another thought on gay marriage

let's say you have a white friend who is inspired to be in the baseball hall of fame. Then you find out that this white friend wants to be in the african american baseball hall of fame. Wouldn't you say "humm.....I like you....I support your bid for being in the baseball hall of fame, but there is a problem....you see you are a white person and therefore you canNOT be in the african american baseball hall of fame......not because I discriminate against or hate you....but by common sense, your "dream" won't work and you'll have to "settle" for Caucasian American baseball hall of fame". That's what everyone with a brain would say. How would you feel if that person gets angry and demand we as a society to change the definition of "african americans" to include white people so that he can be in the african american baseball hall of fame? it's stupid and ridiculous. This is exactly what's happening w/ gay marriages.

if you do a survey of all of the people in the world about their definition of marriage you'll see VAST majority of them support marriage being between man and woman. So liberal americans are just plain stupid.

health care and education reform

Liberals complain about Conservative's views and actions on healthcare as non-sense and obstructionist. To some degrees I agree. But I have an interesting point of view here to show that liberals are as non-sense and obstructionists as they accuse republicans to be ... but just on different issues.

Health care reform vs education reform

• health care is broken so is our education system.

• american health care is ranked low in all developed nations and american education system is also ranked bottom in the list.
• Millions of americans have no health care because the system sucks. Millions of americans didn't get good education from public schools because they suck as well.
• People die from lack of good health care. Kids get shot, robbed, raped, beat up in schools.
• People get poor health care and kids get poor education.
• There has not been any serious effort to reform health care until now. There has not been any serious effort to reform our education system until now either.
• Democrats came up with a health care reform with public option as a main point of the health care reform. Republicans came up with charter and voucher system as a main point of the education reform.
• Democrats accused repbulicans on being obstructionist on health care reform; republicans accused democrats on being obstructionist on education reform.
• Republicans wants the same old way of tax credits to "fix" the health care system. Democrats wants the same old way of paying more to the teachers to "fix" the education system.
• Tax credits is just a patch work and does not solve the fundermental issues in our health care system and paying more to the teacher is also a patch work and does not solve the fundermental issues in our education system.
• Democrats say Republicans wants to keep the profit up for insurance and drug companies so they can get campaign contribution from them later. Republicans say Democrats wants to keep the salary up for teachers in teacher unions so they can get campaign contribution from them later.
  
• Republicans are working for the interest of drug and insurance companies and not caring about americans in general and tried to stall health care reform. Democrats are working for the interest of teachers union and gay activist groups and not caring about american children's interest and tried to stall education reform.
• Republicans mobilized their base to fight against public option and democrats mobilized their base to fight voucher and charter schools.
  
• Democrats say republicans shameless invented the rumor of "death panel" and "socialism" to scare the people about health care reform specifically about the public option. Republicans say democrats shameless invented the rumor of "they are turning our children into products and let big corporation make money off our children" and "racism" to scare the people about education reform specifically about the privatizing schools.
• Liberals say most conservatives ignorantly agreed or lead to believe that publictizing health care is a bad idea. and Conservatives say most liberals ignorantly agreed or lead to believe that privatizing schools is a bad idea.
• Liberals say conservatives are stupid rednecks. Conservatives are saying liberals are stupid perverts.
  
• At the end of the days, liberals work for teachers union and gay activists groups and republicans work for insurance and drug companies. And no one is working for America. And most americans are just too stupid to realize that.
  

As you can see both side are doing the EXACTLY the same thing i.e. making up bullshit and lies to protect their special interest groups and not caring about what's really good for america. The saddest thing is that liberals in general have such limited intellectual capacity to realize the party they support are as bad as the party they hate and liberals are no smarter or rather as dumb as conservatives. But liberals in general are too self absorbing and arrogant to reflect on this.

Hate crime bill

Today the house is going to vote on including gays in the hate crime bill. (http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2009/10/09/1008414/adl1) The argument is that gays should not be made as 2nd class citizen by not being included in the hate crime bill. There are many violent crimes against gays so they should be protected under hate crime bill.

I am ok with that. But then there is another question, what about fat and ugly people? there are also many violent crimes against them. I personally know kids in school get beat up because they are fat. By not including fat and ugly people then are we saying they are 2nd class citizen? Then what about alcoholics who argue they have a proven genes that contribute to their alcoholism. Should they not be protected under hate crime bill if they get beat up because a drunk? As you can see, the problem is very apparent that if you protect a few special groups under hate crime bill, then other groups can argue they need to be protected as well otherwise it constitutes discrimination.

for example, 2 friends are walking down the street. one is fat and one is gay. 2 gangsters came and said to one "we are going to beat you up because you are fat" and to the other "we are going to beat you up because you are gay" so one gangster punched the gay person and the other punched the fat person. Then the gangsters are arrested and prosecuted. Even though they both committed exactly the same violent crime originated from hatred, one who beat up the gay person gets 10 yrs and the one who beat up the fat person gets 5 years. How f*cked up is this? Either both should get 10 yrs or both should get 5 yrs. How can we live in a society where there are specially protected groups? How would you feel if we live in a society that punishes criminals more if they victimized a wealthy white person vs a poor black person? wouldn't you say that we should punish crimes equally regardless who the victim is?

The current way of hate bill basically said "hey if you want to earn the privilege of being specially protected, you must pay a lot of money to democrats in the form of campaign contribution just like gays did. BUT if you don't, then your group of people will be 2nd class citizen and won't be protected even though you suffer as much or more hate than gays do, just like, for example, fat or ugly people." This is black mail.

so what's the solution? well, it's either abolish the hate crime bill and punish criminals equals so we don't have "superior" groups of people to protect OR expand the hate crime bill to say if anyone commits a crime against another person(s) based on any attributes of that person (race, sex, immigration status, fatness, ugliness, orientation, political views, etc.) then that constitutes hate crime. I am in favor of 2nd option because hate crime is hate crime regardless what that person is hating. Hate against gays is the same as hate against blacks and same as hate against fat people and so on so forth. Hate is hate. why should we make some hate more criminal than others. If we as a society truly believes in stamping out hate crimes then let's stamp out all hate crimes as oppose to only stamping out hate crimes against groups that paid a lot of money to democrats in the form of campaign contribution.

Hate from Liberals

I will start using this particular blog entry to start keep track of all the hate crimes and anti democracy actions committed by liberals.

1) Some liberal crack head shot and killed an abortion activist who was protesting legally and peacefully. This kinda of liberal hatred is unacceptable.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/index.html

2) One of the biggest liberal grassroot organization ACORN is caught telling people how to start a prostitution ring involve underage illegal immigrants without getting caught and how to get tax credit for the prostitution ring. Shameless.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/10/acorn.prostitution/index.html?iref=newssearch
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2009/09/16/am.acorn.video.reaction.cnn

ACORN is also caught in voter registration fraud.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/10-13-2004/0002275937&EDATE

3) One of the biggest liberal abortion operation "planned parenthood" has been revealed to have help to conceal statutory rapes, sexual abuses, or even outright racial genocide.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08022802.html

4) Liberals say they are open minded but in practice they'll attack anyone who disagree with their agenda even on things that are not related. In this case they attacked liberman for not supporting public option and now they are targeting his wife all because her husband decide not to sleep with liberal agenda.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/12/14/hadassah-lieberman-under-attack-over-industry-ties/

And they harrass him whenever they can. Democrats are hateful towards different ideas

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

why gay movement is hateful and discriminatory

Here is an interesting thought. Let's say you live in 1900s where women in united states cannot vote and there is a movement called "let's allow white women to vote". This movement explicitly did NOT include minority women. Anyone other than white supremacists would ask why this movement only covers white women? what about black, asian, hispanic, and native american women? The answer from "let's allow white women to vote" activists is that there are more white women and white women are the major so let's worry about the majority first and maybe we'll revisit later about minority women's rights to vote. For now, let's worry about the "important" group i.e. white women." Wouldn't you say this movement is a hateful, discriminatory, racist movement that reaffirms white society's degrading views on minorities. what do you mean by "let's worry about the majority white women?" huh? why can't the movement include all women? wouldn't you fervently against this movement because it's so called discrimination in mask?

well, same exact thing with gay movement. There are many other groups than gays who currently cannot get benefits as married couples. For example, an 80 year old lady and her 60 year old daughter who where never married. The mother and the daughter live together in the same apartment, contributing money to sustain themselves. They depend on each other in a partnership, and they love each other in the mother-daughter way. How they depend on each other and support each other are exactly the same as heterosexual or some gay couples do. But currently they do not get any benefits married couples or civil unioned gays get. Nothing. I.e. they are treated worse than gays if you take gay's argument. Another example are 2 old sisters living together. They are never married to anyone else, and they are not incestuous lesbians i.e. they are just living together as 2 sister would. Supporting and depending on each other. They don't have any of the rights traditionally married couples or civil unioned gay couples do. In other words, there are many other groups who have the same plight and have met with same or worse discrimination than gays do. Yet the gay movement deliberately ignored them just like in my example the "let's allow white women to vote" movement deliberately ignored minority women. By forcing majority of americans to accept gays' definition of marriage, it still does not at ALL address the need of other discriminated groups. The mother and daughter and the 2 sisters obviously cannot get married and they don't want to. Why should they suffer because they are in a non-sexual partnership? By not including them in the solution gay movement offers in essence is discriminating them the same way the "let's allow white women to vote" movement is discriminating against minorities. And that make gay movement hateful and biased.

if gays are not a bunch of hateful and discriminatory bigots, they, instead of proposing to change the definition of marriage which does NOT help the mother/daugher and 2 old sisters groups, would and should push for a more balanced solution by revisiting why our nation is distributing benefits and rights based on marriage or even civil unions. Even if gay marriages or civil unions are fully allowed, 2 people will still have to in essence f*ck each other in order to get benefits/rights. Why do 2 people have to f*ck (whether heteralsexually or homosexually) in order to get beneifts and rights? why can't gays push for giving benefits based on any partnerships even non sexual ones? In french domestic partnership is granted to people like mother/daughter and 2 old sisters. Just like people asked in my example why can't we have a movement that allow all women to vote which address the suffrage issue for all women I ask why can't gays come up with a solution that addresses the inequality of all groups? If the "let's allow white women to vote" activists insist there is no way to include minority groups in their movement I must say they are either stupid or hateful. And this is what I say about gay activists because their solution only caters to their need while ignoring and discriminating the others just like "let's allow white women to vote" solution.

this is why people hate democrats

As a part of budget cut in California, democrats included a 4 billion cut on correctional facilities (jails) You would think that saving would come from cutting back on the money spent on prisoners by cutting down some of the ridiculous treatment prisoners gets and cut back on the frivolous pay prison unions get. WRONG. They are proposing to release 40,000 prisoners. While they claim these 40,000 criminals are going to be non-violent ones but there are some significant issues they conveniently "forgot" to mention to Californians.

1. The reason why we spent so much money on prisons was because we have many crimes committed. Democrats passed laws that made california very attractive to illegal immigrants and many of the crimes are commited by illegal immigrants. Democrats also dominate the school board and california schools are the WORST in the country. 30% drop out rate, 40% of students can't meet basic math and reading requirement. Yet california public schools spend twice as much as california private schools per student and achieve a fraction of the results that private schools deliver. Democrats controlled public school system produced MOST of the new crimes. What do you think those disrespectful highschool drop out do? Many commit crimes! And there are many more examples. Democrats created the crime situation in California and failed to stop it. There are no one else to blame than democrats since they overwhelmingly dominate the state government.

2. The reason why prison system here in california costs almost double as neighboring state such as nevanda per prisoner is because Democrats gave almost unrestricted benefits to prison unions. The previous CA governor gray davis gave unions a 30% raise. Have you ever gotten a 30% pay raise? and relaxed the rules on overtime as a result the cost per prisoner skyrocketed and money paid to overtime went thru the roof and unchecked. The bottom line is californians give money/tax to the government to have the government do service for them but instead democrats stole the money by giving it to labor unions who then later paid democrats back in the form of campaign contributions. Since they stole so much money, we are now running out of money to do service for californians such as locking up criminals. But instead of stop stealing, democrats continue to give labor union high benefit and are planning to release criminals to terrorize law abiding citizens. The plan is obvious, when enough californians are victimized by the criminals that democrats released califnornians will be forced to raise taxes i.e. put more money in the pot for democrats to steal more and give to labor unions so they can get kickbacks later during election times. this is so evil and devious. Californians have voted to say no to new taxes thru the recent initiatives. But democrats are so devious they are deliberately releasing criminals to force us to pay.

3. There are many other ways to reduce prison cost than releasing criminials on the street. How about make criminals work? IF they have so much energy to fight in prisons all the time, then they should spend the energy to work! How about having prisoners doing 3 shifts? i.e. mid night to 8am, group1 sleeps, from 8am to 4pm group 2 sleeps, from 4pm to midnight group 3 sleeps. This will increase the prison capacity by 300%. And doing shifts is ok because millions of Americans are working on midnight and graveyard shifts. If law abiding Americans can do shifts, why can't criminals?

4. Criminals are in jail for a reason whether big or small crimes or nonvilent or violent crimes. The bottom line is that they have victimize others and that's why they are in jail. If you let them get off easier you are in essense training them to commit more crime. This is much like if a child misbehaves you need correct him right away otherwise the child will misbehave more and more. If a child pushes another child, a bad parent will say "whatever, I have no energy to correct him, as long as he does hit and injure another child", well guess what? by doing nothing or little you are actually encouraging bad behaviors and eventually the child will hit and injure another child. And we call this irresponsible parenting. what democrats are doing is irresponsible governing. Can we say "gee health care cost is so high so people are not allowed to see doctors unless they have a severe health issues. so if you have an infection, you can't see a doctor" well, by doing this you are actually making sure there are going to be an endless cases of severe health issues by not treating the problem when they are still treatable. If you have an infection, it's best to treat it early on than to wait until your arm needs to be amputated. Same thing with crime, when a criminal breaks into cars and you do little to punish him, he will commit more crimes, then he realizes if he gets caught all he gets is 10 hours of community service, a few counseling session, and 1 day of house arrest (gee I have to stay home and watch tv) then he will go up the crime ladder by committing burglery. And then he will move on to commit assault, then robbery, and then and only then you are arresting him. This will actually produce a endless stream of serious and violent criminals because your lax punishment are making car theives into violent criminals over time. If you look at the profile of criminals most of them started small then go up the crime ladder because they think they are above the law. By having lax punishment for small time criminals you are actually helping more of them go up the crime ladder and in the process millions of americans will suffer as a result of democrats irresponsible actions.

The sad thing is that liberal in general are so stupid and arrogant and incapable of thinking that they are going along with democrats on this issue with out even asking basic questions. And when liberals get mugged, robbed, and having their cars vandalized they still are so stupid to not realize who the real culprit is and blame republicans by not taxing more. Our country is in trouble as long as we have selfing absorbing and arrogant liberal crack heads thinking they know what they are talking about.

what's difference between homosexuality and race?

one of the most important argument gay activists use to support gay movement is that homosexuality is no different from race issue. i.e. if interracial marriage is ok then why is homosexual marriage not ok? When I say "you can't compare homosexuality with race, they are different" gay activists often counter by asking sarcastically "but what's the difference?" Here is a difference for one.

Interracial marriages are PROVEN success by history! There were extensive interracial marriages between major population centers. for example, between china and middle east people in counties like turmenistan, afghanistan, kazakhstan, etc. are decendents of interracial marriages between arabs, russians, and chinese. if you study the lineage, genetics, or just facial features, it is very apparent that they are mixed. Throughout history, during conquering quests by empires (greek, romans, Genghis Khan, ottaman, persian, etc.) their armies often marry locally and have EXTENSIVE interracial marriages and that produced many of today's population in those areas. Between Europe(white) China (asian) Africa (black) there are many population that can be scientically traced to be mixed (turks, asian minors, even arab, iranians, kurds, etc.) and the same holds in asian pacific islands and south america. There are even more extensive inter-ethnic marriages such marriage between Han and Xi ethnic chinese groups. In short, human history has extensive interracial marriages. Don't believe me? try to go to library and find out yourself. This is a well known scientific, historic, and social fact. As a matter of fact it is next to impossible to find a "pure bred" person who is from a lineage of a family that never married someone outside of their tribe, region, country, ethnic groups, or sometimes race.

Interracial marriages over history has proven as good if not better than intra-racial marriages. Socially it's proven to be sustainable i.e. families and large population of interracial marriages can form strong countries, flourishing economy, and social functions for hundreds of years. Look at Iran, Turkey, etc. Culturally it's proven "arguably superior" since it allowed people to bring out the best from each culture involved in interracial marriages and improve them. Genetically interracial marriages is KNOWN to significantly reduce genetic diseases and improve human gene pool. Don't believe me? go read scientific journals and everyone of them you read will support the fact that interracial marriages are advantageous as far as evolution and genetics are concerned. (of course, Nazi, KKK, and some white liberals will disagree)

So history has proven the extensive practice of interracial marriages and has proven the sustainability and advantages of interracial marriages. Can you say the same for homosexual marriages? NO. There has NEVER EVER been a culture of any significance or duration that practiced extensive homosexual marriages. NEVER. The closest example is during the very end of roman empire they allowed gay marriages but then the empire prompted crumbled and ended. There has NEVER been any scientific support that says a society with extensive and prolonged gay marriages can be sustainable past 1 generation. Nor any historic proof that shows extensive and prolonged gay marriages are as good as interracial marriages socially and culturally. NEVER. And NO ONE EVER can prove that gay marriages help human evolution and gene pool.

Interracial marries have proven and undeniable positive historic track record and gay marries don't! That's the difference! It's important to liberals readers that the purpose in this specific blog entry is not about whether gay marriage is good or bad but rather to show that there are significant differences between interracial and gay marriages contrary to what ignorant and uneducated white liberals claim. And gay activists are IGNORANT to make any comparison between those 2 types of marries. Gay artists' claim of sameness between interracial and gay marriages only shows their stupidity, lack of understanding of world history and racist hateful intention. I urge all readers to pass my blog site to your friends so we can stand up to refute liberals' stupid arguments.

Other evils

Lawyers, gays, and unions support democrats and let's take a look at what democrats have done to california. If they have their way with our country we'll all end up like california. But don't get me wrong, I don't like republicans (Pharisees: Jews back in Jesus's time who preach and pray publicly yet did not have true hearts for God i.e. hypocrites. I'll get to that later.)

-------------------------------

Sacramento, California -- With a new $8 billion deficit projected for the 2009-2010 fiscal year, fed-up Californians are planning to protest April 15 against high taxes and big government. Similar protests are planned nationwide.

In support of the Tax Day Tea Parties is SaveCalifornia.com, a leading California family values organization, which is warning state legislators not to even think of raising taxes or fees again.

"Even if the ruling Democrats don't recognize the folly of subsidizing laziness and illegal immigration, surely they can recognize billions in government waste from duplicative agencies, overpriced services, bloated salaries and outright fraud," said SaveCalifornia.com President Randy Thomasson.

"We're laying down the line," said Thomasson. "Raising taxes again on hard-working families is completely unacceptable. Families and businesses have to cut wasteful habits to survive; so must our bloated government. If Democrats or Republicans raise taxes again, 2010 is going to be a rough election year. Making California families pay $1,000 in new taxes is already punishment enough at the hands of our foolish, selfish, tax-and-spend politicians."

SaveCalifornia.com is helping fed-up citizens call and email Governor Schwarzenegger and their state legislators. The pro-family organization is especially urging Californians to attend the April 15 Tax Day Tea Parties.

At least 36 public protests against higher taxes and big government are scheduled for Atascadero, Bakersfield, Chico, El Cajon, Escondido, Eureka, Fresno, Glendale, Hollister, Los Angeles (two locations), Merced, Modesto, Napa, Norco, Oceanside, Palm Desert, Rancho Cucamonga, Redding, Redlands, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego (two locations), San Francisco, San Jose, San Mateo, Santa Ana, Santa Monica, Santa Barbara, Stockton, Temecula, Valencia, Ventura, Victorville and Yucaipa.

"Hard-working Californians are fed-up with our wasteful, tax-and-spend government that is hurting families and individuals," said Thomasson. "California state government has gotten so bad, it is punishing families that raise and feed their own children by levying a pseudo-tax of $210 per child. People who know that stealing is wrong will loudly protest oppressive taxes and big government at the April 15 Tax Day Tea Parties happening up and down California and across the nation."

For expert commentary on California's government waste, contact Tom Hudson, executive director of the California Taxpayer Protection Committee, at 916-445-3986.

Instead of raising taxes again, massive waste in California government must be eliminated:

1. Duplicative agencies: Instead of one agency handling taxes like in other states, California has four tax agencies that are duplicative, inefficient, confusing to taxpayers, competitive with each other and losing money. This is just one of many areas of state government where, collectively, billions of dollars and untold amounts of time are being wasted through poor organization, overlapping functions, outdated thinking, and bad financial stewardship.

2. Health care fraud and waste: Much of the state's waste comes from Health and Human Services, which amounts to one-third of the state budget. Fraud is rampant in Food Stamps, Medi-Cal and CalWORKS programs. In 2004, the California Performance Review noted, "The Legislative Analyst's Office has put the estimated loss due to fraud in the Medi-Cal program at $1.8 billion annually. Some other estimates go as high as $3 billion." In addition, duplicative agency functions are scattered among several departments, wasting precious funds.

3. Unemployment payments: The Unemployment Insurance Fund is going broke because it places too many people on unemployment, including those fired for misconduct, those not truly seeking work, seasonal workers, ineligible workers, those working other jobs, and deceitful claims. Fraud is definitely part of the $7 billion in annual payments, exacerbated by allowing people to file claims by phone or online and easily qualify rather than appearing in person to provide evidence and undergo examination. Unemployment checks are being mailed out of state to non-Californians and are going to illegal aliens in violation of federal law. Other crimes occur when a fraudster changes a recipients' mailing address online or by phone to his own address. Meanwhile, millions of dollars are being wasted each month on the Employment Development Department's dysfunctional phone system.

4. Government employees and commissions: Bloated salaries, pensions and benefits that vastly outweigh the private sector are weighing down the state budget. In tax year 2007, the State of California had more than 38,000 full-time employees with each being paid more than $100,000. In addition, the University of California had more than 17,000 employees with each being paid more than $100,000 in fiscal year 2006-2007. Very high salaries for state boards and commissions, which only meet once or twice a month, is another well-known example of government waste.

5. Prevailing wage: Conforming California's prevailing wage laws to the federal Davis-Bacon Act would save about $1 billion per year in state construction projects. California's inflated prevailing wage commonly adds 30% to costs.

6. Workers' compensation: Conforming California's workers' compensation laws to Arizona's laws, for example, would save state and local governments $2.5 billion per year. More savings would be realized by stepping up efforts to prevent fraud. Requiring physicians to verify claims should be the norm, not the exception. Unfortunately, California's workers' compensation system commonly allows 104 weeks -- two years -- of "temporary disability" benefits without requiring a medical professional to regularly validate whether the disability is real and the employer-paid benefits justified. What's more, the deceitful practice of allowing ex-cons to collect workers' compensation based on a premeditated "slip and fall" at a jail or prison must be eliminated.

7. Prisons: The average cost per inmate in California is about $49,000, twice the cost to run prisons in other states. For example, the average cost per inmate in Florida is under $20,000. A private prison in Oklahoma, which contracts with Arizona, cost only $47.65 a day per inmate, or $17,392.25 per year, in 2007.

According to the California Legislative Analyst's Office, "The average cost to incarcerate an inmate has more than doubled over the past 20 years from about $19,000 in 1988-89 to about $49,000 in 2008-09, an average annual increase of roughly 5 percent." This overspending problem was escalated in 2002, when Democrat Gov. Gray Davis gave the prison guards' union a massive 33.76% pay hike and shut down five private prisons that threatened the union's monopoly.
Since then, overtime and excessive costs have made corrections the fastest-growing part of the state budget. Reducing expenses by reining in bloated salaries, privatizing prisons and following the lower-cost model of federal prisons would result in substantial savings.

In addition to bloated prison costs, skyrocketing prison medical expenditures must be placed on an immediate diet. As the Associated Press reports, "Annual health care spending has soared from $2,714 in 1995 to $13,778 this year for each of the state's 171,000 inmates, according to the state Department of Finance. While the receiver's office disputes the state's cost figure, California's inmate health care costs are high compared to other states. University of Texas researchers found California averages $6,935 annually on each inmate's direct care, while Ohio and Texas each spend less than $4,300. New York spends $5,813, while Florida averages $4,330 on inmate health care, about the same as the federal prison system."

Adding to these costs is the obvious fact that most convicted murderers in California prisons are dying natural deaths with very expensive prison health care instead of receiving the death penalty even though that was their well-deserved sentence.

8. Government schools: California public schools receive more than 40% of the state budget yet have chronic problems: bureaucratic waste, low academic performance, high drop-out rates, lack of discipline, lack of accountability, language confusion, negative socialization, sexualization, violence, etc. Private schools operated by churches usually educate for half the price that the public schools charge taxpayers, with usually much higher achievement levels and parental satisfaction.

In the mid-1960s, California had an admirable public school system and spent $3,000 per pupil in year-2000 inflation adjusted dollars. Now, California taxpayers spend much more for a vastly lower quality of education. Current per-pupil spending statewide averages $11,626, a 27% increase in real, inflation-adjusted terms over the past decade. But all these billions of dollars aren't meeting the academic needs of children. And still, the well-moneyed government employee unions continue to call for more spending and higher taxes, which shouldn't even be considered when public school enrollment is declining.

California government schools are not poor, but misspend much of the $40 billion in state general-fund spending for K-12 public education they receive each year. The Pacific Research Institute study, Citizens' Guide to California Public School Finance, found that California's per-pupil spending is as high as $15,000 or $20,000 per pupil, depending on the district. According to the landmark 2007 education study, Getting Down to Facts, "Solely directing more money into the current system will not dramatically improve student achievement and will meet neither expectations nor needs."

9. Illegal aliens: Subsidizing illegal immigration and non-English languages costs California more than $10 billion per year. The drain of taxpayer funds is felt in the public schools, the state welfare system, the unemployment insurance fund, jails and prisons, and much more under Health and Human Services.

Illegal immigration is not just a federal problem. The California Legislature has undertaken no serious effort to place citizens' needs first at emergency rooms or report employment violations to federal authorities. What's more, California doesn't have firm laws mandating English immersion in schools or requiring English-only government forms and voting pamphlets. Between 1990 and 2004, dysfunctional illegal immigration policies helped close 70 California hospital emergency rooms and trauma centers. More than 42 percent of California's taxpayer-funded, Medi-Cal births are to illegal immigrant mothers. In Los Angeles County alone, the total cost of illegal immigration to taxpayers exceeds $1 billion per year, not counting education. Every month, $37 million in welfare and food stamps goes to illegal aliens and their families in Los Angeles County.

L.A. County Supervisor Mike Antonovich reports, "Within this County's health care delivery system, illegals are being treated at a cost of about $400 million dollars a year. The cost alone to our Criminal Justice system for the 25 percent of the illegals that up the jail population exceeds 250 million dollars a year. Additionally, illegals collect over $240 million in CALWORKS payments and $180 million in food stamp allocations. These costs alone exceed one billion dollars annually -- excluding the cost of education."

Five closings of hospital emergency rooms in 2003 and 2004 in LA County were largely caused by illegal aliens seeking "free" medical care. The head of the Los Angeles County Emergency Medical Services Agency stated that the cost of treating thousands of uninsured (illegal immigrant) is severely distressing hospitals.

Last year, hospital administrator Carol Plato testified to the Florida Legislature how just one hospitalized illegal immigrant cost her medical center $1.5 million. These high-cost occurrences in California, which has more than three times the illegal alien population of Florida, are likely draining funds from California hospitals at a greater magnitude.

10. Surplus property: Billions of dollars in revenue could be easily realized by the sale of thousands of acres of unused or underused property. In 2004, the California Performance Review noted, "The State of California owns millions of acres of real estate, plus more than 22,000 structures. It owns golf courses. It owns a stadium. It owns fairgrounds across the state, some located on patches of the state's choicest land." Last week, the California State Auditor criticized the state Department of General Services and various state agencies for failing to identify and report excess property that could be sold off. Selling of the valuable land under the antiquated San Quentin Prison could yield $2 billion alone.

Government leaders and voters would be wise to follow the substantial recommendations of the California Performance Review, which, in 2004, laid out a plan to save $32 billion over five years by eliminating duplicative bureaucracies, improving internal systems, stamping out fraud, and requiring performance-based budgeting. Now, more than ever, these sensible reforms need to be implemented.

Resolution 92

Here is another sick news. Democrats in congress are drafting a resolution 92 to URGE all public schools to observe a day of silence for gays. The day of silence means that any students and TEACHERS can choose not to speak for the day. This means students don't have to answer questions, participate in class and teachers don't have to teach! I.e. a holiday in school in celebration of gay and remembrance of gays "suffering.

Our public schools are the worst in the world. Our kids know so little about anything that it's shameful and shocking. Very little math, science, geography , history and even common sense. Our kids have the highest crime rate, least respect for parents, etc. Having another day wasted on those political gimmick is stupid. Our kids should learn more about math and science. How about a day of non-silence to celebrate math and science!?

If you have a day of silence of gays then why not have a day of silence for chinese, hispanics, native americans, blacks, fat people, short people, ugly people, nerdy people, hairy people, immigrants, people speak little english, and more? These groups also suffer pesecution because of who they are. We all know fat or ugly kids get picked on way more than gays in school, we all know those kids from mexico who don't speak english gets picked on way more than gays, then why don't we have a day of silence for them? Having a day of silence for gays but not for others is discriminatory and shows that gays are treated as the superior group of people who deserve special priviliges.

This again goes back to my claim in the previous posting that our schools have turned from academic institutes in to political brainwashing machines for liberals. Our children have been turned from students into commodities in what I call the "largest child sex trade in human history" by the teacher union and gay activists. In return for their tirelessly and faithful and consistent brain washing our kids to accept and cherrish homosexual life style and consequently providing more young sex partners for gays to choose from, teacher union get consistent support from democrats and gay activists for more job security, higher pay, more benefits REGARDLESS of their failure. They are trading our children for money. This is a CRIME.

Teachers and Gay issues

During Prop 8 there were a lot of claims by liberals that schools won't be required to teach our children about gay marriages. But that's not the point. The point is if gay marriage is legal and some liberal teachers decided to bring books about gay marriages (family with 2 dads or girls can get married to princess) there will be NO recourse whatsoever if the parents don't want their children to be exposed to such controversial concept. Even if the principal agrees, he/she cannot do anything since the teacher can say "gee, isn't gay marriage legal? they why can't I read those books about gay marriages to little children? As a matter of fact, I'll bring more books on this topic...what are you gonna do!" It is happening in Massachusetts. After gay marriage is legalized school teachers immediately started brain washing kids and parents could not do anything. Just wash the video below. When gays say that they'll leave our school neutral on this subject, they were lying



So some people say, "gee, why do you assume our teachers will be left leaning?"....well, if they are neutral on this subject then they would not have made huge financial contribution to fight against proposition 8. The matter of the truth is that the teacher union has donated more than 1 million dollars to fight against prop 8 i.e. they are "in bed" with gays. Just so sad and maddening that our teachers failed to teach our children academically and instead of learning more to improve their teaching skills they choose to ally with gays instead.

As a matter of fact in california there is a law in the making to officially have a "gay recognition day" in public school SB 572. In essence, they are turning our schools from academic institutes into a political brain washing machines. with this law they want to have 1 day of revelry to celebrate gays. Just imagine what kind of activities will be forced on our children from 1st grade to 12th grade. Isn't that sick? Our teachers have failed miserably in teaching our children, in order to save their jobs they made a deal with gays. " we will help you brain wash the children, letting more of them turning gay, so you can have more young sex partners in the future. In exchange, you will tell democrat politicians to hold the line for teachers and increase their benefits regardless of their performance". This is what I called child sex trade! Here is a link to show that they are even doing gay days in kindergardens http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78829

30% of californian high school students drop out. 30% !!!! Many of the rest of the 70% still lack basic math, science, history, geography, and reading skills. Maybe we should have a "let's learn more science day" or "let's learn a bit more reading day" instead of a gay day! This sort of evil nonsense is the reason why 20% of california kids can't find US on a map and 15% still think the sun revolves around the earth. But overwhelming % of our kids from public schools are expert in all sex positions and fetish and different types of drugs.

Some parents who can't afford private schools are trying to home school their children to avoid this type of gay brain washing. But liberal judges made a ruling to ban homeschooling in california unless the parents have teaching credentials which takes years of full time study to obtains. Well, the public school teachers have the credential and still failed miserably in teaching our children. So what good does that credential do? With such bad track record, any homeshcool can do a better job than public schools. The reality is that this a biased ruling to help fortify the position of teachers union so that their jobs are guaranteed regardless of the level of bad jobs they do. It also helped gays to guarantee that they have full access to all children in california so that they can brain wash them all and have their pick of young sex partners at will!

SICK! That's why I propose privatizing public schools. They have failed and no amount of money can save them. US public schools are ranked bottom in all developed nations for 25 years! Our public schools are like GM, Ford, and Chrysler that could not fend off japanese competition that started in the '80s. There is no point of saving these ineffective companies when they can't save themselves for 30years. By the same token, if we do the same thing about our public schools the the same result will come. We've tried to throw more money, more teachers, etc and only got minimal results. Do you know they've recently readjusted the medium score for SAT down to account for the fact that our kids are dumber now? Let's try something radical to privatize schools so that there will be real competition to do a better job in teaching our kids. The schools will have a better system better policy better visions and teachers are motivated more because it's either do a good job and get promoted or you are fired. That's why our private industry are so much more efficient and competitive than any government institutes. Democrates are vehemently against this idea because of gays and teacher unions (see my theory of their conspiracy above).

where does the insult end?

white liberal gay activists say "gays should get married because interracial marriages are ok i.e. if you let minorities intermix then why not let men intermix. " needless to say that's insulting and racist (see my previous posts) I ask myself when will such insult end? It's forseeable that in 5 years when white liberals want to have underage marriages (60 yr guy marries a 5 yr boy) then they will again use minorities to justify their festish. In another 5 yrs when they want to legalize beastiality marriage they'll again say "gee if you let blacks , hispanics , and asians intermix, then why not let humans and dogs intermix?".....when will they stop insulting us? when will they stop using minorities and civil rights movement as their tools to justify their festish?

what would malcomX and martin Luther King say

Gays are MOSTLY white liberals. That's a fact. They compare themselves to blacks. i.e. gay movement = civil rights movements, gay marriages = interracial marriages, etc. In short, they say " if blacks get to do this then we get to do this also"

I often wonder if Malcom X and Dr. King were alive and see and hear this kind of propaganda, what would they say? ......I strongly believe that both of them will see this as another example of insensitive and degrading racial attack against blacks. I only hope the civil rights leaders today won't be so complacent and cowardly that they will speak up against such racist and ignorant comparison.

Minorities are NOT white liberal's political slaves

Often times white liberals try to portrait themselves as minorities' friends and advocates. Until recently I believed them. But after a couple of incidents and some deep thinking I have come to the realization that while some of them are really our friends but many (approaching most) of them actually think of us as their political slaves who beg for their friendship, sympathy, welfare money, and affirmative action. And in return we "voluntarily" became their political peons and do any of their whimsical biddings.

I was once on a march to show support for traditional marriage in San Francisco (the epicenter of liberals and gay movement). While I was standing on the street many cars passed by slowly since the street is a very congested road. Many of them honked to show support and many of them gave me thumbs down, yell at me, and even flashed middle fingers. So that's fine on the surface, some ppl can get agitated over difference in opinions. Then afterward I realized that people who honked to show support are racially mixed (blacks, whites, hispanics, asians, etc.) and people who gave me thumbs down are also racially mixed. However ALL of the people who yelled at me angrily and showed me middle fingers were WHITE (about 15 of them)....yes ALL of them are white liberals. Why is that? Wouldn't you suppose ppl who gave me middle fingers should be also be racially mixed just like ppl who supported me or ppl who gave me thumbs down? So I reached the epiphany that white liberals get EXTRA angry because they have taken for granted that minorities are their political servants and slaves. To them we are like little puppies rolling on the ground to gain master's favor and get some table scrap in the form of affirmative action or welfare money. The master loves the little puppies since they do what he wants them to do. But when the puppies decide to not roll around and fetch sticks, then the master gets extra angry and kicks them. That explains perfectly why white liberals in that incident will get extra mad to use obscene gestures to show their disgust of our rebellion.

The message to white liberal is that the age of white liberal domination is OVER. We minorities, whether white, black, asian, or hispanics are NO longer your puppets or slaves (physically or politically). Don't expect us to vote however you want us to vote. In the case the gay rights, we will review our own conscience, culture, and religion and make decision accordingly instead of blindly succumb to your sexual fetish. White liberal always make the statement that "...if blacks get to marry whites, then men and men can get married too..." This shows clearly that they really think of us like trash in their mind that if we can get married interracially then anything goes. The only reason they smile at us is because we give them votes. Just ask yourself, if one day minorities vote for republicans instead, will white liberals still treat us the same way? African Americans in California voted overwhelmingly for prop 8 and just do a search on google and you will see tons of hate and racist blogs targeting african americans all because of that. Get the picture?

Some whites also asked me how I can explain that some "educated and affluent" minorities are on the side of gay movements. After all , still overall 30% of minorities in California voted for gays. Just watch this video and you'll the answer. I am a field negro too. And we minorities are FREE from the white liberal shackles!

king's new dress story

I think one of the major reason why gay movement is gaining momentum was because gay activists realized and successfully capitalized on the stupidity of the liberal Americans population by putting out this perception that if you are smart and open minded then of course you should see why gay movement is legitimate. And being liberals, they all wanted to look smart and open minded at ALL COST. So in order to show off their smartness and openness liberals embraced homosexuality without reservation. This reminds me of the king's new dress story where con arts claim that they are weaving a suit for the king that only smart people will be able to see. so to avoid being labeled stupid the king's servants all made up stories about them being able to see the new suit and how it was the most beautiful suit ever. This went on and on until the king was in a parade naked thinking he was really wearing the beautiful suit. And everyone cheered as if he was really wearing something in order to show that they are also smart. Until an innocent boy who is not full of shit told the truth that the king was actually naked. I think this deceitful campaign ran by gays is a much bigger hoax than king's new dress and it will take more than 1 person to speak up to reveal the truth.

Gay Marriages V.S. Abortion

Here is a startling and troubling observation.

Liberals and gay activists say gays are human beings and they are equal human beings, and they deserve ALL rights including the right of marriage.

The same group of people (liberals and gay activists) then turn around to say hey unborn babies are NOT human beings and they do not have ANY rights including the right to survive.

Isn't that hypocrisy to the extreme? On one hand they are criticizing half of American people about taking their rights away, and at the same time they are promoting taking the rights from unborn babies to just live. They say the words "F*gg*t" dehumanize homosexuals and is hateful and I agree, but then they turn around and call unborn babies "fetus" in order to dehumanize them to facilitate their abortion agenda i.e. abortion will be banned if everyone start to call fetus "unborn babies". They also asked sarcastically to Americans that "what right do you have to strip away my right to marriage?" but then I ask them "what right do you have to strip unborn babies' right of survival?" Gays say " I am genetically gay thru no fault of mine and why should I be a second class citizen?" ..good argument... then I ask " babies are conceived thru no fault of theirs and why should they be treated not even as a second class citizen and get killed at will?" Gays asked is it the right of majority to strip the minority of equal rights? Then I ask why are you liberals and gays support abortion that allow mothers to kill babies? Isn't genecide 1000 times more hateful than not giving equal marriage rights?

Some people attempted to explain such double standard by invoking the buzz words "a woman's right to her body". Well, is it really a woman's right to kill her baby? Can a mother exercise the right of her body by going to nigh clubs and not come home for days leaving her child at home starving to death? This is what we call child endangerment, abandonment, and child abuse. Can the woman tell the judge "hey it's my body and I can decide if I don't come home to care/feed my baby" well the argument is not going to fly because the judge will say your exercise of your right to your body has endangered your baby and plus you are a mother and your responsibility of taking care of your child supersedes your urge to go partying". If you don't want to get a baby then do not get pregnant. It's a woman's right to tell the guy to use condoms. it's a woman's right to her body to say "unless you put condoms on I won't have sex w/ you." Once you are pregnant, you have a living human being under your care and killing it through "exercising the right to your body" is murdering your child. The fundamental argument by abortion activists is that baby is not a human being and is only a piece of tissue therefore killing that "tissue" is ok. How would you feel if people say gays are not human beings and it's the right of anyone to discriminate them or even kill them? How would you feel?

Some people say "well if the baby is in uterus then it's ok to kill him/her but once it's out then it's not ok to kill" well, why does it matter if it's in uterus or not? it's a living human being. How would you feel if people say "hey, if a human being is heteralsexual it's not ok to kill him/her but if that same human being is a homo then it's ok to kill him/her" wouldn't you say the same thing that I say that "why does sexuality matter"? Isn't a human being a human being regardless of heteral or homo just like a human being is a human being regardless of inside or outside of uterus? You see, every argument gays use to support their cause and fight "discrimination" can be used to support prolife movement and fight abortion. But yet the same group of people (liberals) who support gay movement are against prolife movements. How double standard!!

If martin luther kings civil rights movement only included blacks and stated that only blacks are worthy miniority and deserves equality and rest of the minority (aisnas, hispanics, native americans, etc.) are not human beings. Do you think there will any legitimacy in such movement? Do you think civil rights movement will be as successful as today? The answer is NO. Because no one will join it because they find it double standard and insincere. The same holds for gay movement. Gay activists promotes "human rights" and equality but at the same time dehumanizing unborn babies and taking all rights including the right to survive from babies. That's why most of americans see gay movement as insincere and double standard.

Now is abortion ok for cases of incest and rape? that is in gray line and requires more thinking and debate. But I want to point out that overwhelming percentage of abortions performed today are not related to incest or rape or even life threatening condition to mothers. So please don't let these minority cases distract the main issue. I for one supports abortion IF the preganacy is threatening mother's life. To me a life threatening preganacy is like an innocent child holding a loaded pistol aiming at the mom's head. Now the child doesn't mean harm but is just about to pull the trigger. As a police man, you have no choice but to shoot the kid to protect the mom. But again, this is a minority cases and should not be used as an excuse to convolute the main issue.


I am interested in hearing from gays or liberals readers how you can on one hand ask for human rights and full equality but at the same time promotion genecide and label unborn babies as not human beings? who are you to say they are not human beings? Remember 300 years ago, white racists said black, asians, and other minories are not human beings the same way liberals and gays say today that unborn babies are not human beings. Remember unborn babies are as human as gays. If you help to contribute to their death thru abortion then why are you surprised that you are treated the way you are today?

To me gay movement propoganda is like listening to KKK members whining about how they are discrimated. Wouldn't normal listeners say "what the heck are you talking about...... well, stop murdering and committing hate crimes before you complain about being 'discriminated'...so double standard."

Letter from a Reader

Here is some excerpts from a letter from a reader who also faced persecution from gay activists.

....what is the choice when a human being like me is faced w/ intimidation from homosexual bigots? One must stand up and continue the fight for freedom of speech and democracy even when threatened by physical violence by gay activists... we must let American people hear our side of the story and let Americans learn the disgraceful tactics employed by gay activists....we should contact the media and use grassroots to let people know that we should not be afraid of hate and threats from gay movements and stand up and be able to speak our minds...... Americans should not be forced to recognize something they don't fundamentally believe based on people's cultural, moral, social, and religious background. Gays use black lists to target Americans whether day-to-day citizens or politicians who dare to oppose their agenda. How can one call himself progressive and open minded if they put people of different opinions on a blacklist? Isn't it the essence of democracy to allow difference of opinions and isn't the meaning of open mindedness to respect and accept of others who disagree with one's opinion? This type of balcklist should not exist in US. This vehicle of hate only exist in oppressive regimes such as cuba and north korea. It's so shameful to see gay activists using the same tactics used by totalitarin regimes.....

"Gay genes"

After seeing the success of civil rights movement championed by martin Luther king and Malcolm X gay activists tried to mimic it by declaring gay being an identity just like race. They claim that they are under unchangeable "gay genes" that propelled them towards homosexuality.

That claim is illogical. Why would evolution ever create such gene? There have been various attempts to explain the gay gene. One of the more prominent theory is that in cavemen time when time is bad the less dominant males will turn gay in order to stop reproduction so that his relatives (nephews, nieces) can have better chance of survival and at least those males can pass on their genes partially. The obvious question is if the time is bad and additional reproduction is not wise then why don't those male not reproduce i.e. because abstinent from sex? Most of the mammals only mate during a certain season so there is already a gene in mammals to turn off sexual urge and activities for an extended period of time. In many cases where external environment becomes too harsh, many mammal would skip a reproduction year/cycle. In order words the theory gays offer does not logically support gay genes. And their scenario mentioned above can only lead to periods of temporary abstinence rather than turning full out gay permanently.

And in animal world, gays claim, that you can find homosexual behaviors. That's true. However they always and intentionally did not mention the 2nd part which is those behaviors are temporary and are results of confusion, lack of experience to pin point a female, lack of dominance to fight and get a female, or a complete lack of female in a breeding population. There has NEVER been observed and proved of any instance where a male mammal knowing that he has full access to a mating female but deliberately choose a male to practice homosexual actives because it prefers male. NEVER has there been such observation. Once a mating female is introduced the male mammals in all such homosexual observations turned heterosexual. There has NEVER been a documented case of permanent homosexuality either. In other words homosexuality in mammal world in the wild is basically males can get females to have sex and they had to find some replacement such as trees or other males to hump. This is similar to having a un-neutered dog try to hump every guests that come to your house and also the sofa pillow. We've all seen and heard about things like this. Such behavior obviously does not mean bestiality is OK. If there is truly a gay gene then we should see this very evidently in primates where we should be able to scientifically observe that a significant percentage of primates (10-20%) are permanent and fully homosexual (i.e. intentionally reject a mating female in preference for a male instead) . Now since primates don't have any moral doctrine or church teaching so if this gay gene is present then it will show up in every primate groups i.e. everywhere you look. But as you all know there has NEVER been any documented mass OR permanent homosexuality in primates. So this means the gene is NOT present in primates as gays claim. Almost all human genes can be found in mammals so the lack of permanent gay genes in mammal is a good indication of no such gay gene in human.

third, it is politically incorrect and dangerous for anyone to fund researches that state gay genes do not exist. If I were to apply for a government grant to prove that gay is not genetic but rather a behavioral issue. Do you think I can get the grant? whoever giving the grant will be afraid of being called bigot, homophobic, hateful, use tax payer's money to fund intolerance, etc. that he will NEVER give me grant. In other words, the reason why you only see research paper that implies that there is a gay gene is because the research that show otherwise could never get any funding. And one must review carefully of those gay gene research to see the political bias of the researchers (for example, if the researcher is a big time liberal or even a gay), who's funding the research (don't tell me it's the GLBT organization), the type of research method (if their survey is done in san francisco, then of course 20% of male according to their "research" is gay), etc. Do NOT take any research paper on face value. Sadly scientific research now a days are being heavily influenced by political pressure. And also if a professor writes a research that states there is no gay gene, aside from lack of funding, he will get protested against and labeled as hate and bigot and get kicked out from his university. So there is alot of intimidation and that's why few dares to object or even provide research to prove that there is no gay gene.

You know in the early centuries when white people claim they have a superior traits or the white race is of superior breed. There were "scientific" research to show such crap. Anyone who object would be mocked, and precluded from the upper society. But now we know there is no such superior race/breed/traits. Same thing today, gays state there is a gay gene. Anyone who object will get mocked, protested against and "destroyed" politically and career-wise. But I bet in 10 years once the people are less eager to be politically correct then true science will show that there is no gay genes.

And so some may ask then "what about those studies that show there is correlation between some genes and being gay". Firstable assuming those studies are valid (see my point above about political driven or unscientific studies) we have to ask are those gene gay genes or personality genes that put individuals in situations where they are more likely to be gay. Let me explain. If I come up with a study stating that I found a CEO gene that if you have this gene then you are made to be a CEO and you are destined to be a CEO from the moment you are conceived. Anyone with common sense will know there is NO CEO genes. Rather the genes I isolated are most likely to be personality genes such as genes that make you stubborn/persistent (important quality to be successful), or genes for being very eloquent in talking (ability to bullshit your way up), or genes that make you like to delegate work to others (manager type). Having those genes PLUS the right environment and opportunities could significantly increase your chance of becoming a CEO but by no means it's a irreversible CEO gene that destine you to be a CEO. Same thing with a "pilot" gene. Well, there is no pilot gene but there are genes that make you much less prone to motion sickness, genes that suppresses fear for height, etc. that those genes, again, when combined with proper environment can increase your chance of being interested and becoming a pilot. So same thing I believe holds true with the "gay" gene and those studies that show correlations between being gay and have certain genes. For example, those genes they found could very likely be genes that makes a person very sensitive to rejection. So this group of guys who were rejected harshly by girls developed this fear and distaste for girls. But this by no means make them gays. But unfortunately due to lack of family support, common sense, or religious support, etc. some of them choose to approach males instead. That's why those scientists observed higher likelihood of being gay in those people , not because of an irreversible gay gene but rather a personality gene that combined with right situation (rejected by girls harshly, dysfunctional family, no friends, no religion, no community, hang out with certain group of people, etc.) can increase your chance turning into homosexuality. The other possibility is for that gene to be a personality gene of trying to be unique or trying to be someone else. You see many white boys trying to act black by dress up and talk and walk and act like African Americans all because they want to be "cool" like them but they actually look ridiculous. Well, people with this gene may also develop admiration for gays being so fashionable, so unique and different, so educated , and so rich that they intentionally or unintentionally tried to mimic them or even join them. Again, this is not a gay gene but a personality gene when combined with other personality traits and situations may significantly increase your change of going the wrong way. So you see those studies do NOT conclusively show that there is a gay gene but rather they show (if those studies are valid) that there care genes when combined with certain situations and opportunities and personalities could expose you to situations that may lead to homosexuality in today's society. If we live in 100 yrs ago these genes could just as likely to lead you into totally different things such as a monk or communists, who knows. So we must learn not to look at things superficially, but instead we need to take any findings and think beyond the obvious. I blame our public school systems for not teaching our children to think thoroughly or even think at all. That's why we ended up today with all those arrogant liberals who think they are smart but in actuality and in the eyes of people from other countries those liberals think very superficially.

Gay gene or no gay gene is really the minor point. the major point is that human beings have self control. I may have alcoholic genes but it does not excuse me for drinking excessively. I may have a violent gene but that will be no defense in court if I assault someone. I may even have a fat gene but being fat and heavy is still wrong. The point is the entire argument of gay gene is a moot and illogical approach to justify gay behaviors. Some liberal readers will say at this point that people all have different moral standards. True. That's why gays should not and cannot make a law to legalize gay marriage to force everyone who comply in their moral standards and their moral doctrine. You see? The message is: hey gay actistists, leave us americans alone!

Is opposition to gay marriage hate?

here is a story. Let's suppose you know a kid in middle school who eats his boogers. Yeah, what a disgusting habit. That kid thinks there is nothing wrong with eat boogers since we all swallow our own saliva too. what's the difference?! Hum..true.... That kid also says if I eat my booger how does it harm you in anyway? True. That kid also asks "am I not a human being even though I like to eat my booger?" well, yeah, that's right he's still a human being. So you decided to be his friend as long as he doesn't try to offer you his booger to eat :) You try to stop other kids from making fun of him or even beating him up. So you actually try to protect him. But one day that kid comes to you ask you to sign a petition to the national institute of education and you asked him what the petition is all about. He said he wants to petition to change the official English definition of the word booger from "solidified nasal mucus" to "an acceptable and chewy salty snack" he claims this change of definition will gain him rights and equality and stops discrimination, etc. Of course any person with common sense will say "dude, I respect your booger eating habit and I even defended you when other kids try to kick your ass. But man, changing the definition of booger to snack is going way to far. Booger is not snack and I don't want kids around the country to learn that booger is a snack!" How would you feel if that kid after finding out you don't support changing the definition of boogers started to spit on you, hate you, call you a bigot, a close minded fool, and even threatens to hit you? Isn't this story outrageous and ridiculous? Well, that's what gay activists are doing. Even though we Americans disagreed but tolerated their gay behaviors they turn on us and wrongfully accused any Americans who disagree with changing the definition of marriage as hateful and bigots! Well, just to make it plain to gay activists, we do not support changing the definition of marriage the same way we do not support changing the definition of booger to be included as a snack!

Right to vote being stripped away

What is the right to vote? Does it simply mean you can vote? or does your vote need to be counted? in other words, if we say African Americans have the right to vote but if some white folks don't like the way they voted then African Americans' votes can be discarded. Is that right to vote? Obviously NOT! The right to vote is for someone to be able to vote and his/her vote is counted.

Proposition 22 in California shows that about 60% of Californians favor the definition of marriage to be between opposite sexes. And the 4 judges under influence and pressure from gay activists said pretty much "oh, wait, thanks for voting but since we don't like the way you voted so your votes don't count and prop 22 is unconstitutional. Ha Ha." That equates to taking the right to vote from 60% of the people because whatever they've just voted didn't matter. WTF? Imaging you voted for Obama and the supreme court says "whatever, we don't like the way you voted and this election doesn't count" man, there will riots! Because people's votes need to be respected and counted. In essence, gay activists are trying to get marital rights for 10% of the population by stripping away the right to vote of 60% of the population! That is un-democratic and plainly evil! No one should be able to sit and watch our democracy is being undermined in such a fundermental way!

Where does it stop

When gay activists argue we should change the definition of marriage that often leads me to think where this slippery slope will stop.

Current definition of marriages
union between 2 adult human beings of opposite sex

the version of marriage definition proposed by gays is to remove the clause "opposite sex"
union between 2 adult humans beings

The polygamists will then also argue to change the number 2 to "x" to permit polygamy.
union between x number of adult humans beings

Then under age marriage proponents will argue to drop the word "adult"
union between x number of humans beings

The bestiality sickos will then argue to drop the word "human"
union between x number of beings

and so on so forth.......if we allow gay marriages to go ahead then I ask "where does it stop"?

Stupidity of changing definition of marriage

Gay activists often argue that changing the definition of marriage will give them more rights and equality. That on the surface sounds good but after a bit of thinking I realize how ridiculous it really is. Here is an analogy to make it clear.

I for one oppose affirmative action based on race because that takes away rights and equal treatment of poor/disadvantaged white people. So the proper approach to correct this problem is to revisit how we administer the affirmative action i.e. make it need-based not race-based i.e. anyone regardless of color should be able to receive help if he/she is disadvantaged socially and economically. But if someone tells me there is a quicker way to correct the current affirmative action laws by changing the definition of the phrase "colored people" to include white people because white is technically a color so white people should be also classified under the phrase "colored people" therefore they will be automatically included in the current race-based affirmative action laws since they are also "colored". I would say " what the heck are you thinking? what ? no, this is a stupid short cut instead of a thorough fix of the problem. If we change the definition of colored people to include white folks then what is the point of having the phrase colored people? ie. why don't we just say "everybody" instead of colored people then? This is a ridiculous idea". Well, it's the same thing with gay marriages. Currently family benefits are administered based primarily on marriage that indeed exclude others from getting equal rights in some cases. We need to thoroughly review how we give out family benefits such as giving social security benefits not only to surviving spouse, but maybe also to domestic partners, or even sibling partners (e.g. 2 old sisters who never got married to anyone and they live together to support and depend on each other. They are not emotionally or sexually engaged so they are not civil unioned but they are a form of plutonic partnership and I think they should be able to get each other's social security benefit should one decease). As you can see we should review and change the way to administer benefits. However, it is plainly a stupid idea for gay activists to say there is a quicker short cut by changing the definition of marriage to include gay couples. This does not solve the problem (i.e. the issue of 2 old sisters metnioned above would still be unresolved by gay marriages and they will still be discrimated and excluded) and if we change the definition of marriage to include gay couples, then what stops others from continue to change the definition of marriages? Changing the definition of marriage to include gay couples to get equal family benefits is as ridiculous as changing the definition of the phrase "colored people" to include white people in order to get equal benefits under affirmative actions. Gosh, liberals think they are all smart but not really. They are cows who don't think for themselves.

Gay activists are forcing their opinion on the rest of americans

Gay activists often ask me questions such as “why can’t gays get married?” I tell them the issue is not whether or not gays can get married. As a matter of fact gays CAN get married. They are free to call each other husband and wife and on one says gays cannot do that. The real issue is that gays want to go one step further by making it a law to allow gay marriages so that OTHER people who are morally, religiouly, socially, or culturelly object to gay marriages will be FORCED to accept it under law. So the issue should be correctly stated as “why are gays forcing their opinions onto the rest of americans?” So don’t let gay activitests trick you by thinking that the issue is about not letting them get married but rather show it to everyone that the issue is gays are forcing their opinion on us. This clarification instantly turns the table on this issue. I often ask them at the end of the discuss “how would liberal americans feel if the christians are making a law stating that Jesus Christ is now legally recognized as the national Savior of America (like national flag, national anthem , national flower, national birds, etc)?” Liberals would fight to death to prevent such a law even though it has no direct impact on their lives because they do not believe in Jesus and do not want their country to be associated w/ anything they fundermentally disagree. well, this is kinda the same for christians and normal americans alike on the gay issue. We will not be forced to accept anything we fundermentally disagree on a national, state or local level.

is gay movement (gay marriage) a civil rights issue?

people often compare gay marriages with interracial marriages. Specifically they say “well 100 yrs ago people of 2 races cannot get married but they can now, people of the same gender is not allowed to get married today and by the same reasoning that they should be allowed to get married just like people of different races”. let me just say as a minority myself that this comparison is totally inappropriate. One cannot compare race issue with gay issue. These 2 things are totally separate. If this approach of piggyback one movement on the previous movement is valid then what stops people who promote under age marriage from piggyback onto the gay movement? what prevents polygamist, beastiality people, etc. from also claiming “gee you let gays get married then why can’t we get married?” When people ask me “so interracial marriage is ok, then why can’t gay marriages be ok?” I ask them “let’s suppose gay marriages are legal, how would you respond if someone ask you a similar question that if gay marriage is ok, then why isn’t underage, polygamist, or even beastality marriage legal? If you say gender is not an issue, then people will say then why is age, number, and species matter in marriages?” once they hear my response I can see those gay activists are confused in their mind because they know the validity of this argument and they have nothing solid to respond. Often time they just respond something like “whatever” and resume their hateful name calling tactics. Their ignorant behavior clearly shows me that reasoning is NOT on their side contrary to what they claim. In addition, all of the people I’ve met who make such comparison between race and homosexuality are liberal white americans. Man, I say those libral white americans are ignorant and have no true understanding of what civil rights movement really is. Having someone stating that civil rights movement and gay marriage movements are the same is like hearing some libral white american stating that koreans and japanese are the same. Dude, give me a break. You stupid white libral americans. I have NEVER EVER hear a minority making such ignorant comparison.

2nd, if someone finds a bone and believes it’s a definiative proof of evolution and takes this bone to Dr. Darwin (assumes he is still alive). After careful examination Darwin himself declares this bone is nothing but a KFC chicken bone and means nothing to his theory of revolution. When Darwin himself, the creator of the theory of evolution, says something is not a proof of evolution that means a LOT. Because he will be the most enthusiastic person to embrace anything that supports his theory. when he rejects a proof that means it really is not a proof. so why am I tell you this example? well, african americans are the group that founded the modern civil rights movement, they’ve talk the talk, walk the walk, many of them died for their cause. and they continue to carry on the fight for civil rights. If the gay movement is truely part of the civil rights movement, then of course the african american community will open their arms to embrace it. But the reality is that OVERWHELMING percentage of the african americans and civil rights leaders say the gay movement is NOT a part of the civil rights movement. And as a matter of fact they resent such comparison. This goes to show you that gay marriage movements are so lacking support that they unilaterally piggy back on the civil rights movement in order to gain legitamcy.

In the next postings I will discuss the proposition 8 in california, my view of gay marriages, etc. stay tuned