NationStates Jolt Archive

The GBLT community does not want to feel threatened or ashamed of who they are, which is part of the press of the 'normal' society that they too have to live in everyday.

Hmm. Now. Which of those two looks like the logic of a 10 year old?

Do you live in the postmodern world?

Flaws

1) This is proberbly the first (and only) straight pride march there has ever been (Someone should research that) and given the massively larger number of gay pride marches, the accusaition "We are in charge" seems a little understated

2) You do not need to be a historicaly persecuted group to be allowed to march in pride. And if you do, I suppose you support Neo Nazi parades (the Second World War was a pretty big of historical persecution of Nazis)

3) Do you have any evidence that the straight pride march is anything other than a celebration of hetrosexuality?


1) The Straight Pride march is a recent development, given that simply lynching gays will not be overlooked like they may have been in the last two centuries. Note that there has never been any White Pride march by mainstream non-KKK/NeoNazi crowd.

2) That is a disingenuous statement. The Nazis were the prime global European power during the early 20th Century and they were responsible for a systematic effort to place a religious/ethnic group into extinction. Freedom of Speech. And I would like any articles which cite NeoNazis being persecuted.

3) Given that the idea was conceived by a Republican Club, and the Party's ideology in recent times has included denouncing homosexuality as an abomination of evil, it brings the notion of altruistic heterosexual pride to question.

Do you live in the postmodern world?
Where everything is self-referential? I don't see how postmodernism is being applied here.

2) That is a disingenuous statement. The Nazis were the prime global European power during the early 20th Century and they were responsible for a systematic effort to place a religious/ethnic group into extinction. Freedom of Speech. And I would like any articles which cite NeoNazis being persecuted.


My agruement is that people on here seem to be of the opinion that you need to be a historicaly persecuted group in order to have a pride march. I would say the Nazi's were very persecuted during WW2 and hence you should have no problems with them having pride marches.

My agruement is that people on here seem to be of the opinion that you need to be a historicaly persecuted group in order to have a pride march. I would say the Nazi's were very persecuted during WW2 and hence you should have no problems with them having pride marches.
Not comparatively relivant. Nazi dogma is not simply pride in itself but also the abolition of other groups. And they are only 'oppressed' in that they where defeated in a war they started. There are enough mitigating differences that make the comparison invalid.

Where everything is self-referential? I don't see how postmodernism is being applied here.

In the postmodern world (At least in Britian) anything less than a positive endorcement of a homosexual lifestyle is considerd rampenet homophobia. So I dont see how your statement

The GBLT community does not want to feel threatened or ashamed of who they are, which is part of the press of the 'normal' society that they too have to live in everyday.

is true. Homosexuals are not threatend by society any longer. If anything they are defended. Postmodernism guarantees that every group is portrayed as equals and that minority groups need more protection because they are smaller. However egalitarian logic refutes that, saying that all groups should revieve the same level of social "protection". Your statement is flawed, homosexuals are no longer persecuted, threatened or any of the other epitetes you applied.

Ok I will give a reason. Normallity is just as valid as abnormality, the only diffrence is one gets much less attention because its much rarer. This is a celebration of normality, which does not recieve enough special attention as abnormabity.
You contradicted yourself. You said abnormality doesn't receive as much attention as normality, and then said normality doesn't receive as much attention as abnormality.

In the postmodern world (At least in Britian) anything less than a positive endorcement of a homosexual lifestyle is considerd rampenet homophobia. So I dont see how your statement



is true. Homosexuals are not threatend by society any longer. If anything they are defended. Postmodernism guarantees that every group is portrayed as equals and that minority groups need more protection because they are smaller. However egalitarian logic refutes that, saying that all groups should revieve the same level of social "protection". Your statement is flawed, homosexuals are no longer persecuted, threatened or any of the other epitetes you applied.
Ohhh. You live in lala land with the fairies and the unicorns with the giant chocolate waterfall.

So you maybe haven't gotten the news that there are laws being argued that specificly limit the rights of homosexuals, or that being against homosexuality has been coded as 'morals,' or that anti-homosexual rhetoric is uttered by congressmen on the floor, or that people are still being beaten or killed for being homosexual, or that last week PBS was forced to pull a piece off the air that had homosexuals in a positive light.

What you're talking about isn't post-modernism (and somewhere right now I know a literature professor is having uncontrollable twitches), it's pure fantasy.

You contradicted yourself. You said abnormality doesn't receive as much attention as normality, and then said normality doesn't receive as much attention as abnormality.

Ok a typo, but you see what I am getting at.

You contradicted yourself. You said abnormality doesn't receive as much attention as normality, and then said normality doesn't receive as much attention as abnormality.

Why is it so stupid to be proud of who you are? You're being a little unfair here in suggesting that any heterosexual parade, or pride directed towards heterosexuals is simply a way to thumb your nose at the gay community. I'm just proud of who I am. Would you rather me be ashamed of my heterosexuality? Let us celebrate. How does it affect you or others?

Ohhh. You live in lala land with the fairies and the unicorns with the giant chocolate waterfall.

So you maybe haven't gotten the news that there are laws being argued that specificly limit the rights of homosexuals, or that being against homosexuality has been coded as 'morals,' or that anti-homosexual rhetoric is uttered by congressmen on the floor, or that people are still being beaten or killed for being homosexual, or that last week PBS was forced to pull a piece off the air that had homosexuals in a positive light.

What you're talking about isn't post-modernism (and somewhere right now I know a literature professor is having uncontrollable twitches), it's pure fantasy.

And people are still attacked for being black, hispanic etc but it is far better now than it ever was. There are far fewer race related incidnedts now, and the same is true of homosexual related attacks.

Why is it so stupid to be proud of who you are? You're being a little unfair here in suggesting that any heterosexual parade, or pride directed towards heterosexuals is simply a way to thumb your nose at the gay community. I'm just proud of who I am. Would you rather me be ashamed of my heterosexuality? Let us celebrate. How does it affect you or others?
Examine again the complex reasons behind the gay pride parade, not the one you constructed for yourself, but the actual reasons. Now, come up with comparative reasons for having a straight pride parade.

Ok a typo, but you see what I am getting at.
Its not a typo, heterosexuality does receive more attention the homosexuality and rightfully so. Why would they need a parade then?

And people are still attacked for being black, hispanic etc but it is far better now than it ever was. There are far fewer race related incidnedts now, and the same is true of homosexual related attacks.
One out of three is 'a little better.' Great. Works done, the world is a caring place. We can all go home in harmony.

Or wait. Maybe there is still work to be done.

Examine again the complex reasons behind the gay pride parade, not the one you constructed for yourself, but the actual reasons. Now, come up with comparative reasons for having a straight pride parade.

Try reading my post. I've given reasons for giving a straight pride parade. You're just ignoring them. Because I'm proud of my heterosexuality. I'm proud of who I am and I'd like to celebrate it. What's the big deal about that?

And people are still attacked for being black, hispanic etc but it is far better now than it ever was. There are far fewer race related incidnedts now, and the same is true of homosexual related attacks.
yet how many people are calling for the banning of books with characters of a different race or written by such?
and how many tv stations are being lambasted for airing a show with brief appearances of different race characters?

the reaction to homosexuality may be less violent but no better at all

Try reading my post. I've given reasons for giving a straight pride parade. You're just ignoring them. Because I'm proud of my heterosexuality. I'm proud of who I am and I'd like to celebrate it. What's the big deal about that?
No friend, you are not reading. Gay pride parades are far more complex than that. As a member of the dominant, even presumed default group, your day to day life is a celebration of who you are. Nothing is preventing you from spontanious celebrations. No one is going to start yelling "Breeder" and chasing you down the street.

So your 'pride' is deficient, lacking the context we have put forth with the Gay parades. So again, in the same complexity and without the foot stamping "but I want a parade, too..." give me a reason for the parade.

However, nowhere is it forbidden to offend anyone who is white, male, and heterosexual (all at the same time). That person is ALWAYS fair game to be the butt of jokes, the focus of what's wrong, and that person is FORBIDDEN to argue back, talk back, or even offer their opinion on their own lifestyle (much less criticize anyone else's).

We had to attend sensitivity training. Mandatory. A lot of corporations do this now to cover their butts from lawsuits.

In order to be sensitive to a homosexual, we must allow them to engage in talk that if a male heterosexual said to a female hetero, would get you fired.

That is shocking. Please be assured that not all gay rights activists support such horrible double standards. Most of us are genuinely in favour of equality.

No friend, you are not reading.

Okay. That's the response I usually give to people who don't like to listen.

Gay pride parades are far more complex than that.

No, they're not. You're assigning WAY too much meaning to them.

As a member of the dominant, even presumed default group, your day to day life is a celebration of who you are. Nothing is preventing you from spontanious celebrations. No one is going to start yelling "Breeder" and chasing you down the street.

Straight parades aren't just about celebration of who one is. They're also celebrations of expression. Some heterosexuals, like myself, would like to express our heterosexuality to the public. Is that so wrong?

So your 'pride' is deficient, lacking the context we have put forth with the Gay parades.

Oh, so my pride isn't as good as a homosexual's now. Your arguments are sounding more and more biased every time I hear them. You sure YOU'RE not a homosexual?

So again, in the same complexity and without the foot stamping "but I want a parade, too..." give me a reason for the parade.

I did. You just don't want to acknowledge them as credible because you can't except the fact some people like to celebrate just for the sake of celebration. I guess parties are wrong too.

Originally Posted by Cannot think of a name
Ohhh. You live in lala land with the fairies and the unicorns with the giant chocolate waterfall.

So you maybe haven't gotten the news that there are laws being argued that specificly limit the rights of homosexuals, or that being against homosexuality has been coded as 'morals,' or that anti-homosexual rhetoric is uttered by congressmen on the floor, or that people are still being beaten or killed for being homosexual, or that last week PBS was forced to pull a piece off the air that had homosexuals in a positive light.
And a school text featuring a girl with "two mummies" has caused uproar over supposedly promoting "abnormal" families and a homosexual lifestyle. UGH. It's just a kid's book where an incidental part of the background are a girl's same-sex parents... People have such small minds. I'm just trying to prove that homosexuality is NOT fully accepted by society here...


What you're talking about isn't post-modernism (and somewhere right now I know a literature professor is having uncontrollable twitches), it's pure fantasy. Po-Mo is just a convenient term for Neo to slam anything he doesn't like about society. ;)


And the straights can go ahead with their silly parade, it's just pointless reactionariness anyway.

Okay. That's the response I usually give to people who don't like to listen.
Dead end.



No, they're not. You're assigning WAY too much meaning to them.
They're not? So, Stonewall (http://www.socialistalternative.com/literature/stonewall.html) never happened? Laramie? (http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Stonewall/2878/)
There isn't an amendment to limit homosexual rights being argued? There aren't people, just two days ago (http://www.profindpages.com/news/2005/01/29/MN718.htm) up in arms about the mere portrayal of homosexuality? Maybe you are not trying hard enough.

Of course I can understand why. If you acknowledged that there is an actual complexity to the Gay Pride parades, your whole indignation would fall to pieces...



Straight parades aren't just about celebration of who one is. They're also celebrations of expression. Some heterosexuals, like myself, would like to express our heterosexuality to the public. Is that so wrong?
Since society by default assumes you are heterosexual, even if you are not, in what way are you demonstrating, and what? "You're right, we're straight?" What does this accomplish that walking down the street does not? What are you going to express? Are you going to walk down the street and whistle at hot chicks?



Oh, so my pride isn't as good as a homosexual's now. Your arguments are sounding more and more biased every time I hear them. You sure YOU'RE not a homosexual?
RIF, champ. Look, I'm proud of my calves, but they don't get a parade. You need more. Like we've provided for the Gay Pride parades.



I did. You just don't want to acknowledge them as credible because you can't except the fact some people like to celebrate just for the sake of celebration. I guess parties are wrong too.
Never said parties where wrong, and you want to celebrate to celebrate, knock yourself out. Not what you where saying though, was it?

Hmm. I believe I did. I think my response was:



And beat them. And limit there rights. Not 100 years ago. Yesterday. Today.


When we reach a point where people really don't care, instead of paying it lip service, maybe we can have that.


RIF. No one is saying that they can't have thier parade. Your repeated return to this notion despite different people have told you this multiple times indicates that you don't even know what you are arguing. Focus man, focus.

RIF


RIF, again. No one is saying they can't.


So in this strawman world where you are arguing against a fictional entity that wants to ban the parade, you are right-they should be able to have the parade. But you see, this is how free speech works. You are free to say what ever you want and we are free to examine that speech and call you on your assumptions. It doesn't mean we don't think you should have the right to say it, it means we think you're a dink. Don't want people to think that of you? Too bad.

First of all, the personal attacks on me are childish, irresponsible, and take away from your arguement. Congrats on calling me a dink. Yeah, real mature.

The issue at hand was the direct criticism of the Oklahoma Republicans. As such, the arguement was that it was discriminatory. As such, I made the statement that they have the right to do as they please, and that it was no different than homosexuals parading around their beliefs. And, those that called the hetero parade "homo bashing" were themselves hypocrites.

You assume that my arguement was based solely on the law, in which case you are in error. If you want people to be equal, then do not criticize a group for partaking in an endevour, of which another group has, to express themselves.

The law is the law, and yes, you pointed out that the First Ammendment guarantees it by the government (good job on that btw). And legally it has been followed. However, if we really want equality it must start here, and now, socially.

If you want to truly treat people as they are equal, then judge both groups with an objective eye. It's amazing that people support a gay parade while condoning one that, on its merits, is celebrating heterosexuality. That, my friends, is not equal treatment. This equal treatment is not based on law, but rather a social code.

In other words: Want to be equal? Then let's start acting like we are! Lose these idiotic parades!

As far as you saying what you did, I really don't care. My focus was not on what you in particular were saying. I'm sorry if you thought that I was referring to you or anything you presented.

My next point: I really don't care what you think of me. I've been labeled a bigot, racist, and other terms. If you happen to share that belief then so be it. I do not care if a person is gay or not, unless they parade it around. You assume that I truly do not believe it. In other words, you make a blant claim of which you cannot corroborate. Congrats.

I just find it funny that people praise homosexual groups for parading around and taking pride in themselves, but when a heterosexual group wants to do the same they're the first to criticize.

If we were all interested in true equality, then a parade on either side wouldn't be necessary. And that, my friends, is the issue as I see it. I know I've repeated myself over and over again, but for some people the first few hundred times it doesn't stick...

Don't like it? Then don't read it.

Don't like it? Then don't read it.
How would I know if I like it until I've already read it?

How would I know if I like it until I've already read it?

Damn it! Beat me to it! ;)

Dead end.




They're not? So, Stonewall (http://www.socialistalternative.com/literature/stonewall.html) never happened? Laramie? (http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Stonewall/2878/)
There isn't an amendment to limit homosexual rights being argued? There aren't people, just two days ago (http://www.profindpages.com/news/2005/01/29/MN718.htm) up in arms about the mere portrayal of homosexuality? Maybe you are not trying hard enough.

Of course I can understand why. If you acknowledged that there is an actual complexity to the Gay Pride parades, your whole indignation would fall to pieces...




Since society by default assumes you are heterosexual, even if you are not, in what way are you demonstrating, and what? "You're right, we're straight?" What does this accomplish that walking down the street does not? What are you going to express? Are you going to walk down the street and whistle at hot chicks?




RIF, champ. Look, I'm proud of my calves, but they don't get a parade. You need more. Like we've provided for the Gay Pride parades.




Never said parties where wrong, and you want to celebrate to celebrate, knock yourself out. Not what you where saying though, was it?

Seriously, the whole "RIF" BS that you keep touting is getting old. People object to being told that they're illiterate. And, of course, it shows that you have no respect for anybody.

Perhaps you should try reading stuff in context. It actually might help you better understand our positions on these matters. But then again, you're so rooted in political correctness that you cannot objectively analyze our point of view, so I doubt it'll do much good.

Really, this has turned into a pointless arguement because of people not willing to examine the other's side.

Touche. Another thread bites the dust.

Ohhh. You live in lala land with the fairies and the unicorns with the giant chocolate waterfall.

So you maybe haven't gotten the news that there are laws being argued that specificly limit the rights of homosexuals, or that being against homosexuality has been coded as 'morals,' or that anti-homosexual rhetoric is uttered by congressmen on the floor, or that people are still being beaten or killed for being homosexual, or that last week PBS was forced to pull a piece off the air that had homosexuals in a positive light.

What you're talking about isn't post-modernism (and somewhere right now I know a literature professor is having uncontrollable twitches), it's pure fantasy.

Yet another great instance of insulting somebody else.

Anybody up to finding more of "Cannot think of a name"'s Easter Eggs in this thread?

First one to 10. Ready, set, go!

Damn it! Beat me to it! ;)

Whoa, I am SOOOOO happy that somebody actually took the time to see what in the hell I was saying!

First of all, the personal attacks on me are childish, irresponsible, and take away from your arguement. Congrats on calling me a dink. Yeah, real mature.

The issue at hand was the direct criticism of the Oklahoma Republicans. As such, the arguement was that it was discriminatory. As such, I made the statement that they have the right to do as they please, and that it was no different than homosexuals parading around their beliefs. And, those that called the hetero parade "homo bashing" were themselves hypocrites.

You assume that my arguement was based solely on the law, in which case you are in error. If you want people to be equal, then do not criticize a group for partaking in an endevour, of which another group has, to express themselves.

The law is the law, and yes, you pointed out that the First Ammendment guarantees it by the government (good job on that btw). And legally it has been followed. However, if we really want equality it must start here, and now, socially.

If you want to truly treat people as they are equal, then judge both groups with an objective eye. It's amazing that people support a gay parade while condoning one that, on its merits, is celebrating heterosexuality. That, my friends, is not equal treatment. This equal treatment is not based on law, but rather a social code.

In other words: Want to be equal? Then let's start acting like we are! Lose these idiotic parades!

As far as you saying what you did, I really don't care. My focus was not on what you in particular were saying. I'm sorry if you thought that I was referring to you or anything you presented.

My next point: I really don't care what you think of me. I've been labeled a bigot, racist, and other terms. If you happen to share that belief then so be it. I do not care if a person is gay or not, unless they parade it around. You assume that I truly do not believe it. In other words, you make a blant claim of which you cannot corroborate. Congrats.

I just find it funny that people praise homosexual groups for parading around and taking pride in themselves, but when a heterosexual group wants to do the same they're the first to criticize.

If we were all interested in true equality, then a parade on either side wouldn't be necessary. And that, my friends, is the issue as I see it. I know I've repeated myself over and over again, but for some people the first few hundred times it doesn't stick...

Don't like it? Then don't read it.
So equality is "If they get a lollipop, I get a lollipop?" Well, the straight community owes the gay community a whole lot of lollipops. And they'll continue to hold parades until they get them.

And freedom of speech means agreeing with everything everyone says, without examination? That's a craptastic world.

We've laid out what is happening to the GBLT community this very day. It's why the parades exist. The best you can come up with is, 'if they get a parade, I want one too or no one gets one.'

Sorry, that is ill-concieved and lacks understanding of the issue. It means the person has made a rash reaction to something that s/he has a limited or flawed understanding of. This means I'm going to have a lesser regard for it, and the person for having not thought it through. There is a shorter way of saying that, but I understand you're sensitive.

Since you could do more for your concerns for equality by fighting for the rights of homosexuals, and thus removing the underlining motivations and need for the parade in the first place. Or you can throw an ill-concieved tantrum about how you think the world aught to be.

Seriously, the whole "RIF" BS that you keep touting is getting old. People object to being told that they're illiterate. And, of course, it shows that you have no respect for anybody.

Perhaps you should try reading stuff in context. It actually might help you better understand our positions on these matters. But then again, you're so rooted in political correctness that you cannot objectively analyze our point of view, so I doubt it'll do much good.

Really, this has turned into a pointless arguement because of people not willing to examine the other's side.

Touche. Another thread bites the dust.
Wow. Just wow.

I'd ask you to lay out the context I seem to be missing, but I have to go do things.

Whoa, I am SOOOOO happy that somebody actually took the time to see what in the hell I was saying!

Just commenting on the error in logic.

To get to the last line, I had to read the rest. If I didn't like what you said then it was too late not to read it.

Damn san-fransisco is hard to walk around when its raining...

(I hope I dont have to explain that)

Actually, I have to admit I don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Personally I think a heterosexual parade is a great idea. I know I'm very proud to be heterosexual, just like homosexuals are proud of THEIR sexual preference. I think I actually might fly to Oklahoma to participate.

Wow, you just replied without having read a single post in this thread, didn't you?

Meanwhile, since you say you are proud of your sexuality - something you have no control over and thus couldn't have caused in any way, are you also proud of the following?:

-The fact that the sun rises.
-The fact that you have fingers.
-The fact that you have hormones.
-The fact that there is hemoglobin in your erythrocytes.
-The fact that your pupils shrink when I shine a bright light in them.
-The fact that the tide rises and falls.

Are you going to hold marches for the things listed above?

Actually, I have to admit I don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Sounds like a snide remark about San Francisco's gay community using the song "It's Raining Men."

why is it only heterosexual male caucasians can be discriminatory?

why is it only heterosexual male caucasians can be discriminatory?
Are you really, honestly, hurt that the gays and lesbians get a parade and you don't? Didn't your parents teach you that just because Johnny gets something that doesn't take anything away from you?

Actually there is already a "straight" pride parade. It happens every year in NYC on March 17. Gay people usually protest it though. Still the new anti hate crime laws will put a stop to that.

Actually there is already a "straight" pride parade. It happens every year in NYC on March 17. Gay people usually protest it though. Still the new anti hate crime laws will put a stop to that.

Those poor oppressed heterosexuals. :D

Actually, I have to admit I don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Slipery slope?

And freedom of speech means agreeing with everything everyone says, without examination? That's a craptastic world.
.

He means if you are going to support gay pride marches, you cant not support straight pride marches. He's not saying you have to agree with everyone else, but if you support one group performing an action, you have no reason to not support another group performing the same action. The only diffrence here is that the groups are diffrent. You can't say "I support Gay pride marches" and "I dont support straight pride marches" because both groups are doing the same thing, just diffrent emphesises.

He means if you are going to support gay pride marches, you cant not support straight pride marches. He's not saying you have to agree with everyone else, but if you support one group performing an action, you have no reason to not support another group performing the same action. The only diffrence here is that the groups are diffrent. You can't say "I support Gay pride marches" and "I dont support straight pride marches" because both groups are doing the same thing, just diffrent emphesises.
Or, you know, I could examine the motivations, conditions, goals and outcomes of each on thier own merit and judge that way.

Crazy, I know...

Or, you know, I could examine the motivations, conditions, goals and outcomes of each on thier own merit and judge that way.

Crazy, I know...
jsut give it up, ive been saying the damn thing since PAGE ONE and they still havnt taken a fucknig clue and sit around repeating their shit without even considering any other factors

jsut give it up, ive been saying the damn thing since PAGE ONE and they still havnt taken a fucknig clue and sit around repeating their shit without even considering any other factors
Yeah, I know. But it kills time.

they are celebrating the fact they arnt gay
Hell, I would be too.

Homosexuals should be looking for the cure, not reveling in their mental illness.

Hell, I would be too.

Homosexuals should be looking for the cure, not reveling in their mental illness.
racist/sexist/etc idiots should be deported to siberia

Hell, I would be too.

Homosexuals should be looking for the cure, not reveling in their mental illness.

Duh,,, I thought it was a choice. :confused:

racist/sexist/etc idiots should be deported to siberia
There was nothing racist or sexist about my statement.

There was nothing racist or sexist about my statement.
i said etc to apply to idiots who are prejudicded against other things for nonexistant reasons

There was nothing racist or sexist about my statement.


het·er·o·sex·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ht-r-skszm)
n.
Discrimination or prejudice against lesbians or gay men by heterosexual people.

please note the root of this word, you big nathty thekthitht. :(

het·er·o·sex·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ht-r-skszm)
n.
Discrimination or prejudice against lesbians or gay men by heterosexual people.

please note the root of this word, you big nathty thekthitht. :(
I have no more prejudice against homosexuals than I do against pedophiles. Both are in need of serious mental help.

I have no more prejudice against homosexuals than I do against pedophiles. Both are in need of serious mental help.

Oh so you're a psychiatrist now... :rolleyes:

I have no more prejudice against homosexuals than I do against pedophiles. Both are in need of serious mental help.
except for the fact that we have indications that homosexual tendencies are genetic
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/scotts/ftp/bulgarians/nih-nyt.html

except for the fact that we have indications that homosexual tendencies are genetic
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/scotts/ftp/bulgarians/nih-nyt.html

So? If people have a genetic tendency to criminality, does that excuse their criminality?

I'm not defending homophobia btw, bigotry sucks. But so does weak argument.

So? If people have a genetic tendency to criminality, does that excuse their criminality?

I'm not defending homophobia btw, bigotry sucks. But so does weak argument.
except criminality you know hurts other people... and the genes that would influence it are rarer.

but im pretty sure my argument worked fine against his: relating homosexuality and pedophilia.


and if there is a homosexual gene it defeats his argument entirely, that they are in need of serious mental help, well if a criminal has a very rare gene that screws with his brain chemistry, what amount of rehabilitation will help him? none

thats differnet than this, you arnt reading between the lines. they are NOT celebrating their heterosexuality, they are celebrating the fact they arnt gay and are doing it SOLELY to mock homosexuals


:headbang: rubbish, no mocking is happening. it may well be that they are doing it to prove a point, but their point is a good one. If there can be a gay pride march why not a straight one? Paranoia is an ugly thing

Sounds like a snide remark about San Francisco's gay community using the song "It's Raining Men."

Makes sense, if it were an isolated comment. Of course, I don't have a clue what it's talking about in reference to my post. Ah well.

Slipery slope?

Not in the least. It is *exactly* the same. Someone taking pride in their sexuality is *exactly* like taking pride in menstruation, hormones, or having toenails.

He means if you are going to support gay pride marches, you cant not support straight pride marches. He's not saying you have to agree with everyone else, but if you support one group performing an action, you have no reason to not support another group performing the same action. The only diffrence here is that the groups are diffrent. You can't say "I support Gay pride marches" and "I dont support straight pride marches" because both groups are doing the same thing, just diffrent emphesises.

Do you not understand the difference between "tolerate" and "support"? How about "allow" and "support"? You are aware that these are different words?

Not in the least. It is *exactly* the same. Someone taking pride in their sexuality is *exactly* like taking pride in menstruation, hormones, or having toenails.
If so that seems to lead your point that having pride in such things is silly

So if they are exactly the same is not a gay pride parade silly as well as a strait one? (just trying to follow the logic … so much arguing I forgotten your stance on the subject … hell I have forgotten mine by now lol)

If so that seems to lead your point that having pride in such things is silly

So if they are exactly the same is not a gay pride parade silly as well as a strait one? (just trying to follow the logic … so much arguing I forgotten your stance on the subject … hell I have forgotten mine by now lol)

Maybe it's just my view... but the whole point of 'gay pride' marches is a form of protest.... at being considered and treated, as second class citizens.

The 'pride' is extracted from refuting that 'second class' status.

Similarly... 'black power' was about showing that blacks were not happy to sit under the oppression of whites.

The reason a 'straight pride' march is silly - is because it is protesting something ridiculous.... 'straights' are not being oppressed by a 'gay' majority, or a 'gay' establishment.

That's how I see it, anyway.

Maybe it's just my view... but the whole point of 'gay pride' marches is a form of protest.... at being considered and treated, as second class citizens.

The 'pride' is extracted from refuting that 'second class' status.

Similarly... 'black power' was about showing that blacks were not happy to sit under the oppression of whites.

The reason a 'straight pride' march is silly - is because it is protesting something ridiculous.... 'straights' are not being oppressed by a 'gay' majority, or a 'gay' establishment.

That's how I see it, anyway.
I happen to think it is silly too but my libertarian streak takes hold and I just got to ask myself … ehhh why not lol

Do you not understand the difference between "tolerate" and "support"? How about "allow" and "support"? You are aware that these are different words?

I understand. Hence why I am using those diffrent words. Your side of the debate are quite happy to admit that Straight pride parades are allowed but you will not support them because you think they are stupid. I am saying that if you support gay pride there is no reason to not support straight pride.

If so that seems to lead your point that having pride in such things is silly

So if they are exactly the same is not a gay pride parade silly as well as a strait one? (just trying to follow the logic … so much arguing I forgotten your stance on the subject … hell I have forgotten mine by now lol)

No, because a gay pride parade is not about having pride in your sexuality - it is about *not* being ashamed of it, as others would have you belive.

If I had been told from birth that I should be ashamed of having toenails, and then I realized that I shouldn't be - then I would want to spread that message.

I understand. Hence why I am using those diffrent words. Your side of the debate are quite happy to admit that Straight pride parades are allowed but you will not support them because you think they are stupid. I am saying that if you support gay pride there is no reason to not support straight pride.

And you have been refuted about 100 times with the fact that the purpose of the two is entirely different. So maybe you should either get a new line or stop making an ass out of yourself.

And you have been refuted about 100 times with the fact that the purpose of the two is entirely different. So maybe you should either get a new line or stop making an ass out of yourself.

Not rearly, you say the purpose is to celebrate abnormality. I say that celebrating normality is just as valid.

Not rearly, you say the purpose is to celebrate abnormality. I say that celebrating normality is just as valid.

I am really getting fed up with your inability to read English. I have never once said that the purpose is to celebrate abnormality. Would you care to try again?

I am really getting fed up with your inability to read English. I have never once said that the purpose is to celebrate abnormality. Would you care to try again?

Ok, here is a demand. How, in any way shape or form is a straight pride parade insulting or damaging to anyone in such a fashion you should feel you should not support it. Because any arguement you apply to the straight pride march can be applied to the gay pride march.

Ok, here is a demand. How, in any way shape or form is a straight pride parade insulting or damaging to anyone in such a fashion you should feel you should not support it. Because any arguement you apply to the straight pride march can be applied to the gay pride march.

Wrong again. My posts aren't in Greek, you know.

A gay pride parade is a statement of being unashamed. They have been told for most of their lives that they should be ashamed of who they are - that they should hide it, or try and "cure" it. When they march, they are making a statement that they are not ashamed, and no one is going to make them such. This cannot be applied to this case because there is no place in the world where society has been told that they should be ashamed of being heterosexual, that they should hide it or try and "cure" it.

The purpose for the "straight pride" celebration is one of the following:
1 - Make fun of the gay pride parade. This is certainly allowable, but I have no reason to support someone whose purpose is to mock another group because of their own bigotry.

2 - Celebrate the fact that they are heterosexual. This is just plain silly, so I have no reason to support it.

Wrong again. My posts aren't in Greek, you know.

A gay pride parade is a statement of being unashamed. They have been told for most of their lives that they should be ashamed of who they are - that they should hide it, or try and "cure" it. When they march, they are making a statement that they are not ashamed, and no one is going to make them such. This cannot be applied to this case because there is no place in the world where society has been told that they should be ashamed of being heterosexual, that they should hide it or try and "cure" it.

The purpose for the "straight pride" celebration is one of the following:
1 - Make fun of the gay pride parade. This is certainly allowable, but I have no reason to support someone whose purpose is to mock another group because of their own bigotry.

2 - Celebrate the fact that they are heterosexual. This is just plain silly, so I have no reason to support it.

I could easisly state that the hetrosexual pride march is about being unashamed. Guys (and to a lesser extent girls) are often insulted for being obsessed with the other sex. It is often mocked as being childish or immature (though I am unsure as to develop a sex drive is part of maturing) .In the case of guy's this is biological as much as anything else, since the sex centre of the male brain is 8 times larger than that of the female brain. So it could be argued that this is a way to say "Stop critisicing it, its who we are, dont ignore it". While I dont agree with the notion (As a Christian I believe sex drive is something you need to control) I can see it makes sense. So you could therefore link it to not being ashamed of it.

I could easisly state that the hetrosexual pride march is about being unashamed. Guys (and to a lesser extent girls) are often insulted for being obsessed with the other sex. In the case of guy's this is biological as much as anything else, since the sex centre of the male brain is 8 times larger than that of the female brain. So it could be argued that this is a way to say "Stop critisicing it, its who we are, dont ignore it". While I dont agree with the notion (As a Christian I believe sex drive is something you need to control) I can see it makes sense. So you could therefore link it to not being ashamed of it.

"Being obsessed with the other sex" and "being heterosexual" are not the same thing, so no, you couldn't link it to that at all.

"Being obsessed with the other sex" and "being heterosexual" are not the same thing, so no, you couldn't link it to that at all.

Its just being proud of your attractions and defying the label of "immature" and "Childish". While I agree that these labels are nessecary and accurate then the members of this group may not and so they may be doing this in defiance of those. You cant prove me wrong, and I cant prove that is the case but it is a possiblity, so the validty of a straight pride march stands. The idea of Sexual Liberation. Something William Blake saw comming a long time ago.

Its just being proud of your attractions and defying the label of "immature" and "Childish". While I agree that these labels are nessecary and accurate then the members of this group may not and so they may be doing this in defiance of those. You cant prove me wrong, and I cant prove that is the case but it is a possiblity, so the validty of a straight pride march stands. The idea of Sexual Liberation. Something William Blake saw comming a long time ago.

As I have pointed out, being "proud of your attractions" is idiotic. It's like being "proud of your digestive juices."

I could easisly state that the hetrosexual pride march is about being unashamed. Guys (and to a lesser extent girls) are often insulted for being obsessed with the other sex. It is often mocked as being childish or immature (though I am unsure as to develop a sex drive is part of maturing) .In the case of guy's this is biological as much as anything else, since the sex centre of the male brain is 8 times larger than that of the female brain. So it could be argued that this is a way to say "Stop critisicing it, its who we are, dont ignore it". While I dont agree with the notion (As a Christian I believe sex drive is something you need to control) I can see it makes sense. So you could therefore link it to not being ashamed of it.
Neo - pay attention.

Don't embarrass yourself in YET ANOTHER thread....:

"The whole point of 'gay pride' marches is a form of protest.... at being considered and treated, as second class citizens.

The 'pride' is extracted from refuting that 'second class' status.

Similarly... 'black power' was about showing that blacks were not happy to sit under the oppression of whites.

The reason a 'straight pride' march is silly - is because it is protesting something ridiculous.... 'straights' are not being oppressed by a 'gay' majority, or a 'gay' establishment".

As I have pointed out, being "proud of your attractions" is idiotic. It's like being "proud of your digestive juices."

Its not being proud of your attractions. Its celebrating them. It can be argued that this demonstration is an attack on sexual repression. These people may want to make it clear that there is nothing wrong with be open about who/what you find sexually attractive. So many activities get men/women labeled perverts and maybe these people are trying to remove stigmas (I know these stigma's are in place for a good reason, but these people may disagree)

The reason a 'straight pride' march is silly - is because it is protesting something ridiculous.... 'straights' are not being oppressed by a 'gay' majority, or a 'gay' establishment".

So the KKK should have the right to protest at their persecution? Everyone hates them, the media despises them etc. Your suggesting that only persecuted minorities have the right to display pride?

Its just being proud of your attractions

...

Its not being proud of your attractions.

Riiiiiiiiiight.

So the KKK should have the right to protest at their persecution? Everyone hates them, the media despises them etc. Your suggesting that only persecuted minorities have the right to display pride?

Neo - I told you... you're just embarrassing yourself.

Again.

The KKK was (and still is, around here) a movement that operated by persecuting. They have been generally 'removed' from the public consciousness, largely through the protesting activites of the offended minorities and their supporters.

The KKK isn't a victim of persecution today - they are just not popular, since their message of persecution is less palatable.

Sure - if they want to protest their 'unfair treatment', they are welcome to try - but it would be ridiculous.

Like the French aristocracy after the revolution protesting about what a hard life they were living, now that they were no longer able to parastitise the peasantry.

No, because a gay pride parade is not about having pride in your sexuality - it is about *not* being ashamed of it, as others would have you belive.

If I had been told from birth that I should be ashamed of having toenails, and then I realized that I shouldn't be - then I would want to spread that message.
Then why do they call it a gay pride parade :p

Then why do they call it a gay pride parade :p

Because they were sick of being made to feel 'ashamed'.

Let me explain.
No.
Let me sum up.

Some people (perhaps gay) think that only they have the right to feel aggrieved, and don't believe that anyone else is as aggrieved as they are, and feel that only a group as aggrieved as theirs can have a parade.

Some people (perhaps hetero) think that gays are abnormal, but don't mind them having a gay pride parade. They feel that there are probably many aggrieved groups, and that any group can have a parade.

Some of the first group feel that if you're not an aggrieved group they approve of, you must be trying to oppress them in some way.

The First Amendment says we all get a parade. No matter how aggrieved or un-aggrieved we are. No matter what someone else thinks we're trying to say by marching.

If the parade was in my town, I would march, because as a heterosexual I have been oppressed by political correctness gone mad. Because I was oppressed by homosexuals because of my sexuality.

Sex, as far as I'm concerned, is OK between any number of consenting adults.

It can be the subject of a parade. So can your oppression.

But if you have been oppressed, and want to be proud in a parade, then so can I.

Oh, and some think that gays are somehow abnormal. It's not abnormal.

Because they were sick of being made to feel 'ashamed'.
But she said it was not about having pride in something

...



Riiiiiiiiiight.

Ever heard of a thing called "Context"? In the first instance I was saying they are being proud of their attractions being liberated. In the second I was saying its not simpley (as you suggested) pride in "being" a hetrosexual.

I really don't get the point of any of these whatever-pride parades...do what you do, enjoy it, and go about your business. jeez. If we could just keep people out of strangers' sex lives, we'd be fine.

I really don't get the point of any of these whatever-pride parades...do what you do, enjoy it, and go about your business. jeez. If we could just keep people out of strangers' sex lives, we'd be fine.
True that

I mean I was not arguing for or against the other ... just dont see why they both cant have one sillyness hasent stoped many people before their time and sure wont stop many after it either

True that

I mean I was not arguing for or against the other ... just dont see why they both cant have one sillyness hasent stoped many people before their time and sure wont stop many after it either


College students should have parades...we put up with enough shit...that, and you'd get to see co-eds in their pajamas, in 20 degree weather....

College students should have parades...we put up with enough shit...that, and you'd get to see co-eds in their pajamas, in 20 degree weather....
;) agreed ... the school cheerleaders around here have national underwear day soon as its warm enough :-D its a lot of fun (for the guys)

I asume for the cheerleaders too cause they keep doin it year in and year out

Or they're just stupid enough to think it's a real national holiday and they're serving the nation by walking around like that (which might be the case, dunno; haven't seen those cheerleaders) :cool:

Or they're just stupid enough to think it's a real national holiday and they're serving the nation by walking around like that (which might be the case, dunno; haven't seen those cheerleaders) :cool:
They are deffinatly serving their nation :-D
big hocky team (I am not a sports fan at all but good teams tend to draw good cheerleaders)

Ever heard of a thing called "Context"? In the first instance I was saying they are being proud of their attractions being liberated. In the second I was saying its not simpley (as you suggested) pride in "being" a hetrosexual.

If it isn't pride in being a heterosexual, then it isn't a "straight pride parade", now is it. What you are describing is a "promiscuity pride parade."

Then why do they call it a gay pride parade :p

Probably because it's much shorter than the rest of what I said. =)

Yay for straightness! I say, that every passionate Straight person should initiate or take part in a Straight Pride Parade. No one can take being straight away from you. No matter what anyone says you have the right to celebrate your sexuality. Say want you want commies, but I love women, and I will always have the right to shout about it.

Yay for straightness! I say, that every passionate Straight person should initiate or take part in a Straight Pride Parade. No one can take being straight away from you. No matter what anyone says you have the right to celebrate your sexuality. Say want you want commies, but I love women, and I will always have the right to shout about it.

Do you also wish to have a parade for the fact that you sweat?

So far I've seen repeated arguements in the form of Catharine MacKinnon, who said that the only people with a right to protest were those who were "disadvantaged." I've also seen another side that follows Waldron's theory of three-dimensional tolerance, a position that states that people should be allowed to come to express themselves with whatever resources they have.

Personally, I belive in Waldron's theory. And I believe that one would find that a truly tolerant person is one who believes this. As it states that the political discourse between two groups is very important, and as such, both sides should be able to express their views as they see fit.

To deny someone the right to assemble and speak just because they are the one's in the majority is just as wrong as the majority denying rights to a minority. Tyranny in the name of tolerance is still tyranny.

This is one of the important doctrines for social libertarians, that we must not deny other's right to speak, but we don't have to accept, or even listen to it.

Do you also wish to have a parade for the fact that you sweat?
If I wanted it, I should be allowed to hold it.

If I wanted it, I should be allowed to hold it.

Which has nothing whatsoever to do with the point since no one in this thread has argued that the parade should not be allowed.

If it isn't pride in being a heterosexual, then it isn't a "straight pride parade", now is it. What you are describing is a "promiscuity pride parade."

Ok, let me try to explain. You may or may not get this, but here goes. The idea I am getting at is that under normal social circumstances, a certain level of display of sexuality of a heterosexual nature is considered inappropriate by society. Hence those who engage in said inappropriate displays are labelled "Pervert", "Immature", "Slut", "Disgusting" etc. My point is that the march could be about removing this image and so saying that these labels are irrelevant and that people should not have to hide their sexual attractions of a heterosexual nature. William Blake had similar ideas (read Songs of Experience and you will see what I am getting at, if you analyse it). In other words a straight pride parade (In the way I am trying to explain it to you) is not so much pride in "being" straight, it could be seen as a pride in sexual freedom of a homosexual nature, in other words being "proud" of your attractions. If you take this out of context again you are either very stupid or you position is so weak that you feel a need to.

Ok, let me try to explain. You may or may not get this, but here goes. The idea I am getting at is that under normal social circumstances, a certain level of display of sexuality of a heterosexual nature is considered inappropriate by society. Hence those who engage in said inappropriate displays are labelled "Pervert", "Immature", "Slut", "Disgusting" etc. My point is that the march could be about removing this image and so saying that these labels are irrelevant and that people should not have to hide their sexual attractions of a heterosexual nature. William Blake had similar ideas (read Songs of Experience and you will see what I am getting at, if you analyse it). In other words a straight pride parade (In the way I am trying to explain it to you) is not so much pride in "being" straight, it could be seen as a pride in sexual freedom of a homosexual nature, in other words being "proud" of your attractions. If you take this out of context again you are either very stupid or you position is so weak that you feel a need to.

Again, what you are describing would not be a "heterosexual pride parade" then, because no one has been told by society that simply *BEING* heterosexual is something they should be ashamed of. What you are describing is a "PDA pride parade" or a "promiscuity pride parade".

What you are describing is a "promiscuity pride parade."

Where?

Where?

According to Neo Cannen, the purpose of the parade has nothing to do with heterosexuality, but has to do with uninhibited sexual attractions. Someone who does not inhibit their sexual attractions (unless they are fairly asexual) is going to be pretty promiscuous.

Again, what you are describing would not be a "heterosexual pride parade" then, because no one has been told by society that simply *BEING* heterosexual is something they should be ashamed of. What you are describing is a "PDA pride parade" or a "promiscuity pride parade".

For the [insert large number here] time what I described was not a parade to demostrate the pride in just "being" a hetrosexual. It is being a hetrosexual and not supressing what that entails, and not being "ashamed" of it. You have allready admited that they gay pride march is misnamed so its fair to say that using the misnaming arguemnt here is a bit hypocritical.

According to Neo Cannen, the purpose of the parade has nothing to do with heterosexuality, but has to do with uninhibited sexual attractions. Someone who does not inhibit their sexual attractions (unless they are fairly asexual) is going to be pretty promiscuous.

I did not say thats what THE purpose is (Not the only one). What I am explaining is that it is a possible purpose and since you cannot prove one way or the other for certianty (Apart from saying "of course it is!") that the puropse is mocking the gay community then you also cannot prove that what I describe is not the case.

For the [insert large number here] time what I described was not a parade to demostrate the pride in just "being" a hetrosexual. It is being a hetrosexual and not supressing what that entails, and not being "ashamed" of it. You have allready admited that they gay pride march is misnamed so its fair to say that using the misnaming arguemnt here is a bit hypocritical.

Reading comprehension is a good thing, my dear.

There is nothing in heterosexuality that says you have to express it all the time. Homoesexuals are told that they should be ashamed just for *being* homosexual. Thus, your example, while cute, is not the same thing.

Meanwhile, you ahve already stated that you would not support such a march, because you do not agree with it. As such, you have already refuted your own point.

I did not say thats what THE purpose is (Not the only one). What I am explaining is that it is a possible purpose and since you cannot prove one way or the other for certianty (Apart from saying "of course it is!") that the puropse is mocking the gay community then you also cannot prove that what I describe is not the case.

(a) I have spoken to College Republicans who put things like this on - so I *can* state that this is not the case.

(b) It wouldn't matter anyways. Unless the cause is *exactly* the same, any statement that one must give it equal support or be hypocrtical is stupid.

Meanwhile, you ahve already stated that you would not support such a march, because you do not agree with it. As such, you have already refuted your own point.

No, I have suggested that such a march is a possible reason to refute your constant insistance that the straight pride parade is a mockery of the gay pride parade. And while I dont support the idea's I support the idea behing promoting it through a march as being reasonable and sensable (In the same way you support the gay pride march, though you yourself are not gay)

(a) I have spoken to College Republicans who put things like this on - so I *can* state that this is not the case.


Anyone can claim that without proof on here. Unless you can provide some kind of certian proof that statement is being ignored.

No, I have suggested that such a march is a possible reason to refute your constant insistance that the straight pride parade is a mockery of the gay pride parade. And while I dont support the idea's I support the idea behing promoting it through a march as being reasonable and sensable (In the same way you support the gay pride march, though you yourself are not gay)

(a) I have not constantly insisted that it is a mockery, although I know this to be true. I have simply refuted your idiotic claim that one must give all marches equal support.

(b) If you don't support the ideas then you do not support the parade. You may tolerate it. You may know that it must be allowed, but you do not support it.

Anyone can claim that without proof on here. Unless you can provide some kind of certian proof that statement is being ignored.

I'm not trying to prove anything here, so why would I provide proof?

This conversation is about your idiotic claim that one must support all causes equally, whether one agrees with them or not.

(a) I have not constantly insisted that it is a mockery, although I know this to be true. I have simply refuted your idiotic claim that one must give all marches equal support.

(b) If you don't support the ideas then you do not support the parade. You may tolerate it. You may know that it must be allowed, but you do not support it.

a) You must accept all marches as valid, you cant just say "Thats stupid" and insult those taking part, which is what you are doing.

b) I dont agree with their ideas but I can see the logic of it, something that you fail to see. I dont agree with some parts of Old Labour socialism, but that doesnt mean I cant see the logic of what they are trying to do

a) You must accept all marches as valid, you cant just say "Thats stupid" and insult those taking part, which is what you are doing.

Again, study a little bit of English. "Accept as valid" is not the same thing as "support." I fully accept the fact that someone wanting to hold a parade for their fingernails is valid. However, I also have every right to express my view that such a parade would be stupid.

Second of all, I have never once insulted those taking part in this parade. I have pointed out the fact that their reason for doing it is born out of a misconception, but this does not qualify as an insult.

b) I dont agree with their ideas but I can see the logic of it, something that you fail to see. I dont agree with some parts of Old Labour socialism, but that doesnt mean I cant see the logic of what they are trying to do

I can see the logic of it, just like I can see the logic behind holding a parade for my fingernails. However, seeing the logic is not the same thing as agreeing with and supporting that logic, which is what you apparently fail to see.

Again, study a little bit of English. "Accept as valid" is not the same thing as "support." I fully accept the fact that someone wanting to hold a parade for their fingernails is valid. However, I also have every right to express my view that such a parade would be stupid.

Second of all, I have never once insulted those taking part in this parade. I have pointed out the fact that their reason for doing it is born out of a misconception, but this does not qualify as an insult.

I can see the logic of it, just like I can see the logic behind holding a parade for my fingernails. However, seeing the logic is not the same thing as agreeing with and supporting that logic, which is what you apparently fail to see.

You are not accepting that this parade is as valid/equal etc as the gay pride parade. Thats my issue.

You are not accepting that this parade is as valid/equal etc as the gay pride parade. Thats my issue.

Wrong. I accept it as equally valid.

It is the premise upon which it is based that I disagree with. This premise is not the same as that upon which gay pride parades are based. As such, this is no different from me disagreeing with the premise of a parade for people who sweat, or a parade for people who hate the color purple, or a parade for flat-earthers.

I did not say thats what THE purpose is (Not the only one). What I am explaining is that it is a possible purpose and since you cannot prove one way or the other for certianty (Apart from saying "of course it is!") that the puropse is mocking the gay community then you also cannot prove that what I describe is not the case.
Well, we can start off by looking at who's putting it on.

The College Republicans.

What party is it that keeps introducing bills that limit the rights of homosexuals? Republican. When you go to the website of the college Republicans one of the pictures is someone holding a Santorim sign, a guy so vitriolic about homosexuality that he has become a source of some comedy to some in the GBLT community.

Then there is the fliers:
We're here, we're conservative, we're out.
We're conservative. Doesn't seem like it's about hedonism.

Now, since nothing about the organizers supports what you said, I think we can resonably dismiss it.

And, since much of what the organizers does is work to limit homosexual rights, it seems that mockery, if not the only thing on the list, is at least one of them.

Here's the thing: I don't care if you want to mock something. I'll disagree, maybe even call you an idiot-but that's the risk you take by stating your opinion. Being free to say what you want is only half of the freedom of speech equation. The other half is peoples freedom to call "bullshit." But if you're gonna do it, own it. Don't dance around it and wuss out when you're pressed. No one is buying that straights are supressed. Not when I can get Girls Gone Wild off the tv. Not when Howard Stern is on the air three hours every morning. (and don't give me the obscenity thing, deeds and words won't match with the organizers on this, either). Not when 'Spring Break' is an event (one can argue that your fantasy purposed parade happens in Ft. Lauderdale every spring).

So cut the bullshit. Really. I'd respect you more if you where just honest about it. This "I get a parade, too, so you gotta love me just as much" crap just don't fly.

So what? Straights should be proud of who they are. So should gays. Everyone should be proud of him or herself.

So what? Straights should be proud of who they are. So should gays. Everyone should be proud of him or herself.
which is irrelevant in this discussion

So what? Straights should be proud of who they are. So should gays. Everyone should be proud of him or herself.

Being proud of something that you have no control over is idiotic.

So what? Straights should be proud of who they are. So should gays. Everyone should be proud of him or herself.
Since Pride parades are put in opposition of a pressure to feel ashamed, who is pressuring the straights to feel sooo ashamed that they need a parade to demonstrate thier pride?

If oppression of homosexuals is what the Gay Pride parades are in reaction to, what is the straight pride parade in reaction to?

which is irrelevant in this discussion

All I'm saying is, so what if someone wants to have a straight pride parade? They're proud of who they are, big deal, no skin off my nose.

All I'm saying is, so what if someone wants to have a straight pride parade? They're proud of who they are, big deal, no skin off my nose.
thats not the point at hand

If oppression of homosexuals is what the Gay Pride parades are in reaction to, what is the straight pride parade in reaction to?
The misuse of the label homophobe.

what an awsome celebration thingy. About time someone did this, im sick of putting up with all the "gay pride", "gay strait alliance" shit.

what an awsome celebration thingy. About time someone did this, im sick of putting up with all the "gay pride", "gay strait alliance" shit.

That's ok kiddo. Get it out you will feel better.

There's nothing discriminatory about it. I guess the people holding it could be holding it out of spite, but discrimination it is not. Gay republicans are allowed to be gay and republican. They don't have to be able to participate in a straight pride week that happens to be run by republicans.

I bet gay republicans would also go to the straight parade... since the point of the parade is that group parades are stupid... a gay republican would be making a statement that "I'm a person, don't peg me into a subculture based on my sexuality" by showing up.

I bet gay republicans would also go to the straight parade... since the point of the parade is that group parades are stupid... a gay republican would be making a statement that "I'm a person, don't peg me into a subculture based on my sexuality" by showing up.

Note that the Republican party basically alienated gay republicans last year. So, no, I doubt it.

The misuse of the label homophobe.
Really? How will this parade correct that? What are they going to do that addresses that concern?

And, what term would you use for people who are disproportionately concerned with how people they don't know love each other, so much so that they want to banish it from thier sight?

Really? How will this parade correct that? What are they going to do that addresses that concern?

The same way a parade would instill acceptance of alternate lifestyles.


And, what term would you use for people who are disproportionately concerned with how people they don't know love each other, so much so that they want to banish it from thier sight?

The same think you call people who are disproportionately concerned with how people they don't know love their deity, so much that they want to banish it from thEir sight.... Objectors

So what's the straight pride march gonna look like? Probably gonna be a buttoned-up, boring dreary event. ;)

The same think you call people who are disproportionately concerned with how people they don't know love their deity, so much that they want to banish it from thEir sight.... Objectors

Funny, I've never met anyone who meets that description, yet I've met plenty who meet the other.

This thread is an interesting topic.

If "gays" are allowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity, then logic would dictate that "straights" are equally endowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity.

Do I detect a double standard? :headbang:

This thread is an interesting topic.

If "gays" are allowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity, then logic would dictate that "straights" are equally endowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity.

Do I detect a double standard? :headbang:

True. But when have hetros been outcasts for being hetros?

The purpose is suspect especially since the Repub club is doing it.

But as I said, if they are that insecure and want to do it; have at it.....

This thread is an interesting topic.

If "gays" are allowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity, then logic would dictate that "straights" are equally endowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity.

Do I detect a double standard? :headbang:
You're missing the real issue. And that is how boring this "straight pride march" is going to be. Just picture a throng of safely heterosexual, conservative religious folk marching. Sounds awfully boring compared to the yearly gay pride march that goes through town. :D

This thread is an interesting topic.

If "gays" are allowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity, then logic would dictate that "straights" are equally endowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity.

Do I detect a double standard? :headbang:

If and only if the purpose of a gay pride were to actually "celebrate" sexuality and not to simply demonstrate non-repression of it, you might have a point.

Meanwhile, no one is arguing that the Republicans should not be allowed to have their parade, simply that the reasoning behind it is faulty.

Well, this makes sense, seeing as we straight people are so oppressed!

Sound like the assholes with whom I go to school.

Straight pride. Heh. Sounds like White Pride. Seems mildly amusing for oh, 5 or 10 seconds, then you realize what sorts of people would actually show up at a white pride parade - then it gets scary.

Seems mildly amusing for oh, 5 or 10 seconds, then you realize what sorts of people would actually show up at a white pride parade - then it gets scary.
Yeah albinos freak me out as well :(

This is what we get for not just letting Gay people get married.. i personally am in favor of it.{gay marrages} but i swear.. Straight people are getting stupider because they ban it... hmmm... intelligence over seeing what you dont want to see.. strange choice.. i choose Intelegence (as you can see i cant spell so i need it!)

So, here's my theory after riding the merry-go-round on this.

One thing keeps coming up on the side of the proponents of this ill-concieved little affair:
"If they can do it, we can do it." That is the why. Me too-ism. But if that where it the people behind it would have the mentality of a 10 year old. Granting the benefit of the doubt, I think that there is more.

They wanted to get refused, this whole demonstration-the very thrust of what they are doing, hinged on them getting shut down so that they could beat the double standard drum. They where so set on it that even though they are being allowed to do the parade they still beat the drum.

I think this thing was designed thinking that they'd get blocked and they'd make a stink. But the good folks in Oklahoma called thier bluff. Now they have to actually throw the stupid thing. Quick, write down some float ideas....

So, here's my theory after riding the merry-go-round on this.

One thing keeps coming up on the side of the proponents of this ill-concieved little affair:
"If they can do it, we can do it." That is the why. Me too-ism. But if that where it the people behind it would have the mentality of a 10 year old. Granting the benefit of the doubt, I think that there is more.

They wanted to get refused, this whole demonstration-the very thrust of what they are doing, hinged on them getting shut down so that they could beat the double standard drum. They where so set on it that even though they are being allowed to do the parade they still beat the drum.

I think this thing was designed thinking that they'd get blocked and they'd make a stink. But the good folks in Oklahoma called thier bluff. Now they have to actually throw the stupid thing. Quick, write down some float ideas....

Damn never thought of that... *Aplauds loudly* That is brilliant idea.. now their stuck with it... lol.. man can someone call Queer Eye for some decorating ideas?

"YEAH YEAH SEX WITH THE OPPOSITE SEX, YEAH YEAH"

These people are a bunch of faggots.

That makes a lot of sense....

Damn never thought of that... *Aplauds loudly* That is brilliant idea.. now their stuck with it... lol.. man can someone call Queer Eye for some decorating ideas?
Nice! Because, in reality, straight people march in Gay Pride parades in solidarity, so if they want to keep to thier dogma they'd allow homosexuals to march, give a little "You Breeders are good people" nudge-and of course the Queer Eye guys have been out there helping out the poor downtrodden straight guy, they're a natural!

I'm more and more convinced that they just stepped in it.

This thread is an interesting topic.

If "gays" are allowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity, then logic would dictate that "straights" are equally endowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity.

Do I detect a double standard? :headbang:

Do you honestly believe that:

a) Gay Pride marches are more about 'celebrating' than about raising awareness?

b) The Straight Pride march has ANYTHING to do with 'celebrating' being straight?

c) The Straight Pride march is anything OTHER THAN a deliberate parody of "Gay Pride"? Basically - a means to mock the opponents' argument, adding nothing of import to the debate?

Personally - this just sounds like more of what Bush proved was an effective tool - you repeat something often enough, and some people start to believe it.

So, Kerry is a 'flip-flopper', and there is a place for 'Straight Pride'.

Another example of Republicans appealing to the lowest common denominator... what surprises me is that the less neanderthal Republicans aren't fighting against this corruption in their ranks.

This thread is an interesting topic.

If "gays" are allowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity, then logic would dictate that "straights" are equally endowed to "celebrate" their sexuallity.

Do I detect a double standard? :headbang:

Do you honestly believe that:

a) Gay Pride marches are more about 'celebrating' than about raising awareness?

b) The Straight Pride march has ANYTHING to do with 'celebrating' being straight?

c) The Straight Pride march is anything OTHER THAN a deliberate parody of "Gay Pride"? Basically - a means to mock the opponents' argument, adding nothing of import to the debate?

Personally - this just sounds like more of what Bush proved was an effective tool - you repeat something often enough, and some people start to believe it.

So, Kerry is a 'flip-flopper', and there is a place for 'Straight Pride'.

Another example of Republicans appealing to the lowest common denominator... what surprises me is that the less neanderthal Republicans aren't fighting against this corruption in their ranks.