Ohio Gays Oppose Free Speech
Well, at least that's what the gay Ohio group Equality Ohio says:
We call on Blackwell to retract his statement and apologize for his remarks
In other words, if you speak your opinion, you should shut up -- unless, of course, you agree with them.. So, what horrible thing did Ken Blackwell, candidate for Ohio governor in 2006 say?
I think homosexuality is a lifestyle, it's a choice, and that lifestyle can be changed. I think it's a transgression against God's law, God's will. The reality is again ... that we make choices all the time. And, I think you make good choices and bad choices in terms of lifestyle. Our expectation is that one's genetic makeup might make one more inclined to be an arsonist, or may make one more inclined to be a kleptomaniac. Do I think that can be changed? Yes.
So, according to the gays, he should be shut up. That's right, if you have an opinion that disagrees with the gay lobby, you are "divisive and offensive" and you should apologize, then shut up. Sorry, faggots, in this country, at least so far, we've got freedom of speech. If I Ken Blackwell or I want to tell you that what you're doing is against God's law, we have a right to do that and zero obligation to "shut up." In fact, in a free country, you telling me to "shut up" is much more offensive and dangerous than me telling you that you've made a bad choice.
Comments
1
Wow, so you have the freedom of speech to tell them they're faggots living against God's law, but they don't have the freedom of speech to ask you to take it back and say you're sorry...
Ah, now I understand the confusion; you must have gotten the Soviet version of the First Amendment. You should really update that to the American version, it's a bit more relevant. Gays have every right to tell bigots (or circus clowns for that matter) that they should apologize and take back their remarks.
And I have every right to tell you that you're a moron (which I am doing right now). And you have every right to tell me I'm an idiot fag-lover (which I expect in the near future). And, since it's your blog, you have every right to ban me. And I have every right to call you a moron on someone else's forum.
Ain't freedom grand?
Ah, now I understand the confusion; you must have gotten the Soviet version of the First Amendment. You should really update that to the American version, it's a bit more relevant. Gays have every right to tell bigots (or circus clowns for that matter) that they should apologize and take back their remarks.
And I have every right to tell you that you're a moron (which I am doing right now). And you have every right to tell me I'm an idiot fag-lover (which I expect in the near future). And, since it's your blog, you have every right to ban me. And I have every right to call you a moron on someone else's forum.
Ain't freedom grand?
Posted by: anonymous at July 27, 2006 02:11 PM (VPFKi)
2
And I agree with everything you've said -- except the part about what the people in Ohio are doing. They instead are claiming that the person does not have the right to speak that way because he's an elected official. That's wrong, plain and simple.
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2006 02:56 PM (/k+l4)
3
First, to our "brave" anonymous commenter, the gays in Ohio were not ASKING they ARE DEMANDING that he RETRACT his statement. What that means is that he would go on record officially saying his statement was wrong, thus going against his beliefs. The gay lobby does this ALL THE TIME, as does the atheist lobby. They sue because someone said being gay is a sin, and is NOT biological. They don't "ask you to take it back", they SUE YOU and DEMAND a full retraction.
Second, long time Ogre, how's tricks?
Second, long time Ogre, how's tricks?
Posted by: Smokey at July 28, 2006 01:30 AM (DiOns)
4
Indeed, Smokey, that's the distinction I'm trying to make.
Not bad, Smokey. I'm looking for some quizzes for ya... hope things are going well with you.
Not bad, Smokey. I'm looking for some quizzes for ya... hope things are going well with you.
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2006 01:33 AM (o2crh)
5
Ogre,
The kooks, crackpots, and nutcases over at BlueNC dedicated a thread about you:
http://www.bluenc.com/node/3135
The kooks, crackpots, and nutcases over at BlueNC dedicated a thread about you:
http://www.bluenc.com/node/3135
Posted by: The Reckoning at July 28, 2006 12:51 PM (M5zWC)
6
Thanks for the note.
How did I know this post would bring out the kooks who completely missed the entire point of the post?
How did I know this post would bring out the kooks who completely missed the entire point of the post?
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2006 01:23 PM (/k+l4)
7
And I love when they call me a theocrat -- having never, ever, taken a position that government should enforce religious edicts on anyone, anywhere...except for supporting that whole "Thou Shalt Not Kill" thing.
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2006 01:28 PM (/k+l4)
8
Wow, I went back and read that entire linked news article, and not once did I see where the gays were saying Blackwell had no Constitutional or legal right to say what he did, nor where they threatened to sue. In fact, I haven't seen any such case where a person was sued by the "gay lobby" for saying homosexuality is a sin. Could you please reference a reliable source, Smokey?
Now, I did read that Equality Ohio said that this kind of speech was unacceptable from a public official. I agree with them--it would be equally unacceptable if he said straight people were all child molesters, or that epileptics are just trying to get attention. Sure, he has a legal right to say it, but it's not acceptable for him to say, no matter how much he believes it. A person who said such things shouldn't be elected to any post (which is, of course, the entire motive of Equality Ohio--to ensure that someone who says and believes such things doesn't get elected).
And Smokey, if it offends you that I post under the name "anonymous" instead of under a clever but equally anonymous handle (like, oh say, Smokey), then you can just suck it up and deal.
Now, I did read that Equality Ohio said that this kind of speech was unacceptable from a public official. I agree with them--it would be equally unacceptable if he said straight people were all child molesters, or that epileptics are just trying to get attention. Sure, he has a legal right to say it, but it's not acceptable for him to say, no matter how much he believes it. A person who said such things shouldn't be elected to any post (which is, of course, the entire motive of Equality Ohio--to ensure that someone who says and believes such things doesn't get elected).
And Smokey, if it offends you that I post under the name "anonymous" instead of under a clever but equally anonymous handle (like, oh say, Smokey), then you can just suck it up and deal.
Posted by: anonymous at July 28, 2006 01:55 PM (VPFKi)
9
By "demanding" an apology, they are claiming that they have a right to an apology. If they have a right to an apology, then the only logical conclusion is that no one else has a right to say anything about them.
It's one thing to condemn what a person says, it's something completely different to claim that they should not be able to say it.
It's one thing to condemn what a person says, it's something completely different to claim that they should not be able to say it.
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2006 01:59 PM (/k+l4)
10
The point of your post is that you are a hate-filled bigot. The rest is just filler.
Posted by: Robert P at July 28, 2006 10:27 PM (ahl/o)
11
You didn't do well in reading comprehension in school, did you?
Posted by: Ogre at July 30, 2006 09:01 PM (o2crh)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.011 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0085 seconds, 19 records returned.
Page size 10 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.