Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Homo Fisking Fay
Posted by Dan Savage on Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 7:21 AM
There's a particularly repulsive opinion piece in today's UW Daily—home of the state's most laughable Dino Rossi endorsement—by some douchesparkle named John Fay. Let's dive right in:
Now, I realize the gay marriage issue surrounding the California voters’ decision on Proposition 8 is extremely emotional for a lot of people, and I respect their difference of opinion, but let us try and consider the vote from a rational basis.
Yes, by all means, let's be rational. Alright... done. And with all that pesky rationality out of his system, Fay resumes writing his opinion piece:
The decision of California’s Supreme Court in May to legalize gay marriage, which Prop. 8 overturned, was extremely rash. There is nothing constitutional about gay marriage on a state or federal level. For gay marriage to even fit within the court’s jurisdiction, it must have some basis in constitutionality.
Gay marriage isn't constitutional because... why exactly? Because it has no basis in constitutionality, silly! See how that works? Fay doesn't argue that the equal protections clause in the California state constitution, for instance, doesn't apply to gays and lesbians, or that homosexuals aren't, per California, a "protected class like race and gender," and that marriage isn't a "fundamental civil right," as the courts in California found. He simply says that gay marriage can't be constitutional because gay marriage has no basis in constitutionality! It's Jello-solid logic like Fay's that has caused support for a ban on same-sex marriage in California to drop 18 points between 2000 and 2008.
Race is a biological state; homosexuality is more of an emotional condition, and we should not, for that reason alone, start passing laws condoning it.
Yeah, we wouldn't to pass laws condoning emotional conditions. Only "biological states" need apply for civil rights protections or press for full civil equality. I mean, take religious fervor—there's an emotional condition that has, throughout all of recorded human history, prompted people to do great evil. Fly planes into office buildings, saw off peoples' heads, burn witches and heretics, torture people (the Inquisitions, etc.)—and religious belief certainly isn't a biological state, seeing as how people of all races can convert and revert.
But what's that you say? Religious beliefs are a protected by our civil rights statutes? ZOMG!
Being homosexual, like other emotional tendencies, doesn’t make someone a bad person, but it’s a problem that needs to be dealt with, not denied.
Gay people aren't bad—we just have an emotional tendency that's a problem for, um, well... gee. It's not for any of the gay people I know. But for the sake of argument, let's grant that homosexuality is a problem. (It certainly is for Fay.) So how would do you propose that we be "dealt with," Fay? Our families and churches have a pretty good shot at talking us out of identifying us as gay when we're kids—with hetero role modeling, with threats, with emotional and spiritual violence—but most of us grow up and come out anyway. And once we're adults and we're out and we fall in love and decide to start families—what then? How do you propose we be "dealt with" then? Round us up?
Now, there are several major problems with legalizing gay marriage. Once you’ve legalized gay marriage, why not polygamy, incest, bestiality or any other form of union? If the only criteria is that people love each other, then who says it’s wrong for a 70-year-old man to marry 10 underage girls?
Uh... laws against child rape? Age-of-consent laws?
Legalizing same-sex marriage no more requires us to legalize man-on-dog marriage or man-on-daughter marriage or man-on-ten-year-old marriage than legalizing pot requires us to legalize meth. Each of Fay's proposed nightmare scenarios can be debated on their merits. And things can legalized them one at a time—legalizing marriages between loving, consenting adults of the same gender doesn't require us to legalize marriages between men and dogs.
Also, the Christian concept of marriage predates any state-sanctioned licensing program, which means marriage is an inherently religious concept in America. Any state interpretation of marriage that violates traditional church views may well be a violation of the First Amendment.
Divorce violates the Christian concept of marriage, and yet it's legal—please explain, Fay.
Fact is, the state usually has very different concepts about a lot of things—usually broader concepts, to accommodate social and religious differences—than any one church or faith might. That's why we have civil marriage rights and religious marriage rites. And the First Amendment doesn't enshrine "traditional church views," or forbid others from expressing views—or living their lives—in violation of a particular church's "traditional views." Churches are free to impose their values only on their believers, Fay, not on everyone else.
Oh, I'm on a plane and the doors are about to shut. So I've got to sign off. Fay's stupidity continues here (Gay marriage will lead to violence! "Open homosexuality will create social disorder!) Sloggers should feel free to continue tearing him apart in comments.
Share via
1
The desire to marry is an emotional condition, no matter who is getting married. Alleged 'Christians' did not invent marriage, and they do not own it. Religions ganging together to purchase a state constitutional amendment would seem to violate the separation of church and state. And perhaps the failure to allow gay marriages will lead to violence. It is time to buy lions.
2
I can't muster the energy to argue with people like this. Honestly. What a tool. Where would one even begin? It's a nonsensical argument put forth by a nothing columnist at some university out west somewhere.
Pleasant journey!
Pleasant journey!
3
First off, Marriage has been in place for longer then 2000 years, it changes as culture changes.
To say just because this is how something "always was" does not make it the way that it is "supposed" to be.
And he started the piece off with a simpson's reference? WTF?????
To say just because this is how something "always was" does not make it the way that it is "supposed" to be.
And he started the piece off with a simpson's reference? WTF?????
4
Wow, lets hope this man continues to give us the opportunity to loudly and systematically tear his flimsy, half-baked, entirely preposterous ideas to pieces. The more he lets us openly and publicly do so, the more people get to see just how insanely stupid this man and all those who think like him truly are.
God, if I met this man in real life and heard him say this blatant horseshit I'd kick him in the area where his balls should be.
God, if I met this man in real life and heard him say this blatant horseshit I'd kick him in the area where his balls should be.
5
What an idiot - I can't even begin. For some enlightened reading, check out the Richard Rodriguez interview in Salon today.
6
You know what cheezes me off the most about stuff like this? It's not the illogic. It's not even the inflammatory & borderline hateful stuff. It's when straight people like this assclown states AUTHORITATIVELY what homosexuality is ALL ABOUT. Oh, he doesn't need any information from real, live gay people about what gay life is like, because HE KNOWS!! And how does he know? Well...his wifey-wifey has a hairdresser who's gay. Plus there's Uncle Steve, who he's seen twice in the last 20 years. And that's all he needs to know. So he's now an authority on what being gay is like, and perfectly qualified to give his opinion on this topic.
Presumptuous ass.
Presumptuous ass.
7
All right! I'm the first to start crying about Dan attacking someone for no reason! Get ready to get sued, Dan! You are hysterical on this! You are using your blog to push people around! Oh Dan, you big, influential bully blogger, you!
(Tongue in Cheek, for those humorless twits out there)
(Tongue in Cheek, for those humorless twits out there)
8
The Christian "concept of marriage" does predate civil marriages. But you know what? Falling in love predates Christianity.
Religious marriage was developed simply to acknowledge the human practice of pair bonding, which was going on before we were even fully human. And some of those pair bondings have always been same-sex.
That means that same-sex pairings are older than any religion, civilization, or culture. We have been around just as long as anyone else. We are part of human tradition, not some new interloper from outer space that is threatening to destroy "the way things have always been."
Why not acknowledge our place in human history?
Religious marriage was developed simply to acknowledge the human practice of pair bonding, which was going on before we were even fully human. And some of those pair bondings have always been same-sex.
That means that same-sex pairings are older than any religion, civilization, or culture. We have been around just as long as anyone else. We are part of human tradition, not some new interloper from outer space that is threatening to destroy "the way things have always been."
Why not acknowledge our place in human history?
9
What the hell is going on at the UW? This kid is (presumably) too young to be such a tool.
If he's like that in his 20's, can you imagine what a weirdo he'll be when he's in his 50's? He will have failed in life, of course, unless his parents leave him something, so he will be voracious in trying to find someone to blame for his divorces, his children, and the fact he can't hold a job.
It's really quite sad.
If he's like that in his 20's, can you imagine what a weirdo he'll be when he's in his 50's? He will have failed in life, of course, unless his parents leave him something, so he will be voracious in trying to find someone to blame for his divorces, his children, and the fact he can't hold a job.
It's really quite sad.
10
One bit on the slippery slope argument: If there is a slippery slope, it begins with marriage itself, not same-sex marriage. If legalizing marriage hasn't compelled us to legalize, say, mixed-species marriage, then neither would legalizing same-sex marriage.
11
I have a theory about college newspapers: they suck.
This falls in the same category as the Dino Rossi endorsement. They need to make a name for themselves so they write and print the most asinine articles they can come up with. They when they go on the job-market they can point to the articles as evidence of journalistic integrity and independence. Along the way, they perpetuate half-baked ideas like homosexuality is an "emotional state" what ever the fuck that means.
By the way is all human sexuality an emotional state, meaning that HETEROSEXUALITY is an emotional state too ... ?
This falls in the same category as the Dino Rossi endorsement. They need to make a name for themselves so they write and print the most asinine articles they can come up with. They when they go on the job-market they can point to the articles as evidence of journalistic integrity and independence. Along the way, they perpetuate half-baked ideas like homosexuality is an "emotional state" what ever the fuck that means.
By the way is all human sexuality an emotional state, meaning that HETEROSEXUALITY is an emotional state too ... ?
12
I believe this young scholar's arguments can be summarized thusly: "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve."
13
His facebook lists, among his heroes, Robert E. Lee.
He also lists his address. I hope he takes it down soon or he might find his home vandalized for this stupidity. No more Mr. Nice Gay!
He also lists his address. I hope he takes it down soon or he might find his home vandalized for this stupidity. No more Mr. Nice Gay!
14
"There are plenty of things I don't know, but there is nothing I don't have an opinion about. Please do not ever refer to me as "Johnny," "Jonathin" "Jack" or some other lame stereotypical nickname. If you can't think of something more original than that you might as well just refer to me by my real name. Acceptable nicknames include "Faysta" "Fay-Gangsta" or (If you are Michael Triller, and only if you are Michael Triller) "FAY-BAAAAABAAAAAAAH!" I am pretty much obsessed with history (guess what my major is). My heros include but are not limited to George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Scoop Jackson, Harry Truman, Winston Churchill, Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee. These are the people who you will not insult in my presence if you want to avoid a heated discussion." - from his facebook.
15
Now now, no violence or vandalism. Just public humiliation on the internet for a completely non-valid argument is all. Keep it so he gets knocked down a couple of pegs. Don't commit crimes. Other than being a gay, of course.
16
I agree with one thing: marriage is a religious or "sacred" institution and really doesn't have any place in our government. I say remove all state use of the term marriage, and provide civil unions for all from the government's perspective. Then the magic underpants crowd, or the flying spaghetti monster crowd, or whoever, can hold their marriage ceremonies in their churches in whatever mystical way they choose. But in the meantime, if the straights can push it through the government, so can we.
17
His arguments are old and tired. I bet he thinks he's the first to make them though.
Really, does ANYONE even care to debate the "gay marriage leads to man-dog marriage!" bullshit anymore?
It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
Really, does ANYONE even care to debate the "gay marriage leads to man-dog marriage!" bullshit anymore?
It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
18
Oh, and @9, back in the last century when I edited the UW Daily's opinion page, I received a surprisingly large number of submissions from right-wing nutjobs. I think all the reason, rationality and critical thinking around got them riled up.
20
@12, of course not, it was Adam and StevEN.
@13, not a smart thing even to suggest. And not the way we'll win the day on this issue.
As his "argument" was issued from a publication from an "institution of higher learning," other members of said institution need to pick him apart in the same setting, with informed, logical and clear argument and show his ignorance and bigotry for exactly what it is.
He sounds like a typical too-big-for-his-britches young conservative 20-something who comes from the school of thought that says, "if I think it, it is so" and his "argument" is just as idiotic. Fine--in America we all reserve the right to make an ass of ourselves in public, and worse, to be wrong. He shouldn't be silenced, he should be countered in debate, and hopefully educated. Barry Goldwater came around on gay issues, this pup can.
@13, not a smart thing even to suggest. And not the way we'll win the day on this issue.
As his "argument" was issued from a publication from an "institution of higher learning," other members of said institution need to pick him apart in the same setting, with informed, logical and clear argument and show his ignorance and bigotry for exactly what it is.
He sounds like a typical too-big-for-his-britches young conservative 20-something who comes from the school of thought that says, "if I think it, it is so" and his "argument" is just as idiotic. Fine--in America we all reserve the right to make an ass of ourselves in public, and worse, to be wrong. He shouldn't be silenced, he should be countered in debate, and hopefully educated. Barry Goldwater came around on gay issues, this pup can.
21
@14: Ah, conservative history majors. It takes a special kind of dumbass to sit through hours and hours of history classes and then conclude that George W. Bush is a good president.
23
http://dailyuw.com/2008/10/21/government…
Give the guy a break, he apparently doesn't even understand that Stephen Colbert is doing satire.
Give the guy a break, he apparently doesn't even understand that Stephen Colbert is doing satire.
24
Dan et al...I think we're taking the entirely wrong approach here.
I say hire this guy. Give him a column at the Stranger. Oh, the hours of joy we'd all gain watching him roll out his not-to-be-denied logic. But, really, that's only the first step in this brilliant plan.
From the platform of the Stranger, we can help groom this man into the next Washington State Republican Superhero, and he could launch his career from the pages of The Stranger. He could be the new standard-bearer for the Grand Old Party Party.
That should ensure a more rapid trajectory toward gay rights and equality for all.
I say hire this guy. Give him a column at the Stranger. Oh, the hours of joy we'd all gain watching him roll out his not-to-be-denied logic. But, really, that's only the first step in this brilliant plan.
From the platform of the Stranger, we can help groom this man into the next Washington State Republican Superhero, and he could launch his career from the pages of The Stranger. He could be the new standard-bearer for the Grand Old Party Party.
That should ensure a more rapid trajectory toward gay rights and equality for all.
26
Tearing apart college opinion pieces, Dan? Seriously? What, did you run out of old ladies to beat up and babies to take candy from?
27
what the hell is wrong with the daily? did all the liberals get too lazy and quit, leaving it open to be taken over by the right wing assholes?
28
50 years ago, he would have been defending segregation; 100 years ago, why women shouldn't have the right to vote, 150 years ago, slavery, and 250 years ago, the divine right of kings. With exactly the same arguments. Which are just as wrong today as attempts to deny one's own privileges to others always have been. If he would just read his Bible, he'd know that there is a special, fiery place in hell reserved for him.
29
Going after a UW freshman for (the humanity!) writing an opinion in a school paper? Great choice, Dan, continue the pit-bull-with-press-ons schtick, it always gets the most comments.
The chances of Fay's attorneys making you 'be nice' are slim. Was it Marlee or Dan who learned the lesson here, hmm?
The chances of Fay's attorneys making you 'be nice' are slim. Was it Marlee or Dan who learned the lesson here, hmm?
30
ZOMG, marriage is only for religious people? What's next down that slippery slope? Will the state now require a signed profession that you're a believer before it allows you to get married? Will the state now grant you additional rights based on other religious ceremonies (get confirmed, get mitvah'd, get your driver's license early!)
And, ya know, the Biblical concept of slavery pre-dates the US constitution, so let's bring that back too! As it says in Leviticus 24:44-46: how many Canadians should a good American Christian own these days, Mr Fay?
On a less silly note, Mr Fay: there is a constitutional basis for marriage. Everyone should have the liberty to choose their spouse--a fundamental choice in one's life--without state intrusion. It's these principles of liberty and privacy that form the basis for marriage rights, and to deny them to same-sex couples is a violation of these very Constitutional privileges.
And, ya know, the Biblical concept of slavery pre-dates the US constitution, so let's bring that back too! As it says in Leviticus 24:44-46: how many Canadians should a good American Christian own these days, Mr Fay?
On a less silly note, Mr Fay: there is a constitutional basis for marriage. Everyone should have the liberty to choose their spouse--a fundamental choice in one's life--without state intrusion. It's these principles of liberty and privacy that form the basis for marriage rights, and to deny them to same-sex couples is a violation of these very Constitutional privileges.
34
@17: Old and tired indeed.
That's actually what I found to be the most offensive and most truly depressing about this entry--I've been reading this EXACT shit from conservatives, rehashed and recycled ad infinitum, my whole adult life.
My god, how sad it is to glimpse such a dull, repetitive, unenlightened world.
That's actually what I found to be the most offensive and most truly depressing about this entry--I've been reading this EXACT shit from conservatives, rehashed and recycled ad infinitum, my whole adult life.
My god, how sad it is to glimpse such a dull, repetitive, unenlightened world.
35
I think it's a great opinion piece that makes its point very well: only complete dumbasses oppose gay marriage.
36
"Any state interpretation of marriage that violates traditional church views may well be a violation of the First Amendment."
This is idiotic. The First Amendment says, regarding religion, this: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
How the hell would it violate the First Amendment if a state were to define marriage as between two consenting adults? That is not prohibiting the exercise of anyone's religion.
Douchesparkle is a terrific word for the guy, especially considering his supreme lack of understanding of basic constitutional concepts. Dude needs to read a book or something.
This is idiotic. The First Amendment says, regarding religion, this: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
How the hell would it violate the First Amendment if a state were to define marriage as between two consenting adults? That is not prohibiting the exercise of anyone's religion.
Douchesparkle is a terrific word for the guy, especially considering his supreme lack of understanding of basic constitutional concepts. Dude needs to read a book or something.
37
as journalism becomes irrelevant, you will begin scraping the bottom of the barrel.
looks like the quality of the UW Daily has matched the quality of the football team.
looks like the quality of the UW Daily has matched the quality of the football team.
38
If someone had written this at Evergreen, they would have been torn limb from limb on red square and possibly burnt in effigy.
39
So how long before Savage loses control again and appropriates Slog to try and defame this person? I mean, that's what Slog is for right? Dan Savages own little rage laden soap box.
40
Old and tired bullshit dan, Old and tired bullshit.
I can't believe this kid published this thinking he was so clever with his arguments or something.
I can't believe this kid published this thinking he was so clever with his arguments or something.
42
Yeah nothing like throwing a little red meat out there to distract from the whole KOMO capitulation.
Can't run with the big boys anymore so let's destroy a college newspaper columnist instead.
Magnanimous.
Can't run with the big boys anymore so let's destroy a college newspaper columnist instead.
Magnanimous.
43
There is nothing to be gained from this. College Republicans exist for the sole purpose of being a little grit of sand in everybody else's shoes.
44
Put sexual preference as a religous choice - same as whether life starts before conception.
Marriage is a religous term and we should take it out of the law - and any church is free to 'marry' or not, any one they choose.
Civil unions are another subject, but FWIW, DINKS, straight or gay, are really about the only single demographic class that has money, and probably deserves a tax raise.
Marriage is a religous term and we should take it out of the law - and any church is free to 'marry' or not, any one they choose.
Civil unions are another subject, but FWIW, DINKS, straight or gay, are really about the only single demographic class that has money, and probably deserves a tax raise.
45
@23: I know a few conservatives who really didn't know it was satire either. They would tell me "Oh I hate Jon Stewart, but that Stephen Colbert, he has the right idea."
How fucking sad is that? What do you say to that level of ignorance?
How fucking sad is that? What do you say to that level of ignorance?
46
Okay, great. So let's take away the right to marry from people with other "emotional conditions." Let's start with religion (good idea, Dan), and then move onto "being an angry/crazy asshole," which is certainly "an emotional condition." That would prevent the horrific nutjobs that Dan has presented in his HETERO additions to Slog from marrying.
On a more serious note, this is the most fucking infuriating bullshit I have ever read. I'm not sure whether to cry or get really, really mad. I guess I do have an emotional condition.
WHAT. THE. FUCK.
On a more serious note, this is the most fucking infuriating bullshit I have ever read. I'm not sure whether to cry or get really, really mad. I guess I do have an emotional condition.
WHAT. THE. FUCK.
47
Ok so I'm a grad student at UW and after reading this I don't think I can drag myself onto campus today.
For those of you teasing Dan about responding to a "mere" university daily...this is a big deal to some of us. That a leading university would print this shit.
Aw hell, maybe we need to know that people like this are lurking in our midst. Ew.
Maybe I'll see if I can get a bunch of saner students to write in to the Daily and give em hell.
For those of you teasing Dan about responding to a "mere" university daily...this is a big deal to some of us. That a leading university would print this shit.
Aw hell, maybe we need to know that people like this are lurking in our midst. Ew.
Maybe I'll see if I can get a bunch of saner students to write in to the Daily and give em hell.
48
@39: Yeah, because when people attack your stupid fucking girlfriend on Slog you find the need to lash out at them.
But fuck Dan for being upset when some college asshat attacks his ummm you know WHOLE FUCKING LIFE AND FAMILY AND MARRIAGE.
No you little fucking douchebag, why should he care? It's just someone saying mean, ignorant things. Like this:
Bellevue's girlfriend likes to fuck dogs.
There. Don't say anything! Don't let this become a "rage laden soap box".
But fuck Dan for being upset when some college asshat attacks his ummm you know WHOLE FUCKING LIFE AND FAMILY AND MARRIAGE.
No you little fucking douchebag, why should he care? It's just someone saying mean, ignorant things. Like this:
Bellevue's girlfriend likes to fuck dogs.
There. Don't say anything! Don't let this become a "rage laden soap box".
49
The following apes the prevailing arguments against same-sex marriage to show how the fundamental rights of religious minorities could also be taken away by a scant majority of voters:
The proposed Protection of Religion Amendment (PRA) defends the traditional definition of religion as America's founding fathers knew it in 1791.
Legal recognition of newer cults is a slippery slope because it would allow demonic cults that molest and eat children to be called a religion.
To avoid discriminating against cults, I support giving them some of the same rights and benefits as traditional religions.
Being born in a cult is not a choice. However, I know many ex-Mormons who have converted to my traditional religion with compassion and help from God.
I am not anti-cult and have many friends who are Mormons. I do not mean to offend anyone with PRA.
The proposed Protection of Religion Amendment (PRA) defends the traditional definition of religion as America's founding fathers knew it in 1791.
Legal recognition of newer cults is a slippery slope because it would allow demonic cults that molest and eat children to be called a religion.
To avoid discriminating against cults, I support giving them some of the same rights and benefits as traditional religions.
Being born in a cult is not a choice. However, I know many ex-Mormons who have converted to my traditional religion with compassion and help from God.
I am not anti-cult and have many friends who are Mormons. I do not mean to offend anyone with PRA.
51
Come on, he's a young tart, wet behind the ears, with a dick that rules his life. To take some kid seriously about something he knows nothing about, Civil Law, is to look at G.W. Bush and conclude he's doing a fantastic job of running America because it hasn't come apart. Forget the punk, he's had his 15 minutes of SLOG fame.
52
@48, theres a fundamental difference between fellow commentators attacking individuals on slog as a non sequitur to the topic of the slog post and dan savage focusing on some peon at some media outlet to harness his anger at, then dedicating an entire post to it. He's done it with two other people too, even far removed from gay marriage; pot busts with the credulous hacks and gitner.
He uses slog as a bully pulpit and you all fall in line with it. Attacking my girlfriend and me defending her isn't even in the same ballpark, and it's obvious to me that you're too stupid to realize it.
He uses slog as a bully pulpit and you all fall in line with it. Attacking my girlfriend and me defending her isn't even in the same ballpark, and it's obvious to me that you're too stupid to realize it.
54
"which means marriage is an inherently religious concept in America"
the fuck it is. only to the inherently religious. for the rest of us atheists, agnostics, non believers, and the generally sane in this country, marriage is a tradition. we do it because everyone else does. because for some it's the ultimate expression of commitment to another person. for the financial support and security, the tax benefits, the health insurance, and the desire to raise children and afford a mortgage.
there's a reason why we have the option of getting married through civil ceremonies in this country. without religion, a religious officiant, a church, without even the mention of god.
so fuck you for suggesting that marriages outside of traditional church views could violate the first amendment. if you really believe that might be true, you are totally misinterpreting the first amendment and should re-do the 8th grade.
the fuck it is. only to the inherently religious. for the rest of us atheists, agnostics, non believers, and the generally sane in this country, marriage is a tradition. we do it because everyone else does. because for some it's the ultimate expression of commitment to another person. for the financial support and security, the tax benefits, the health insurance, and the desire to raise children and afford a mortgage.
there's a reason why we have the option of getting married through civil ceremonies in this country. without religion, a religious officiant, a church, without even the mention of god.
so fuck you for suggesting that marriages outside of traditional church views could violate the first amendment. if you really believe that might be true, you are totally misinterpreting the first amendment and should re-do the 8th grade.
56
I'm so sick of the bestiality argument. Animals can't consent to shit, ergo, it can never be legal to marry a lower animal.
Idiots.
Idiots.
58
"Being homosexual, like other emotional tendencies, doesn’t make someone a bad person, but it’s a problem that needs to be dealt with, not denied."
I propose to Fay some sort of "camp", where the problem could be "concentrated" so as to be more effectively dealt with.
I propose to Fay some sort of "camp", where the problem could be "concentrated" so as to be more effectively dealt with.
59
and I'm kind of glad i've pushed someone to the point of them being totally engorged with rage towards me and my girlfriend. When will this anonymous person seek mental health and substance abuse counseling?
60
Godwined in 58 comments, that took forever!
Is this a new record for slowest Godwin? Can we have an official Guiness judge come and verify this?
Is this a new record for slowest Godwin? Can we have an official Guiness judge come and verify this?
61
I remember when Canada and Denmark permitted gay marriage and gays to serve in the military and they ceased to be first-world nations.
Oh, wait, no, actually they got STRONGER.
And more people stayed married than in our country.
Hmmm ...
Oh, wait, no, actually they got STRONGER.
And more people stayed married than in our country.
Hmmm ...
62
I can't tell if Fay's idiocy is is an emotional tendency or a biological state. If it's just biological I guess we should all tolerate it. Though if it turns out to be an emotional condition I would think we should deal with that swiftly and brutally before it is allowed to spread and lead to social disorder.
63
@Will, why are you living in a place you don't think highly of? You seem like you'd be happier in Canada.
64
@13 *cough*
email:
johnfay@u.washington.edu
address:
5046 16th Ave. NE
Seattle, WA 98105
Residence:
Mannex
email:
johnfay@u.washington.edu
address:
5046 16th Ave. NE
Seattle, WA 98105
Residence:
Mannex
65
You know all those emotional arguments about how other people's gayitude hurts the feelings of poor straight people and endangers their marriages? Let's have those back; I'd much rather hear about feelings than hear some asshat claim "facts" accompanied by cartoons that imply sheepfucking.
66
So... gays are denied civil marriage because it is "not the way we've done things" or religious traditions prohibit it. Then, why is it that there are many churches - Christian ones even - that gays CAN get married in? They CAN get married "in the eyes of god" but then denied their legal right because of a line in a civil code somewhere.
68
My sole consolation regarding the impending Great Depression II, is that the employment opportunities for the Junior Varsity Wingnut Pundit team will involve wearing a blue vest with a giant yellow smiley-face button. Though if he's especially lucky, he might end up on a street corner offering to diagnose your "emotional condition" in exchange for food.
70
@52: And you are too stupid to know what a "blog" is. Not that I am surprised, since you don't understand monetary policy either. I doubt you can even understand the meaning of "street" and "people". But go ahead, sweetie, by all means look it up.
71
A word to the wise: Don't mess with the Faysta. He'll go all "heated discussion" on your ass.
Seriously,who besides Joel Connelly lists Scoop Jackson as their hero?
Seriously,who besides Joel Connelly lists Scoop Jackson as their hero?
72
This op-ed is curiously reminiscent of all of the ways that whites used to excuse their opposition to civil rights. "I'm not bad, I'm just logical!"
Bigots like this will always lose in the end. We just can't be complacent.
Bigots like this will always lose in the end. We just can't be complacent.
74
What the hell!??! Why aren't Jews, Hindi, Buddhists, and other older religions letting some young pup propagate the idea that Marriage has been around for only 2000 years?!? If this man is such a student of history as he claims, why does it seem he views all of history through the prism of one being who lived and died 2000 years ago? There was a lot going on before, a lot going on after, and a student of history should take it all into consideration.
76
@73, I've noticed a trend that Will thinks very highly of Canada, is from Canada, and won't shut up about Canada being more free and fair and better than United States. And yet he chooses to live in the dumpy old United States. I don't get it.
77
Bellevue: A paper with a daily circulation of 20,000 (U.W. Daily) merits being held to public scrutiny and critique regardless of the age or experience of the writer. You may have heard about the historic goings-on around gay marriage in the news lately... it's sort of a topical blog discussion.
78
from Facebook
Activities:
Reading, playing bump, walking my dog, hanging out with buddies, hanging out with the girls in my community, researching for papers, arguing about obscure topics, lecturing people on topics they have no interest in hearing, spending time with family, electing Republicans
Interests:
History, geography, classic literature and any other academically oriented and mildly anti-social activity I can think of. I also enjoy politics, especially when people disagree with me. I love volunteering for political campaigns provided of course the candidate is conservative.
Favorite Music:
Way too many to name here.
Favorite TV Shows:
Malcolm in the Middle, The Simpsons, Home Improvement, Firefly
Favorite Movies:
Star Wars (the original trilogy), The Lord of the Rings (all three), X-men (all three), Rob Roy, Apollo 13, The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, A Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, All of the Indiana Jones movies of course.City Slickers, Gladiator, Rocky, The Karate Kid, Rudy, all three Pirates of the Caribean, pretty much anything with John Wayne in it.Serenity.
Favorite Books:
Truman by David McCullough, The Great Game by Peter Hopkirk, The Punic Wars by Adrian Goldsworthy, Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis, The Iliad by Homer, The Bible by God's servants, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy and the Hobbit by John Ronald Reuell Tolkien, Honor: A History by James Bowman, Nixon by Johnathan Aitkin, Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott. The Buckleys: An American Family by Reid Buckley
Favorite Quotations:
"I never forgot who I was or where I came from or where I was going back to." -Harry Truman
"Whatever you do, tell the truth." Grover Cleveland
"That depends on what the definition of is, is." -Bill Clinton
"It takes 47 muscles to frown and 17 muscles to smile. But it doesn't take any muscles to just sit there with a dumb look on your face." -Despair
"It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me. But the law can stop a man from lynching me. And I think that's pretty important." -Martin Luther King Junior
"Whatever history says about me, I hope it will record that I appealed to your brightest hopes, not your worst fears." -Ronald Reagan
"If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen." -Harry Truman
"If you struggle with loneliness you are not alone. And yet you are alone. So very, very alone." -Despair
"The secret of the demagogue is to make himself as stupid as his audience, so they believe they are as clever as he." -Karl Kraus
"The Buck Stops Here." -Harry Truman
"Hindsight is not wisdom and second guessing is not an exit strategy." -George W. Bush
"Quitters never win, winners never quit, but those who never quit and never win are idiots" - Despair
"It's the little things in life that remind you that someone out there is out to get you." -Bryce.
"Christians believe not that God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because he loves us." -C.S. Lewis.
"Just because you're necessary doesn't mean that you're important." -Despair
"Whatever you feel, you will feel more strongly than anybody else." -My Mother.
About Me:
There are plenty of things I don't know, but there is nothing I don't have an opinion about. Please do not ever refer to me as "Johnny," "Jonathin" "Jack" or some other lame stereotypical nickname. If you can't think of something more original than that you might as well just refer to me by my real name. Acceptable nicknames include "Faysta" "Fay-Gangsta" or (If you are Michael Triller, and only if you are Michael Triller) "FAY-BAAAAABAAAAAAAH!" I am pretty much obsessed with history (guess what my major is). My heros include but are not limited to George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Scoop Jackson, Harry Truman, Winston Churchill, Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee. These are the people who you will not insult in my presence if you want to avoid a heated discussion.
More...
Activities:
Reading, playing bump, walking my dog, hanging out with buddies, hanging out with the girls in my community, researching for papers, arguing about obscure topics, lecturing people on topics they have no interest in hearing, spending time with family, electing Republicans
Interests:
History, geography, classic literature and any other academically oriented and mildly anti-social activity I can think of. I also enjoy politics, especially when people disagree with me. I love volunteering for political campaigns provided of course the candidate is conservative.
Favorite Music:
Way too many to name here.
Favorite TV Shows:
Malcolm in the Middle, The Simpsons, Home Improvement, Firefly
Favorite Movies:
Star Wars (the original trilogy), The Lord of the Rings (all three), X-men (all three), Rob Roy, Apollo 13, The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, A Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, All of the Indiana Jones movies of course.City Slickers, Gladiator, Rocky, The Karate Kid, Rudy, all three Pirates of the Caribean, pretty much anything with John Wayne in it.Serenity.
Favorite Books:
Truman by David McCullough, The Great Game by Peter Hopkirk, The Punic Wars by Adrian Goldsworthy, Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis, The Iliad by Homer, The Bible by God's servants, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy and the Hobbit by John Ronald Reuell Tolkien, Honor: A History by James Bowman, Nixon by Johnathan Aitkin, Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott. The Buckleys: An American Family by Reid Buckley
Favorite Quotations:
"I never forgot who I was or where I came from or where I was going back to." -Harry Truman
"Whatever you do, tell the truth." Grover Cleveland
"That depends on what the definition of is, is." -Bill Clinton
"It takes 47 muscles to frown and 17 muscles to smile. But it doesn't take any muscles to just sit there with a dumb look on your face." -Despair
"It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me. But the law can stop a man from lynching me. And I think that's pretty important." -Martin Luther King Junior
"Whatever history says about me, I hope it will record that I appealed to your brightest hopes, not your worst fears." -Ronald Reagan
"If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen." -Harry Truman
"If you struggle with loneliness you are not alone. And yet you are alone. So very, very alone." -Despair
"The secret of the demagogue is to make himself as stupid as his audience, so they believe they are as clever as he." -Karl Kraus
"The Buck Stops Here." -Harry Truman
"Hindsight is not wisdom and second guessing is not an exit strategy." -George W. Bush
"Quitters never win, winners never quit, but those who never quit and never win are idiots" - Despair
"It's the little things in life that remind you that someone out there is out to get you." -Bryce.
"Christians believe not that God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because he loves us." -C.S. Lewis.
"Just because you're necessary doesn't mean that you're important." -Despair
"Whatever you feel, you will feel more strongly than anybody else." -My Mother.
About Me:
There are plenty of things I don't know, but there is nothing I don't have an opinion about. Please do not ever refer to me as "Johnny," "Jonathin" "Jack" or some other lame stereotypical nickname. If you can't think of something more original than that you might as well just refer to me by my real name. Acceptable nicknames include "Faysta" "Fay-Gangsta" or (If you are Michael Triller, and only if you are Michael Triller) "FAY-BAAAAABAAAAAAAH!" I am pretty much obsessed with history (guess what my major is). My heros include but are not limited to George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Scoop Jackson, Harry Truman, Winston Churchill, Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee. These are the people who you will not insult in my presence if you want to avoid a heated discussion.
79
Granted, the Daily editorial page is a joke these days, and the writer in question is a callow bigot. But, in fairness, this did run right next to an op-ed decrying the passage of Prop 8.
81
@77, the length to which savage pursues attacking the writer of such an op/ed determines how topical it is. And the comparison was that me trading insults (that are rarely topical) with people on Slog is analogous to Dan Savage pursuing these kinds of vendettas against other people in the media.
82
I wonder if the guy (or any of the idiots like him) knows that the concept of marriage came out of feudal ceremonies between two men, the knight pledging to serve the lord..
83
I wonder if the guy (or any of the idiots like him) knows that the concept of marriage came out of feudal ceremonies between two men, the knight pledging to serve the lord..
84
@13 *cough*
email:
johnfay@u.washington.edu
address:
5046 16th Ave. NE
Seattle, WA 98105
Residence:
Mannex
email:
johnfay@u.washington.edu
address:
5046 16th Ave. NE
Seattle, WA 98105
Residence:
Mannex
86
Well-written, ANTI Prop 8 editorial printed in same edition of Daily - give positive feedback here:
http://dailyuw.com/2008/11/25/propositio…
Title:
"Proposition 8 Disappointing"
http://dailyuw.com/2008/11/25/propositio…
Title:
"Proposition 8 Disappointing"
87
@ 71 - But he also lists Harry Truman as a hero. Until Bill Clinton came along, Truman was probably the most vilified president by the right, even so far as to be accused of being a communist sympathizer. So WTF??
88
In Israel only Jews are allowed a true religious marriage. Anyone else can get a partnership, even gays can get a partnership.
That is the way it should be. As a Jew I believe that most gentile marriages are a sham. And Rabbis in Israel recently invalidated thousands of these gentile marriages, just like the sham gay marriage in California.
As Jews we must stand by Israel in this. America can have whatever partnerships they want, but true marriage is really only between a Jewish man and a woman. As Jews we must honor Christian marriages as being a little better than gay marriage because Christians have dark souls and are too ignorant for a true Jewish marriage.
Gays however will never be capable of anything more that partnership. The wise Rabbis of Israel have already sorted all this out, we should follow their lead.
P.S. So called "Pride Parades" are not allowed in sacred Jerusalem. The gays in Israel are allowed to gather in a stadium, out of public sight. America should consider following Israel's lead in this too.
That is the way it should be. As a Jew I believe that most gentile marriages are a sham. And Rabbis in Israel recently invalidated thousands of these gentile marriages, just like the sham gay marriage in California.
As Jews we must stand by Israel in this. America can have whatever partnerships they want, but true marriage is really only between a Jewish man and a woman. As Jews we must honor Christian marriages as being a little better than gay marriage because Christians have dark souls and are too ignorant for a true Jewish marriage.
Gays however will never be capable of anything more that partnership. The wise Rabbis of Israel have already sorted all this out, we should follow their lead.
P.S. So called "Pride Parades" are not allowed in sacred Jerusalem. The gays in Israel are allowed to gather in a stadium, out of public sight. America should consider following Israel's lead in this too.
89
Yark ule busk saban busk saba sek. Plo fellin sup peplin san, scu yessin slish buccon bip bessin. Plep tevit scun crandle devinsurt, devinsurt busk yon saba cusc.
90
Bellevue Avenue: I notice you completely failed to give an actual reason why what Savage is doing is wrong.
92
@88... great example of why marriage should be left to each fairy-tale loving religion to handle internally and the government stays out of it. I'm happy to have you confined within the boundaries of your church and not setting public policy.
As for Pride in Jerusalem... this picture disagrees with your premise.
http://www.jerusalemshots.com/Jerusalem_…
As for Pride in Jerusalem... this picture disagrees with your premise.
http://www.jerusalemshots.com/Jerusalem_…
95
John Fay is allowed to publish his idiotic thoughts on gay marriage on the Interwebs. I am not allowed to respond.
Got it.
Got it.
97
here's what's going on at the daily:
sara jeglum is an irate, irrational right-wing nutjob from wenatchee. she worked very hard to elevate herself through the ranks of the mediocre and retarded on the daily's writing staff to make herself editor in chief. then she started recruited like minded people out of the communications department to fill out her editorial board. she hired wagner, the sports editor, who is laughably incompetent but a hardline republican. then she hired natalie sikavi, who's a fiercely conservative reactionary who counts charles krauthammer as one of her all-time heroes.
natalie sikavi is almost entirely responsible for the opinion pieces that get published in the daily. she was responsible for writing the rossi endorsement and she was the one who cleared this piece of shit article to get published. she needs to be fired from her job, and then jeglum needs to be removed. if any of you need a project, make that it. we at the university have no tolerance for this level of bullshit, but we are limited in what we can do since these are appointed positions. i will be more than happy to take suggestions for anything that i can immediately take action on, because this needs to stop immediately.
sara jeglum is an irate, irrational right-wing nutjob from wenatchee. she worked very hard to elevate herself through the ranks of the mediocre and retarded on the daily's writing staff to make herself editor in chief. then she started recruited like minded people out of the communications department to fill out her editorial board. she hired wagner, the sports editor, who is laughably incompetent but a hardline republican. then she hired natalie sikavi, who's a fiercely conservative reactionary who counts charles krauthammer as one of her all-time heroes.
natalie sikavi is almost entirely responsible for the opinion pieces that get published in the daily. she was responsible for writing the rossi endorsement and she was the one who cleared this piece of shit article to get published. she needs to be fired from her job, and then jeglum needs to be removed. if any of you need a project, make that it. we at the university have no tolerance for this level of bullshit, but we are limited in what we can do since these are appointed positions. i will be more than happy to take suggestions for anything that i can immediately take action on, because this needs to stop immediately.
98
@95, how far do you take it determines everything. You're allowed to do as you please but if you want The Stranger to be something more than a classified with weak political rantings, it behooves you to rise above this kind of malarkey.
@90, i expect savage to continue beating this drum for the next 24-48 hours or at least get his minions at The Stranger to do it. It isn't wrong to call bullshit but it is wrong to harp on something and then engage in the same ridiculous disingenuous language that the original author used. and especially name calling and bragging about how the obvious ridiculous defamation is number two on google...these aren't the actions of a mature person who should have better judgment.
@90, i expect savage to continue beating this drum for the next 24-48 hours or at least get his minions at The Stranger to do it. It isn't wrong to call bullshit but it is wrong to harp on something and then engage in the same ridiculous disingenuous language that the original author used. and especially name calling and bragging about how the obvious ridiculous defamation is number two on google...these aren't the actions of a mature person who should have better judgment.
99
to drive the point home, here is what the daily's opinion column has been reduced to, with each article written by natalie sikavi and all appearing within the past four weeks:
Religious forum: what moment made you proud to be Jewish?
http://dailyuw.com/2008/10/2/religious-f…
Religious forum: what is the biggest transgression your religion has committed?
http://dailyuw.com/2008/10/16/religious-…
Does your faith influence how you vote: Judaism?
http://dailyuw.com/2008/10/30/does-your-…
What would you change about your religion: Judaism?
http://dailyuw.com/2008/11/13/what-would…
Religious forum: what moment made you proud to be Jewish?
http://dailyuw.com/2008/10/2/religious-f…
Religious forum: what is the biggest transgression your religion has committed?
http://dailyuw.com/2008/10/16/religious-…
Does your faith influence how you vote: Judaism?
http://dailyuw.com/2008/10/30/does-your-…
What would you change about your religion: Judaism?
http://dailyuw.com/2008/11/13/what-would…
100
@64
@84
Isn't anyone going to post Dan Savage's home address?
What is the point of posting Fay's home address - unless you want him to be confronted? Is this really worth the risk of someone harming the guy in a physical confrontation?
@84
Isn't anyone going to post Dan Savage's home address?
What is the point of posting Fay's home address - unless you want him to be confronted? Is this really worth the risk of someone harming the guy in a physical confrontation?
101
Jerusalem is one of the most pro-Gay cities in the world. That's because Judaism is so pro-Gay. We talked about how great the Jerusalem pride celebration has become in our campus Hillel meetings.
Anyone who says Jerusalem is anti-gay is just anti-semitic.
Anyone who says Jerusalem is anti-gay is just anti-semitic.
102
yea right. unless your name happens to be natalie sikavi, then your religion is a crutch for you to lean on when you need to an excuse to hurl bigoted, homophobic invectives at the people you hate.
i'm not saying she's a bigot because she's jewish. she was already a bigot to begin with, she just also happens to be jewish and spends all of her goddam time talking about how great her religion is. that she can't seem to think of anything else to write about is representative of the simplistic and narrow lens from which she views those around her.
i would be equally critical if she wrote four articles praising how great her dog is because that would demonstrate the same level of profoundly idiotic dialogue that she chooses to engage in. nobody cares about how much she loves god or going to mass. if she wants to write about that, she can start her very own godblog, but university students aren't going to tolerate that shit being printed in our newspaper anymore.
i'm not saying she's a bigot because she's jewish. she was already a bigot to begin with, she just also happens to be jewish and spends all of her goddam time talking about how great her religion is. that she can't seem to think of anything else to write about is representative of the simplistic and narrow lens from which she views those around her.
i would be equally critical if she wrote four articles praising how great her dog is because that would demonstrate the same level of profoundly idiotic dialogue that she chooses to engage in. nobody cares about how much she loves god or going to mass. if she wants to write about that, she can start her very own godblog, but university students aren't going to tolerate that shit being printed in our newspaper anymore.
103
Okay, wow. Race has no biological basis at all, unless you're talking about how different people look. That alone automatically knocks down whatever semblance of credibility he may have had before that.
104
Persinally, I would like to know why Bellevue Ave's panties are so in a wad. It must be something juicy for him to ultra-pissy. Can someone fill me in?
105
Guess I should really preview my comments before I post instead of trusting my obviously lacking typing skils...
106
@99, thanks for the heads up about the articles that Natalie Sikavi has written. From your posting those, I went to look at the other articles that she has written. Her religious articles seem to avoid any mention of same-sex marriage, but interestingly, she herself wrote an opinion piece saying that same-sex marriage should be protected.
http://dailyuw.com/2008/5/22/same-sex-ma…
While I think John Fay's opinion piece was badly written, I think this argument is tough enough without a bunch of grudge-wank sprinkled on it. Grow up.
http://dailyuw.com/2008/5/22/same-sex-ma…
While I think John Fay's opinion piece was badly written, I think this argument is tough enough without a bunch of grudge-wank sprinkled on it. Grow up.
108
We're not all bad at UW! It's just the people who write for the Daily- which no one takes seriously anyways. The rest of us donate to HRC, worked for Obama, and attended the prop. 8 rally downtown. And we support the arts too! See? See world? We aren't all bad!
Right? Guys?
Hello...?
Right? Guys?
Hello...?
109
@38: "If someone had written this at Evergreen, they would have been torn limb from limb on red square and possibly burnt in effigy."
I agree this kid is an ass. But please man, we just had a colleague light himself on fire in red square three weeks ago. I see the flowers still every day as i walk though the square. That is something not to be laughed about.
I agree this kid is an ass. But please man, we just had a colleague light himself on fire in red square three weeks ago. I see the flowers still every day as i walk though the square. That is something not to be laughed about.
110
Natalie Sikavi and Dan Savage are the only writers in Seattle to stand up for Judaism in the sea of Christian idiots that is Seattle.
Judaism is the only TRUE religion. Islam and Christianity are cults for idiots.
It is anti-semitic not to like Natalie's writing. There are many Jewish writers at The Stranger, and most of them are pro-Israel and observe the major holidays.
Seattle had better get used to a pro-Jewish voice. It is racist, Christian and homophobic to say anything bad about Judaism or Israel. Not to mention anti-semitic.
Now that Obama has selected Rahm Israel Emanuel as chief of staff, America will be even more pro- Israel that ever. Anyone who doesn't like it is a Christian, anti-semitic idiot.
Judaism is the only TRUE religion. Islam and Christianity are cults for idiots.
It is anti-semitic not to like Natalie's writing. There are many Jewish writers at The Stranger, and most of them are pro-Israel and observe the major holidays.
Seattle had better get used to a pro-Jewish voice. It is racist, Christian and homophobic to say anything bad about Judaism or Israel. Not to mention anti-semitic.
Now that Obama has selected Rahm Israel Emanuel as chief of staff, America will be even more pro- Israel that ever. Anyone who doesn't like it is a Christian, anti-semitic idiot.
111
we;; bellevue ave @ 98
..while it might be true as you state that
" i expect savage to continue beating this drum for the next 24-48 hours or at least get his minions at The Stranger to do it. ", why not hold your rants until AFTER this happens.
i'm not a minion , but you really do sound like an off topic ass with an personal ax to grind.
..while it might be true as you state that
" i expect savage to continue beating this drum for the next 24-48 hours or at least get his minions at The Stranger to do it. ", why not hold your rants until AFTER this happens.
i'm not a minion , but you really do sound like an off topic ass with an personal ax to grind.
112
@109: I don't think the comment was any sort of reference to that. No need to be the sensitivity/thought police.
115
He likes Malcolm in the Middle. That explains it. Does he like According to Jim and King of Kings too? I can't stand any of those shows...
116
This article makes me sick to my stomach! This guy needs to be fired from the UW Daily. This is unacceptable writing and should not be endorsed or tolerated by the UW. We are a lgbt friendly city and this is pure bigotry. Email and call the UW Daily and make complaints. Get the word out and let the UW know about this homophobic excuse of a human being! I am sick and tired of morons spewing hate.
117
Yay, Issur's back. Is that the real Issur?
While I know that gay couples are just as bonded as straight couples, without the perspective that the opposite sex brings, same-sex marriage is a pale imitation -- two salt shakers with no pepper in sight. All yang and no yin. More like the world's smallest frat house than anything else.
While I know that gay couples are just as bonded as straight couples, without the perspective that the opposite sex brings, same-sex marriage is a pale imitation -- two salt shakers with no pepper in sight. All yang and no yin. More like the world's smallest frat house than anything else.
118
@ 117: Because, obviously, all men have exactly identical personalities to all other men, and all women to all other women. There is, of course, no pair of heterosexuals with similar personalities that just encourage their shittier tendencies: short temper, impatience, etc. And there are no gay couples in which each partner has a mind of his or her own. This is why my girlfriend and I agree on everything. Ever. Fucking dumbass. "Penis" and "vagina" are not personality traits, and do not determine the quality of the relationship.
@ Dan: I love how he has to specify it's a 70 yo man that wants to marry all those underaged girls. Because, apparently, if he was 30, it wouldn't be so bad?
This is a clear example of the right wing mentality that "gross" and "wrong" are the same thing. To him, the reason that pedophilic polygamous situation is wrong is because it's gross, not because, say, it's wrong for anyone to fuck a 10 yo, because 10 yos have a right to live their lives without penises in them.
This is probably also, at the core of it, his argument with gay marriage, and with abortion. "Ew, gross, so it's wrong."
@ Dan: I love how he has to specify it's a 70 yo man that wants to marry all those underaged girls. Because, apparently, if he was 30, it wouldn't be so bad?
This is a clear example of the right wing mentality that "gross" and "wrong" are the same thing. To him, the reason that pedophilic polygamous situation is wrong is because it's gross, not because, say, it's wrong for anyone to fuck a 10 yo, because 10 yos have a right to live their lives without penises in them.
This is probably also, at the core of it, his argument with gay marriage, and with abortion. "Ew, gross, so it's wrong."
119
asdf @ 27: Yes, many of the liberals got too lazy and quit. I'm one of them. But Sarah Gaither wrote a lovely piece taking the opposite position. Go and cheer. Maybe the editors will realize they don't need to publish this idiotic tripe to get page views:
http://dailyuw.com/2008/11/25/propositio…
I know this jackass personally. It was really just a matter of time.
http://dailyuw.com/2008/11/25/propositio…
I know this jackass personally. It was really just a matter of time.
120
@6: It's when straight people like this assclown states AUTHORITATIVELY what homosexuality is ALL ABOUT. Oh, he doesn't need any information from real, live gay people about what gay life is like, because HE KNOWS!! And how does he know?
"Takes one to know one"? I've decided that the anti-gay social conservatives spend every minute of every day fighting their urge to have sex with another man, and the rest of us just don't understand their daily moral struggle against their own forbidden desires.
0700: Wake up. Want to get fucked by a dude, but choose not to ask for it, because IT'S WRONG.
0800: Eat breakfast. Think dirty thoughts about the sausage, but don't do anything about it, because IT'S WRONG.
0900: Go to class, think about screwing the football player in the front row in the ass, but don't, because IT'S WRONG.
etc.
I really feel sorry for them that they have to struggle against that emotional desire all the time, knowing that they'll be damned to hell for doing it.
Oh, and posting this kid's info = not cool. Posting it to Lustlab = really not cool. He has to struggle with his brain's allergy to reason and his "emotional" impulses - punishment enough.
"Takes one to know one"? I've decided that the anti-gay social conservatives spend every minute of every day fighting their urge to have sex with another man, and the rest of us just don't understand their daily moral struggle against their own forbidden desires.
0700: Wake up. Want to get fucked by a dude, but choose not to ask for it, because IT'S WRONG.
0800: Eat breakfast. Think dirty thoughts about the sausage, but don't do anything about it, because IT'S WRONG.
0900: Go to class, think about screwing the football player in the front row in the ass, but don't, because IT'S WRONG.
etc.
I really feel sorry for them that they have to struggle against that emotional desire all the time, knowing that they'll be damned to hell for doing it.
Oh, and posting this kid's info = not cool. Posting it to Lustlab = really not cool. He has to struggle with his brain's allergy to reason and his "emotional" impulses - punishment enough.
121
Like The Daily is Shit and Everyone Knows It I'd like to point out that there are liberals who have worked for (or in my case) are still writing for the UW Daily. This should not be a reflection of the Daily as a whole (although I feel that there has been an increasing amount of conservatism displayed in the paper lately).
However when the author's argument includes the Simpsons, the "incest, bestiality" line of thinking...which is completely ridiculous...notable difference between two consenting adults and 1 consenting adult + 1 might not be consenting (or human) other), and religion, I tend to lose faith in the validity of their argument.
With this in mind, I would not censor an article because it has conservative viewpoints that I disagree (strongly) with. Like Director of Student Publications Kristin Millis stated in a recent e-mail, I too believe in free speech, the First Amendment, "dialogue and robust discussion". I am in favor of more thoroughly reading over articles that might go in the opinions section, and sincerely hope that someone writes a very strong rebuttal (and that the Editorial Staff prints the article).
When the author's argument is that "Being homosexual" is "a problem that needs to be dealt with" I think that the Editorial Staff should expect a significant amount of negative feedback.
However when the author's argument includes the Simpsons, the "incest, bestiality" line of thinking...which is completely ridiculous...notable difference between two consenting adults and 1 consenting adult + 1 might not be consenting (or human) other), and religion, I tend to lose faith in the validity of their argument.
With this in mind, I would not censor an article because it has conservative viewpoints that I disagree (strongly) with. Like Director of Student Publications Kristin Millis stated in a recent e-mail, I too believe in free speech, the First Amendment, "dialogue and robust discussion". I am in favor of more thoroughly reading over articles that might go in the opinions section, and sincerely hope that someone writes a very strong rebuttal (and that the Editorial Staff prints the article).
When the author's argument is that "Being homosexual" is "a problem that needs to be dealt with" I think that the Editorial Staff should expect a significant amount of negative feedback.
122
Although the column under scrutiny merits criticism, I would argue that the larger problem is the paper's emphasis on diametrical opinion pieces. These point-counterpoint, liberal-conservative, Christian-Muslim-Jew are incredibly sophomoric and no sort of dialogue. They simply promulgate the polarized positions most Americans have become accustomed to in the popular media.
We ought to expect more deliberate and thoughtful expressions of opinion from ourselves, and our fourth estate.
We ought to expect more deliberate and thoughtful expressions of opinion from ourselves, and our fourth estate.
123
Dear Dan Savage,
I used to work at the Daily last year. I don't what has happened since then, but I am glad someone respectable is voicing their thoughts. The Daily has long floated on inflated egos stemming from all its 5-year seniors who don't realize they STILL work for a campus paper. I am very happy someone is putting them in place and setting them straight (er, no pun intended).
I almost hope Fay is a secret closeted homosexual and simply wrote that article because he is in fear of coming out. Perhaps I could forgive him then. Sadly, this is probably not the case.
I used to work at the Daily last year. I don't what has happened since then, but I am glad someone respectable is voicing their thoughts. The Daily has long floated on inflated egos stemming from all its 5-year seniors who don't realize they STILL work for a campus paper. I am very happy someone is putting them in place and setting them straight (er, no pun intended).
I almost hope Fay is a secret closeted homosexual and simply wrote that article because he is in fear of coming out. Perhaps I could forgive him then. Sadly, this is probably not the case.
124
John Fay's article must be taken into prospective. His purpose was to create controversy, as he stated when he ran to be President of the UW College Republicans. It appears he succeeded.
From his Facebook Group page:
John Fay For President of UW College Republicans http://www.facebook.com/directory/groups…
"6. Controversy: As Republicans and as Americans we must be proud of who we are because we have something to be proud of. We must never let unkind and dishonest people shame us or cow us into quiescence. I know some folks hesitate about our seeking controversy but frankly that is the best way to get the word out about our club and hey, we actually believe in what we are doing anyway. If the Horowitz Foundation repeats Islamo-fascist week we should be a part of that. We also should work with the SCCC again if they do another empty holster protest. But there were lots of other ideas we didn't pursue this year, like global warming awareness, an affirmative action bakesale etc. We should plan on at least one major controversy per quarter. I don't know about you guys but I always sleep with a cleaner conscience after being called a fascist by a bunch of out of work hippies."
From his Facebook Group page:
John Fay For President of UW College Republicans http://www.facebook.com/directory/groups…
"6. Controversy: As Republicans and as Americans we must be proud of who we are because we have something to be proud of. We must never let unkind and dishonest people shame us or cow us into quiescence. I know some folks hesitate about our seeking controversy but frankly that is the best way to get the word out about our club and hey, we actually believe in what we are doing anyway. If the Horowitz Foundation repeats Islamo-fascist week we should be a part of that. We also should work with the SCCC again if they do another empty holster protest. But there were lots of other ideas we didn't pursue this year, like global warming awareness, an affirmative action bakesale etc. We should plan on at least one major controversy per quarter. I don't know about you guys but I always sleep with a cleaner conscience after being called a fascist by a bunch of out of work hippies."
125
114 - depends on your definition of "race" and "biological." If for race you mean the color of skin, facial characteristics, and perhaps even some physiological differences, between say, Asian people and African people, or Caucasian and Latino folks, then it is absolutely a genetic, and therefore "biological" state.
Culture, on the other hand, is a state of mind, and not transmitted via biology.
Culture, on the other hand, is a state of mind, and not transmitted via biology.
126
"Fact is, the state usually has very different concepts about a lot of things—usually broader concepts, to accommodate social and religious differences—than any one church or faith might."
That one statement, right there, gets to the real heart of so many contentious issues, not just this one. I really wish that more people could understand that what a government should or shouldn't allow is very different from what a particular idea, belief, church, or faith should allow. The First Amendment gives you the right to speak your mind, to make your views known, without fear of reprisal from the government but not necessarily from people who disagree with you. That's there to protect everybody, not just you. And that's how government--the state--should strive to act at all times. It's there to support and protect everybody, not just your idea or your belief or your faith.
In this case, if your particular faith cannot accept the idea of two men getting married, then the government should allow you to deny them a place at your altar, your place of worship, but not at the expense of denying them a place at any altar, anywhere. That's what freedom of religion means: you get to have your religion and everybody else gets to have theirs, even if it's different than yours.
That one statement, right there, gets to the real heart of so many contentious issues, not just this one. I really wish that more people could understand that what a government should or shouldn't allow is very different from what a particular idea, belief, church, or faith should allow. The First Amendment gives you the right to speak your mind, to make your views known, without fear of reprisal from the government but not necessarily from people who disagree with you. That's there to protect everybody, not just you. And that's how government--the state--should strive to act at all times. It's there to support and protect everybody, not just your idea or your belief or your faith.
In this case, if your particular faith cannot accept the idea of two men getting married, then the government should allow you to deny them a place at your altar, your place of worship, but not at the expense of denying them a place at any altar, anywhere. That's what freedom of religion means: you get to have your religion and everybody else gets to have theirs, even if it's different than yours.
129
I am ashamed that this hateful and ignorant article was published in my school's paper. Not all UW students are like John Fay.
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.…
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.…
130
If we put as much energy into winning marriage equality as we do attacking neanderthal opinions such as Mr. Fay's (whom I believe to be a lonely virgin), we might actually WIN marriage equality. When you argue with a fool, the fool wins. Standing up and fighting for your rights is not the same thing as pointing out a fool's foolishness. Do not be distracted from the struggle.
131
FROM STONEWALL TO PROP 8: HOW DO WE WIN LGBT LIBERATION?
7pm
Wednesday, December 10
Room 1110, Seattle Central Community College (Broadway & Pine in Capitol Hill)
On November 15, 2008 the national spotlight settled on a new—and newly invigorated—civil rights movement. In Seattle and over 300 cities across the country, tens of thousands protesters took to the streets in a national day of action to oppose the passage of Proposition 8, a California ballot measure that bans same-sex marriage.
Coming on the heels of the election of the first Black president and the ousting of George Bush, there was an overriding sense at the demonstrations that history is on our side, as growing numbers feel increasingly confident in calling for marriage equality now.
The modern gay rights movement started with a riot almost 40 years ago at a New York City gay bar. The gay rights movement of the 1970s broadly raised the hopes and demands that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people have the same rights as straight people.
What lessons from the last period of mass radicalization can we learn from in building a new civil rights movement today? What will it take to turn back the right's attacks and win full LGBT equality and liberation? Join fellow activists for this important discussion!
December 10: http://daywithoutagay.org/
Raising our voices for equal marriage rights: http://socialistworker.org/2008/11/17/ra…
For more info call 206-931-2922 or email info@seattleiso.org
Sponsored by the INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST ORGANIZATION
More...
7pm
Wednesday, December 10
Room 1110, Seattle Central Community College (Broadway & Pine in Capitol Hill)
On November 15, 2008 the national spotlight settled on a new—and newly invigorated—civil rights movement. In Seattle and over 300 cities across the country, tens of thousands protesters took to the streets in a national day of action to oppose the passage of Proposition 8, a California ballot measure that bans same-sex marriage.
Coming on the heels of the election of the first Black president and the ousting of George Bush, there was an overriding sense at the demonstrations that history is on our side, as growing numbers feel increasingly confident in calling for marriage equality now.
The modern gay rights movement started with a riot almost 40 years ago at a New York City gay bar. The gay rights movement of the 1970s broadly raised the hopes and demands that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people have the same rights as straight people.
What lessons from the last period of mass radicalization can we learn from in building a new civil rights movement today? What will it take to turn back the right's attacks and win full LGBT equality and liberation? Join fellow activists for this important discussion!
December 10: http://daywithoutagay.org/
Raising our voices for equal marriage rights: http://socialistworker.org/2008/11/17/ra…
For more info call 206-931-2922 or email info@seattleiso.org
Sponsored by the INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST ORGANIZATION
132
OMG where to start!
what an ignorant, privileged idiot!
Although I disagree with EVERYTHING said in this article; I'm a little glad it was published, maybe the feedback will teach him and idiots like him a thing or two. (probably not)
oh yeah
race is not biological
and neither is gender!
what an ignorant, privileged idiot!
Although I disagree with EVERYTHING said in this article; I'm a little glad it was published, maybe the feedback will teach him and idiots like him a thing or two. (probably not)
oh yeah
race is not biological
and neither is gender!
134
I'm new to the stranger blog..but i got linked here after reading the fay article. Spot on! What he said was just mean spirited and wrong.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Slog Somehow Overlooked... by Dan Savage
-
VivaVulva Viagra! by Dan Savage -
Life and Death in a Recliner in South Carolina by Dan Savage
-
Health at Every Size by Dan Savage
-
"Let his days be few... Let his children be fatherless and his wife a widow." by Dan Savage
-
Feeling Sorry for Carrie Prejean by Dan Savage
-
Last Night's Colbert Report by Dan Savage
-
$2,600,000,000 by Dan Savage
-
All The Best Men Are Taken by Dan Savage
-
I Hate You, Garrison Keillor by Jen Graves
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (134) RSS