Offical Rob's take on Gay Rights thread

[Guest RobJohnstone]

You know, I was watching O'Reilly tonight and there was a segment on an Internet site providing information on "Gay Hot Spots" in college's acroos america. Hot Spots meaing where you can go and have sex in private places which are really public like dorm bathrooms and such. O'Reilly did not give out the link but he said it even gave times to go for better success in find a gay sex partner. He had a representative for gay rights on his program advocating this to be lawful and nothing wrong with it. Now O'reilly brought up the point that if he were a college student he would not want to walk into a bathroom watching "betty and bob" having sex or " john and john". So it wasn't a gay thing, which got me thinking.....

 

Why should gay people in america have a double standard? They already have every right available to them as every other american has, why should they have more? Why as a taxpayer should I have to pay for a "Gay Pride Parade" (BTW, if you didn't know, taxpayers 95% of the time pay for cleanup of any parades or rallies, no matter what it is about.) in my town or city? I do not have rallies or parades promoting promoting my morals, nor would I. We are acually paying for the gay population to spread it's word abroad. And to top that off they want extra laws such as discrimation type laws giving people that abuse of people in the gay community extra penalties or such actions. I am clearly against "The Gay Movement". I feel it is immoral and creates uncomfortable situations for some parents. Why should a parent have to answer his child when he/she asks why Steve has to mommies? I figure if I use the ACLU's logic of if something in public offends certain people, like how they attacked christmas type things in the past(http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,71990,00.html) because certain objects like nativity scences were exposed to the public, and it offended certain groups like islamic communities. Now if they can get laws passed because people do not agree with christmas, why should I have to put up walking around town and watching two dudes make out in public? Now I right there was just using the ACLU logic, but surely you will never see them pull a suit against such things. SO anyway back to the point, why is there a double standard and why do we allow this to happen?

 

--Rob

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Those gays also pay taxes and live in the same country as us, so they're paying for their parades, as well as the cleanup after a Klan rally, St. Patrick's Day Parade, the Macy's thanksgiving day parade, and Mardi Gras. There's all types of singles services that try to bring men and women together, and singles hotspots, so why shouldn't there be ones for gays as well?

 

Before you go to the knee-jerk reaction of calling me a socialist, I don't feel gays (or any other minority for that matter) deserve special rights, just equal ones.

 

As for the question of seeing two people of the same sex kissing in public being offensive or what have you, that's a question of your own personal insecurities rather than of their morality. What's the difference between two men kissing and a man and a woman kissing in public? It's a public display of affection either way you look at it, so should they all be banned? Of course not. Two consenting adults have every right to express their affections for one another in public, taking public decency into account.

 

As for answering awkward questions like "Why does billy have two dads?" The answer's easy. Billy's dad likes men. Some men like men, most men like women, and some women like women. It's not that complicated.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

"Those gays also pay taxes and live in the same country as us, so they're paying for their parades, as well as the cleanup after a Klan rally, St. Patrick's Day Parade, the Macy's thanksgiving day parade, and Mardi Gras. There's all types of singles services that try to bring men and women together, and singles hotspots, so why shouldn't there be ones for gays as well?"

 

The saint patricks day parade I thought was a big gay rally. Atleast in NY. I also thought the MAcy's Thanksgiving parade was paid for mostly by Macy's. I've never been to a Klan rally, I did not know they still had those. Too my knowledge it was unlawful for a rascist group to hold a rally because it was not under the terms of a peaceful rally. I could be wrong. As for Mardi Gras I am sure that the revenue from tourism to the event defintle pays for cleanup and then some. SO once again, why should taxpayers have to pay for this nonsense?

 

--Rob

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

(BTW, if you didn't know, taxpayers 95% of the time pay for cleanup of any parades or rallies, no matter what it is about.)

 

We all pay for all of the parades, no matter what it's about, so bitching about one parade and not another is ridiculous, especially when they're paying the same damn thing as everyone else. Face it, your problem is with homosexuality itself, and no amount of rationalization can hide that.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

NO, I am deal with a paying for a thanksgiving day parade even though to my knowledge, I think sponsers help in paying for it. Thanksgiving is a national and federal holiday. Having a gay pride parade is a double standard, we do not have white pride parades. If there was such a thing it would get shitted on my everyone and their mother. Please tell me you deny that if their were a white pride parade people wouldn't get into a fuss about it. Also btw I am not trying to promote one, it serves no purpose.

 

--Rob

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Well, then write your congressman and request that you be refunded the 26 cents or whatever you pay with your taxes to help clean up trash in the streets.

 

It's faulty logic to claim you shouldn't pay for a public service just because you don't use it. I've never had to call the fire department, should I be allowed to not pay my part of it? Of course not.

 

Of course a white pride parade would get shit on, just like people shit on the million man march, just like you're shitting on gay parades. As americans, we have the right to peacefully assemble, and the public picks up the tab to clean up the litter afterwards. Deal with it.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

"They already have every right available to them as every other american has, why should they have more?"

 

Oh? Married straight couples get tax breaks and extra rights and stuff. There's been a big arguement over that for just about forever if you haven't noticed, although more and more states are including a legally similar process that doesn't have the Church muckeymucking around in it.

 

"Why as a taxpayer should I have to pay for a "Gay Pride Parade" (BTW, if you didn't know, taxpayers 95% of the time pay for cleanup of any parades or rallies, no matter what it is about.)"

 

Their tax money is just as green as yours.

 

"I do not have rallies or parades promoting promoting my morals, nor would I. We are acually paying for the gay population to spread it's word abroad."

 

I don't get gay pride events, either, Rob. I'll tell you that much. However, I also gotta wonder why black people need their own TV networks and radio stations that cater just to them, since I always believed in the "we're all alike" hoopla. I don't make noise about it, because it doesn't bother me any, but there it is anyway. For what it's worth though, all the black people I know don't get it either.

 

I think, like in all minorities, be they sexual or religious or racial or what have you, some people don't make a big deal out of it, like me. Others do make a big deal and are loud about themselves. There's really nothing you can do about it unless you mend the constitution. *shrug*

 

"I am clearly against "The Gay Movement"."

 

Well, chances are you have an elected official who agrees with you, juding by your state Reps

 

"I feel it is immoral and creates uncomfortable situations for some parents. Why should a parent have to answer his child when he/she asks why Steve has to mommies?"

 

Because that is a situation that exists in this world today, whether you like it or not? Would you rather your child hear about it from you or someone else you don't know?

 

You could beat the bush. Why are some kids white and some kids aren't? Why is that other kid's parents poor? The same answer works for all these situations: "We're all different."

 

Chances are, if your kid is young enough to believe in the tooth fairy, he or she is young enough to understand "We're all different" and not need a lesson on other people's bedroom behavior until they're way older.

 

"like how they attacked christmas type things in the past"

 

Well, you're parroting Bill O'Reilly here, and his reserach staff tend to take ACLU cases out of context. I wish I could find some of these cases on their site, but can't. But then again, I've asked you to do research in the past and you've declined because of the work and effort involved, so I'll assume you'll let me slide on the same.

 

I don't know about the nativity scene stuff, although I think a city should not include nativity scenes in public city-run displays, as not all the taxpayers are necessarily Christian.

 

As for the Christmas on the public school calendar thing, I can understand that one. When I went from a religious private school in 6th Grade to a Public School in 7th Grade, I noticed that those two weeks off switched from "Christmas Break" to "Winter Break."

 

it offended certain groups like islamic communities

 

I could see many people being offended that they're paying for a nativity scene, not just Islamics.

 

If you're going to do a city-sponsored Christmas display, keep it to the non-secular displays of the holiday. Trees, presents, Santa Claus, candy canes, etc. Nativity scenes, manhorahs (I know I probably spelled that wrong), and the Ramadan symbols shouldn't be a part of it.

 

"Now if they can get laws passed because people do not agree with christmas"

 

They don't pass laws. Our legal system is not yet that much of a joke. They sue.

 

"why should I have to put up walking around town and watching two dudes make out in public?"

 

Because it's a Constitutional right as long as they're not doing anything obscene by, say, straight people standards. I'd be just as upset about seeing a man/woman blowjob in a public place as I would a man/man, but I think both should be held to the same standard. You're the one whining about parades and stuff and how they should be treated equally, but now you're saying gay people shouldn't be allowed to kiss in public?

 

Personally, I've seen pro-life parades with more disgusting imagery and paraphanelia than any gay pride parade. I mean, I'm not trying to shift the thread to that issue, but if you want to put an end to the obscene parades and Do It For The Children™, then let's call a spade a spade here.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

"They already have every right available to them as every other american has, why should they have more?"

 

Oh? Married straight couples get tax breaks and extra rights and stuff. There's been a big arguement over that for just about forever if you haven't noticed, although more and more states are including a legally similar process that doesn't have the Church muckeymucking around in it.

 

I am talking about more than tax breaks.

 

"I do not have rallies or parades promoting promoting my morals, nor would I. We are acually paying for the gay population to spread it's word abroad."

 

I don't get gay pride events, either, Rob. I'll tell you that much. However, I also don't question why black people need their own TV networks and radio stations that cater just to them, since I always believed in the "we're all alike" hoopla. For what it's worth though, all the black people I know don't get it either.

 

I think that is more of a racial issue. Besides BET does not really show the great aspects of the Black community. I think BET is just called that to get toward the black youth. I have never seen a show on BET that shows black people in general in a positive light. It's always rappers talking about selling drugs and having hoes (example Jay-Z). (BTW I like rap music, but to a certain extent. Ex. Kool Keith, Rakim, etc...)

 

it offended certain groups like islamic communities

 

I could see many people being offended that they're paying for a nativity scene, not just Islamics.

 

If you're going to do a city-sponsored Christmas display, keep it to the non-secular displays of the holiday. Trees, presents, Santa Claus, candy canes, etc. Nativity scenes, manhorahs (I know I probably spelled that wrong), and the Ramadan symbols shouldn't be a part of it.

 

I want other religions to spread their holiday cheer. Most major religions teach morality and overall great things. I would love to see jewish plays or a kwanza festival. It is only fair considering I want to see christmas plays as well. Most religious holidays or festivals are a time for being happy, why not spread that?

 

Because it's a Constitutional right as long as they're not doing anything obscene by, say, straight people standards. I'd be just as upset about seeing a man/woman blowjob in a public place as I would a man/man, but I think both should be held to the same standard. You're the one whining about parades and stuff and how they should be treated equally, but now you're saying gay people shouldn't be allowed to kiss in public?

 

The original issue was about homosexuals having gay sexual affairs in public restrooms. As I have read and maybe it could be coming from the conservative side, this happens alot. If I walked into a bathroom and saw a dude banging another dude from behind, I would be fucking pissed. But also the same could be said about a regular couple doing the same thing. From what I have read though it seems as though the biggest problem lies in the gay community.

 

--Rob

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

So what's the point you're trying to make? That this is unacceptable? Of course it is, it's public indecency, and they would suffer the same punishment as if a man and a woman were caught having sex somewhere like that.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

yes but, as reported by foxnews (transcript of the show was not out while I posted this), it seems as though the gay community has the leading statistics in this issue. That is a problem considering they are a very small minority.

 

--Rob

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

"I think that is more of a racial issue."

 

But both are a hotbed of minority issues. Race is bigger of course because they've been battling for decades.

 

"I want other religions to spread their holiday cheer"

 

Great. So do I. I just don't want the city taking part in it. Keep it non-religious if you're doing it with taxpayer dollars. Is that too difficult? I don't care if the local Church is ablaze with lights and a giant "O HOLY NIGHT" sign, that's their land.

 

If I walked into a bathroom and saw a dude banging another dude from behind, I would be fucking pissed.

 

A very heavy majority of the people in the country, including myself, would be, too. I can't defend that, because I don't agree with it.

 

"From what I have read though it seems as though the biggest problem lies in the gay community."

 

Are all of us angels? Hell no. Every group has it's bad apples.

 

Should I get mad at Christianity because Jerry Falwell and Fred Phelps have a pretty good following for being as hateful as they are? Naw, not going to waste my time. And as long as they aren't violent, the consitutionally have a right to their opinion.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

"I want other religions to spread their holiday cheer"

 

Great. So do I. I just don't want the city taking part in it. Keep it non-religious if you're doing it with taxpayer dollars. Is that too difficult? I don't care if the local Church is ablaze with lights and a giant "O HOLY NIGHT" sign, that's their land.

 

But why ban a christmas story from school? Not being able to hold a play, isn't that just as bad as book burning? Also if it is ok for taxpayers to pay for gay pride parades, why is it not ok for some city office to have say, the ten commandments over say, the waiting room of an office? Just wondering the logic behind that. Also I am sure a plaque or what have you is 99% cheaper than throwing a parade.

 

--Rob

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

"But why ban a christmas story from school? Not being able to hold a play, isn't that just as bad as book burning?"

 

I'll agree that I thought the banning of "A Christmas Carol" was pretty stupid, if that's the incident you're going on about.

 

"Also if it is ok for taxpayers to pay for gay pride parades"

 

Yeah, because, again, they're also paying for "Abortion Is Murder" parade. I don't exactly agree with that viewpoint, but I'm paying anyway, aren't I?

 

"why is it not ok for some city office to have say, the ten commandments over say, the waiting room of an office"

 

You're comparing apples to oranges again. I'll take the bait anyway, I guess.

 

Besides, as far as I know, a politician could display the ten commandments over their office if they wanted to. If politicians were banned from using any religion, George The Lesser would not have made many of the speeches he's made the past few years, such as his Columbia speech where he was saying some very Christian things.

 

The difference comes, however, from being religious as a person, to putting religion in their job. The city taxpayers should not pay for those ten commandments. Nor should the Ten Commandments be etched in stone over at the City Park.

 

Let's go beyond government for a minute and let me give you another example: Let's say a guy works at a shipping company, putting stuff in boxes, labeling them, and sending them out to the delivery truck. Now, he can be as deeply religious as he likes, but he can't stamp crosses and Jesus Fish on the labels he's sending out or he's giving the idea that the company he works for is endorsing that particular religion.

 

If that example sounds a little odd, it's because it's 6:10AM here and I need to go to bed before my biological clock goes out of whack.

 

Good night, morning, whatever.

[Guest Ace309]

Also if it is ok for taxpayers to pay for gay pride parades, why is it not ok for some city office to have say, the ten commandments over say, the waiting room of an office? Just wondering the logic behind that. Also I am sure a plaque or what have you is 99% cheaper than throwing a parade.

 

Well, to begin with, a rally has a fundamentally different purpose than religious paraphernilia, in that the purpose of the rally is ostensibly to raise awareness about rights and fundamental human dignity being denied to gays, whereas the purpose of a religious object is to endorse or support a given religion.

 

While I agree that many gay pride parades and rallies go above and beyond this, and I'm personally pretty offended by a lot of the gay camp parades, I'm not opposed to them any more than I'd be opposed to a civil rights march, which has essentially the same facial purpose.

 

I anticipate you'll counter based on the fact that you have a right to be treated equally regardless of your religion. Well, yes. The problem is that in displaying a religion with implicit endorsement, you're proselytizing. In participating in a gay rights parade, you're not trying to "convert" people (and the general position espoused by gays is that you're born that way, so it would be kind of silly to try to convert them anyway). There's an implicit call to come out, sure, but you're not trying to fundamentally change who people are.

 

Of course, don't interpret this as a knock on religion. I think religion is great. I just think that kindly old Mr. Atheist who lives down the street shouldn't have to pay for it.

 

Also, AOO, fine point regarding never having had to call the fire department. (Y)

[Guest RobJohnstone]

The difference comes, however, from being religious as a person, to putting religion in their job. The city taxpayers should not pay for those ten commandments. Nor should the Ten Commandments be etched in stone over at the City Park.

 

Let's go beyond government for a minute and let me give you another example: Let's say a guy works at a shipping company, putting stuff in boxes, labeling them, and sending them out to the delivery truck. Now, he can be as deeply religious as he likes, but he can't stamp crosses and Jesus Fish on the labels he's sending out or he's giving the idea that the company he works for is endorsing that particular religion.

 

If you wanted to compare apples to oranges you did a damn fine job. What is wrong with the Ten Commandments being in a park again? Don't kill,steal, be jealous. Honor your parents. Where do they get these crazy ideas and morals? (sarcasm end!) Seriously, come on.

 

--Rob

[Guest RobJohnstone]

Also if it is ok for taxpayers to pay for gay pride parades, why is it not ok for some city office to have say, the ten commandments over say, the waiting room of an office? Just wondering the logic behind that. Also I am sure a plaque or what have you is 99% cheaper than throwing a parade.

 

Well, to begin with, a rally has a fundamentally different purpose than religious paraphernilia, in that the purpose of the rally is ostensibly to raise awareness about rights and fundamental human dignity being denied to gays, whereas the purpose of a religious object is to endorse or support a given religion.

 

While I agree that many gay pride parades and rallies go above and beyond this, and I'm personally pretty offended by a lot of the gay camp parades, I'm not opposed to them any more than I'd be opposed to a civil rights march, which has essentially the same facial purpose.

 

I anticipate you'll counter based on the fact that you have a right to be treated equally regardless of your religion. Well, yes. The problem is that in displaying a religion with implicit endorsement, you're proselytizing. In participating in a gay rights parade, you're not trying to "convert" people (and the general position espoused by gays is that you're born that way, so it would be kind of silly to try to convert them anyway). There's an implicit call to come out, sure, but you're not trying to fundamentally change who people are.

 

Of course, don't interpret this as a knock on religion. I think religion is great. I just think that kindly old Mr. Atheist who lives down the street shouldn't have to pay for it.

 

Also, AOO, fine point regarding never having had to call the fire department. (Y)

I think you are wrong. Those parades or rallies are an endorsement to being gay. It should be treated in the same light in religion, but I do not think you agree with me there. They are advocating a way of life, a style of living, that is immoral. I just do not think that I should have to pay for it. Just as you do not want to pay for religious things in parks and such.

 

--Rob

[Guest Ace309]

Sure, they're advocating a lifestyle, but they're advocating a lifestyle based on an inherent part of who they are.

 

Leave morals out of it, because the law and the taxation system don't deal in morals. If you wanted to have a Christianity rally in which you did not push your values on anyone but merely celebrated the unity of Christians, I highly doubt there would be any problems with it. Even the Army of God, which holds values FAR more extreme than any true branch of Christians or pro-lifers, and even the KKK, are allowed to conduct peaceful demonstrations.

 

Gay rallies are about telling people it's okay to come out of the closet, that it's okay to be who, by the common line of thinking, they really are.

[Guest bob_barron]

But they have a right to assemble- it's in the Constitution.

 

I don't like them either but we shouldn't discriminate against people just because their different.

 

Do you also think we should not allow Klan rallies?

[Guest DrTom]

I think gay people should have the same rights as everyone else, and that's where it has to stop. A lot of minority agendas are concerned with special rights that go above and beyond what most Americans have. Legal and political double standards should not be encouraged. The only right I can see that the gay community doesn't enjoy across the board is marriage. Let them marry wherever they want, then. Who cares about an institution that doesn't work half the time people try it, anyway?

 

By the way, the Klan is a bad example. They probably would have faded into obscurity 20 years ago if reporters didn't keep rapping on the coffin and waking them up every so often. The Onion had a very amusing article about this a while ago, actually.

[Guest EricMM]

First about the O'Reilly piece. The guy from the Gay Alliace group was wrong, he said it was entrapment for the cops to go into the bathrooms and try to catch sex in the act. I disagree, I agree with O'Reilly that they need to scare people into not having sex in fucking bathrooms. That's fine by me. The guy went on to say that the cops were being homophobes about it, calling it "bagging f*gs" but that's a personal thing and probably not Boston Police Policy.

 

In regards to parades. I am ambivilant. I think that on one hand, gay rights parades are important, since there is still a lot of bigoted people out there who get a kick out of the term "queer stomping" and such people need to be seen as the violent fucks they are. On the other hand, Gay Pride parades that consist of people dressing in revealing costumes and flaming around in public aren't necessary or helpful. It's fine to have pride in your sexuality, and I understand the goal of the parades, but the method is too extreme. Take it down a few notches and I'd have no problems with it.

 

Again, if a parent feels uncomfortable telling his kid about billy's two daddies, I think that's ignorant. That's just my opinion, but I really feel that people are letting their religion or conservative values get in the way of the truth. I don't feel homosexuality is deviant in any way, so why shouldn't I tell my kid about it?

 

What's wrong with two men getting married and adopting a kid? What's wrong with telling my kid that billy's dads love each other and decided to get married? Whats wrong with treating homosexuality the same as heterosexuality? Afraid you're going to teach the kid to accept homosexuality as normal? Afraid he might see it as ok and try it out? I don't understand why many parents don't want to deal with that issue. It's not that big a deal. I, like most guys, like girls. Some guy like guys instead. I, like most guys, walk around on my own two feet. Some guys can't and have to use a wheel chair. Some of them were born without the use of their legs, some lost it. I hesitate to use this example, since homosexuality is no handicap, but the end is the same. Whether you're born with it or learn it, there's no reason to treat someone different.

[Guest treble charged]

I think there are people who are narrow minded enough to believe that if they tell their kids that it's OK to be gay, then they'll be gay when they get older. It's just a theory, but if it's true, then it's really sad.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

I think there are people who are narrow minded enough to believe that if they tell their kids that it's OK to be gay, then they'll be gay when they get older. It's just a theory, but if it's true, then it's really sad.

My beliefs are homosexuality is immoral and indecent. Those views will not change. Not just immoral but also disgusting.

 

--Rob

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

....wow, someone's asking to get owned.

 

So, Rob, what's the solution to 'the gay problem' then? Put them all into worker camps where they are put into a gas chambe- wait...

[Guest RobJohnstone]

Thanks for putting words in my mouth, I notice you love doing that. My solution is for them to keep it private, I do not want to see that shit in public. That solution would not work though because that would be unconstitutional. It is ok though, in the end, people will learn from their wicked ways.

 

--Rob

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

Thanks for putting words in my mouth, I notice you love doing that. My solution is for them to keep it private, I do not want to see that shit in public. That solution would not work though because that would be unconstitutional. It is ok though, in the end, people will learn from their wicked ways.

 

--Rob

When will you learn from your wicked, bigot ways?

[Guest RobJohnstone]

Because I dislike gays does not make me a bigot. Now that I look at the definition though

 

Big ot - One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

 

I guess I am a bigot but, so are you. You are strongly partial to your political beliefs aren't you?

 

--Rob

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

Group: Gays.

 

Religion: Jews

 

Race: Blacks.

 

 

 

 

Nope. I've voted Republican in the past.

[Guest RobJohnstone]

I'm sorry, do you claim that I am a bigot against blacks and jews? How do you have the right to say that? Don't you know Jesus Christ was jewish? You threw away all your credibility right there. And although I could not prove to you that I am not a rascist, why not ask flyboy is I am? You are a fucking idiot of the higherst form. You throw around comments calling me a rascist and a jew hater without even having proof to back up your staements. FUCK YOU. NO. FUCK YOU AGAIN. FUCK YOU SOME MORE YOU STUPID ASSHOLE. NEVER MAKE THOSE CLAIMS AGAIN.

 

--Rob

[Guest bob_barron]

So Rob-

You can't control being gay. If someone likes weiners more then tacos- they can't really help that.

 

So why should we discriminate against them?

[Guest RobJohnstone]

I am not going to quote scripture but I will say this, God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. End of story.

 

BTW, FUCK YOU TYLER YOU ASSHOLE.

 

--Rob