your mother. Bye Bye retarded fuck.
desager1 10 months ago
@desager1 lol u mad? must be a lot of cognitive dissonance trying to decide between the two, i could see how that might cause some anger
puntme 10 months ago
@puntme I just don't like retards, seeing as you are a retard.
desager1 10 months ago
@desager1 *pats u on the head* its ok dont let the mean words hurt your feelings
puntme 10 months ago
@puntme lol, retards sure are funny, bye retard.
desager1 10 months ago
@desager1 *tucks u into bed* there there little liberal its gonna be ok, just dream about a glorious multicultural utopia where everyone is a gay vegan transgender black muslim
puntme 10 months ago
@puntme Well that would be better than a inbred pig fucking redneck retard shithole. Bye bye retard.
desager1 10 months ago
@desager1 nah no one would be around to pay taxes for welfare, so everyone would starve to death. lol, or die of aids.
puntme 10 months ago
@puntme Why u picking on these loud obstinate elite lezbobs, there puntme.....You don't see me talking to pat maddow like that...
mjswans 9 months ago
ATTENTION to all WHITE liberal/Progressives d DO NOT compare the homosexual agenda with Black Civil Rights. We find comparing what happened to us, with what gays want offensive, and will lead to getting your ass whopped, much faster than using the N word.
coliwood 1 year ago
@coliwood lol thats very very true
iamasuicidalchick 1 year ago
@coliwood And I as Jew I find any mention of slavery highly offensive. How dare blacks have the audacity to compare slavery to what happened in the Holocaust. You might have done a little work you weren't paid for but you damn sure weren't marched into gas chambers by the millions.
tbone2872 11 months ago
@tbone2872 Progressives, like yourself, often lie to support your argument, So, I am guessing your NOT Jewish, you say that, b/c there is noway to verify it. 2nd No OBSERVANT Jew, having commonality with Blacks, would make such insensitive statements. 3rd Observant Jews follow the Torah, and are not advocates of the Homosexual agenda. If you knew history, you'd know That many of the prejudices that Blacks faced, in the south, were also extended to Jews. So, quite lying and learn History,
coliwood 11 months ago
@coliwood I actually am quite knowledgeable in the area of social history in the US. If you were you would also know that racial oppresion of Blacks extended far outside the boundaries of the Mason/Dixon as both Malcolm X's and Fred Hampton's assasinations occured in New York and Chicago respectively. You missed my point entirely. I was merely pointing out that the useless practice of guaging oppression of others by using a comparitive scale is obsolete because someone can always legitimately..
tbone2872 11 months ago
@coliwood ...claim to have had it rougher. And as Fred Hampton pointed out the oppression of anyone is constantly furthered by devisiveness created by racial and class martyrdom. As long as people with the same goals of freedom have determined each other to be the enemy rather than blame the oppressor. the oppressor has won. Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and Fred Hampton became dangerous when each recognized that racial issues were surface issues to disguise the real culprit, divisiveness.
tbone2872 11 months ago
@tbone2872 Blah, Blah, Blah, Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. Gays are not oppressed. The are not comparable parralles between gays and blacks and the antebellum south. For one reason. Gay man can conceal himself. I, on the other hand, am a nigga all day everyday, I can't wash this off.
coliwood 11 months ago
@coliwood A gay man can conceal himself? Have you ever met Little Richard?
tbone2872 11 months ago
@tbone2872 LOL, that is a good point. But still, you can't just assume someone is gay. Look at "Prince" he looks the part of the stereotypical homosexual, but he CLEARLY isn't. The man gets more Pussy, than a toilet seat. My point is there are a lot of gay men who have successfully remained in the closet or hidden their sexual preference i.e. Rock Hudson. If I venture into the wrong neighborhood, I am in trouble. Where as a gay, white, male will go unnoticed. Unless he wearing Ass-less Chaps
coliwood 11 months ago
@coliwood True.
harveysuperboy 11 months ago
@coliwood y cant we work together to overpower the racist homophobic rednecks? alot of them want slavery aswell as antisodomy laws
MamaMario13 11 months ago
@MamaMario13 What politician or pundit, is advocating a return to slavery? and anti-sodomy laws? I mean legitimate politician or pendent, not those West Boro baptist church dip-shits or the KKK.
coliwood 11 months ago
@coliwood So they have to conceal themselves to avoid harassment, violence, and discrimination, but the fact that they can pretend to be something they're not means they're not oppressed after all. How very forward-thinking of you. Hey, back in the 50's black people could just say and do whatever white people told them to do and they'd have been fine, I guess that whole civil rights movement was a bunch of blah blah bullshit too, huh?
BigMikeMcBastard 10 months ago
@BigMikeMcBastard OK you fucking moron.Gays don't HAVE to conceal themselves NO ONE made that argument. What is being said is, Gays CAN conceal themselves "CAN", giving them and advantage that REAL minorities, especially blacks don't, and didn't have in the antebellum south. Which is why there is NO comparison to between gays and blacks. As a black man, there are certain place I cannot go, but a gay white male can, because You cant "see" gay. You should learn to think before you type. DUMBASS
wutbothersme 10 months ago 2
@wutbothersme Just so you know, the irony in all of this really is just too much. I'm sure the white guys in the 50's had some good justifications for why Jim Crow etc weren't really oppressive at all, too. What goes around... really goes around, am I right?
BigMikeMcBastard 10 months ago
Terrible irony that a minority which struggled so hard for its rights is now all too eager to deny a different minority they're not fond of their own rights. Easy come, easy go, I guess.
BigMikeMcBastard 1 year ago
lets get Asian ladies Datemedear.info
fraekoud 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Rachel Maddow is an Oxford educated Rhodes Scholar (take note Christine O'Donnell) who has her pulse on what is right in American politics. Her nightly show contains the most well researched information I've ever seen or heard. The difference between the accuracy of her programme and the low brow, muck raking rubbish on the Fox Network is in a word QUALITY. Rachel cares about her audience enough to ensure that she delivers only the best in television journalism. Rachel is an American treasure.
Georgie2047 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Rachel Maddow is an EVIL ASS and a NUT CASE PERIOD! MSNBC is full of left wing bull crap period! MSNBC is full of anti-semitic bigots and morons period! MSNBC is anti-America, anti- Christian, anti-Capitalism, pro-communism, pro-socialism, pro-marxism, and pro-muslim. MSNBC IS EVIL PERIOD AND SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN ASAP!
NOBULLSPIN1 1 year ago
@NOBULLSPIN1 Who let you out of your padded room?
RaptorClaws24 1 year ago 2
@NOBULLSPIN1 funny if you took MSNBC and replaced it with fox, youd be right (with the exception of it being right wing instead of left wing)
idaman12345 1 year ago
@NOBULLSPIN1 Do you have any evidence that backs up your claims or are you just crazy/ignorant?
MichaelnChristine 1 year ago
@NOBULLSPIN1 So the First Amendment doesn't apply to people who disagree with you?
BigMikeMcBastard 1 year ago
this whole thing is ridiculous. . . their biggest rhetoric is "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" but he sure as hell didn't create Adam and Mary J. Blige. . .
The949080 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
The thing that people don't seem to realize is that Marriage isn't "owned" or "exclusively" accorded to one religious faith, like Christians seem to like to believe. Marriage goes back before recorded history, which would mean it would predate the Bible, and since everyone in the world wasn't Christian, then it can't "belong" to Christianity alone, or any religion or culture. This issue should never be put on a ballot. You can't "vote away" the constitution by an ignorant "majority".
FrankiexNYC 1 year ago
These Princeton "law" professors are halfwit bleeding heart leftists. To think this nimrod is "educating" our kids, the future of this country! Scary!
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@onetondrumbum Just because u dont agree dont insult her intelligence. Nobody can get to her level in an educational insitituion by being a 'halfwit bleeding heart leftist'. Quite apart from anything else your phrase is grammatically incorrect because leftist is not a real word. It doesnt help your cause when you are insulting someones intelligence if you fail to use English correctly. By why cant you be civilized in your criticism and admit that their may be extremely clever people who disagree
punkmanjon 1 year ago
Comment removed
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@punkmanjon I fail to use English correctly? lol.
And this coming from someone who thinks leftist is not a real word, (it most certainly is).
A person who doesn't know how to spell the word "institution".
A person who doesn't know how to use punctuation.
A person who thinks letters (u) take the place of words (you).
Now seriously, don't you feel kind of stupid now? Not only was my grammar error free, but in the process of trying to school me your grammar was horrendous!
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@onetondrumbum Leftist is not a word in the English language. It is a made up term. My grammar wasnt incorrect I simply shortened some words and left out some punctuation to be able to fit my whole point into one comment. My point still stands though, which is do not inul someone intellect using made up words simply because they disagree with you.
punkmanjon 1 year ago
@punkmanjon A sign of true intellect is listening and learning. It's ok to be wrong, we all are at times. To not concede when we're wrong is when ego trumps reason. EVERY word was "made up" at one time. There are hundreds of new words added to the English language every year. Leftist is in every dictionary and has been in use since the 1700's. Someone, please educate this person as there beef with me is only serving to deepen the hole they are already in!
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@onetondrumbum If leftist were a real term then you should be able to use its opposite, rightist but you cannot. It is an Americanism and as such not legitimate English.
punkmanjon 1 year ago
@punkmanjon Say what? Are you perhaps in grade school? I'm serious. Maybe you are very young and I'm assuming you're an adult. If you are in fact young please forgive me for the tone of my previous messages. If you are in fact an adult, you're not a very educated one. That's not an insult, it's simply the truth. For your information, "rightist" is also a real word in the English language. Come on, wake up and smell the coffee. You're a riot!
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@onetondrumbum Hahaha you have made a huge amount of assumptions mate. I am actually a lecturer at the University of London and we would not accept the term leftist (or rightist for that matter) in an essay. The terms might be used by the media in America but they are equivalent to slang and not acceptable in an academic essay. Im aware you werent writing one but you missed my main point which was that you insulted someone's intellect simply because you disagreed with them.
punkmanjon 1 year ago
Comment removed
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@punkmanjon You can't give it a rest. I could care less what words you would or would not use in as assay in England. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? You lost the argument, just face it. Both are actual words, not slang, but for the record you can include some slang as real words in many cases regardless. To the point you claim you were making. I can and do insult Maddow's intelligence because it's so easy and I'm free to do so. I do not think she's a smart person.
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@onetondrumbum Try and keep up you were insulting the prof from princetown not Maddow.
punkmanjon 1 year ago
@punkmanjon Once again it's you, shooting from the hip and getting it wrong. I first insulted Maddow's (see below) before I insulted the "good" professor. Since this a a clip of the Maddow show, and since you made no mention of the name of the person being insulted in your original message to me I assumed it was the host of the show. If I assumed wrong, that is your fault as you weren't clear to begin with. I don't think I assumed wrong though, I think you are just pulling a spin job.
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@onetondrumbum You said 'These Princeton "law" professors are halfwit bleeding heart leftists. To think this nimrod is "educating" our kids, the future of this country! Scary!' in a clip which has an interview with Melissa Harris-Lacewell. I replied directly to this comment. You were talking about Melissa because A) Rachel is not an educator and B) she did not go to Pincetown. On a seperate note Melissa is a political science prof NOT a law prof. Thats a lot of wrong you have going on there.
punkmanjon 1 year ago
@punkmanjon You're right about professor Lacewell, but assuming too much in the rest of your post. When a person responds on youtube it does not quote the exact post they are responding to and since I insulted the intellect of both professor Lacewell and Maddow and you didn't mention which of the two your reply was regarding I could only assume it was Maddow you were referring to, since after all the clip is from her show.
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@onetondrumbum Always an excuse isnt there? Youtube puts comments directly above the one they are referring to. Its not my fault if you didnt bother to check. But ONCE AGAIN you havent addressed my main point which is that you have insulted Prof Lacewell simply because you disagree with her. I really dont think you could describe her (or Maddow) as unintelligent. People dont become professors at world renowned universities if they are stupid regardless of their political stance.
punkmanjon 1 year ago
@punkmanjon No, I'm not the type to make excuses, as noted when I said "You're right about professor Lacewell not being a law professor. You may not think I can describe them as unintelligent, but I did therefor I could. Intelligence is not all encompassing. Ever hear of an idiot savant? Street smarts (common sense) verses book smarts? The ability to gain vasts amounts of learned knowledge does not in intellectual make.
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@onetondrumbum Gaining vast amounts of learned knwoledge is not the be all and end all of being an intellectual certainly, it also requires the ability for original and independent anlysis of information but you cant seriously be saying you think these women dont have any common sense and therefore that makes them unintelligent? What makes you qualified to judge their intellect?
punkmanjon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@punkmanjon In any event I'll update my position.
'These Princeton professors by in large are halfwit bleeding heart leftists. To think this nimrod is "educating" our kids, the future of this country! Scary!'
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
Cornell University Law school
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word “marriage” means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word “spouse” refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
Legal definition of marriage: MARRIAGE
"A contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought io exist between husband and wife"
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
Rachel Maddow you vial cretin. Taking away gays rights? Gays have as much "right" to marry as they do to having children. They can't procreate. The very definition of marriage in all the dictionaries and LAW BOOKS!: The state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law!
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
@onetondrumbum I guess we should take away the right for old people and infertile people to marry too since they can't procreate.
justme19928 1 year ago
@justme19928
The LEGAL definition of marriage is that between a man and a woman. Why can't minors marry on their own? Because the law of the land say you're not an adult until the age of 18. Certainly their are 15, 16 ,17 year old kids more mature than 18 year old "adults". Isn't government denying minors the same rights afforded to adults? Nothing in the Constitution that says one must be 18 to be assured of their rights. The law : men and women over 18 can marry the opposite sex. That's Law
onetondrumbum 1 year ago
What the fuck do white people have to do with the question she asked you? Excuses excuses excuses, what a lame ass. Typical elite; people are just too dumb to understand why they voted and need more college. This professors comments are fascinatingly stupid.
bolsonwjls 1 year ago
OBAMA IS NOT PRO GAY MARRIAGE. Why are they saying the voters who got obama in is suprisingly against gay marriage.
jahjirahcooper 1 year ago
Lacewell is sooo right on every point. Sadly, we will have to go through more of the hate (even from the blck community) gauntlet to get our rights
sleekcartim 1 year ago
Religion dillutes and often squelches common sense. Most black people are part of a predominately religious subculture. Most blacks have an above-average opportunity to have their common sense or squelched.
Get rid of religion, and good people will become even better under their own power.
djdrocco 1 year ago
Communities of color....people of color.
God I hate those fucking terms. Might as well say "colored people"
Notice how it is almost always blacks that use that term. I never heard of a non-black minority use that term.
DorkTheNerdInvader1 1 year ago
Good news: Prop 8 has been overturned!
Take that homophobes.
idontmakeitrainsim 1 year ago 17
This has been flagged as spam show
@idontmakeitrainsim DIE YOU FUCKING FAGGOT!!!!
Bravesfan4500 1 year ago
@idontmakeitrainsim no its not
G41MCombo 11 months ago
@idontmakeitrainsim Ya moron thats a sign that you live in dictatorship, and peoples votes don't count. Take that you sheep
qw2589 9 months ago
@qw2589 I am the shepherd.
idontmakeitrainsim 9 months ago
Melissa Harris gives me goose bumps.
rushnut1958 1 year ago
thank god for prop 8..and hopefully more propositions like it.
ewashington4178 1 year ago
the christians are all the same..no matter what color or sex..its funny in alot ways..how blacks..like the one below me say..well gays are racist..they never cared about blacks....goddamn, thats fucking sad ..now this bitch below wants to use the race card to justify from the real fact is that she herself dont like gays or care for equality..now i may be getting but so did she...so i guest we are at a dilema.
blackvenomnicole 1 year ago
be that as it may..these blacks may have completly diffrent views than gays.. and in the the present blacks and gays may be on diffrent sides of the fence ...and yes..there are some gays who never worried about blacks struggles today..and visa verca. but lets be honest we both are still in the same boat today just like the past on fixing inequality. and now blacks that voted yes turn into whites in the past. cause of thier religion...
blackvenomnicole 1 year ago
You can be religious and still vote in favor of gay rights. There is so much mis-information out there. Gay people are fighting for the same MARRIAGE rights under the law as straight people. We are NOT fighting for religious marriage or to challenge anyones view on what their version of a marriage is. Just the same rights :)
tristanmayfield 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People should not intervene with who people marry. I think blacks have been so caught up in the mouths of ministers that they fail to understand this subject particularly. Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. Some verses that discuss it is in Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13. But if you are without an awareness of sinfulness, then that's your problem not others, so they should mind their business about whom you choose to marry and let God handle you instead.
Par5Birdie 1 year ago
All bigots make me sick and shall be tarred and feathered!
padude64 1 year ago
I hate when people compare interracial marriage to gay marriage. It is TOTALLY different. Supporting Interracial Marriage is STILL DEFENDING THE STANDARD DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE because the relationship still has a MALE and a FEMALE in the picture. Gay marriage CHANGES THE DEFINITION by changing the genders involved. It is NOT to be compared.
boyofjazz 1 year ago
@boyofjazz
"I hate when people compare interracial marriage to gay marriage. It is TOTALLY different. Supporting Interracial Marriage is STILL DEFENDING THE STANDARD DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE because the relationship still has a MALE and a FEMALE in the picture"
I can easily sub a;; your "reasons" against gays with interracial marriage. The "standard" and "definition" at one time were blacks and whites with "their own kind".
The standards have already change before this on several points.
hipstermi 1 year ago
fucking ignorant homos. They're too blind sucking cocks and catching HIV/AIDS, bumping coochies and scissoring to know that blacks were kidnapped from their homeland, murdered, raped and are STILL kept economically segregated all on the basis of color and fear of superiority, not because they wanted to rub cocks and kiss a girl but on the basis of SKIN COLOR.
stfu faggots
DistantLover666 1 year ago
@DistantLover666 go die please.
agoodgirlNOT 1 year ago
@agoodgirlNOT
I already am dead, apparently so are you.
Go throw a pride parade, you crack whore
DistantLover666 1 year ago
@DistantLover666 You can no more help your sexual preference than you can help your skin color.
Did you CHOOSE to be straight? Did you make a conscious effort? Because I didn't. I just know that I like girls. The same way I can't help that I like certain foods or certain activities.
You're comparing a group of people who have been killed for what they do in bed to a group of people who have been killed for their skin color and you don't see any irony there? Not a surprise.
IAmPhotoBucket 1 year ago
@DistantLover666 And you fucking every cunt you see you sick wacko! Dont go there boy!
padude64 1 year ago
Fucking dumb niggers. They're too stupid to remember *their* civil rights movement, either because they're too young to have seen it or known anyone who experienced it, or they were just too retarded to pay attention during history class.
If your "group" or whatever during one time had to go through great strife to achieve equal rights, you have no excuse to keep away rights to another group.
All the video description shows is that if they didn't "get" Prop 8, then they were too stupid.
IAmPhotoBucket 1 year ago
@IAmPhotoBucket omg. go die somewhere.
agoodgirlNOT 1 year ago
@agoodgirlNOT Well, I probably will some day. Would you care to refute anything I said?
When one group is oppressed, and then is given rights, and then proceeds to help oppress another group, how do you not see a problem with that? How do you not think "Wow, what a bunch of ungrateful fuckheads." ?? Really. Explain it to me. Do you not see the irony there?
'I want equal rights!'
"yeah me too!"
'no, you can't have equal rights. queer.'
Fuck dude, get a goddamn clue.
IAmPhotoBucket 1 year ago
@IAmPhotoBucket
lol, talk abt getting a clue, the difference between me and you is I KNOW this is still a racist piece of shit country that wants to see us dead, while you THINK blacks have equal rights/have "made it".U think you can change AmeriKa?hahah, yeah, right after I get my 40 acres &a mule, fool. I never admitted in my post that blacks have it easier b/c of some worthless words on a "Civil Rights" act and a "Constitution". Grow up. The only way to change this cunt-ry is to destroy it.
DistantLover666 1 year ago
It sounds like you're angry about bad things people did to others a long time ago that have had no affect on you and you want reparations for suffering that you never went through
It's been a while since I've seen someone so brutally angry with their own country for such a fucking retarded reason. I really doubt you have been through anything that truly counts as oppression or suffering. If you're on a computer, you probably have a job and a home and are already better off than a lot of people
IAmPhotoBucket 1 year ago
@IAmPhotoBucket i get what your sayin and i apologize for what i said, but why use negative insults against a whole race of people to prove your point? you just alienate people and people dont want to listen to you.
agoodgirlNOT 1 year ago
A good indication if someone is a giant retard is if they ignore an argument simply to focus on one word. Be it "nigger" or "faggot" or "hurfdurf" or whatever, it doesn't matter. Chances are they are ignoring the argument because they have no points of their own.
If they're offended by nigger it's simply because they were told they needed to be. The word itself isn't offensive unless you let it be
It's like the gay wizards in HP cowering whenever someone mentions voldemort. Grow a pair, jesus
IAmPhotoBucket 1 year ago
@IAmPhotoBucket im a girl i dont have a pair . and it offends people because its still used against them as an insult. and people like you can say it its just a word blah blah blah. but if the intent of it is to call someone less of a person. so when you try to prove a point and the people your focusing on you insult them their gonna label you a racist and not care what you have to say. so GROW A BRAIN DICKWAD!
agoodgirlNOT 1 year ago
All insults are meant to bring down a person.
If I call you a cunt, even if that applies more to you as a woman, you're going to be more offended if I call you a nigger, simply because you were taught to feel that way.
IAmPhotoBucket 1 year ago
Fuck fags, send them all the fucking gas chamber
MrTheaterjunkee 1 year ago
the reason why most black people voted for prop 8 is simple....most black people are christian
KDubRollerblader 1 year ago 22
@KDubRollerblader there definitely is that sad correlation
phantomdoodler 1 year ago
@KDubRollerblader Education and income are quite significant factors, as well. Let's not conveniently forget those. If they are factors too, and class (which subsumes largely those two factors in this nation) is heavily raced against people of color, people of color will be among those more likely to vote for things like prop 8. Poverty and poor education didn't MAKE people vote that way, but there is a strong correlation there as well as religion.
PrezAlex 1 year ago
@KDubRollerblader and we are right
90thefallen 1 year ago
@KDubRollerblader and unfortunately blacks are, in general, more religious than their fellow white christians. thats at least what I have seen and I know a pretty decent number of black people.
DrNHand1994 1 year ago
@KDubRollerblader so to be christian means to discriminate against people?
fauxindigo 1 year ago
@fauxindigo Are you prepared to argue that non-religious people are as proportionately against gay rights as religious people? I hope not. :D
AdIgnorantiam 1 year ago
@AdIgnorantiam um no i'm not prepared to argue that b/c it's not true. most non-religious people are not brainwashed by religion into thinking that homosexuality is unnatural or wrong.. why do you think the trends show that with the younger generations; they are more accepting? b/c they have a better understanding than people did 30 years ago.
fauxindigo 1 year ago
@KDubRollerblader but seriously, a lot of blacks come from africa where they are all conservative christians and muslims
MamaMario13 11 months ago
@KDubRollerblader
when you would think they learned a lesson, but NOPE. Christianity just destroys intelligence.
wetdream09 11 months ago
@KDubRollerblader maybe the most black people voted for prop 8 because Obama believe marriage is between man and woman
KingCobra1984 11 months ago
This was disappointing. It was also more of a religious issue than a racial one though. Blacks AND Latinos are culturally quite Christian/Catholic. There were also plenty of Whites who voted against gay marriage too. Another consideration: having lived in the SF Bay area when this prop passed, I recall a LOT of confusion around it. Many ppl thought when they voted "yes" on Prop 8 they were voting FOR gay marriage rights, but it was just the opposite.
CheezInspector 1 year ago
@fireflygirl246 the way that she is talking about the african american vote is problematic and bias. She states, "the same voters that disproportionately helped to TAKE RIGHTS AWAY." in saying this, she is placing significant blame on African Americans. I hear what you're saying, but she definitely could have phrased her scope better.
sofreshsoclean12345 1 year ago
People dont realize that most black people are actually conservative democrats, traditional values with some socialist view points. As most black people see themselves as being Christian, they immediately decide anything gay is wrong,so assuming black people would align themselves with anit- prop 8 movements
houseofbenjamin1 1 year ago
7 in 10 african americans dont know shit about shit.
broskie926 1 year ago
@broskie926, because an ignorant racist troll who is cowardly hiding behind his computer keyboard and making himself look foolish in public, does.
CheezInspector 1 year ago
@broskie926 : nd u do?...aahahahh
henry7515 1 year ago
@broskie926 you sir, are an idiot.
sagequan 1 year ago
I really dislike the fact that rachel is generalize this much and speaking about blacks as if they are to blame. i love her, but this is prime example of what ange marie hancock calls the "oppression olympics" -everyone is fighting to be the most oppressed group.
Melissa made some great points. She's brilliant
sofreshsoclean12345 1 year ago
@sofreshsoclean12345 but she didn't speak as if blacks were to blame, she said right off the top that blacks only made up 10% of the vote and if 7 in 10 voted for prop 8 that would be only 7% of the vote so she is not blaming blacks. The story is about why would one group of people that are shown discrimination on a regular basis would then turn around and discriminate against another group of people, its a valid and intresting question we should look into.
fireflygirl246 1 year ago
Do you think it's a little hypocritical for Harris-Lacewell to criticize white feminism for not making the issues of women of other races central, and then turn around and say to lesbians and gays "well YOU didn't come to US?"
obsday 1 year ago
Bottom line is that we dont fully except gays in our race just like any other race.
gazzi22 1 year ago
Makes one wonder if a majority of blacks wouldn't treat another minority group exactly the way they were treated and even allegedly still are being treated.
Marchant2 1 year ago
If Rachel and Chaz Bono got married would that be considered same sex marriage?
owatadikiam 1 year ago
This is a democratic country, if the majority of Americans are against gay marriage then such a union should not be legal. It is very sad that the liberals in this country are taking over and turning this nation on its head, directing it on a course that is in complete contradiction with the spirit of democracy. The support for the destruction of this nation is one defining liberal trait that needs to be eliminated in order for this country to have prosperity.
ryi5005 1 year ago
Not a democracy, its called a republic, in other words a nation under the rule of law.
And the reason for that is because the law grants certain inalienable rights of Life Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
So I does not matter if 99% of America has an opinion , a persons individual freedom is protected by the constitution.
And Gay marriage goes under both liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Ex0dus111 1 year ago
This USA is actually an indirect democracy, or republican democracy; still a democracy. You are correct that a person has the right to choose to be with a man or a woman, but we are not talking about individual freedoms. We are talking about marriage documents that are made legally binding by a government that, in theory, represents the people. If the majority of Americans want marriage to be defined as a union between man and wife, then that is what marriage should be.
ryi5005 1 year ago
@ryi5005 (PART 1) Wrong on all counts.
The US is a Republic. That republic is governed today by a parti system, that parti system is elected democratically. That makes it a republic with Democratic instances in certain electoral proccess, but only because they happen to be in the constitution.
Ex0dus111 1 year ago
Exodus: In other words, an indirect democracy, as I said.
ryi5005 1 year ago
@ryi5005 No, a few democratic instances does not a democracy make.
Ex0dus111 1 year ago
@ryi5005 (PART 2) Ur "piece of paper" argument is also false, as there are plenty of government approved, legally binding documents that are a part of our other rights.
Like a Birth certificate, or a pay check, or anything signifying the right of ownership, or any notarized legally binding contract.
Ex0dus111 1 year ago
Exodus: What point does this prove exactly? Marriage is a union that has been expressly defined. Altering such a definition is the right of the majority.
ryi5005 1 year ago
@ryi5005 Merely disproving ur previous argument.
And the only place where Marriage has been defgined in the way u say is the old testament of the Bible, a document that has no bearing in law, and very little moral bearing, even for christians.
Ex0dus111 1 year ago
1.)"That is what I said."
No.You said,'they can marry people of the same sex.'It's there in print,man.
2.)There is indeed precedent in the Loving vs. Virginia decision,which was a civil rights case regarding 'civil' unions.
A case that was said to be both in violation of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment as well as equal protection...
thirdshift47 1 year ago
3.)"You are talking about American tradition of the 20th century."
No,i'm talking about the 'traditional concept' of civil unions in the US since the ratifying of our Constitution.
4.)"I am talking about marriage...going back thousands of years...all over the world..."
Are you serious?
There's never been a singular idea of marriage in world cultures in history.Polygamy has been widely practiced throughout history,& even today in Yemen,women are fighting for the right to marry in their youth.
thirdshift47 1 year ago
@ryi5005 (PART 3) Marriage is a concept that we are taught as children is part of our own pursuit of happiness, to find the person u love, and to make that person one with u, in a legally binding manner, that is traditional, natural and accepted by all of society.
That is the concept of marriage and denying anyone that concept is a breach of their right to pursuing happiness, as well as an underhanded attempt at denying the normality and elevation the love between to people should have.
Ex0dus111 1 year ago
Exodus: I think you miss the point, you speak of tradition, yet you ignore the fact that marriage has traditionally been a union between man and woman. I have no problem with gay people being happy or pursuing happiness. The definition of marriage has always been clear to everybody in the world, and has never implied a union between people of the same sex. They can have a legal union, but it is not their right to alter this traditional definition.
ryi5005 1 year ago
@ryi5005 Traditions that are oppressive does not deserve to be carried forward.
Specially if they violate someones rights.
Ex0dus111 1 year ago
LOL
I was gonna let you off the hook,but since you want it...
1.)It's well established that in both ancient Greece & Rome same sex relations was commonly practiced and involved ritual ceremonies of marriage.
Infact,if you've ever read Plato's 'Symposium'--which you probably haven't(that's what all them Berkely faggots do)--you find Socrates engaged in such behavior.
And in the case of Rome,it existed formally until Constantine established Chistianity as the national religion...
thirdshift47 1 year ago
2.)It wasn't until the Theodosian Codes of 342 AD that same sex unions were outlawed in Ancient Rome(but everyone knows how freaky ancient Romans were.)LOL
Southeast China was also a region were the practice was prevalent.
All of this is irrelevant,though,because even 1st graders know that their judiciary & legislature's traditional attitudes toward gays have nothing to do with the world,or they would've acknowledged many pre-Christian 'traditions' in the world;plus were talking US laws.
thirdshift47 1 year ago
You might find it odd but i'm a homophobe just like yourself.
The only difference is that I come real with my shit & don't delude myself by trying to actually sound convincing about something i'm bigotted against with convoluted logic & shoddy facts.
Your'e welcome.
thirdshift47 1 year ago
The same sex unions that you speak of are nothing like the concept of marriage that we have, which stems from Judeo-Christianity. You are talking about an tradition practiced by a cult of people. You can probably find some immaterial examples in some other jungle or dessert practiced in the past. I am talking about the general idea of marriage that has been passed on for thousands of years, followed by the majority of humans. Fundamentally, a union between opposite sexes, and nothing more.
ryi5005 1 year ago
I totally agree with you;the Judeo-Christian concept of 'traditional' marriage has proven to be totally irreconcilable with the 1st Amendment,barring religion from the State.
thirdshift47 1 year ago
That is for the people of this country to decide.
ryi5005 1 year ago
@ryi5005
"The definition of marriage has always been clear to everybody in the world, and has never implied a union between people of the same sex. They can have a legal union, but it is not their right to alter this traditional definition."
1. the defintion has changed many times in history.
2. as to "everyone" the Dutch ruled the opposite. they say a civil union is NOT queal to a marriage so they changed the law. Have you ever been out of the country?
hipstermi 1 year ago
You're echoing the exact phenomena that Prof.Lacewell is adressing in the interview;how the argumunts against gay rights are the very same arguments that have always been used to challenge individual freedoms.
It's not even a question of whether this is a democracy,a republic, or a dictatoship;the Declaration of Independence,ratified before the Constitution,granted certain 'unalienable rights.'
Indeed,slavery & Jim Crow didn't end because the American white majority overwhelmingly hated it.
thirdshift47 1 year ago
They have the right to all of the freedoms that any other citizen has, they can marry people of the same sex. You are talking about creating rights that nobody else has, altering the law, and transforming the traditional concept of marriage. Please, don't compare jim crow laws to this situation. The gay community is trying to invent a right that nobody else has, and that is fine in my eyes, as long as the majority of Americans agree because this is still a fundamentally democratic nation.
ryi5005 1 year ago
1.)No.They can marry people of a different sex.
2.)Again,you're rehashing old arguments;no one is speakingof altering the law precisely because the law doesn't have to be altered;we have Constitutional precedent.
3.)It's in obvious violation of the equal protection clause of the 14 Amendment.
4.)The traditional concept argument is laughable because up until '67 the 'traditional' concept of marriage in the country was whites marry whites;blacks marry blacks.
thirdshift47 1 year ago