Archive for the ‘Gay Marriage’ Category

Ace on “Hypocrisy”

Friday, November 13th, 2009

Out of the mouths of frat boys, comes wisdom:

Hypocrisy does not mean “Establishing a standard for yourself and then failing to live up to it.” There is a different word for that: It’s called being a human being. Or at least a human being who does, in fact, attempt to better herself and set goals and maintain a standard of conduct.

Anyone who sets goals for himself will fail. And what is the alternative?

Hypocrisy is, instead, proclaiming a series of values and vindictively using those values to chastise others for failing to live up to them, all the while gleefully violating them yourself.

Has Prejean done this? I don’t remember a single statement she made about sexual modesty. The only thing I remember her saying about sex at all wasn’t even about sex, per se, but about marriage, and that marriage should be between a man and a woman.


When the day comes you catch wind of the fact that Carrie Prejean has married a woman, go ahead and give me a call.

Actually, even then don’t expect to find me too terribly interested. Lest anyone forget — Carrie Prejean did not raise the issue of same-sex marriage. Perez Hilton did that. Ms. Prejean simply answered the question that was put to her. After Mr. Hilton brought it up.

Who asked him, anyway?

I have a short list of people who have no business whatsoever judging, or imposing criteria upon, Miss America contestants — or any contestants in any other contest dealing with feminine beauty. I’m thinking children; eunuchs; straight women; gay men.

I’m not entirely sure about the eunuchs and the straight women.

And this is certainly not intended as an insult, either. Do you know how many women have approached me, over the years, about “do you think I should wear these pumps or those sandals?” and I look at them all perplexed, and say “you’re asking me?” And yet the question-mark-pockmarked assault continues. Do these shorts make me look fat. Thread count in the bedsheets. Eggshell or off-white. Oneida or Noritake.

Specialties, folks. All specialists to their specialties. Can’t believe it has to be said, but…when a decision is to be made about which young lady looks best in a bathing suit, this is what straight men are for — and a straight man is what you want. Best looking in an evening gown: Ask a straight man. Singing: Straight man. Talent: Straight man. Sexiest walk: Straight man.

Perez Hilton had as much business there as a pig has in church. It’s not a discriminatory statement. It’s just a fact.

Back to the subject at hand: Yes, we need to revisit what exactly hypocrisy means. It’s not a catch-all trap for you to use against people who have upheld, or embraced, or advocated some standard you personally find unappealing. There has to be an actual contradiction taking place. One set of rules for yourself and a higher one for others. Without that, the H-word has no meaning within that particular situation.

Doug Elfman vs. Miss Cali

Tuesday, May 26th, 2009

Miss CaliThis actually took place last month but I just found it. Entertainment columnist calls beauty contestant stupid — because she has an opinion about gay marriage that’s different from his.

Hahaha. Miss California Sister Carrie Prejean, who lost the Miss USA pageant here in Las Vegas on Sunday because she’s dumb, says God was testing her faith when He placed Perez Hilton along her Path to Glory — a path also lined by her swimsuit, fake-white teeth and boob glue. God works in mysterious ways.

I guess it’s all that God talk that got him down.

Anyway, that charming gem of a post netted twenty comments.

Four of them agreed with him.

The other sixteen handed him his own ass.

I like that. Times like these, sometimes I wish I was a blond female sexpot who looked amazing in a skimpy bikini, rather than a pudgy middle-aged straight white guy. That way I could come to know this extra special visceral hatred these anti-traditional-marriage anti-life anti-God types have for those who disagree with them, and happen to be gorgeous women. It must be quite a feeling.

I’m an ordinary dude. I only get the ordinary anger.

What is it, anyway? Is it resentment over the courtship rituals of studly guys and attractive females? Belief in God? It’s like a chemical combustion process; if all the ingredients are there, the incendiary reaction is greater than whatever takes place with only a few of them. It must be the beginning of a healthy household that does it. He knows what he wants out of life, she’s gorgeous and knows he’s the man she wants, they both benefit from a strong, stable belief system. That, it would seem, is the flammable triangle. That’s when our secular post-modern liberals start to make real asses out of themselves.

It must be — they’re watching others do, what they know they could’ve done, if they chose to. But they picked a different path and chose to celebrate ugliness, uncertainty, weakness, arrogance-over-principle, and the phony adulation of those in proximity, prioritized over what’s known to be right. For those who aren’t quite up on what’s been going on: The beauty queen didn’t bring up the subject of gay marriage. Perez Hilton did. She ad-libbed on the spot, did a better-than-average job doing it, and didn’t quite deliver the answer Hilton and the other anti-prop-8 folks wanted. That’s why all the fecal matter is flying her way.

What a bunch of craven cowards.

And they think they’re compassionate, and tolerant of diverse points of view. Really something. I don’t think they’re sane; I really don’t.

No Respect for Homemakers

Friday, January 9th, 2009

Ah, I like BlueCanary for her candor. Be sure and save this for the next time someone doubts the existence of a “homosexual agenda to destroy homes.” I’m sure some of their bedfellows really do care about individual rights and freedoms. I’m reasonably sure the homosexual-agenda isn’t even the predominant view, among Prop-8 opponents.

But boy howdee, friends and neighbors, it is out there. It is definitely out there. Something about a man and a woman declaring their love for each other and living together happily, just rubs ’em the wrong way.

The subject under discussion is a Google Maps “mash-up” with Prop 8 donors. Yeah. That’s so you can find the name, occupation and location of anybody in the San Francisco area who donated money for Proposition 8, which passed successfully on November 4, defining marriage in the State of California as a union between a man and a woman.


Ugh, lots of “homemakers” donated. I didn’t know it was possible to respect such people less than I already do, but yes, yes it is.


What’s wrong with “homemakers?”


I have no respect for anyone who surrenders their financial independence/employability to another person in the hope they won’t be in the 50% of marriages that end in divorce.


bitter much?

let the nannies raise the kids!

i’ll get you my pretty … and you’re little dog, too!


I agree–I think we can safely say that at least 100% of homemakers have no interests other than getting fat and mooching. I definitely think that they certainly wouldn’t be involved with volunteering or creative pursuits, and people who might choose to stay at home with their kids are easily worthy of scorn and hate.

Nothing counters bigotry like a little more bigotry!


wait, what?
I have no respect for anyone who surrenders their financial independence/employability to another person

Not everyone needs to be monetarily directed, nor would I want to live a society in which everyone was.


It has nothing to do with monetarily directed. It has to do with being able to support yourself and your children should your spouse decide to leave you/gets hit by a MUNI bus. It is reckless and foolish to gamble with something as vital as your security. Period.

I didn’t say I hate these people. I said I don’t respect them. But feel free to flame away because I voice an unpopular opinion.

I’m not gonna flame at all. I think it’s wonderful she spoke up and made her feelings known.

One thing though.

How is she so sure that when gay marriage was briefly legal, and by default recognized, in the State of California, at least some of the homosexuals weren’t “surrender[ing] their financial independence/employability to another person in the hope they won’t be in the 50% of marriages that end in divorce”? Does sexual preference have some kind of bearing on such a deplorable phenomenon? I don’t recall anyone stepping forward to say so. I don’t recall any evidence of such a thing.

I wonder if she does.