Gays in California now have the right to be miserable too.

[Ernest Buckley]

I think straight people fear gay people attacking them... LOL

Seriously, I never understood the gay bashing. The only thing I don`t get is having a parade. I don`t parade saying I`m straight.

[Dreabfly]

 

The only thing I don`t get is having a parade. I don`t parade saying I`m straight.

 

 

I can explain that one. The parade felt important in the beginning stages of the community coming out as a whole for unity - and to assert some level of public statement about bashing - that we weren't going to be battered into dissappearing into our homes and hiding. Much like the marches in the 60's for civil rights, it simply said "we're here and we're people and we're not afraid of you." That statement has been made and I think we're learning to move on.

 

Personally - I'd have no problem if Pride went away alltogether. It's devolved into just another weekend street fair that pushes products in cities where it's been around awhile. But there are still places on the planet where intimidation is the norm, and I think that gays and lesbians in those places would say that Pride is still an important part of moving forward.

 

As for the buttless pants and drunken naked dancing on floats - yeah - ummm - some of us have always felt that the press coverage of that has never helped us. But just like all groups - we are diverse and have varying opinions about how to best represent our cause and our lives.

[GVDub]

 

The only thing I don`t get is having a parade. I don`t parade saying I`m straight.

 

 

You've never walked down the street holding hands with your girlfriend/wife? When you did, did people act as if it were wrong, give you the stink-eye, make rude comments designed to be overheard, or even come right up to you and tell you that you were evil? If that had ever happened to you and you suddenly found a parade where you could proudly walk along with your sweety, you'd probably do it, right? Because walking around having to deny who you are all the time is a drag.

 

I'm straight, but I've had a very similar experience walking down the street with my wife because we're two different colors and some people have problems with that. And it wasn't that long ago that our marriage would have been unrecognized in many states (the last state anti-miscegenation laws weren't finally taken off the books until 2000, despite having been ruled unconstitutional in 1967 by the Supreme Court).

[fetishfrog]

 

Conversing would be so much easier if people would address what was actually said. From this it is quite clear you disagree with something, but as of yet, I have no clue what. frankenputer, the legal system assures us that, unless we are not of sound mind, when we name beneficiaries, executors, etc., it is binding. They have have the same rights. They have always had the same rights, even if the avenue of approach was a little different. Also, what institution would you be referring to? Just curious.

 

 

 

I'll explain it to you then...slowly of course. The line I quoted and disagreed with was:

 

 

No one is trying to deprive homosexuals of life, liberty, or the persuit of happiness. I find it quite odd that a group that is always so ready to point out the "flaws" of the Judeo-Christian tradition are so dogged to engage in something so tied to it.

 

 

And my reponse was:

 

 

couldn't disagree more. A number of Judeo-Christian organizations (in the name of God, ironically enough) protest the very thought of gay marriage, and are, in effect, actively attempting to deny gay couples equal protection under the law.

 

 

*pause for effect*

 

Now, you see, by denying gays the right to marry you deny them all the legal benefits that one receives by being married. Therefore, gays do not, by virtue of the fact that they're gay, receive equal protection under the law, which is a violation of their right to liberty.

 

*take a deep breathe....exhale*

 

Also, by denying gays the right to marry, you, in effect, deny them the opportunity to experience the happiness that accompanies a couple who wish to marry and express their love in said fashion. By doing so, you deny them their right to pursue happiness.

 

Questions?

[MrKnobs]

IPersonally - I'd have no problem if Pride went away alltogether. It's devolved into just another weekend street fair that pushes products in cities where it's been around awhile. .

 

Gosh, I would.

 

My band's singer is a lesbian and we get a tremendous amount of work during "Pride Week" here in Austin.

 

 

Terry D.

[Guitzilla]

 

You've never walked down the street holding hands with your girlfriend/wife? When you did, did people act as if it were wrong, give you the stink-eye, make rude comments designed to be overheard, or even come right up to you and tell you that you were evil? If that had ever happened to you and you suddenly found a parade where you could proudly walk along with your sweety, you'd probably do it, right? Because walking around having to deny who you are all the time is a drag. I'm straight, but I've had a very similar experience walking down the street with my wife because we're two different colors and some people have problems with that. And it wasn't that long ago that our marriage would have been unrecognized in many states (the last state anti-miscegenation laws weren't finally taken off the books until 2000, which was our 11th anniversary, despite having been ruled unconstitutional in 1967 by the Supreme Court).

 

 

 

I think that alot of people forget that alot of equal rights campaigns just kicked into gear 30 to 40 years ago. Our society has changed so much in that time, and in some ways not at all.

 

As for the Gay Pride Parade. I went once. It is not my thing. Unfortunately, the images you see on TV are the guys running around in underwear or drag queens (I don't have a problem with them.) They don't represent my relationship, or the other gay couples that I know. Most of us lead very "normal lives." In our spare time, we work on our houses, go out to dinner, have coffee with friends, etc.

 

I'm already in a gay "marriage." We just want the same benefits that are afforded to other couples.

[UstadKhanAli]

 

I can explain that one. The parade felt important in the beginning stages of the community coming out as a whole for unity - and to assert some level of public statement about bashing - that we weren't going to be battered into dissappearing into our homes and hiding.

 

 

Yes, and a reason why a lot of people have protests, parades, whatever is because they feel that they need to receive more publicity for their positive messages, causes, whatever. That's fine with me.

[UstadKhanAli]

 

 

 

I wanted to reprint this again for the benefit of people who have already made derogatory comments, such as gay people having holes in their pants or whatever. I think a lot of the messages that people are posting here are getting overlooked, ignored, etc., and this is one that should not be. Thanks for your consideration.

[UstadKhanAli]

Would gay couples rather go to see "Speed Racer" or "Iron Man"?

[Ernest Buckley]

 

You've never walked down the street holding hands with your girlfriend/wife? When you did, did people act as if it were wrong, give you the stink-eye, make rude comments designed to be overheard, or even come right up to you and tell you that you were evil? If that had ever happened to you and you suddenly found a parade where you could proudly walk along with your sweety, you'd probably do it, right? Because walking around having to deny who you are all the time is a drag.

 

 

Can`t say what I would want to do. I don`t have a problem with anyones sexual orientation, I just find parades in general to be silly ego trips and that goes for the St. Patricks Day parade as well so... and I`m Irish. Call me a Racist.

 

 

I'm straight, but I've had a very similar experience walking down the street with my wife because we're two different colors and some people have problems with that. And it wasn't that long ago that our marriage would have been unrecognized in many states (the last state anti-miscegenation laws weren't finally taken off the books until 2000, despite having been ruled unconstitutional in 1967 by the Supreme Court).

 

 

I dated an African American - American Indian girl for 4 years and had to deal with a lot of the same stuff you did and probably still do. However, even during those years of dating her, I never had the desire to parade about it. Like I said previously, I don`t get the parade thing.

[Guitzilla]

 

Would gay couples rather go to see "Speed Racer" or "Iron Man"?

 

 

"Iron Man" was amazing, but I am a huge comic geek. I'm afraid of "Speed Racer" Some things should remain a cartoon.

 

I would love to see "Howard Chaykin's American Flagg" made into a movie. It is an old First Comic that would ROCK as a movie.

[Geoff Grace]

The thing I find bemusing is that so many people are willing to tolerate all sorts of relationships between consenting adults -- S&M, B&D, etc. -- but marriage? NO! That's where I draw the line!

 

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[Geoff Grace]

it's pointless to try and explain morals to liberals.

 

C'mon, I know plenty of morally upstanding people who are liberal, conservative, and in-between. I'm sure you do too, if you stop and think about it.

 

If you don't, you need to get out more often!

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[wwwjd]

 

You lost me on this one too. Can you please explain how this is a "breakdown in worth and value"? Thanks.

 

 

In short, it's the ME system. ME is the ONLY value, therefore everyone else does not have value. I could kill them, ignore them, watch them get hurt... doesn't affect ME - value skewed. I misquoted whoever I was paraphrasing but the message was the same. Tell me the world is not HUGELY EMBRACING "MEism"

 

What's the connection? gay marriage doesn't affect ME and MY FAMILY so who cares. See the devaluing going on?

 

As I will continuously state, it's not up to me what people do in their bedrooms so to speak, but I take issue with the VERY SLOW and DELIBERATE deconstruction of our systems that define right and wrong and even, dare I say it, morality

[rasputin1963]

A gay's life, if he/she travels much, can be schizophrenic: there are some places in the USA where being gay is simply a non-issue at all... Then there are other places where you'll be greeted-- by perfect strangers (clerks, waitresses, sales attendants, etc.)-- with sneers and open frowns, or be denied service altogether. And this often just based on one's appearance or mannerisms alone.

 

Just as Blacks have been saying about themselves for decades now, "Gays are not a monolith". ie., they don't think, act and move in unison.... and all know each other.... they are dispersed throughout every level of society, knowing no ethnic or class or national limitations.

 

In 1968, President LBJ was given a memo stating that there were a "dangerous" level of lesbians in the military's medical core. He set up a task force to root them out and fire them; the only problem was, it was discovered that these women were in top positions of honor where they had served with great fidelity and diligence. LBJ then dropped his "task-force". He needed these dykes too much.

 

Despite popular stereotypes to the contrary, [YOUTUBE]p4enfUyGWSY[/YOUTUBE]the vast majority of pedophiles are heterosexuals.

 

The most convincing books I have read on the subject indicate strongly that sexual orientation is cemented into the embryonic hypothalamus in-utero.... within the first three months after conception. Think about the implications of this....

[amplayer]

 

I have never walked around in public with a hole in them on purpose, but I have had a seam give way and unfortunately I did not have an extra pair of pants. My sincerest apology to you and your daughter.

 

 

Obviously not everyone wears these. Actually, I had the misfortune to be driving with my children through Provincetown, MA, and there must have been some kind of gay festival going on or something. Anyways, the hole in the pants was not even the most lude thing going on in public, but it was the thing that my kids unfortunately noticed as I was hurriedly trying to get out of there.

 

I have no problem with guys wanting to have anal sex with other consenting guys, but I certainly have a problem with the claim that this is ordinary enough behavior that it should be taught to young children as acceptable. That rips them off of their childhood.

 

Legalizing gay marriage sends a message that all families should teach their young that the gay lifestyle is just as legitimate as the heterosexual lifestyle. That in itself means that the subject needs to come up for children way before they need ever think about sexuality. I fully support consenting adults doing whatever they want with each other, but I do not support the redefinition of marriage to include homosexual marriage.

 

I realize many here believe homosexuality is a legitimate lifestyle and therefore this argument I'm making is seemingly superfluous. I disagree.

I want my kids and all kids to have a chance at childhood without worrying about sexuality beyond being taught how babies are made, which is already very difficult for them to try to understand.

 

FWIW, public heterosexual crude behavior is equally as bad IMHO. I have not had the misfortune of inadvertently coming upon people behaving that way when with my kids, but I would be just as upset about it.

[Guitzilla]

 

Obviously not everyone wears these. Actually, I had the misfortune to be driving with my children through Provincetown, MA, and there must have been some kind of gay festival going on or something. Anyways, the hole in the pants was not even the most lude thing going on in public, but it was the thing that my kids unfortunately noticed as I was hurriedly trying to get out of there. I have no problem with guys wanting to have anal sex with other consenting guys, but I certainly have a problem with the claim that this is ordinary enough behavior that it should be taught to young children as acceptable. That rips them off of their childhood. Legalizing gay marriage sends a message that all families should teach their young that the gay lifestyle is just as legitimate as the heterosexual lifestyle. That in itself means that the subject needs to come up for children way before they need ever think about sexuality. I fully support consenting adults doing whatever they want with each other, but I do not support the redefinition of marriage to include homosexual marriage. I realize many here believe homosexuality is a legitimate lifestyle and therefore this argument I'm making is seemingly superfluous. I disagree. I want my kids and all kids to have a chance at childhood without worrying about sexuality beyond being taught how babies are made, which is already very difficult for them to try to understand. FWIW, public heterosexual crude behavior is equally as bad IMHO. I have not had the misfortune of inadvertently coming upon people behaving that way when with my kids, but I would be just as upset about it.

 

 

I understand you wouldn't want your children seeing that. I just hope that you can understand that not all of us are like that. In my experience, most of us are not like that.

 

I have come across a straight couple "making love" in a car on Main Street and I was mortified for the same reasons that you were by the lewd behaviour that you experienced. They were doing it with no thought of the impressions that they could leave on children.

 

I can respect that you disagree with my lifestyle, and have the right to. I only want the same benefits that you are entitled to from the government. I pay taxes and vote just like I hope that you do. I just want a level playing field as far as these benefits are concerned. Our government should not deny them to anyone, or should deny them to everyone. I feel that this is the rational resolution to this situation.

 

We really aren't that different.

Cheers

[humancertainty]

 

You've never walked down the street holding hands with your girlfriend/wife? When you did, did people act as if it were wrong, give you the stink-eye, make rude comments designed to be overheard, or even come right up to you and tell you that you were evil? If that had ever happened to you and you suddenly found a parade where you could proudly walk along with your sweety, you'd probably do it, right? Because walking around having to deny who you are all the time is a drag. I'm straight, but I've had a very similar experience walking down the street with my wife because we're two different colors and some people have problems with that. And it wasn't that long ago that our marriage would have been unrecognized in many states (the last state anti-miscegenation laws weren't finally taken off the books until 2000, despite having been ruled unconstitutional in 1967 by the Supreme Court).

 

 

Wait, a COURT ruled that anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional?!?!? What a wretched undermining of values and morals!!!

Not to mention, our constitution.

I have a lot of ethics. It does not make me tell other people what to do or think. I could give a {censored} if people agree with my ethics. I think the whole concept of marriage is ridiculous, but I think everyone ought to be able to indulge if they so desire.

Then again, if I wanted to tell other people what to think, I would have morals.

Our current president got into office by judges, in spite of there being a popular vote for his opponent. Not that I voted for either of those idiots, but judges making law sort of had a precedent. And has for awhile.

[Geoff Grace]

 

I take issue with the VERY SLOW and DELIBERATE deconstruction of our systems that define right and wrong and even, dare I say it, morality

 

 

In a country that embraces freedom of religion and a multi-cultural melting pot -- e pluribus unum -- one must be very careful when making assumptions about "our systems that define right and wrong."

 

Speaking personally, I view the highest moral act as one derived from love and the lowest moral act as one derived from fear. So, when two people love one another -- opposite sex or not -- it is the highest moral state there is. It would therefore be an act of love for society to accept, or at least tolerate, a gay marriage based on love. Far from deconstruction, this in my view, would be an act of growth from a maturing and loving culture.

 

On the other hand, the intolerance of gay marriage is derived from fear -- if not fear of homosexuality, then fear of the devaluation of straight marriage, or fear of change, or fear of a particular sense of morality slipping away, etc. And while fear is a natural emotion, it should never be indulged because fear intensified leads to hatred and violence; and hatred and violence against gays is all too real our society. In my view, to claim the high moral ground while living in fear is perverse.

 

You may disagree, and I respect that other people have a different sense of morality than mine. That's one reason that I would never condone legislation that would force a church to sanction gay marriage. But in a free and open society that endorses freedom of religion, I also would never condone the reverse -- legislation that would force our diverse culture to bend to the will of one or more particular religions.

 

For a minority, majority rule can create as great a tyranny as that of any despot.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[Philter]

 

I have no problem with guys wanting to have anal sex with other consenting guys, but I certainly have a problem with the claim that this is ordinary enough behavior that it should be taught to young children as acceptable. That rips them off of their childhood.

 

 

So does teaching them about all different heterosexual practices. Sex is sex dude. Where exactly did you hear that they are teaching kids about anal sex, or were you just making a straw man argument?

[amplayer]

 

So does teaching them about all different heterosexual practices. Sex is sex dude. Where exactly did you hear that they are teaching kids about anal sex, or were you just making a straw man argument?

 

 

Think about it from kid point of view:

A) Homosexuality is taught as equal to heterosexuality and ordinary

B) Babies are taught to be made from sexual intercourse

C) Child says, "Hey, if men and women have sex with penis and vagina, how do gays do it?"

 

Maybe you could avoid the sodomy answer, but you have to have some answer. No matter what, you end up in a discussion that shouldn't be needed.

[ViLo]

 

Lakers vs. Celtics!

 

 

I'M ONE VERY ANGRY MEXICAN I TELL YA!!............................oooops wrong thread.

[amplayer]

 

Our current president got into office by judges, in spite of there being a popular vote for his opponent. Not that I voted for either of those idiots, but judges making law sort of had a precedent. And has for awhile.

 

 

Not quite correct. In the case of GWB getting elected over Gore, the courts were involved to decide about whether the recount in Florida was justified. The courts in this case, were not making laws.

And in case you didn't know, the president of the United States is NOT elected by popular vote under any circumstances. We have a Republic. Our Electoral College system has no requirement to be the same as the whole USA popular vote, and it never has.

[ViLo]

........nah!

[amplayer]

 

I understand you wouldn't want your children seeing that. I just hope that you can understand that not all of us are like that. In my experience, most of us are not like that.

 

 

I have both friends and relatives who are gay, and none of them behave that way.

It occurs to me that gay pride parades and festivals hurt the cause of gays much more than just about anything else. It's a wonder people still feel the need to participate in these in such outlandish ways. Don't they realize the damage they're doing to their own cause?