From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V4 #281 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Saturday, October 16 2004 Volume 04 : Number 281 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) [LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com] RE: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) ["Aaron Milenski" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) >Hmmm. I think straight Republicans should not be allowed in public office, >so >I suppose I can see where he's coming from. There's something very insecure >and frightened at the core of someone who would find someone like Mary or >me a >threat. As an educator, I feel like it is my job to keep my private life >PRIVATE with children, and to be totally objective about sexual orientation >in a >classroom setting, not promoting or condemning anyone's orientation. Call >me >zany like that, but.... I'm truly embarrassed to live in Ohio, as we have an anti-gay marriage ballot issue this year. It's very likely to win, too. I find it really disturbing than an issue of that type is somehow allowed to be on the ballot. I've always contended that ballot issues aren't about democracy but about subverting the legal system (this can be done on both the left and the right) by having the people make an emotional choice about something that should be decided in a courtroom if not at all. Anyway, a lot of people disagree with me, but this isn't the only ballot issue with major repercussions. The Colorado issue is a really bizarre one, as it can create a situation where one state changes its rules and has an effect on the entire nation. _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:26:58 -0700 From: Michael Mitton Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) > I find it really > disturbing than an issue of that type is somehow allowed to be > on the ballot. I've always contended that ballot issues aren't about > democracy but about subverting the legal system (this can be done > on both the left and the right) by having the people make an emotional > choice about something that should be decided in a courtroom if not > at all. Anyway, a lot of people disagree with me, but this isn't the only I guess I disagree. Gay marriage seems to be precisely the sort of thing that works as a ballott initiative: it's an easy-to-grasp, simple issue where the opinions of the public are just as relevant as the (presumably) better informed legislators. We elect our represtatives based on the broad principles they support (not the nitty-gritty policy details), so if an initiative is about one of these principles, it seems just as reasonable to have direct democracy. The counterargument is probably something along the lines of, "You can have the majority but still be wrong." See civil rights. But just because a majority signs off on an initiative doesn't mean the courts have been subverted. In Oregon, ballot measures that pass are regularly rejected by the courts as unconstitutional. Even when the ballot measure attempts to change the state constitution, they often get thrown out for being improper changes to the constitution. Then of course, even if it gets by these checks, you may very well be able to appeal to federal law to block the initiative. Of course, Oregon year in year out has the most ballot initiatives of any state in the country, occasionally more than the other 49 states put together. So I'm probably more concerned about the nitty-gritty policy details that regularly end up on the ballot about which, with all due respect, public opinion is irrelevant. BTW, my favorite ballot measure story: there was a measure to shut down Oregon's only nuclear power plant, a plant which was only a couple years away from the end of its life anyway. A month before the vote, the utility company actually decided to close the plant down of its own accord, because the needed upkeep was too expensive, especially in a land of cheap hydroelectric power. So how did the public vote? Keep the plant open... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:44:42 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) >I guess I disagree. Gay marriage seems to be precisely the sort of >thing that works as a ballott initiative: it's an easy-to-grasp, >simple issue where the opinions of the public are just as relevant as >the (presumably) better informed legislators. We elect our >represtatives based on the broad principles they support (not the >nitty-gritty policy details), so if an initiative is about one of >these principles, it seems just as reasonable to have direct >democracy. Well, I suppose I'm as scared of the decisions of people in the lagislature as I am of the general public. I suppose my issue is a lot more about what can get on the ballot and how than I am by the actual process of voting for it. _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 16:46:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Michael Mitton wrote: > Of course, Oregon year in year out has the most ballot initiatives of > any state in the country, occasionally more than the other 49 states > put together. Which has led to charmers like 2000's Proposition 9: Section 1. ORS 336.067 is amended to read (new section): "(e) Sexual Orientation as it relates to homosexuality and bisexuality, is a divisive subject matter not necessary to the instruction of students in public schools. Notwithstanding any other law or rule, the instruction of behaviors relating to homosexuality and bisexuality shall not be presented in a public school in a manner which encourages, promotes or sanctions such behaviors." I realize that not everyone on this list shares my personal beliefs about the civil rights of gay and bisexual people. And I have no idea what most people think about sex-ed curriculums. But I hope that the level of pedantry here is consistently high enough to scream in terror at HOW POORLY WRITTEN the measure itself is. - - Why is "Sexual Orientation" capitalized? - - What's with the comma after "bisexuality" going unmatched by a comma before "as"? - - Why does "subject matter" have an "a" before it? - - Can you really say "necessary to [noun]" that way? I think "for" would be much more natural. - - Similarly, does one "instruct behaviors", not "instruct students in behaviors"? And so on. Admittedly, the only reason I ran across the text of this measure in the first place was my politics-- maybe things this atrocious regularly get on ballots in some states. For example, there's this proposal (not actually on the ballot, I don't think) from my own state... http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/elepip/pipc.htm a ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:22:53 -0600 From: Roger Winston Subject: RE: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) At Friday 10/15/2004 12:17 PM, Aaron Milenski wrote: >Anyway, a lot of people disagree with me, but this isn't the only >ballot issue with major repercussions. The Colorado issue is a really >bizarre one, as it can create a situation where one state changes >its rules and has an effect on the entire nation. I assume you're talking about Amendment 36, which would split the electoral votes proportionally according to the popular vote, rather than assigning all nine votes to the popular vote winner. Proponents of the measure say that if had been in effect in 2000, Bush would not have won. The most bizarre thing is that if it passes, it will be retroactive to the current election. But there's already a preemptive federal lawsuit challenging it. Really, all we want to do is take the election spotlight away from Florida this year. Latre. --Rog - -- Distance, Redefined: http://www.reignoffrogs.com/flasshe ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:02:38 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) On Oct 15, 2004, at 1:00 PM, LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com wrote: > This wasn't the first time Mary has been thrown into the news > involuntarily. > At this summer's Republican convention, Illinois Republican Senate > candidate > Alan Keyes said that, as a lesbian, she is a "selfish hedonist." Funny thing, Keyes has a lesbian daughter, at least if you can believe what you read on the internets. What's the deal with people like Keyes and Phyllis Schlafly? Bad parenting or bad genes? Beware the Smelly Toad - - - Steve __________ George W. Bush has failed America. In 2001 President Bush used the horrible events of September 11 to push through an agenda serving his neoconservative masters, no matter what the cost. The result has been the biggest debt in the nation's history and the greatest alienation of the U.S. from its allies since the Revolutionary War. To make matters worse, George W. Bush is a flatulent arrogant pussbag, a lying sack of horseshit, and an assfaced ignorant fuckhead. Next November, save America...from another four years of a dickhead President with the total combined intelligence of a wet sock and a mud brick. Don't be an asshole...vote Democrat in 2004. (random, I affirm!) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 18:22:29 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) Yes, everybody, please base your vote on the important issue of gay marriage. Consider this quote from John Kerrry, though: "The President and I have the same position, fundamentally, on gay marriage. We do. Same position." Of course, it's not really fair to judge Kerry on anything he says, is it? Phyllis Schlafly, incidentally, has always been close to and has even worked alongside her gay son on certain issues. Maybe he'd apologize to those on the Left who feel he isn't gay in an acceptable manner. In related news, proud Leftist John Cale thinks that objectionable lyrics should be treated as a "law-enforcement problem." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:02:52 EDT From: AWeiss4338@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) In a message dated 10/15/2004 2:08:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com writes: This wasn't the first time Mary has been thrown into the news involuntarily. At this summer's Republican convention, Illinois Republican Senate candidate Alan Keyes said that, as a lesbian, she is a "selfish hedonist." If the Cheney's want to be angry with anyone, it's Keyes they should be angry with, not Kerry. But Dick and Lynne will never criticize him, because he is also a republican. Andrea Whose state is on record as being agianst gay marrage, yet our governor is openly gay. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 19:50:38 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) On Oct 15, 2004, at 5:22 PM, JRT456@aol.com wrote: > Phyllis Schlafly, incidentally, has always been close to and has even > worked > alongside her gay son on certain issues. Maybe he'd apologize to those > on the > Left who feel he isn't gay in an acceptable manner. Typical JR red herring. The question is about the parents, not the children. The parents are the ones that hold themselves up as moral exemplars, and rail against the choice of homosexuality as a lifestyle. Clearly, they failed to rear their children correctly. - - Steve __________ Among other things, it demonstrates that the current administration's officials are dogged, if inept, disciples of the patriotic bromide, military pageant, "big lie" combo pioneered by Nazi propaganda theorist Joseph Goebbels. - J. Hoberman, on Fahrenheit 9/11 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 21:21:53 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) In a message dated 10/15/04 8:54:20 PM, steveschiavo@mac.com writes: > Typical JR red herring. The question is about the parents, not the > children. The parents are the ones that hold themselves up as moral > exemplars, and rail against the choice of homosexuality as a lifestyle. > Clearly, they failed to rear their children correctly. > To repeat, Phyllis Schlafly is a parent who is outspoken about her love and her pride for her eldest son. They're very close, and share many political opinions. Nothing has changed in their relationship since John's sexuality was made public...not that he was ever closeted. Schlafly probably wouldn't claim so herself, but I'd say the lady holds up as a strong moral exemplar. She likely wouldn't apologize for having a gay son who doesn't live up to your expectations or your stereotypes. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 19:35:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Gil Ray Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) - --- JRT456@aol.com wrote: > Yes, everybody, please base your vote on the > important issue of gay marriage. > Consider this quote from John Kerrry, though: "The > President and I have the > same position, fundamentally, on gay marriage. We > do. Same position." > > Of course, it's not really fair to judge Kerry on > anything he says, is it? My favorite Ronald Reagan quote ! "Well....there you go again." There is a big difference, though. Bush wants a constitutional ammendment on the matter (which in itself is funny, since his party thinks there's already too many laws, though guns, gays, separation of church and state, using the Supreme Court to decide an election, and abortion rights seem to be exempt) There I go again! Gil Gil _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 22:01:28 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) > In a message dated 10/15/04 8:54:20 PM, steveschiavo@mac.com writes: > > >> Typical JR red herring. The question is about the parents, not the >> children. The parents are the ones that hold themselves up as moral >> exemplars, and rail against the choice of homosexuality as a >> lifestyle. >> Clearly, they failed to rear their children correctly. >> On Oct 15, 2004, at 8:21 PM, JRT456@aol.com wrote: > To repeat, Phyllis Schlafly is a parent who is outspoken about her > love and > her pride for her eldest son. They're very close, and share many > political > opinions. Nothing has changed in their relationship since John's > sexuality was > made public...not that he was ever closeted. Schlafly probably > wouldn't claim > so herself, but I'd say the lady holds up as a strong moral exemplar. > She likely > wouldn't apologize for having a gay son who doesn't live up to your > expectations or your stereotypes. Schlafly gets points for not disowning her gay son, but loses points for making/letting him become gay in the first place. No Moral Exemplar status for her. Once again, I have no expectations for or about him. - - Steve __________ "The logic of missile defense is to make the stakes of power projection compatible with the risks of power projection," says Keith B. Payne, a deterrence theory expert and an ardent supporter of missile defense. - Bill Keler, NYT ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:07:19 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) In a message dated 10/15/04 11:02:25 PM, steveschiavo@mac.com writes: > Schlafly gets points for not disowning her gay son, but loses points > for making/letting him become gay in the first place. No Moral > Exemplar status for her. Once again, I have no expectations for or > about him. > Okay, so we've established that you have disdain for John Schlafly's mother because he's gay. I'm sure that seems perfectly nuanced to you homophobes. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 22:42:21 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:07:19 EDT, jrt456@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 10/15/04 11:02:25 PM, steveschiavo@mac.com writes: > > > Schlafly gets points for not disowning her gay son, but loses points > > for making/letting him become gay in the first place. No Moral > > Exemplar status for her. Once again, I have no expectations for or > > about him. > > > > Okay, so we've established that you have disdain for John Schlafly's mother > because he's gay. I'm sure that seems perfectly nuanced to you homophobes. I thought you guys didn't do "nuance" - it's like French or something. Irony also, it would seem, is alien. - -- ++Jeff++ The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 00:05:34 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) In a message dated 10/15/04 11:53:24 PM, jeffreyw2fs@gmail.com writes: > Irony also, it would seem, is alien. > In this case, that would be "irony" as defined by Alanis Morissette...which, yes, is a fairly alien use of the term. However, I'm certainly familiar with Leftists who are quick to use homosexual slurs against gays who don't vote as they're told. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:44:00 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) > In a message dated 10/15/04 11:53:24 PM, jeffreyw2fs@gmail.com writes: > >> Irony also, it would seem, is alien. On Oct 15, 2004, at 11:05 PM, JRT456@aol.com wrote: > In this case, that would be "irony" as defined by Alanis > Morissette...which, > yes, is a fairly alien use of the term. Hey, it was Jeffery used the term. I just think it's funny. > However, I'm certainly familiar with Leftists who are quick to use > homosexual slurs against gays who don't vote as they're told. Come on JR, you're fucking with us, right? Because we know you're not stupid, but this is your third Smelly Toad in a row. - - Steve __________ The homosexual activist movement is now closer than it has ever been to administering a devastating and potentially fatal blow to the traditional family.' - James Dobson, Focus on the Family ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 01:04:03 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] non-musical post (just PLEASE vote) In a message dated 10/16/04 12:52:24 AM, steveschiavo@mac.com writes: > > Come on JR, you're fucking with us, right? Because we know you're not > stupid, but this is your third Smelly Toad in a row. > I'm not familiar with that Alanis Morissette song. Take a look at your last few postings, and you're obviously trying to make some kind of point about Phyllis Schlafly having a gay son. It obviously doesn't bother her, so why don't you just try clearly stating why it's such a concern to you? ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V4 #281 *******************************