Comments

2
...and yet so many gay folks still in the closet...

IT'S OK, YOU CS'S, YOU CAN COME OUT NOW!!
3
That is appalling, shocking and wrong. That poor little boy had no chance of winning...
4
This post was poor cover for Dan wanting to post hubby wiggling his tuckus on the internet. It's ok man. You've earned it!

(jk! I agree!)
5
That looks way more fun than DDR.
6
Terry's got some good moves!
7
wow... your husband looks SMOKIN hot in those jeans... GRR DAN! nice calves! thanks for sharin!
8
Competitive side-by-side movements while staring at a teevee is not "dancing together". Though whatever it was, it was definitely adorable, and no, that kid did not stand a chance on points, and yes, your hubby makes junkie jeans look gooooood.
9
Be a good gay and teach that kid to boogie!
10
I had a good chuckle at this, can't believe Terry let you post it!
Also, I think I need to get myself this game so I can bust a move to some It's Raining Men (except I would be in my underwear... not with neighbors' kids.)
11
The gays tried to recruit me but I have flat feet so I was disqualified.
12
That was sweet, very sweet, Dan.

I wish we had such sweetness in my neck of the woods. Over the holidays my daughter's best friend went back in the closet, couldn't take the pressure from her mom. She's forbidden from staying with us, too.
14
No wonder Dan fell for Terry after watching him dance all night--the man has some moves!

Love this video, and love that you are winning the fight...thank God for friendship, and may the haters be the ones forced to hide from now on.
15
Did anyone notice that when the two women are falling out of the window in the music video, the one who's wearing a green dress partially disappears? Apparently no one told her, you can't wear green when you're in front of green screen, because then the computer inserts "background" onto your clothing.
16
Kim, I'm so sorry to hear that :( Even though she's not allowed to see you, she's very lucky to have someone who she knows accepts her. That's so much more than many other gay teenagers have.
17
Superdooperextrapooper cute! Thanks for sharing this wonderful video with us!
18
Open homosexual? Like he’s only open 9-5 Monday through Friday and the rest of the time he’s closed? I’m confused.
19
Dan, I can't believe Terry let you post that ;)
20
Oh Dan, you are the best Sex Columnist EVER for posting that, and Terry is the best husband EVER for letting you (I won't even mention that he has a body to die for...jeez.)

Kim, that is so sad. Two of our neighbours also monitor how much time their kids can spend with ours (I think they have visions of us waiting at the door with a Halloween candy bowl full of condoms, or something), but I don't think their kids are gay, just wanting out of the convent occasionally...
I don't know what the rules are in the States, but here you can give any information to a kid who is 14 or older, so I'm sure you know you can keep being a source of info, as well as an ally to her, without her parents' consent...one of my son's friends (whose parents just pulled her out of public school to put her in a private Christian school) talks to me via webcam, for instance...just sayin'.
21
I can die a happy old man knowing the liars will lose. It's something I knew would happen because the gay people I've had the honor of knowing, and there have been many, were just everyday people trying to make the most of their lives like anyone else. And they did it with dignity and courage and a considerable amount of joy despite the way they were treated.
22
I guess I've had a less common life path: I was sad that my gay friends weren't more taken by my two boys when they were that age ... quickly adding that many of my straight male friends weren't too taken, either. I guess folks who don't like kids come in all sizes. Either that or the boys were a pain in the ass; but, no, they were charming.
23
How far we've come? Western culture has never been in worse shape the past 1000 years, but since the poofters are gaining more acceptance, we've come so far.
24
Hi JunieGirl @14--I've missed you.
25
@23 i guess they don't call you basehead for nothin..put the pipe down.
western culture ? what's that ?
26
Thank you Canuck and Jamie,

"Staying with us" was about moving in with us. She knows the door is open. We get to see her, my daughter sees her everyday at school, and Facebook makes it possible to interact as well. Plus, I can always show up at ye ol' church on Sunday for face to face time. I just wish there was more that I could do for her.
27
My thoughts are with your daughter's friend, Kim. I'm glad she has your family for backup.
28
Damn, Dan! A fine looking husband you snagged there.
29
Kim, thanks for being there for her. A few years ago, our son had a friend who thought he would need a new place to live and, of course, we offered our home. He didn't take us up on it, but he told us that the offer had made all the difference. Knowing you're there for her will make a big difference for her, too.
30
My six year old just got that same game. (Or a very similar competitor.) It's been great for wearing her out for bedtime, as well as being the only time I'll get off my cellulitic ass too...
31
Hot hot hot! Was there filming from 2 angles? I want to see the front-on video (or at least pix).
32
And yet, we know from things Dan has written that his mom came around in a big way.

It reminds me of a conversation I had with my old college roommate, still a dear friend, at the death of my grandfather just over a year ago. I remarked that, while I loved grandfather and he had many admirable qualities, he was a Kentucky good ol' boy who watched Fox News till the end.

And yet, my friend reminded me, there was something in what grandpa passed on to me that allows me to have an enduring friendship with himself, a gay black man. While we shouldn't lose sight of how far we have to go, it is fine to remember how far we really have come.
33
I've thought for a while now that all those folks at all those Officially Designated Hate Groups don't care beans about homosexuality. Couldn't care less one way or the other.

For them, it's all about the money. They demonize Teh Gays, not-very-bright but probably in a lot of cases well-meaning people get their irrational fears stoked of Teh Gays coming for their children or ruining the "institution of marriage" or putting Teh AIDS into the town reservoir or whatever and send off their checks to stop it.

If those Officially Designated Hate Groups didn't have us, they'd invent us.

And that, to my mind, makes what they're doing all the more evil.

Your other half can sure get his groove on, Mr. Savage! He's a keeper!
34
Awesome. I anxiously await for more sexy Terry footage.
35
Dept. of Two Steps Forward, One Step Back:
You may want to sign this online petition that just landed in my inbox:

http://www.change.org/petitions/view/tel…
36
Hi Rob! @ 24! It's been a little hectic around Casa JG lately, but I'm glad to be back. :)
37
Dan, I love you. And your husband. And your straight couple friends and their son. And this blog post. For all the ranting you do (which, don't get me wrong, I love too), it's the optimistic messages of hope that really make me love you. <3 You and your family are welcome to come dance in my straight living room with my kids any evening you want! Oh, and Terry has some moves!
38
Drew @33, I've long suspected that it was because Teh Gays weren't producing more offspring of their own, and so they didn't breed a new generation into the fold and thereby provide a future source of funding.
39
Kim, as several others have said, I'm glad she has at least you to show her that people can be better at accepting gays than her family has been. It makes a great difference, from what I've been told.

I'm not gay, and -- I'm sad to confess -- I was very much anti-gay at some point in my life, very long ago, back in the old days when I thought that lesbianism would spread to all women and make almost-nil my chances of ever finding sexual happiness actually equal zero.

I've since then grown wiser. Others can, too. Which is our best hope for the future. As Dan says: the battle is being fought (and lost by the anti-gays) in the houses, in the living-rooms and kitches of the world.
40
@23 for the insightful totally politically incorrect win.

by all measures our culture is on its last swirls around the bottom of the crapper.

as homosexuality becomes openly accepted.

coincidence?

Gommorah is so close you can taste it.....
41
"Officially Designated"?

ooooohh....

does it come with a certificate or decoder ring?
42
@40: Actually, he was referring to the insidious influence of all that Negro "rap music" on the ears of our children.
43
Terry and Avery are getting down with their bad selves.

Shake your groove thing, shake your groove thing, yeah, yeah...

We are winning and it's scaring the crap out of the haters. Best go change your pants bitches, you're really stinking up the place.

44
BTW, in the weeks/months since I last watched Dan & Terry's It Gets Better video, Terry has somehow morphed in my memory into Mark Pellegrino. Looking again, I'd say it's a pretty decent resemblance.
45
A shirtless Terry video will be much appreciated next time...
46
Thank you, gus, j in ca, and ankylosaur.

I appreciate the kind wishes and thoughts on her behalf and your words of encouragement. I've always been the type to feel injustice strongly, and the type of person who sees pain/rejection and wishes to comfort, heal, encourage, nurture, forgive or whatever else one wants to call it. I just want to make things better, kinder...

Sorry, to have occupied a little too much of this thread, too. This video is about joy and being full of integrity! Having spent part of my holiday shaking my bunda to Just Dance 2, etc. (and messing with Tony Hawk Shred Big Air), I recommend such moments of joy.
47
@40
You wrote: "by all measures our culture is on its last swirls around the bottom of the crapper."

Really? I guess that depends upon your metrics.

In the last 200 years, we've seen "divine right" monarchy replaced by some form of representative government in all western nations--and a great many non-western nations, as well.

In the last 100 years, we've made vast progress in making sure women have the right to vote--a right they now hold even in Iraq.

Slavery in western nations is a thing of the past.

Women in America no longer die at the hands of back-alley abortionists.

People who burn crosses to frighten "uppity" blacks or jews are now prosecuted, instead of silently encouraged.

You may want to return to the good old days of the 1861, when Scarlett O'Hara's biggest concern was which of her hoop skirts to wear to the barbecue at Twelve Oaks, and she was able to overlook the fact that her hoop skirt was the end result of a barbarous system of chattel slavery. You may want to live in the good old days of the 1950's, when Joseph McCarthy could ruin lives by making baseless accusations of Communist affiliation (an affiliation which was, by the way, a constitutionally protected right).

I prefer 2011.

48
Haters can't dance!
49
On a side note, did y'all know that "It's Raining Men" was written by Paul Schaffer, from the David Letterman Show? For reals!
50
Okay, I keep coming back and watching that clip, and I'm thinking Terry has a real Jake Shears vibe going there...it's like watching "I Don't Feel Like Dancing" from behind...too cute!
51
Damn, Terry sure is fine!
52
What the.... it's almost as though...

IT GETS BETTER!!!
53
those look like jeggings to me. just say no. skinny leg jeans are a bad enough fashion trend, jeggings are an abomination.
54
Dude, love and unity: THE ONLY WAY?

Damn, cheers!
(heh, tears too, but nice tears)
55
Canuck, I wonder if Jake picked up a bit of his dancing style when Terry and Dan took him under their wing as a lad...excellent eye you have!
56
Couple things-

First, your partner isn't your husband, and you he and the child you are raising are not a family. Those are words which actually mean something. They have actual definitions which don't fit your circumstances, Mr. Savage. My wife and I conceived children within our marriage and together we are a family. I don't doubt that you love your boyfriend and would love a child you adopted together. Love is not the definition of family, however. Isn't English so much more clear when we use words according to, you know, their actual definitions?

Obviouly, gay men are not automatically pedophiles any more than straight men are. Your partner dancing with a young boy is no more threatening on its face than my taking my niece and her friends out for ice cream is on its face. This is hardly radical, it simply is psychologically factual. Also obviously, pedophilia and homosexuality are both sexual perversions, but pedophilia has identifiable non consenting victims. This places it under the purview of a mental health, criminal and moral issue, while homosexuality is merely deviant and self destructive.

And don't kid yourself. Full social acceptance of your deviancy will never happen. People will accept that you've embraced a deviant lifestyle, accept that it doesn't hurt them and assume it not to be their business. They will treat homosexual couples the same under the law as normal ones. They will refrain from violence based on your perversions, or be punished for not doing so under the law. This is far from embracing your deviancy as the social and biological norm that is heterosexuality. Kid yourself all you like, you are and will always be a deviant with the social ramifications of deviancy.

BTW, you might try a nodding acquaintance with facts. The Southern Poverty Law group designating 'hate groups' is in no way 'official.' While they have every right to their opinions, they are just that, opinions. I'm unaware of any government agency in charge of deciding who is exercising their right to have and publish and opinion and who is a hate group, but such an agency would hardly surprise me in the current leftist administration.

Also, Michael Medved nowhere hints at being sexually aroused by contemplating lesbian sex anywhere of which I'm aware. In the quote you attribute to him it simply doesn't come up at all, which makes your statement not so much an opinion as a lie and a calumny. Yes, I understand the frustration and jealousy you must feel of that gentleman. He is so much more intelligent and well spoken than you could ever be for a start. He has a normal lifestyle with a real marriage that is socially accepted and acceptable, as well. And most frustrating, he speaks to the core of this country while you reflect a tiny fringe at the far left.
57
Hey Dan,

Can you tell Terry to start a Youtube channel that features him dancing? Maybe a Monday-Friday thing where each day he loses another piece of clothing? Joking. Sort of.

You two are so awesome. You're lucky to have each other, and the world is lucky to have you both.

58
@56--your smugness and self-righteousness smells all the way to the east coast here. Please take your faux-intellectualism and go away. Your "obvious" points and your ilk are fast becoming amusing anachronisms. Enjoy irrelevance!
59
@56 I spend all my time on conservative blogs I don't agree with in order to tell them that their deviant lifestyles will never be accepted by us 'normal' Americans. Oh wait... I don't do that because I have a life with a real family to enjoy and worry about.

And as Mrs. Doubtfire says:

"Some families have one mommy, some families have one daddy, or two families. And some children live with their uncle or aunt. Some live with their grandparents, and some children live with foster parents. And some live in separate homes, in separate neighborhoods, in different areas of the country - and they may not see each other for days, or weeks, months... even years at a time. But if there's love, dear... those are the ties that bind, and you'll have a family in your heart, forever."

Thanks for everything Dan. You fill more people with laughter and hope than you could ever know in a lifetime on this Earth.
60
@56 Hey... fuck you.
61
@23 aww, poor you! Are you one of those whiny nostalgia-ridden assholes for whom the past is always better, the "Western culture" is always rotten and the youngest generation are "spoiled disrespectful brats" for (gasp!) liking a different kind of music and fashion?
62
Don't get too excited about the Southern Poverty Law Center declaring some organization a "hate group." They have a poor track record on these declarations, and frequently label libertarian or gun rights groups as hate groups, including, oddly, the Fully Informed Jury Association. It's hateful to think jurors should know their rights...
63
CWA, AFTAH and FRC deserve their designation as hate groups. What they do is exactly the same as what racist and anti-Semitic groups do: spread lies about the target group in order to incite hatred and violence against members of that group. And even the lies are the same: they're out to do horrible perverted things to your women and/or children! Those evil black men will rape your daughter! Those evil Jews will sacrifice your son on a satanic altar! Those evil Homosexuals will recruit your kids and give them AIDS! Always the same, sensationalistic lines, aimed at short-circuiting people's ability to think rationally, to cause a panic and lead good people to do bad things.

It's the exact same despicable strategy, with the exact same goal, as what schoolyard bullies do, only with ten times the malice and consequences that are even more serious. People die because of what hate groups do. Lives are ruined. Families are torn asunder. Human potential is wasted. And for what? Whatever the haters have to gain from this, they must be prevented from gaining. Nobody must be allowed to profit by the destruction of innocents!
64
@56: TL;DR
65
@62: Your precious FIJA encourages jurors to vote for acquittal if they happen to think that the law is unjust, which would fuck up the judicial system pretty damn badly.
66
Terry's dance moves are priceless! And that is by far the funniest and cutest video I've seen. <3
67
Seattleblues, three questions:

1. My husband has an adopted brother. Is he part of their family, or should we stop inviting him for family get-togethers?

2. Everyone I know I Canada who is married has made the assumption their marriage is legal and binding, as legally binding as the marriage Dan and his husband had when they, too, married in Canada. If Dan and his husband aren't really married, as you say, what should I tell my friends? (I'm off the hook, thank god, as I got married in the States)
More importantly, can I now call my friends' kids bastards when they annoy me?

3. Where in the bible does Jesus talk about "deviants"? I've read quite a bit about his teachings, and even did an online search, but I can't find the part where he talks about that (just lots of "love, love, acceptance, love, blah, blah"), could you please cite the chapter and verse to which you are referring? Because you do follow the teachings of jesus, right?
68
@56 >Also, Michael Medved nowhere hints at being sexually aroused by contemplating lesbian sex anywhere of which I'm aware. In the quote you attribute to him it simply doesn't come up at all, which makes your statement not so much an opinion as a lie and a calumny. Yes, I understand the frustration and jealousy you must feel of that gentleman. He is so much more intelligent and well spoken than you could ever be for a start. He has a normal lifestyle with a real marriage that is socially accepted blah blah blah blah

Translation: I am Michael Medved posting anonymously because I am butthurt.
69
@40: Do tell, what measures are you using? I'm fascinated.
70
This is genuinely heartwarming.

It's also heartwarming to see that about half the posts here are to note how smoking hot Terry is in his skinny jeans and tee. Hoorah for Sloggers.
71
SPLC are whores who pimp "hate" to panic their credulous liberal donors to donate.
They have a vested interest in reporting more and more HATE and finding more and more OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED HATE GROUPS.
72
65

so you think Southern juries should convict jews and blacks on trumped up racially motivated charges just to make the DA happy?
73
67

Romans Chapter 1

24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, perversion, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30Backbiters, haters of God, deviants, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

74
Re 59

I find points of view I don't share interesting. Liberal concepts of social and economic justice, while patently unworkable, are at least motivated by a destire to better society. It's people like Mr. Savage for whom I have little respect. 'I'm gay, no-one wants to treat me as a priviledged class because of this choice, and I'm damned angry about it!' about sums his worldview up. Sorry, I don't have sympathy for those who, having made a choice, don't like the repercussions.

As far Mrs. Doubtfire is concerned, I don't see why a comedy defininition of family is germane. Should we quote Carlin or Drew Carey on definitions as well, in your estimation?

Re 67
Fair point. Heterosexuals adopting a child much in need of a loving home are a different matter.

All that I'm saying is that words have meanings. Marriage refers to the union of a man and woman in a lifelong partnership recognized by the state. It does not refer to heterosexual cohabitation. It does not refer to one night stands. And it does not refer to deviant and perverse couplings homosexuals practice, however long term.

I don't know how the law stands in Canada regarding reciprocal recognition of marriage. In the United States Mr. Savage is no more married than is my dog. His marriage in Canada is a political statement without legal ramifications here.

Nor did I anywhere mention the Bible or religion at all. My faith is a personal matter, not one which dictates the law for my fellow citizens.

RE 65

Try reading some legal history. Or even cursory histories of England from about 900 AD to 1400 AD. The whole point of juries is to express the will of ones peers in the law. It's a check against government power enshrined in the common law, and adopted by the United States. The best way for juries doing so to not 'fuck up' the legal system is for the legal system not to adopt unjust laws.
76
@Seattleblues:

I don't know how the law stands in Canada regarding reciprocal recognition of marriage...His marriage in Canada is a political statement without legal ramifications here.


His marriage in Canada is exactly the same, legally, and in every other definable sense, as my in-laws' 52 year Canadian marriage is. Does that make their marriage a political statement when they visit the States? Does it have no validity beyond Canadian borders?

And I beg to disagree: Your religion, although you take care not to mention it very often, is precisely the reason you hold the views that you do, and is the reason you send your children to Christian, rather than public schools where they might encounter people who do not decry being gay as you do. Your religion informs your opinions, and if you think it's a separate matter, you are delusional.
78
Christ, that man is dreamy.
79
@74 Just FYI, you sound about 19-23 in your childishly spiteful remarks posing as straight faced intellectualism. The transparency is indicative of your actual indignation and stupidity or, more likely, your attempt to troll. 4/10!
80
Canuck,

I have friends who married in China, though the husband is a US citizen. Their marriage was not recognized here in the US until they went throught the paperwork at INS. Mr. Savage has not and cannot go through that kind of paperwork, as his 'marriage' is not legally recognizable here in Washington State. Canada may view Mr. Savages marriage as equivalent to your heterosexual in-laws for all I know. That holds force only while he is in Canada or under the jurisdiction of its government.

My faith emphasises the notion of free will, the necessity to make choices for oneself. I don't mention it very often not because I'm ashamed of it, but because the faith choices of others are between them and God, not them and I.

And yes, my faith and my upbringing absolutely inform who I am and what I believe. Quite apart from that faith are simple matters of common sense, though. 3% of the population, in a free country, don't get to determine policy for the other 97%. They don't get to set the terms of social discourse, or morals or any other purely social ramifications of choices they make. Yes, the tiny minority that is homosexual has every right to expect equal treatment under the law, freedom from violence and all the other benefits of a law abiding society. But they don't have the right to impose their morality or view of sexuality on society. If they choose a socially distasteful lifestyle, they must live with the consequences of that lifestyle, just as any other person would.
81
@80 >3% of the population, in a free country, don't get to determine policy for the other 97%.

Um, yes we do and we will continue to do so. Gay marriage is right around the corner pal, whether you like it or not isn't really our problem. Your hand was already forced with the DADT repeal, there is plenty more where that came from and there isn't anything you can do about it! ^_^ Sorry, but you are losing =(
83
Terry has a 'rear view' to die for!!!! Dan, you are a lucky, lucky man.
84
I know it is cold here, but I have to wonder what it means when Fox New's Red Eye starts making fun of Conservative Christian anti-gay groups. Maybe there are more conservative, liberal, progressive, green, libertarian... people in society who don't share their obsession or think that we need to keep a portion of the population as second class citizens? I know I didn't get my knickers in a twist when Merriam-Webster added same-sex relationships to their definition of marriage, after all the English Language is constantly changing and adapting. Then again, I tend to think that the only way to allow one's relationship to be diminished is to personally decide it has been diminished. But, then again, I find the source of both my ethics and morals within myself, and not require an outside source to define them for me. Just my $0.02, though.

Anyhow... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgA52KXqD…
85
Amen @82.
86
Seattleblues, you do realize that not too long ago, a substantial portion of the US population would have considered your mixed race marriage "socially distasteful" as well, don't you? Your hypocrisy is stunning, and your outlook puts you, thankfully, in the same rapidly diminishing numbers as those racist bigots of a generation ago.
87
@ Seattleblues: You say: "Yes, the tiny minority that is homosexual has every right to expect equal treatment under the law"

Read that again. Cogitate as best you can. And then get back to the real world with what that means. And please, spare us the inane shrieks that homosexuals can get married as long as they marry the opposite sex. It's a tired and thoroughly ridiculous bromide.

I'm so very sorry your immutable definitions of English are ossified somewhere in the 1990s. The word "marriage" until very recently also did not include divorce as a potential ending. Please stop masquerading your reflexive fear of change with pseudo-intellectualism.

Once again, enjoy your rapid descent into irrelevance.
88
@ Seattleblues "3% of the population, in a free country, don't get to determine policy for the other 97%."

So the majority shouldn't accommodate, um, amputees, veterans, babies, centenarians, Delawareans and any of the other countless groups that are not the majority? We should only vote for things that only benefit the majority?

But the part that really confuses me is this: "The tiny minority that is homosexual has every right to expect equal treatment under the law."

You are aware that marriage is a legal institution, right? I got legally married recently, despite the fact that there wasn't a God or a Bible in sight, AND now that I'm married I'm no longer in the majority. According to your logic, does this mean single people can vote away my rights?
89
@80: "I have friends who married in China, though the husband is a US citizen. Their marriage was not recognized here in the US until they went throught the paperwork at INS."

I am pretty sure that you are confusing marital status with immigration status, i.e. the overseas marriage was being used to obtain legal resident status for the non-citizen wife, so prior to that status being granted there was paperwork, etc. to be completed. Here's a follow-up question that may help clarify: After your friends resolved their INS paperwork, did they have to get married again in the US for their marriage to be recognized?

Spoiler alert: I'm pretty sure the answer is NO, because the USA - like many countries - recognizes foreign marriages. Which brings us back to Canuck's point: How is it fair and legal for the USA to recognize some but not all foreign marriages when those marriages are legally identical in the countries where they took place.

Try to remember in your answer that legal marriage is a civil institution, not a religious one.
90
@87

I have. A homosexual should not be discriminated against in housing, employment and so on. I can't, and should not be able to, refuse to sell or rent a house to a gay or lesbian couple. I can't refuse to hire, or having hired terminate employment for someone based on their chosen sexual orientation. Violence directed against someone should be punished whatever their orientation.

What the left wants isn't equality. With that I have no quarrel. What the left wants is protected status for homosexuals, with which I do quarrel. They want it to be a special crime, for instance, to commit an assualt against someone based on race or sexuality. They want freedom of speech to be limited so as not to offend those who choose a deviant sexuality. They want social acceptance for men and women who choose deviance. This is no different than my church demanding incorporation of the book of Luke into our law, or Jewish synagogues demanding the inclusion of the Torah into the law. It is no different from a call for Shariyah law as a matter of public policy.

Canuck,

There is a vast difference between an illusory (genetically a black or asian or caucasion person are not different in any meaningful way from each other) difference between ethnic peoples and the chosen lifestyle of homosexuality. If I choose to sky-dive I accept the attendant risks. If I choose to risk all of my savings on a stock issue, I accept the possible consequences. Somehow if I choose homosexuality the attendant costs are supposed not to be the responsibility of the one making the choice, but of society as a whole. I just don't understand that view.

I agree that my values and morals are not ipso facto a matter of public policy. I simply wish the same courtesy extended those of us in the majority by the homosexual agenda.
91
With respect-

No one will change their position one jot by this, so I'll quit wasting your time or mine.

Yes, gay marriage is a near certainty given the de-evolution of our society. With Edna St Vincent Milay I'll say "I know. I understand. I accept. But I do not approve and I am not resigned."

Mr. Mehlman,

Not everyone who seeks out other views is unsatisfiied with their own. Because I don't enjoy echo chambers and do enjoy spirited discussion of issues does not necessarily make me gay. It doesn't make me a liberal to discuss issues with liberals, or a Muslim because my Islamic neighbor and I frequently discuss comparitive religion. It just makes me someone who is curious about how other people think.
92
Dan and Terry are awesome and hot.

I also dance with my nephews...occasionally in the livingroom of their straight parents. Funny that the world hasn't come to an end.
93
@72: You're an idiot. If the case is trumped up and based for the most part on prejudice, then the evidence will not justify a conviction, and so the jury should vote to acquit. That's NOT the same as taking issue with the law in question.
@73: Nice try, but that's not Jesus. Romans, in the New Testament, was written by Paul. Remember, he's the guy who decided that you don't have to follow the Old Testament (i.e., be a good Jew) in order to be a good Christian. Next caller?
@74: It is the role of the courts, not the lay people, to decide whether or not a law is just. Such a practice as is encouraged by the FIJA amounts to vigilante justice at best, and anarchy at worst.
Okay, you have your definition of marriage, and you're welcome to it. But on whose authority do you seek to enshrine it as THE definition of marriage? Why should you get to define marriage for the rest of us? Are you just an arrogant ass frantically trying to impose his petty desires on others in society?
@80: Government does not exist for the purpose of imposing the will of the majority on the minority. It exists to bring justice and equality to all its citizens.
Also, the existence of free will does not imply that everything is a choice. I like the scent of hydrogen sulfide, but hate the scent of tobacco smoke. I like bitter, spicy and acrid tastes in food, and can't stand overly sweet meals. For many people, those personal attributes would be the inverse of mine. I can't change my personal preferences, and neither can anyone else, barring extreme circumstances or trauma.
94
@90: When people choose to be straight and accidentally an unwanted pregnancy, society takes responsibility for their choice, right? Yup, society adopts children from parents who can't or won't care for them, because they made the mistake of choosing to be straight and accidentally formed babby.
So according to your logic here, Teh Ghey is actually just asking for the same treatment as straights.
95
No one will change their position one jot by this, so I'll quit wasting your time or mine.


Translation: I know I've lost, I know my argument isn't based in logic, but I can't bring myself to admit it.

However, Seattleblues, please don't assume that the rest of the world is as stubbornly wedded to their opinion as you are. Some people will change their opinions because they don't see admitting they're wrong as a sign of weakness.
96
95, now 96, comments about complete jibberish... Great use of the dog whistle, Dan! The advertising team thanks you for the page-views!

@3 & @4 FTWs.
97
Love this game!! My 32 year old gay ass destroyed my teenage, cheerleading, dance squad nieces the entire holiday. One of them smugly asked if me if I had tried a Benni Bessasi song yet. I said no, she eagerly selected it, and then I said, "but its on my iPod". Beat her by several thousand points!
98
Hmm... I THINK Merriam-Webster is a pretty solid authority on word definitions. Right?

"mar·riage
noun \ˈmer-ij, ˈma-rij\
Definition of MARRIAGE
1
a (1) : 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 (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage
b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock
c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage"


Well, so much for the one man, one woman definition.

Unless you want to argue, practically, why your personal definition of marriage (since that's all it is) should be the law of the land? Do gays never cohabit? Are they inherently unable make lifelong commitments or to pool their finances together or raise children (adopted or otherwise)?

See, once you leave the obedient, unthinking right-wing circles, "because I say so" or "because THEY say so" no longer work as arguments. There has to be something convincing about your arguments for them to be taken seriously among the rest of us.

And gay marriage isn't a "special right," and here's why: marriage, in PRACTICE, isn't just a male and a female deciding that they may as well form a legal union so as to please the Lord and also to create offspring. Typically, you marry somebody that you are sexually attracted to, that you are in love with, and that you have made a lifelong commitment to. For gays, this is going to be a same-sex partner.

So don't give us any of that bullshit about how gay marriage would be a "special right" because gays can still marry an opposite-sex partner if they want to. There are three things wrong with that argument:

1) If gay marriage is legal, straights can marry a same-sex partner if THEY want to, just as gays can marry an opposite-sex partner. So, even using your own logic, there's no "special right" for gays anyway.

2) Most forms of discrimination can be lazily defended by saying that the victims have the "right" to give up whatever they're being discriminated against for. Jews have the "right" to become Christian. Blacks have the "right" to move to Africa. Women have the "right" to get a sex change and become a man. Yet somehow these aren't proper defenses for sexism, racism, or antisemitism. Why should this same logic, then, qualify as a defense for homophobic laws?

3) It is more accurate to discuss people's right to marry "someone they wish to marry," rather than people's the right to marry either "a man" or "a woman." Even if a gay man has the right to marry "a woman," he is being denied the right to marry "someone he wishes to marry." Yet straight people enjoy this right every day. To deny this very obvious contrast is dishonest.

Marriage should be between two consenting adults. There is absolutely no convincing reason to restrict it beyond that.
99
@ Seattleblues: "You'll stop wasting your time or mine" by leaving the argument. Just admit you don't have a leg to stand on. Your rebuttal to my position that homosexuals deserve equal marriage rights with pedantic rantings about "special rights" and hate speech issues are the last gasp of the loser. This is about the LEGAL rights of marriage given by a secular government. Your natterings about religion are irrelevant to this issue.

Hear that? That's the sound of you and a two-toothed Klansman jerking each other off over the good ol' days. Buh-bye! : )
100
Would it be shallow to note how incredibly hot your husband is?
101
The definition of family has also adapted beyond the "traditional family" according to Merriam-Webster.

To sum it up in a few pithy statements, marriage equality is necessary to right the wrong created by the government when it involved itself in marriage and provided legal rights, benefits, tax breaks, etc. The only ethical and therefore moral option, in my opinion, is to right the inequality. Basically there are two options as I see it, 1) the government does away with marriage and only allows for civil unions or no legal rights for any union, or 2) extend the same legal rights, etc. to all couples. I would guess that those who already enjoy the legal rights of marriage would like to keep them, which really only leaves us with option number 2. The wrong of denying legal rights of marriage to some citizens will right itself, it is only a matter of time, justice like compassion and love wins in the end.
102
@65, 93: While we may disagree about what jurors should be instructed to do, the point is that this is a political disagreement, not a "hate group" issue.

By the way, jurors already can vote however they want, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Even if the jurors come out after the verdict was announced and say that they nullified, the verdict has to stand. It's just a question of whether to tell them this.
103
Nice post, Dan! Thanks!
Seattleblues is one of an ever-shrinking group that still believe he chose to be straight, like I chose to be gay. Once that group becomes too tiny to matter, these arguments will end. Until then, folks like Seattleblues will think that we're demanding 'special rights' to live like everyone else- you know- equal protection under law, the right to marry and join our lives to those we love, the right to not be beaten to a pulp because we find a man's ass sexy. All *those* special rights.
What I find curious is that the Seattleblues folks are so completely unwilling to take every single GLBT's personal experience as truth when we say "WE HAD NO CHOICE IN WHO WE FIND PHYSICALLY ATTRACTIVE". There's something diabolical and evil in nullifying that many individual's experience in favor of writings in a 3000 year old book.
104
@100 - Yes...but appropriate.

    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


    Add a comment
    Preview

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.