California Bill to Shut Down Political Opposition to Homosexuality Nears Passage

EQCA ^ | 8/23/05

[caseinpoint]

Totally ridiculous. I especially like that line about "Candidates must live up to a higher standard willing to represent all constituencies and communities." First, tell that to Sheila Kuehl or Barbara Boxer or any of those other extremists. Second, it is impossible to represent all constituences and communities because too often their interests are diametrically opposed to each other. To the victor go the spoils. If I elect a Republican, I expect that Republican to represent Republican ideals. If a Democrat is elected, I expect that Democrat to represent Democratic ideals.

If this bill is signed by The Terminator, expect it to be impossible to take a stand against gay marriage or any of their other causes. Any candidate will be immediately confronted with someone demanding he or she take a stand on the issue and if the candidate so much as demurs on the answer, the campaign war chest will be eaten up by court proceedings for "hate speech". Will it be challenged in court? Of course. Litigation is California's idea of a fun time.

[the anti-liberal]

So, what's a bigger threat to California and the country at large: the socialist liberal left (hence PC) or illegals?

[Owl558]

I notice that the article simply spews a bunch of platitudes, but doesn't give examples of the so-called gay bashing that goes on. Can't say that I've ever heard any in a Statewide campaign, at least, not that I can remember.

[American Quilter]

So, what's a bigger threat to California and the country at large: the socialist liberal left (hence PC) or illegals?

Hmm, that's a tough question.

[Albion Wilde]

Hasn't this state fallen into the ocean yet??

[the anti-liberal]

It sounds like a voluntary waiver of free speech.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Homosexual activists are the opposite of what they claim. They claim to be gay, but they are miserable. They claim that heterosexuals are homophobes, but they are the ones living in fear of heterosexuals. What they truly are in fact are HOMOFASCISTS.

The really strange thing of opposition here is the German homosexuals helped bring fascism to Europe under Hitler. In the end Hitler, himself a closet homosexual, wiped them out. Hitler the homo

[Always Right]

Why not include class welfare or wealth discrimination to that list?

[darkangel82]

When I run for office, I want to be sure that I am judged on my knowledge, experience and integrity, and not viewed on stereotypes or hate,” said Marina Gatto, a 16-year-old gay rights activist victim of public school indoctrination

[concerned about politics]

It sounds like a voluntary waiver of free speech.

Only a dupe would sign it.
This is the dumbest thing I've eve heard. Who cares a whit about what the homosexuals want, anyway?

[Pyro7480]

“When I run for office, I want to be sure that I am judged on my knowledge, experience and integrity, and not viewed on stereotypes or hate,” said Marina Gatto, a 16-year-old gay rights activist.

;-)

[Millee]

Thank you! :-)

[doc30]

Candidates should not discriminate and victimize the LGBT community for political purposes

Then why do you have to politicize the LGBT community to begin with?

[Allan]

A Canadian would like to know:

Does the First Amendment still apply in the USA?

[the anti-liberal]

We don't (or at least, I don't), but they keep pushing the matter. I think we would all be happier if they just kept their sex lives to themselves and left the rest of the world alone.

Something must be done to either wake these folks up out of their narcissistic, destructive delusion, or shut them up once and for all (legally speaking, of course).

[scripter]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

Freepmail little jeremiah and scripter if you want on/off this pinglist.

Root Causes, Homosexual Consequences
Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Revision 1.1)

See my profile for much more.

[Map Kernow]

All the bill would do would add gays to a voluntary waiver that candidates can choose to sign saying they won't go negative.

Sounds really cuddly and unthreatening. Except when you read this:

The legislation, sponsored by Equality California (EQCA), would prohibit the use of any negative appeal based on prejudice against LGBT people by candidates or campaign committees who sign the voluntary pledge provided for in the Code of Fair Campaign Practices.

People "volunteering" to give up their free speech right to comment "negatively" on "gays" and then being subject to the police power of the state if they decide they want to undo the waiver (i.e., get their free speech rights back)? Does that sound real "voluntary" to you? Why does California need a law for such a "voluntary" waiver---can't this "Equality" organization get in the face of candidates to sign such a pledge without it?? Who the hell decides what a "negative appeal" is anyway? The gay fascists, that's who.

Do they have anything by George Orwell in your library?

This is a gay fascist attack on free speech. The fact that these lavender Lenins are using a little KY jelly they're styling "voluntary waiver" doesn't mean they're not still trying to f*** our rights.

[Elpasser]

California is now going the route that Canada did. The homosexuals gain favor, then power, then they immediately move to stifle any opposition to their agenda, irrespective of the right of free speech.

[the anti-liberal]

Hopefully these folks don't understand the term 'voluntary' the same way the IRS folks do...