DADT
Was trying to post a comment to, of all things, a National Review column on DADT repeal in which the author claims, "it’s quite possible to be pro-gay rights generally and still to support marriage as the union of husband and wife."
So I wrote:
According to whose definition of "pro-gay rights"? I think pretty much the only gay people who don't include marriage in their list of top gay rights are the really radical kweer activists (your language filter won't allow me to post the actual word they identify with) who would generally prefer abolishing the secular aspect of marriage for everyone.
So, which side do you want to side with? Because I think the only other people you'll find who agree with you that marriage rights are not an integral part of gay rights are straight people.
Funny to complain about service members opinion's not being given enough weight in terms of making military policy but feel quite comfortable dismissing the opinions of a minority class regarding how to remedy unfair harms against them.
I didn't see my comment post immediately, and I was invited to review the Comments Policy of the website. I'm like, 4REALZ?
Commenters who over time prove trustworthy and considerate may be invited to post directly to the website. This is an initiation-only process. If a commenter is approved by NRO, a star (
) will appear alongside his or her comments.
Wow. It gets worse from there. Can you imagine spending much time on a forum where the conversation is constrained to those folks who only say things the site owners like?
I think part of this is just because their right wing crazies audience would get too out of hand if given an open mic. But it really was funny not to be able to use the word "queer" because they have to filter it it out or else their user base will use it to do nothing but queer bash.
So I wrote:
According to whose definition of "pro-gay rights"? I think pretty much the only gay people who don't include marriage in their list of top gay rights are the really radical kweer activists (your language filter won't allow me to post the actual word they identify with) who would generally prefer abolishing the secular aspect of marriage for everyone.
So, which side do you want to side with? Because I think the only other people you'll find who agree with you that marriage rights are not an integral part of gay rights are straight people.
Funny to complain about service members opinion's not being given enough weight in terms of making military policy but feel quite comfortable dismissing the opinions of a minority class regarding how to remedy unfair harms against them.
I didn't see my comment post immediately, and I was invited to review the Comments Policy of the website. I'm like, 4REALZ?
Commenters who over time prove trustworthy and considerate may be invited to post directly to the website. This is an initiation-only process. If a commenter is approved by NRO, a star (
) will appear alongside his or her comments.
Wow. It gets worse from there. Can you imagine spending much time on a forum where the conversation is constrained to those folks who only say things the site owners like?
I think part of this is just because their right wing crazies audience would get too out of hand if given an open mic. But it really was funny not to be able to use the word "queer" because they have to filter it it out or else their user base will use it to do nothing but queer bash.