Login to Change.org
Create an Account
Scott Wooledge
Brooklyn, NY
Recent Activity
-
Scott signed the petition | -
Scott commented on the article |"After all, let's call "gay panic" what it really is -- an act by someone so self-loathing or insecure that they annihilate a person because they can't come to terms with their own issues."
No, too complicated. Call it what it is: MURDER.
We'll see the end of it, when a woman who stabs a man to death for making an unwanted pass at her uses it.
Why not? Precedent has been set! Unwanted sexual advances are grounds for justifiable homicide!
-
Scott commented on the article |You can still see the video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7vfqvgGap0
and I downloaded it to my hard drive if any needs a copy.
-
Scott commented on the article |So are you saying gay people don't have the right to tell Tim Horton's they will stop buying TH's products if TH wants to make in-kind donations to groups that are fighting our rights?
As far as your hypothetical goes, we're pretty used to companies turning down our requests for sponsorship. I don't begrudge any business the right to decline sponsoring a politcal activity. Most consumer goods and services have policies against it. As TM actually does (they violated their own sponsorship policy by signing on to this event, which is why they pulled out).
-
Scott commented on the article |
I've noticed Manuel, your replies in this thread have consistently focused on picayune details, ignoring your points have been obliterated.
Canada has experience no examples of clery being compelled to support gay marriage. It's a red herring you and the National Organization of Marriage are happy to repeat.
It's akin to fearing the Catholic Church is vulnerable to being persecuted for not performing Jewish ceremonies.
It hasn't happen and ain't gonna happen.
-
Scott commented on the article |
I find it interesting, and I'm sorry to say, hypocritical (I know you'll consider that an insult, but it's how I see it) that upthread you said: "I just think that the case of calling a gay union a marriage is just demanding for the sake of demanding."
But when challenged on why the secular laws of the United States should not be changed, you can only state because these laws should respect YOUR personal and religious beliefs, regardless of how those laws affect others who do not share your personal and religious beliefs.
"Separate but equal" never is. We can point to that as an empirical fact, in our own country and many others. -
Scott commented on the article |
You said some pretty offensive things, you shouldn't be surprise people if you get push back. Most offensive to was the point you never explained how legalizing gay marriage would somehow disrespect heterosexual marriage:
You wrote:
"Remember that for us, who see gay unions as something beautiful, also want respect for our own unions."
I don't know how or why you have the idea gay people don't respect your unions.
-
Scott commented on the article |
""Religious groups like Catholic Charities or the Salvation Army may lose their tax exemptions, or be denied the use of parks and other public facilities, unless they endorse gay marriage."
LIE - I actually agree with them
And as my own senator once famously said:
"You have the right to your own opinion. You do not have the right to your own facts" -Daniel Patrick Moynihan ...
You may agree with it, But that statement is factually untrue, absolutely, demonstrably a lie. And I support your right to agree with it, absolutely. You can also agree with people who think the world is flat and the tooth fairy will give you a dollar for every tooth you put under your pillow. That is absolutely your right to express that opinion.
-
Scott commented on the article |
"Religious groups like Catholic Charities or the Salvation Army may lose their tax exemptions, or be denied the use of parks and other public facilities, unless they endorse gay marriage." LIE - I actually agree with them, you can see how I am treated just because I do not endorse gay marriage
Then you agree with their lie. Because it is a flat out lie. No, Churches would not be forced to endorse gay marriage or lose their tax exempt priveledges, or be forced out of public parks.
Has that transpired in Canada since gay marriage became legal?
And spare me your "see how I'm treated?" martyr complex. You've been engaged in debates, and your opinions have been challenged, and your facts corrected. How you have be treated badly? Oh my god, someone suggested you were discriminating?! That's about the harshest treatment I've seen you endure.
And you can stop with the I have gay friends lines. No one cares.
-
Scott commented on the article |
K, Manuel, Maggie Gallagher and her group, NOM cannot debate this issue without spreading lies. Go directly to her own site and you'll see she is a liar:
http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/c.omL2KeN0LzH/b.4475595/k.566A/Marriage_Talking_Points.htm
"“Religious groups like Catholic Charities or the Salvation Army may lose their tax exemptions, or be denied the use of parks and other public facilities, unless they endorse gay marriage."
LIE
“Public schools will teach young children that two men being intimate are just the same as a husband and wife, even when it comes to raising kids.”
LIE
“If courts rule that same-sex marriage is a civil right, then, people like you and me who believe children need moms and dads will be treated like bigots and racists.”
JUST ABSURD
“High rates of divorce are one more reason we should be strengthening marriage, not conducting radical social experiments on it.”
JUST ABSURD.
And for the record, I fully support NOM's right to have an event, and to tell these egregious and absurd lies. I really do, I really wish them well.
At the same time, if Blount Foods and Timothy Horton want to donate food that NOM will turn around and sell for $10, I am making it clear to them, I won't be buying anything from them. I see no compelling reason I should add to the profit margin of a company that supports liars who are fighting my right to equality. I am under no obligation to patronize those places, it is my own freedom to choose not to, and freedom to tell them why not.
And I did just that, and so did many others. Apparently, the message got heard, because they decided not to support the event.
All perfectly reasonable, civil and democratic, and with in the realm of perfect tolerance.
And--how about this--without lying?
Impact
4 Actions
0 Recruits
Top Causes
|
3 Actions
|
Organizations
-
Human Rights Campaign1 Action 0 Recruits
