-
GoBadgers wrote on 08/19/2009 04:57:29 PM:I like to know why we don't tax this GL lifestyle. It doesn't matter if you are obese or a heavy smoker, gays, especially gay men, have a shorter life expectancy and are a grave health care risk. Yet we discriminate against smokers, heavy people are being targeted, but gays with their disgusting lifestyle and all the ailments that goes with it are immune from inclusion in this serious debate.
I think it is incredibly bizarre that people actually want to encourage others to live hopeless, unhealthy lives and even more, dictate to everyone else that it is a reasonable decision! Thank you Mayor Sullivan for giving us a little breathing room before these logic-challenged liberals raise their stupid ordinance again.
If this fellow were allowed to do so, he would tax gay men because he believes they "are a grave health care risk." He has no shred of evidence to back up this statement (nor did the several other people who accused gays of this during the hearings), and yet, if he were to have a seat at some level of government, he would single gay men out for taxation. He attempts to justify his treatment of gays by saying that they "live hopeless, unhealthy lives..."
I fully expect bullies like the fellow above to make it a point to go out of their way to let gay people know that they lost, that they will be discriminated against in future, and that nothing can be done to stop it. No ordinance. No equal protection under the law. The council on discrimination will continue to round file complaints of sexual discrimination because, according to Mayer Sullivan, Dan Coffey, Debbie Ossiander, Chris Birch and Bill Starr, such discrimination doesn't exist. NEXT!
1 comments:
At the 1st assembly meeting the Red Shirts (should have Brown) keep chanting "Equal Rights,Equal Rights,Equal Rights" - they stopped that, someone must have pointed out to them that that was NOT what the Red Shirts actually wanted.
Then there was a rumor that Jerry was going to get signatures to get this on the ballot - but that went away, maybe because 57% of the Assembly ended up voting their constituency and Jerry figured that dan would veto the ordnance and dan could not veto a vote?
Post a Comment
Please, no foul language, and be constructive with your thoughts.