Regrettably, the F.B.I. has issued a statement denying any sort of criminal investigation into the activities of sarah palin...I read that earlier not just on wickepedia but also, I believe, on the U.S.A. today site.

Intresting...Well, the only thing that ever came out of sarah that was anywhere near decent would probably be her daughter bristol...

Thanks miss dorsey for sharing this with us.

Oh, those wacky freepers, bless their hearts.

Something tells me they are projecting a lot more of their hopes and dreams on Palin than she is capable of shouldering.

Respect ? Sorry mr. reed but this bitch dont deserve respect...Bad enough that she's been against equality...She has also been known to make rape victims pay for their own pregnancy test kits...As I said in an earlier comment...This bitch would make king george look like a saint by comparison.

Thomas, it's amazing that this rediculous rape victim story continues. It has been disproven. the charges were attempted at a lower level and nixed by either Sarah Herself or someone just under Her. Utter nonsense. Based on Your previous level of comments though, Mr McHugh I'm surprised to see this from You. Their are valid reason for an ultra liberal to oppose Palin that I can repect. If I can show the level of respect I show for a totalitarian socialist like President Obama that I do, I should think liberals should be able to muster the same for the governor of Alaska.

Charlie... respect is a two way street; in order to get respect you have to give it give it first. Sarah continues to dehumanize us and denigrate us as perverts, pedophiles, and promiscuous sex addicts. Why should we bow down and respect a person who holds no respect for us. We have been giving respect to ass-halves like Palin for too long and all it has gotten us is more disrespect and more bigoted slander. When we rise up and say enough is enough, they then point the finger and say we are nothing but a violent mass of denigrates that need to be controlled. You call Obama a socialist? You are poorly mistaken. Socialist believe in the will of the majority over that of a minority when it comes to human rights. The GOP are more content with that measure than Obama, or as I like to call him Count Obracula. The religious right supports ballot measures for human rights, because they know that the majority opposes sharing their heightened statuses to disfavored minorities. Not to mention such measures are extensively unconstitutional.

Dont think I support the democrats. I am far from their bullshit parade. However the bullshit parade from the GOP is far deeper and far more pathogen laced than any other political platform.

"The man who smiles when things go wrong has thought of someone to blame it on." Robert Blotch

Next time you see a GOP smile in times of a crisis listen closely to who he or she blames. If it isn't "god's will;" "the homosexual don'it."

Mr. reed...The first time I heard anything about those claims was in an interview with katie couric...If memory serves me correctly.

In any case, she is definatly against abortions even in the case of incest and/or rape so those reasons alone would be enough for me to say "no" to her being our next president which I wouldnt be surprised is what she intends to become.

Surely you jest, Mr. Reed.  I try not to use inflammatory language myself; but I don't begrudge its use by others.  I can understand the language Mr. Jones uses (language, btw, I would not characterize the way you have characterized it).

I consider anger at Ms. Palin's words and actions to be perfectly justified.  She is suggesting that we Queers are not entitled to the protection of the law, while she supports "special rights" for heterosexuals.  It's enough to make anyone's blood boil [well...anyone who has any sense of justice and decency, anyway]. 

Would you counsel African Americans to show respect for the Grand Kleagel of the KKK?  I hope not.

Guys, I just do not see Her as a threat. She does not have the power base to become much more than senator or radio talk show host. I also suspect there are huge exaggerations in the accusations against her, but I need to back away from that until I find out exactly what Her stands are. For now I am going to concede I may not know Her as well as I thought.

The next time YOUR adult relationship is referred to as being equivalent to that of incest, pedophilia and bestiality, you can keep your bullshit self-righteous to yourself. Unless of course, you don't mind being to as an incestuous pedophile.

You shouldnt be whining and bitching about tollerance...Not when the bible thumpers want to label homosexuals as "perverts", "pedophiles", "sinners", "monsters" and whatever other derogative thing you idiots can think of.

I find it ironic though the fundies want tollerance while all the time being intollerant...I also believe its called hypocrisy.

You two could be poster children for the libs!  Congrats!

To "not perfect, just right" (um, ok....),

I just have to ask- Why, if you are a member of Change.org, do you find it necessary to troll through the Gay Rights section and continue to spread the type of hatred that this site is working towards expelling? I understand that just because you may be for Animal Rights does not mean you are automatically for Gay Rights, but it seems to defeat the entire purpose of Change.org when you not only are not progressive on an issue, but are also just downright mean and trying to cause trouble.

Unless of course, you only joined so you could find people to harrass on various "liberal" issues. In which case, you must have an either very sad or very boring personal life. It is good to have someone to debate intelligently with on controversial topics. However, your remarks thus far have been neither intelligent, nor on topic.

Why am I a member?  I think it is vital to 'know your enemies' and those that would destroy your way of life.  That is why.

I suppose that is understandable. But I still maintain that it takes a certain type of bored lifestyle or vindictive personality to go somewhere and intentionally start arguments with an audience that you know will never agree with you nor will you ever give in. What is the point except to cause some excitement? Do you thrive on the melodrama of arguing, even when the arguments turn petty and mean?

It's not like either side will ever give in. Most people don't even take the time to listen to one another, sadly. This site is a refuge for people of like minds to keep abreast of the issues they find most important and share their ideas. Of course you are certainly allowed to be a part of it, unless the administrators were to do something to your account. But I think most would agree that your presence here certainly isn't welcomed. Would you like it if I came to some right-wing website you were a member of, just to cause trouble and treat people as if they were ridiculous and unintelligent?

Stay here and "know your enemies" if you must. But what a terrible way to represent your "side".

I disagree. This is a site where opposing ideas are freely exchanged. People of different viewpoints freely exchange ideas. sometimes We find We agree, sometimes not. Even when We disagree, I think We often move closer as thinking people. The thought process results in fertile minds that often move closer to solutions. We are not androids, trapped forever in the confines of a specific program. 

I agree that's what this site is for, Charlie. You are a perfect example of the best of this site. You are conservative, but debate with people intelligently and with conviction. It would be fun to debate with you and see your side of things. You spark debates, not ridiculous arguments. Mr. not perfect, on the other hand, has yet to make one valid point that is on the topic of gay rights. So far all I've seen from him is basic extreme right-wing rhetoric with insults thrown in everywhere. He is not truly debating, just causing trouble. He'll argue about how stupid liberals are and how he knows better than them, but not once has he mentioned gay rights.

Don't get me wrong, I love political discussions as well. Debating is fun! But he is not debating. He's just arguing about nothing in order to inflame things.

It also speaks volumes for a person's character when they use their real name.  ;)

I concur.

Thanks Charlie.  That really means a lot.

"Every five hours a LGBT teen takes his or her life and for everyone that does twenty more try. When kids call in they say it is because of religious persecution; that they feel their lives are meaningless and they should die because they are terrible people." - Suicide Prevention Center taken from For The Bible Tells Me So  by Daniel Karslake

"All to often Gay teens face the same persecution from their parents, friends and family members as they do from society, and often have no where to turn for support." -Jeff Lutes

Yes our founding fathers had this in mind when they decided that others have a right to a opinion that destroys the lives of thousands of families each year just from suicide alone, not to factor in the intense violence against LGBT still do this day. All of this because of people having the right to an opinion. Yes the first amedment is a wonderful tool, gift, whatever you want to call it. However when the government takes religious sides millions of innocent people are slaughtered by hated beyond any rational means just because of who they love.Because the government continues to dither from our constitution into their own agendas the freedom of speech is nothing more than a pipe dream for the poor, and a soap box for the wealthy religious right. Where half a century of scientific findings about how normal LGBT people are is completely silenced then overruled by the likes of James Dobson, Rick Warren, and Bill O'Reily.

Indeed mr. marshall.

I too have noticed that our goverment doesnt always abide by the constitution and considering that both D.O.M.A. and D.A.D.T. are both in the news, I would like to point out the probability that D.O.M.A. violates the first amendment since in my opinion, its based on a christian belief concerning marriage.

D.A.D.T. would seem, to me, to violate the moral requirement that our military personel conducts themselves with honor and integrity...I mean...How can you be honorable and/or integral when your forced to lie about your sexual orientation ?

I have to stand with You on this Mr. McHugh. I believe every opposition to gay marraige I have ever seen eas religion based. ( it is not just the Christians though) Government should have no say in religous matters, getting married is between two people and god. It should be up to the individual church.

Charlie you have it right when you said that marriage is up to the individual churches.  I want the government (a.k.a. the state) separated from the church.  The state should only be allowed to perform civil unions; churches should be allowed to perform either civil unions or marriages to either hetrosexual or homosexual couples.  Regardless of whether a couple is joined via civil union or marriage - ALL spouses are granted equal rights.  This would make government officials' opinions on marriage/civil unions irrelevant and they can support any church of their preference.  This allows governmnet officials focus on relevant tasks, i.e. law enforcement, public education, public safefy, and infrastructure.

Charlie, that would seem to make sense, as far as state vs. religion goes. However, it just isn't built that way. Marriage is also a legal institution, as evidence by the marriage certificate and the fact that any justice of the peace can perform a marriage. Marriage has been a legal matter for millenia. So if you simply remove the religious ceremony of any religion, you still have the legal marriage. Otherwise atheists and agnostics wouldn't be allowed to marry either.

Furthermore, civil unions are in no way equal to that legal institution of marriage. I'm sure there's posts about it on here some where in the back. But I'll share this information with you again. There are over 1,100 benefits of marriage that civil unions don't cover. You can take a closer look at them here: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf

And lastly, of course marriage equality is a relevant and important tasks, though I'm sure the same argument was put against civil rights in the 60s. It is, after all, the same issue for a different group of people. Would you find it so unimportant if it were straight people who weren't allowed to marry due to their sexual preference?

Oops, sorry. I was talking to Richard Forrest.

Exactly...No good leader worth the having ever had an attitude of "My way or the highway" nor should they have such an attitude.

Ummm, excuse me?  No one has a 'My way or the highway attitude'??? Have you watched/seen/listened to this fool that is in office now??? He is the most arrogant, self-serving, megalomaniac to ever be elected!

And pray ... any pray ...

You make an intresting case for her running sir...

If she does decide to run...Lets all pray that she doesnt manage to white wash her image before then.

Can I hear a B

Can I hear a U

Can I hear a S

Can I hear a H

You want whitewashing look no further than BUllSHit. When will neo-cons like yourself realize that all political platforms are out the rape the population? It's not about us, its about them. It doesn't matter if they're Ass or Elephant, neo-con, or neo-lib. You are just as blindfolded as everyone else that pics a side for politics, and your religious involvement you post on you site makes me question if you are brainwashed as well.

Then again the religious zealots have a very hard time accepting reality since reality, logic and reason to them are three prime evils they try hardest to combat. It likes watching a delirious mad man try to scratch and rip his eyes, ears, and tongue out so the delusions wont hurt him no further.When he is simply... just insane.

You made a interesting mention of social liberals, saying that they are so open minded their brains are falling out. Well social neo-conservatives... their minds are so closed their brain has shrunken, like their intellect and empathy, to those voodoo shrunken heads you see witchdoctors wear. To put it on a third grade reading level; they're intellectually void. I have pictures of black holes that don't look as void as the empathy and intellect of neo-cons.

But before you said liberals are too open minded you said, "Get government out of education/indoctrination." So then who will pay for public school? The wealthy, because no poor person could ever send their kid to school when it cost thousands of dollars a year to teach them. Oh that's right we should have the church take up education. That's a great idea. You know what happened when the church ran education, we had the witch trials, we believed it was ok to dehumanize African Americans, and of course slaughter my ancestors the Native Americans. 

Religion is the most bullshit indoctrination of anything. Teaching children, science, mathamatics, tolerance oh and uh... evolution, is not indoctrination. It is teaching them reality. Also teaching children it is not Ok insofar as to bully people based on their age, religion, gender, race, color AND sexual orientation AND gender identity is not indoctrination either. It is teaching them compassion and empathy, something that most anti LGBT and tolerance student's parents lack.

You really do defeat yourself even as an internet troll. Wanting to make the US more intellectually void and more religiously sound is not going to help a country but destroy it. When all people lose their ability to think (because they believe they will be sent straight to hell) you get a country tittering on the brink of absolute despotism. It is not then but now for those who understand and accept reality, reason and logic, that it is their duty and responsibility to overthrow such governments and reestablish the constitution. 

When you try to sidestep reality its back hands you. When will people realize that? And when will you realize that when those you oppress and reject rise; it will be to your ultimate demise?

Its time for those like you to wake up and see, not just smell, reality, "whether you like it or not."

"He is the most arrogant, self serving, megalomaniac ever to be elected." Yeah, I feel that way about Cheney too! I would say that about Bush, but he was more of a puppet than anything else. Cheney, Rove and Rumsfeld pulled his strings, yet his "my way or the highway" resonated with such far reaching negative consequences for this country, it made everyones' head spin, and it caused this country to spiral into political and economic despair.

It is obvious you are anti Obama, and you are so quick to judge his decisions without considering why he is making them. This country needs a lot of 'fixing'. Obama didn't make this mess. Are you not paying attention. Obama isn't 'hell bent' on destroying capitalism. The Republicans have been doing that for a long time. You cannot have an effective capitalistic economy if you allow it to go unchecked, and greed takes over. As a result, everyone loses. When deregulation became the name of the game and competition got eliminated by unchecked corporate takeovers and monopolies, you no longer have a productive capitalistic economy. (Capitalism only works when you have competition). I hate to break your bubble here, but we are not the most prosperous of nations today, nor are we the most productive. Take a look around. Where is the prosperity when half of our nation is without health care, and many people are facing bankruptcy due to medical costs and/or dishonest lending practices by banks and lending institutions, coupled with wages flatlining while the cost of living, especially housing, is more than most average people can handle. Where is the productivity when you have at least 10% unemployment with a very slim chance for an immediate recovery. Why do you think President Obama has to take aggressive measures to get this country back on track. Take a look at what FDR had to do to get this country out of a depression. Yes, it will require much more of government intervention to remedy this horrible situation we are in. When you have corporations who have made their fortunes by our capitalism willing to reinvest in America, willing to keep their companies here, willing to hire Americans, instead of looking for cheap labor elsewhere, willing to pay their fair share of taxes, instead of being enabled by previous administrations by tax loopholes and tax-free outsourcing, when businesses are willing to self-regulate and realize that one does not give CEO's millions of dollars in benefits and salaries, when the people they employ are barely making it, then we could talk about President Obama "raping our nation."

I'm sorry, Mr. "not perfect", but you are wrong in your comments, because you are not facing the reality of the situation. Do your homework. Don't just listen to what you've been told, or the handful of people you chose to believe; really look at our history and learn as much as you can from all sides to be able to give an honest and informed opinion.

PS: Late-breaking news. Are you looking at the progress Obama is now making in Russia, using diplomacy. I would say it is very good indeed to get other countries to be willing to cooperate and work with us toward a more peaceful world; wouldn't you agree?

PPS: To everyone else. I am sorry for going off topic, but I just couldn't let this go.

Poor Miss Barbara,

Little do you know that I am a histrorian, and that I know full well what I'm talking about.  It is simply obvious that you are anti-corporation, ant-profit, and anti-capitalism.  Yes I oppose Mr. Obama at every turn, since, as a student of history and observer of current issues, I see that he hes taking the fast lane to destruction.  We can thank Mr. Wilson for starting the socialist decline, then MR. Roosevelt for creating this monstrous welfare state where no one wants to be responsible for themselves.  Roosevelt might have gotten us through the War, but he began a war on individualism and self-reliance here at home. 

Mr. Obama makes my skin crawl everytime he goes outside the country with his list of 'I hate America because...'  He says it's time to put the Cold War behind us- well, DUH! We put it behind us in 1989 when we won it! There is nothing you, he or anyone can say that will convince me that he is using 'diplomacy' to disarm our defenses while insane dictators around the globe are increasing theirs.  His is a failed policy.

It would be nice if 'we could just all get along with doves flying and peace signs.'  This is reality - not some drugged out hippy conference.

Admittedly, I am not, nor is anyone, perfect, but at least I know I am right! :-)

Mr. Wrong,

You say that you are a "historian" *cough*Bullshit*cough* yet at the same time you say that "we won" the Cold War. That is absolutely false, Russia beat itself. Russia was guilty of over-reaching, just as Dubya and the Rethuglican Rubberstamp Congress had done to this country. You call yourself a "historian," I would say you are more of a Rethuglican "historian," which would be a REVISIONIST historian.

Just because your hero Reagan "declared" us the "winners" of the Cold War, and told Gorbie to "tear down that wall" doesn't a victory make.

Don't think I'm a Democrat, I'm not. I'm an independent who leans libertarian, and one who thinks on many issues Obama is doing good, and on others doing horrible. I am probably one of his most vocal detractors on this site. I was against the multiple bailouts such as GM, Chrysler, AIG and the financial industry. If they are going to go under, LET 'EM.

Your way has already proven itself to be wrong already, you know the one that rapes the poor and middle class to just give the corporate the welfare checks the feel they "deserve." And in THAT aspect, yes, Obama HAS failed. He has kept much of the same policies YOUR guys have been "trying" for many decades, and as we are seeing in this depression, those policies have FAILED the American people.

To use your closing phrase, Admittedly I am, nor is anyone, perfect, but at least I know you're full of shit!

Mr . Hershey,

The name is RIGHT, since you seem unable to read, and I have not slighted you in the least by calling your erroneous opinions bullshit, so I would appreciate if you didn't do that to mine.  You know nothing about me, yet you seem to know it all.  Why is is that libs (or the 'independent' set who can't seem to make up their minds) must resort to immediate name calling and making up silly words like 'rethuglican' ??? 

You'll never win, but good luck in trying.

And do try to learn someone's name before calling their opinions bullshit, please.

The only difference between yourself and Dave name calling is you take the back burner approach to degrade people. While Dave calls out the bullshit when he sees it. You don't call them names directly or tell them their facts are bullshit as contrast to your stark opinions, but you say your stupid parroted regurgitation's like "I think it is vital to 'know your enemies' and those that would destroy your way of life."

How two people of the same sex getting married destroying your way of life? Its not. Perhaps it might be if you feel women are below men; since many relationship psychologist and sociologist state that the "facts" say same sex couples are better and more stable than opposite sex couples.

Married heterosexual couples can learn a great deal from gay and lesbian couples, far more than the stereotypical images presented by the television show "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," according to the first published observational studies of homosexual relationships.

"Gay and lesbian couples are a lot more mature, more considerate in trying to improve a relationship and have a greater awareness of equality in a relationship than straight couples," said John Gottman, a University of Washington emeritus professor of psychology who directed the research along with Robert Levenson, a University of California, Berkeley, psychology professor.

"I think that in 200 years heterosexual relationships will be where gay and lesbian relationships are today," said Gottman, who now heads the Relationship Research Institute in Seattle.

In the first of two papers published this month in the Journal of Homosexuality, the researchers explored the conflict interaction of homosexual and heterosexual couples using mathematical modeling techniques. In the second study, they looked at factors influencing gay and lesbian couples' relationship satisfaction and dissolution.

"In the modeling paper we looked at processes, and they look so different you could draw a picture," said Gottman. "Straight couples start a conflict discussion in a much more negative place than do gays and lesbian couples. Homosexuals start the same kind of discussions with more humor and affection, are less domineering and show considerably more positive emotions than heterosexual couples.

"The way a discussion starts is critical. If it starts off in a bad way in a heterosexual relationship, we have found that it will become even more negative 96 percent of the time. Gays and lesbians are warmer, friendlier and less belligerent. You see it over and over in their discussions, and their partner is receiving the message they are communicating. In turn, their partner is allowing himself or herself to be influenced in a positive way. With married heterosexual couples a discussion is much more of a power struggle with someone being invalidated."

Gay and lesbian relationships seem to be marked by what Gottman calls "the triumph of positive emotions over negative emotions."

"Negative emotions have more impact in heterosexual relationships," he said. "This is why our previous research has shown you need a 5-to-1 ratio of positive to negative statements. This seems to be universal in heterosexual couples. But it may be different in gay and lesbian relationships where positive emotions seem to have a lot more power or influence."

Unfortunately Matthew, THAT doesn't even work. Not all parents (or family members for that matter) are as accepting your father or Dick Cheney (when it comes to family members being LGBT.)

There is a very high rate of teen suicide among LGBTs, much because of the lack of acceptance by their family. There is a very high homeless teen population due to the same reason.

It is unfortunate in today's society we are still having to protest this crap, but it is a reality nonetheless.

Well, now, I guess there is nothing more to say Barbara, since you know it all and isist that I know nothing - its goes with my long held theory: never argue with a fool.

 Have a great week.

What a child... LOL and I am the young one in these here parts.

NJ did you get the memo from Jesus that the rapture just isn't going to happen (because its bullshit) and you feel bad about it? Why dont you go take it out with your church since they are the ones who continually lie to you telling you "here are the conclusions, now what facts can we use to support them," in stead of "here are the facts, what conclusions can we draw from them."

You might be a historian, but I am a premedical science student. Most historians I know are atheist or agnostic because through studying history they found how depraved and destructive religion and its flocks are. Your statements suggest that you feel being on the losing side of history is a good thing; that being an oppressor of a minority is a just cause.

To put it simply the facts are:

Homosexuality is a common accruing natural phenomenon. 

Humans are also part of nature and there are those who have a sexual orientation that is homosexual.

Same sex relationships last far longer than those of heterosexuals, and are considered the vanguard of what heterosexual relationships could become. -John Gottman PhD

One cannot change their sexual orientation

Sexual orientation is not a choice

Sexual orientation is different for each human being. Like fingerprints or tiger stripes.

gay people exhibit lower rates for being pedophiles than heterosexuals.

NARTH is a discredited, anti-science/psychology organization that tries to undermine half a century of research, facts and conclusions by real doctors.

James Dobson is a discredited religious psychologist who ex-gay programs and talk show have been complicit with the rise in anti-LGBT violence and teen suicide.

Same sex couples raise children equal and often better than opposite sex couples, because they often don't instill intolerance and bigotry into their children.

These are the facts; facts found through nearly half a century of research. Now what conclusions can you draw from them?