NationStates Jolt Archive

Texas recently passed a law empowering people working at adoption centers to, if they even have a hint of a reason to suspect, refuse adoption to anyone who they think may be gay, and then force them to "prove" their sexual orientation. It also is in the process of passing a law to ban "indecent cheerleading."

Does this seem off to anyone but me?

PS - Don't attack me as a Northern bigot. My family's from Dallas and I'm a huge Cowboys fan.

Well, the it doesn't seem odd that the government is trying to maintain some level of social dignity with that cheerleading thing. In today's world, however, moral fiber is basically gone, especially in the North. As for the gay thing, I personally support that. It's similar to not letting a child be adopted into a broken home. I know I'm going to get some crazy liberals flaming me down for saying this, but I think homosexuality is wrong. period. And why should we change what evolution has established? 2 men/2 women can't have a child together by natural means, so they shouldn't have one together by any other means.

Of course it's off, it's Texas. What do you expect, understanding and compassion, maybe respect for gay rights? You've got a better shot looking for a snowball in hell.

(In my defense: I am a northern bigot from Iowa. I am bigoted against anyone who tramples on human rights, anyone who's idea of diplomacy is "I got a bigger gun than you do", and anyone who managed to snort coke, skip war service, and still hold high office. I also have an inherent disrespect for any state that just laughs this off and elects him anyways)

Edit: Apparently I'm a crazy liberal. I kind of like the idea.

How does one "prove" their sexual orientation?

Texas recently passed a law empowering people working at adoption centers to, if they even have a hint of a reason to suspect, refuse adoption to anyone who they think may be gay, and then force them to "prove" their sexual orientation. It also is in the process of passing a law to ban "indecent cheerleading."

Does this seem off to anyone but me?

PS - Don't attack me as a Northern bigot. My family's from Dallas and I'm a huge Cowboys fan.

Yeah.. how does one "prove" they are straight. ?

Again, it's Texas. Proof of homosexuality could be anything from "He could pronounce the letter 'O' right" to "He had on hair gel/shirt and tie/deodorant."

On the other hand, proof of heterosexuality in Texas probably requires showing them your pregnant sister.

By having sex with someone their opposite sex? I would think that would be the only way to "prove" anything in this ideological scheme. If they are THAT uptight.. then they should choose people they "believe" aren't gay from whatever performances that they know of.

How does one "prove" their sexual orientation?

My question exactly...

Perhaps they just want a good excuse to watch people have sex :D

I think Kholar's got it.

On the other hand, proof of heterosexuality in Texas probably requires showing them your pregnant sister.

Um... she could have been impregnated by someone else...now, the act of impregnation itself, on the other hand, might prove something.

I'd love to prove my sexual orientation. However, the thought of what the beaurocrats administering this test would look like gives me pause.

On the other hand, proof of heterosexuality in Texas probably requires showing them your pregnant sister.

That would probably defeat the purpose of adopting.

Sexual Nazis... bah! http://img125.exs.cx/img125/2775/huelga3wl.gif

Texas recently passed a law empowering people working at adoption centers to, if they even have a hint of a reason to suspect, refuse adoption to anyone who they think may be gay, and then force them to "prove" their sexual orientation. It also is in the process of passing a law to ban "indecent cheerleading."

Does this seem off to anyone but me?

PS - Don't attack me as a Northern bigot. My family's from Dallas and I'm a huge Cowboys fan.


yes....i'm all for indecent cheerleading - provided it's my wife who's cheering and it's only for me and we're alone.

Well, the it doesn't seem odd that the government is trying to maintain some level of social dignity with that cheerleading thing. In today's world, however, moral fiber is basically gone, especially in the North. As for the gay thing, I personally support that. It's similar to not letting a child be adopted into a broken home. I know I'm going to get some crazy liberals flaming me down for saying this, but I think homosexuality is wrong. period. And why should we change what evolution has established? 2 men/2 women can't have a child together by natural means, so they shouldn't have one together by any other means.

So I'm crazy eh? Well I guess it takes a special kind of crazy to be creating a plan to separate the entire Northeast from the Union...literally.

That would probably defeat the purpose of adopting.

Are you implying that he and his sister are going to adopt? Can they marry in Texas? That is very liberal indeed.

I'm a native Texan and frequently look at my home state and go "WTF?"

They are looking at passing a bill to require you to prove you are a citizen to vote. Not that I want non-citizens to vote, but how many people named "Smith" are actually going to be questioned. And it would make registering to vote a pain in the ass, further reducing the number of people who bother.

They are also looking at passing a bill that would allow you to be convicted of a DUI if you had any trace of an intoxicating substance in your system. So if you were in an accident and had smoked pot 3 weeks before, you can be convicted of a DUI.

The lege there is nothing if not entertaining. :rolleyes:

Well, the it doesn't seem odd that the government is trying to maintain some level of social dignity with that cheerleading thing. In today's world, however, moral fiber is basically gone, especially in the North. As for the gay thing, I personally support that. It's similar to not letting a child be adopted into a broken home. I know I'm going to get some crazy liberals flaming me down for saying this, but I think homosexuality is wrong. period. And why should we change what evolution has established? 2 men/2 women can't have a child together by natural means, so they shouldn't have one together by any other means.

That's just stupid. What about a heterrosexual couple than isn't able to have a child for medical reasons? Should they be banned too? Why don't we just eliminate a large number of parents who are willing to adopt children in a world so needing of them?

I mean, if YOU think it's wrong. BTW you'll probably get a lot of 'crazy' single parents flaming you down too.

By having sex with someone their opposite sex? I would think that would be the only way to "prove" anything in this ideological scheme. If they are THAT uptight.. then they should choose people they "believe" aren't gay from whatever performances that they know of.
LOL according to Seinfeld, the test for a man is if another man touches "it" and it moves it means you are gay. I think that is now the law or it least it should be.

Well, the it doesn't seem odd that the government is trying to maintain some level of social dignity with that cheerleading thing. In today's world, however, moral fiber is basically gone, especially in the North. As for the gay thing, I personally support that. It's similar to not letting a child be adopted into a broken home. I know I'm going to get some crazy liberals flaming me down for saying this, but I think homosexuality is wrong. period. And why should we change what evolution has established? 2 men/2 women can't have a child together by natural means, so they shouldn't have one together by any other means.

I'm assuming you missed a [/sarcasm] here....

Um... she could have been impregnated by someone else...now, the act of impregnation itself, on the other hand, might prove something.

In Texas? I'll admit, it isn't Georgia, where apparently your first girlfriend is a mule, but I don't think the sister thing is that rare.

The law, as it stands, is a farce. It simply cannot pass muster.

For one thing, you cannot "prove" heterosexuality, and considering that hetero and homo sexuality exist on more of a scale than a stark definition; its just laughable to think that someone could enforce this law at all. The methods that it would take to prove bisexuality or homosexuality would violate just about every freedom detailed in the constitution.

It seems more of an attempt as a "protest" law, lashing out agaisnt any pretext of civility towards homosexuals. The law underwrites the very fundemental antagonism that the State of Texas as a governmental body has towards the homosexual portions of its community.

Simply put; the State government is making it clear that it wishes to be the next Birmingham, Alabama. To force a showdown now, when anti-homosexual sentiment is at new highs.

This is fairly standard practice amongst social bigots; entrench where you are strong and lash out, violently or through litigation. With the defeat of the Texas sodomy law still fresh in their minds, the legislators wish it to be known that Homosexuality is still a crime there.

Are we sure the two are not somehow intertwined? That by banning indecent cheerleading the legislature of Texas is now looking for a way to reproduce the free p0rn it's missing out on by having town square sex acts to prove you're able to adopt? Hell, you could film that and put it online and make money. Might be a new income source for Texas as now the Girls Gone Wild people will be out of the state.

In Texas? I'll admit, it isn't Georgia, where apparently your first girlfriend is a mule, but I don't think the sister thing is that rare.

:eek: I always thought mules were...you know, mules. So, Georgian mules do get pregnant, given the appropriate...um...you know, care?

I've got no clue. Somebody sent me a link yesterday to this:

http://www.foxnews.com/alancolmesradio/vidPlayer/player.html?colmes/050605/colmes_neal_horsley_050505&Alan_Colmes_Audio&Alan%20Colmes%20Radio&acc&Radio&-1&wvx-300

I think that says it all.

Damn, Damn Northern Bigots ;)

Though, I am mad at your constant putdowns of Texas. My Family has been in Texas for over a century, yet you come and say that all texas are Racists. Mabye its cause I am from Houston ( which is one of the more open minded areas of Texas ) but I dont see much of that. so all you damn northern bigots should understand that Texas has a right to choose what they want to do! RARGH! :mad:

Sure Texans have a right to do what they want to do. As long as it doesn't violate a puritanical moral code held by a small fanatical section of the country. And as long as it doesn't involve craziness like making it harder to get guns or beer or tobacco.

I've got no clue. Somebody sent me a link yesterday to this:

http://www.foxnews.com/alancolmesradio/vidPlayer/player.html?colmes/050605/colmes_neal_horsley_050505&Alan_Colmes_Audio&Alan%20Colmes%20Radio&acc&Radio&-1&wvx-300

I think that says it all.


Wow!

Lincoln was wrong.

We should have let the bastards leave.

PS - Don't attack me as a Northern bigot. My family's from Dallas and I'm a huge Cowboys fan.

Pffft, anyone from north of Conroe is a yankee anyway...

So I'm crazy eh? Well I guess it takes a special kind of crazy to be creating a plan to separate the entire Northeast from the Union...literally.

Could we please? I say we grab California and Hawaii too...we do need some nice vacation spots.

waves at Greenspoint and The Seperatist states.

'nother Houstonian checking in, and I don't in any way pretend that I have a clue asto what motivates our state legislature at times.

and Dementedus_Yammus - yeah we should never have made the Second Big Mistake - which was rejoining.

The First of course being joining in the first place.

Well, the it doesn't seem odd that the government is trying to maintain some level of social dignity with that cheerleading thing. In today's world, however, moral fiber is basically gone, especially in the North. As for the gay thing, I personally support that. It's similar to not letting a child be adopted into a broken home. I know I'm going to get some crazy liberals flaming me down for saying this, but I think homosexuality is wrong. period. And why should we change what evolution has established? 2 men/2 women can't have a child together by natural means, so they shouldn't have one together by any other means.
One quote, and then you run away? No attempt to defend the indefensible? Sigh. Oh well. I'll have my fun anyway.

"Moral fiber" is an arbitrary concept. Used in this context, it becomes the ultimate defense of reaction, as "moral fiber" as a concept simply means apologism for the defects in status quo morality, or a return to an older form, as evidenced in Madlemia's post. To put it in concrete terms, Madlemia is arguing for a return to pre-feminist days where women were forced to wear the western equivalent of burkhas in order to preserve their modesty. Additionally, the law is also an example of the imposition of morality by one generation on another whose views on the subject are entirely different.

The last part would be laughable if it didn't cause things like the above discussed bill. To me, there seems to be no moral compass by which homosexuality could logically be declared immoral. Golden Rule? Definately not. Kantian ethics? Can't formulate a generalizable rule out of discrimination that anyone would want. Utilitarianism? Oppressing gays causes them to be less productive members of society. Postmodern and Levinasian ethics don't need to be discussed. Biblical ethics? Set aside the question of separation of Church and State for now. The Old Testament outlines why keeping a particular group in a subordinate role simply because of their difference or potential threat to status quo conceptions of society. I haven't read much of the New, but what I have would seem to indicate that Jesus preached love for all human beings, regardless of their choices. Everyone else has answered the rest effectively.

In today's world, however, moral fiber is basically gone, especially in the North

Moral fiber gives me gas

The First of course being joining in the first place.
Heh. A history textbook I read discussed in depth the possibility of what a Texan nation could have looked like. Many speculate that it would have taken the entire west coast and become a competing nation to the US to satisfy European fears of a strong US. Kinda timely given cross-pond relations, isn't it?

If Texas was a person, I'd slap them.

By having sex with someone their opposite sex? I would think that would be the only way to "prove" anything in this ideological scheme. If they are THAT uptight.. then they should choose people they "believe" aren't gay from whatever performances that they know of.
Gay Man: I am here to adopt a child.
Female Texan Interviewer: Are you gay?
Gay Man: No Ma'am!!
Female Texan Interviewer: We need proof that you are heterosexual.
Gay Man: Surely Ma'am, do you want me to do you on your desk, or do you have a cozy room in the back? :D

Pffft, anyone from north of Conroe is a yankee anyway...
Hell, I was born in Houston and my grandmother always complained I talked like a yankee. (She's from Odessa)

And Yes, Our lege is dominated by nuts. But in the words of Molly Ivins "Texas liberal is not an oxymoron."

Simple case. Texas is ass backwards.

I live here. And I hate it. If only I didn't have to right now.

Gay Man: I am here to adopt a child.
Female Texan Interviewer: Are you gay?
Gay Man: No Ma'am!!
Female Texan Interviewer: We need proof that you are heterosexual.
Gay Man: Surely Ma'am, do you want me to do you on your desk, or do you have a cozy room in the back? :D

....And in other news, thousands of single men have applied for adoption in Texas. All are hoping to be asked to prove their sexuality.

See, even if the interviewer was a man, the gay man could simply mount him and moan a woman's name during sex. That would also work to prove that you were bisexual, and thus not homosexual.

....And in other news, thousands of single men have applied for adoption in Texas. All are hoping to be asked to prove their sexuality.
TOO Funny!! :cool:

See, even if the interview was a man, the gay man could simply mount him and moan a woman's name during sex. That would also work to prove that you were bisexual, and thus not homosexual.
Yes by George, I think you've got it!! :eek:

I don't think anyone has mentioned it, but the proposed law also prohibits bisexual people. As for banning cheerleading, that's not entirely accurate. What they want to do is ban acts/routines that are too "sexual", forcing them to rewrite whatever they have planned. Frankly, I think that should be up to the cheerleaders themselves.

This is just another fine example of the many things wrong with this state, and why I happen to hate it so much.

But I love Texas. You can think it's backwards and nuts and still love it. You just have to have a sense of humor. And appreciate contrariness.

I like Texas, don't get me wrong. Some people are so nice compared to many northners I have met here. It's alot of warmness, but still...the state is going backwards in movement. You cannot prohibit growth.

And as far as the cheerleading goes, I don't care one way or the other. It has nothing to do with how these girls react outside of school, because some learn that from outside of class.

Absolutely agreed BK - got ta love us and the absolutely friggin wierd things we ( especially the legislature ) can come up with some times.


and yes Deleuze, I think Texas staying independant would have split the continental US in half - and perhaps it would have been the republic of Texas that bought Alaska from Russia...and wouldn't that have made for some differences.


I can say this - I doubt that law will take off and fly - I do happen to know the first single man in the nation to adopt a child- he is a volunteer at the community theatre where I work. He has written a screen play that was made into a movie about it. IIRC it is titled "In Search of My Son"

I'm in Texas, and I lobbied strong against this as a fiscal conservative. I asked the representative who added this amendment to explain to me where he expects to get the money to pay for that program. It would cost more money to investigate these families than just to leave it alone. I say let anyone adopt a child so long as the home is loving and stable. I specifically wrote him to tell him that he is wasting state resources by investigating these families that could be used to investigate TRULY abusive homes, as child abuse is a literal epidemic here in Texas. I called him out and told him that he is NOT a Conservative if he thinks that wasting government money is a conservative value.

Again, that money has to come from SOMEWHERE... he has yet to tell me where he intends to draw that money from. We can't simply deficit spend like the Federal government can, so we must either cut services or raise taxes.

So whatever, this state is going to Hell, and real Republicans like me are nearly powerless to stop these crazy religious bigots from enacting their "Pseudo-Christianity First" program. I am a Christian, but I will NEVER use the government to evangelize for me, nor will I allow my church to be "owned" by the government. These religious leaders are selling out their followers to Satan (aka the government) and in time, they will realize the mistake they made. When government owns the churches, they can then destroy them. That's what we are heading to. Falwell, Robertson, Phelps, and Dobson think that selling out to the government in exchange for getting a few social policies based on the Bible enacted will protect their butts, but they are wrong, dead wrong. They will lose their churches and religion will be set back 1,000 years for it. What dark ages did to learning, will soon happen to religion once they sell out to the state.

If anyone wants to discuss this more in depth, feel free to e-mail me at jj4sad6@yahoo.com

This is rediculous that there is a restriction on homosexuals adopting. If its a good home, there is no problem. If the gays cannot have a child by addoption, they are just going to find a pair of lesbians and have kids and have joint custody, so whats the difference? there is the same chance as the kid turning out strait or gay, especially now a days. Im not saying that homosexuality is right, I just say that as long as it doesn't involved me, let them do what they want.

And to prove their sexual orientation, they should do the same thing that they did to the monks in that one joke, tie a bell to their dick and see if they pop one when a nude woman walks by.

On the other hand, proof of heterosexuality in Texas probably requires showing them your pregnant sister.
Jeez...that's like me saying all Iowans are zoophiles. We know how you farmers love your cows.

On a related note, I hadn't heard of the "prove you're not gay" law (I've been out working on the house all day and havent' checked the news sites), but the indecent cheerleading law was proposed and pushed through the TX congress by Democrats.

It seems more of an attempt as a "protest" law, lashing out agaisnt any pretext of civility towards homosexuals. The law underwrites the very fundemental antagonism that the State of Texas as a governmental body has towards the homosexual portions of its community.

Simply put; the State government is making it clear that it wishes to be the next Birmingham, Alabama. To force a showdown now, when anti-homosexual sentiment is at new highs.

This is fairly standard practice amongst social bigots; entrench where you are strong and lash out, violently or through litigation. With the defeat of the Texas sodomy law still fresh in their minds, the legislators wish it to be known that Homosexuality is still a crime there.
That's interesting, as a declaratory law. Why do they still do this? Didn't they learn their lesson with the blacks in the 1960s?

In today's world, however, moral fiber is basically gone, especially in the North.
I think that the American south is much more immoral than the north.

These religious leaders are selling out their followers to Satan (aka the government)
Classic libertarian! :D

That was actually a very good post, thank you.

And the "liberal safe haven" is being subjected to a takeover. It's a sad month so far for us.

there is the same chance as the kid turning out strait or gay, especially now a days.
Statistically, the chance that they would turn out gay would be somewhere between 1% and 10%, depending on what "percentage of population is gay" statistics you go by.

Actually...that'd be a really good experiment. Let gays adopt and see how many of the kids turn out gay. It might go a long way to explaining the "genetics vs environment" argument once and for all. :)

I think that the American south is much more immoral than the north.

You've got that right.

Having been following the cheerleading nonsense from my home in Houston, let me just say: Texas is not "on the verge of passing a law" to that effect. The Texas House of Representatives -- which, much like the US House of Representatives, has less stringent requirements for its members than the Senate and thus is full of looneys -- passed the bill. The Texas Senate, to the extent that they've even noticed its existence, has ignored it. It has basically no chance of passing in the Senate, and thus basically no chance of becoming a law.

You've got that right.
To elaborate, mainly because of the racism, homophobia and gratuitous use of the death penalty, all of which are evil.

To elaborate, mainly because of the racism, homophobia and gratuitous use of the death penalty, all of which are evil.

Yeppers. It's a total hypocrisy, too, because most of the people here are hardcore Christians. It's actually funny when you think about it.

Having been following the cheerleading nonsense from my home in Houston, let me just say: Texas is not "on the verge of passing a law" to that effect. The Texas House of Representatives -- which, much like the US House of Representatives, has less stringent requirements for its members than the Senate and thus is full of looneys -- passed the bill. The Texas Senate, to the extent that they've even noticed its existence, has ignored it. It has basically no chance of passing in the Senate, and thus basically no chance of becoming a law.
Ahhhh. Thanks for that update. I didn't know it hadn't passed the Senate yet. What little I'd caught of it in the news made it sound like it had passed the whole TX Congress...although I wasn't paying that much attention. ;)

Of course it's off, it's Texas. What do you expect, understanding and compassion, maybe respect for gay rights? You've got a better shot looking for a snowball in hell.

(In my defense: I am a northern bigot from Iowa. I am bigoted against anyone who tramples on human rights, anyone who's idea of diplomacy is "I got a bigger gun than you do", and anyone who managed to snort coke, skip war service, and still hold high office. I also have an inherent disrespect for any state that just laughs this off and elects him anyways)

Edit: Apparently I'm a crazy liberal. I kind of like the idea.

http://www.goodworksonearth.org/hellfrozeover.png
Thats in Michigan :p

My question is why does this matter, America is slowly but surely falling apart, Texas is at the lead, and the sooner you Ban homosexuality, the sooner they will come to Canada for the respect they deserve.

Had it happened in any other state this wouldn't be on the forum. :(

All states have some screwy laws. Did you know New York actually has a death penalty for suicide? In California it is illegal to allow your pets to mate within 1500 feet of a school or bar. In Indiana it is illegal for liquer stores to sell milk. So what the hell is the big deal about this law?

People need to get a life and stop criticizing Texas just cause Bush got re elected. You can bitch about Bush all you want but don't bitch about an entire state in general. Incest is not common here you damned perverts. Neither is the KKK.

Texas is great. I would explain why the law was put into place (not that I agree with it) but I don't think that is the problem. If it were any other state you wouldn't be talking about it.

Have a nice day :D

Yeppers. It's a total hypocrisy, too, because most of the people here are hardcore Christians. It's actually funny when you think about it.Texas is not funny, it's hilarious. I have a great sense of humor. Why? Because I grew up a Texas liberal.

-snip-

Oh, you think this is a thread made just to piss at Texas?

Well, if it was, I'd still support it, because this state fucking sucks. The accents are terrible, too many people are intolerant assholes, the accents are terrible, there are too many religious zealots, the accents are terrible, there are too many hypocrites, and, oh yeah, the accents are terrible.

And don't get me started on the state of public education, or pollution, for that matter.

Texas is not funny, it's hilarious. I have a great sense of humor. Why? Because I grew up a Texas liberal.

Likewise.

People need to get a life and stop criticizing Texas just cause Bush got re elected.

Well, I doubt he's the sole source of our image problem. But he's not helping.

... grumble grumble not even a goddamn Texan grumble friggin' carpetbagging Yankee with a fake accent grumble...

Well, I doubt he's the sole source of our image problem. But he's not helping.

... grumble grumble not even a goddamn Texan grumble friggin' carpetbagging Yankee with a fake accent grumble...

NO SHIT!

Bush is not a real Texan. I don't care where he says he's from.

Bush lost an election in Texas partly because his opponent characterized him as an Ivy League intellectual. Bush vowed never to be out-dumbed again. He's been quite sucessful.

:) So true.

the accents are terrible.
Oh STFU! You live in EAST Texas...what do you expect? None of you people up there can speak worth a damn (the EAST Texas accent is the drawl that some retards associate with all of Texas) and East Texas is also home to Vidor (not far from Houston) where the KKK still rules.

I was born, raised and currently live in South Texas and have no discernable accent. Keep your hick accents in Houston and surrounding areas and don't infect the rest of us.

I'm in Texas, and I lobbied strong against this as a fiscal conservative. I asked the representative who added this amendment to explain to me where he expects to get the money to pay for that program. It would cost more money to investigate these families than just to leave it alone.

My family adopted a baby girl so I know the system pretty well. They already investigate families. They send people to your house to look around for anything suspicious or potentially dangerous for a child. They then talk to the entire family in the living room about all different kinds of things. Stuff from what we eat for dinner to what my favorite tv show is and how we are punished when we do something wrong. They then talk to each member individually and ask them a bunch of questions that can trick you into revealing hidden aggression and stuff like that. They then interview the parents together and the children together. After you adopt the child the social worker visits your family every few months for (I think) three years to make sure the family is doing good and they do the talk part again but mainly just the family together.

Protocoach i am amazed how you can take something that a particular state did and wrap it into your dislike of the president and his policy's. you can rest easy tonight knowing that he had nothing to do with the current politics of Texas or had any hand in what the people of my great great states elected officials decide for state law.

(In my defense: I am a northern bigot from Iowa. I am bigoted against anyone who tramples on human rights, anyone who's idea of diplomacy is "I got a bigger gun than you do", and anyone who managed to snort coke, skip war service, and still hold high office. I also have an inherent disrespect for any state that just laughs this off and elects him anyways)

Oh STFU! You live in EAST Texas...what do you expect? None of you people up there can speak worth a damn (the EAST Texas accent is the drawl that some retards associate with all of Texas) and East Texas is also home to Vidor (not far from Houston) where the KKK still rules.

I was born, raised and currently live in South Texas and have no discernable accent. Keep your hick accents in Houston and surrounding areas and don't infect the rest of us.

Tell me about it! I grew up in Port Aransas (near Corpus Christi, such a beautiful place). I have a Pennsylvania accent! Of course, that came from my friends, who were all from the Northeast.

Oh, and then there's the very South of Texas. I lived in the Rio Grande Valley for a few years, and barely anybody had an accent.

Oh STFU! You live in EAST Texas...what do you expect? None of you people up there can speak worth a damn.

It isn't as simple as north, south, east and west. Some parts of Houston have a real heavy accent whereas some (by some I mean very few) sound nothing like a texas accent.

I travel a lot and when I talk to someone from Manhatten or anywhere up north my accent never seems to bother them and their accent never bothers me

Tell me about it! I grew up in Port Aransas (near Corpus Christi, such a beautiful place). I have a Pennsylvania accent! Of course, that came from my friends, who were all from the Northeast.

Oh, and then there's the very South of Texas. I lived in the Rio Grande Valley for a few years, and barely anybody had an accent.
HAHA! I live in Flour Bluff (the nice part... not the white trash part over near NAS CC ;)) and my neice and nephew go to school in Port A because their schools have been ranked "exceptional" for I don't know how many years running.

*sings "It's a Small World".*

HAHA! I live in Flour Bluff (the nice part... not the white trash part over near NAS CC ;)) and my neice and nephew go to school in Port A because their schools have been ranked "exceptional" for I don't know how many years running.

*sings "It's a Small World".*

Yeah, the schools are definitely A+. And Flour Bluff is nice. I like the Sub-Way there --- They put shitloads of meat on every sandwich!

Hey, I was born in Houston and have hardly any accent. My grandmother accuses my of talking like a yankee. When I lived in Florida they said they couldn't tell. They picked up on my ex-husbands accent and he's from Dallas.
I have a slight Texas/southern accent and I think it's charming. :p
I'm not sure most people could tell where I'm from. I've lived in Texas, California, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Florida. I'd probably really confuse people.
Oddly enough, when I'm speaking to someone with a heavy accent, mine gets worse.

Hey, I was born in Houston and have hardly any accent. My grandmother accusses my of talking like a yankee.

Haha, a few years back when I answered the phone, it happened to be my grandma. We talked for a few seconds (about thirty), and she asked who it was (haha), and I said "*insert name*". She said "WHAT!? You sound like a damn YANKEE!!". She was funny about it, though, and was okay with it!

My dad's a different story... He actually threatened me for talking this way.

My accent also gets stronger if I'm talking to someone with a strong accent. Its real moment to shine, though, is when I'm angry. The angrier I get, the stronger it gets... and since my voice tends to approach a higher pitch at the same time, you end up with something that sounds sort of like Tinkerbell, but all drawlariffic, arguing loudly. Dignified.

Of course it's off, it's Texas. What do you expect, understanding and compassion, maybe respect for gay rights? You've got a better shot looking for a snowball in hell.

(In my defense: I am a northern bigot from Iowa. I am bigoted against anyone who tramples on human rights, anyone who's idea of diplomacy is "I got a bigger gun than you do", and anyone who managed to snort coke, skip war service, and still hold high office. I also have an inherent disrespect for any state that just laughs this off and elects him anyways)

Edit: Apparently I'm a crazy liberal. I kind of like the idea.

I would like to bring it to the attention of participants in this debate that I have already posted my well founded thesis (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=8177806&highlight=only+trying+to+steal+bed+space#post8177806) that Texas is slowly being drawn into the bizarro universe. In texas the rules of logic and ethics are now quite different to those in the universe to which the rest of us are accustomed. In Texas it is quite rational to believe that a man nicknamed "the Texacutioner" is a compassionate anything and that a cheerleader is more macho than a football playing war hero.

This is much like how in a positively spherical universe an equilateral triangle has 3 right angles even though in the universe to which we are accustomed such an arrangement of angles simply makes a shape like this |_|_

My accent also gets stronger if I'm talking to someone with a strong accent. Its real moment to shine, though, is when I'm angry. The angrier I get, the stronger it gets... and since my voice tends to approach a higher pitch at the same time, you end up with something that sounds sort of like Tinkerbell, but all drawlariffic, arguing loudly. Dignified.

Cool. When I get mad (and loud), I start sounding like a classic tough guy. I don't force it, either. It's always been that way. I'd record it, but I don't have the equipment to do so!

I lived in Missouri City until I was 11. I also lived in Alief while I was in HS. Finished HS in the Austin area.

My accent also gets stronger if I'm talking to someone with a strong accent. Its real moment to shine, though, is when I'm angry. The angrier I get, the stronger it gets... and since my voice tends to approach a higher pitch at the same time, you end up with something that sounds sort of like Tinkerbell, but all drawlariffic, arguing loudly. Dignified.
I don't have a discernable accent... until I get drunk... and the drunker I get, the heavier the drawl.

...Or maybe that's just the slurring. ;)

The good thing is: I quit drinking almost a year ago... so my 'accent' hasn't shown up in almost a year. :D

My accent also gets stronger if I'm talking to someone with a strong accent. Its real moment to shine, though, is when I'm angry. The angrier I get, the stronger it gets... and since my voice tends to approach a higher pitch at the same time, you end up with something that sounds sort of like Tinkerbell, but all drawlariffic, arguing loudly. Dignified.
ROFL
I'm loving the picture that gives me.

Yeah, the schools are definitely A+. And Flour Bluff is nice. I like the Sub-Way there --- They put shitloads of meat on every sandwich!
They don't do it that much anymore. I think they got new management. *heh* Although, I had Subway from the one on the island today...and they put a TON of meat on it. *thumbs up* :D

NO SHIT!

Bush is not a real Texan. I don't care where he says he's from.

Bush lost an election in Texas partly because his opponent characterized him as an Ivy League intellectual. Bush vowed never to be out-dumbed again. He's been quite sucessful.

Ha ha ha.

You're exactly right about him not being a Texan. He's from Connecticut. Everything about him is a fraud, with the possible, but not necessary, exception of his stupidity.

I don't know why some people feel like this thread is to pick on Texans. The loudest critics of the state on here have all been Texans.

I don't know why some people feel like this thread is to pick on Texans. The loudest critics of the state on here have all been Texans.
I haven't said much because I don't have to. I just look at states like California, Oregon, Washington and Massachusetts and thank GOD I live in Texas. :D

I haven't said much because I don't have to. I just look at states like California, Oregon, Washington and Massachusetts and thank GOD I live in Texas. :D I obviously have very bad karma. I'm a Texan living in Oklahoma. :D

I obviously have very bad karma. I'm a Texan living in Oklahoma. :D
Remember that old joke?

"Why does Oklahoma suck so much?

To keep Texas from sliding into the Gulf."

:D

So I'm crazy eh? Well I guess it takes a special kind of crazy to be creating a plan to separate the entire Northeast from the Union...literally.

What would you do for food?

I don't know why some people feel like this thread is to pick on Texans. The loudest critics of the state on here have all been Texans.

Probably because most threads about Texas on nearly any forum bitch about the state (and this one did indeed start with a general "Texas sucks" theme.) When was the last time you saw a thread that started by PRAISING Texas?

Probably because most threads about Texas on nearly any forum bitch about the state (and this one did indeed start with a general "Texas sucks" theme.) When was the last time you saw a thread that started by PRAISING Texas?There are bad things about all places. It's just that Texas is just plain nuts. The place is backwards, contrary, cantankerous and perverse. Which would never stop me from being proud to be a Texan. Partly because I think all but backwards pretty well describe me.

You americans always getting at each others throat... just like you're civil war... I'd just wish you had another in the '80s maybe all you ned is some more :fluffle: with your mothers and sisters and Dads ;)

Whats all this normal stuff about anyways...

That's interesting, as a declaratory law. Why do they still do this? Didn't they learn their lesson with the blacks in the 1960s?


They learned other things than just that as well though. Remember that any movement without a leader and without a strong media backing will eventually fade back into obscurity. Obscurity on the national scene means that the problem is effectively in the hands of the few in power.

The black population of the South had plenty of false starts; it may be decades before the Gay rights movement gets momentum again if it is stalled out now. Just as the civil rights movment didn't get moving with the end of the women's rights movment, or after WW2, or any of the other dozens of times it COULD have happened.

That, I suppose, is what is being banked on here; with anti-homosexual feeling at an all time high, no appreciable high-profile leaders in the gay rights movement, and a cowed media uninterested with provoking anyone...the bet is a pretty good one I'd say.

These laws, if even 1/10th of them remain in place, will continue to put the gay rights movement on the defensive, forced to concentrate on keeping their very right to life. In this manner, the issue can be kept where these anti-homosexual people want it; in the closet.

Remember that there is no real certainty that the US will ever give homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals. No certainty at all. Only the proper timing and use of resources by the LGBT community can effectively restore homosexuals to 1st class citizenship. Now would not be the time to them to rise up and assert themselves; they would be fighting against all odds.

So actually, this move is not only expected, but its part of a general campagin. You will almost certainly see many more where this one comes from, different areas, different focuses, but still the same campaign to remove the rights of homosexuals.

To elaborate, mainly because of the racism, homophobia and gratuitous use of the death penalty, all of which are evil.

I'd like to question if any of you saying this have ever been in the south for more than a week or so. I think you're confusing the 1960's South with the current South. I've lived various places in the South and the North, and the South is WAY more racially integrated and racially accepting in the North. Maybe you ought to get the Southern conservative racist backwoods hick stereotype out of your mind and start paying attention to reality. People in the South aren't racist bigots. There is more racism in the North than in the South. Also, the S
.outh isn't an epicenter for homophobia either. More people in the South are practicing Christians than in the North, so they tend to not support homosexuality, but that doesn't mean they are homophobic. Get out of college and get some real world experience before you act like you know what you're talking about.

-snip-

I happen to live in the South, and have been to the North, and I'll say this --- What you just said is complete and utter bullshit.

The South, more racially-accepting than the North? Hahahahahaha. Lest we forget that many Alabama golf courses STILL don't allow Blacks, Mexicans, and Hispanics membership.

Well I don't know what racist community you're living in but everywhere I've been that has been the case...and that is an extensive number of places.

Well I don't know what racist community you're living in but everywhere I've been that has been the case...and that is an extensive number of places.

Oh, so you've been to Ohio, I see.

Not all of us Texans are ignorant fools, I am from Texas and I have no objection to anybody that is different from thier religon, sexual orientation or thier color. I also know many around me who object to this sort of discrimination.

Places I've lived in the North...Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Maine, New York, Maryland. Way to argue buddy.

Its funny how people take thier stereotypical thoughts about something and try to pass it off as actual facts. Childish....

Not all of us Texans are ignorant fools, I am from Texas and I have no objection to anybody that is different from thier religon, sexual orientation or thier color. I also know many around me who object to this sort of discrimination.
Some Texans are cool, but the bad folks are the ones that get on the news, and it ends up with a bad reputation for everyone.