Video: Gay Marriage Proponents Attack Elderly Woman , page 4

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 14 times

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 09:22 AM by niteboy82

reply to post by Marcus Calpurnius

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

If I go to a "pro-life" shindig and I have a plastic replica of an aborted fetus and I'm grinning while saying "abort abort abort!" should I really anticipate no one doing anything? Will people recognize my constitutional rights to speech?

This lady knew what she was doing and unfortunately those guys gave her exactly what she wanted to get on tv and play little old lady martyr for those that could use this to further their agenda. Nothing more, nothing less.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 09:37 AM by toochaos4u

Nothing going on. Grandma Giggles wasn't hurt. I thought there was going to be a video of an old woman beat down and comment that this is wrong. I see a giggly old woman trying to set off a large group of protesters that pull a burial cross covered in cloth from her and destroy it. If this was an attack my cat's bite is mortal wound.

But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

One poster is correct. A group of religions that accept gay people is Paganism. Many of the ancient Indians native to the US referred to gays as "Two Spirits". They believed they had the souls of a man and a woman. As of 1991, male and female bodied Two-Spirit people have been "documented in over 130 tribes, in every region of North American, among every type of native culture.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 09:57 AM by undo

i loved my mom. she died at 89 years of age.
i loved my grandmother. she died at ...well she was so old she had been congratulated by several presidents many times for her advanced age. they couldn't find her birth certificate so they guessitimated she was somewhere over 90.
etc.
i would never think of these fine women as old bags. they were awesome people, who lived long, worked hard, and prayed often.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by undo]

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 09:58 AM by Helmkat

Two wrongs do not make a right.

The woman was doing only as she believed and the protesters did nothing to further their cause. Can I understand their anger? Sure but their actions were misguided.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:01 AM by sos37

Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by SonicInfinity

That video made me LOL! But seriously...that old woman was provoking a large angry crowd full of gay men. While I don't agree with them pulling away things from her hands, it shouldn't be difficult to see how was simply there as a provocateur.

I guess there had to be one person defending the crowd. You must really see the little old lady as a huge threat if you're really defending their actions.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:01 AM by rickyrrr

Originally posted by CreeWolf
reply to post by Acidtastic

reply to post by Jezus

reply to post by rickyrrr

I've got a solution! Let gays and lesbians establish their own nation with their own Constitution. There, they can marry, propagate and circumvent all that silliness of living in a nation founded on religious principles......you know, nations like the UK, US, Saudi Arabia, India, and practically EVERY NATION on EARTH!

Is there a religion on earth where gay and lesbian "marriages" are "sacred"?

[edit on 12-11-2008 by CreeWolf]

Interesting. What do you suggest we do about atheists? So far there is nothing on the constitution preventing atheists from marrying one another, or an atheist to marry a christian, jew etc. In fact, ministers routinely marry people of different religious backgrounds, with only some exceptions.

If gay marriage represents some kind of offense or affront to religion (as if gay people are gay "at" you), then it would only stand to reason that atheist marriage also does, in fact, even more. But the people pushing for prop 8 don't seem to have any problem with that, doesn't that strike you as a double standard?

What about gays who are also atheists, would it then be ok if they want to marry does being an atheist isolate you from the controversy somehow?

No, being an atheist would not isolate you from the controversy, The only thing that does is *not* being gay.

Therefore, this is not about religion, this is about homosexuality and the imaginary "impact" it has on the lives of religious people against gays marrying. This is nothing other than homophobia with a religious rationalization.

-rrr

edited for typo

[edit on 12-11-2008 by rickyrrr]

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:02 AM by wayno

reply to post by SonicInfinity

Well, I wouldn't use the word "malicious," but what should have happened was a proper debate between her and the proponents

Debate? Why should the older woman be allowed to change the agenda? It was a rally. A pro-gay rights rally. It was never intended to be a debate. If anything it was a venue for people to vent and to validate their utter frustration over the situation.
The older woman's intentions are extremely suspect. She had no business going to that rally with an inflammatory symbol - that huge cross.
It was arrogant and plainly wrong. She started it.
The people at that rally were smarting and emotional. They were right to rebuke her arrogant, insulting presence, but were "over the top" in their response. There were some who tried to calm the scene but failed. She should never have gone in the first place.
It was a setup.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:04 AM by undo

reply to post by toochaos4u

they were roughing her up a bit, pushing her around with their bodies. had she stumbled, she could've broken bones. when a woman becomes menopausal, her body doesn't uptake calcium as efficiently and as a result, many suffer with osteoporosis. one trip, one stumble, broken hip bones, which are excruciatingly painful and life threatening. i don't think they needed to be that close to her to begin with. it was clearly just a bad situation all around, but people need to realize, their wallets and protruding parts are no more important than personal convictions and vice-a-versa

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:06 AM by sos37

Originally posted by Elemensa
I'm upset to say for some reason i think the woman deserved some kind of malicious response (non violent obviously) for her inexcusable decisions. Hey, i hope this wares of tomorrow.

Inexcusable decisions??? Are you serious? Each and every person has a right to make their own decisions, despite whether or not you agree with them. What's inexcusable is that attitutde you just put into words.

You might as well opt for a nation of non-independent citizens who do not make their own decisions and can't think for themselves. That sounds like a hive-mind where the citizens are the drones and the government is the queen bee.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:13 AM by rickyrrr

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by SonicInfinity

That video made me LOL! But seriously...that old woman was provoking a large angry crowd full of gay men. While I don't agree with them pulling away things from her hands, it shouldn't be difficult to see how was simply there as a provocateur.

I guess there had to be one person defending the crowd. You must really see the little old lady as a huge threat if you're really defending their actions.

Little old ladies would hold crosses in front of alleged witches that were burning at the stake. Would you be outraged if somebody tried to stop a sweet little old lady from pushing her beliefs upon the life of another person if that person is an innocent victim who is been burned alive?

As much as I believe any form of violence is wrong against anybody, all the feeling sorry for her cause "awww it's a little old lady" is an unfair advantage for that woman, If it was a young white guy who happened to have his head clean shaved holding the cross would this video be posted here? Even as it would be no less wrong, the answer is "no" as this video has been put here because of the perceived effect it will have on the viewer. It is pointing the finger at those violent misguided individuals who assaulted her and then implying "Look that's what gays do!" by asking the supposedly innocent question "Is this going on in other places as well?" Which is in fact an accusatory question to an entire group of people.

What if I show a video of a republican screaming "kill that N" about obama, and then asked "Wow, is this what republicans are like?" it would be the same sort of strategy: Point the finger at one reckless individual and then plant the seed to hate the entire group.

-rrr

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:13 AM by undo

about 3 years ago, i was contemplating the outcome of advanced genetics. it dawned on me that there are so many men now who only respect and love other men, that women may be replaced. that bothers me immensely. i think what we are seeing is the changing of the guard. it's evident everywhere, if you just look. someone really big, really high up, possibly not even human, is gently nudging people in the direction of outright hatred of women and anything to do with women. that this confrontation could've been a man carrying a cross instead of an old lady, is an example. it could've been, but it wasn't. and that people defended their right to take her property from her hands, and stomp on it, a clear violation of her property and personal space, is another. the deaths of over 500 million female children and unborn females in china and the islamic disdain for anything to do with women in society...

guys, you do realize this planet is a 50-50 deal. you aren't here by yourselves?

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:19 AM by niteboy82

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Originally posted by sos37
Inexcusable decisions??? Are you serious? Each and every person has a right to make their own decisions, despite whether or not you agree with them. What's inexcusable is that attitutde you just put into words.

And as much as it sucks to say, with those decisions come their right to consequences. If she is so frail that she could so very easily be injured, then she probably wouldn't have put herself in that position. If she did, then she's either not very bright, or she is brave enough to take the chances necessary to be a frail person going into crowds of people.

If she was in WalMart on the day after Thanksgiving running around for sales and someone grabbed a $20 DVD player out of her hand and she fell, would we say that all Italian Americans are out of control because the person who grabbed the DVD player happened to be Italian?

This is really only a big deal to those with agendas who look out for any action that is perpetrated by a homosexual simply to keep remind people that the actions of a few should somehow reflect upon the whole.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:24 AM by undo

little old ladies can also be senile. the onus was on the HEALTHY ADULTS present, to make rational decisions. i mean, i certainly wouldn't take a big cross into the middle of a group of angry gay men and rouse the rabble as it were. this entire event is clearly demarcating what is a complete lack of compassion for people who disagree with you (both sides appear to be suffering with it but the little old lady was most likely a few cans short of a six pack. perhaps eccentric and maybe even alzheimers. not that protesting what you feel is right or wrong, is evidence of alzheimers, it just shows that she wasn't thinking clearly in that situation!)

i don't like the direction this is going in at all!

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:28 AM by Dbriefed

I see stupid people. Both in the video and in some posts.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:33 AM by Acidtastic

reply to post by undo

that's not patronising at all,making a massive leap to her being an old bible thumper,to being a senile old lady. She knew what she was doing there,and she knew the response,and she knew the outcome of that response. She doesn't seem to senile to me

And those defending free speach,or trying to label it as free speach,it was HATE SPEACH and that's all that twisted malliscious people like her have. They hide their hate behind a cross,and that's quite sad. They haven't even got the balls to say "I hate poofs and stuff" infact,I've only seen one poster on this thread,who admitted being slightly uncomfortable around gay people. And that's just fine,that poster doesn't then go on to say he/she hates them,or that they're an abomonation against god or wotnot. Then run and hide behind a book touted as the word of god,written by man.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:36 AM by Anonymous ATS

You say this is on par with black american rights movement? how many former black americans hve u met .... i have met plenty of former homo-sexuals.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:38 AM by undo

reply to post by Acidtastic

so how do you know she was working on all four burners? i remember caring for mom when she came down with alzheimers. that woman did somethings that reminded me a great deal of her behavior. one sign of alzheimers is they have no understanding of danger. they aren't with us in reality. they have one foot here on earth and the other, somewhere else, either in the past or in some alternate reality or afterlife scenario. seriously. it was just totally lacking in common sense for her to be there and for the men present, who are presumably healthy, to treat her as they did.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:39 AM by Acidtastic

reply to post by undo

I don't,how do you know she wasn't? You see what i did there? Took your strawman argument,and turned it back on you

Clever,weren't it

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:45 AM by undo

reply to post by Acidtastic

i don't think it's a strawman. these things have to be considered. she's old, and many old people are senile, have alzheimers or some other condition that effects their ability to make safe decisions for their continued well being. she didn't even consider that it might turn violent or that she might get knocked down and injured? the only time this kind of confrontation is undertaken by people who are functioning with all their faculties is when they have plenty of support. they don't just rush into a hostile audience by themselves, flailing a symbol around that's sure to cause even more hostility. what part of "that doesn't make any sense" don't you get?

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 10:46 AM by LSDeviant

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Acidtastic

so how do you know she was working on all four burners? i remember caring for mom when she came down with alzheimers. that woman did somethings that reminded me a great deal of her behavior. one sign of alzheimers is they have no understanding of danger. they aren't with us in reality. they have one foot here on earth and the other, somewhere else, either in the past or in some alternate reality or afterlife scenario. seriously. it was just totally lacking in common sense for her to be there and for the men present, who are presumably healthy, to treat her as they did.

Sorry to jump into the fray, but with all due respect, how do YOU know she was senile? I know lots, LOTS of bible thumpers, related to a few of them, and I personally don't think ANY of them have their heads on straight, but you, sir, are guilty of ageism.