Clint Eastwood Signs Brief Supporting Same-Sex Marriage

Perhaps you all don't see the irony here ~ the big time, major, celebrity speaker at the GOP convention signing a pro-gay marriage document, a document to be presented to the California Supreme Court....that's pretty fucking ironic.....

He was only one of many signers, was a brief to the United States Supreme Court, not the California Supreme Court.


>>>>

It doesn't matter how many others signed it or whether it was the California Supreme Court or the US Supreme Court. It makes no difference to my point. It is still highly ironic that this man was a speaker at the GOP convention, supposedly representing Conservative values, and he signed a document that condones gay marriage. Does not matter how many others signed it. The point is he does not represent GOP values.

since "liberal" California shot the marriage right down twice.....it may not be that much of a Democrat value as well....
 
always thought he was over rated.


Hes trying to fix the damage he did to his career with the chair bit.


There are many young actors who will think of working with him or doing a differing project without him and quess what choices they are making.


He has damaged his career by being seen a a tea party fool.


Its hurts you in Hollywood when people see working with you as an unpleasant experience.


Think about it.

Your an Up and coming young actress and you are torn by the many choices you are given as your next project.

You see a script about homelessness that is well written and you are looking forward to the challenge of your part in it.

Yet your other project is interesting and you will be working with an ICON in the film industry (Eastwood).

Then you hear he is a tea party nutter who hates the president of the united states so much that he publicly Lied about him at the republican convention.


He damaged his career.
yea Clints career is ruined......im sure if wants to do a movie.....that movie will get made....
 
I wonder how a petition signed by a bunch of actors and hollywood parasites can influence the Supreme Court's decision on the constitutionality of a referendum voted on by the people?

Because those “actors and hollywood parasites” are citizens as well, despite your disdain for your fellow Americans, and enjoy the same First Amendment rights as all the people.

They also have the First Amendment right ‘to petition the government for a redress of grievances,’ in this case where the people of California erred and authorized a measure clearly offensive to the Constitution.

twice?....

Yes. Civil rights should NEVER be put to a popular vote. If we had waited for voters to decide interracial marriage, it sure as hell wouldn't have passed in the 60s. A majority disapproved of interracial marriage until the 1990s.
 
Could it be that Clint who has been around Hollywood stars for half a century had gay friends and knows that there commitments to each other has no effect on his relationships with women and family and that allowing them to marry harms no one?
Ya know, the subject here?
Sort of like the veer offense.
 
Could it be that Clint who has been around Hollywood stars for half a century had gay friends and knows that there commitments to each other has no effect on his relationships with women and family and that allowing them to marry harms no one?
Ya know, the subject here?
Sort of like the veer offense.

Yes, that is the most likely scenario. It's what is happening all over the country. People are finding out that friends and family members are {GASP} gay and that it is much harder to deny rights to someone they love.
 
Because those “actors and hollywood parasites” are citizens as well, despite your disdain for your fellow Americans, and enjoy the same First Amendment rights as all the people.

They also have the First Amendment right ‘to petition the government for a redress of grievances,’ in this case where the people of California erred and authorized a measure clearly offensive to the Constitution.

twice?....

Yes. Civil rights should NEVER be put to a popular vote. If we had waited for voters to decide interracial marriage, it sure as hell wouldn't have passed in the 60s. A majority disapproved of interracial marriage until the 1990s.
what i am usually getting at Wytch is that with as many Democrats/Liberals in this State.....that Prop. should have passed easily the second time around......i just like hearing the excuses put forth as to why it didn't.....instead of the real reason.....
 
Could it be that Clint who has been around Hollywood stars for half a century had gay friends and knows that there commitments to each other has no effect on his relationships with women and family and that allowing them to marry harms no one?
Ya know, the subject here?
Sort of like the veer offense.

Yes, that is the most likely scenario. It's what is happening all over the country. People are finding out that friends and family members are {GASP} gay and that it is much harder to deny rights to someone they love.

my mind was changed back in the mid nineties after getting a route up in the Anaheim Hills....i don't know how many Gay couples and single Gays i had living on the route.....but the ones i got to know were some pretty nice people.....my whole perception was changed just by actually knowing some......
 
Yes, it did end that way with Native Americans.
White folk ended their culture where for thousands of years gays were accepted.

And many of the others you are exactly right.
RELIGIOUS REASONS is why it went back to folks not accepting them.

You state the same thing twice but the first time you state you do not hate gays for religious reasons and then you make this point that gay acceptance will not last with the facts being that societies used RELIGIOUS REASONS each and every time they persecuted gay folks.

Who are you trying to shit here? You come across loud and clear.

Religious reasons? And which religion would that be? And are you honestly claiming that all religions reject homosexuality no matter how pagan that religion might be? Or are you just admitting that all major religions have a common morality that rejects homosexuality.

After considering the matter seriously, that societies collapse shortly after they accept the normalcy of homosexuality has nothing to do with homosexuality at all. It's not a cause, it's a symptom of a culture already quite sick. These societies fell, the Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, over and over again, the same thing. It's not because gays suddenly got married or could openly practice their romance. It's that by the time that culture got to the point where they accepted homosexuality, they were already rotted out. If they weren't already degraded, they would never have accepted homosexuality in the first place.

Really? What societies had THAT happen? List them.

And that is the last you will hear from Katzndogz. Once a completely bogus meme is challenged, you get dead air.

The Roman Empire had several gay emperors, from almost the beginning. Two emperors had public gay weddings. And their empire lasted for hundreds of years beyond that point. Homosexuality and gay marriage were accepted throughout most of its existence. The Roman Empire ended about a century after converting to Catholicism and gay marriage was banned.
 
Last edited:
Could it be that Clint who has been around Hollywood stars for half a century had gay friends and knows that there commitments to each other has no effect on his relationships with women and family and that allowing them to marry harms no one?
Ya know, the subject here?
Sort of like the veer offense.

Yes, that is the most likely scenario. It's what is happening all over the country. People are finding out that friends and family members are {GASP} gay and that it is much harder to deny rights to someone they love.

my mind was changed back in the mid nineties after getting a route up in the Anaheim Hills....i don't know how many Gay couples and single Gays i had living on the route.....but the ones i got to know were some pretty nice people.....my whole perception was changed just by actually knowing some......

The reason gay rights seem to be on the fast track is what you experienced. The more people that come out of the closet makes it harder and harder to deny these equal rights to people you know and like.
 
Yes, that is the most likely scenario. It's what is happening all over the country. People are finding out that friends and family members are {GASP} gay and that it is much harder to deny rights to someone they love.

my mind was changed back in the mid nineties after getting a route up in the Anaheim Hills....i don't know how many Gay couples and single Gays i had living on the route.....but the ones i got to know were some pretty nice people.....my whole perception was changed just by actually knowing some......

The reason gay rights seem to be on the fast track is what you experienced. The more people that come out of the closet makes it harder and harder to deny these equal rights to people you know and like.
i voted for the marriage thing twice.....i felt if your going to give them everything then your going to give them that Certificate too....otherwise why give all the other things?.....its like you can own a gun....but you cant have any bullets....
 
Here we have citizens that want to use the power of government and the law in a nation where the founders specifically wrote the Constitution to LIMIT THE POWER OF GOVERNMENT and protect the rights of the individual and twist it, distort it, slant it and abuse it to take rights away from the individual.

I know I will sleep better at night knowing that 2 folks that happen to love each other and are committed to each other are banned from getting married.

We do not need to end the wars, balance the budget, fix education, solve our energy problems, fix Medicare or any of the 1001 other problems we face.

We need to ban gay marriage as that is more important.
 

Forum List

Back
Top