Archive

Gay Pride

  • Al Bundy
    FairwoodKing;421556 wrote:Catholics used to burn us at the stake. That's how the word "faggot" became used. In the dictionary sense, a faggot is a bundle of wood used for burning things. The Nazis sent 100,000 of us to our deaths in concentration camps. The Soviets sent us to the Gulag. In many parts of present-day African, Protestant Christians put us in jail for long periods of time. I won't even talk about what the Islamic governments do to us.

    On the other hand, Canada grants us marriage rights and acceptance in the military.

    Which group would you rather be associated with?
    Does Canada still have a military? :)
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    isadore;421551 wrote:For homosexuals, tolerance, acceptance and the equal protection of the law.

    So it is about acceptance and equal protection.

    I credit you for your honesty. And I'll proffer that someone engaging in a private act has absolutely nothing to do with a race of people enslaved for centuries. It isn't the same thing. One is an act, the other is being.
  • Bio-Hazzzzard
    FairwoodKing;421556 wrote:
    On the other hand, Canada grants us marriage rights and acceptance in the military.

    Which group would you rather be associated with?
    What an inconvienence it is to live in the United States, isn't it FWK
  • isadore
    Al Bundy;421583 wrote:Does Canada still have a military? :)
    Yes they do. "Since 2002, 150 members of the Canadian Forces have been killed serving in the Afghanistan mission."

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/casualties/list.html
  • isadore
    Manhattan Buckeye;421590 wrote:So it is about acceptance and equal protection.

    I credit you for your honesty. And I'll proffer that someone engaging in a private act has absolutely nothing to do with a race of people enslaved for centuries. It isn't the same thing. One is an act, the other is being.
    I will proffer to you that you have two groups long oppressed for something they were born with skin color and sexual inclination. For milleniums homosexuals have been oppressed. Skin color and consensual adult sex acts are not reasons that should justify treating persons as less than equal, as denying them the equal protection of the law or denying them the right to marry.
  • FairwoodKing
    Bio-Hazzzzard;421594 wrote:What an inconvienence it is to live in the United States, isn't it FWK

    It certainly is if you're gay and you want to serve in the military. I have gay friends who served in the US military and they were terrified the whole time they were in it.
  • Bio-Hazzzzard
    Fairwood, what is wrong with this approach that I had stated in an earlier post?
    Bio-Hazzzzard;420046 wrote:wouldn't it be easier to lay low and feel out the community before you lash out and possibly make things hard for yourself? Let your neighbors and coworkers see you as an average everyday guy instead of moving there and pushing your ways directly on them. If you establish a good relationship with new friends, neighbors, etc.. I believe they will accept you for who you are, don't you think? There is never a war unless one is started.
  • Bio-Hazzzzard
    FairwoodKing;421642 wrote:It certainly is if you're gay and you want to serve in the military. I have gay friends who served in the US military and they were terrified the whole time they were in it.
    What time period did your friends serve?
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    isadore;421614 wrote:I will proffer to you that you have two groups long oppressed for something they were born with skin color and sexual inclination. For milleniums homosexuals have been oppressed. Skin color and consensual adult sex acts are not reasons that should justify treating persons as less than equal, as denying them the equal protection of the law or denying them the right to marry.
    That's why your opinion is in the (extreme) minority. Many gays have lived their lives even during the worst of times with no oppression at all. The same can't be said about racial minorities.
  • isadore
    Manhattan Buckeye;421673 wrote:That's why your opinion is in the (extreme) minority. Many gays have lived their lives even during the worst of times with no oppression at all. The same can't be said about racial minorities.
    None are so blind as those who will not see. In those societies homosexuals would be imprisoned, tortured, killed for practicing homosexuality. As in many of those societies Jews or various Christian sects could suffer the same fates for practicing their religions openly. That is oppression and homosexuals have suffered it for millenia.
  • FairwoodKing
    Manhattan Buckeye;421673 wrote:That's why your opinion is in the (extreme) minority. Many gays have lived their lives even during the worst of times with no oppression at all. The same can't be said about racial minorities.

    There was a time when I had no oppression, either. It was when I was totally in the closet. I was teaching at a high school when I came out. The kids found out about me because I went to a gay roller skating event. I'm lucky I didn't get fired. I took a lot of heat over that.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    A gay roller skating event that the kids saw? Fairwood, you are indeed the King of the trollers.
  • FairwoodKing
    Manhattan Buckeye;421876 wrote:A gay roller skating event that the kids saw? Fairwood, you are indeed the King of the trollers.

    One of the high school seniors went there to skate, and he brought four freshman girls with him. Believe me, it wasn't my idea for that bunch to be there.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    Where did you skate? In 1983?
  • Bio-Hazzzzard
    Manhattan Buckeye;421876 wrote:A gay roller skating event that the kids saw? Fairwood, you are indeed the King of the trollers.
    That's funny he couldn't avoid them kids, but he sure can avoid the questions that have been asked to provide us with credible evidence of his inability to get a job in OH because of his sexual preference.
  • FairwoodKing
    Manhattan Buckeye;421899 wrote:Where did you skate? In 1983?

    Yes, it was around then.

    I think I need to clarify myself. I did not have sex with any of the boys nor did I do anything that could have gotten a girl pregnant. I'm not into children and never have been.

    As far as the gay roller skating was concerned, there is gay skating all over the country. It is an event that can be enjoyed by adults or teenagers in a non-sexual, non-bar, and non-threatening environment.
  • majorspark
    Marriage throughout history has been an honored institution defined by the moral boundaries of a state or group of people. Most states in our union follow the moral definition of marriage as being that of one man and one women not in close relation to each other and of a certain age. The limits of "close" relation and age are defined by the individual states.

    This is a reflection of the moral beliefs of the people throughout this nation. Whether they are base on traditional moral beliefs or religious beliefs, are irrelevant to the argument. No matter what the reasons are for attaining a moral definition of marriage, a definition of marriage will be made by some group of people, whether it be the state or religious institutions.

    Some have posted that the state should in no way be involved in defining marriage, but be limited to only legal civil contracts. This is quite enticing to a limited government fellow like myself. But its unfortunately just not possible. The depravity of man will not permit it.

    Suppose we limited government to defining the rules governing civil contracts and left religious institutions with the freedom to define and conduct marriage as they see fit. Can we except plural marriages? How about the marrying of young teenage girls? What about marrying 1st cousins? Brother and sister?

    We all know too well there are religious institutions as well as secular groups in this country that would engage in these immoral practices of marriage. They do so today outside of our laws. How much more so absent of involvement of government. Some form of governance has to step in and by force of law define what a legal moral marriage is.

    That definition in this nation is made by the will of the people voting their conscience through state and local governance. It is my opinion that it remains there. There are many "gray" areas when it comes to defining marriage. It would be impossible to enforce a federal definition on over 300 million people without forcing reasonable definitions of 10's of millions to be stifled. It is my opinion that they be left to the states and the people to decide. As the constitution directs.

    Lets not forget FairwoodKing & Isadore, if the federal government's law trumped the states, there would be no place where same sex marriages would be recognized. A large majority of the states reject that definition as well as the feds. Some definition of marriage will be made by some level of governance. It is unavoidable. Otherwise we will have anarchy in marriage.

    Any yes in this country it will be determined by the moral compass of the people. At all levels of governance.
  • I Wear Pants
    I think you need to add "in the 1970s or 1980s" to the end of that last sentence. <<< That was meant for FWK

    But I can't believe people are suggesting that someone just "lay low" so that there aren't any conflicts.

    Edit: Oh no majorspark! Not an anarchy in marriage!
  • majorspark
    I Wear Pants;422013 wrote:But I can't believe people are suggesting that someone just "lay low" so that there aren't any conflicts.
    I think his point is to the reality of a situation in his opinion. There is a time and season for everything. There is a time for peace and a time for war. What good does it do for your cause to die on the hill of futility? Maybe by some small chance you become a martyr for your cause. Very small maybe. There is a time to "lay low" and a time to fight. A wise and frugal fighter is quite aware of these principles. He knows when to speak and when to be silent. He knows when to tear down and when to build.

    Wise judgments of these principles are of great value to any pursuit in life. Once you get out of school and head into the "real" world you will come to the full realization of the wisdom of these principles. There is a time to stand up and a time to sit down. Your personal judgment on what to do and when, will define your success or failure. I am not saying you violate your moral compass. Just be wise and evaluate the bigger picture. In the end maybe you determine you see a need to die on a hill. No matter the futility.

    One of my favorite songs. By the Byrds. Priciples taken from the book of Ecclesiastes.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LSTc-5Fn_Y&feature=PlayList&p=5C99628B1C3A3AB8&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=10
    I Wear Pants;422013 wrote:Oh no majorspark! Not an anarchy in marriage!
    LOL! One of the worst forms of anarchy. Had some personal experience with this form myself. My wife once thought she had equal rights and told me to make my own sammich. Chaos ensued and soon everyone in the family was making their own sammich as they saw fit. The grotesque combination of meats, bread, and condiments became unbearable. Order had to be restored. I had to put the wife in her place. The family now enjoys the sammiches I see fit.

    All kidding aside. I think you got the point I was making. As for my wife, I kid but she has been an equal partner in raising my kids. I am thankful to her that she has provided a balancing force to my own ideas, pursuits, and disciplinary actions that I have seen fit to use to guide my children to be upstanding adults. We as men like to joke about our wives. But I do not know where my family would be without her insight.
  • WebFire
    FairwoodKing;421642 wrote:It certainly is if you're gay and you want to serve in the military. I have gay friends who served in the US military and they were terrified the whole time they were in it.

    Why would they be terrified? Did they go around introducing themselves as "Hi I'm Fred and I'm gay"?
  • jmog
    FairwoodKing;419809 wrote:Since you want links, here's one for you. An historical marker honoring a lesbian was destroyed in gay-friendly Dayton recently.

    http://www.whiotv.com/news/24197732/detail.html?cxntlid=cmg_cntnt_rss

    It will cost $1000 to repair the marker. I'm just glad that it's not common knowledge that Baron von Steuben was gay. If the world finds out about that, every sign in Steubenville will be damaged.

    That link has zero to do with what anyone has been talking about. But thanks for a link that is irrelevant to the conversation. Should I post one now on the plight of women in Iran? It would have about as much to do with the subject at hand as yours.
  • jmog
    FairwoodKing;420032 wrote:At no point are we trying to take away anyone else's rights. We just want the same rights that straight people have.

    Name a right that you do not have that straight people have.

    While I am actually for gay civil unions/marriage (with the caveat tha I mentioned earlier), technically you have the same right to marry someone as a straight person does right now.
  • Bio-Hazzzzard
    I Wear Pants;422013 wrote:
    But I can't believe people are suggesting that someone just "lay low" so that there aren't any conflicts.
    I'm sorry I wasn't elaborate enough for you to understand the context of what I said. Majorspark hit it spot on. This is exactly what I was getting at, maybe I was a bit too simplistic with my opinion.
    majorspark;422020 wrote:I think his point is to the reality of a situation in his opinion. There is a time and season for everything. There is a time for peace and a time for war. What good does it do for your cause to die on the hill of futility? Maybe by some small chance you become a martyr for your cause. Very small maybe. There is a time to "lay low" and a time to fight. A wise and frugal fighter is quite aware of these principles. He knows when to speak and when to be silent. He knows when to tear down and when to build.

    Wise judgments of these principles are of great value to any pursuit in life. Once you get out of school and head into the "real" world you will come to the full realization of the wisdom of these principles. There is a time to stand up and a time to sit down. Your personal judgment on what to do and when, will define your success or failure. I am not saying you violate your moral compass. Just be wise and evaluate the bigger picture. In the end maybe you determine you see a need to die on a hill. No matter the futility.
  • isadore
    major sparks wrote:That definition in this nation is made by the will of the people voting their conscience through state and local governance. It is my opinion that it remains there. There are many "gray" areas when it comes to defining marriage. It would be impossible to enforce a federal definition on over 300 million people without forcing reasonable definitions of 10's of millions to be stifled. It is my opinion that they be left to the states and the people to decide. As the constitution directs.


    Lets not forget FairwoodKing & Isadore, if the federal government's law trumped the states, there would be no place where same sex marriages would be recognized. A large majority of the states reject that definition as well as the feds. Some definition of marriage will be made by some level of governance. It is unavoidable. Otherwise we will have anarchy in marriage.

    Any yes in this country it will be determined by the moral compass of the people. At all levels of governance.
    major sparks wrote:I think his point is to the reality of a situation in his opinion. There is a time and season for everything. There is a time for peace and a time for war. What good does it do for your cause to die on the hill of futility? Maybe by some small chance you become a martyr for your cause. Very small maybe. There is a time to "lay low" and a time to fight. A wise and frugal fighter is quite aware of these principles. He knows when to speak and when to be silent. He knows when to tear down and when to build.

    Wise judgments of these principles are of great value to any pursuit in life. Once you get out of school and head into the "real" world you will come to the full realization of the wisdom of these principles. There is a time to stand up and a time to sit down. Your personal judgment on what to do and when, will define your success or failure. I am not saying you violate your moral compass. Just be wise and evaluate the bigger picture. In the end maybe you determine you see a need to die on a hill. No matter the futility.

    One of my favorite songs. By the Byrds. Priciples taken from the book of Ecclesiastes.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LSTc...ext=1&index=10
    The voting conscience of the people as through their state and local government. Their conscience in Ohio voted to deny blacks and women suffrage and gays the right to marry or even have civil union. Now that is a conscience suffering from racism, misanthrope and homophobia. Not something to admired, praised and placed on a pedestal. Yes and of course several states have not seen gray areas on the issue of marriage, just black and white. Those two could not mix, these states with their great consciences would not allow blacks and whites to marry, an example of enlightened state opinion. Of course they federal supreme court forced its definition of marriage on tens of millions of bigots who controlled southern state governments to your obvious dismay.
    At present the federal government is moving toward a more enlightened view toward homosexuality with the repeal of the don&#8217;t ask, don&#8217;t tell policy. Without federal efforts homophobic state governments will be preventing gay marriage well into the 22nd century. Thank God for the Full faith and Credit clause, equal protection clause and substantive due process.
    Wow! &#8220;Time to stay low,&#8221; something anyone needs to deal with the states. Wells that is your great state governments in action. As the Byrd might sing. A time to deny the right to marry&#8221; which never ends until the federal government forces them. As it was the denying blacks a proper education, denying them access to public accomodation, allowing them access legal system, the right vote, serve on juries. People waiting nearly hundred years after the 14th Amendment passed to get their state governments to allow them to exercise their basic rights. People like you telling them to stay low and wait their time. \We would not want to interfere with states rights. Finally it is the federal government that comes to their rescue from these atrocities. States rights is crap. The large majority of the states were created by the federal government with its rules and with it setting up their boundaries and approving their constitutions. The rest created by a king, the colonists his subjects who identified themselves as Englishmen and women through almost all the colonial period.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    isadore;422547 wrote:The voting conscience of the people as through their state and local government. Their conscience in Ohio voted to deny blacks and women suffrage and gays the right to marry or even have civil union. Now that is a conscience suffering from racism, misanthrope and homophobia. Not something to admired, praised and placed on a pedestal. Yes and of course several states have not seen gray areas on the issue of marriage, just black and white. Those two could not mix, these states with their great consciences would not allow blacks and whites to marry, an example of enlightened state opinion. Of course they federal supreme court forced its definition of marriage on tens of millions of bigots who controlled southern state governments to your obvious dismay.
    At present the federal government is moving toward a more enlightened view toward homosexuality with the repeal of the don&#8217;t ask, don&#8217;t tell policy. Without federal efforts homophobic state governments will be preventing gay marriage well into the 22nd century. Thank God for the Full faith and Credit clause, equal protection clause and substantive due process.
    Wow! &#8220;Time to stay low,&#8221; something anyone needs to deal with the states. Wells that is your great state governments in action. As the Byrd might sing. A time to deny the right to marry&#8221; which never ends until the federal government forces them. As it was the denying blacks a proper education, denying them access to public accomodation, allowing them access legal system, the right vote, serve on juries. People waiting nearly hundred years after the 14th Amendment passed to get their state governments to allow them to exercise their basic rights. People like you telling them to stay low and wait their time. \We would not want to interfere with states rights. Finally it is the federal government that comes to their rescue from these atrocities. States rights is crap. The large majority of the states were created by the federal government with its rules and with it setting up their boundaries and approving their constitutions. The rest created by a king, the colonists his subjects who identified themselves as Englishmen and women through almost all the colonial period.

    What the heck was that?

    20 years ago, without colonies and the king, the idea of gay marriage was an impossible idea, even among the most socially liberal of states.