LGBT ... And My Personal Brick Wall

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: Snarl

It didn't 'come off' that way to me. I don't consider heterosexuals worthy of any special rights or considerations. I can't justify 'LGBT rights' in the same regard.

Nobody is supposed to be getting special rights. That's why the Term "Gay Rights" is a BS term used to imply a classification of Rights to a special Group, of which there is no such thing. It's "Equal Rights" and the apply to all of us equally, end of story. That's how it's supposed to be anyway.

The school who is teaching my 12 year old daughter about "Gay rights" don't see it that way.. My daughter hasn't even left primary school yet ffs, call me what ever you want but who ever is pushing this crap needs to be strung.

Here, this might even be better. Don't answer any of those questions and write something along the lines of:

“I respectfully decline to answer this survey as it MAY open me or my family members up to discriminatory action for being part of a constitutionally protected class.”

Now they don't know why you are refusing to answer. It could be that you are protecting your disabled child or spouse. Disability is also a protected class...

You might still want to speak with an attorney, most will talk with you for free.

Given that I am a controversial in-between character not unlike William S. Burroughs in regards to the gay community and other outlooks on alternative lifestyles in contrast with the mainstream society, I am borderline anti-social in my approach to anything official. Like surveys such as the one outlined in the OP, for example. I consider myself homosexual but have never been welcomed into the LGBT community with open arms either (and do not really care to). However, because of my sexuality and the fact I know many people who are also gay or bisexual and accept them, I would have to consider myself an ally. But the LGBT community needs to back down from their overly political stance as well.

Sometimes labels are such pigeonholes. Be a bigot if need be... if it means having your own unique position or viewpoint in life.

As a bisexual person, my desire to not be labelled is stronger than any need to be acknowledged or accepted and I really feel I am neither "member" or "ally" as I have nothing to do with the gay community but just choose to live life openly but quietly. I have never felt judged or endangered for being what I am and I live in a small town. Because my sexuality is completely irrelevant in public and I just accept it, the public tend to find it irrelevant also.

I'd rather everyone respected an individuals right to be different than need to be communal or have allies.

Sorry to rant but the world is getting too squished by politically correct definitions. (though my friend got bashed for being gay so im not naïve to the dangers)

a reply to: corsair00

I get what you are say... I checked out the community for a while in my young years and didn't feel welcomed either... not dyky enough. All the women were aggressive toward me for not "commiting" to being a lesbian. Well I commit only to my partner and living life with personal integrity, not a concept and fashion sense. It was just weird and too political.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
I see in the news that Burger King is wrapping their whoppers in rainbow paper to show solidarity with the LGBT community. I'm the first one to stand up and say that I AM an ally. A very strong one. But even I found this patronizing and weird.

Well...it was in San Francisco, right?

a reply to: Snarl

I would say that you wouldn't, but we shouldn't forget what happened to Brendan Eich because me made a personal donation to support the classical definition of marriage. That, too, is considered hate these days.

Now, I don't care what people do in their own homes. I don't care if the state chooses to extend equal legal benefits and contract to them, but when it comes down to demanding that I call it a marriage and accept it in defiance and violation of my right to belief ... well, I struggle.

originally posted by: ketsuko

Now, I don't care what people do in their own homes. I don't care if the state chooses to extend equal legal benefits and contract to them, but when it comes down to demanding that I call it a marriage and accept it in defiance and violation of my right to belief ... well, I struggle.

This is the part I don't get. You say you don't care about the actual benefits and other real qualifying things that they receive but have a problem when it comes to labeling it "Marriage" and "Accepting" the reality of it. What do you mean by accepting it??? If you accept all those qualifying legalities what is left that you can't accept exactly???

Then what is the problem with the word Marriage??? Marriage is a word that has no meaning outside what we give it just like any other word. The word itself isn't the thing so I don't understand what difference it makes. Or even why or when you would be in a position where it's a problem. Is there a point where someone is going to hold you down until you say the word or something???

Hopefully that makes sense, because it's hard to explain my question for some reason. I just don't understand what people mean when they say they accept all the actual changes and legalities or whatever, but still won't accept it or use that one word to describe it. Can you explain it??

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: ketsuko

Now, I don't care what people do in their own homes. I don't care if the state chooses to extend equal legal benefits and contract to them, but when it comes down to demanding that I call it a marriage and accept it in defiance and violation of my right to belief ... well, I struggle.

This is the part I don't get. You say you don't care about the actual benefits and other real qualifying things that they receive but have a problem when it comes to labeling it "Marriage" and "Accepting" the reality of it. What do you mean by accepting it??? If you accept all those qualifying legalities what is left that you can't accept exactly???

Then what is the problem with the word Marriage??? Marriage is a word that has no meaning outside what we give it just like any other word. The word itself isn't the thing so I don't understand what difference it makes. Or even why or when you would be in a position where it's a problem. Is there a point where someone is going to hold you down until you say the word or something???

Hopefully that makes sense, because it's hard to explain my question for some reason. I just don't understand what people mean when they say they accept all the actual changes and legalities or whatever, but still won't accept it or use that one word to describe it. Can you explain it??

If the word isn't such a big deal, why are you so insistent that she say it? Frankly, when you add multiple question marks to your question, it makes me read hostility in your question. She has already said she accepts. Can you explain why you insist she use the word marriage?

No you didn't make sense to me. As long as people don't infringe on my rights, I could care less what words they choose to use to describe my relationship with my partner. If they treat me with respect why should I feel the need to brow beat them to use a word?

a reply to: mOjOm

To me, accept and tolerate are two different words. Right now, I tolerate gays. That means I accept that they have the right to live their lifestyle as they see fit so long as it does not infringe on me.

Acceptance carries the connotation of approval. I accept they have the right to live as they choose, but I do not approve of that choice. From the perspective of my religious beliefs, that is a sinful lifestyle. However, I'm not going to stop them, nor do I want there to be laws stopping them. There are lots of things I think are sinful that I don't think should be illegal. The law, IMO, exists in the main to protect your rights, not to protect your morality.

And you don't want to talk to an editor about the importance of words and there meaning. I don't make much hay about it most of the time because I don't like playing grammar Nazi on myself or others. I don't come here to critique. However, what a word means is important, and it shouldn't be changed lightly or on a whim. If it's true, and I see no reason why it shouldn't be, that there have always been people with homosexual urges, then it's also true that for whatever reason, there has never been a society that has seen fit to redefine marriage, either. That's in how many years of recorded human history? Maybe we should stop and think about why that might be. Maybe, it's because marriage has meant much more than just "two people who love each other and enjoy tax breaks" like it does to today's shallow, self-obsessed, narcissistic and pathetic society. And really if that's all it means, then perhaps we should default to the politically correct and choose a more equal term such as civil union or domestic partnership which is far more all inclusive and can include any two people who want to fit in that definition by law ... mother/dauther, two best friends, sisters, brothers ... Why should only people who want to bump uglies get the tax breaks for loving each other?

originally posted by: Khaleesi

If the word isn't such a big deal, why are you so insistent that she say it? Frankly, when you add multiple question marks to your question, it makes me read hostility in your question. She has already said she accepts. Can you explain why you insist she use the word marriage?

No you didn't make sense to me. As long as people don't infringe on my rights, I could care less what words they choose to use to describe my relationship with my partner. If they treat me with respect why should I feel the need to brow beat them to use a word?

Chill man, or woman I'm not being hostile toward anyone. I'm not demanding anything either. I'm just asking some questions. If you don't wanna answer then don't. I don't care.

Sorry about the question marks. Maybe you shouldn't read so much into punctuation FFS!!

a reply to: ketsuko

That all seems reasonable to me and you seem totally reasonable yourself.

Back to the word marriage again though. What extra does it mean to you that makes it so it only applies to Man and Woman couples and not others even though aside from a couple anatomical differences they are the same. As in both have love, commitment, respect, etc. ???

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: mOjOm

To me, accept and tolerate are two different words. Right now, I tolerate gays. That means I accept that they have the right to live their lifestyle as they see fit so long as it does not infringe on me.

Acceptance carries the connotation of approval.

Ok, now it makes more sense why Acceptance is such a big hangup. Because it comes up all the time with this subject. It's always "Acceptance" too.

So to you the word Acceptance includes some idea that you personally are not just tolerant but also approve as well??

It's a strange word in this sense too because nobody is actually accepting anything in the sense that nothing is being offered. That's what always seemed strange to me. I've always just seen it as almost pointless in the sense that when a couple marries, whether others Accept it or not, it still is. In fact other Acceptance doesn't seem like it would matter. After all, either you personally think and know you are married to someone or not. Doesn't matter what anyone else has to say about it.

Also, I don't know if this matters but I'm a Male, have a wife of 15 years, totally hetrosexual. The reason I ask these questions is because I personally don't understand why such a big deal is made about these things. Like any other guy Male on Male is not something I want any part of, but ignoring it never seemed too difficult so I'm trying to figure out just exactly why it is such a difficult thing for others, both male and female.

originally posted by: DarknStormy

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: Snarl

It didn't 'come off' that way to me. I don't consider heterosexuals worthy of any special rights or considerations. I can't justify 'LGBT rights' in the same regard.

Nobody is supposed to be getting special rights. That's why the Term "Gay Rights" is a BS term used to imply a classification of Rights to a special Group, of which there is no such thing. It's "Equal Rights" and the apply to all of us equally, end of story. That's how it's supposed to be anyway.

The school who is teaching my 12 year old daughter about "Gay rights" don't see it that way.. My daughter hasn't even left primary school yet ffs, call me what ever you want but who ever is pushing this crap needs to be strung.

My 7 year old son is asking me if he should be with boys or girls. Before I could say anything he began to inform me that "boys can be with boys" which of course I knew but did not imagine even for a minute that he would question something like that. Now I think I know what Putin was concerned about. Are we conditioning our children to no longer seek partners of the opposite sex? I know my son isn't gay. He checks out girls more than me and that says a lot. But he is wondering he should be.

If you believe you were born gay, that is fine even though I have not seen any proof of that. But do those that believe that believe you can ONLY be gay if you were born that way?

a reply to: TrueBrit

Some of us do not, per se, oppose "their existence" as persons with human struggles like all of us . . . but different.

We 'merely' oppose their ramming their agenda down our throats and adjusting the whole culture to their SENSIBILITIES.

I don't care to monitor their bedroom.

I don't need them monitoring my politics nor my philosophical nor cosmological values to THEIR litmus test.

I have some spiritual concerns about their devastations to themselves and to the society in general but those are arguable and reasonable people can differ on them.

But not according to that 'community.' It's their way or the highway in fierce and very hostile terms more in keeping with Westboro church than with reasonable, rational "live and let live" attitudes they PURPORTEDLY are so fond of.

The hypocrisy spread far and wide gets to be a bit much more than occasionally.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

I'm no expert or anything. I'm just some random guy but I really don't think you need to worry about it. When that part of your kids development kicks in, he'll know what he likes.

What I don't get is why they confuse kids by saying anything about sexuality at 7. I mean at that age they won't understand the context of what's being said to them.

Then again all kids develop differently so it seems better to just wait and if they ask, then tell them the truth. But don't bring it up before they're ready or they just won't understand.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: MALBOSIA

I'm no expert or anything. I'm just some random guy but I really don't think you need to worry about it. When that part of your kids development kicks in, he'll know what he likes.

What I don't get is why they confuse kids by saying anything about sexuality at 7. I mean at that age they won't understand the context of what's being said to them.

Then again all kids develop differently so it seems better to just wait and if they ask, then tell them the truth. But don't bring it up before they're ready or they just won't understand.

I agree but I think what is causing him to ask is all the hype and attention. It is shown everywhere. Cant watch the news, cant walk down town. It has to be the most awkward moments. What do you say to a 7 year old? Your right they shouldn't even be thinking about it but it is in your face everywhere children look and they ARE noticing it seems.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

That certainly would make it more difficult. I chose not to have kids so it's hard for me to say. I can only relate to my sisters kids and myself when I was growing up and things were way different back then.

Sexuality is always confusing at a young age. Even though you understand some of it in technical terms, you don't understand the more subtle ideas. Even seeing a penthouse magazine for the first time I remember being somewhat confused, a bit grossed out while also interested at the same time. Male and Female roles haven't been constructed mentally to understand certain things yet. Female consists of Mother, Sister type roles and Males a Father, Brother type. Upon seeing, in my case, the Mother, Sister role in such an extreme way, my mind had to then construct a new model for what Women could be.

The influence from outside probably isn't good in some ways because it's not being done in a tolerant or casual way. Like you say, it's agenda driven and not allowed to be seen in non confrontational ways at the moment. This goes for both sides too not just one or the other.

Luckily kids are masters of flexibility and as they get older as long as you have a firm ground of support they can handle anything and will come out fine. I think the most important thing is to make sure they know they're fine and safe from the outside world until they are prepared to engage in it.

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: TrueBrit

Some of us do not, per se, oppose "their existence" as persons with human struggles like all of us . . . but different.

We 'merely' oppose their ramming their agenda down our throats and adjusting the whole culture to their SENSIBILITIES.

I don't care to monitor their bedroom.

I don't need them monitoring my politics nor my philosophical nor cosmological values to THEIR litmus test.

I have some spiritual concerns about their devastations to themselves and to the society in general but those are arguable and reasonable people can differ on them.

But not according to that 'community.' It's their way or the highway in fierce and very hostile terms more in keeping with Westboro church than with reasonable, rational "live and let live" attitudes they PURPORTEDLY are so fond of.

The hypocrisy spread far and wide gets to be a bit much more than occasionally.

You mean like how you ram your agenda down other people's throats? You're correct about the hypocrisy, but in your position have no right to say a single damn thing about anyone else's.

Deal with your own hypocrisy and then - if you have a shred of energy left - go after someone else's.

Your thinly-veiled hate is sickening. The war for right and wrong is on and you're absolutely right that it's my way or the highway. If you wanted it to be your way you should have been born 400 years ago. Sorry about that.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

Couldn't agree more..

I don't like that a lot of gay people act like caricatures, of course I'm generalizing heavily.. I just don't like the fact that it has become just another tool to divide us, and people are falling for it as usual.
And of course, if you're not on the bandwagon you are automatically a bigot.

Though, I guess a lot of gay people do feel that it is their turn exercising some power after having been discriminated against so heavily for so long, so at the same time it is understandable. I just can't help but feel that they are being used very effectively. In addition to creating yet another division I feel that a lot of non issues related to this tedious debate takes away from what I would consider real issues, i.e. TPTB and the rapidly expanding police state.

In reality you being gay doesn't stop me from considering you one of the most levelheaded and insightful posters on this forum.