Society is forced to be accepting of gays & transgenders.

originally posted by: KyoZero
a reply to: SpaceGoatFart

oh don't fear

I don't judge the group by examples. I know many Catholics are fine people...my whole point is how is it that pedophilia by Catholic leaders garners a fraction of the attention that anti-gay rhetoric gets

Well it's probably a local thing because where I live pedo priests have been under the spotlight for the last 20 years and the Church started to sack them and also compensated the victims.

On the other hand, we have been the second country to legalize same sex unions and adoptions (and I'm proud of this).


So I don't really feel like we still have a problem in here between how gays are treated and accepted VS how the pedo priests problem is addressed. And I'm living in a Catholic country.


I know the situation isn't the same in all countries, but the situation in the US is vastly different as it's not a catholic country per se, so I suppose the American vision regarding the "Church VS gays" situation is very different and probably a bit biased.

What I'm saying in particular is that the current hostility against gay rights movements in the US (being stronger than in Catholic countries in Europe) must have some roots which are linked to a specific brand of puritanism. While in Europe the Church is slowly but surely evolving regarding these difficult subjects which are pedo priests (which are just a small branch of a larger pedophilia problem which is mostly taking place inside families) and same sex couples.

This thread is priceless. The current atmosphere in North America is its cool to support LGBTQ causes. Once these individuals reach a level of acceptance where they are no longer of interest to the crying liberal media we will move on to support another disenfranchised subgroup of society. Maybe by then Islam will be "cool", and the same folks who denounce it today will be screaming bloody murder should anyone do the same.

I don't support the subjugation of any member of society, but at the same time, I am very wary of large-scale focus on minority groups who do not represent the majority of the population.

Frankly I think it's ridiculous we need to define minority subgroups based on their sexual preference at all. Its JUST SEX. Should a person and their lifestyle be defined by whom they choose to have sex with? Does sex dictate every other aspect of life? Does gender identity demand a certain mode of behaviour? No, people are people, and we all want to belong, which can be a very powerful thing in directing society.

Curious those who support the OP seem to be presenting large, well reasoned arguments, and those who oppose are mostly labelling her or slinging anger rather than making a sensible rebuttal.

a reply to: dangerballs

for most intelligent people, equal rights are very important, especially if you are in a small scale group of people so to be able to use your rights, for example the correct pronoun or marriage to same sex...it is very important as well.

To say you are "forced to be accepting of gays" is just like saying "I wish gays would go back to where they came from, no rights, no thoughts of them".

originally posted by: dangerballs
Frankly I think it's ridiculous we need to define minority subgroups based on their sexual preference at all. Its JUST SEX.

It's funny you say so, because seen from the outside of the US, it does seem like those subgroups only started to become more vocal when they were directly attacked because of their sexual preferences (by some people claiming that god hates fags, by a bearded duck hunter airing his strong opinions on TV, by a deranged who shot them in a disco)

Before that they weren't really trying to expose their belonging to a subgroup.

They only started to do so in reaction to a perceived hostility, as a support to the other ones belonging to that minority, to show them they aren't alone.


Makes you think...


Maybe it's actually a reaction mechanism to an external aggression that caused all this. Maybe if everyone learned to live and let live it wouldn't have come this far...

a reply to: dangerballs


that's rich, you think we support lgbt to be cool. that's you well thought out reasonable rebuttal?

a reply to: veracity

I never said in don't believe in equal rights, in fact, I specifically said "I don't support the subjugation of any member of society".

When you refer to intelligent people in a run-on sentence with no capitalization and poor punctuation it mostly invalidates you argument.

Thirdly, I did not ever state I was against homosexuality. You took what the OP said, and spun it into hate speech in your own mind. For all you know I could be a homosexual.

Poor argument, try again.

a reply to: SpaceGoatFart

You make some good points, but you also state "Before that they weren't really trying to expose their belonging to a subgroup", referring to recent incidents. So you're saying until Duck Dynasty was on television the LGBTQ community did not self-identify? I guess the gay pride events going back decades must be a figment of my imagination.

originally posted by: dangerballs
a reply to: SpaceGoatFart

For all you know I could be a homosexual.

Username checks out.


J/K!

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: kaylaluv

I know that its not the same but what if your mutliple personality has gender issues

This is the next big issue. Many people have multiple personalities. And each personality has its own sexual orientation and gender identity. So, one day they are transgender male identifying as female, so want to use the ladies room, and the next day they are male, and want to use the men's restroom.

The problem is that nobody considers these people, when they see the same person using men's one day and women's the next, they think it's the same person "breaking the rules".

But, depending on the "phases of the moon", or whatever, that person's particular personality is just dominant.

So, we have to make the laws respect their rights too.

Are we seriously talking about encouraging / enabling Multiple Personality Disorder?

I mean what mental illness isn't worse than this?

Lets embrace insanity and call the whole notion of doing so "sanity" woo hoo!

Next we'll all be arguing over how the build the restrooms for the imaginary folks that Schizophrenics think they see.

a reply to: knoxie

Yes it is. I take it your lack of capitalization and misspelling of "your" is meant to put me in my place? Thank you for so perfectly illustrating my point.

a reply to: Butterfinger

So if I'm gay I should be horribly offended by that "joke" right?

And if I am straight, then its just funny? Pathetic.

originally posted by: dangerballs
a reply to: SpaceGoatFart

You make some good points, but you also state "Before that they weren't really trying to expose their belonging to a subgroup", referring to recent incidents. So you're saying until Duck Dynasty was on television the LGBTQ community did not self-identify? I guess the gay pride events going back decades must be a figment of my imagination.

You say that like there were never any discrimination or attacks against gays before that.

The pace surely increased lately (and hence threads like this one about people being annoyed about all this activism) but let me assure you:

when and where LGBT requests to be treated like normal people are met (same sex unions, no discrimination), they don't bother anyone with their sexual preferences and keep it mostly personal

These labels regarding their sexual orientations mostly come from society itself.

When you meet someone who's gay he doesn't introduce himself like "hello I'm David. Gay person".

On the other hand, most people will refer to David (especially when he isn't there) as "the gay".


Still makes you think...

a reply to: dangerballs


my lack of capitalization and misspelling is meant to put you in your place. can you explain?

a reply to: dangerballs

Neither, just trying to lighten up with some basic internet posting-banter

You can actually say the same about my username. I did it for the lulz, I laughed and thats all that matters

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Winstonian

I'd like to know what you mean by "force you to agree".

I would like to know that as well. Major difference between being forced to agree and being required by an employer to show tolerance to others sexual orientation who are not being disrespectful or predatorial.

originally posted by: dangerballs
a reply to: knoxie

Yes it is. I take it your lack of capitalization and misspelling of "your" is meant to put me in my place? Thank you for so perfectly illustrating my point.

ifwewereingrammarschooland youweremyteacher then maybe, maybe youhave anargument but weare on aninternet messageboard so pointing outgrammar errorsisweak

a reply to: DeadFoot

You've so completely twisted any meaning out of anything that I said that I'll just skip it. I'm very tired of people who think I have to conform to the idea that gay sex is awesomest awesome thing to ever happen in society. I'll never be mean to someone because of their lifestyle, but I don't agree with it. Your reaction falls pretty well in-line with everything else I hear in the news, on-line, etc. It's just more noise in the din and water under the bridge.

You're welcome to think I'm a brat for thinking so, but this is not the same as wishing for a return to slavery or some other nonsense. It's a misguided form of sexuality that acts as an evolutionary dead end and probably found itself shunned by most of society because it was an activity (much like other things that were shunned in the past, including adultery) that lent itself to the spread of disease. There are lots of modern work-arounds for this, so it's not as big of a deal now, but it's still not intrinsically good. That doesn't mean the people who engage in the activity are intrinsically bad, however. I disagree with the IDEA of homosexuality but hold nothing against individual homosexuals.

I'm also not interested in laws that prevent gay sex, gay advertising, etc. People have to be free to figure it out for themselves. It would just be nice if people could be a little more level-headed across the board.

a reply to: SisterDelirium

"I'm very tired of people who think I have to conform to the idea that gay sex is awesomest awesome thing to ever happen in society."

People are doing this to you? If so, then you are correct, they should not be making you think that.

"It's a misguided form of sexuality that acts as an evolutionary dead end and probably found itself shunned by most of society because it was an activity (much like other things that were shunned in the past, including adultery) that lent itself to the spread of disease."

Comparing it to adultery shows that you do not know much about gay, trans. I can see you are very sweet and wants what is best, but you also have a very narrow mind that is not allowing you to understand the full concept.

a reply to: SisterDelirium


but see, just the other day my husband came home from work and one of his work mates actually said he'd wish more people had died in the Orlando massacre. he said they're meant to die, it's in the bible....

i have a gay brother who is about the best person i know. he works for doctors without borders and has been to Haiti multiple times after their earthquake, for example. so, if i get heated in conversations titled like this one - tuff shiooooot!

also, we had ted cruz (while running for president!) meet with anti-gay pastor kevin swanson for Christ's sake. this guy want it to be a crime punishable by death. so again, yea, i get heated!

a reply to: knoxie

nevermind read it wrong, are you in TN? KNOXIE?