Comments (19) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   parkersinthehouse said, 16 days ago

   i love you bennett - such class

2. 

   Ken Warren said, 16 days ago

   You’re right, very, very classy cartoon.

   Gays and Gay marriage will be a very big issue for the Republicans because it’s gets their base to out vote. Hate Works.

3. 

   NoFearPup said, 16 days ago

   Maybe being “gay” isn’t something most Americans want to have classified as “protected” behavior ? 31 out of 50 states have rejected same sex marriage.

4. 

   churchillwasright said, 16 days ago

   KEN: Yes, we all know that everyone against gay marriage hates gays. That’s why this defeat is no surprise in that most Republican of states, Maine. /sarc off

   The Gay Lobby has miscalculated. Instead of pushing for Gay Marriage, they should be concentrating on legalization of Civil Unions.

   BTW, Ken, can you provide a breakdown of votes by party affiliation? I can’t find one (not that I have any doubt that a greater % of Reps would have voted against it. I just know that there are more registered Dems in Maine than Repubs.). I’d just like you to substantiate you’re rant at least a little.

5. 

   parkersinthehouse said, 15 days ago

   to say everyone against gay marriage hates gays is ridiculous

   marriage does not belong to homosexuals - my opinion

   but hate? it’s not in my nature - and i think you’re wrong about us

   bennett’s toon is classy because of his artwork and his delivery - i don’t support your hate

6. 

   oldlegodad said, 15 days ago

   If gays would just stop acting qu€€rs there would be no problem.

   Hairy dudes in tight short shorts are gross.

7. 

   Loco80 said, 15 days ago

   Hate doesn’t enter into it. Reality does. So far, the popular vote is 31 states to NO states. That is a fairly substantial statement, spoken by the population of mostly “blue” states.
   Ken, if you are a Monty Python fan, did you ever watch “The life of Brian?” Do you identify with “Loretta?” There was no hate spoken there, only acceptance, but REALITY set in.

8. 

   comYics said, 15 days ago

   I think christians should have special rights also, like not having to be around a-holes since we believe in peace.

9. 

   scottfreitas said, 15 days ago

   It is intellectually dishonest in the extreme to even pretend the institution of marriage has any connection to same-sex “couples”.

   Marriage is as old as Man, an institution which has existed for eons, and which has NEVER been connected with homosexual behavior. Only in the past 20 or so years, in certain portions of the West, has there been a pureply politically-driven movement to redefine marriage into something which literally makes no sense and serves no purpose, other than to serve the selfish whims of nihilists.

   Sane people are trying to stem the tide of madness which is swallowing Western civiliztion, but I fear it is hopeless. With our judeo-christian foundations forcibly torn away from us, we are fated to do nothing except drift towards the same destruction which every other great civilization before us has suffered…

10. 

    HUMPHRIES said, 15 days ago

    ^ selective “facts” ?

11. 

    cdward said, 15 days ago

    comYics, Christians have had special rights in this country for years.

    oldie, wrote: “If gays would just stop acting bleeep there would be no problem.” Sigh. If you replaced the word “gays” with any number of groups, it would be true as well. For example: “If GoComics commenters would just stop acting bleeep there would be no problem.”

    Fortunately, none of the gays I know walk around in tight short shorts. Actually, most of them are far more conservative dressers than the straights.

12. 

    DrCanuck said, 15 days ago

    Did no one else catch the doppleganger here?

13. 

    motivemagus said, 15 days ago

    cdward - and better dressers, too.
    (original) scott, you’re not correct. There are examples of same-sex marriage around the world, and far into the past – a quick check reveals examples from the Ming Dynasty, in various African cultures, and, perhaps most significantly, a casual reference by Cicero; apparently by Juvenal’s time it was a commonplace, as he attended a number without special comment. It was banned by Emperors Constantius II and Constans in 342 AD – with the advent of Christianity. If anything, it far predates Christianity, and is only now returning to common use.

14. 

    fennec said, 15 days ago

    Yep, two scotts and two different accounts and two opposite POV’s. Seems to happen with a certain degree of frequency here.

15. 

    deadheadzan said, 15 days ago

    Dr Can, yes, 2 Scotts is quite a coincidence. Happens fairly often.

16. 

    scottfreitas said, 14 days ago

    They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but whomever is imitating me seems to have missed that old saying… ><

17. 

    comsymp said, 14 days ago

    In the long run, It won’t matter what the voters think in Maine, California, Florida or any of the other states that have forbidden same-sex marriages. This one will be decides by the courts, and it’s a no-brainer.

    Homosexuals currently have no federal civil rights protection of any kind, and they are forbidden to marry because of religious intolerance… period. The perception that marriage should be exclusively a heterosexual institution is based on religious law, therefore, is blatantly unconstitutional.

    Civil unions for same-sex couples would be fine if straight couples were restricted to the same status. But as long as heterosexual couples are given the right to marry by the state, so should gay couples. Separate status is an inherently unequal status.

18. 

    comsymp said, 14 days ago

    ———-

    scottfreitas writes, “Only in the past 20 or so years, in certain portions of the West, has there been a pureply politically-driven movement to redefine marriage”

    ———-

    Yeah, scott, progress is a bitch. I hope you don’t mind the rest of us evolving without you.

19. 

    parkersinthehouse said, 14 days ago

    one scott is two too many