Gay Pride

• majorspark

  

  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.

  Sounds like a case of vandalism. What's this got to do with gays being fired from their jobs?
• FairwoodKing

  majorspark;419866 wrote:Sounds like a case of vandalism. What's this got to do with gays being fired from their jobs?

  
  The purpose of this thread is to discuss various gay issues. Actually, I started it with the intention of talking about progress that we have made. I don't know how we got off track.
• Bio-Hazzzzard

  

  FairwoodKing;408307 wrote:Now that Gay Pride Week is over, I would like to make some observations.
  
  I will move back to Ohio in a few weeks. I know that Ohio does not offers these rights to gay people. I will do everything in my power to become a gay activist and to get our human rights that we deserve.

  I believe you started the trend with the original post of this thread when you said you wil do everything in your power to have a sovereign state of ohio conform to what you think is right for for youself with no concern for the citizens of the state of OH
• ralphus33

  Gay people can use the internet now? Shoot here I was thinking they had no rights.
• FairwoodKing

  Bio-Hazzzzard;419969 wrote:I believe you started the trend with the original post of this thread when you said you wil do everything in your power to have a sovereign state of ohio conform to what you think is right for for youself with no concern for the citizens of the state of OH

  
  At no point are we trying to take away anyone else's rights. We just want the same rights that straight people have.
• I Wear Pants

  Bio-Hazzzzard;419847 wrote:Were they fired from there jobs? That is what your worried about if I'm not mistaken. Yes, you will deal with hate crimes wherever you go a choice you have to deal with.

  Yikes man. So now hate crimes on gays are just something they have to deal with? Did you say that about blacks before them?
  
  No one should have to deal with hate crimes and no one should act like someone had hate crimes coming to them.
• majorspark

  

  Hate crime laws are some of the most discriminatory laws on the books.
  
  All criminal violence against humans should be treated equally.
• Bio-Hazzzzard

  

  ^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

  

  I Wear Pants;420033 wrote:Yikes man. So now hate crimes on gays are just something they have to deal with? Did you say that about blacks before them?
  
  No one should have to deal with hate crimes and no one should act like someone had hate crimes coming to them.

  Take a look at the world today, yes hate crimes do exist. I am a hater of no one, however, there are many that go to the extent of commiting these crimes. Unfortunate reality along with any other crime.
• I Wear Pants

  majorspark;420044 wrote:Hate crime laws are some of the most discriminatory laws on the books.
  
  All criminal violence against humans should be treated equally.

  I don't disagree.
• Bio-Hazzzzard

  

  I Wear Pants;420033 wrote:No one should have to deal with hate crimes and no one should act like someone had hate crimes coming to them.

  I agree with this statement. I don't want to misrepresent myself as some kind of hater because I am far from that. The reason I made that statement is the fact that there are hardcore haters out there and it is a part of life that minority groups unfortunately have to live with. Should it be that way, absolutely not, but it does happen
• I Wear Pants

  Okay. It just sounded like "well you'll have to get used to it" originally. Which is IMO the wrong way to look at it. The way to look at it is "those assholes better learn to like them, deal with them maturely, or ignore them".
  
  I think we have similar thoughts on this just maybe didn't get it out like we thought we did or I didn't read what you said correctly.
• isadore

  BCBulldog;413482 wrote:It was the Issue that was put forward. If the homosexual community (or anyone else for that matter) want to change a law in Ohio, it is not that hard. Our constitution is damn near a dry-erase board. Sodomy laws are draconian, marriage laws are not. Why can't you understand that defining marriage as only between one man and one woman is not homophobic?

  A law that denies citizens their deserved "equal protection" should not be denied by majority vote. Ohioans used that vote to deny blacks and women the right to vote each action was bigoted and draconian. When states refused to allow competent people of different races to marry it was draconian as it is now when used to deny competent people of the same sex that right. It is cruel and homophobic.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  ^^^
  
  Well, a lot of folks disagree with you. For the zillionth time, the gay lobby grew out of tolerance, not as an "equal protection" group. When the gay lobby said persecution of gays was wrong, a lot of Americans agreed with them. When the gay lobby said their privacy (a key word there) should be respected, a lot of Americans agreed with them. Now that the gay lobby is saying that refusal of state recognition of marriage is a form of persecution, some Americans agree, some Americans disagree.
• FairwoodKing

  I think what would solve the whole problem is if marriage was a religious event conducted by houses of worship and civil unions were conducted by the state. Legal benefits would only apply to civil unions. That way gays and unmarried straight couples could have the benefits of marriage without it being called that. If a church wanted to deny a gay couple the rite of marriage, that would be the church's business.
  
  The State of Washington already has something similar to this. The only problem is that the benefits do not extend to federal laws. For example, a gay person cannot use his or her partner for purposes of filing IRS returns.
  
  Despite my complaining, I really am pleased that we gays and lesbians have made as much progress as we have. There is still much work to be done, but we are accepted more today than we have ever been.
• sonofsam

  

  Fairwood, I wish the best to you... This area is majority anti-gay, but you don't seem to be "flamer" gay. As long as you do your own thing and keep your expeditions behind doors, then welcome back. Be what you want to be, just don't reach out to the wrong people...
  
  I am about as anti-gay as they come, but I have worked with a few gays that did their job well and did not make me feel uncomfortable... I have no problem hanging out with a gay guy as long as he likes taking about chicks...
• believer

  

  FairwoodKing;420723 wrote:Despite my complaining, I really am pleased that we gays and lesbians have made as much progress as we have. There is still much work to be done, but we are accepted more today than we have ever been.

  Keep in mind there's a difference between tolerance and acceptance. For example I tolerate gays and lesbians but it doesn't mean I accept homosexuality as an "alternative" lifestyle.
• isadore

  Manhattan Buckeye;420672 wrote:^^^
  
  Well, a lot of folks disagree with you. For the zillionth time, the gay lobby grew out of tolerance, not as an "equal protection" group. When the gay lobby said persecution of gays was wrong, a lot of Americans agreed with them. When the gay lobby said their privacy (a key word there) should be respected, a lot of Americans agreed with them. Now that the gay lobby is saying that refusal of state recognition of marriage is a form of persecution, some Americans agree, some Americans disagree.

  
  Equal protection is government acting to provide tolerance to those who have been denied it by the states. The right of privacy which was used to end sodomy laws was based on the Ninth Amendment and substantive due process from the 14th. The federal courts have played a major role in advancing the rights of homosexuals against homophobic opposition. Hopefully that will be continued against the hateful ban on gay marriage.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  It is "hateful" now, come on. Really.
  
  On this thread people have asked FairwoodKing to provide examples of hateful actions, and even he (assuming he is gay) can't do it.
• isadore

  Manhattan Buckeye;421175 wrote:It is "hateful" now, come on. Really.
  
  On this thread people have asked FairwoodKing to provide examples of hateful actions, and even he (assuming he is gay) can't do it.

  
  What do you want. Gosh historical, colonists executing homosexuals and beginning over three hundred years of anti gay laws. Jefferson suggesting castration for sodomy. To police raids on gay bars that lead to the Stonewall riots. Hateful laws like the one forbidding gay marriage. Is there any question that a law forbidding consenting adults of two different races from marrying is hateful. The same is true of a law forbidding consenting adults of the same gender from marrying.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  "Jefferson suggesting castration for sodomy."
  
  LOL you might want to do some research on this!
• isadore

  Manhattan Buckeye;421283 wrote:"Jefferson suggesting castration for sodomy."
  
  LOL you might want to do some research on this!

  
  Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least. - Bill Number 64, authored by Jefferson and "Reported by the Committee of Advisors, 18 June 1779"
• Manhattan Buckeye

  And what was the other choice?
• isadore

  Manhattan Buckeye;421516 wrote:And what was the other choice?

  For homosexuals, tolerance, acceptance and the equal protection of the law.
• FairwoodKing

  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?