Finally! A Republican who makes sense on Marriage Equality

It has taken long enough, but finally a senior Republican has worked out where they should be on Marriage Equality:

A national Republican strategist said in Iowa on Monday that Republicans should speak out in favor of same-sex marriage because the majority of Americans support it and it’s consistent with conservative values.

In private meetings with GOP elected officials and operatives from across Iowa, Ken Mehlman, who was chairman of the Republican National Committee from 2005 to 2007 and managed George W. Bush’s re-election campaign, has been urging the politicos to recognize the evolution in thinking and demographic shifts in Iowa and the nation.

“Republicans have an opportunity to both stand up for values that are core to our philosophy — freedom, family values and the golden rule — and to do the right thing politically by allowing adults who love one another to have access to civil marriage,” Mehlman said in an interview with The Des Moines Register on Monday. 

He spoke Monday evening at a public event at the Davis Brown law firm in Des Moines, Iowa. The crowd of about 40 included influential Republicans such as Eric Branstad, Steve Roberts, Stan Thompson, Christine and John Stineman and Eric Woolson.

Mehlman, who revealed he was gay in 2010, doesn’t go as far as saying Republicans will lose future elections if they continue to crusade against same-sex marriage.

But it’s indisputable that 53% of Americans support the freedom to marry for same-sex couples, he said.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Jenkins/593642943 James Jenkins

    Well thats his career over…

    • Stuart Dumphries

      Mehlman was in charge of Dubya’s 2004 election campaign, and has already been RNC Chairman. He came out as gay a couple of years ago. I doubt he has much to lose.

  • Andrei

    A national Republican strategist said in Iowa on Monday that Republicans should speak out in favor of same-sex marriage because the majority of Americans support it and it’s consistent with conservative values.

    So what does the dictionary have to say

    Conservative
    disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

    Yep just as I thought, a politician changing the meaning of words to that of the exact opposite of what they actually mean. Quelle surprise!

    Of course this whole silly business is based upon silly word games by politicians because as everybody knows a male/male or female/female pairing is in no way, shape or form equivalent to a life giving male/female one.

    “Equality” is in this context is just an empty noise word

    • stinkeye3

      Like”Liberals” wanting to ban everything?

    • unsol

      LGBT were born LGBT just the same as infertile people or infertile pairing (remember it is the pairing that often creates infertility rather than the individuals themselves).

      So your statement indicates a world view that would ban not only same sex couples from marrying, but also infertile couples.

      So how do you propose to do this? Compulsory tests before they walk down the aisle?

      You also seem to assume that marriage is something that is brand new for these couples when in actual fact most people live together long before they get married so the whole point is just to seal the deal, to make legal a relationship that is already well established. That is where the equality argument comes into play as LGBT couples can do everything hetero couples can do – including having their own children and adopting (just not as a couple) except calling their lifelong public union marriage.

      Your comments are indicative once again of a naivety that one would normally associate with a child; pretending things dont exist doesnt make them any less real.

      Marriage is not about procreation. It is about love, choice & commitment with children the added blessing if the couple concerned choose to have them.

      And I know you will mostly likely come back once again with the death to society argument so I will be preemptive and say that if you really cared about the longevity of our society you would be advocating for one that is gracious, accepting & empathetic.

      Most importantly you would recognise that the only risk to our children is narrow minded bigots & dysfunctional fuck wits who rape, beat & abuse our babies while their missus & wider community stand by in silence.

      • BR

        “LGBT were born LGBT just the same as infertile people or infertile
        pairing (remember it is the pairing that often creates infertility
        rather than the individuals themselves).”

        I think you’ll find that the jury’s still out on that. However, the official leftist homosexual lobby’s official point of view is essentially what you just said.

        If I remember correctly ,some years ago an Australian sperm bank refused to allow homosexuals to donate sperm. There were a number of reasons for this, one of them being that it was deemed sensible to prevent the homosexual genetic defect being propagated.

        Cue the howls of outrage from the leftist homosexual lobby, claiming discrimination. Some contradicted their own propaganda line, claiming that homosexuality is acquired rather than innate.

        So what is it? Acquired or inborn? Any reply to that question is entirely subjective and dependent on one’s political view.

        Bill.

        • unsol

          “deemed sensible to prevent the homosexual genetic defect being propagated”

          yet it is the straight people that keep having these LGBT kids…

          In terms of being ‘born this way’, the jury is out for all but the LGBT.

          And it is a moot point as no one can prove they are not so if they say that they have always felt attraction to the same or both sexes or felt like they were female trapped in a males body & vice versa then who is anyone to claim that is not true? No one would ever choose to suffer discrimination, to exist in a living hell.

          Young gay male suicide makes up most of our suicide stats – clearly it is not something they feel they have a choice about.

          And for any heterosexual who has never felt anything but heterosexual I would say, who are you to assume that it is not innate.

          • BR

            Where did I say that it is not innate? Go back and read what I said again, slowly this time.

            Bill.

          • unsol

            And where did I say that you claimed it was innate?

            To use your words….go back and read what I said again, slowly this time.

            Further, re your sweeping generalisation that “….any reply to that question is entirely subjective and dependent on one’s political view” – politics and ideology are not synonymous, not by any means.

            If anything, those that oppose marriage equality propose the State continues to interfere in our personal lives, meaning they are socialists by default.

  • dotcom

    I agree. If it is what a majority of stupid Americans want, then this horrible cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race. Put it to the vote. I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

    • Mitch82

      Yup, and I bet you’ll stay perfectly quite if a referendum came back in overwhelming support of the bill.

      • cows4me

        Personally if New Zealanders voted for gay marriage then I could live with it. I’ve said my piece, stated my case, made my predictions. Let the people choose. Of course it won’t happen because our elected representatives know whats good for us, don’t they.( jolly joke)

      • dotcom

        I presume you mean “quiet”. But let respond to your stupid comment this way. I was on the losing side on MMP, but I still voice my adverse opinion frequently on MMP, fully aware that I was on the losing side. Am I required to relinquish my opinions on life, just because I might be part of a minority at any time. Sonny boy, this is not how democracy works.

        • Mitch82

          Dear Professor Democracy,

          Yes, I meant ‘quiet’. Simple typo.

          It’s really simple: You said “put it to a vote”. In saying that, I’m assuming you mean “put it to a vote, and if it goes ahead, we’ll let it be and move on to the next issue”, rather than “put it to a vote, and if it goes ahead, we’ll call it voting fraud and continue carping on, regardless”. A vote isn’t going to change your opinion, and nobody is asking for you to change it. We’re just hoping it might be the end of your ignorant “fuck the science” comments.

          Know the difference between having an opinion, and throwing it up in somebody’s lap.

          Also, still waiting to hear about the list of books I’ve burned or ignored. And patronizing or insulting me still doesn’t give your argument any strength.

          Love,

          Silly little man.

          • dotcom

            Fuck, what a numbskull. You do your cause no good at all. Why do I waste my time discussing it with idiots. I’m the one here saying “put it to the vote” and before the vote is even held, you’re accusing me of crying foul and claiming voter fraud. And for this you call ME a “silly little man”. Get fucked idiot-brain.

          • Mitch82

            Do you need a tissue, sweetie?

          • dotcom

            No Mitch, but when you argue with me for disagreeing with me, then still argue with me when I agree with you, then (not me of course) but if there is a statistical blip in the number of gay people bashed in the next few days, you will have caused it. I’m not the only one reading your infuriatingly stupid and gay-petulant remarks.

          • Mitch82

            I asked you a simple question – whether a referendum result in favor of the bill would mean you’d shut up about the whole thing. If you want to argue instead of answer, that’s your issue.

            Go on, take that tissue. Dry your eyes.

          • dotcom

            No you didn’t. You identify as a gay, and you lie. Sorry that I so willingly link the two. Your words – your exact words – that the referendum that Dotcom suggested would have Dotcom “call it voting fraud and continue carping on”.
            It is no wonder you are hated. it is no wonder there is hate crime. You have invited a mini-blip in it in your words above. You do it every day. You bitch about hate crime, but you deliberately create and stimulate the hate.

          • dotcom

            So. If you invite me for a cup of tea, my answer will probably be – “don’t mind if I do”.
            But if you invite me to hate you, gayguys, my answer will readily be the same answer to a similar question.

          • dotcom

            I agree with Kel Mehlman. If it is what a majority of Americans want, then this gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race.
            Put it to the vote. I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

          • Mitch82

            *Yawn*

            I’m not gay, as I’ve said many times to you. I use ‘carping on’ because that’s what you do. I mentioned ‘voter fraud’, AS PART OF A QUESTION to you, which you haven’t answered. I used that because any poll or vote that supports the anti-gay side of the argument is held up as a sacrosanct, irrefutable be all – end all of the debate. The polls that aren’t, and clearly show that the majority are for this, are labelled biased, liberal, wrong company doing the polling, misleading questions, take your pick – happens every time.

            So, again, I ask you the question, and I’ll try to ask it nicely.

            If we had a referendum, tomorrow, and the result was overwhelmingly in favor of legalizing gay marriage, would you accept the result and move on, or would you challenge that result?

          • dotcom

            Again you lie. I did answer the question, using MMP and election results in my analogous but unambiguous answer. Do you lie by reflex action? “Yawn” yourself, you rude ignorant prick. Do you sit at the table and yawn in peoples’ faces when you are conversing with them, ignoramus?

            Your newly phrased question presupposes that there are only two valid answers – both slanted towards your point of view. Genuine questions are open-questions. A genuine question wouldn’t presume a limited number of just 2 biased choices to which my answer is restricted. So if you wish to ask me an unbiased question – an open-question – I might consider answering it – AGAIN.

          • Mitch82

            Okay, I’ll try ask an unbiased question:

            Would you like a tissue?

            *Yawn*.

          • Ronnie Chow

            “Why do I waste my time discussing it ”

            Because you are a gambler , and like all gamblers , you play to lose .

          • dotcom

            Or I could simply say, okay, then I don’t agree with a vote. I mean, what retards here. I agree or I disagree with a “gay friendly” situation, and either way, I’m a monster. You lot are totally fucked in the head.

        • Gayguy

          Being on the losing side is a bit of a habit for you then.

          • dotcom

            What I already said. If the number of hate crimes against gay men shows a statistical blip this week (not from me of course), it will have been caused by the Gayguy who here speaks for all gayguys, and is inviting hatred for the sake of inviting hatred. Your gratuitous comment here is totally unrelated to Cam’s post, has no other purpose than to provoke, and to invite hatred against all who identify as “gayguy”. You silly boy.

          • Gayguy

            Gosh you babble when your true colours are shown.

          • Ronnie Chow

            “A rise in minority power, women’s rights, gay rights and the use of the immigration debate by radical-right ideologues has created a “skin-head Mecca” in the United States, says a national hate-crimes expert.

            Mark Potok, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) Intelligence Project, said the center has documented 888 hate groups operating in the United States, a number that has grown by a “staggering” 48 percent since 2000.”

            Young people who come from dysfunctional families , are lonely and have low self-esteem and feelings of rage are turning to hate groups to create an alternative family.

            That wouldn’t describe you , Dotcom , by any chance ? Certainly describes that skinhead Redbaiter .

          • dotcom

            You have stolen the words “gay” and “rainbow” from us already. Now you want to bastardise the word “hate” as well.
            Hate groups are as their opposing gay hate groups see.

          • Gayguy

            Stolen??? Oh good lord you are thick.

          • dotcom

            I’m thick, but you’re the one risking HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, and a hundred other diseases.

          • Gayguy

            Actually I’m risking nothing.

            And good to see you admit your thick. Well done.

          • Ronnie Chow

            “risking HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, and a hundred other diseases.”

            All available in the buffet of life . Not restricted to the enemy . Ask any soldier .

          • dotcom

            I don’t hate you. I loathe people who have unprotected anal sex, male or female, married or unmarried, gay or straight.

            We provide everyone with unlimited numbers of condoms and dams. There is NO excuse for NOT using them every time anal sex is engaged in. People deliberately endanger community health: I loathe them.

          • Gayguy

            And yet you spend all your time on here attacking homosexuals. If you stick to this tack you may redeem your self in some very small way.

          • dotcom

            No I don’t. I attack people who have unprotected anal sex, male or female, gay or straight, married or unmarried.

          • Gayguy

            This is a new statement from you. Until now you have attacked homosexuals only.

          • dotcom

            Onus probandi. Prove it, Gayguys.

          • Gayguy

            Every single thing you have posted on this topic proves it.

            Did you get a Latin phrase for the day calendar for Christmas? Seems you have another new phrase today.

          • unsol

            Nope, he is taking a phrase that I gave him. On the up side he is using it in the right context.

          • Gayguy

            How kind of you to help out the poor fellow out.

          • Ronnie Chow

            What , even after an enema ?

          • unsol

            That’s lies dotty – the truth is you attack then change tack when it the heat gets too much.

            You have no idea if gayguy has unprotected sex anymore than he knows if you do.

            You are making wild assumptions that achieve only one thing – highlighting that you can be an ass.

          • dotcom

            Whatever, unsol. I agree with Kel Mehlman. If it is what a majority of Americans want, then this gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race.Put it to the vote.
            I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

          • Ronnie Chow

            “People who deliberately endanger community health…”

            Now you’re onto it . The crux of your fear . Disease . Not gays at all !

          • dotcom

            Exactly. As I have already said a thousand times on this blog. Finally, you listen to me for the first time. Stop posting rancour, and you might actually learn something.

      • dotcom

        What a retard. I agree with something “gay friendly” and still the gay fucktards want to argue with me.

  • cows4me

    “Republicans have an opportunity to both stand up for values”, what a load of horseshit. How is promoting gay marriage standing up for values, quite the other end of the spectrum if you ask me. But hay why not sale out your values, after all it’s all about the ballot box isn’t it. If you keep selling out your “values” you end up with nothing of value at the end.

    • unsol

      “How is promoting gay marriage standing up for values, quite the other end of the spectrum if you ask me”

      I consider those who continue to deny the right of a small number of adults in consensual & legally & socially acceptable relationships – unlike those that opponents continue to try & draw similarities too – as indicative of someone who lacks good values & common decency.

      I believe that people who have good values, a moral compass & emotional maturity accept what they cannot understand & recognize that those who are attracted to the same or both sex are wanting what we all want – to be accepted by society for the way God made us, to find a spouse who accepts us & to marry that spouse so that they, like heteros, have the chance to have a life long companion with the same rights afforded to everyone else in a legally & socially acceptable relationship.

      The Civil Union Act was a consolation prize & in many ways made things worse as now a minority group of people seem to think that separate is equal.

      In an age where marriage has already revolutionized beyond its original mandate (heirs, status & procurement of wealth, divorce, women being able to work outside the home, to choose to not have kids or if infertile to still remain married & adopt or get IVF)) so that it has become about choice, love & commitment as opposed to obligation, there is simply no justification to continue denying the LGBT the right to marry.

      The church – even if their arguments could stack up (an oxymoron as it could never happen) – is irrelevant when it comes to the law in a secular society like NZ & the so-called secular arguments are just an excuse to justify bigotry; to try & link sex with children, relatives or animals with same sex couples is revolting & morally repugnant beyond belief.

      So this republican is right to accept what is obvious – there is no plausible reason for marriage equality to not go ahead…the majority of society sees this & wants it so any politician who wants to keep their job must man up & accept it.

      it is not for anyone to pass their so-called moral code on anyone; same sex have no impact on anyone else’s lives any more than a heterosexual & anyone who calls themselves a right winger or conservation should be advocating for this law change as it is a step towards the State removing itself from our personal lives for good.

      • dotcom

        Prove this moot (onus probandi).

        “A wedding ring converts a loving and committed relationship into a more loving and more committed relationship.”

        You will not be able to even come close to making the case “for”.

        • Gayguy

          Dotty has a point. Look and the millions upon millions of heterosexual marriages that fall apart. affairs happen, they are dissolved after a few days due to getting drunkenly married etc…

          Heterosexuals have proved time and again that for most of them a wedding ring is worthless and the institution a mockery,

          • cows4me

            If marriage as an insitution is a mockery why would gays wish to follow down the same path? Oh wait, I know, don’t tell me, it’s not a mockery, it’s the prize. No to gay marriage.

          • unsol

            Because they should have the same chance as the rest of us to at least see if they have got what it takes; many people have made it a mockery, but it is still something many want to do (prob not most though – BDM show marriages are way down).

          • cows4me

            Pretty feeble excuse if you’re saying gay marriage is simply a chance for gays to fail at marriage like the rest of us. I’m against gay marriage as I see it of one part of a greater agenda to slowly break down societies norms and institutions as away to do away with the nuclear family and introduce a Marxists/Communist new world order. No doubt you think I’m quite mad, so be it. There’s a film on the net Agenda:Grinding America down. It lays it all out and the facts presented are indisputable. You may wish to view it or not but be warned it won’t suit your world view.

          • unsol

            I’d love to have a look at ait – love seeing alternative world views.

            In terms of my stance I dont consider marriage to be a societal norm or tradition per se as it was a man-made construct for the purpose of procuring wealth etc that the Church then the government decided it wanted to control.

            I dont think same sex relationships are any more prevalent now than what they have ever been & can see no correlation between 2 decent people of the same sex choosing to commit & a so-called marxist “new world order”.

            Ideology has nothing to do with sexual orientation & Marxism is nothing more than a utopia that, while mankind exists, can never come to fruition as it is the nature of man to avoid a level playing field.

          • Gayguy

            Actually gays want marriage equality because of love, that and we can redeem the poor old girl after what you hetero’s have done to her.

          • BR

            No, you only want homo “marriage” so that your delicate little sensibilities are not hurt.

            Bill.

          • Gayguy

            If that allows you to sleep at night you go right on believing the bullshit in your head.

        • unsol

          I wouldnt even attempt to prove that – like GG has said, the dismal record of hetero marriages have made the institution almost laughable.

          But in my own relationship – the wedding band didn’t convert or change anything per se. Instead it took the already fantastic foundations & gave us a formal way to build on them…all the while having a fab day & brilliant holiday!

          Divorce is shocking, but the many of the marriages remaining are I suspect anything but happy, loving & committed…longevity is not proof you have a marriage. Not by my standards anyway.

      • cows4me

        “It is not for anyone to pass their so-called moral code on anyone” . A bit of double dutch there. Are not gays trying to pass their moral code on general society?

        • unsol

          No. Their moral code is the same moral code of most people that has always pushed for change upon realising injustice that needs to be made right. It is the moral code of most people in NZ.

          Gay marriage has no impact on anyone but the individuals pursuing it.

          But denying them marriage has direct & a degrading impact on them as they are equal but not quite equal enough.

          I see you say later that you have no issue with same sex attraction or even this Bill per se – then why fight so hard against on here? What are you afraid of? How does it impact you? What do you think will happen? Why is it you think there is something wrong with same sex attraction & relationships – when did those ideas first form, who were you influenced by?

          I have asked all these questions of myself and came up with one answer – the Church which had its claws into society for far too long. A church that is at best contradictory & at worst often hypocritical & indicative of anything but what Christ stood for.

      • Rodger T

        You might like this unsol,

        • unsol

          Perfect! :)

  • Changeiscoming

    Whale why don’t you have a poll – “Do you support Marriage Equality for ALL New Zealanders?” Thats a phrase Louisa Wall likes to use. I think you would be surprised with the result.
    my vote – NO!!!

    • Gayguy

      Given the comments I have see on here, it is you who would be surprised.

      The “no” votes would be lucky to reach double digits.

      • unsol

        I agree – most people who read this blog dont comment yet most who are polled in NZ are in favour….the same group of people who are voting right leaning more than left leaning.

        • dotcom

          Prove it (onus probandi).

          • unsol

            I take it you arent aware of the many polls re marriage equality in NZ that have been well publicized on MSM, the fact that Bigot Bob M only managed to get 70,000 votes – assuming all are valid – for his petition & that National got the highest party votes ever under MMP in the last election.

            Seems to me that dotcom needs a name change – half-cocked would be a good start.

          • dotcom

            My god, resorting to nickname bating now, Unsol, the second lowest form of internet debating.

            What gay marriage referenda? There has never been one. Onus probandi, unsol.

          • unsol

            Gay marriage polling ya egg.

            Referendums are meaningless & a huge waste of money unless binding.

            Few referendums in NZ have been binding.

            Polling has always been a good indication of where the mood is at – despite the margin of error, hence why they are so widely used in the lead up to elections & therefore, why they more than suffice in this instance.

            And regurgitating your newfound phrase onus probandi (yes you can thank me if you like) doesnt add any more credibility to your comments.

          • dotcom

            Unsol, my preference is to discuss the topic that Whale posted. I agree with Kel Mehlman. If it is what a majority of Americans want, then this gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race.Put it to the vote.
            I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

      • dotcom

        Prove it.

        • Ronnie Chow

          Ask your mate’s dog . The dog that doesn’t seem to get sick from licking it’s backside . And cats , for that matter .

          • dotcom

            My cat told me she thinks we humans are filthy .. ..

            .. .. ‘cos we don’t lick our bums clean after crapping.

            As I explained it to my cat, we don’t have several million years of natural immunity to bum-cleaning-by-lick.
            Besides, I have never seen my cats stick their tongues 150mm up their own bums, or 150mms up their best friends’ bums.

            And bum-cleaning-by-lick does not rip apart rectal linings.

          • unsol

            Probably not the best analogy….cats are now found to have many diseases that may be very harmful to humans….ever heard of toxoplasmosis

            And you can be assured that, like anything in the human & animal kingdom, a minority of cats would prefer the same sex.

          • dotcom

            Prove it (onus probandi), unsol. When did you last consult with a wombat for example, to find out which sexual preference it had?

          • unsol

            Good grief, you’re a sucker for punishment eh.

            For someone you declares their intelligence with the kind of sanctimony that would make even Andrei a saint, you certainly seem to lack basic knowledge on anything.

            So once again I suggest you replace your name with half-cocked…or half wit…..half of anything will do

          • dotcom

            Unsol: I agree with Kel Mehlman. If it is what a majority of Americans want, then this gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race.
            Put it to the vote.
            I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

          • dotcom

            Unsol, I agree with Kel Mehlman. If it is what a majority of Americans want, then this gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race.
            Put it to the vote.
            I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

          • dotcom

            The analogy was made by Ronnie Chow, not by me. All I did was discredit his silly and baseless analogy. I suspect he won’t use the analogy again.

          • unsol

            Fair enough!

          • Gayguy

            You know an AWFUL lot about anal sex, right down to how far a persons tongue goes up the arse.

            You know far too much for some one who has just an “academic” grasp of the concept you dirty thing you.

          • dotcom

            Gayguys, I agree with Kel Mehlman. If it is what a majority of Americans want, then this gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race.
            Put it to the vote.
            I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

          • Ronnie Chow

            Dr. Germ , wash your mouth out with soap .

          • dotcom

            Ronnie Chow, I actually enjoy conversing with you, but I will not converse with any comments that call me other than Dotcom. Talk with yourself if you want. You see, the rest of the internet/blogosphere has moved on from childish name-calling, and corruptions of nicknames. You seem to be stuck in a single-digit age group.

          • http://www.whaleoil.co.nz Whaleoil

            You seem to know an awful lot about this subject….fetish?

          • dotcom

            You seem to post often on this subject. “Gratuitously”. Fetish? Knowledge does not equate to fetish. Except in the mind of the beholder.

          • Gayguy

            You know too much for simple academic interest.

            You have had a go at it you dirty old man, more than once too.

          • dotcom

            Know your friends well. But know your enemies better.
            All people, male or female, married or not, gay or not, who have unprotected anal sex in my community, New Zealand, are my enemies.
            Use condoms and dams!
            Do you agree?

        • Gayguy

          Oh Whale, can you post a poll about marriage equality, ONLY if it is a poll that allows a person to vote ONCE and not vote against it multiple times.

          There you go Dotty, up to Whale now.

      • BR

        It’s already reached it.

        Bill.

  • Gayguy

    I see the nasty know nothing shit head homophobic dicks are having a wee tanty again.

    Awwwwwwwwwww.

    • dotcom

      What I said to Mitch

      • Gayguy

        As I have said you before, your behavior on here has removed any expectation for people to treat you in a civil way.

        • dotcom

          Oh, something on topic for a change, Gayguys.
          Whoops, not just yet. I keep hoping for an on-topic comment from you Gayguys, but you keep disappointing. Which millennium did you last post on topic, Gayguys.
          Like I say, Gayguys,
          Invite me for a cup of tea, I’ll readily oblige.
          Invite me to hate you, I’ll equally readily oblige.

          • Gayguy

            You do not need an invitation to hate homosexuals. You do that quite willingly already.

            And I make it a rule never to have cups of tea with those who are offensive. Enough people do that already.

          • dotcom

            I don’t hate gays. I have no problem with your gay lifestyle. Your hedonistic lifestyle was the life I preferred for myself for decades of adulthood, so I hate none of it. I only hate the danger you collectively pose to community health with your unprotected anal sex.

            On gay marriage, I agree with Kel Mehlman. If gay marriage is what a majority of Americans want, then the gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this direction taken by the human race. So by all means, put it to the vote.

            I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Until then, shaddappa you face.

            But in any case, stop having unprotected anal sex, New Zealanders, married or not, and gay or not. Please.

          • unsol

            So what about the lesbians, bisexuals & transgenders – are they all hedonistic too?

            You realise that of the approx 10% of the gay community, less than half would be men as women outnumber men by about 70,000 or so according to recent research.

            And while I understand your stance on unprotected sex – it should be a stance across the board though given young Maori women are not only 5 x morely likely to get pregnant than non Maori, but also have the highest rates of STIs…particularly Chlamydia (mind you seems upper middle class white boys like to pass that around too given someone in our circle got caught out re secret relationships whereby he was infected & had happily been passing it on).

            So your obsession is a little worrying. If you prefer men then why not accept it and move on. At least you know the likes of me, WO, Mitch & gayguy wouldnt judge you…

          • dotcom

            But it patently is a stance I have across the board. How many fucking times do I fucking have to say it.

            “Stop having unprotected anal sex, New Zealanders, married or not, and gay or not. Please.”

            How across the board do you want me to be? How across the board is that comment NOT?

          • unsol

            No, a stance across the board would be “stop having ANY kind of unprotected sex NZers”…..or do you not realise how serious other STIs are? Further, while a lot of our HIV/AIds stats are over represented by the gay men community, there is still a good proportion of heteros that get it.

            Current stats as of Dec 2012:

            “HIV INFECTION

            Fifty-six people (51 males and 5 females) were diagnosed with HIV through antibody testing in New Zealand in the first half of 2012.

            Thirty-one were men infected through sex with other men, 14 (10 men and 4 women) through heterosexual contact. For the remaining 11 people the means of infection was un-known or information is still awaited.

            Of the 31 men infected through sex with other men, 22 (71%) were infected in New Zealand, and 9 (29%) overseas.

            Of the 14 people reported to have been infected through heterosexual contact, 8 (57%) peo-ple were infected in New Zealand, 5 (36%) overseas, and for one (7%) the place of infection was unknown.

            A further 25 people (17 males and 8 females) had a first viral load test in this period. These were mostly people who had been previously diagnosed overseas and had not had an anti-body test in New Zealand.

            AIDS

            Nine people (6 males and 3 females) were notified with AIDS in the first half of 2012.

            Four were men infected through sex with other men, 2 women were infected through het-erosexual contact, and for 3 people (2 males and 1 female) the mode of infection was un-known.

            Of the nine people diagnosed with AIDS, there were six Europeans, 1 Maori, 1 Asian, and 1 African.”

            MOH newsletter…

            This follows on from such research as that carried by Otago University’s Aids Epidemiology Group in 2009 which found “184 people were diagnosed with HIV.

            It said 152 people were infected through sexual contact, including 91 men through sex with other men, and 39 men and 22 women through heterosexual contact.

            Two were infected through injecting drugs, two through overseas transfusions, and four children were infected through mother-to-child transmission, three of these infections taking place overseas.

            Three people had other means of infection, and for 21 the means were unknown or unreported. A further 43 people were diagnosed with HIV through viral load testing in New Zealand, most of whom had previously been diagnosed overseas.

            The group said 48 people were notified with Aids, including 22 men infected through sex with other men, 19 men and five women through heterosexual contact, two through drug use, one through an overseas transfusion, two children infected by their mothers and two unknown or unreported causes.

            The group said the rise in diagnoses by 89 per cent from 2000 to 2006 in New Zealand was similar to an 86 per cent rise in 23 European countries.

            The report said safer sex practices, HIV testing and the prevention and treatment of other sexually transmitted diseases were important to reducing the spread of HIV.

            The researchers said the reason more heterosexual men than women were diagnosed with HIV in 2008 was unclear, as rates overall had previously been similar.”

            Best to stop being a mouse & get off the wheel as it seems to me you’re just spinning out the same old crap that has no substance, rhyme or reason….

          • dotcom

            Sorry, didn’t bother reading this, even though it was addressed to me. Seems to have nothing to do with anything I posted or with what Cam originally posted. I agree with Kel Mehlman. If it is what a majority of Americans want, then this gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race.
            Put it to the vote.
            I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

          • Gayguy

            Yea, you hate homos. Your posts have made that clear.

          • dotcom

            Well, I don’t actually, but you apparently are more aware of my head space than I am, so what is the point of arguing with me, Gayguys, clearly if I am so stupid, it isn’t worth the effort. I agree with Kel Mehlman. If it is what a majority of Americans want, then this gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race.
            Put it to the vote.
            I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

      • Ronnie Chow

        ”’You have to stop saying things that directly lead people to hating you (that’s the collective “you” ‘

        Do you have any idea how sociopathic that statement is , Dotcom ?

        • dotcom

          No, I don’t have any idea of how sociopathic it is, Ronnie. Please explain in words of one syllable for me, Ronnie Chow.

          • Ronnie Chow

            Sociopaths have faulty development in three areas: ability to love, impulse control and moral reasoning.

            http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_AcRpuLTXqPE/SRCU9ReJsLI/AAAAAAAAAKs/Wd3Mw8aaIqQ/s400/ac8720Narcissist.jpg

          • dotcom

            Sorry to be pedantic Ronnie, but your question was not “Do you know what sociopath means?”. it was “do you have any idea how sociopathic that statement is?”. And I still have no idea of how sociopathic my statement was. If you want to tell me “very”, then consider it a formality, and already done. End of conversation I would have thought.
            Unless of course you actually have anything today to comment on today’s topic, which doesn’t happen to be Dotcom. I have no interest in being your favourite topic. It would be a refreshing change if you would post on other than Dotcom. I suspect other commenters here are getting a bit bored with you.
            In any case, please stop trolling my comments. By all means have a conversation with me, but you are trolling my comments, and I would prefer you didn’t.

  • BJ

    The equality argument does not make for something thats different – as in gay relationship commitment – identical to what it is striving to be equivalent to – as in heterosexual relationship commitment.

    As has been suggested by many, including myself, this equality the proponents of gay ‘marriage’ are looking for, needs another name because they do not bring the same parts that make up a marriage. A recent submission put to the select committee calling for gay relationship commitments to be named ‘Sarriage’ is the most sensible thing I’ve heard yet.

    Up till now – a declaration of being married has been self explanatory – that is – I know when someone is talking about their spousal opposite sex. Surely it would be best to avoid ambiguity by knowing that when someone is going to ‘Sarry’ or is ‘Sarried’ means someone is talking about their spousal same sex.

    • cows4me

      Geez BJ that will go down like a shower of shit. It’s got to be “marriage”, it’s the holy grail but I like Sarried, sure could live with that.

    • Gayguy

      So because you will be confused, a section of kiwis have to be second class citizens?

      Wow, that has to be the worst argument I have seen on this whole issue.

      • BR

        So just to spare your delicate widdle feelings, homo “marriage” needs to be state sanctioned, moving society one step closer to becoming a perverts paradise.

        No. Not now, not ever.

        Bill.

        • Gayguy

          Guess you will need to find a new country to live in after this year then.

  • dotcom

    Whale Oil. May I just point out that the commenter called Gayguy, has not posted one comment among many on this thread, that is on topic. It is rancour, rancour, rancour and more rancour. Do you have a policy on off-topic rancour?

    • Gayguy

      Care to explain what HIV has to do with gays getting married?

      • Ronnie Chow

        Dr. Germ needs a scapegoat .

        • Gayguy

          I would be very interested to see his answer.

      • dotcom

        I agree with Kel Mehlman. If it is what a majority of Americans want, then this gay marriage cause is lost for America, and they can continue to do the research to show this putrefaction of the human race.
        Put it to the vote.
        I say exactly the same for New Zealand. Put it to the vote. Otherwise, shaddappa you face.

      • dotcom

        Sure. But first answer me what your 25 comments on Dotcom, have to do with gays getting married. When you have done this, I’ll happily link HIV with gay marriage. Not a difficult ask for me, but an impossible one for you. Leave my posts alone. Post on topic. Stop trolling my comments.

        • Gayguy

          Slapping homophobic fools is a past time of mine, and Whale is more than happy to let me do so.

          So, please tell us all how marriage equality will bring about the end of all things because of HIV.

          • BR

            You’re not slapping anyone. You are having a tanty every time it is pointed out that the introduction of homosexual “marriage” is a bad idea. What have you got to complain about? You are now legally allowed to bugger your neighbour. I’m not even sure that most homosexuals actually care about homo “marriage”. They will just simply go on buggering one other regardless. It is the leftist homosexual lobby (most of whom are not homosexuals) who are beating the drum on this issue with such zealotry.

            Bill.

          • Gayguy

            Oh Bill you simple creature. How is marriage equality a bad thing? I have yet to see any sensible argument against it. There have been the made up health reasons, the nonsense social reasons, the distorted Biblical reasons, but not one logical, sensible well supported reason.

            It will have no impact on haters like you at all, so how about buggering off to a different country, and leave the rest of us civilized people alone.

            Oh, and Dotty, I am still waiting for an answer.

    • Ronnie Chow

      Telling tales ? Peter Pan Syndrome ?

    • Pissedoffyouth

      Hey dotcom, if you don’t want gays to spread HIV, wouldn’t you want gay marriage?

      Then they can wait til marriage to lose their virginity and are banging only one person for the rest of their lives.

  • BR

    “Marriage equality”.

    Anybody who promotes “marriage equality” is doing the left’s dirty work.

    Anyone who uses such words is singing from the leftists songbook. Phrases like “marriage equality” would be meaningless but for the likes of the Labour party and the Greens and their supporters.

    Bill.

    • Gayguy

      Yes, we all know you are a hater.

      Now back in your cave if you please.

55%