San Diego Firefighters Forced To Attend Gay Pride Parade

Originally posted by djohnsto77

I don't see parading in there anywhere.

thats not frisco and thats not the entire manual and you know it...i;m talking the manuel...the handbook,

they usually start out with appearence, then sick days and vacation, then job duties and ALL KINDS of other stuff.

you seem to know this is not in their job description, i just wanted to check it out cause again, most jobs have the little umbrella like "or anything the super deems necessary as long as on duty or paid double time" or something like that...

we all know that manuel consists or more than a couple lines.

still waiting

Originally posted by Boondock78
thats not frisco

What are you talking about?

Do you even know what we are talking about?

What city it happened in?

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by Boondock78
thats not frisco

What are you talking about?

Do you even know what we are talking about?

What city it happened in?

my mistake..i read frisco in a recent post and it stuck....
sorry about that...

stiull not the full manuel though..frisco thing my mistake

hats next, rights for child molesters? I guess they are like the gays, "just born that way"

Wow, that is completely uncalled for, your are putting Gays and Child Molestors in the same basket. So because Im gay that makes me a child molestor does it????????

About high time the mods intervened in this thread, the homophobic remarks is ridiculous

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone
Wow, that is completely uncalled for, your are putting Gays and Child Molestors in the same basket. So because Im gay that makes me a child molestor does it????????

About high time the mods intervened in this thread, the homophobic remarks is ridiculous

Yes, that is a ridiculous comparison.

I fully support the rights of people who want to march in a parade like this to do so. What I'm opposed to is forcing someone who doesn't want to to have to do it as a condition of their employment with the State.

That position takes rights away from people, it doesn't support anyone's rights.

[edit on 8/8/2007 by djohnsto77]

What I'm opposed to is forcing someone who doesn't want to to have to do it as a condition of their employment with the State.

Oks I agree, if they were forced into participating in the parade, as they put it and it is not a condition of their employment, then I would say it is wrong.

But if they were encouraged to participate, (which all firfighters from that firestation are encouraged to do), and they are going off on one, becuase they have a phobia against homsexuals or lesbians then I would have a problem with it.

We wont know until theoutcome of the lawsuit, most of what been put on here is assumptions and speculation.

Where I am they force the police department to attend the parade and be involved but then again the chief has been rumoured to be gay and is at least gay friendly.

The elites want these kinds of events because there is no way that gays could have made these kinds of things happen without support of people at the top.

.....they heard statements such as, "show me your hose," "you can put out my fire," "you're making me hot," "give me mouth-to-mouth," "you look hungry, why don't you have a twinkie (from a man wearing a "Girth and Mirth" t-shirt)," and "blow my hose."

When they refused to respond to the crowd, some in the crowd turned hostile and started shouting, "F--- you firemen" and others began "flipping them off."

...the city should have known from past experience "the kind of offensive activities that go on at this event."

.....the firefighters also were targets of sexual gestures, including exposure of genitals, blowing kisses, grabbing of the crotch

This speaks for itself. This is not a case of "Pride". It is baiting pure and simple. San Diego has reason to be ashamed over this. Sexual orientation is not a reason for a parade. This is a bunch of emotional children acting like what they are. I'll bet the Gays are just as embarrassed about this as anyone else. Why would Gays want to be represented by stuff like this. Talk about setting a movement back by 50 years. Looks like its time for Gays to clean their own house if they want to be taken seriously. In the meantime, I'll keep my sexual preferences to myself and not insult others by walking around talking about it all the time. You know, act like a responsible adult.

I hope the people of San Diego like this Chief well enough to pay the punitive damages on this one. I'll bet there are plenty of video's of this floating around to show in court.

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone
We wont know until theoutcome of the lawsuit, most of what been put on here is assumptions and speculation.

Yes, agreed.

It is possible these guys are just making unfounded allegations for whatever reasons, but if what they claim is true, I believe it is harassment and should be treated like any other form of harassment, like that against gays and women.

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone

hats next, rights for child molesters? I guess they are like the gays, "just born that way"

Wow, that is completely uncalled for,

I agree. This thread is about the whether or not firefighters were forced to support a political cause against their wishes.

It's not a bully pulpit to proclaim your ignorance or homophobic beliefs.
.

Originally posted by Boondock78
[if it goes against their way of life so much and they were so much more nervous there than at any other time, i too want to know if they would run into a burning building to save a homosexual person?
if no, then there is a problem.lets see if we get an answer....i've been waiting for pages now

:shk: What exactly are you looking for here? I fail to see how you cannot distinguish between a PROFESSIONAL relationship versus a social one?

Look in my line of work I have to put myself at risk strapping into a chopter to go get some piece of human garbage gang banger. I go and he gets the same level of professionalism I give the 2 year old with febrile seizures.

By your logic I would then have to have a drink with the guy or hang out for a drive by lest you lable me a hypocrite.

Please explain to me why you feel these firemen had some sort of obligation beyond that of a professional relationship in the line of duty?

Originally posted by Blaine91555

.....they heard statements such as, "show me your hose," "you can put out my fire," "you're making me hot," "give me mouth-to-mouth," "you look hungry, why don't you have a twinkie (from a man wearing a "Girth and Mirth" t-shirt)," and "blow my hose."

Sure. I bet it happened just like that. Isnt a little bit obvious that they did not want to go from the BEGINNING when they heard they were selected to do this??? And then Lo and Behold , they have to endure all this!!!

Its hearsay BS and they better have lots of witnesses who heard all the above comments if they're going to win any type of lawsuit. Its also funny that most of you posting are totally against crooked lawyers that bring frivolous law suits up. :shk:

I dont know where you all come from, but everywhere i've lived firefighters have participated or had a PRESCENSE in any of these activities. Who gives a damn about their "Job descriptions"??? Mine doesnt say i have to climb a ladder, but i do.

Look at it this way, if President Bush said firemen had to attend a gay rally and have a prescense there, then it would be ok for most of you righties, wouldnt it???

This is ridiculous. I predict this story is only big here on ATS and nobody else gives a hoot.

[edit on 8-8-2007 by dgtempe]

[edit on 8/9/07 by FredT]

Let's Have Some Pride

Quite a thread so far.

Obviously this is a touchy topic for several of us, but that's hardly unusual when it comes to politics.

Without getting too specific, I just want to remind my fellow members that all opinions regarding the topic are welcome.

Opinions regarding other members are not welcome. That's not what our forums are for. :shk:

If you find yourself boiling over, please take a break, take a few deep breaths and try not to go into flame mode.

It is entirely possible to discuss even the most sensitive issues if we keep our cool.

Please do your best.

(Post removed. Please see my message above. Your complaints are being reviewed, but further posts of this kind will not be tolerated. --Majic)

[edit on 8/9/2007 by Majic]

Whats next, rights for child molesters? I guess they are like the gays, "just born that way"

Give me a f'in break!!

Here's a break for you, remember that slippery slope argument always has it's opposite side of the mountain too so my advice is to stay away from little girls because using your own twisted logic you are obviously a sexual predetor and a danger towards them.

What's that, that's not what you were implying at all, well nor was I. Merely pointing out that as straight people have a right to have consenting sex 'because they were born that way' where all that might lead and also letting you know how it feels to have nasty little insinuations attached to your rights and lifestyle.

BTW do you think they would have complained so much if they'd been on the femme dyke girl to girl action float?



[edit on 9-8-2007 by ubermunche]

Originally posted by dgtempe
How the heck were they Harassed??
That's a load of crap.

You've read and heard what they were subjected to. Some of it, you refuse to believe. That's fine.

But do me a favor, dg. Post your yardstick for what is sexual harassment here. Post your meter for how much harassment should be tolerated here also.

According to you, the firefighters are afraid of their own sexuality. According to you, they should be able to tolerate sexual harassment. And if the harassment crosses over the boundary of what even you determine to be objectionable, you can just refuse to believe it ever happened. Nice, neat, little package.

Now, can we apply those same standards to the gays? Should they be required to tolerate harassment because otherwise they will be accused of being afraid of their sexuality?

I doubt it.

Originally posted by DenyAllKnowledge
On the other hand.... if my kids were old enough to actually be firemen, I would hope they've got enough decency and respect for their fellow citizens to not be even remotely bothered by the event. Or else they're in for one hell of an arguement and an awful lot of frowning!

So you intend to raise your children to strictly follow your beliefs on sexuality, or else they will be subject to your disapproval.

Originally posted by Boondock78

Originally posted by jsobecky
Putting your employees in a position where they must endure someone waving their genitals at them is sexual harassment, plain and simple. Your values and priorities are skewed, imo.

in a position when someone must endure genitals waving in their face???
bwuhahahahahahahahBWUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH

that is GREAT

hahahahahahaha

cry baby fireman

From the link in the OP

LiMandri said the firefighters also were targets of sexual gestures, including exposure of genitals, blowing kisses, grabbing of the crotch, rubbing of nipples, tongue gestures and men hugging and kissing one another passionately – many wearing make-up and dressed like women.

slackerwire.com...

And, btw, I said "must endure someone waving their genitals at them".

You said "must endure genitals waving in their face".

Your words, not mine.

Quote someone correctly, or not at all.

I want to start off by saying I live right here in San Diego !
And I'm sick and tired of some posters saying that San Diego should pay
dearly for dead-beat firemen. Or that San Diego should be ashamed.
As a city, we have nothing to be ashamed about when it comes to this
incident. Let me pose another possible scenario.

Here in San Diego, we have what is known as "The-Over-The-Line"
tournament every year. It's basically a three-man softball tournament
played at the beach, attracting teams from all over the world. Men's teams,
women's teams, co-ed teams, whatever. It's a party atmosphere where
skimpy dress is the norm, where imbibing of adult beverages is the norm,
and where the team names are so hilariously dirty that they cannot be
repeated in any of the news media. ABC wanted to do a sports special on
the tournament, with a condition that the team names and rowdy antics
be cleaned up. The organizers told them to piss off. It is the way it is.

Police and some fire crews patrol the area. What if one of the fire crews
happened to have a gay member or two that couldn't accept this very
down-to-earth party atmosphere? What if some of the religous firemen
took offense to the scantily-clad women at the tournament? Would we have
more lawsuits? Would we have to shut down everything because someone
somewhere was offended? And would the gay firefighters sue because
they disagreed with the lifestyles?

Now, can we apply those same standards to the gays? Should they be required to tolerate harassment because otherwise they will be accused of being afraid of their sexuality?

I doubt it.

Put it this way, harrassment wise gay people have been subjected to sly digs and innuendo for centuries, along with physical violence even the criminalising of their existence.

Two wrongs don't make a right but I'm still doubtful about the real extent of the harrassment. A certain type of straight guy sees even the most casual glance from a gay man as a full on sexual overture, this usually accompanied with the idea that gay people are a different species deserving of less in the way of rights and protection. Like I said I've known of firemen who were gay that genuinly feared for their lives if the secret came out. That's not a healthy or morally right attitude to have infiltrating an organisation and this may be at the root of this whole issue.

But yes if there were people in that parade doing exactly as has been described then the gay community needs to challenge this as unaceptable, it's just a pity that some use this as their excuse to trot out all the old chestnuts. The gay agenda, gay=peadophile, blah, blah.



[edit on 9-8-2007 by ubermunche]