October 24, 2014 9:17 pm -


The Texas Department of Public Safety refused to grant a driver’s license to the daughter of Houston Mayor Annise Parker, who recently issued subpoenas to five local pastors who have been attacking a non-discrimination ordinance for perhaps the most ridiculous reason to come out of Texas yet: Because she has two mothers. Mayor Parker tweeted explaining…


D.B. Hirsch
D.B. Hirsch is a political activist, news junkie, and retired ad copy writer and spin doctor. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.

124 responses to Texas Denies Girl Driver’s License Because She Has Two Moms, One Of Whom Is Houston’s Mayor

  1. tiredoftea October 24th, 2014 at 9:25 pm

    OK, this takes back any good the black hat guy did in the other story! Unfuckingbelievably stupid!!!

    • Spirit of America October 24th, 2014 at 9:48 pm

      For me, just the opposite… what the guy in the black hat did in other story proves that as@holes like this are in every group but don’t represent the entire group. The ‘black hat guy’ are more the norm, just aren’t reported any where near as much as the idiots.
      My view.

    • whatthe46 October 24th, 2014 at 9:56 pm

      clap clap.

  2. Obewon October 24th, 2014 at 9:32 pm

    Change is good and the natural state of our 6,000 year old Earth and universe…

  3. Carla Akins October 24th, 2014 at 9:32 pm

    Punish the child for her parents choices, which she has no options to change. The girl has a certified, valid birth certificate – whose purpose is to prove citizenship – that is where their concern needs to stop.

    What if one of the workers was assisting a teen they knew, and noticed the father listed on the birth certificate was wrong, perhaps mom got around, who knows…do they deny it then because it makes just as much sense. They are not vetting a marriage certificate but a birth certificate. I’m not sure I believe the law reads that way – there would be no purpose.

    • whatthe46 October 24th, 2014 at 9:54 pm

      just because a man’s name is on the birth certificate, it doesn’t means he’s the father either. just ask past murray’s guest. this is just plain mean, nasty, ignorant, stupid and the obvious “bias.” since her birth certificate is legal and it was accepted by the state department and filed as such, how can they deny her? i don’t follow.

      • Carla Akins October 24th, 2014 at 10:00 pm


        • whatthe46 October 25th, 2014 at 3:10 am

          what if a woman and her wife both had their eggs inseminated by the same donor and the fertilized egg was implanted in the “host” if you will (for lack of a better word), shouldn’t both of their names be listed on the certificate as well since it could be either of theirs? the fact is, these ladies are her parents “legally” and they can’t take that away from either of them or this kid. damn i hate stupid people.

    • M D Reese October 25th, 2014 at 3:00 am

      I have a step-brother who never knew his father and thought that my dad was also his and he went under dad’s last name. Dad never got around to adopting him so he essentially was living under an assumed name. When he was in his 40s he applied for a passport and had a hell of a time. He had let his driver’s license (under my dad’s last name) lapse, and it was hell to get his birth certificate (which mom had lost…mine too…) We all had to write statements that we had always known him under my dad’s last name. He finally got his passport and set off on his fantasy dream of going around the world. He got as far as Thailand and ended up in prison for doing something stupid….but that’s just the kind of guy he is…

      • Carla Akins October 25th, 2014 at 6:58 am

        Sounds a little like we may share relatives. I used my step-dads name (although I knew) all through school k-12. My drivers license was in my legal name (I didn’t meet my bio dad till I was 40) but the school allowed me to go by and use my step-dads name the whole time.
        I have two (half) brothers one, knowingly fraudulently put his name on his step daughters birth certificate when she was two. His wife left him 2 years later and he paid child support the whole time but he loved her and didn’t mind.
        My baby brother is a serial marrier. He’s 45, married 5 times and raised 5 kids to adulthood and currently raising another – none of which are his. He does have 1 bio kid, age 7 from his 4th wife that had Chase after she’s left him for someone she met on FB. He always wanted to be a Dad and it matter little to him where they came from.

        • M D Reese October 25th, 2014 at 3:32 pm

          I think we’re probably half-step-siblings! I counted once and came up with 9 parents having 8 children in some combo or other. Oddly enough, of all of us kids, only 2 had children themselves. I promised myself when I was about 9-10 that I was never going to get married and never going to have children and I kept my word.

          Oh–the stepbrother who never knew his father? He fathered a child in Hawaii and never took responsibility–The rest of us have been hounded by the authorities looking for him for at least 20 years now. He was up here visiting my other brother, and I didn’t even bother to go say hi–just not anyone I need in my life.

          • Carla Akins October 25th, 2014 at 6:37 pm

            All my life I had some strange pull to meet my bio dad, even though I knew it was a bad idea and all my good friends tried their best to convince me not to go. But there’s a pull not to be denied. Yes I went, bless my husband – he never said anything except offer to go with me. I knew I needed to go, and Jamie paid for the whole fiasco. Of course, everyone was right. Nothing awful but certainly nothing good came from it. I know it sounds silly, but I was driven to now what he looked like. Some things are biological and psychologically driven.

          • M D Reese October 25th, 2014 at 7:49 pm

            I do understand. My “mother” left when I was not quite 5. It’s actually my first vivid memory. All my dad ever said was that she left on an airplane. From then on I was left with crazy grandparents or friends of my dad when he was between wives. It was awful. Nobody ever taught me how to brush my teeth fer chrissakes! How basic can you get on parenting?
            Anyhow, I did get sent to see my “mother” when I was about 8–there was absolutely no draw there. It’s bothered me my whole life. I rationalized it due to the fact that my father was a real bastard and wife beater–and I look like him. Who knows. But even now that I’m in my 60s I wonder sometimes how a woman could have a baby, never love it, and never show any interest in their lives.

          • jasperjava October 26th, 2014 at 2:33 am

            From what I know of you from your participation on this board, you turned out okay. Congrats.

          • M D Reese October 26th, 2014 at 6:21 pm

            Thank you! I can’t explain it–I just knew that it was wrong and I’ve lived my life treating others as I would like to be treated. Lately I’ve been having a rough time health-wise (temporary–on the mend and better every day) and a lot of that energy has been coming back to me in kindness from folks who don’t even know me that well. It makes me cry–in a GOOD way!

  4. Teddy Simon October 24th, 2014 at 9:44 pm

    Although I think they should not deny this girl a license I do agree only the maternal mothers name should be on the birth certificate , if the name of the father is unknown put unknown , perfectly legal

    • whatthe46 October 24th, 2014 at 10:06 pm

      if they were married before the child was born, then she has every right to be on the certificate. no different than if it were a male and female.

      • M D Reese October 25th, 2014 at 2:53 am

        Exactly. But we’ll just fight this battle red state by red state just like all the other battles we’ve had to fight in order to be treated equally under the law and be free from the religious dogma of others.

      • Teddy Simon October 25th, 2014 at 10:52 am

        Where it list MOTHER and FATHER if one is not know then you put unknown , you do not put a females name in the FATHERs line nor a Males name in the MOTHERS line , last time I check a woman can not inseminate another woman

        • jasperjava October 25th, 2014 at 3:45 pm

          Narrow-minded bigot who thinks that a birth certificate should be confined to merely biological definitions.

          What century is this? Why do we still have people like you around? Go back to your cave.

        • DCKeene October 25th, 2014 at 9:57 pm

          They are her legal parents. Time to change the birth certificate then. Seems to be lagging behind current society. Just need to change the effing form to conform to today’s norms.

    • whatthe46 October 24th, 2014 at 10:31 pm

      “…if the name of the father is unknown put unknown…” furthermore, surely you’re not suggesting that this woman doesn’t know who the father of her child is. besides, she could have gone to a sperm bank for all we know, and she wouldn’t have put “unknown,” maybe “donor.” or she could have had a trusted friend donate and sign an agreement waiving his rights.

      • M D Reese October 25th, 2014 at 2:51 am

        …and of course the bottom line is that it’s none of their business.

        • whatthe46 October 25th, 2014 at 3:16 am

          exactly. i couldn’t agree more.

    • Carla Akins October 24th, 2014 at 11:30 pm

      And what if she were adopted?

      • whatthe46 October 25th, 2014 at 3:41 am

        especially if same sex adoption is legal, then both of their names would appear. so sad. this girl must be so heartbroken.

      • Teddy Simon October 25th, 2014 at 10:49 am

        Then it would list adopted , but not MOTHER and FATHER ,you can not put a female ‘s name in the FATHER category

        • Carla Akins October 25th, 2014 at 6:39 pm

          Uh, yes you can. This is 2014.

          • Teddy Simon October 26th, 2014 at 12:24 am

            Where it says Birth mother and birth father that is all you can put there if there are more categories or if they need more categories then that is where you put any other name but in BIRTH mother and BIRTH father those are the only names you can put there , just because someone is gay doesn’t change the meaning of birth .

        • flopdog October 25th, 2014 at 8:39 pm

          It is not legal to note adoptive status on a birth certificate.

    • jasperjava October 24th, 2014 at 11:40 pm

      Who the hell gives you the right to decide who are the parents of this girl?

      Crawl back under your rock.

      • Teddy Simon October 25th, 2014 at 10:46 am

        One woman did not inseminate , the other DUMBASS . Birth certificates list MOTHER and FATHER DUMBASS

        • arc99 October 25th, 2014 at 12:01 pm

          Birth certificates list legal parents, not necessarily biological.

        • jasperjava October 25th, 2014 at 3:42 pm

          You’re a right-wing fascist twit who wants to impose your narrow version of what a family is on everyone else, and you have the gall to call other people names?

          It’s amazing to me that ignorant knuckle -dragging bigots think that they are actually smarter than more evolved people.

          • Teddy Simon October 25th, 2014 at 11:23 pm

            Your stupid , oh because someone doesn’t agree with you you call them right wing well your a fing idiot . What does a birth certificate have on it Name of mother , name of father , if unknown you put unknown DUMBASS

          • jasperjava October 26th, 2014 at 12:20 am

            I love it when an ignorant twit calls someone “stupid”, but doesn’t have enough grasp of English grammar to make the distinction between “your” and “you’re”.

            Listen, Teddy, YOU’RE the kind of creep who thinks you have the right to impose YOUR values on everyone else. You think that YOU are the only one who gets to decide who is whose parent and what a “normal” family looks like. People like you are the worst type of human being, because you refuse to let people live their lives in peace.

            The sooner we get rid of Taliban freaks like you, the better.

          • Teddy Simon October 27th, 2014 at 12:39 pm

            What I am saying DUMBASS is where it says BIRTH parents is what it means anything else in those two slots would be false , DUMASS , I’m not pushing beliefs on anyone just telling it like it is , in those two slots that is all you can put , you seem to be the one pushing your beliefs you think that anything can be changed like the meaning of BIRTH parents

          • jasperjava October 27th, 2014 at 1:19 pm

            I guess some of us believe in the fundamental human right to define ourselves and our families as we wish, while others prefer to bow down and accept the limitations imposed by authority.

            If that’s how you want to be, a pathetic little minion defined by the pigeon-holes provided for you, go right ahead. Just don’t expect everyone to conform to your rigid parameters. Some of us believe in freedom.

            You gotta love a dumbass who doesn’t know how to spell the word dumbass.

          • Teddy Simon October 31st, 2014 at 5:12 pm

            So ypou want to change the meaning of BIRTH correct ???

          • LauraFarq October 26th, 2014 at 1:26 am

            Teddy: You do realize when a child is adopted by ANY couple the birth certificate is changed to the adoptive parents don’t you? I am not going to call you names but you seem to be commenting on something you have no knowledge on.

          • Teddy Simon October 27th, 2014 at 12:34 pm

            Where the cert. says BIRTH parents , the only thing that can be put there is BIRTH mother and father , anything else would be false , that is what I am saying , anything else as far as other categories is different but birth parents is exactly that BIRTH parents

          • LauraFarq November 3rd, 2014 at 12:12 pm

            Check it out Teddy. You are wrong. Adopted parents are listed as birth parents.

        • DCKeene October 25th, 2014 at 9:52 pm

          Mine doesn’t, cause I was given to the state. DUMBASS comment.

    • DCKeene October 25th, 2014 at 9:50 pm

      I don’t know my maternal mother, as she gave me up for adoption. Should I be denied a DL because of this? You’re word-salading what a parent is. It’s just gross.

  5. tracey marie October 24th, 2014 at 9:53 pm

    Damn, hell , shit and sigh

  6. StoneyCurtisll October 25th, 2014 at 12:38 am

    Key word…”Texas”…

  7. StoneyCurtisll October 25th, 2014 at 12:43 am

    One more “liberal” that Texas has denied the right to vote…

  8. Pundit456 October 25th, 2014 at 2:25 am

    The headline worked, Alan. I saw the title and I had to read more because with I do not support same gender matrimony, I know that it should not affect a child’s ability to get a driver’s license; unless of course, as in this case, a person is attempting to get a license using fraudulent documentation.

    Americans seem to use words these days without absolutely no appreciation for their import.

    For example, a “certificate” is an official “certification” by a professional who possesses credentials and authority to document an event. This girl was born only once and at the time of birth she did not have two mothers; nor will she ever have two biological mothers. Therefore a certificate reflecting an event that never occurred is in fact fraudulent.
    Astounding that a city would elect a mayor who did not know and or appreciate this.

    • whatthe46 October 25th, 2014 at 3:03 am

      “Kathy Harbin and Michelle Call, with their children Louis and Leo Harbin-Call, spoke at a press conference in support of same-sex adoption at the State Capitol Building in Salt Lake City, Friday, February 28, 2014. The Utah Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for the Utah Department of Health to issue birth certificates that list the same-sex parents as the children’s legal parents.” i would assume this was ok in texas when she was allowed to put the child’s other mother on the certificate. consider also, she had to have a certificate to get into school so, if its accepted then why all of a sudden is it not good enough? this isn’t about 2 mothers this is a political jab at her period. and the certificate was filed with the state and accepted as well. so what’s this about what she did or didn’t know again?

      • Pundit456 October 25th, 2014 at 1:44 pm

        It is simply a case of “The Emperors’s New Clothes”; sooner or later a person with a firm grip on reality will not buy into the delusion.
        If your birth records were altered to reflect that someone other than your parents were your parents, would that make it true? If an identity thief presents themselves at your bank, as you, with credentials that say they are you, does that make it true?
        Members of the lgbt subculture, their supporters and proponents have no regard for the implications, ramifications or consequence to society resulting from their futile quest for validation. They are willing to destroy a whole country and in the end they are still just sexual deviants living in an alternate reality.

        • whatthe46 October 25th, 2014 at 3:27 pm

          “They are willing to destroy a whole country and in the end they are still just sexual deviants living in an alternate reality.” that’s just plain stupid and you people are too hooked on sex and that’s where the deviancy starts. stay out of other pepole’s business. their lives does not affect yours in the least. gays and lesbians have been around since the dawn of dirt and yet you are here.

          • flopdog October 25th, 2014 at 9:23 pm

            Rush being married like 8 times is “sanctified.” Kardashian pregnant with another man’s child while married is “sanctified.” Divorcing the first guy and marrying the guy who got her pregnant is “sanctified.

            But two old ladies who have lived together since WW2 getting married will “destroy the country.”

        • jasperjava October 25th, 2014 at 3:38 pm

          If we can finally manage to destroy YOUR fascist version of the country, we will all be better off.

        • flopdog October 25th, 2014 at 8:37 pm

          In all legal adoption cases, new birth certificates are issued with the names of the adoptive parents in the birth parent fields. That’s been the law in all fifty states for a long, long time. Therefore, in every adoption, “birth records were altered to reflect that someone other than your parents were your parents.”

          Other than your personal objection to same sex adoption, what is the difference between this case and the case of heterosexual adoptive parents?

    • whatthe46 October 25th, 2014 at 3:22 am

      you seem to not have any appreciation for the words “equal rights” for all.

    • searambler October 25th, 2014 at 9:31 am

      This is a purely political chickenshit move by a couple of minor functionaries at the DPS. You know it, I know it, they know it. Try to defend it all you want, no one is buying the crap you’re selling here.

    • Roctuna October 25th, 2014 at 10:07 am

      You are so full of crap. I can’t write any more ‘cuz it’ll get me banned. Go try to get your humanity certified.

      • Pundit456 October 25th, 2014 at 5:15 pm

        Translation: Aside from profanity laced ad hominem attacks expressing frustration over your inability to refute my comment, you have nothing to say.
        Got it.

        • Roctuna October 25th, 2014 at 5:52 pm

          I, for one, am tired with debating with the jerks like you that post on this site. I have nothing BUT disdain and insults for you. If you don’t like that, GFY.

        • flopdog October 25th, 2014 at 11:04 pm

          “Crap” is now “profanity?”

          “You can get me to crap a pineapple,” [Ronald] Reagan replied, “but you can’t get me to crap a cactus.

    • arc99 October 25th, 2014 at 12:00 pm

      There was nothing fraudulent about the documentation. It is truly fascinating to listen to people who are preoccupied with denying equal rights to other people, treating them in a manner they personally would not tolerate.

      I personally do not support right wing ideologues, so maybe I should go to court and try to have your first amendment rights revoked. After all, you made a false statement that the documents were fraudulent where there is no applicable law which supports your claim. If you are not going to use your first amendment rights in a responsible manner, maybe they should be taken away or at least subject to a popular vote..

    • mmaynard119 October 26th, 2014 at 8:58 pm

      You should contact Fox News about being a pundit. You do have a talent for restating the obvious.

  9. rg9rts October 25th, 2014 at 3:27 am

    Wanna bet the Mayor is a democrat?

    • Fossil1944 October 25th, 2014 at 9:00 am

      If she isn’t , she should be.

  10. Fossil1944 October 25th, 2014 at 8:59 am

    If it is stupid and weird you want, then lets talk Texas.

    • searambler October 25th, 2014 at 9:25 am

      I dunno, Florida sure gives them a run for their money…

  11. William October 25th, 2014 at 10:37 am

    The of course there is Texas.

    The Texas Health and Safety Code 192.008 states that the supplementary birth certificate of an adopted child must be in the name of the adoptive parents, one of whom must be a female, named as the mother and the other of whom must be a male, named as the father.

    To meet this statutory requirement, when a child is adopted by a same-sex couple, one of the adoptive parents must choose to be designated on the birth certificate as the father, in the case of a male couple, or the mother, in the case of a female couple. The other adoptive parent is not listed

    • R.J. Carter October 25th, 2014 at 1:48 pm

      At some point, is going to have to rewrite their program to take this into account… and it’s going to cause havoc with everyone else’s trees.

  12. Pundit456 October 25th, 2014 at 3:00 pm

    Most of the replies to my original comment were too juvenile to merit a response. This supplemental comment is just for clarification.
    The precepts of America’s predominant society are designed to compliment the natural order of humanity.
    Same gender sodomy is not normal human sexual behavior and this is an immutable fact; regardless of what anyone chooses to believe.

    Bogus marriage licences, fraudulent birth certificates, fraudulent drivers licences, and any other attempts to emulate normal society; and all attempts to institute laws to force people to indulge the delusions of a deviant corrupt subculture do not accord validity, credibility, legitimacy or normalcy to the lgbt subculture. However, as those attempts corrupt our legislature, judiciary and president, they threaten the very foundation of a country that was founded and built on adherence to the laws of nature,the United States Constitution and the tenets which offend lgbt and any other subculture dedicated to sexual deviancy or other perversity.
    In other words, regardless of how noble one thinks the lgbt cause, its methods are subversive, myopic and malicious.

    • arc99 October 25th, 2014 at 4:00 pm

      there is nothing “deviant” about homosexuality. your personal opinions and/or religious beliefs about appropriate sexual behavior are not “immutable facts”, they are cultural traditions based on the worship of the God of Abraham.

      In native American cultures, “two spirit people” (of man and woman) were celebrated as uniquely spiritual people and enjoyed an honored place in the tribal community. It is the height of cultural arrogance to assume that your spiritual and moral background is to be imposed on everyone through force of law. It is your cultural hubris that I find “deviant”.

      In other words, no matter how legitimate you think your arguments are, they are no different than the 19th century idiocy which prevailed against interracial marriage.

      As far as I am concerned it is people like you who threaten the very foundation of this country with your insistence that some people should not have the same right as you to marry the person of their choice.

      Your ignorance will soon be relegated to the dustbins of history, just as this man’s ignorance was, whose comments bear a striking resemblance to yours.

      Senator James R. Doolittle (D-WI), 1863: “By the laws of Massachusetts intermarriages between these races are forbidden as criminal. Why forbidden? Simply because natural instinct revolts at it as wrong.”

    • AnOski October 25th, 2014 at 6:48 pm

      >Same gender sodomy is not normal human sexual behavior and this is an immutable fact

      Your “immutable fact” is incorrect.

      Since we observe homosexuality in the natural world, your only possible claim to what might be considered “normal” is that “*some* animals do it the other way *most* of the time.”

      This is simply an argument for conformity. An argument against ever doing anything that most people wouldn’t also do in the same way.

      You add, “regardless of what anyone chooses to believe.”

      Your beliefs are just that. And the prevailing belief in this country appears to be that people should be able to have sex with and marry whomever they wish:

      Your belief — that homosexuality is wrong — is not “normal.” Time for you to change sides, right?

    • doodlebug0 October 25th, 2014 at 8:40 pm

      Who’s to say what “normal” human behavior is? Homosexuality has been going on since the dawn of homo sapiens. No one has to live by your standards.

    • Diana Kay Hoskins October 25th, 2014 at 8:50 pm

      Sigh…You are not even interesting enough to make me sick.

    • flopdog October 25th, 2014 at 9:26 pm

      Gay marriage “corrupt[s] our legislature, judiciary and president” but unlimited, anonymous political donations do not.


    • DCKeene October 25th, 2014 at 9:48 pm

      You sure do comment a lot on gay posts. I’m guessing you are a self-hating closet case.

    • Sherri G October 25th, 2014 at 11:43 pm

      And the 51% divorce rate with the majority caused by adultery, TV and movie violence & sexuality, and allowing the baring of breasts for men’s enjoyment is ok but not for their TRUE purpose of feeding a baby has NOTHING to do with the downfall of society, right? wow!

      • Pundit456 October 26th, 2014 at 9:24 pm

        None of that is relevant to the topic nor anything I have said.

        • Sherri G October 27th, 2014 at 12:29 pm

          You are claiming marriage equality is causing the downfall of our morality and I was pointing out the fallacy of your argument….yes its relevant.

          • Pundit456 October 27th, 2014 at 3:23 pm

            Actually you implied that inasmuch as we are not perfect we have no right to exclude mockeries of marriage and normal interpersonal relationships.
            The topic was a fraudulent birth certificate.

    • jasperjava October 26th, 2014 at 12:29 am

      I’m just glad that deviant, perverse people like you are becoming fewer and fewer as time goes on.

      I can’t think of anything more perverse than to deny people the right to love and marry who they wish.

      A generation or two ago, people like you were screaming and complaining
      about how “unnatural” it was that people of different races were falling
      in love and marrying each other.

      Who are YOU to decide such things for other people? Who do you think you are? You’re opinions are deviant and indecent to the extreme.

      • Pundit456 October 26th, 2014 at 9:22 pm

        Reading and studying can help to expand your thinking range.

        • jasperjava October 26th, 2014 at 10:24 pm

          Pretty ironic for an ignorant right-wing bigot to tell others to read more.

          I’m not interested in your Klan or Neo-nazi “literature”.

          • Pundit456 October 27th, 2014 at 3:55 pm

            You are the one that expressed difficulty thinking; I mrely suggested a remedy.

    • Roger Smith October 26th, 2014 at 4:29 am

      Your point is invalid because normal society is a artifical construction. It is not static but fluid and this subject to change. For a while people said the same want inter racial marrige.

      • Pundit456 October 26th, 2014 at 9:20 pm

        In case you missed my reply to James Merrill, same gender sodomy is not normal human sexual behavior; an immutable fact.

        • Roger Smith October 26th, 2014 at 11:14 pm

          But it is, there are sexual pleasure nerves in that anus in the case of men, and women. Those don’t just form magically. Evolution formed them and thus are natural. Oh and I would like to point out that if you have ever received oral sex , or given it, you have committed sodomy yourself. Fact is what ever you want to do, as long as it is consentual, it is normal human behavior. One last fact. Homosexuality is found in 1000’s of species. Only one exhibits homophobia. If normal is what the masses do the your the abnormal one.

          • Pundit456 October 27th, 2014 at 3:41 pm

            The fact that you cannot discern the ignorance reflected in your comment unquestionably establishes that you are beyond reason; which fortunately is inconsequential. And that’s my final answer.

          • Roger Smith October 27th, 2014 at 4:05 pm

            Ignorance is effectively a synonym of close mindedness. You sir are the ignorant one for ignoring scientific fact for personal ideology.

          • Pundit456 November 1st, 2014 at 9:39 pm

            Ignorance means unaware; closed mindedness means not receptive to contradictory information. Synonyms? Really?
            I take it you also think scientific fact and personal ideology are synonymous.Effective communication with you will not be possible if you are not going to use standard definitions. I do not subscribe to the lgbt dictionary.

        • OldLefty October 27th, 2014 at 3:40 pm

          In case you missed my reply to James Merrill, same gender sodomy is not normal human sexual behavior; an immutable fact.


          It’t not a fact at all… ‘mutable’ OR immutable.

          • Pundit456 November 1st, 2014 at 9:41 pm

            Probably felt good saying that and imagining that someone might actually think it true.

          • OldLefty November 2nd, 2014 at 7:42 am

            Probably felt good saying that and imagining that someone might actually think it true.


            Just stating an “immutable” fact.



            Fletcher, Martin (January 3, 2007). Birds do it, bees do it . . .


            The Gay Side of Nature

            I think it is YOUR wishful thinking trying to trump nature.

          • Pundit456 November 2nd, 2014 at 8:06 am

            What you choose to believe is of no consequence or interest to me. If it gives you solace to believe whatever, so be it.
            Normal sexual intercourse is the only natural method of perpetuating the human species. No scientists anywhere on the planet has ever proven or even posited otherwise.
            You are obviously intractable so further discussion is pointless. This is my final response to you on this subject.

          • OldLefty November 2nd, 2014 at 8:18 am

            Thou dost project too much, Methinks.

            It is clearly YOU who must ignore the facts in order to engage in wishful thinking.

            “Normal sexual intercourse is the only natural method of perpetuating the human species.”

            1) Except for the other means, like in vitro fertilization.

            2) That has nothing to do with what we see in nature.

          • Pundit456 November 5th, 2014 at 9:52 pm

            Until you made this comment I was not certain whether or not you were an antagonist.
            Clearly my comment excludes IVF as a natural method of conception, so it makes absolutely no sense to try and contradict my comment by attesting to it; and if that atrocious excuse for a Shakespearean quote was intended to be funny; it isn’t.

          • OldLefty November 5th, 2014 at 10:05 pm

            Your comments make no sense, they reflect only your wishful thinking.

            And that atrocious excuse for a Shakespearean quote was intended to be an accurate observation with a Shakespearean twist to illustrate your projecting your own what “gives you solace to believe whatever” onto others.

            When a person has uncomfortable thoughts or feelings, they may project these onto other people, assigning the thoughts or feelings that they need to repress to a convenient alternative target.
            Neurotic projection is perceiving others as operating in ways one unconsciously finds objectionable in yourself.

          • Pundit456 November 6th, 2014 at 4:19 pm

            You seem to understand yourself very well; and I suppose you are sharing your introspection as an explanation for your behavior on this thread.
            All I can say is, apology accepted.

    • The Bon_Scott October 26th, 2014 at 8:03 am

      How ironic that you used the words “myopic” and “malicious”.

    • James Merrill October 26th, 2014 at 10:27 am

      In YOUR opinion, in reality homosexual behavior has been observed in every higher order species and is therefore “natural”. As to the rest of your post it’s just a bunch of gobbledy gook.

      • Pundit456 October 26th, 2014 at 9:18 pm

        Same gender sodomy is not normal human sexual behavior; an immutable fact.
        People are of course entitled to infer whatever they choose relative to activities they observe, but inasmuch as lgbt members “self-identify”, unless and until a nonhuman species so identifies, human conclusions are nothing more than speculation; but more likely wishful thinking.

        • James Merrill October 27th, 2014 at 3:03 am

          You can argue against a fact but it doesn’t make you right or change the fact it just makes you sound stupid.

          • Pundit456 October 27th, 2014 at 3:35 pm

            The immutable “biological” (which does not mean Bible) fact is that same gender sodomy is not normal human sexual behavior.
            Some people choose to delude themselves to the contrary and it is their right to do so.

          • OldLefty October 27th, 2014 at 3:38 pm

            Who decides what is “normal human sexual behavior”??

            It has nothing to do with biology since we find in the animal kingdom.

          • Pundit456 November 1st, 2014 at 9:41 pm


          • OldLefty November 2nd, 2014 at 7:28 am

            You don’t have biology on you side.

          • Pundit456 November 2nd, 2014 at 7:50 am

            Biology is not on anyone’s side; it is what it is. That you choose to subscribe to some alternate theory is of no relevant import.

          • OldLefty November 2nd, 2014 at 8:20 am

            Biology is not on anyone’s side; it is what it is.



            And homosexuality is commonly found in the wild, and just because you wish it were not so, is of no relevant import.

          • Pundit456 November 5th, 2014 at 9:24 pm


          • tracey marie November 1st, 2014 at 9:56 pm

            why isn’t it normal sexual behavior.

          • Pundit456 November 2nd, 2014 at 8:14 am

            If I thought you query was genuine, I would answer. However, you clearly want to try and discredit my response with myriad convoluted and ridiculous analogies; so I’ll pass. Accept the facts; don’t accept them, your choice. I am quite comfortable living in reality and feel no compulsion to disillusion those who choose an alternate reality.

    • stevetenhave October 26th, 2014 at 10:36 pm

      The uneducated and malicious words of a person that has little or no perception of the world that they live in. This is a very clear example of what happens when a ‘world view’ is mutually exclusive from reality. The language that you use is clearly inflammatory, blatantly derogatory toward a subsection of society that has no impact or influence on you other than a strange perceived slight against your own misguided moral ‘values’.

      Frankly I feel sorry for you, to exist with so much hate and vehemence toward another person based out of a fearful bigotry. What a small and pitiful individual.

      • Pundit456 October 27th, 2014 at 3:53 pm

        Vitriol and ad hominem attacks are by nature malicious and portend hatred because they are directed at a person rather than an issue.
        It is the standard resort of the lgbt subculture; intended to intimidate because its assertions are indefensible.

        • stevetenhave October 27th, 2014 at 4:08 pm

          It’s rather extraordinary how well you represent the exact opposite of your own opinion. You’re clearly speaking from a position of self loathing because your break down of your own foibles is so accurate.

          It must be pointed out that your continued assertion that the lgbt culture exists in an indefensible position is ignorant and facile. You’re making the mistake of thinking that forceful delivery of factually incorrect statements will somehow make them fact. It’s like arguing with a child that has an extended vocabulary but no contextual understanding of what it is that they’re actually saying and no moral ability to draw any level of empathy for the people that you’re belittling.

          Pretty words and forceful delivery don’t hide the simple fact that you’re attempting to cover up bigotry and homophobia… I’m mean come on, same sex sodomy? What are you, 3?

          • tracey marie October 27th, 2014 at 6:06 pm

            this ones blog is one great big hate fest against GLBT, it is not worth anyones time.

          • stevetenhave October 27th, 2014 at 6:18 pm

            As a straight person with a firm belief in equality regardless of gender or sexual orientation I believe that standing back and not saying anything is an unacceptable position. Apathy in the face of a forceful antipathy is never a sound strategy however in the measure of Pundit456 I believe that you are correct.

          • tracey marie October 27th, 2014 at 8:59 pm

            I read it’s blog, I laughed at the baggerish written as if it were fact

          • Pundit456 November 1st, 2014 at 9:35 pm

            One, lgbt may be a culture unto itself but in the context of America it is a subculture.
            Two, you say a lot about incorrect facts, but I see none cited.
            Three, “homophobe” and its derivatives are fabricated pejoratives that have no innocuous or positive connotation. nor any legitimate etymological basis.
            Sodomy is defined as an unnatural sex act. I believe I said same gender sodomy and I fail to see what the use of correct terminology as to do with age or the validity of the term.
            Bigotry means that a conclusion is not supported by relevant facts; not the case here.
            Empathy, not until lgbt stops corrupting the law.

          • stevetenhave November 1st, 2014 at 9:47 pm

            You do spout a lot rubbish. Just because you state something as fact does not make it so. You’re deluded. Not only are you deluded but you also make no sense whatsoever. Do you actually read what you write or is it just some form of thesaurus fuelled keyboard diarrhoea?

        • Guest October 28th, 2014 at 6:40 pm

          “The fact that you cannot discern the ignorance reflected in your comment unquestionably establishes that you are beyond reason; which fortunately is inconsequential.”

    • tracey marie October 27th, 2014 at 6:04 pm

      rotflmao….I will be the one to break it to you…your hatem, fear and ignorance are abnormal, the issue is yours and your ilks, stop projecting

  13. whatthe46 October 25th, 2014 at 3:33 pm

    that was my belief.

  14. marecek21 October 25th, 2014 at 9:15 pm

    Just petty!

  15. Red Eye Robot October 27th, 2014 at 10:27 am

    Hey Guess what? She Lied!

  16. Pundit456 November 1st, 2014 at 9:19 pm

    Please cite the source that has determined that the mouth and or the anus are sex organs necessary for procreation or human existence.
    Male female sexual intercourse is normal because it is the only natural means of sustaining the species.
    Also, please cite the source that has determined a purpose for same gender sodomy beyond depraved sexual gratification.
    If you get your physical and prostate exams at a veterinarian, or practice bestiality, it is understandable that you would think animals are the same as humans. However, human beings and animals are distinctly different species; and since animals do not talk men use their knowledge of human behavior to speculate as to the motivation for certain animal behavior; but without discernible empirical evidence, it is just speculation.