this is sad but expected, after all this is the screwiest city in the screwiest state on earth, i call it the granola bar state, take out the fruits and nuts, and all ya have is flakes (AKA Holywood types).
they have befowled an instatution of 5000 plus years in a singal weekend, while marrage is a legal thing it ia a huge social and religious thing, cival unions, i think its creapy but ok, i dont give a damn what you do when the drapes are shut, but this incuranse thing is bogas, it is a known risk, like smoking or being a booze-hound
My aunt and uncle have been openly gay since the 60's. They aren't institutionalized, imprisoned nor even poor.
But you keep conjuring up windmills to attack, ok?
Nick
i guess your aunt and uncle are one of the lucky ones then. good for them. the point is that persecution, in it's many forms, does happen, and happens frequently to people because of their sexual orientaion. according to you, being gay must be all bubblegum and roses.
My aunt and uncle have been openly gay since the 60's. They aren't institutionalized, imprisoned nor even poor.
But you keep conjuring up windmills to attack, ok?
Nick
So Matthew Shepard just tripped, right?
I'm glad for your aunt and uncle. I guess the experiences of two people "out since the 60's" are emblematic of the treatment of homosexuals in all corners of the globe in the past couple of centuries, since this was the quote that I was referrring to:
Quote:
Yep, and I'm sure those little old lesbians had ancestors sweating in a cotton field under fear of whip to stay in their place as well.
You just keep coming up with insignifigant examples of your personal experiences to try to prop up your arguments, okay?
i guess your aunt and uncle are one of the lucky ones then. good for them. the point is that persecution, in it's many forms, does happen, and happens frequently to people because of their sexual orientaion. according to you, being gay must be all bubblegum and roses.
Isn't it amazing how I don't know a single homosexual who has ever had trouble with the law or even a career due to their sexuality. That must be because, well a whole lot of people don't even ask about it.
I also find it humorous that pfflam speaks of my experience in the past tense. I don't study music at a university any more. But that really shouldn't matter should it since gay people are in all walks of life. Sure they are more likely to congregate in certain cities and fields but I didn't just stop encountering them because I finished college as he suggests. Last I checked I was still a landlord, still an elementary school teacher and still had the same family.
Maybe my aunt and uncle aren't lucky. Maybe people just really aren't that interested in someone's sexuality if it isn't shoved in their face. By that I mean that if I don't care what you do in the privacy of your bedroom, you take care not to get in my face with it. Be you male, female, gay , lesbian or straight. If I want to know, I'll ask.
I'm glad for your aunt and uncle. I guess the experiences of two people "out since the 60's" are emblematic of the treatment of homosexuals in all corners of the globe in the past couple of centuries, since this was the quote that I was referrring to:
You just keep coming up with insignifigant examples of your personal experiences to try to prop up your arguments, okay?
If you consider Matthew Shepard to be convincing or even a trend you are wrong.
I could be beat down by a couple of men tomorrow. They could cruelly beat me to death for whatever hateful reasons they care to conjure. The difference is my death wouldn't be front page news because I happen to be a white heterosexual male.
There are people killed everyday for all sorts of reasons. In fact take a look at this FBI Hate Crime Report. It shows that more hate crimes for anti-white than for homosexuals. It also shows many more crimes both for race and religion.
BTW as an interesting side note the "intolerant" state of Texas had fewer hate crimes overall and per capita than the very "tolerant" state of Massachussetts.
Perhaps Pfflam will have to put away the Southern twang and start practicing his "boston-ese" accent.
It's Real Video but it is a pretty good clip mentioning many of the points discussed here. Plus if you watch it you can supress your gag reflex at... gasp... Fox News.
It's Real Video but it is a pretty good clip mentioning many of the points discussed here. Plus if you watch it you can supress your gag reflex at... gasp... Fox News.
Nick
Barney Frank makes a good argument against the federal effort.
Isn't it amazing how I don't know a single homosexual who has ever had trouble with the law or even a career due to their sexuality. That must be because, well a whole lot of people don't even ask about it.
It might also be because discrimination in those two categories would be flagrant. In Northampton, MA, a local journalist was invited to spend one day with a lesbian woman, dressed in similar clothing. The harassment was all hostile stares and whispered hate speech and threats in passing, but it was real enough that the journalist couldn't sleep for days afterward.
Cases like Matthew Shepard are rare because most of the harassment consists of attempts by cowards to scare away people they don't want around, not anything that is likely to register on a police report or be subject to a workplace investigation.
And yes, this does happen even in "enlightened" places - that was the point of the invitation above, actually, to prove that even one of the towns rated most friendly toward gays and lesbians can be hellish - and it certainly happens north of Mason-Dixon. Though I suspect that the statistic you cite in a subsequent post is skewed by the fact that it can only track reported crimes, and anti-gay discrimination is far more likely to be reported in a town that's perceived as generally sympathetic.
Quote:
Maybe my aunt and uncle aren't lucky. Maybe people just really aren't that interested in someone's sexuality if it isn't shoved in their face. By that I mean that if I don't care what you do in the privacy of your bedroom, you take care not to get in my face with it. Be you male, female, gay , lesbian or straight. If I want to know, I'll ask.
That's the best case. Your aunt and uncle are quite lucky if they get to enjoy that circumstance, based on what I know.
Well Amorph, again the FBI showed about 1300 crimes for around 250 million people in 1995. (We are pushing 300 million now.)
I don't call those bad odds. If I want hard stares, I'll just drive home since you can get plenty of those in traffic. You've also yet to address how forcing homosexual marriage on the general populace would somehow end these perceived hard stares or whispered hate speech. In fact how can you legislate an end to such things? You can't.
People get hard stares or whispers all the time. It could be because someone doesn't like you writing a check at the supermarket. It could be because you take too long at the ATM machines. I assure you that in an age where all you have to lose sleep over is a hard stare, that is a good thing, no matter what your gender.
BTW, anyone who is a parent gets used to plenty of hard stares thanks to the wonderful joy that children bring into the world.
As to the "rule of law," the idea that there is either Absolute Respect for the Rule of Law or Total Anarchy is a fallacy of the excluded middle at best, and one that ignores the principles the American government was built around.
The lawmaking process is not perfect, as we all know. That's why the courts have the power to strike them down. But the only way to contest a law in court is to break it and argue that the "illegal" action shouldn't be. Judges can't make those decisions proactively.
In other words, civil disobedience is built into the system as part of the lawmaking process. If Americans were to simply sit back and accept whatever gets rammed through the relevant legislatures and Congress they would be abandoning their role in the lawmaking process, and breaking the system.
To paraphrase a certain wise man, the law exists for man; man does not exist for the law.
We (my family) always seem to get weepy eyed glazed smiles of lovin appreciation and super-goodness
I didn't say my children yell and scream at me nor anyone else in public. As for the weepy eyed glazed smiles, it sounds like you have your kids doped up.
My children are very nice but are just entirely too bright for their own good. Suppose you and I were having a picnic at the park with said respective families. You leave your car keys on the table because, being the homophobe you are, you don't like getting poked by long sharp objects in your lower torso.
My two year old would wait until no one is looking, snag your keys, open your car door (yes even if it is locked), get in, lock the door, and likely start the car.
They get lots of loving stares right up until they start honking your car horn at you, I assure you.
My four year old, well he is four which pretty much sums it up. Pretty much take anything he cares to say and repeat it at least 5 times. It seems all four year olds do this and it is intensely annoying. So while you and I are coaxing my 2 year old son out of your now locked car, he would be telling you that the two year old loves keys. (5 times) He loves cars (5 times). He likes your car (5 times) Can he go for a ride in your car? (5 times) Can we go to your house and type PBSkids into your computer so he can play it... (5 times)
As a native-born Texan, I 100% support Pflamm's characterization of this backwards, Jesus-freak encrusted, hateful former-slave state. There is nothing socially redeeming about Texas, or the South at large. A haven of hatred and prejudice, all wrapped up in the leather cover of a Bible.
As a native-born Texan, I 100% support Pflamm's characterization of this backwards, Jesus-freak encrusted, hateful former-slave state. There is nothing socially redeeming about Texas, or the South at large. A haven of hatred and prejudice, all wrapped up in the leather cover of a Bible.
For the record I will say that in viewing the Fox news clip provided by Trumptman I find John Cornyn of Texas to be a bigot in regard to gay marriage and / or gay civil unions. In fact I find John Cornyn to be more than simply a bigot in this regard, I find him to be a sellout to a portion of the population (narrow minded control freaks who want to dictate others relationships) over standing up for civil rights of gay individuals. I conversly find Barney Frank of Mass to be right on and well spoken with this issue.
I also completely understand your frustration Kirkland in this heated debate going on in the United States concerning a right that I firmly believe you should have to attain marriage if you were to choose to.
My point in calling pfflam on his post was simply this:
Let me illustrate:
Do all blacks eat watermelon and fried chicken as their two food groups?
Should we think of asians only as "slant-eyed" people?
Are Bostonians all rude by default?
Do all Arabs want to kill westerners?
Are all Blondes dumb?
I could go on and on..... I wish not to with all due respect.
My point is that in each statement above a negative connotation is expressed in a general sense as to bind all members of given "group" as defined by bigoted and misguided hate speech.
I stand by your side of this issue Kirkland and indeed I stand for dignity and respect for all human beings.
Bigotry no matter where it is directed is misguided and people with a spine will point it out.
Am I suggesting we can not have jokes and good humor? No not at all.
I am only suggesting we stay semi-civil as we all deserve dignity not just some.
To suggest homosexuals are oppressed the same way many minorities are is just nonsense because unless you broadcast your sexuality, no one can act on it.
This isn't true at all. You don't have to broadcast your sexuality in order for your same sex partner to not get health insurance.
As to the "rule of law," the idea that there is either Absolute Respect for the Rule of Law or Total Anarchy is a fallacy of the excluded middle at best, and one that ignores the principles the American government was built around.
The lawmaking process is not perfect, as we all know. That's why the courts have the power to strike them down. But the only way to contest a law in court is to break it and argue that the "illegal" action shouldn't be. Judges can't make those decisions proactively.
In other words, civil disobedience is built into the system as part of the lawmaking process. If Americans were to simply sit back and accept whatever gets rammed through the relevant legislatures and Congress they would be abandoning their role in the lawmaking process, and breaking the system.
To paraphrase a certain wise man, the law exists for man; man does not exist for the law.
To a degree, I do agree with you. I would say the difference I disagree with in this instance is the fact that it is the government officials themselves who are engaging in the civil disobedience. I find absolutely nothing wrong with the various homosexual couple repeatedly going in, asking for marriage licenses and then suing because they cannot get one. If they were to be arrested for asking, I would not think them wrong in being arrested for their cause. If they held a protest, or even held a sit-in at city hall blocking access to the office of marriage licenses claiming that if they can't get married, no one should, and were peacefully acting, and peacefully arrested for doing so, I would think no wrong of them.
So that is an awful lot of civil disobedience I endorse. What I don't endorse is government ignoring it's own laws. That sets a very bad precident in my opinion.
Comments
Originally posted by a_greer
this is sad but expected, after all this is the screwiest city in the screwiest state on earth, i call it the granola bar state, take out the fruits and nuts, and all ya have is flakes (AKA Holywood types).
they have befowled an instatution of 5000 plus years in a singal weekend, while marrage is a legal thing it ia a huge social and religious thing, cival unions, i think its creapy but ok, i dont give a damn what you do when the drapes are shut, but this incuranse thing is bogas, it is a known risk, like smoking or being a booze-hound
Another prejudice has fallen...
Originally posted by billybobsky
a side issue who are DMBand0026 and DMBFan920? Note the name similarities, the regional proximity, are they the same person?
[OT]
No, he is a friend of mine from around where I live, we're different people.
[/OT]
Originally posted by trumptman
Uh, basically whatever?!?
My aunt and uncle have been openly gay since the 60's. They aren't institutionalized, imprisoned nor even poor.
But you keep conjuring up windmills to attack, ok?
Nick
i guess your aunt and uncle are one of the lucky ones then. good for them. the point is that persecution, in it's many forms, does happen, and happens frequently to people because of their sexual orientaion. according to you, being gay must be all bubblegum and roses.
Originally posted by trumptman
Uh, basically whatever?!?
My aunt and uncle have been openly gay since the 60's. They aren't institutionalized, imprisoned nor even poor.
But you keep conjuring up windmills to attack, ok?
Nick
So Matthew Shepard just tripped, right?
I'm glad for your aunt and uncle. I guess the experiences of two people "out since the 60's" are emblematic of the treatment of homosexuals in all corners of the globe in the past couple of centuries, since this was the quote that I was referrring to:
Yep, and I'm sure those little old lesbians had ancestors sweating in a cotton field under fear of whip to stay in their place as well.
You just keep coming up with insignifigant examples of your personal experiences to try to prop up your arguments, okay?
Originally posted by running with scissors
i guess your aunt and uncle are one of the lucky ones then. good for them. the point is that persecution, in it's many forms, does happen, and happens frequently to people because of their sexual orientaion. according to you, being gay must be all bubblegum and roses.
Isn't it amazing how I don't know a single homosexual who has ever had trouble with the law or even a career due to their sexuality. That must be because, well a whole lot of people don't even ask about it.
I also find it humorous that pfflam speaks of my experience in the past tense. I don't study music at a university any more. But that really shouldn't matter should it since gay people are in all walks of life. Sure they are more likely to congregate in certain cities and fields but I didn't just stop encountering them because I finished college as he suggests. Last I checked I was still a landlord, still an elementary school teacher and still had the same family.
Maybe my aunt and uncle aren't lucky. Maybe people just really aren't that interested in someone's sexuality if it isn't shoved in their face. By that I mean that if I don't care what you do in the privacy of your bedroom, you take care not to get in my face with it. Be you male, female, gay , lesbian or straight. If I want to know, I'll ask.
Nick
Originally posted by tmp
So Matthew Shepard just tripped, right?
I'm glad for your aunt and uncle. I guess the experiences of two people "out since the 60's" are emblematic of the treatment of homosexuals in all corners of the globe in the past couple of centuries, since this was the quote that I was referrring to:
You just keep coming up with insignifigant examples of your personal experiences to try to prop up your arguments, okay?
If you consider Matthew Shepard to be convincing or even a trend you are wrong.
I could be beat down by a couple of men tomorrow. They could cruelly beat me to death for whatever hateful reasons they care to conjure. The difference is my death wouldn't be front page news because I happen to be a white heterosexual male.
There are people killed everyday for all sorts of reasons. In fact take a look at this FBI Hate Crime Report. It shows that more hate crimes for anti-white than for homosexuals. It also shows many more crimes both for race and religion.
BTW as an interesting side note the "intolerant" state of Texas had fewer hate crimes overall and per capita than the very "tolerant" state of Massachussetts.
Perhaps Pfflam will have to put away the Southern twang and start practicing his "boston-ese" accent.
Nick
It's Real Video but it is a pretty good clip mentioning many of the points discussed here. Plus if you watch it you can supress your gag reflex at... gasp... Fox News.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
Marriage Video Clip
It's Real Video but it is a pretty good clip mentioning many of the points discussed here. Plus if you watch it you can supress your gag reflex at... gasp... Fox News.
Nick
Barney Frank makes a good argument against the federal effort.
Originally posted by trumptman
Isn't it amazing how I don't know a single homosexual who has ever had trouble with the law or even a career due to their sexuality. That must be because, well a whole lot of people don't even ask about it.
It might also be because discrimination in those two categories would be flagrant. In Northampton, MA, a local journalist was invited to spend one day with a lesbian woman, dressed in similar clothing. The harassment was all hostile stares and whispered hate speech and threats in passing, but it was real enough that the journalist couldn't sleep for days afterward.
Cases like Matthew Shepard are rare because most of the harassment consists of attempts by cowards to scare away people they don't want around, not anything that is likely to register on a police report or be subject to a workplace investigation.
And yes, this does happen even in "enlightened" places - that was the point of the invitation above, actually, to prove that even one of the towns rated most friendly toward gays and lesbians can be hellish - and it certainly happens north of Mason-Dixon. Though I suspect that the statistic you cite in a subsequent post is skewed by the fact that it can only track reported crimes, and anti-gay discrimination is far more likely to be reported in a town that's perceived as generally sympathetic.
Maybe my aunt and uncle aren't lucky. Maybe people just really aren't that interested in someone's sexuality if it isn't shoved in their face. By that I mean that if I don't care what you do in the privacy of your bedroom, you take care not to get in my face with it. Be you male, female, gay , lesbian or straight. If I want to know, I'll ask.
That's the best case. Your aunt and uncle are quite lucky if they get to enjoy that circumstance, based on what I know.
I don't call those bad odds. If I want hard stares, I'll just drive home since you can get plenty of those in traffic. You've also yet to address how forcing homosexual marriage on the general populace would somehow end these perceived hard stares or whispered hate speech. In fact how can you legislate an end to such things? You can't.
People get hard stares or whispers all the time. It could be because someone doesn't like you writing a check at the supermarket. It could be because you take too long at the ATM machines. I assure you that in an age where all you have to lose sleep over is a hard stare, that is a good thing, no matter what your gender.
BTW, anyone who is a parent gets used to plenty of hard stares thanks to the wonderful joy that children bring into the world.
Nick
The lawmaking process is not perfect, as we all know. That's why the courts have the power to strike them down. But the only way to contest a law in court is to break it and argue that the "illegal" action shouldn't be. Judges can't make those decisions proactively.
In other words, civil disobedience is built into the system as part of the lawmaking process. If Americans were to simply sit back and accept whatever gets rammed through the relevant legislatures and Congress they would be abandoning their role in the lawmaking process, and breaking the system.
To paraphrase a certain wise man, the law exists for man; man does not exist for the law.
ever thank O thayt pardner?!
Hell, we'da make life uh livn hayull for um sissee boyz . . . . yayez we-uld!
GET IT?!
but seriously, you still don't answer why you care?
Originally posted by trumptman
[ . . . ]BTW, anyone who is a parent gets used to plenty of hard stares thanks to the wonderful joy that children bring into the world.
Nick
Hmm?!?!
wyzat Trumpt?
your kids yell and scream at you in public?
I wonder why?
We (my family) always seem to get weepy eyed glazed smiles of lovin appreciation and super-goodness
Originally posted by pfflam
Hmm?!?!
wyzat Trumpt?
your kids yell and scream at you in public?
I wonder why?
We (my family) always seem to get weepy eyed glazed smiles of lovin appreciation and super-goodness
I didn't say my children yell and scream at me nor anyone else in public. As for the weepy eyed glazed smiles, it sounds like you have your kids doped up.
My children are very nice but are just entirely too bright for their own good. Suppose you and I were having a picnic at the park with said respective families. You leave your car keys on the table because, being the homophobe you are, you don't like getting poked by long sharp objects in your lower torso.
My two year old would wait until no one is looking, snag your keys, open your car door (yes even if it is locked), get in, lock the door, and likely start the car.
They get lots of loving stares right up until they start honking your car horn at you, I assure you.
My four year old, well he is four which pretty much sums it up. Pretty much take anything he cares to say and repeat it at least 5 times. It seems all four year olds do this and it is intensely annoying. So while you and I are coaxing my 2 year old son out of your now locked car, he would be telling you that the two year old loves keys. (5 times) He loves cars (5 times). He likes your car (5 times) Can he go for a ride in your car? (5 times) Can we go to your house and type PBSkids into your computer so he can play it... (5 times)
Such intellect has to be directed, not subdued.
Nick
Originally posted by pfflam
perhaps them gay people just know they aint wanted down here Texas way
ever thank O thayt pardner?!
Hell, we'da make life uh livn hayull for um sissee boyz . . . . yayez we-uld!
GET IT?!
but seriously, you still don't answer why you care?
This is a truly bigoted post pfflam
As a native Texan I do take offense to this.
I hope you can refrain from this style of posting.
Fellows
Originally posted by Kirkland
As a native-born Texan, I 100% support Pflamm's characterization of this backwards, Jesus-freak encrusted, hateful former-slave state. There is nothing socially redeeming about Texas, or the South at large. A haven of hatred and prejudice, all wrapped up in the leather cover of a Bible.
For the record I will say that in viewing the Fox news clip provided by Trumptman I find John Cornyn of Texas to be a bigot in regard to gay marriage and / or gay civil unions. In fact I find John Cornyn to be more than simply a bigot in this regard, I find him to be a sellout to a portion of the population (narrow minded control freaks who want to dictate others relationships) over standing up for civil rights of gay individuals. I conversly find Barney Frank of Mass to be right on and well spoken with this issue.
I also completely understand your frustration Kirkland in this heated debate going on in the United States concerning a right that I firmly believe you should have to attain marriage if you were to choose to.
My point in calling pfflam on his post was simply this:
Let me illustrate:
Do all blacks eat watermelon and fried chicken as their two food groups?
Should we think of asians only as "slant-eyed" people?
Are Bostonians all rude by default?
Do all Arabs want to kill westerners?
Are all Blondes dumb?
I could go on and on..... I wish not to with all due respect.
My point is that in each statement above a negative connotation is expressed in a general sense as to bind all members of given "group" as defined by bigoted and misguided hate speech.
I stand by your side of this issue Kirkland and indeed I stand for dignity and respect for all human beings.
Bigotry no matter where it is directed is misguided and people with a spine will point it out.
Am I suggesting we can not have jokes and good humor? No not at all.
I am only suggesting we stay semi-civil as we all deserve dignity not just some.
With complete respect,
Fellows
Originally posted by trumptman
To suggest homosexuals are oppressed the same way many minorities are is just nonsense because unless you broadcast your sexuality, no one can act on it.
This isn't true at all. You don't have to broadcast your sexuality in order for your same sex partner to not get health insurance.
This has been a long thread with a lot of good arguments. I would hate to see it degenerate.
Originally posted by Amorph
As to the "rule of law," the idea that there is either Absolute Respect for the Rule of Law or Total Anarchy is a fallacy of the excluded middle at best, and one that ignores the principles the American government was built around.
The lawmaking process is not perfect, as we all know. That's why the courts have the power to strike them down. But the only way to contest a law in court is to break it and argue that the "illegal" action shouldn't be. Judges can't make those decisions proactively.
In other words, civil disobedience is built into the system as part of the lawmaking process. If Americans were to simply sit back and accept whatever gets rammed through the relevant legislatures and Congress they would be abandoning their role in the lawmaking process, and breaking the system.
To paraphrase a certain wise man, the law exists for man; man does not exist for the law.
To a degree, I do agree with you. I would say the difference I disagree with in this instance is the fact that it is the government officials themselves who are engaging in the civil disobedience. I find absolutely nothing wrong with the various homosexual couple repeatedly going in, asking for marriage licenses and then suing because they cannot get one. If they were to be arrested for asking, I would not think them wrong in being arrested for their cause. If they held a protest, or even held a sit-in at city hall blocking access to the office of marriage licenses claiming that if they can't get married, no one should, and were peacefully acting, and peacefully arrested for doing so, I would think no wrong of them.
So that is an awful lot of civil disobedience I endorse. What I don't endorse is government ignoring it's own laws. That sets a very bad precident in my opinion.
Nick