moonbattery.gif


« Open Thread | Main | Military Unenthused About Chairman O »


November 11, 2008

Elderly Christian Woman Attacked by Homosexual Mob

Michigan isn't the only place where militant homosexuals have been attacking Christians. Perverts across California have been throwing public tantrums over the passage of Proposition 8, which bans the disgraceful sacrilege known as gay "marriage." In Palm Springs, 69-year-old Phyllis Burgess was brave enough to show up at a demonstration carrying a cross. The freakazoids snatched it away, stomped on it, struck her on the head, and spat on her. As she testified:

It was like a dog pack, actually.

Here KPSP Local 2 News obediently tries to spin the story to favor the violent mob, even though its own crew was attacked:

You know Change has come to America when it would be safer to display a cross in Iraq than it is in California.

On a tip from V the K.

Posted by Van Helsing at November 11, 2008 9:41 AM

Comments

How did these sissy boy, fudge packers attack this elderly woman? With a purse or by playing Barbara Streisand lyrics? One way to get back at these limp-wrists is by hitting them over the head with frozen fruitcakes. Not only is that just poetic justice (and plain funny), one can then eat the evidence, leaving no trace of the assult.

Posted by: leftwingsmasher at November 11, 2008 10:01 AM

Masher, that is too funny! Thanks for the chuckle! LOL!!!!

Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 11, 2008 10:10 AM

While I don't agree with what the protestors did, that woman really should have known better than to walk into a passionate crowd.
It's no different than the kind of stuff going on at McCain/Palin rallies. Imagine someone walking into there with an Obama/Biden sign or an Obama shirt?

It's common sense people, use some of it.

Posted by: Alessia at November 11, 2008 10:18 AM

I dont recall McCain-Palin supporters beating anyone up - especially old people. There were false stories planted about people saying Obama should be killed. But that turned out to be fake as none of the secret service agents heard it.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 11, 2008 10:25 AM

So, basically, Allessia is saying that we should never stand up to left-wing bullies. Just quietly submit, and everything will be fine.

Posted by: V the K at November 11, 2008 10:27 AM

Rosa Parks should have just sat at the back of the bus. Why did she have to go and stir up trouble? Common sense, people. Use some of it.

Posted by: Alessana at November 11, 2008 10:45 AM

Why did she have to go and stir up trouble?

becaquse she had to try out what she learned at the subversive highlander school a week earlier.

Posted by: Artfldgr at November 11, 2008 10:55 AM

And those little girls outside the school in Birmingham Alabama? They should never have gone through that passionate crowd. Common sense, people. Use some of it.

Posted by: Alessana at November 11, 2008 10:55 AM

Besides, passion trumps reason every time. That's why we don't punish people if they commit "crimes of passion." Oh wait...

Posted by: cowlove at November 11, 2008 11:09 AM

"It's no different than the kind of stuff going on at McCain/Palin rallies."

When you produce any verifiable evidence that McCain/Palin supporters beat up and spit on an elderly Obama supporter, you can make this claim.

Your support of these animals is disgusting.

Posted by: cowlove at November 11, 2008 11:14 AM

"Typical" liberals version of "Free Speech"


and


"Trpical" liberal trying to justify it. LIE and Accuse the other side of it. "Typical"

Posted by: TED at November 11, 2008 11:43 AM

Did they walk into it Alessia

Girl Scouts http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2008/09/girl_scouts_lea.html

Cub Scouts http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/09/021387.php

Posted by: TED at November 11, 2008 11:48 AM

It's no different than the kind of stuff going on at McCain/Palin rallies. Imagine someone walking into there with an Obama/Biden sign or an Obama shirt?

It's common sense people, use some of it.

Posted by: Alessia at November 11, 2008 10:18 AM

And no differnt than a silly moonbat troll coming here and stirring up shit just because you can?

You little missy, are a confused dipshit.

Posted by: Jimbo at November 11, 2008 11:51 AM

So if a black walked into a Klan rally he's to blame for what happens?

Or a woman walks down a dark alley and gets raped, she's to blame?

Check your moral compass, Alessia. It's in bad need of calibration.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 11, 2008 12:28 PM

Alessia Troll.

Remember when the media put a couple of jokers wearing towels on their heads in at a NASCAR
event expecting the crowd to go violent? Absolutely nothing happened.
Conservatives as a rule don't go to idiotic demonstrations and certainly don't beat up old ladies.



Liberal debate strategy: False parallism matched with a lie, generously rolled in frank emotion.

Posted by: Fiberal at November 11, 2008 12:28 PM

The pink phinks are nothing but thugs they all deserve to be sent to levenworth for life and longer

Posted by: Spurwing Plover at November 11, 2008 12:29 PM

None of the rallies have been violent. That one incident in Palm Spring was the result of provocation and was unnecessary. The rest have been actually very festive considering what is happening to them. The only negitive statements at any of these rallies was disapproval of the hatred that is being projected at them. Disapproval of hatred and anger isn't anger and hate.

The language at the rallies to ban same sex marriage have been full of hate and vile condemnations of people. There is where all the hate is coming from.

Heck, your language on this site alone shows how full of hate you are. You can only hate in others that which you hate on yourself. Do some soul searching and come to terms with your own self loathing.

Posted by: Joe at November 11, 2008 1:28 PM

" The only negitive statements at any of these rallies was disapproval of the hatred that is being projected at them."
Try telling that to the black blogger who went to document a gay protest over the amendment and described it as being like a Klan rally with the Klansmen wearing polo shirts and Birkenstocks instead of white robes.
There, the "Festive" gays spit on him, and repeatedly called him the "N" word.

Posted by: Adam at November 11, 2008 1:51 PM

Oh, really, Joe? It was provoked? An old lady carrying a cross provoked you?

And the vandalism against churches, the calls on gay websites to burn down churches, hurling racial epithets at minorities... this is "festive" to you?

These protests convinced me I was write all along. Extending marriage to gays on the theory that it will make them better people makes about as much sense as giving out mortgages to deadbeats in the hopes that it will make them fiscally responsible.

I don't hate gay people, but I do hate jerks. And that's what these people are behaving like.

Posted by: V the K at November 11, 2008 1:55 PM

"None of the rallies have been violent. That one incident in Palm Spring was the result of provocation and was unnecessary."
~Ah yes, it was the old woman's fault she was beat up and spit on. Of course. It's all making sense now. And we really shouldn't be concerned because this is just one isolated incident. Therefore, it's unimportant. Are you really so dense that you actually believe your own tripe?

"The language at the rallies to ban same sex marriage have been full of hate and vile condemnations of people. There is where all the hate is coming from."
~Do you have some evidence? A link? News story you can refer to? Anything?? You're not providing anything to support your opinion, so I get to call b.s. It didn't happen and you're making things up.

"Heck, your language on this site alone shows how full of hate you are. You can only hate in others that which you hate on yourself. Do some soul searching and come to terms with your own self loathing."
~Again, how about some quotes? The only hate I feel in myself is for people who 1.) beat up and spit on old women and 2.) justify those actions. I'm looking at you, Joe, with number 2. The only people who feel self-loathing are people so filled with rage and hatred of a differing view that they beat up and spit on old women.

What drugs are you moonbats using that alter your brains in such a way as to permanently destroy your self-awareness. These thug perverts beat up and spit on an old woman, yet you have the gall to come here and say we're filled with hate. We're intolerant. How is it possible to be so incredibly hypocritical and idiotic, yet purport to be enlightened?

Posted by: cowlove at November 11, 2008 1:57 PM

Yeah, this elderly woman was just trying to incite and provoke the anger of the gay men in that crowd. She was doing this so that conservative people could see this and try to use it against the gay and lesbian movement by trying to say that this violence toward her was somehow representative of all gay people. Give me a break. This woman, with her cross (representing the reason why people voted in favor of banning gay marriage in the first place) was just an IDIOT, BIGOT, and I hope she stays in her church where her religion belongs.

Posted by: James at November 11, 2008 2:11 PM

James it's pretty sick that you're blaming the victim here. Do you do the same to rape victims? If a gay man walks into a biker bar and gets beat up, is it his fault as well?

"I hope she stays in her church where her religion belongs."

So when you wrote your post, nothing jumped out at you and said, "Gee, here I am calling this victim of violent bigotry a bigot herself, and the language I'm using characterizes me as a bigot as well. I'm a huge hypocrite and not very bright." Nothing? That never dawned on you?

Maybe it will now, but I'm not holding my breath.

Posted by: cowlove at November 11, 2008 2:20 PM

ah, so those queers fell into her perfect trap and attacked her eh? wow she must be some sort of evil super-villain James.
Why were they not repelled by the sight of her crucifix? I'd almost expect them to be quaking with their hands over their eyes.

Posted by: xantl at November 11, 2008 2:21 PM

Joe and James, you must really have a sickness inside you to justify attacking an old lady. And I think that sickness is hate. James's last sentence really exposes the ugliness inside you guys.

Posted by: V the K at November 11, 2008 2:34 PM

Alessana you are the one with out common sense. Law abiding citizens don't go around beatin' up old ladies. I guess you think angry godless fags are allowed to because they can't get married. She had freedom of speech rights just like they did. You are a prime example of the stupidity that will try to overtake this great country. You should be outraged about this. What do they teach in school now a days. Once again librals making excuses for librals. The next four years there will be much more of this going on as trolls like Alessana run this country and its freedoms into the ground. What ashame.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 11, 2008 2:35 PM

She was doing this so that conservative people could see this and try to use it against the gay and lesbian movement by trying to say that this violence toward her was somehow representative of all gay people.

And if you guys had behaved like decent human beings instead of animals, she would have failed. But I guess that was just too much to ask.

Posted by: Giant Cluebat at November 11, 2008 2:41 PM

James and Joe. You two have the same problem as Alessana. You all are some twisted folks. By the way I was the one that posted anonymous at 2:35 pm. I was just so sick at my stomach I forgot to put my identity in. Oh yea! I thought librals had compassion. Obviously not......Well maybe just for their own dumd asses.

Posted by: Watching at November 11, 2008 2:44 PM

Did you think the homosexuals were just going to bend over and take it?

Posted by: claw at November 11, 2008 2:52 PM

^^ We have a winner. ^^

Posted by: cowlove at November 11, 2008 2:55 PM

claw brings up an important point, I say this as the blogosphere's most prominent caption-oriented humorist... gay marriage will always be a joke no matter what the law says. Gays will always be ridiculed so long as they continue to act like freaks. That's human nature, and it's never gonna change.

Posted by: V the K at November 11, 2008 3:03 PM

Rats.. claw beat me to it. I was just going to point out that the prop 8 passage was hard for some of them to swallow...

Posted by: Naqamel at November 11, 2008 3:07 PM

This whole thing is a bit sickening really.

Remember Sodom?

Posted by: Aussie-John at November 11, 2008 3:18 PM

This whole thing is a bit sickening really.

Remember Sodom?

Posted by: Aussie-John at November 11, 2008 3:18 PM


Boy do I! I lived in occupied San Francisco for 18 years!

Posted by: Jimbo at November 11, 2008 3:36 PM

Hopefully she didn't get HIV or HEP B or C from these frothing fairies.

Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2008 3:37 PM

[This whole thing is a bit sickening really.

Remember Sodom?

Posted by: Aussie-John at November 11, 2008 3:18 PM]

San Francisco = Sodom

NYCNY = Gomorrah

Not sure which Biblical city really fits LA but it definitely should NOT be called the City of Angels.

Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2008 3:40 PM

"Yeah, this elderly woman was just trying to incite and provoke the anger of the gay men in that crowd. She was doing this so that conservative people could see this and try to use it against the gay and lesbian movement by trying to say that this violence toward her was somehow representative of all gay people."

Kind of like those gay activist freaks on Sunday who disrupted the Michigan church service with their blasphemies? They had video cameras rolling and a reporter on hand in the hopes that they'd provoke the decent people in the church into getting violent against the perverts, so they could record it and then use it against Christians and have an excuse to howl like scalded cats about what horrible bigoted psychos all Christians are. Fortunately, the people in the church did no such thing, and remained calm as the perverts performed their repulsive demonstration. A comparison between the two incidents says a lot about the kinds of people on each side.

Posted by: Adam at November 11, 2008 4:24 PM

"Alessia at November 11, 2008 10:18 AM"

What you advocate is NOT "common sence", it's COWARDICE.

Gang, I think "Alessiana" was mocking Alessia.

Posted by: KHarn at November 11, 2008 4:26 PM

If this woman is to blame for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, then may I offer that Matthew Shepherd deserved what he got too? hmmm?

Posted by: Anonymous at November 11, 2008 5:04 PM

Preparation H banned ! No wonder the gays are mad.

Oh, proposition 8. Sorry my hearing isn't what it used to be. ;)

Alessana or whatever your name is, you are wrong to support violent people whatever their cause may be.

Posted by: Hemlock at November 11, 2008 5:53 PM

Protected, privileged groups like gays, blacks, Hispanics, Atlantians, whatever, do not seem to understand that it is their oftentimes egregious behavior and not their sexuality, race or belief system that reasonable people object to. (Notice that the country just elected a completely unqualified, radical left-leaning black man with nice manners.)



It is amazing that some individuals can be confused about the acceptability of roughing up an elderly lady.



These protected and privileged groups refuse to acknowledge the depredation of their own awful behaviors for the simple reason that they are in fact protected and privileged.

Posted by: Fiberal at November 11, 2008 6:42 PM

[I hope she stays in her church where her religion belongs.

Posted by: James at November 11, 2008 2:11 PM]

I would like to see you & your fellow perverts TRY make her or the rest of us 'keep it in our churches'.

In case you hadn't noticed, even Blue State, CA wants nothing to do with your sick, depraved and disease ridden lifestyle choice being legitimized.

Get used to it.

The more you & your fellow Sodomites push your wickedness on America, the more the rest of America is going resist.

Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2008 7:56 PM

First if idiot Christian zeolets are stupid enough to go to a rally of people that are really pissed off at them. Then according to the logic I see spouted from some here she deserves it!! Like "Fiberal" said "I would like to see you & your fellow perverts TRY make her or the rest of us 'keep it in our churches'." or "Jimbo" "Hopefully she didn't get HIV or HEP B or C from these frothing fairies."

This is nothing but a bunch of childish name calling and being assholes!! "Jimbo" Has nothing except small minded hatred to go by to think any body there has HIV or HEP B.

Now if we wanted to use small minded thoughts like that we can start counting all the sexually transmitted diseases that us Hetrosexual people can carry and give to our loved ones! HIV and HEP B. is just the starting point!

This really just proves once again that you people don't think for yourselves! See look at my book written somewhere between 1000 to 2000 years ago says it it wrong. So I will just fallow this book and not think for my self. I will call people names and beat people because I think that is what this book says to do!

We won't even go into how many different bibles there are. How the "official" bible got to be. All the other books written more then 1000 years before the books became "official". Plus all the books written along side it and was not allowed into the "official" bible!

I am willing to bet based on many pass examples that if there was a large crowd or crazed christians gathered together. One person walked up stating they are gay, they would not have something ripped out of their hand and stomped on! Like many many guy people in the past you Christians with the rule, wait what is it again? Oh yeah I think it says thou shall not kill? Would be dead, like many in the past have already killed!

Nothing but a bunch of hypocrites!!! Oh wait that is redundant right? Hypocritical Christian. It is your God Jesus that said love your neighbor like yourself right? I guess my book left out the conditions with that part.

Posted by: Earl at November 11, 2008 8:39 PM

[Like "Fiberal" said "I would like to see you & your fellow perverts TRY make her or the rest of us 'keep it in our churches'." or "Jimbo" "Hopefully she didn't get HIV or HEP B or C from these frothing fairies."]

I said those things. Get your facts straight. If you ant to continue whitewashing Jesus and Bible's teachings that homosexuality is a sin against man and God, then keep on.

As for HIV, HEP B & C those are higher among people who practice sodomy i.e. homosexuals.

http://www.modidi.net/press_release/inglese_modidi1.pdf

Scripture should never be studied in isolation from the rest of the Bible. Compare scripture to scripture and you will find consistent treatment of homosexuality throughout the Bible.

Practicing homosexuality is an abomination to God.

Only by twisting a single passage or making unsupportable stretches of logic can you conclude that Jesus thought practicing homosexuality is acceptable.

Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2008 8:52 PM

[I said those things. Get your facts straight. If you ant to continue whitewashing Jesus and Bible's teachings that homosexuality is a sin against man and God, then keep on.]

Sorry, that was meant to say:

I said those things. Get your facts straight. If you want to continue whitewashing Jesus and contend that the Bible's teachings that homosexuality is not a sin against man and God, then keep on.

I meant to edit it but went ahead and hit 'Post'.

Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2008 8:56 PM

BTW, I don't hate homosexuals but I will not exculpate its sinfulness or danger to the public well being; both cultural, economical, biological, etc.

Remember hate the sin, not the sinner.

On a final, parting note on this matter, those claiming Jesus never had anything to say about homosexuality always omit his repeated references to Sodom and Gomorrah as examples of what awaits those who do not repent. Matthew 10:15, Matthew 11:23-24, Luke 10:12, Luke 17:29.

The apostle Peter, who no doubt heard Jesus' teaching, says virtually the same thing in one of his epistles. 2 Peter 2:5-7

And no, Sodom and Gomorrah were not destroyed for the sin of "inhospitality." Everyone in Jesus' time knew what Sodom and Gomorrah were about:

". . .Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." Jude 1:7

Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2008 9:02 PM

It's fairly clear that the Left makes no distinction between hate speech and hate actions. Speech, reflecting an individual thought, is now a crime. Apparently, from the view of some of the LT's popping up here, beating the shit out of a little old lady for exercising her first amendment rights is NOT a crime, it's "her getting what she deserved".

Ya know, libbies, 1984 was a WARNING, not a freakin' guidebook.

I suggest you look up the bio of Ehrnst Roehm for a picture of where you'll end up.... but why would you listen to any of us goober pea-brained rednecks here? History? Pfffththth! Real Socialism hasn't been tried yet. Just because every time it's been tried before meant the ones who put the "Dear Leader" in power were the first ones against the wall (or in today's society, 'thrown under the bus') doesn't meant that The One (tm) would do that to you, his loyal sheeple, right? Right?

Posted by: hiram at November 11, 2008 9:27 PM

"I will call people names and beat people because I think that is what this book says to do!"
~You're confused. This post is about homosexuals beating and spitting on an elderly Christian woman. Apparently the ilk from the left thinks she deserved it. Do you?

"I am willing to bet based on many pass examples that if there was a large crowd or crazed christians gathered together. One person walked up stating they are gay, they would not have something ripped out of their hand and stomped on! Like many many guy people in the past you Christians with the rule, wait what is it again? Oh yeah I think it says thou shall not kill? Would be dead, like many in the past have already killed!"
~Interesting thought. You should refer to an earlier post on the front page about homosexuals storming a church service, shouting profanity and blasphemy, etc. Guess how many Christians got violent? None. Please share your "many pass examples [sic]" of Christians ripping the heads off of homosexuals and stomping on them. Links. News articles. Youtube videos. Please post any evidence you have.

Thanks, Earl, for being a perfect example of the disease that is Moonbattery: lack of self-awareness, hypocrisy to an extreme degree, poor reading comprehension, and an utter lack of logical thought processes.

Posted by: cowlove at November 11, 2008 9:35 PM

Seems that the 21st century 'Brownshirts' might actually end up being....


PinkShirts.

Posted by: hiram at November 11, 2008 9:45 PM

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/the_daily_show_proves_that_code_pink_whackos_are_babbling_idiots

Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2008 10:05 PM

hiram,
I did not say that anybody at that church got violent. I said "I am willing to bet based on many pass examples that if there was a large crowd or crazed christians gathered together. One person walked up stating they are gay, they would not have something ripped out of their hand and stomped on! Like many many guy people in the past you Christians with the rule, wait what is it again? Oh yeah I think it says thou shall not kill? Would be dead, like many in the past have already killed!"

from http://www.hatecrimesbill.org/2008/03/two-gay-teens-k.html
"But a string of anti-gay beatings, shootings and killings in recent months shows that homophobic hatred didn’t disappear when Matthew Shepard was killed 10 years ago this October, nor is it confined to rural pockets of America’s heartland.

In the last year alone, young gay people have died at the hands of straight friends in central Florida, been beaten to death after leaving a bar in Greenville, S.C., and assassinated in an eighth grade classroom in California. Last weekend in Athens, Ga., a 17-year old gay man carrying a purse was beaten and verbally gay-bashed by three boys he knew, according to a March 4 report in the Athens Banner-Herald."

Now how many Heterosexuals have gays killed?

Where was it in the story about somebody "ripping the heads off" I saw that they ran down the isles.

Now I am not a Christian. I would not do anything like this. I do not believe it is ok to do this. There church is sacred to their religion and beliefs. I would not disrupt their sacred space.

One thing I have asked everybody that is against gay marriage for is prof of one marriage that broke up because gay people get to do the same thing. Not one example has been given. Because the only people screwing up marriage is the people getting married. And remind me again who can get married. Oh yeah I remember now heterosexual couples!!!!

So because people can not allow other people the same rights and freedoms. These people in the church will never allow some kind of compromise. You do your thing. Worship god as you belief. Live your life as you belief. Keep your damn religion off of me!!!

Posted by: Earl at November 11, 2008 10:52 PM

First if idiot Christian zeolets are stupid enough to go to a rally of people that are really pissed off at them.

So should an old lady choose to exercise her right to free speech she deserves to be beaten by men who are much younger and stronger than she is?

Where I come from you don't hit a woman; much less an elderly woman, unless you want to be beaten yourself. Fragility and physical weakness, not to mention respect for the elderly, would prevent any civilized person I know from dreaming of beating an old woman no matter how pissed they were at her politics.

It's somewhat telling that you would consider a predilection for homosexual relations as a better qualifier for protection than fragility and age.

Then according to the logic I see spouted from some here she deserves it!! Like "Fiberal" said "I would like to see you & your fellow perverts TRY make her or the rest of us 'keep it in our churches'." or "Jimbo" "Hopefully she didn't get HIV or HEP B or C from these frothing fairies."

Most people do keep it in their churches; or when in public at least in the arena of polite discussion. It is not mobs of radical Christians conducting violence in the streets in this story; it is mobs of homosexuals who were denied something that they wanted via the democratic process. Having had their imposition of their will onto the majority rejected by that majority they are now violently circumventing the democratic process. And in the middle of all this you are defending the physical assault of a fragile old woman, due to the fact that society rejected the idea that there is a need for homosexual marriage. You are the lowest of the low.

Posted by: mandible claw at November 11, 2008 11:00 PM

Posted by: Earl at November 11, 2008 10:52 PM

Are you planning to provide anything approaching a shred of proof that those incidents occurred purely and solely because the victims were homosexuals? Do you think that crimes do not happen to heterosexual people? Or that if a crime happens to a gay person it must be because they are gay? It could only be this - and not the myriad other, far more common and far more rational reasons for which crimes occur?

By your logic it would be just as easy to claim that the incident this thread is about occurred because gay people hate old people and want to kill them all. Assuming causality in order to claim victimhood does no-one any favours at all.

Posted by: mandible claw at November 11, 2008 11:04 PM

Earl:
Now how many Heterosexuals have gays killed?
Do you think those statistics are tallied, seriously? Here is a hint for your tiny atrophied brain.

two white men kill a black men: Hate crime
four black men kill a white couple: murder, race not mentioned only show photographs.

Liberals created the special "victim" class based on sexuality/race they do not count if the perpetrator was gay/black/transexual/mongaloid.

Earl no one is saying that conventional marriages would break up, you stupid retard. What people are against is homosexuality being "normalized" via the school system, businesses being forced into pandering to homosexuals or face discrimination laws, and the very idea that society should change around a handful of queers, instead of them changing around it.


Posted by: xantl at November 11, 2008 11:11 PM

Mandible,

In Seattle a truck load of guys (don't remember the exact number) saw to guys holding hands in Seattle. Those two people where walking, minding their own business. The truck stopped, and they beat one of them to death. In court documents the defendants stated they attacked and killed him because he was gay. It is from their own words that we know that people attack and kill gay people just because they are gay.

The incident in Athens, GA said how they "gay-bashed" the victim. Oh wait everybody robing somebody says those things.

So it is ok in your mind if physical violence is used against a 17 year old? If physical violence is not ok, then it simply is not ok. I don't for a second think that violence is ok. No matter the age, or their beliefs. But that is the main area that we are different. If it is against somebody you don't like. Killing them is no big deal. But take a cross from their hands and point your finger at them, an oh boy you are now the "lowest of the low".

I don't believe violence is a reasonable way to solve problems. The old lady was not "physically assaulted" and the news reporter said she was not hurt.

Some of the people that voted against this was because of lies. Lies paid for by the LDS church. Nothing about prop 8 would have anything to do with teaching kindergartners about gays.

There was a time when the majority of people thought it was ok to treat black people like animals. Is what they did right? There was a time when the majority said women can not vote. Was that right? There was a time when the majority of the population believed it was ok to kill and use Christians for their entertainment. Was that right?

Posted by: Earl at November 11, 2008 11:28 PM

Here comes the old "black" vs. "homosexual" meme. How about I compare you with child molesters instead, you're both sexual deviants fair play?

The Massachusetts court system already set the standard for your "lies". Perhaps you should do your own research? The MA court ruled that since gay marriage is legal, the school system has a responsibility to normalize homosexuality, and parents have no right to opt-out of it.

Posted by: xantl at November 11, 2008 11:44 PM

*SIGH*

I wasn't going to comment anymore on this but...

[I don't believe violence is a reasonable way to solve problems. The old lady was not "physically assaulted" and the news reporter said she was not hurt.]

Not physically assaulted?

Do you have some sort of learning disorder?

[The freakazoids snatched it away, stomped on it, struck her on the head, and spat on her.]

Snatching the cross from her was assault AND theft. Her being struck on the head and SPAT on is assault. If the person(s) who spat on her have HIV: attempted murder.

Why do you insist on trying to apologize for these perverts physically assaulting this lady simply because she dared disagree with their perversions?

How your liberal skull keeps from riving itself in twain from all the cognitive dissonance inside it is a mystery...

Maybe it is all that space where your brain should be?

Posted by: Mike at November 12, 2008 12:25 AM

Posted by: Earl at November 11, 2008 11:28 PM

Mandible,

In Seattle a truck load of guys (don't remember the exact number) saw to guys holding hands in Seattle. Those two people where walking, minding their own business. The truck stopped, and they beat one of them to death. In court documents the defendants stated they attacked and killed him because he was gay.

Um so there was an incident in which a bunch of drunken rednecks killed someone because he was gay. That is tragic and disgusting; but that was not my point. My point was that this kind of incident is in fact increibly, minutely rare, and yet similar claims surface in response to even the most rife of bad behaviour by anyone who happens to be gay. What part of the fact that a bunch of redneck assholes killed a guy for his sexual preferences do you think justifies beating up an old woman for holding a cross? Oh and do you think that any church in the land would have those people in that truck inside their doors; or that the old lady in this instance had any kind of remote connection whatsoever to their intent and actions? She was exercising free speech, and nothing more. You're conflating her holding a cross with some other people murdering someone for his private affairs and attempting to use it to justify what happened to her. Oh and just a thought, if you really are so concerned about these supposed rampant instances of gay people being murdered for their preferences, do you think it is a good idea to try and defend the actions of gay people like the ones in this group? Do you think that would make the kind of unhinged freak who would actually think someone's preference of sex partner means the right thing to do is to kill that person, would respond positively to this kind of action?

It is from their own words that we know that people attack and kill gay people just because they are gay.

No-one is denying this. What I am saying is that such instances are incredibly few and far between, and that conservatives, Christians, right-wingers and anyone else worth their salt would be the first to condemn them, as I have done above. On the other hand, are you able to honestly say that in none of these cases was a "hate crime" motive attributed because the victim of a crime was gay? Are you willing to claim that homosexual rights movements do not push their politics in such ways? Because there are tons and tons of documentation around demonstrating that they do. And all of this is moot, since the protesters here were demonstrating against having their wishes denied by the democratic process and part of that protest took the form of assaulting an elderly woman. Gay people could be getting shot or beaten up at the rate of one a month and it would still not make this okay; the reality is that an exceedingly small handful of gay people have been hurt or killed for being gay since the advent of the gay rights movement and yet you are still claiming this as justification for beating an elderly woman who demonstrated support for the opposing position in a legal question.

The incident in Athens, GA said how they "gay-bashed" the victim. Oh wait everybody robing somebody says those things.

So you've now listed two incidents where the perpetrators admitted to anti-homosexual motivations; and from the second one you've omitted any kind of context which might demonstrate whether the incident being referred to as "gay-bashing" meant that it was motivated by prejudice and bigotry, or whether it was a fight of some normal type for whatever reason, in which the attacker noted in his motivation that the victim was gay.

So it is ok in your mind if physical violence is used against a 17 year old?

Why on earth would it be? And how on earth is that related to attacking an elderly woman over her expression of free speech in a legal debate? Your attempt at argument contains the most ludicrous type of fallacy. But since you went first I guess I will just follow your lead and abandon any attempt at rational debate. Here you go: Is it okay in your mind to club baby seals to death and kill and eat pregnant women? It must be, if you don't agree with what I say.

If physical violence is not ok, then it simply is not ok. I don't for a second think that violence is ok. No matter the age, or their beliefs. But that is the main area that we are different. If it is against somebody you don't like. Killing them is no big deal. But take a cross from their hands and point your finger at them, an oh boy you are now the "lowest of the low".

Point out to me where it was that I said violence against gay people was okay. Go ahead, show me the exact place where I said that; as opposed to puported instances of violence that is exclusively anti-gay in nature not being relevant or legitimate as an excuse for violence against an old woman.

Either that or take your mantle of wounded victimhood off of this damned debate and admit that you are simultaneously claiming to oppose violence while at the same time justifying the violent incident that is the only one which is being debated here. In other words, that you are a lying swine who uses a collection of puported historical grievances to attempt to paint opponents in a debate as evil while legitimizing your own support of the most heinous acts possible committed by your own side.

I don't believe violence is a reasonable way to solve problems. The old lady was not "physically assaulted" and the news reporter said she was not hurt.

If you would like to try out this theory, I am mmore than happy to spit on you, menace you, and wrench belongings from your grasp. You may then inform me whether or not you have been insulted.

Some of the people that voted against this was because of lies. Lies paid for by the LDS church. Nothing about prop 8 would have anything to do with teaching kindergartners about gays.

Prove it. Your say-so means precisely zero.

There was a time when the majority of people thought it was ok to treat black people like animals. Is what they did right? There was a time when the majority said women can not vote. Was that right? There was a time when the majority of the population believed it was ok to kill and use Christians for their entertainment. Was that right?

There was a time when homosexuals lost a legal battle enabling them to claim that marriage between couples of the same sex must be viewed as exactly equivalent to marriage between couples of the opposite sex, when the fact that civil unions are recognized and that there are literally dozens of other avenues by which full legal rights can be attained by same-sex couples means that literally the only motivation they could have had was to challenge the traditional concept of family and marriage; among the people whose support and acceptance they claim they don't need and who they view as enemies to their way of life. Then there was a time that having lost this debate via the democratic process, began protesting rowdily in public, and physically and verbally assaulted an opponent who was conducting a peaceful counter-protest in accordance with her first amendment rights. Is what they did okay? You are sure trying your best to make it appear so.

Posted by: mandible claw at November 12, 2008 2:32 AM

If you would like to try out this theory, I am mmore than happy to spit on you, menace you, and wrench belongings from your grasp. You may then inform me whether or not you have been assaulted.

Posted by: mandible claw at November 12, 2008 2:44 AM

Earl needs to be hit over the head with a few frozen fruitcakes himself. Jeez, an old lady gets mauled and he stands up to for the attackers because they are a minority? Earl, walk off a cliff.

Posted by: leftwingsmasher at November 12, 2008 5:21 AM

"Plus all the books written along side it and was not allowed into the "official" bible!"
Yes, there were some books left out of the official Bible by the early church council that estblished the canon, such as the Gospel of Thomas. However, in the case of each book rejected, they had good reasons for believing that those books were fraudulent and thus didn't belong in the Bible canon. Some were written so long after the events they were supposed to have recorded that they could not be seen as accurate, others differed so much in their content from other books which were known to be true that it was established that they couldn't be accurate accounts (i.e. the book of Thomas has Jesus doing and saying things which are quite contrary to the things He said and did in the four accepted Gospels).
"Now how many Heterosexuals have gays killed?"
For just two examples, Jesse Dirkhising and Mary Stachowicz.

Posted by: Adam at November 12, 2008 5:39 AM

How did we get from perverts beating an old woman and spitting on her to black's getting the right to vote? Earl, instead of writing the first thing that pops into your mind, try to stay on topic and respond to specific points.

Oh and all your examples? Your "quotes" from victims and defendants? Give us proof or it didn't happen.

Posted by: cowlove at November 12, 2008 6:26 AM

Earl=idot/fag

Posted by: Anonymous at November 12, 2008 8:47 AM

Go away Anon@8:47

Posted by: cowlove at November 12, 2008 9:27 AM

If you would like to try out this theory, I am mmore than happy to spit on you, menace you, and wrench belongings from your grasp. You may then inform me whether or not you have been assaulted.

In Earl's case, he wouldn't feel "assaulted," just very, VERY aroused.

Posted by: V the K at November 12, 2008 9:32 AM

The only amusing thing in this horrible incident was when the hopelessly PC anchorman said on one of the videos, "a lot of hate evidently on both sides." Uh, sure, buddy. The quiet old lady carrying the cross was really dishing out the hate to that mob.

The anti-8 crowd is either confused or lying. The "separate church and state" chant shows that they don't understand the 1st Amendment, because it protects freedom of religion, it doesn't restrict it. And have you noticed how the gays don't protest against the liberal churches who are pro-gay marriage? They don't insist on "separation" then.

Re. what Jesus did / didn't save about homosexual behavior: Arguing from silence is a logical fallacy, Jesus inspired all scripture, He supported the Old Testament law to the last letter, the "red letters" weren't silent on these topics in the sense that they reiterated what marriage and murder were, He emphasized many other important issues that these liberal theologians completely ignore (Hell, his divinity, his exclusivity, etc.), He was equally "silent" on issues that these folks treat as having the utmost importance (capital punishment, war, welfare, universal health care, etc.), and abortion and homosexual behavior simply weren't hot topics for 1st century Jews.

Posted by: Neil at November 12, 2008 9:59 AM

Earl. You misattributed me. Wipe the spit off your screen so that you can follow.



cowlove



Give us proof or it didn't happen. Are you kidding? Liberals cannot use verifiable themes, proof or facts; they will certainly become conservatives.

Posted by: Fiberal at November 12, 2008 11:43 AM

hiram,

"I will call people names and beat people because I think that is what this book says to do!"
~You're confused. This post is about homosexuals beating and spitting on an elderly Christian woman. Apparently the ilk from the left thinks she deserved it. Do you?

First I don't believe that she should have been treated the way she was. I believe that violence is a base, immature, idiotic way of dealing with problems. Not once did I say "I think this was a good idea" or anything like that.

This post is about the way human beings are treated. It is all about treating humans with respect. Something that if you take a small amount of time and look over what has been posted about the gays, it shows nothing but base, and immature attitudes, and thinking.

The only thing that anybody can point to as a reason why they feel this treatment is ok, is the christian bible! That is the only reason they are treated like this.

Posted by: Earl at November 12, 2008 11:38 PM

Neil,

"Give us proof or it didn't happen. Are you kidding? Liberals cannot use verifiable themes, proof or facts; they will certainly become conservatives."

Funny thing about all that. Tell me at what second point do you see that lady getting spit on? Tell me at what second did you see her getting hit on the head?

If you can't give proof it did not happen right? That is what you people said.

Posted by: Earl at November 12, 2008 11:40 PM

For a group that is so "against" hate and discrimination they sure know how to display hate and discrimination. - The gay motto - "we love you and show tolerance as long as you agree with us - otherwise we kill you"

Posted by: Gaylynne Coates at November 13, 2008 12:11 AM

For a group that is so "against" hate and discrimination they sure know how to display hate and discrimination. - The gay motto - "we love you and show tolerance as long as you agree with us - otherwise we destroy you"

Posted by: Gaylynne Coates at November 13, 2008 12:12 AM

[The only thing that anybody can point to as a reason why they feel this treatment is ok, is the christian bible!]

Absurd.

One can oppose homosexuality without reasons of religion.

It is a highly dangerous deviant lifestyle choice that spreads disease and endangers the public health and welfare.

That's for starters.

I'll let your liberal brain try to comprehend the fact that morality and ethics can exist apart from religion and this is coming from a devout Roman Catholic.

Posted by: Mike at November 13, 2008 12:18 AM

At 0:40 she stumbles after being struck on the back of the head.

At 0:50 she's clearly spit on.

Geez, just check out the guy at 1:14 and tell me who's filled with rage and hate?

Beyond that, Earl, it doesn't matter if you agree with this woman's beliefs or not. She has a right to express them in a public area, and this group denied her that right. I can only assume you support them because you support silencing any opinion contrary to your own.

Posted by: cowlove at November 13, 2008 7:12 AM

Earl;

I didn't say that. That's cowlove. Mine is the post above it.

The names of the posters appear at the END of the post

hiram

(see?)

Posted by: hiram at November 13, 2008 4:12 PM

I dont like what Gay people did to this old lady. That is DISREPECT!!! Everyone HAS right to speak up what they believe. Black People dont attacked anybody during those EVENTS!

Get out of street, we dont need you... you have to ACCEPT what election day tell you.

You GAY people!! Geez! Get A LIFE!

Posted by: Brent at November 14, 2008 8:37 AM

I dont like what Gay people did to this old lady. That is DISREPECT!!! Everyone HAS right to speak up what they believe. Black People dont attacked anybody during those EVENTS!
Get out of street, we dont need you... you have to ACCEPT what election day tell you.
You GAY people!! Geez! Get A LIFE!

Posted by: Brent at November 14, 2008 8:38 AM

Wish I'd come across this earlier. At the McCain/Palin rallies, they didn't have to resort to this kind of behavior because the fucking police took care of it for them. Arresting anyone from the other side if they were visible trying to get in, and forcibly ejecting them if they had a ticket and then expressed their disagreement.

Read this account by a military mom who tried taking a stand against the war at a Palin rally:

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/104521/?page=1

Jesus, the denial of the suppression of dissent under Bush you people display is stunning.

Bush and his uniformed goons have been making damned sure that Bush, Cheney, etc. never appear before anything but a sterilized crowd. The McSame/Failin' campaign kept strictly to the playbook. I guess they were worried that Ace McCain or Joan of Wasilla might get a little too mavericky and lead their enthusiasts in a drawing and quartering using monster trucks.

Posted by: Paul Burrell at November 16, 2008 10:36 AM