Gay discrimination

[Turtle]

The underlying cancer reveals itself.

Yes it does, because that's what they are ultimately after. You will rarely find a gay protest without seeing protests against the Bible, because the Bible is the foundation for their want of the "M" word. The Bible makes is pretty clear what the dogma's stance is on homosexuality, and they don't like that one bit. They feel that all of their woes are rooted in the Bible. They're wrong, but that's what they believe. Did you know they even tried a legal attack on the Bible, under the discrimination laws, to get the Bible rewritten? What a hoot.

If you are somehow trying to imply that the underlying cancer is somehow with me, then you have a laughingly absurd misconception of my views on religion. Laughingly absurd.

 

[skyraider]

There are multiple examples of different species of animals engaging in homosexual behavior. Dolphins, giraffes, chimps, bonobos (look on youtube) are but a few of the many animals that frequently bat for both teams.

Wow, that really clears things up for the gay crowd, they much watch a lot of Youtube...

 

[Turtle]

Gay people will no longer be placated with a facsimile of equality. No should they, imo.

No matter what, gays will never be accepted and embraced by society as normal.

 

[cheri1122]

The flaw in your argument is none of that is correct. The hairdresser (Antonio Darden) is an independent contractor (and owner of Antonio’s Hair Studio), but has a "Walk-ins Welcome" on the door, which makes it open to the general public. The hairdresser is also one that had done the governor's hair before, more than once, and it was only when he found out about the governor's stance on gay marriage that he then refused to do her hair anymore until she changed her stance, and told the governor's representative that very thing. We don't have to speculate as to the reason, be it tastes in shoes or anything else, because he went onto SiriusXM's OutQ Radio Channel and articulated quite clearly the sole reason he would not do her hair is because she is not a supporter of gay marriage. He told KOB-TV that he told her aids that until she changes her stance on "equal marriage" that he will not cut her hair.

Furthermore,

"A lot of people think that the formula, when it’s made from a hair colorist, that it’s your right to have," he explained. “It isn’t. You came here for me to formulate and do your hair color. Normally I sell the formula to people if they want to go to a different salon that is cheaper. I normally give the formula to clients if they’re moving out of state because I care about my clients. But I would not give that formula to her."

You mean like the wedding photographer, who picks and chooses which weddings she wants to photograph? It's not like she takes walk-ins for wedding photography. She can pick and choose, except the law says she can't.

They weren't all that silent, and it's astoundingly hypocritical. If you don't think it's hypocritical on the face of it, read this article. If you don't then think it's hypocritical, read the comments below the article. It's hemorrhaging hypocrisy.

Antonio Darden, Susana Martinez's Former Hairstylist, On His Decision Not To Cut New Mexico Governor's Hair

You really think the Governor of NM was a 'walk in' client? You suppose you or I could get an appointment with this [or any] exclusive hairdresser, just for the asking?
I have a nephew who is an upscale hair colorist, [also gay as a bowl of daisies!] and he wouldn't do my hair, because I'm not 'cool' enough. And because he has a list of clients not associated with a salon, he can pick & choose. His mother is lucky that he does hers, lol, and I'm jealous - but that's his right.
PS The wedding photographer is open to the 'general public' - he/she does not develop and maintain an exclusive client list, because weddings aren't as regularly scheduled as haircuts. [Except in Hollywood]

 

[cheri1122]

No matter what, gays will never be accepted and embraced by society as normal.

Neither are blacks. Normal, maybe, but accepted and embraced? Not so far, they're not. None of the minority groups are, including women, who aren't a minority, but get treated as 'less than equal' all the time.
That it happens doesn't make it right.
We'll never eliminate crime, should we stop trying?

 

[greasytshirt]

If you are somehow trying to imply that the underlying cancer is somehow with me, then you have a laughingly absurd misconception of my views on religion. Laughingly absurd.

No, I'm not trying to lay any blame on you at all.

 

[greasytshirt]

Wow, that really clears things up for the gay crowd, they much watch a lot of Youtube...

Isn't it cool that a 10 minute youtube ride has countless examples of proof that homosexuality is a common behavior in nature? And to think that humans are the only species that do it. Haha.

 

[greasytshirt]

Sorry. Not believable. Pragmatic means being able to see both side of the issue, and an extreme pragmatic can actually understand both sides of the issue. You can't even understand why "marriage" isn't "just a word." You think redefining marriage to mean the complete opposite of what it was invented for, and of what it has been used for for nearly 4000 years, is "just slightly." Your entire argument in this thread has been one-sided with no acceptance of the other side of the issue. That's why you're not pragmatic at all. Not even close.

I'm extremely pragmatic. I want to cut through all the bull, and grant equality for everyone. One word gets modified. Some people get miffed. Problem solved.




You can tell I'd go real far in politics. :lol:

 

[greasytshirt]

Ok, enough fun for me. I'm gonna go back over to truck talk.

 

[LDB]

If the fight were to get civil unions and equal rights in health care decisions etc. for both partners the same as a married couple (a couple, man and woman, not a pair, two men or two women) they would probably find far more support for their cause and be able to achieve that goal nationwide over a relatively small amount of time.

The argument about just a word won't stand. It may get regular argumentation and support from some but criminal aliens are no less criminal just because some choose to call them undocumented workers nor will calling it affirmative action ever make it anything but discrimination and marriage is between couples not pairs.

 

[Turtle]

You really think the Governor of NM was a 'walk in' client?

I don't know if she was a 'walk in' client, but "Walk-ins Welcome" means that, appointment or not, you're open to the public.

You suppose you or I could get an appointment with this [or any] exclusive hairdresser, just for the asking?

I dunno, but we'll never get one without asking.

PS The wedding photographer is open to the 'general public' - he/she does not develop and maintain an exclusive client list, because weddings aren't as regularly scheduled as haircuts. [Except in Hollywood]

An exclusive client list isn't the litmus test for open to the public, unless contracts are signed making them exclusive clients, forbidding them from going elsewhere. Not being open to the general public is the litmus test. Wedding photography is contract work, where contracts are signed to do the wedding.

I do know that since the incident with the governor, Antonio no longer accepts walk-ins, and is by-appointment only. But more than that, you must fill out an application to become a client now (not so 2 years ago), and if he deems you worthy he'll take you on. His shop is now run out of a small building behind his residence. Somebody obviously pointed out to him the problems of discriminating against someone because of their beliefs when you're open to the public, so he's not open to the public anymore.

 

[Turtle]

Neither are blacks. Normal, maybe, but accepted and embraced? Not so far, they're not. None of the minority groups are, including women, who aren't a minority, but get treated as 'less than equal' all the time.
That it happens doesn't make it right.
We'll never eliminate crime, should we stop trying?

Wow. Five tangents. That's a new record.

OK, what did I say? I said gays will never be accepted and embraced by society as normal. You say neither are blacks, but say they are accepted as normal, maybe, but not accepted and embraced? What the heck are you talking about? Blacks are indeed accepted and embraced as normal. Nobody thinks of blacks as an abnormal aberration of nature. Sheesh.

 

[RLENT]

If the fight were to get civil unions and equal rights in health care decisions etc. for both partners the same as a married couple (a couple, man and woman, not a pair, two men or two women) they would probably find far more support for their cause and be able to achieve that goal nationwide over a relatively small amount of time.

Oh yeah ... I can just see the religious fundies manning the ramparts on that ...

The argument about just a word won't stand. It may get regular argumentation and support from some but criminal aliens are no less criminal just because some choose to call them undocumented workers nor will calling it affirmative action ever make it anything but discrimination and marriage is between couples not pairs.

Well, actually I think the argument about a state-sanctioned institution will stand ... and no amount of cute rhetoric like the above will serve as an effective weapon against it.

Scope out the following two decisions if you want to see where this is ultimately headed:

United States v. Windsor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hollingsworth v. Perry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The best thing those in favor of marriage strictly between a man and woman could have done would have been to get the government out of the business of marriage (which is a religious sacrament) ... civil unions for all by the state, and marriage for those who wanted it by the church ...

But the theocratically inclined took the exact opposite tack ... and will now be hoisted by their own petards ...

Fitting justice perhaps ...

 

[Turtle]

I'm extremely pragmatic. I want to cut through all the bull, and grant equality for everyone. One word gets modified. Some people get miffed. Problem solved.

That's the opposite of pragmatic. You just took sides with your solution. Being pragmatic is stressing practical consequences as constituting the essential criterion in determining meaning, truth, or value. The pragmatic solution would be an action dictated by consideration of the immediate practical consequences rather than by theory (they want it really, really badly) or dogma (burn in Hell). Your solution results in the immediate practical consequences of marginalizing tradition and meaning, which is irrational and unreasonable (both of which are antonyms of pragmatic, actually).

 

[Maverick]

Turtle;674325]That's the opposite of pragmatic. You just took sides with your solution. Being pragmatic is stressing practical consequences as constituting the essential criterion in determining meaning, truth, or value. The pragmatic solution would be an action dictated by consideration of the immediate practical consequences rather than by theory (they want it really, really badly) or dogma (burn in Hell). Your solution results in the immediate practical consequences of marginalizing tradition and meaning, which is irrational and unreasonable (both of which are antonyms of pragmatic, actually).

Good grief.

Turtle, have you ever given thought to you're own jeppity show?

 

[asjssl]

So you believe that fighting for the sake of fighting is a great way to help the country? Instead of just looking at something and saying I get what I want and the other people get to protect what they want so we both win is a bad thing in your mind?

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app

No....my point is no matter what the gay community does ..will tick of a lot of people just that they exist and breath PO a lot of people......lot of homophobia out there...so do what is right...fight for your cause if people get mad oooo weeeelll ...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using EO Forums mobile app

 

[asjssl]

No....my point is no matter what the gay community does ..will tick of a lot of people just that they exist and breath PO a lot of people......lot of homophobia out there...so do what is right...fight for your cause if people get mad oooo weeeelll ...
Why should they have to settle for anything less than marriage...so your feelings Dont get hurt...AGAIN..they are humans...tax payers....American Citizens....just as much right as you and I...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using EO Forums mobile app

Sent from my DROID RAZR using EO Forums mobile app

 

[davekc]

The best thing those in favor of marriage strictly between a man and woman could have done would have been to get the government out of the business of marriage (which is a religious sacrament) ... civil unions for all by the state, and marriage for those who wanted it by the church ....

Government out of marriage would be my vote. Then everyone is happy. Well...except gays that want marriage and can only achieve it in selected approving churches. That might be a problem for the ones that want marriage without a religious vehicle. Majority of gays aren't religious.
What is interesting and they never answer it is why they want that marriage which as mentioned is a religious sacrament. Most aren't religious so it is another agenda beyond just equal rights.
For someone who could care less either way, it does appear it is basically just a "I want it because you religious folks don't like it".
When they turn away equal rights for all and they aren't religious to begin with, well, that is what you are left with. Then they wonder why they aren't welcomed with open arms?

 

[Ragman]

. . . Then they wonder why they aren't welcomed with open arms?

They basically aren't welcome with open arms because we, as Americans, don't like anybody that is different. IMO of course.

 

[davekc]

To some degree you are correct and that will never change just because of the numbers. A majority of anything isn't going to adopt the agenda with open arms of less than two percent of the population that is adversarial.
How Many People are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender? | Williams Institute

Adversarial being the key word. There is a similar comparison with say the disabled. They are certainly welcomed by the majority even though they are a clear minority. The difference of course, is they are not combative with a alternative agenda.