February 9, 2010, - 2:43 pm

Quote of the Day: At Least, She’s Consistent

By Debbie Schlussel

I don’t get the marriage thing. When people ask me to support gay marriage they are asking the wrong person.

Actress Susan Sarandon

I don’t care for her or her politics. But, at least, she’s consistent. (As opposed to phonies like HOprah, who oppose real marriage, but support gay marriage.)


Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: ,

23 Responses

People do oppose gay marriage and it has nothing to do with bigotry.

NormanF on February 9, 2010 at 3:02 pm

It might be 5 years from now or 20 years from now, but Gay Marriage will be legal in America. Last year the guys behind Baseball Prospectus pooled the all the data and voting trends throughout the entire United States and concluded that slowly but surely those said trends have moved consistently towards legalizing Gay Marriage. If your familiar with Sabermatrics, or ever heard of MoneyBall you’ll know these guy’s are wrong like never. I personally don’t know where I fall on this issue and I see both sides of the debate.

Jedi3129 on February 9, 2010 at 3:41 pm

What’s so bad about letting two consenting adults who love each other get married? Will your life somehow get worse cause there’s a married gay couple down the street?

Nak on February 9, 2010 at 3:45 pm

    Nak, for someone like you, who wants to see America destroyed, gay marriage makes sense.

    Occam's Tool on August 25, 2011 at 3:44 pm

And aside from the unwholesome and debauched nature of gay relationships, guess who will be paying for all of the benefits that their ‘spouses’ get from Government and corporations.

Little Al on February 9, 2010 at 4:00 pm

What’s so bad about letting two consenting adults who love each other get married? Will your life somehow get worse cause there’s a married gay couple down the street?

Nak on February 9, 2010 at 3:45 pm

How obtuse can you be? This issue has nothing to do with individual marriages, it has to do with society. Duh.

Two “married” homos are not in the interest of the State. Also, since they cannot NATURALLY reproduce, they cannot be married in the traditional sense. Marriage is for a man and a woman. Anything else is a perversion of the meaning and intent of the word. Also, allowing married homos means that public schools would have to teach that homo marriage is acceptable. Which just happens to be the real agenda here. Homos want their chosen lifestyle to be accepted by the general public. Sorry, but your emotional health is not MY problem, nor society’s problem. Live together all you like. Legally you have civil unions. Finally, homo couples should NOT be allowed to adopt children. Ever. There are plenty of heterosexual couples far more deserving. Get over the marriage thing and move on.

FrenchKiss on February 9, 2010 at 4:08 pm

My practical side is against gay marriage. But my cynical side says, sure – why shouldn’t gays be as miserable as the rest of us.

Richard on February 9, 2010 at 4:15 pm

if gay marriage should be legal then a man should also be able to marry more than one wife.

ari-free on February 9, 2010 at 4:16 pm

    Don’t think that that isn’nt coming.

    Eben on December 6, 2013 at 4:12 pm

Chosen lifestyle? So how long have you chosen to be straight?

Nak on February 9, 2010 at 4:19 pm

And do we really want them handling food in the restaurants that we eat in?

Little Al on February 9, 2010 at 4:20 pm

Chosen lifestyle? So how long have you chosen to be straight?

LOL!!!! Homosexuality is a choice. For example, male or female prisoners often engage in homo activities even though they were heterosexual before entering prison. Ergo, choice. Duh. The human mind is capable of overriding millions of years of evolutionary wiring.

FrenchKiss on February 9, 2010 at 4:26 pm

People choose if and who they want to have sex with. It’s not as if you can say, “oh…my hand is trying to pull down my pants…I can’t stop it!!”

ari-free on February 9, 2010 at 4:30 pm

In some respects, a few of the comments here show the worst aspect of gay indoctrination; these comments support the notion that individuals have no responsibility for their behavior, just like “the alcohol made me do it”, or “well, they were born that way”. The subtle attack on individual responsibility for their actions is in some ways the worst aspect of the gay rights (sic) movement.

Little Al on February 9, 2010 at 4:45 pm

When will we see people marrying animals? Now animals have “rights” being created where there were none. Sounds unnatural and wierd, but, well, think back….

Bill on February 9, 2010 at 11:25 pm

I predict that within a year of ending her show, HOprah will get married, probably to her friend Gayle.

David on February 10, 2010 at 12:21 am

Chlamydia and Syphilis is consistent as well, you know….

As for the rest, they are like your neighbors’ dogs, they only bark to hear their own heads rattle. I do believe I would listen to someone who said something important or God forfend, DO something important……

CaptainSlappy on February 10, 2010 at 9:37 am

It’s not just the various diseases associated with such a “lifestyle”; the way these people live also has an effect on their thought processes, so that everything becomes twisted, distorted and upside-down. Or to put it another way, the way one lives directly affects the way one thinks, and vice versa.

ConcernedPatriot on February 10, 2010 at 11:23 am

Oh good grief. I thought the level of discussion was low on the “gays in the military” entry. The top prize for idiocy here (and it is hotly contested), goes to FrenchKiss:

“Two “married” homos are not in the interest of the State.”

Wow! Very persuasive, if one is a fascist.

It’s really not surprising that the Progressives are so effective in this country–look at how feeble and intellectually incoherent their opponents are.

skzion on February 10, 2010 at 12:49 pm

How about the government get out of the marraige business altogether and just hand out civil unions (contracts) to all binding couple legally as partners much like in business. Then if people want to get married they can go to their local rabbi, priest, minister or athiest(fill in the title). Who acknowledges that marraige becomes unimportant. I don’t acknowledge my government marraige anyway, just my religious one.

Lloyd on June 28, 2010 at 4:58 pm

Hey, if two hairy guys want to savage each other’s rectums every night, it’s only fitting that they do so under the sacred bonds of matrimony. Why would anyone be against that?!

octoman2010 on August 17, 2010 at 1:39 pm

This whole idea of not allowing two men or two women to get married being discrimination is the most intellectually dishonest thing I’ve heard since listening to the Public unions protest Ohio’s Senate Bill 5. Discrimination is when we allow certain groups or classes to do or have something while others are not permitted to do the same thing. Somehow the liberal media has bought into the Left’s equating gay marrriage and traditional marriage as one of discrimination.

The facts are, that the way marriage has been defined, it allows any willing man to marry any willing woman. The man could be gay and the state would not stop his marriage to a woman. So, if the state treats a gay and a heterosexual man equally and allows either to marry a straight or lesbian woman, where is the discrimination?

Instead, they are forcing the bastardization of marriage by allowing 2 men or two women to marry in what now would make marriage discriminatory. By allowing certain combinations, the bigomists and other fetish oriented people have a cliam to being discriminated against.

MedinaDad on March 3, 2011 at 1:36 pm

Excellent, the theme of this bunch of comments is, its not discrimination if its against someone else. So the issue seems to be, you shouldn’t change something because that’s the way its always been done.
I’m wondering if everyone commenting against gay marriage follows the bible to the letter.

WHB on June 3, 2011 at 9:41 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field