XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality, alt.california 
 From: fsmith@emuybcpl.net 
  
 Ward Stewart wrote: 
  
 > On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 21:27:48 GMT, "The Pervert" 
 >  wrote: 
 > 
 > >"Ward Stewart"  wrote in message 
 > >news:fquvivgpaen7jacllpu06572oidls84ild@4ax.com... 
 > >> On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 16:05:21 GMT, "The Pervert" 
 > >>  wrote: 
 > > 
 > >> >Feel free to disagree with a particular opinion.  What I was pointing 
 out 
 > >> >was Ward's usual dishonesty in misrepresenting what was actually said. 
 > > 
 > >> >Quite honestly, I'm not sure what you mean by "circular logic."  I just 
 > >> >don't know what the term means. 
 > > 
 > >> >For the record, I do not agree with the concept (fantasy) of same sex 
 > >> >marriages although I could see some kind of sanctioned "civil union," 
 and 
 > >I 
 > >> >have no problem with gays in the military.  Yes, I believe it is the 
 more 
 > >> >militant gay groups that demand (what a joke) same sex relationships 
 > >being 
 > >> >recognized as marriage per se and I think they are demanding (and will 
 > >> >continue to get) opposition from society. 
 > > 
 > >> You consider it to be indecent and radical that George and I, after 
 > >> nearly a half-century together should seek the protections that are 
 > >> automatic for opposite sex couples? 
 > > 
 > >You don't read nor comprehend, Ward.  And that's fine, but don't ask 
 anybody 
 > >to support your stupidity. 
 > > 
 > >Long ago I said that while I do not support unions between gays being 
 called 
 > >marriage, per se, I had little problem with such unions being given civil 
 > >sanction with associated protections thereto.  That you and George have a 
 > >half century together is fine.  May you have another half century 
 together. 
 > >It's none of my business. 
 > > 
 > >And that is exactly why I consider you a liar and a hypocrite because 
 we've 
 > >gone over this several times already, but you still feel compelled to 
 bring 
 > >up issues which do not exist.  If you have a problem with society for not 
 > >calling your relationship what you want it called, bitch and moan to 
 > >society.  I don't particularly care. 
 > 
 > You misread me -- hardly a surprise since you seem to misread almost 
 > everything -- I don't give a whistle WHAT such an arrangement is 
 > called -- I do require, however, that such an arrangement be PRECISELY 
 > EQUAL to marriage -- 
 > 
 > > 
 > >And given your behavior and attitude in this forum, I will never support 
 > >what you want.  Why?  Because I don't like you.  I don't like your lies, 
 and 
 > >I don't like your stupidity.  Is that because you're gay?  No.  It's 
 because 
 > >you lie and you're sanctimonious and demanding.  Deal with it, Ward. 
 > 
 > SURPRISE -- big surprise!   What I "demand" is that I stand EQUAL 
 > before ALL the institutions of our society.   I know that the words 
 > "equal" and "all" present a challenge for you -- that is and will be 
 > YOUR problem. 
 > 
 > You probably recited the Pledge of allegiance to the flag most 
 > mornings of your elementary school life -- did you listen to the words 
 > being said -- "WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL?" 
 > 
 > > 
 > >> >As has been suggested, there is no monolithic "gay perspective" and it 
 is 
 > >> >but a relatively small segment of gays who are being demanding and who, 
 > >but 
 > >> >such demands, are insuring opposition from those with whom one might 
 > >think 
 > >> >they would want to cultivate understanding and acceptance. 
 > >> 
 > >> Petitioning in the courts and in the body politic is "demanding?" 
 > > 
 > >Petition the courts all you want.  Such is your right.  Knock yourself 
 out. 
 > 
 > We are and do. 
 > > 
 > >Demanding society see you and your relationships by your standards rather 
 > >than theirs (i.e., society's) and damning them for daring to disagree with 
 > >you and your pronouncements is, redundantly, demanding.  For such demands, 
 > >you will get what you deserve.  To wit: very little in terms of real 
 > >understanding and respect, and no small amount of contempt. 
 > 
 > And stunning victory after stunning victory -- 
 > 
 > > 
 > >> >But apparently they don't really want understanding and acceptance 
 which 
 > >> >brings forth a reaction that includes terms like "militant queers." 
 > 
 > YOU become foul mouthed and therefore I am wrong for so provoking 
 > you??  A FANTASTIC notion. 
 > 
 > >Maybe 
 > >> >that's some of that "circular logic" you were talking about.  But like 
 I 
 > >> >said, I'm not really sure what the term means.  Maybe it's "illogical 
 > >> >logic?" 
 > >> 
 > >> It is, quite simply, the illogic that lies at the heart of the 
 > >> definition of xenophobia. 
 > > 
 > >Your pronouncements are, as usual, irrelevant.  That you make them as you 
 do 
 > >(do you really believe your own pomposity?) obviously renders them (as 
 > >evidenced by their chronic ineffectiveness) impotent. 
 > > 
 > I would suspect that my "pronouncements" (as you style them) are 
 > holding up very well indeed -- we ARE prevailing, we ARE winning this 
 > civil rights, this human rights battle and your sour little tantrum is 
 > evidence of this winning. 
  
 And we didn't even have to suck up to the Pervert. 
  
 > ward 
 > 
 > As of an hour ago the Episcopalians assembled passed on the new 
 > archbishop of New Hampshire -- that hot-bed of radicalism! 
  
 -- 
    Fritz 
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
    Taking back my freedom of conscience. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)