======================================
Try Ecigarette For FREE At http://tryecigarette.com
======================================
 |
The Gay THREAT to Marriage! Posted by: TJ68LA
Video duration: 95 seconds Who is really threatening to destroy and devalue the institution of marriage? Find out now! *original music (composed and recorded in one day!) by myspace.com/mrdreams tream Related: gay, marriage, prop, vote, election, christian, mormon, same, lesbian, homosexual Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
Get the F*** Out! by Nick Name - live punk - xxx lyrics Posted by: TJ68LA
Video duration: 184 seconds live show at gay pride in LA. Nick Name info at http://www.kentjames .com Related: punk, rock, henry, rollins, iggy, pop, butch, muscle, gay, radical, queer Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
Latest comments made on this video:
By: snowliontrax. on 13 Jan 09, 22:27:11
you nailed it neighbor? great vid.
By: NeoMegaRyuMkII. on 09 Dec 08, 01:56:58
wow? this is a god vid
By: NOtoPROP8. on 02 Nov 08, 00:47:54
Remember to VOTE NO on PROP 8, it's important. Taking away fundamental rights? is wrong. Stand up to that by voting NO.
By: TJ68LA. on 31 Oct 08, 06:26:27
right, it's just a trivial little thing about a few words and technicalities. People spend $30 million over meaningless trivia all the time right? Why can't you be honest about your true bigoted motives? Lying? is a sin. Just because the PR spin doctors for Yes on Prop 8 have told you to claim you love everyone, no one is stupid enough to believe you love someone as your spending $30 million to keep them from having the same rights you do.
By: leiland12. on 31 Oct 08, 06:02:56
If that is the case, we? should reach out to them and let them know that WE DO NOT hate them, and that WE ARE NOT spending millions to take away their rights -instead of posting videos and blitzing comment boards with misguided perceptions and false accusations of discrimination and hate against propositions that do no more than defend a simple definition.
By: TJ68LA. on 31 Oct 08, 05:19:39
Maybe? money is all you think about, but there is a high percentage of young people who commit suicide when they realize they are gay. They don't do it because they wanted a tax break, they kill themselves knowing there are people who hate them enough to spend $30 million dollars to take away their equal rights.
By: EscapePlatosCave. on 31 Oct 08, 04:52:43
So I guess you thought it was "equality" when Black people were told "you can drink out of a drinking fountain, you just can't drink out of the same one the superior people do, and you can ride on the bus, just ride in the back." No one can make churches treat gay people equally, so why can't you be satisfied with your bigoted backward dark-ages religions and also be patriotic and respect the constitutional separation of church? and state?
By: mrteryx. on 30 Oct 08, 23:16:38
Well, I live in Germany and there exist two forms of marriage; that for same sex and that for the "classical" institution. Quite frankly, it is all the same to me. I do not feel any less married because it is named "civil union". My main concern, is being disadvantaged although I pay in to the federal system with my taxes. If they? do not like my proclivities, then they should not bother with my money. This institution will not demise because same sex partners marry. It is a matter of perception.
By: leiland12. on 30 Oct 08, 20:08:41
If your motive is to provide financial advantages for same sex couples who live in civil unions, that is fine - you have every right to pursue that. This prop and others like it is about protecting the definition of marriage. If two people of the same sex desire to bind themselves in a social institution they may in the form of civil unions. If two people of the opposite sex disire? the same, it is called marriage. Two different institutions, two distinct identities.
By: leiland12. on 30 Oct 08, 20:03:10
Your argument is irrelevant, And your language is filled with hatred and contempt. The goal of this prop is to defend a definition. If one wants to officially change the definition of a 'circle' to mean a 'square' THAT person's? motives should be questioned and justified, not the ones attempting to defend the original definitions. You are wrong,I have nothing but love and respect for homosexuals.
By: mrteryx. on 30 Oct 08, 17:55:04
Should same sex couples be not allowed the financial advantages of marriage? One does not have to get married in a church. You can call it "legal partnering" as a same sex alternative? to marriage but allowing the same benefits. Most people forget that same sex couples pay their taxes too and contribute to society.
By: EscapePlatosCave. on 29 Oct 08, 22:04:30
How about this prop: YouTube users should not be allowed to vote" Must be OK because it doesn't use the word "discrimination" right? Why can't you just admit you're homophobic and u get a rush from having rights others don't have, bigots have been doing that for millennia. Should the definition of who can vote never have been changed to let Black people and women vote? Things are always being redefined as mankind evolves toward equality, and there will always be? people left behind - like you.
By: brucenfrank. on 29 Oct 08, 20:24:44
Shows the absurdity of it all! Brilliant! NO on 8! - and it's? better for the economy, too... ;-)
By: leiland12. on 29 Oct 08, 07:22:33
I enjoyed the disturbing music... Interesting, but "marriage"(no matter how disfunctional some may be as accurately portrayed? in your vid) has always implied there be a husband and a wife, man and a woman. Prop 8 in Cali, and Prop 102 in Az, and others across the nation are 1 SENTENCE long and void of "discrimination". Marriage has always been defined as a heterosexual institution and that's what the language of the amendments aim to protect! This isn't about discrimination as suggested.