tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post5220749644636459963..comments2024-03-19T02:31:02.140-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: Gay marriage: 0 for 32 at the pollsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger122125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-53768366339455124662012-09-13T12:57:25.977-07:002012-09-13T12:57:25.977-07:00That one's position on gay marriage is a proxy...That one's position on gay marriage is a proxy for "moral authority" is true for liberals, but it's also true that liberals sincerely believe withholding legal rights from same-sex couples is morally repugnant. That is, gay marriage is not merely symbolic, as is, say, voting for a black president.Mr Lomezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07043467547490085497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90009974207815821802012-09-07T18:29:00.620-07:002012-09-07T18:29:00.620-07:00I know I'm a fanboy, but who can resist sharin...I know I'm a fanboy, but who can resist sharing such an insight.<br /><br />"The propaganda of perversion is forever reminding us that homosexual acts occur even in the animal kingdom. It neglects to mention, however, that these are very rare, and even then they are performed for simple relief or to assert dominance. Monogamy also occurs among many higher species of animals, but they never mate permanently with their own sex. Nature is trying to tell us something."<br />- Joe SobranAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-73103145661476777572012-09-04T12:50:09.536-07:002012-09-04T12:50:09.536-07:00@jody 3:28PM
http://scans-daily.dreamwidth.org/ ...@jody 3:28PM<br /><br /> http://scans-daily.dreamwidth.org/ would like to have a word with you. <br /><br /> http://forums.comicbookresources.com/forumdisplay.php?15-X-Books would like to talk to you as well.<br /><br />At $3-4 a copy, comic books are too expensive for the average young reader. In order to keep up with whatever narrative is being spun by DC or Marvel, the average reader would have to buy between 12-20 books a week ($36-80 a week, averaging about $54 for any non-fanatic collector.)<br />For that amount of money, a child could buy a used video game and his or her fill of snack food on a weekly basis. Children don't buy comics (at a rate that would keep the business profitable), adults do. So, the comics industry pumps out what the buyers want: hyper-violence and anatomically impossible women for the guys, liberal amounts of subversive sex for the girls. And creators who don't toe the line (Dave Sim, John Byrne, etc.), are thrust aside for people who will. <br />maMu1977http://www.youtube.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-88806549503540081422012-09-02T16:46:54.984-07:002012-09-02T16:46:54.984-07:00Gays (and their assorted allies) have been very cl...<i>Gays (and their assorted allies) have been very clever in the way they have been able to FRAME the 'Gay marriage question'.</i><br /><br />Nah. They and their allies have been very clever in taking over the media. After that, clever counts for jack shit.Svigorhttp://svigor.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-10221368442124119702012-09-01T12:05:27.221-07:002012-09-01T12:05:27.221-07:00But we knew this was going to happen. The gay act...But we <i>knew</i> this was going to happen. The gay activists <i>told</i> us when they were talking about the civil union law that it wouldn't be enough to satisfy them. All that <i>really</i> matters to them is the symbolism of the thing. They just want to be told that they're normal and just like everyone else.<br /><br />Well, they're not. And even if they were, you don't have any kind of right, under any code of ethics I'm aware of, to have your behavior approved of by everyone around you.<br /><br />So part of the reason people are against gay marriage is just that they can see how utterly childish and stupid the reasoning for it is. When you have something that is legally identical to a marriage, but just isn't <i>called</i> "marriage", and that STILL doesn't satisfy you, you are just being a child.<br /><br />It's like, if there was a guy in a wheelchair, and he wanted to call his wheelchair his "legs", then I suppose that's his right, and I probably wouldn't try to stop him. But I don't see what right he has to get pissed off at the rest of us for not playing along. <br /><br />This doesn't mean I hate his wheelchair, or live in some kind of superstitious fear of it. It could be a perfectly nice wheelchair for all I know. It's just not his legs, so I'm not going to call it that.<br /><br />Now, if our wheelchair guy was a reasonable, intelligent adult, he would understand this and quit pestering me about what I called his wheelchair and move on with his life.<br /><br />But if he was anything like a gay activist, he would scream and throw hissy fits and call me a bigot and <i>demand</i> that I call it his "legs".<br /><br />And honestly? The more he did that, the less likely I would be to want to humor him. Simply because I don't think that giving in to childish temper tantrums is such a good idea.<br /><br />But anyway. There are all kinds of good reasons to turn your back on this country, but if you're willing to ditch it over something completely symbolic, that doesn't even REALLY matter to the people who are affected by it, then I don't mind telling you that we'll be better off without you. So leave.Franknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-33566661928140986992012-09-01T12:04:01.054-07:002012-09-01T12:04:01.054-07:00The principle of equality of rights and the sancti...<i>The principle of equality of rights and the sanctity of individual rights is the cornerstone of Western Civilization, and the hallmark of a civilized society.</i><br /><br />Really? You think "Western Civilization" began in America in 1776, or maybe with the Magna Carta? That's funny enough, but to then go on to claim that that's when civilization itself began...<br /><br /><i>I am at the 99% earning bracket in America. So are many of my friends. We create jobs and wealth. If you get the kind of society you want, I am packing and leaving. And so will many of my friends.</i><br /><br />What do you mean, the kind of society we want? You seem to be referring to a society in which gay marriage is not legally recognized. I hate to burst your bubble, kid, but that's exactly the kind of society you've been living in your entire life. <br /><br />And yet, here you still are. Strange.<br /><br />But you know, if it means that much to you, then by all means, leave. Maybe you could meet up with all those people who threatened to move to Canada if George Bush got re-elected in 2004. Start your own little expatriate community.<br /><br />This whole debate is ridiculous, largely because of people like you who want to pretend that gays are somehow really being denied their rights. But there's absolutely no law in this country that says gay people can't buy a house, move in together, have a monogamous relationship, and act in every way as though they're married. You could even rent out a banquet hall and a couple of tuxes and have your own little marriage ceremony. <br /><br />In fact, I know a few lesbian couples who have done exactly this, and the last I heard, the jackbooted thugs of the GOP hadn't kicked their doors down and ordered them to desist.<br /><br />One of my gay co-workers has moved in with his little buddy, set up house, and even adopted a black kid, just like Sandra Bullock. Kid just entered middle school, and from all I've heard, seems pretty messed up. Having a bunch of your dads' random "friends" over to spend the night will probably do that do you. And now that the kid's old enough to know what they're doing together, well, you can't help but feel sorry for him.<br /><br />But who cares about that? All that matters is that things are equal.<br /><br />But do you know the funniest part about all this? We live in Illinois, which recognizes same-sex civil unions. These are <i>exactly</i> the same thing, from a legal standpoint, as a marriage, and yet, <i>they haven't gotten one!</i> In fact, none of the gay couples I know of has.<br /><br />So you can't tell me that this has anything to do with having the same legal rights as anyone else, because once those are offered, most of them don't even take us up on the offer.Franknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-51268096373551916882012-09-01T09:15:05.510-07:002012-09-01T09:15:05.510-07:00I really don't think gays are behind gay marri...I really don't think gays are behind gay marriage. I mean women weren't the instigators of the "women's movement" and slaves didn't start the civil war. People without power cannot demand change. Period.<br /><br />Those who run the media are the only ones with the power to push the gay agenda. If the media ignore it, it literally doesn't exist in public consciousness. Consider the obviously false equality crap. Everywhere at all times and in all places people have rejected the idea that people are fundamentally equal. No society, not even this one is actually organized that way. Liberals don't live as though they believe either. So we all know this stuff is bull.<br /><br />Those who run the media can perpetuate the Big Lie, they just can't make it true.<br /><br />Gays don't particularly want to marry and given the opportunity do not marry at any where near the rate that normal people do. Yet they divorce at a higher rate and have higher rates of infidelity. The fact that there is so little interest pretty well shows they don't really care about it. Those who control the media care because they are population control enthusiasts and their policies are extremely effective at lowering the birthrate. <br /><br />If they were really smart they would export this crap to the 3rd world where folks live in squalor and are starving.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-43199376178472111822012-09-01T08:44:37.375-07:002012-09-01T08:44:37.375-07:00" Of course none of this is accurate and nobo..." Of course none of this is accurate and nobody ever imagined in 1964 that gay marriage had anything to do with civil rights. Just shows how a good marketing strategy can make all the difference in the world."<br /><br />They didn't even think it applied to busing from what I have read.<br /><br />Just like no one thought the Equal Protection Clause had anything to do with integration. Judges decided years later.<br /><br /><br />"Too bad libertarians are unaware that their own god, totalitarianism, has failed even worse."<br /><br />The West is so free now right? People are jailed in England for tweeting something the powers that be don't like.<br /><br /><br />Govt is force and whites are now being forced to give up their societies.<br /><br />In a libertarian society people are free to live and make their own rules locally. You can move to a town that suits you.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71045940662877353712012-08-31T21:00:12.003-07:002012-08-31T21:00:12.003-07:00Gays (and their assorted allies) have been very cl...Gays (and their assorted allies) have been very clever in the way they have been able to FRAME the 'Gay marriage question'. They have been able to PRESENT it as a civil "rights" issue, to be supported by "moral" people and opposed by "bigoted" ones. Of course none of this is accurate and nobody ever imagined in 1964 that gay marriage had anything to do with civil rights. Just shows how a good marketing strategy can make all the difference in the world.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-46310157728421980272012-08-31T20:24:50.969-07:002012-08-31T20:24:50.969-07:00Should have been:
"Democracy is two wolves an...Should have been:<br />"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch" Benjamin Franklin<br /><br />I'll chaulk the omission up to an unconscious anxiety about my place in the metaphor.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-64161763332491363962012-08-31T19:17:52.414-07:002012-08-31T19:17:52.414-07:00"Race is important. Homosexuality not."
..."Race is important. Homosexuality not."<br /><br />Gays will never band together to take the food out of your mouth or the roof from over your head- they'd like to but they don't have the numbers - NAMs soon will.<br /><br />"Democracy is two wolves voting on what to have for lunch" Benjamin Franklin<br /><br />A black wolf and a brown wolf.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-27314449799003730502012-08-31T18:40:36.071-07:002012-08-31T18:40:36.071-07:00"What if the majority decided to reinstate se..."What if the majority decided to reinstate segregation? What if the majority decided that atheists must be burned at the stake? What is majorities decides that women should be forced into marriage and barred from all private and public jobs because of their gender? Are blacks not human? Are atheists not human? Are women not human?"<br /><br />What if a minority demands that white men have to score higher than everyone else to get a civil service job? What if a minority demands that white men have to score higher to get into elite colleges? What if a minority determines that men will never get custody of their kids in a divorce, except in the rarest of cases? What if a minority demands special menus in public schools for some religions but bans Christmas carols? What if a minority demands that all men be smart enough to know that women are a numerical majority with voting rights?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-84346038029577192552012-08-31T18:32:21.583-07:002012-08-31T18:32:21.583-07:00Liar.
Nah, I believe him. I'd even bet he'...<i>Liar.</i><br /><br />Nah, I believe him. I'd even bet he's already got plans to move to Detroit and start acreatin' wealth there and the blacks he couldn't possibly bear to be parted from.<br /><br /><br /><br />Silvernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-8013220460347061382012-08-31T18:26:51.088-07:002012-08-31T18:26:51.088-07:00What if the majority decided to reinstate segregat...<i>What if the majority decided to reinstate segregation? What if the majority decided that atheists must be burned at the stake? What is majorities decides that women should be forced into marriage and barred from all private and public jobs because of their gender? Are blacks not human?</i> <br /><br /><br />Slavery was ended by the majority, you historically illiterate jackass.<br /><br />Your desire for some power for "Good" which exists outside the people and serves to control them is what makes you a totalitarian.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-77960069270834727922012-08-31T18:23:19.825-07:002012-08-31T18:23:19.825-07:00For the last time, freedom of association applies ...<i><br /><br /> For the last time, freedom of association applies only to private life and not to PUBLIC life. You CANNOT have segregated STATE schools. The government represents the law, and the law states that everyone is equal before the law. Hence, segregation in public schools is illegal as well as the right to own slaves. Freedom of association applies to the PRIvATE but not PUBLIC spheres.<br /><br /> I agree that white people should have the right to create their own private schools and even towns and segregate themselves from blacks if they want to. I find that despicable, but I do think you have the right to PRIvATELY segregate yourself from other races if you want to.</i><br /><br />I think people should have the right to do what there is good reason to believe will work best. In other words, empiricism over bs feel good theorizing that either fails in the real world or is else self-evidently suboptimal. Sure, people like you might burst a few veins over it, but I'm pretty sure it'd be a winner with the masses, particularly when you consider the astonishingly minimal harm any of it would do (not that you'd know that by what it's opponents claim). Anyway, surely at some point racial reality has to intrude in public life...doesn't it?Silvernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-53269544267412452922012-08-31T18:21:40.224-07:002012-08-31T18:21:40.224-07:00The point is that POPULAR vOTE CANNOT BE USED TO G...<i>The point is that POPULAR vOTE CANNOT BE USED TO GRANT OR REMOvE INDIvIDUAL RIGHTS.</i> <br /><br /><br /><br />ThE US ConstTtutIon sAys oThErWise.<br /><br />The majority can, if they wish, execute all left-handed people. Individual rights come from the majority, not from judges.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-31363593799105604022012-08-31T18:16:30.123-07:002012-08-31T18:16:30.123-07:00This is according to the book Democracy: The God t...<i>This is according to the book Democracy: The God that Failed. It is written by a libertarian.</i> <br /><br /><br />It sounds very libertarian all right.<br /><br />Too bad libertarians are unaware that their own god, totalitarianism, has failed even worse. A lot of countries have tried letting a small unelected elite makes the rules for everyone - which is the libertarian wet-dream, after all. It tends not to work out well.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-38951093615655780582012-08-31T17:28:58.395-07:002012-08-31T17:28:58.395-07:00"What if the majority decided to reinstate se..."What if the majority decided to reinstate segregation? What if the majority decided that atheists must be burned at the stake? What is majorities decides that women should be forced into marriage and barred from all private and public jobs because of their gender? Are blacks not human? Are atheists not human? Are women not human?"<br /><br />In a Democracy they can do that.The people who founded the country thought slavery was ok. They thought that they could not allow certain people to marry. There were many other laws that forbade many private acts. They just thought the federal govt shouldn't make those laws.<br /><br />I generally don't like telling others what to do, but the govt is now telling people who they have to be around. On top of that they take money from people and give it to people who have many children out of wedlock. They then give these same people money and let them live for next to nothing in my building.<br /><br />Why should white parents be forced to have their daughters exposed to oversexed, black, male teenagers, especially when they have to subsidize it through section 8's and welfare payments?<br /><br /><br /><br />"so, the black people will have to have all their civil rigts upheld by the police. No municipal of state government can assign greater rights to specific groups of individuals."<br /><br />We can reverse the Civil Rights Act and repeal the Equal Protection Clause.<br /><br />The public sphere will be reduced to almost nothing.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-75860732242974189122012-08-31T17:28:16.927-07:002012-08-31T17:28:16.927-07:00"So it doesen't matter whether people agr..."So it doesen't matter whether people agree or diagree with gay marriage. Even if 99% of people were against it, it should still be legalized because not doing so violates the principle of equality before the law and because the state and people do NOT have a right to legislate when it comes to individual rights."<br /><br />So Western Civilization is solely a proposition, exclusive of culture and tradition. You should be very comfortable in the current atmosphere, no need to move, the zeitgeist has been at your back for quite some time. As a matter of fact as a one percent-er, you are the zeitgeist. Using wealth, or the withholding of it, to strong-arm people into abandoning their principles - is that another "Hallmark" of West Civilization?<br />You have no loyalty to your home. Please leave. There is no shortage of arrogant elitists, you will not be missed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-16100210141833832312012-08-31T17:02:17.164-07:002012-08-31T17:02:17.164-07:00Even if 99% of people were against it, it should s...<i>Even if 99% of people were against it, it should still be legalized because not doing so violates the principle of equality before the law and because the state and people do NOT have a right to legislate when it comes to individual rights. </i><br /><br />That's a bunch of baloney. I have a right to keep the money I earn...and the State legislates various restrictions to that right. <br /><br />Marriage is a human right. Marriage is a heterosexual arrangement. The State affirms that through legislation.<br /><br />A homosexual man can legally marry a woman. That is equality under the law.JRLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-47562992832685727442012-08-31T16:49:33.066-07:002012-08-31T16:49:33.066-07:00"Let me give you an example to illustrate the..."Let me give you an example to illustrate the limits of freedom of associaion: You can have an all-white town that become white because white people there decide that in their PRIvATE property ony enters white people. But the PUBLIC parts of the town, such as the streets, cannot be barred to black people because that violates the principle of equality before the law"<br /><br />They had whole towns that banned people in the 1800's. They also had signs that said who could be allowed in the town and who couldn't. This is according to the book Democracy: The God that Failed. It is written by a libertarian. He would limit the public sphere to as small an area as possible.<br /><br />It's an interesting book. You might want to check it out.<br /><br /> Nobody thought that banning people was illegal when it happened. Of course,they thought slavery was ok too. We are more enlightened now about slavery. But not owning someone is completely different than not hiring them for any reason.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-78671475485893090412012-08-31T16:21:54.583-07:002012-08-31T16:21:54.583-07:00Anonymous 7:19 PM
"People have a right to ... Anonymous 7:19 PM<br /><br /> "People have a right to free association. <br /><br />Have you ever been to Chicago and see how segregated it still is?<br /><br />Do you think white people want to move to a black neighborhood?<br /><br />Most whites who live near many black people only do so because they can't afford to live elsewhere."<br /><br /> For the last time, freedom of association applies only to private life and not to PUBLIC life. You CANNOT have segregated STATE schools. The government represents the law, and the law states that everyone is equal before the law. Hence, segregation in public schools is illegal as well as the right to own slaves. Freedom of association applies to the PRIvATE but not PUBLIC spheres.<br /><br /> I agree that white people should have the right to create their own private schools and even towns and segregate themselves from blacks if they want to. I find that despicable, but I do think you have the right to PRIvATELY segregate yourself from other races if you want to.<br /><br /> Let me give you an example to illustrate the limits of freedom of associaion: You can have an all-white town that become white because white people there decide that in their PRIvATE property ony enters white people. But the PUBLIC parts of the town, such as the streets, cannot be barred to black people because that violates the principle of equality before the law. Also, the black people will have to have all their civil rigts upheld by the police. No municipal of state government can assign greater rights to specific groups of individuals.<br /><br /> I hope I have clarified to you why the argument of freedom of association cannot be used to segregate public schools, public transporation and public hospitals.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-6093370937969172572012-08-31T16:09:46.980-07:002012-08-31T16:09:46.980-07:00"There are cities in Mississippi and Alabama ..."There are cities in Mississippi and Alabama where, if it were for popular vote, segregation between whites and blacks would be reinstated. So I ask you: would you be in favor of that?" - Theres a reason it was made illegal. The entire country would basically flip back to the freedom of association model if it were allowed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-52461820589407345462012-08-31T16:04:17.236-07:002012-08-31T16:04:17.236-07:00A society ruled by a religious/social conservative...<i>A society ruled by a religious/social conservative majority and with no respect for individual rights is the kind of society I want to live on.</i><br /><br />Spare us your selective concern for individual rights, you gun-grabbing, institution-marching, conservative-firing, Christian-blackballing, free association-hating, big-gov't liberal.Svigorhttp://svigor.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71397401737679241252012-08-31T16:03:08.366-07:002012-08-31T16:03:08.366-07:00There are cities in Mississippi and Alabama where,...<i>There are cities in Mississippi and Alabama where, if it were for popular vote, segregation between whites and blacks would be reinstated. So I ask you: would you be in favor of that?</i><br /><br />I can't answer for Steve - he's a public figure and a family man, he has to be guarded. Eric Holder has his name on file. Holder's allies the New Black Panthers have made death threats against George Zimmerman - a much less controversial figure. If I were were is Steve's situation I would be very guarded in what I wrote. Candor can get you killed.<br /><br />But my situation is different so I can afford to be candid.<br /><br />I favor segregation. I'm going to cease to be a Republican and become and Independent if I can't register as a reactionary. The evidence is in. We should consider rolling back the sixties. Sowell and other black scholars argue that black progress was set back by the social changes that came about in the sixties (roughly 1965 to 1975). <br /><br />Soon someone else will notice that all this concern with school failure only began with school desegregation. We don't have to wait for Superman. We just separate the races in the classroom. Presto! No more school crisis.<br /><br />Steve's essay on schools, test scores and race opened my eyes. We spend the most on schools and we have gotten our money's worth. Our East Asians students do better than the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans do in their own schools. Our European heritage students do better in our schools than the kids in the old country do. And our Africans do better than stay at home Africans in the Dark Continent. This wonderful result is obscured by the fact that we have school integration. Our schools aren't failing. Our black kids are simply failing to perform in the classroom like white or Asian kids. Someday we will solve that problem too, but for now in the interest of better learning and less violence, we should just separate them.<br /><br />Obviously we should abolish Affirmative Action. It's a system for rewarding bad performance. It is as loony an idea as say - letting certain races have houses that they can't afford.<br /><br />There has been a lot of progress in the past few decades. For example my Android tablet is far superior to the Altair computer I had back then. But on many fronts in the past few decades we have been marching toward false goals.<br /><br />Almost every racial reform since the fifties has had a bad effect because they were based on false premises. Black intellectual inferiority and bad behavior was assumed to be a consequence of white attitudes. It's not. The black brain is about 40cc smaller where it counts. One day we'll fix that but we need to get to that day with the fewest casualties possible. School re-segregation is a good place to start.<br /><br />Albertosaurus<br /><br /><br />Pat Boylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13477950851915567863noreply@blogger.com