Video: Gay Marriage Proponents Attack Elderly Woman

why not dig a hole, bury her up to her neck and stone her to death, sharia style?!!

HELLO EARTH TO AMERICANS?!

Originally posted by DroolsAlot
Im not a religeous person really, but, all I gotta say is. "In the beginning, there was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve"

Is that honestly the best you can come up with?

Pathetic.

-quote-
"I happen to know that the "elderly" woman with the cross and the "angry/godless gay man" (the one to the right of the screen) were in cahoots (I'm sure a few of the others in the crowd were also). I wasn't going to say anything because i didn't think they would get TV coverage but after reading here and elsewhere it seems like their plan worked. Their goal was to make homosexuals appear to be "godless/hateful" individuals to ignite christian counter-protesters to be violent towards them. I think it's an underhanded and truly EVIL thing they're trying to do."
-end quote-


And I just heard that Sunday anti-prop 8 protesters sat in on a church service then stood up proclaiming "It's good to be gay!" and "Jesus was a homo!". That sounds like planted pro-prop 8 people to me too. I'm anti-prop 8 and on the email list for info on protests and nothing of the sort is or has been planned. I think they're just trying to "demonize" homosexuals.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by htownbeantownhb]

reply to post by xander68


no, but here's the best i can come up! quit supporting that horrible debacle. stop it now before it gets out of hand and innocent people get hurt. don't grease that wheel. don't feed the hate. knock it off. quit. stop. cease and desist!

reply to post by htownbeantownhb


do you suppose everyone on this thread that supported their treatment of that woman are also in cahoots ?

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by CreeWolf

 

Humanity doesn't need the approval of a Church to deem a couples marriage to be sacred. The binding of two persons love is sacred in of itself.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

Lets define Sacred:

Dictionary

1. devoted or dedicated to a deity or to some religious purpose; consecrated.
2. entitled to veneration or religious respect by association with divinity or divine things; holy.
3. pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to secular or profane ): sacred music; sacred books.

Turns out, you need a religion or a church for something to be "sacred".

reply to post by CreeWolf


slippery slope. there are gay ministers that will gladly marry gay people. the issue at hand is, is it or is it not sacred to marry two people in love with each other and is it the business of government to determine what is and isn't sacred? based on the constitution, no it is not the business of government to decide what is and isn't sacred. it's the business of government to enact laws which support freedoms of various kinds and moral issues as deemed moral by the people who vote. but sacred.. it's not their job.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by xander68

 

no, but here's the best i can come up! quit supporting that horrible debacle. stop it now before it gets out of hand and innocent people get hurt. don't grease that wheel. don't feed the hate. knock it off. quit. stop. cease and desist!

Im not supporting anything to do with that video- I speak out against hate though, which you like to make excuses for?

These are EXACTLY the kind of people that you run into during Protests. When I witnessed the Protest/Riots in Washington, D.C. a few years ago, the trouble all started with groups of people like this, who do nothing but scream, rant, and shove to get their alleged "point" across. What a bunch of Dirt Bags.

As for stomping on the Cross, well, I guess they did not just insult an entire Religion. I would like to see someone arrive at these protests with a Crescent, and see what the Worldwide reaction is when they stomp on that!

These idiots are the same fools who took a Christian symbol, the Rainbow (Which represents God and Heaven), and turned it into a symbol of Homosexuality.

If you want to live that lifestyle, then that is fine by me, do not however steal my Religion's symbols, or press your ideas upon me to the detriment of my own beliefs.

reply to post by htownbeantownhb

I think they're just trying to "demonize" homosexuals.

Judging from the posts in this thread, no demonization is really necessary. People seem willing to demonize themselves, just to 'get even' with little old ladies who have crosses.

Me, I am demonizing no one. I'm just watching the drama unfold, wondering just how bad it will get before people decide to act like people again, all the while thanking God Himself that I am not in California. Maybe twenty years ago I would let this get under my skin, but that skin tends to get thick with age.

Undo, I'm with ya man, even if I'm not as vocal as you are...

TheRedneck

Originally posted by undo
True, but did you see them pushing her around the crowd? not with their hands, but with their bodies.

No. I just watched the video again to see if I could spot them push her around with their bodies, push her with their belly etc... The only noteable scene was them taking the cross.

Please specify the exact time in the video that they "pushed her" because I could not see it.

reply to post by xander68


you don't recognize injustice as long as it supports what you believe in!
here i am, telling you and everyone here that i support gay marriage rights and you think i'm the enemy because i also support that woman's right to not be divested of her property without her permission? that's the principle this country was founded on! whenever it goes over the line, people get hurt. that's wrong, don't feed it!

reply to post by TheAgentNineteen


they're not dirt bags. they're human beings. but something very strange is going on! i don't like it, not one little bit! either that entire thing was staged or people are devolving into believing it's okay to infringe on others basic human rights, as afforded by law.

Originally posted by harrytuttle

I'm not even sure which side of the fence you are aiming your point at - because the logic is so completely inverted and backwards to the situation with the church lady and oppression of gays that I'm tempted to say you either slipped a disc or ruptured your pancreas.

Do you need someone to call 9-1-1 for you? Do you have health insurance?

Yeah it was reaching...you got me. Just trying to illustrate smiling granny knew exactly what she was doing! Hope my pretzel logic did not confuse anyonel

I am most definitely against Prop 8!

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by htownbeantownhb

 

do you suppose everyone on this thread that supported their treatment of that woman are also in cahoots ?

The people that write outlandish stuff on this board (like supporting the treatment of the old lady) only support that behavior anonymously from behind the safety of their keyboards. They are just trying to get a rise out of people. I was at a protest this weekend and we know that type of behavior is detrimental to the cause.

That's why I believe that people acting that way at protests must be planted by pro-prop 8 supporters.

reply to post by htownbeantownhb


so the people supporting the treatment of that woman are just trolling ? cause that's against ATS rules i do believe.

reply to post by undo

It may be against the rules, but try proving it.

Oops, one-line post... does that mean I should try to state my opinion more?

TheRedneck

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by htownbeantownhb

I think they're just trying to "demonize" homosexuals.

Judging from the posts in this thread, no demonization is really necessary. People seem willing to demonize themselves, just to 'get even' with little old ladies who have crosses.

Me, I am demonizing no one. I'm just watching the drama unfold, wondering just how bad it will get before people decide to act like people again, all the while thanking God Himself that I am not in California. Maybe twenty years ago I would let this get under my skin, but that skin tends to get thick with age.

Undo, I'm with ya man, even if I'm not as vocal as you are...

TheRedneck

Bravo, redneck, as usual you make good sense. You know sometimes I get the feeling that this whole argument has more to do with Gays' guilt or shame they have than anything having to do with being discriminated against. It seems to me the more they can legitimize what they do via adopting laws that were made between a man and a woman regarding the sanctity of marriage, that somehow that will alleviate all the guilt and it won't.

They have civil contracts between couples that give them the same rights as do those in Marriage and if for all intents and purposes they can call that significant other there wife or what ever. They can even choose to create their own version of marriage. But the one kind of marriage where a man and a woman consumate that union by becoming one flesh was never meant to mean the same way it is to be one flesh between two males.

If they can't understand why this means so much to people who believe it to be a special bond between a man and a woman, then all they have to do is look at themselves seeing how important it is to THEM should give them SOME idea how important it is when you take it away from those it was first intended for that being a man and a woman. This is a celebration of THAT kind of couple and no other and some things should be left as they are and not have any addendum to the meaning of Matrimony just to make Gays feel less discriminated against when NO ONE is saying they can't sleep with one another or live that way or even have civil unions between each other.

It is simply a tradition of heterosexual people that have said THIS IS OURS this thing called Marriage between a man and a woman and it is important to us to keep it special to us. It was called Holy matrimony but even in a secular sense, this to me is no different than arguing for males to use womans restrooms or girls suing the Boy Scouts of America so they can be in that too. I mean some things are best left to those they are about and not to those they are not about. Marriage in this context is about one man and one woman now the people have spoken so the rest should kindly DEAL WITH IT. BTW, undo is a she not a he

[edit on 12-11-2008 by MAINTAL]

reply to post by MAINTAL

They have civil contracts between couples that give them the same rights as do those in Marriage

Actually they don't, this is a common misconception. Gays could careless about marriage if the government didn’t make it a privilege that excludes them and if they had all the same rights that you do. There are a lot of straight people who focus on this issue when it does not lawfully affect them; I have no doubts some do so because of their own sexual insecurities, so I won’t judge you for thinking some gays do it because of shame.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by htownbeantownhb

 

so the people supporting the treatment of that woman are just trolling ? cause that's against ATS rules i do believe.

Well...I just don't believe anyone is evil/sick enough to think roughing-up an old lady is cool (especially in the gay movement-we love our mothers, lol), it doesn't matter where you stand on this conflict. And don't call me "naive", I'm a 41yo world-traveled road-weary musician
People say outlandish things from behind the safety of their computer.

I still believe that all the recent "unpleasantness" is the result of pro-prop 8 plants.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by htownbeantownhb]