Ultraviolet Thunderpussy's View: Commentary, Vintage Male Photos, Videos.

Redefining Marriage To Only Suit YOUR Needs is Both Repugnant and Bigoted Anyone who reads this blog knows that I am not for gay marriage because of the bigotry that redefining the term "marriage" engenders. "How can it be bigotry if you allow two men or two women to marry just like two straight people," you ask? Well, when you preface the need to change the term based on the fact that gays are people too and they form relationships that are just as valuable as straights, you presuppose that only human relationships of two people are worth shit and that any other consenting adult bonds are just not worth consideration as well. It is this BIGOTRY and SELFISHNESS of gay marriage advocates that pisses me off! Where do you jerks get off thinking that only your form of marriage is appropriate and that  you get to decide to EXCLUDE others but you get your way and only your way matters! As a libertarian, I fully support allowing any and all consenting adult relationships to be sanctioned, recognized, and protected under the law.   So if three guys or two guys and a chick want to form a life partnership, I am fully supportive of that. But I reject with the greatest contempt and disrespect this pathetic gay marriage notion that if you oppose this redefinition, you are a bad person or that you should not support any cause that goes against it. It has come to a point in this country that we have weak and spineless assholes who only want their way and that want others to pay a price for having their opinions!      Again, as a Libertarian, I want the greatest freedoms for all - I want alternative opinions to be freely expressed without fear of pressure groups forcing people to give up anything for holding those beliefs or supporting causes they believe in. I firmly believe the problem we created by having Government involved in "marriage" is the root cause of the situations we have now.   Marriage should have been only what religion says it is and that any Government recognized human bonding should have been named something else - making marriage separate because it is a religious institution (odd leftists want to blur religion and government when it works to their favor!). So let's have something that are civil unions - and then allow any adult bonding to be recognized with survivorship, benefits, legal protection of property rights, and a specified way to dissolve relationships of any plurality. It seems illogical that those who have spent the better part of a century bitching and moaning about societal norms should try to force their will on society just as those fools decried society doing it to them - but I've learned that there is no interest in EQUALITY with the modern gay rights movement - most of the most vocal gay rights agitators are hellbent to make America and society to pay for perceived persecution - and I am not going to say there was NO PERSECUTION, but you don't resolve past ills by using the same bigotry to force your will on society overall. I would contend that America right now is ready to allow gays and other adult bonding to go forward and this would make no one have to pay any price.    I bet with intelligent persuasion, the gay community could get straight people to see that marriage is only a religious institution and that the overall resolution is a separate civil recognition - and that would not step on anyone's toes. So let's agree - advocate for civil unions for everyone who wants their union recognized and push marriage back to the churches where it belongs.    Those who believe in marriages can get their ceremonies held in the church of their choice and then have that bond recognized also as a civil union.    There is no redefining of marriage just to suit your bigotry - take your hands off the term and stop bastardizing it.   You have no right to it and you have no right to punish society because you want to get your way and others don't support you.    Mozilla Chief Executive Dared To Support What He Believes in and Pays With His Job Yahoo News - Mozilla Chief Executive Brendan Eich has stepped down, the company said on Thursday, after an online dating service urged a boycott of the company's web browser because of a donation Eich made to opponents of gay marriage. The software company came under fire for appointing Eich as CEO last month. In 2008, he gave money to oppose the legalization of gay marriage in California, a hot-button issue especially at a company that boasts about its policy of inclusiveness and diversity. "We didn't act like you'd expect Mozilla to act," wrote Mozilla Executive Chairwoman Mitchell Baker in a blog post. "We didn't move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We're sorry." The next step for Mozilla's leadership "is still being discussed," she added, with more information to come next week. While gay activists applauded the move, many in the technology community lamented the departure of Eich, who invented the programming language Javascript and co-founded Mozilla. "Brendan Eich is a good friend of 20 years, and has made a profound contribution to the Web and to the entire world," venture capitalist Marc Andreessen tweeted. Eich donated $1,000 in 2008 in support of California's Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in the state until it was struck down by the Supreme Court in June. His resignation came days after OkCupid.com, the popular online dating site, called for a boycott of Mozilla Firefox to protest the world's No. 2 Web browser naming a gay marriage opponent as chief executive. On Monday, OkCupid sent a message to visitors who accessed the website through Firefox, suggesting they use browsers such as Microsoft Corp's Internet Explorer or Google Inc's Chrome. "Mozilla's new CEO, Brendan Eich, is an opponent of equal rights for gay couples," the message said. "We would therefore prefer that our users not use Mozilla software to access OkCupid."