What am I?

[Heads22]

Maybe they are trying to present that, hey, maybe gay people are just like the rest of us?

 

But of course, it's irresponsible and immoral to think that gay people could be considered normal.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Why am I not surprised by your complete misunderstanding? If you are gay your sexual behavior is not common. Your love interests are not common. They are rare.

 

Yet Hollywood features gay characters in just about every movie & show to masquerade the idea it is common. That's what makes it an agenda.

 

Equal protection under the law? Please. How many films featuring gay characters even discuss that issue? That's the fisade they use to justify their agenda.

[Heads22]

I think anyone that meets me knows that I am utterly common.

 

Being gay has nothing to do with that.

 

But the "hollywood homosexual agenda" that you describe calls for equal protection under the law. I should know because I'm a proponent of it. Now if you'll excuse me, I have a  latte to sip.

 

And that's a chore because I hate coffee.

 

 

Indeed, even on the board you are boring as hell.

[samclemens]

I think anyone that meets me knows that I am utterly common.

 

Being gay has nothing to do with that.

 

But the "hollywood homosexual agenda" that you describe calls for equal protection under the law. I should know because I'm a proponent of it. Now if you'll excuse me, I have a  latte to sip.

 

And that's a chore because I hate coffee.

 

you seem like a pretty bitter or angry guy when it comes to this topic. seriously, im not trying to offend you, you just come off that way.

 

he does make a decent point about the small percentile. to make an extreme point, theres around 4-6,000 people who vote for the american nazi party in each election. i dont see a s***load of movies and sitcoms about them and a s***load of legislation for what that tiny group of society wants. or wican laws, we should be having more wican and warlock legislation in the US house and senate.

 

equal protection under the law is a legal fiction that we strive for as a society but we will never acheive. to think imperfect beings can is pure idealism, or more frankly put, a pipe dream. and for the record, i would never let my kids see a movie about queer cowboys because i dont want to promote that sort of thing to them, not because i am predjudiced. i guess i would just rather have my kids doing the asskicking on the playground instead of getting their ass kicked. now please dont start with any more namecalling, cause i noticed you and juggernaut were getting into it. just giving my point of view.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

you seem like a pretty bitter or angry guy when it comes to this topic. seriously, im not trying to offend you, you just come off that way.

 

he does make a decent point about the small percentile. to make an extreme point, theres around 4-6,000 people who vote for the american nazi party in each election. i dont see a s***load of movies and sitcoms about them and a s***load of legislation for what that tiny group of society wants. or wican laws, we should be having more wican and warlock legislation in the US house and senate.

 

equal protection under the law is a legal fiction that we strive for as a society but we will never acheive. to think imperfect beings can is pure idealism, or more frankly put, a pipe dream. and for the record, i would never let my kids see a movie about queer cowboys because i dont want to promote that sort of thing to them, not because i am predjudiced. i guess i would just rather have my kids doing the asskicking on the playground instead of getting their ass kicked. now please dont start with any more namecalling, cause i noticed you and juggernaut were getting into it. just giving my point of view.

Yes, because seeing a film about two cowboys having sex = getting their ass kicked on the playground

 

I'd just love to see the logical extension of your argument. "We only have x% of blacks so we don't have to give them equal rights under the Constitution. We only have x% of Latinos so we don't have to give them equal rights. We only have x% of Irish so we don't have to give them equal rights. We only have x% of Jews so we don't have to give them equal rights."

 

Reading your post, I'm reminded of Animal Farm "All animals are created equal but some animals are more equal than others."

 

From a great column by the Angry Liberal:

Gay marriage isn't about gay sex. That's already legal. For those who may have forgotten, by a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas sodomy law, and by implication, all other sodomy laws. In other words, those 3,000+ gay and lesbian couples who got married in San Francisco over the last couple of weeks have been having and will continue to have perfectly legal sex whether they are married or not, and no constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage will stop that. Gay marriage is about two people of the same sex standing before their friends and families and promising to spend the rest of their lives together. I find it impossible to believe that any thoughtful American would feel the need to amend the Constitution to prevent a mutual promise. The real irony here is that the group whose ass is chapped the most by gay marriage is the "pro-marriage" folks. As usual, they are sounding off all across the nation, brains in neutral and mouths wide open. They should be called "Pro-straight marriage" folks. Hey, this could be the next KKK! These morons could dress up in white wedding gowns with veils to protect their identities, and ride around San Francisco, burning wedding cakes on the front lawns of happily married gay and lesbian couples. But I digress . . .

 

2. Marriage isn't about procreation. Hey, I've been to a few weddings in my time, including my own. Never have I heard a line in a marriage vow that includes a requirement that the couple have children. The vows typically consist of stuff about love, honor, cherish, in sickness and in health, well, you know the rest. While many expect a marriage to produce offspring, the legitimacy of an American marriage is not measured by the number of children produced by the couple participating in it. Therefore, anybody who argues that marriage should be limited to heterosexuals because homosexual couples can't reproduce is wrong vis-à-vis marriage and reproduction. This argument would necessitate the denial of marriage licenses to infertile couples, and I'm guessing that movement isn't gathering much steam.

 

3. Gay marriage would not "threaten the sanctity of the institution," whatever the hell that means. That's right. Since marriage is about taking and honoring vows, the only folks who threaten the sanctity of the institution of marriage are those who break their vows. If Americans wish to protect the sanctity of marriage, they could very well start by denying marriage licenses to Republicans. Dubya's own brother, Neil, recently completed a messy divorce from his wife, Sharon. Adultery played a factor. Then there are Republican icons Rudy Giuliani and Newt Gingrich, with one and two marriages ended via affairs, respectively. In short, until the pro-marriage folks do something about their own, who have been wiping their backsides with their marriage vows, they have absolutely no business talking about anybody else's marriage threatening whatever sanctity that the institution of marriage may still possess. Any couple, straight or gay, that can make and honor marriage vows is upholding the sanctity of marriage. Period.

 

4. Kids will not be harmed by gays getting married. Unless you consider that kids have been somehow harmed by learning that two members of the same sex can be in a committed relationship, you have no leg to stand on. Again, I submit that heterosexual divorce and infidelity is infinitely more harmful to children than gay marriage. The Chickens-Little on the right can talk about damage to children the minute they fix the divorce problem in America.

 

5. God hates f**s. BUZZZZZZZZZ! I'm sorry, that sound means you just lost your court case! With the exception of some easily overturned courts located in America's Ignorance Belt, no federal court has any interest in your dumb-assed opinion of what might or might not offend God. Thanks for playing.

[Rex Kickass]

you seem like a pretty bitter or angry guy when it comes to this topic. seriously, im not trying to offend you, you just come off that way.

 

he does make a decent point about the small percentile. to make an extreme point, theres around 4-6,000 people who vote for the american nazi party in each election. i dont see a s***load of movies and sitcoms about them and a s***load of legislation for what that tiny group of society wants. or wican laws, we should be having more wican and warlock legislation in the US house and senate.

 

equal protection under the law is a legal fiction that we strive for as a society but we will never acheive. to think imperfect beings can is pure idealism, or more frankly put, a pipe dream. and for the record, i would never let my kids see a movie about queer cowboys because i dont want to promote that sort of thing to them, not because i am predjudiced. i guess i would just rather have my kids doing the asskicking on the playground instead of getting their ass kicked. now please dont start with any more namecalling, cause i noticed you and juggernaut were getting into it. just giving my point of view.

 

I love your honesty. I don't love your point of view. I don't love being compared to nazis, wiccans or warlocks. I don't love that it's legal in most states to be fired for being gay, yet not legal to be fired for being a wiccan, or a warlock. It may very well not be legal to fire someone for being a nazi. I don't love being called a threat to marriage. I don't love the fact that I had to lie about my entire life to keep my job in Michigan. I don't love the fact that I have been denied jobs solely because I am gay. I don't love the fact that people think gay people want special rights because they want the same rights that you have. I don't want to be a political issue and if you notice, the only ones that bring it up all the time, are the ones that want to insult gay people.

 

I get insulted when other people think that I have some secret agenda. Or that gay people do. And I get insulted when people believe that the notion of equal rights doesn't or shouldn't exist.

 

Sorry if I seem overly sensitive, but it's all part of my "agenda," I guess.

[BHAMBARONS]

5.  With the exception of some easily overturned courts located in America's Ignorance Belt.

 

Just wondered where the ignorance belt is

[Heads22]

Just wondered where the ignorance belt is

 

An area from northern Alabama to southern Alabama....

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Damn, you beat me to it. 

 

Truer words were never spoken.  The south is full of a bunch of redneck dupes - including the family I married into.

 

 

Republican voters in the South are "redneck dupes" huh?

 

 

Keep right on talking that way.

 

Keep right on insulting people just because they dont vote the way you want them to.

 

Keep right on with that elitist, bulls*** attitude of yours.

 

Keep right on not learning the lessons of the 2004 election cycle that insulting people for their political views only motivates them and strengthens their cause.

 

 

The fact that the Democratic agenda is comprised entirely of personal attacks against the President and his supporters & defeatism in the War on Terror will ensure Republican dominance for years to come.

Edited January 29, 2006 by NUKE_CLEVELAND

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

You just need money to benefit from the GOP.

 

 

Im have money but Im not rich, yet Ive benefited from the GOP rule in government.

[BHAMBARONS]

The south is full of a bunch of redneck dupes -

 

 

And so does the North while they might not be called redneck they still exist. And the city of Birmingham is still one of the most liberal cities in the south having never voted for a Republican candidate

[sox4lifeinPA]

And so does the North while they might not be called redneck they still exist.  And the city of Birmingham is still one of the most liberal cities in the south having never voted for a Republican candidate

 

 

hill people = northern rednecks

[YASNY]

Bunch of damn hypocrits. You're all for "equality under the law" yet you disparage a group of people based on where they live and for whom they vote. No wonder the Democratic Party gets it's ass kicked over and over and over and over again.

[Mplssoxfan]

Bunch of damn hypocrits.  You're all for "equality under the law" yet you disparage a group of people based on where they live and for whom they vote.  No wonder the Democratic Party gets it's ass kicked over and over and over and over again.

 

The two of us don't see eye to eye that often, but I have to concur.

[Rex Kickass]

Bunch of damn hypocrits.  You're all for "equality under the law" yet you disparage a group of people based on where they live and for whom they vote.  No wonder the Democratic Party gets it's ass kicked over and over and over and over again.

 

I'm sorry, where did I say that?

[LowerCaseRepublican]

YAS, it is no different than Nuke flaming members of the left.

 

And this pic isn't directed towards you -- it is just kinda-on topic and so I thought I'd throw it into the discussion.

 

[samclemens]

I love your honesty. I don't love your point of view. I don't love being compared to nazis, wiccans or warlocks. I don't love that it's legal in most states to be fired for being gay, yet not legal to be fired for being a wiccan, or a warlock. It may very well not be legal to fire someone for being a nazi. I don't love being called a threat to marriage. I don't love the fact that I had to lie about my entire life to keep my job in Michigan. I don't love the fact that I have been denied jobs solely because I am gay. I don't love the fact that people think gay people want special rights because they want the same rights that you have. I don't want to be a political issue and if you notice, the only ones that bring it up all the time, are the ones that want to insult gay people.

 

I get insulted when other people think that I have some secret agenda. Or that gay people do. And I get insulted when people believe that the notion of equal rights doesn't or shouldn't exist.

 

Sorry if I seem overly sensitive, but it's all part of my "agenda," I guess.

 

first of all, i never said you had a hidden agenda. take the angst out on someone else man. sorry if you feel insulted when people disagree with you and you feel the need to throw pseudo insults around because you cant tolerate other people's points of view. and you call other people here ignorant? kettle calling the pot black my friend.

 

and i never said equal protection "doesnt or shouldnt" exist! what the hell, why are you twisting words? its idealism, something that is strived for, but can never be reached. its a goal, like perfection. and since humans are imperfect, it would follow that humans can never reach that goal, only approach it. as i said, it DOES exist, but can never be truely acheived.

 

you can have that chip on your shoulder if you want though man, thats your problem. what bugs me the most is that you b**** and b**** and b****, yet i havent seen you offer a single solution. how do you suggest we fix all these gripings you listed that i am responding to?

 

p.s. its kinda hard to have reasonable conversations with people who take everything personally. just a general rule you should keep in mind in the future.

[FlaSoxxJim]

I'm sorry, where did I say that?

That was levelled at me, not you. I used the term "redn**k" and am, understandably I guess, being skewered for it.

 

I need to choose my language more carefully sometimes certainly. My mom's family all comes from Arkansas and Kentucky and I spent lots of vacation time there growing up and listening to family members joke with each other about how redn**k they all were - and proudly so, but being a generation removed from it I can understand I don't get to use the word anymore. When I'm over at my mother-in-law's house for family gatherings I will just smile awkwardly when my brothers-in-law try to une-up each other on who is the bigger redn**k.

 

South, north, wherever, it will continue to frustrate me when people willingly allow themselves to be duped into voting for a political party that only cares about them on election days, and then screws them up and down the rest of the time.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

South, north, wherever, it will continue to frustrate me when people willingly allow themselves to be duped into voting for a political party that only cares about them on election days, and then screws them up and down the rest of the time.

 

 

Yeah, like the Democrats and black people.

[JUGGERNAUT]

I agree that the Nazi comparison was WAY out of line. A perfect example of the hollywood homosexual agenda is the movie Hitch. It actually insults gay people but for whatever reason they can't comprehend that. It suggests that any guy who is overly nice to another guy by default must be gay. That whole kiss scene was just a waste of time & thanks to DVDs you can just FF right thru it.

 

But the agenda is clearly evident & with the exception of say Wedding Crashers it's pretty predictable: the nicer a male character is written in a movie the more likely he is a gay character.

 

That has nothing to do with equal protection under the law & everything to do with an agenda aimed at beautifying gay people. When whas the last time you say a movie that beutified a lesbian person? Another strong sign it's an agenda.

 

Since you love to get into hissy-fights over syntax I'll make this as clear as day for you: Only 2-7% of the people of the world wake up thinking the person they love or lust over the most in the same sex as they are. That makes them rare. Which is the opposite of common.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Yeah,  like the Democrats and black people.

No, like Republicans and black people.

[BHAMBARONS]

Even though I live here in the Deep south I have always considered myself an independent and in 04 voted for Kerry and a Republican senator. This year I will vote for a Democratic gov in Lucy Baxley. Anyone is better than Bpb (Abramoff) Riley or Roy (10 commandements) Moore

[JUGGERNAUT]

What Dems & liberals can't seem to grasp is that the conservatives have branched out from their tradional strongholds to areas where liberal thought used to reign: science & media.

 

For the first time in a long time conservative-speak is leading in just about every source of media today. It's outreach has been so profound that even the internet is seeing more growth of conservative-speak & that's beginning to affect major new sources there as well.

 

That's why suddenly the liberal bastion of science is facing it's most severe level of scrutiny in more than a decade. Conservatives essentially want science taught that leads to a more profitable world. Which makes for a more profitable world: man viewed as an animal or man viewed as a child of God? It's pretty easy to make an economic argument for the child of God side.

 

The hollywood/Dem homosexual agenda will end in failure. Why? Because science will close in on the question of what genetic, biological, & chemical factors have the greatest influence. When that happens a conservative marketplace will quickly turn the tide of public sentiment by marketing prevention. A decade after prevention is selling they'll go after behavior.

 

All things considered when America's population bubbles past 350 million on the strength of traditionally conservative hispanic & asian families getting busy the %'s of gay's in the population will be even smaller.

[JUGGERNAUT]

The Dems should really look at the recent Canadian elections as a wake up call. Voters care more about money (making it, keeping it, investing it) then anything else. The Dems need to push aside the bulls*** issues & attack the conservatives where they are weakest: global economy. Get it back into the heads of American voters that a nation trending towards a severe decline in the production of goods & services can not sustain itself.

 

Perot didn't understand you just need 1 CHART: Buying power. Show the American people a single chart of buying power & how it trends over the next 20 yrs. Even those poor in math will be able to understand a downward trend. Making buying power the main slogan of the Dem campaign & shift all public debate towards it.

 

I can't believe the Dems can't figure this out. Which is why I believe both parties are sleeping in the same global economy bed. That's why bulls*** issues continue to determine our electorate.

[Flash Tizzle]

That's why suddenly the liberal bastion of science is facing it's most severe level of scrutiny in more than a decade.  Conservatives essentially want science taught that leads to a more profitable world.  Which makes for a more profitable world: man viewed as an animal or man viewed as a child of God?  It's pretty easy to make an economic argument for the child of God side.

 

 

I don't believe either contribute to a more profitable world. Compare the GDP of countries where a high proportion associate themselves as athiests to those with religious values. I guarantee there wouldn't be a large disparity. Couldn't a proponent of evolution suggest a world which views man 'as an animal' produces a society where people are more willing to "live for today?" Thus, making a more profitable world?

 

The hollywood/Dem homosexual agenda will end in failure.  Why?  Because science will close in on the question of what genetic, biological, & chemical factors have the greatest influence.  When that happens a conservative marketplace will quickly turn the tide of public sentiment by marketing prevention.  A decade after prevention is selling they'll go after behavior.

 

I personally believe any agenda (real or not--I'm not debating) will eventually end because honestly, how much money is their in the homosexual division of Hollywood? How many summer blockbusters can you have where the main character is openly gay? Studio's may finance low budget films such as Brokeback Mountain, but eventually, the stigma of gay characters will end. Honestly, I'd like to know the highest grossing film which involved an openly gay character as the lead. It's probably Brokeback.

 

However some may hate their influence on politics, it's obvious Christian America holds its weight in the box office. Narnia and Passion of Christ are excellent examples. It'd be suicide for major studios not to cater them, whereas high budget movies inspired because of Brokeback won't end nearly as well.

 

All things considered when America's population bubbles past 350 million on the strength of traditionally conservative hispanic & asian families getting busy the %'s of gay's in the population will be even smaller.

 

It'd only be logicial to assume the population would rise proportionately with the total American population. If anything, they'd be less willing to open themselves; giving the appearance of a smaller population.

Edited January 30, 2006 by Flash Tizzle