Gays and the St Patricks Day Parade

[The Dad Fisherman]

Nah.....I'm sticking with my opinion that they are just being A-Holes.

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Nah.....I'm sticking with my opinion that they are just being A-Holes.

I think you meant militant a-holes.

Fine to get stumbling drunk and pass out on the sidewalk as long as you patronize a local establishment.

But this? Really? Good thing my kids aren't around to witness the sexuality. I don't know how to explain it...Dad, why are those people holding hands on the sign Dad?

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I think you meant militant a-holes.

Fine to get stumbling drunk and pass out on the sidewalk as long as you patronize a local establishment.

But this? Really? Good thing my kids aren't around to witness the sexuality. I don't know how to explain it...Dad, why are those people holding hands on the sign Dad?

-spence

Answer this...

Why couldn't they just march with the vets, as vets? Why do they have to make a statement about their sexuality? What harm does it do to leave that aside for one afternoon?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Answer this...

Why couldn't they just march with the vets, as vets? Why do they have to make a statement about their sexuality? What harm does it do to leave that aside for one afternoon?

Yea, why can't you just get in the closet for the afternoon.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Yea, why can't you just get in the closet for the afternoon.

-spence

Amazing. Do you ever get tired of being wrong? Unfortunately for you, no one here was asking gays to deny being gay, nor was anyone asking them to pretend to be heterosexual. Once again, when everyone knows you are badly losing the argument, instead of admitting the other side has a point, you descend to baseless accusations of hate. In this case, you are accusing someone openly supportive of gay marriage, of being a homophobe. It is a common liberal tactic, and we all know it reeks of desperation, it is a ploy of the thughtless when they are forced to conclude that they cannot defend their position.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Amazing. Do you ever get tired of being wrong? Unfortunately for you, no one here was asking gays to deny being gay, nor was anyone asking them to pretend to be heterosexual. Once again, when everyone knows you are badly losing the argument, instead of admitting the other side has a point, you descend to baseless accusations of hate. In this case, you are accusing someone openly supportive of gay marriage, of being a homophobe. It is a common liberal tactic, and we all know it reeks of desperation, it is a ploy of the thughtless when they are forced to conclude that they cannot defend their position.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This is a very eloquent paragraph. It's bat#^&#^&#^&#^& crazy but a joy to read.

They wanted to march openly as gay Vets, they were told they couldn't. This isn't rocket science.

Also, there's a reason so many politicians and sponsors don't want to be associated with the parade, because they're in the wrong...

Likely one of the primary reasons you support gay marriage today Jim is because people over the years challenged the norm. Your position is quite hypocritical.

-spence

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

This is a very eloquent paragraph. It's bat#^&#^&#^&#^& crazy but a joy to read.

They wanted to march openly as gay Vets, they were told they couldn't. This isn't rocket science.

Also, there's a reason so many politicians and sponsors don't want to be associated with the parade, because they're in the wrong...

Likely one of the primary reasons you support gay marriage today Jim is because people over the years challenged the norm. Your position is quite hypocritical.

-spence

The politicians don't march because they have no balls. They lack of moral standard.
It's the same reason the GOP allows Obama to get away with everything. Because he's black they are afraid of being called racist.
When we have a truly colorblind and sexually orientated blind society none of that will matter.
It seems that people that make the issue the most about race and sexual orientation are liberals.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

This is a very eloquent paragraph. It's bat#^&#^&#^&#^& crazy but a joy to read.

They wanted to march openly as gay Vets, they were told they couldn't. This isn't rocket science.

Also, there's a reason so many politicians and sponsors don't want to be associated with the parade, because they're in the wrong...

Likely one of the primary reasons you support gay marriage today Jim is because people over the years challenged the norm. Your position is quite hypocritical.

-spence

"there's a reason so many politicians and sponsors don't want to be associated with the parade, because they're in the wrong"

And one of the reasons is that they don't want to have to defend themselves against baseless accusations of intolerance, from the likes of you. That's precisely why you incessantly make these claims when losing an argument, in the hopes that it will shut some people up. It works, especially in the case of people seeking to win elections. That it doesn't have a shred of intellectual honesty, doesn't mean it's not effective.

"Your position is quite hypocritical."

It's not the least hypocritical. It would be hypocritical if I supported the right of heterosexual vets to march as such, but not homosexual vets.

Spence, I have asked this several times, and you keep dodging. I'll do it one more time, and I'll try to go slowly.

If everyone (not just homosexuals) is being asked to set aside sexual identity for an afternoon, how can that be considered to be discriminatory? If every group is being treated exactly the same, where is the discrimination?

You have fun trying to answer that. Hint..., screaming "HATE CRIME!" isn't really answering the question that I asked.

Here, I'll make it asy for you, all you need to do is fill in the blank.

"In this case, homosexuals and heterosexuals are being treated identically. All are welcome to march, and all are asked to leave sexuality out of it. I, Spence, think that's discriminatory because ______________".

[Ian]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Nah.....I'm sticking with my opinion that they are just being A-Holes.

I think there is some of this going on too, but given the history of intolerance and the recent victories their movement has gotten, I think they felt tired of not being #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s, figured they'd give it a shot... and as far as attention is concerned, it seems to have worked. And not just in Boston.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Ian

I think there is some of this going on too, but given the history of intolerance and the recent victories their movement has gotten, I think they felt tired of not being #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s, figured they'd give it a shot... and as far as attention is concerned, it seems to have worked. And not just in Boston.

Oh, the gays want "tolerance", do they? Then why do they sue Christian business owners, solely for their religious beliefs? When the government tells a Christian photographer, "go to this gay wedding or we will fine you", please tell me how that's not also persecution? I don't think the government would force a black photographer to take pictures at a Klan rally, and I don't see a shred of difference.

"Tolerance" has very little to do with this. It's about punishing those who are not in complete agreement with you.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Oh, the gays want "tolerance", do they? Then why do they sue Christian business owners, solely for their religious beliefs? When the government tells a Christian photographer, "go to this gay wedding or we will fine you", please tell me how that's not also persecution? I don't think the government would force a black photographer to take pictures at a Klan rally, and I don't see a shred of difference.

"Tolerance" has very little to do with this. It's about punishing those who are not in complete agreement with you.

I can see the point you are trying to make, but using the Klan to make a point is probably not a great idea... they are classified as a known hate group by the US government... I am not a fan of organized religion, but I don't think Christians or Homosexuals are members of hate groups...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Ian

I can see the point you are trying to make, but using the Klan to make a point is probably not a great idea... they are classified as a known hate group by the US government... I am not a fan of organized religion, but I don't think Christians or Homosexuals are members of hate groups...

Of course you have a point there. My point is, under this administration, there are plenty of examples of Christians being asked to abandon their beliefs (which is blatantly unconstitutional) to advance the agenda of the current administration. This is a bit off-topic, but I'm confident that I'm correct.

In this case, if heterosexuals and homosexuals were both asked to do the same exact thing (no proclamations of sexuality for 2 hours), that cannot be considered to be discriminatory. By definition, 'discrimination' is singling out one group for different treatment. No one can say that is happening here.

If one group is not inclined to consent, then fortunately for them, they have the right to stay home. No one is forcing them to participate in a St Patricks Day parade.

We live in a pluralistic society, and like it or not, it requires a certain degree of assimilation at times. We all have to try and fit in a bit. We can't always get our way, all of the time, in every situation. Most of us learn this by the time we are 6 or 7 years old. In my opinion, this patricular group, is struggling lately with the notion that others have the right to pursue their vision of happiness as well.

Banning gays from the parade would be one thing. Asking them to leave their sexuality aside for 2 hours is not nearly the same thing, despite Spence's desperate attempts to paint it that way.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

In this case, if heterosexuals and homosexuals were both asked to do the same exact thing (no proclamations of sexuality for 2 hours), that cannot be considered to be discriminatory. By definition, 'discrimination' is singling out one group for different treatment. No one can say that is happening here.

Why do you think that rule exists in the first place? To keep the annoying heterosexuals from flaunting their pride?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Ian

Why do you think that rule exists in the first place? To keep the annoying heterosexuals from flaunting their pride?

But why is that? Why is it easy for one group to avoid public proclamations about their sexuality, and one group struggles with that? Lots of heteresexuals identify pretty closely with being heterosexual, right? Yet, i didn't hear any of them complain about not being able to flaunt their heterosexuality during the parade.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Tolerance" has very little to do with this. It's about punishing those who are not in complete agreement with you.

Oh yea Jim, those gay US Veterans are really trying to stick it to the good God fearing people of South Boston.

Please.

-spence

[Sea Dangles]

I would be interested to know what harm a sign could possibly bring to the parade.They are marching as a bunch of gays,why not fly the flag and tell the world who you are?

The Collier part is sad, especially since he was killed by the cops.

[Piscator]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

The Collier part is sad, especially since he was killed by the cops.

Did I miss something here? He was killed by who?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Piscator

Did I miss something here? He was killed by who?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Friendly fire took his life
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device