The bigotry of gay marriage supporters is hard to fathom.

.
The latest dust up involved trashing President Obama for his pro-marriage views in a way I didn't think was possible. Given how rabid the support of the fringe left was for the empty suit, it's hard to believe they could turn on him this way.

Greg Gutfeld of the Daily Gut lays it all out in his Gregalogue: The Uncommon Bravery of Guliana Rancic.

MONDAY'S GREGALOGUE: THE UNCOMMON BRAVERY OF GULIANA RANCIC

So, it's official: Barack Obama is a bigot.

In a brave stance not seen since the beginning of time, a number of celebrities, journalists and bloggers have called President Obama out on his ignorant, narrow-minded views toward gay marriage.

First, it was renegade blogger Perez Hilton who, after noting Obama`s Christian beliefs, called our President a "stupid bitch." Shortly after that, pageant judge Alicia Jacobs rose up and said she would not have voted for Obama because of his intolerant and freakish views. Meanwhile, outspoken blogs like Queerty and Gawker have started using the b-word against Barack, calling him an out and out bigot. And then – out of nowhere – the Miss California USA pageant has urged Obama to apologize to the gay community! Finally - in possibly the bravest action of all, hard-hitting E News anchor Guliana Rancic tweeted that President Obama is an ignorant disgrace.

This is amazing stuff, people. By coming out against the President over his negative views on gay marriage, these folks are putting their livelihoods at risk.

Okay, they really haven`t actually said Obama by name. Instead, they focused their wrath on Carrie Prejean, the Miss USA contestant who views about gay marriage are entirely the same as President Obama`s. But if Prejean is a bigot for her views, and Obama holds the same views, then clearly Obama is a bigot too.

If A = B, and B = C, then A= C. I learned that when I was ten.

Of course, you won`t hear any of this from those brave voices I mentioned above. I guess views about gay marriage matter if you`re in a beauty pageant, but not if you`re in the White House. Or maybe these folks hold different standards for blonde girls than they do for black dudes.

Meaning, they lower the bar for Obama. Which you could call racist. After all, lowering expectations for someone because of who they are really is the definition of bigotry.

But I prefer not to think that way. Fact is, people like Rancic, Jacobs and Perez are heroes. They know how much tougher it is to beat up on a white Christian chick, than go after the most popular president since Morgan Freeman in "Deep Impact."

For that they deserve a pie of some kind.

A series of youtube videos by Portland City Commissioner Randy Leonard on Portland's own Mayor Sam "If you're 18 in PDX, you can get an" Adams.

.
These, of course, are from the pre-possibly pedophile days before Sam Adams was outed as having had a sexual relationship that he'd repeatedly denied with a possibly-as-young-as-17-year-old boy.

They're a series of videos by Portland City Commissioner Randy Leonard with Sam Adams as the subject.

Not particularly work friendly...

Tip o'the hat to Victoria Taft, one of the few of Portland Radio's outspoken conservative talk show hosts... and yes, she IS all that.

VICTORIA TAFT

PAINTING THE TARGETS IN THE CULTURE WAR

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

So a City of Portland Employee Was So Shocked...

about these videos here and here and here and here and here and here and thought I should see them. Sad. I'd seen them before but I keep forgetting others haven't. Kids, these aren't for you. They're videos featuring your city 'leaders,' but they're unfit for most people to watch.

Gay marriage takes a giant leap off a cliff: activist judge allows New Jersey divorce for couple "married in Canada."

.
Well, the frontiers of gay marriage were push a little farther out today when an activist New Jersey judge played along with the political drama provided by two other gay activists, residents of Maryland, claiming to have been "married" in Canada find themselves apparently incapable of getting a "divorce" in Canada, so they're managing to get a divorce in.... new Jersey.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Not.

Gay marriage activists will also be thrilled with the reason given for the New Jersey divorce: The petitioner says

she needs a divorce recognized in Canada so she can marry another woman there.

If this ain't a "made-for-TV" movie, I've never seen one.

The judge's idiotic, non-legal reasoning for this moronic reasoning?

New Jersey has a long history of recognizing marriages that are valid where they were performed.

So, if we reach the point where people are allowed to marry, say, ducks in Zimbabwe, apparently, in the stilted world of New Jersey Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson, we would have to recognize THAT effort as well.

Or, more reasonably, her Honor would have to recognize say, a Tanzanian marriage between a 14 year old male and a 12 year old female... or younger.

New Jersey, of course, does not allow recognized gay marriage.

This hasn't been a particularly great week for the concept of gay marriage, much like, come to think of it, the training wheels seem to have fallen off President Obama's tricycle.



Judge: Pair married in Canada can divorce in NJ
Friday, February 6 | 1:29 p.m. The Associated Press

A state judge has ruled that gay marriage is recognized in New Jersey for the purpose of divorce.

The wider implications of Friday's ruling aren't immediately clear. But state Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson says New Jersey has a long history of recognizing marriages that are valid where they were performed.

New Jersey doesn't let gays marry but does allow civil unions, which extend the benefits of marriage to gay couples.

La Kia (lah-KEE'-ah) and Kinyati (KIN'-yah-tee) Hammond were married in Canada in March 2004 and lived in Maryland. La Kia Hammond says she needs a divorce recognized in Canada so she can marry another woman there.

The state has not said whether it will seek an appeal.

Karma. Mass. couple who led fight for gay marriage file for divorce.

.
This sounds like a queer deal to me.

Look, before we even get into the questionable morality of this issue, my main concern is the concept of legislating from the bench.

This is not a Constitutional issue. The fact is that, just like me, either of these women were entitle to marry and raise a family under precisely the same circumstances as I am. Like me, they are not entitled to marry someone of the same gender.

Since their right is precisely the same as mine, this is not even an issue of discrimination... thus, the Constitutional aspect doesn't come into play.

But they found a leftist court willing to twist the law to get what they want, while simultaneously silencing the people of the state on the question as to whether or not they want this "right" extended.

Actually, it's not unlike the Taliban City Council of Vancouver suing the people into silence on the matter of downtown redevelopment and the tax-subsidized Pollard Hilton.

Clearly, what goes around, comes around. And this marriage, which lasted, relatively speaking, about 60 seconds is that. It's going to be interesting to see how the issues of "spousal support" (alimony) and child support play out.

I look forward to the outcome, and the realization that, perhaps, there truly is much more to the wanting then their is to the having.

Couple Whose Battle Legalized Gay Marriage Files For Divorce

Women Had Been Married For Four Years (But only together for two - ed)

POSTED: 8:32 am EST February 3, 2009

UPDATED: 12:28 pm EST February 3, 2009

BOSTON -- The gay couple whose court battle led to the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts has filed for divorce.

Watch Report

Hillary and Julie Goodridge, who share custody of their 12-year-old daughter, filed divorce papers in Suffolk Probate Court last week.

.

"I wish I could talk them into staying together, but I don't see how," Hillary’s mother, Ann Kiernan Smith, told the Boston Herald. Smith did not offer a reason for the couple's divorce.

.

"They went through an heroic battle on behalf of all of us in the state, and as a result of their willingness to participate in it, their relationship suffered in significant ways, but we all benefited at the end of the day," said Arline Isaacson, of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus.

.

Family lawyer Ed Dombroski said the divorce is more symbolic than legally significant.

.

More:

.