NationStates Jolt Archive

Introducing another thread about one of general‘s favorite topics, homosexuality:

What if every gay man and woman “in the closet” overcame their shame and embraced who they are (or who they think they are, depending on your thoughts on the subject). How would society cope if every homosexual was proud to be themselves? How could the government continue to deny the right to marry to respectable members of society who had been hiding their sexuality, including politicians, doctors, lawyers and businesspeople? What would homophobes who have long been friends with those who were really gay think? How would conservative families respond to their daughters and sons “coming out.”

Would anything change or would people continue the intolerance and repression of America’s last second class citizens?

Well, many rednecks would get really mad - there'd probably be more violent attacks on gay people.
But if they could stick to their guns, all the close-minded people would die out with time...

Introducing another thread about one of general‘s favorite topics, homosexuality:

What if every gay man and woman “in the closet” overcame their shame and embraced who they are (or who they think they are, depending on your thoughts on the subject). How would society cope if every homosexual was proud to be themselves? How could the government continue to deny the right to marry to respectable members of society who had been hiding their sexuality, including politicians, doctors, lawyers and businesspeople? What would homophobes who have long been friends with those who were really gay think? How would conservative families respond to their daughters and sons “coming out.”

Would anything change or would people continue the intolerance and repression of America’s last second class citizens?

I usually don't post on threads regarding homosexuals, mainly because I don't know much about the issues these people have to deal with. However I am responding to this thread in particular because of the highlighted part of the quote which implies that homosexuals are the only people treated as second class citizens in "America". If, by writing "America", you are referring to the U.S. I would have to say that Mexicans, born and raised in the U.S. are still treated like second class citizens. As are U.S. citizens of African and Native American descent. Homophobia is only one of the many prejudices exhibited by the citizens of the U.S.

I usually don't post on threads regarding homosexuals, mainly because I don't know much about the issues these people have to deal with. However I am responding to this thread in particular because of the highlighted part of the quote which implies that homosexuals are the only people treated as second class citizens in "America". If, by writing "America", you are referring to the U.S. I would have to say that Mexicans, born and raised in the U.S. are still treated like second class citizens. As are U.S. citizens of African and Native American descent. Homophobia is only one of the many prejudices exhibited by the citizens of the U.S.

Let the victim game begin!

I usually don't post on threads regarding homosexuals, mainly because I don't know much about the issues these people have to deal with. However I am responding to this thread in particular because of the highlighted part of the quote which implies that homosexuals are the only people treated as second class citizens in "America". If, by writing "America", you are referring to the U.S. I would have to say that Mexicans, born and raised in the U.S. are still treated like second class citizens. As are U.S. citizens of African and Native American descent. Homophobia is only one of the many prejudices exhibited by the citizens of the U.S.
But it’s the only one recognized by the government, negatively. You will never end private prejudices, but all should have equality under the law.

Well, many rednecks would get really mad - there'd probably be more violent attacks on gay people.
But if they could stick to their guns, all the close-minded people would die out with time...Many rednecks would come out of the closet, too.

Many rednecks would come out of the closet, too.
Exactly.

But it’s the only one recognized by the government, negatively. You will never end private prejudices, but all should have equality under the law.

I didn't realize the rights of homosexuals were not protected under the law in the U.S. However I do think that private prejudices can be changed by making them publicly unacceptable. Some people might argue that this brand of political correctness is just cosmetic. But a child raised in an environment where people of African ancestry are not allowed to drink at the same waterfountain as they will have a different attitude towards minorities than someone who has a chance to go to an ethnicly diverse school.

Haven't there been a few gay pride parades? I swear I remember hearing something about that before...hmmm oh well. Maybe you shouldn't leave it up to them to come out by themselves. Cause they may see a lot of intolerance that only exists in their own mind. So if you have a friend that you are pretty definite is gay. I say throw them a suprise coming out party. Get all of his/her friends and family to come together to say "Hey your gay! It doesn't change anything and we still love you...just maybe not in that way"

I didn't realize the rights of homosexuals were not protected under the law in the U.S.
They can’t get legally married to the ones they love, can they?

Let the victim game begin!

You just sit in your tower princess and let the real people deal with issues of solidarity.

They can’t get legally married to the ones they love, can they?

I don't know. As I mentioned in my first post I'm not familiar with issues homosexuals must face. My intention is not to engage in a debate of "whose got it worse?" But to demonstrate that if one minority wishes other people to recognize their rights then they must acknowledge the struggle for equality faced by others. Or would you prefer to play the game that Fass is suggesting and struggle for "most favoured minority" status?

You just sit in your tower princess and let the real people deal with issues of solidarity.

1. Solidarity is for socialists.

2. Your post was a "more victimised than thou" post. And a particularly inane one at that, because you, by your own admission of ignorance in the matter, aren't even qualified to make it. So, if you are whom they have fighting for solidarity, perhaps you should get educated in the matter before opening your, oh, so demonstrably real yap, hmm?

3. I like my Swedish tower, thank you very much. I was involved in the struggles to change marriage and cohabitation laws, and adoption laws and discrimination laws here, and I am very entitled to just sit down and enjoy it. Although, this is one Rapunzel that knows that her hair is of no use to you, so you better start growing your own.

What's the big thing about marriage? Just be with the person for crying out loud! In the 21st century marriage is nothing more than a legal agreement that allows you to screw up your spouse's life if they upset you or change their mind about wanting to spend the rest of their life with you.

I think everyone's rights should be accepted, HOWEVER...
It is unfair that straight men can be told off for flirting with women too heavily but when a 'gay' man flirts with me too heavily and I complain I get branded as a homophobe.

this whole fag-fashion is just the result of mass brain-washing. if the school system would stop all this propaganda, and children would be tought that fags are just a bunch of sick perverts, we wouldn't have so many of them.

*snip*

http://www.bentsynapse.net/insults/images/feed_troll.jpg

On topic... it would be an interesting notion. I'd especially like to see the rucus it would cause in the clergy...

On topic... it would be an interesting notion. I'd especially like to see the rucus it would cause in the clergy...

An interesting idea, however...

...I'd like to see the rucus it would cause in Congress. :D

Introducing another thread about one of general‘s favorite topics, homosexuality:

What if every gay man and woman “in the closet” overcame their shame and embraced who they are (or who they think they are, depending on your thoughts on the subject). How would society cope if every homosexual was proud to be themselves? How could the government continue to deny the right to marry to respectable members of society who had been hiding their sexuality, including politicians, doctors, lawyers and businesspeople? What would homophobes who have long been friends with those who were really gay think? How would conservative families respond to their daughters and sons “coming out.”

Would anything change or would people continue the intolerance and repression of America’s last second class citizens?


It would be great if this would happen. Living under fear of oppression I imagine would be horrible. And for those "pioneers" of gay pride would likely suffer greatly, like any civil rights activist in the beginning. Eventually though, things would improve over time.

I didn't realize the rights of homosexuals were not protected under the law in the U.S. However I do think that private prejudices can be changed by making them publicly unacceptable. Some people might argue that this brand of political correctness is just cosmetic. But a child raised in an environment where people of African ancestry are not allowed to drink at the same waterfountain as they will have a different attitude towards minorities than someone who has a chance to go to an ethnicly diverse school.

In several states in the US it is ILLEGAL for homosexuals to have sex
(although in some states sodomy* in general is illegal)
http://www.sodomylaws.org/usa/usa.htm
So homosexuals are not protected under the law, quite the opposite in fact.

*If you don't know what sodomy is, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy

this whole fag-fashion is just the result of mass brain-washing. if the school system would stop all this propaganda, and children would be tought that fags are just a bunch of sick perverts, we wouldn't have so many of them.

Dacia Magna: Official Warning for Trolling
This is an example of how to not start off in NS. Insulting groups of people like this is considered trolling, so I suggest that you go to the Moderation forum to read The One-Stop Rules Shop.

But it’s the only one recognized by the government, negatively. You will never end private prejudices, but all should have equality under the law. They do have equality on the law. At least, they do in the UK, and I assume they do in the US. If you're referring to the right to adopt, I don't think unmarried couples or single parents are allowed to adopt either.

In several states in the US it is ILLEGAL for homosexuals to have sex
(although in some states sodomy* in general is illegal)
http://www.sodomylaws.org/usa/usa.htm
So homosexuals are not protected under the law, quite the opposite in fact.

*If you don't know what sodomy is, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy

I thought the Texas law had been struck down... but maybe not. Regardless, those laws are nigh-impossible to enforce. What, do they post cops in the bedrooms? If they do, that violates the 4th Amendment (Unlawful Search and Seizure - it's private property, I assume), and it would take precedence over state laws.

That being said, they definitely should be repealed.

Introducing another thread about one of general‘s favorite topics, homosexuality:

What if every gay man and woman “in the closet” overcame their shame and embraced who they are (or who they think they are, depending on your thoughts on the subject). How would society cope if every homosexual was proud to be themselves? How could the government continue to deny the right to marry to respectable members of society who had been hiding their sexuality, including politicians, doctors, lawyers and businesspeople? What would homophobes who have long been friends with those who were really gay think? How would conservative families respond to their daughters and sons “coming out.”

Would anything change or would people continue the intolerance and repression of America’s last second class citizens?
Hasn't quite a bit of that happened already? Acceptance comes slowly, but when it does come it's usually quite solid.

Dacia Magna: Official Warning for Trolling
This is an example of how to not start off in NS. Insulting groups of people like this is considered trolling, so I suggest that you go to the Moderation forum to read The One-Stop Rules Shop.
ROFLMAO! SIC 'em, Euroslavia! :D

I seem to remember that at least 20 years ago, gays were measured as having higher average educational levels, incomes, etc, than straights.

Like other "second-class" citizens of the USA, they have got it made.

article about successful gay generation (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_n739-40/ai_20139080)

I will look for statistics later, but as far as I know, with some exceptions, they don't seem to be oppressed very much in this country.

And they are really quite funny!

1. Solidarity is for socialists.

And anyone else who wants to fight a social injustice in a democratic manner.

2. Your post was a "more victimised than thou" post. And a particularly inane one at that, because you, by your own admission of ignorance in the matter, aren't even qualified to make it. So, if you are whom they have fighting for solidarity, perhaps you should get educated in the matter before opening your, oh, so demonstrably real yap, hmm?

I'm ignorant when it comes to the specific problems homosexuals face, not the issue of discrimination or prejudice or ways in which social stereotypes are overcome. Of course if feeling sorry for yourself is what you're about feel free to cry yourself a river.

3. I like my Swedish tower, thank you very much. I was involved in the struggles to change marriage and cohabitation laws, and adoption laws and discrimination laws here, and I am very entitled to just sit down and enjoy it. Although, this is one Rapunzel that knows that her hair is of no use to you, so you better start growing your own.
Your hair isn't the only thing that's of no use to me.

In several states in the US it is ILLEGAL for homosexuals to have sex
(although in some states sodomy* in general is illegal)
http://www.sodomylaws.org/usa/usa.htm
So homosexuals are not protected under the law, quite the opposite in fact.

*If you don't know what sodomy is, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy

I didn't have a chance to read the entire article but I did read this; "The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that sodomy laws are unconstitutional on June 26, 2003."

And, according to the map, it seems that sodomy laws have been repealed in most states.

With regards to sodomy, personally it doesn't appeal to me, but I don't think that what consenting adults do in private is anybody's business but those involved.

I myself believe gay marriages should be illegal every where, due to the fact it's against the bible, although other countries who have a gay acceptance religion should be able to allow it with no problem. Even though, the marriages in the US are no longer religious, and more of a political/government idea. Therefore, by not giving gays the right to marry isn't such a bad thing, besides, they can't really have children. Another thing is, WE as people should be more accepting and liberal to other people's choices. If they want to go to hell for being gay, fine by me, as long as it doesn't include me, it's fine. I don't think Jesus tried to show aggression to people against God. And yeah, allowing gay marriages would just promote gay-ness, so I don't think it should be legal. That's all I got to say on that subject.

You can't promote "gay-ness"

Idiot

I myself believe gay marriages should be illegal every where, due to the fact it's against the bible, although other countries who have a gay acceptance religion should be able to allow it with no problem. Even though, the marriages in the US are no longer religious, and more of a political/government idea. Therefore, by not giving gays the right to marry isn't such a bad thing, besides, they can't really have children. Another thing is, WE as people should be more accepting and liberal to other people's choices. If they want to go to hell for being gay, fine by me, as long as it doesn't include me, it's fine. I don't think Jesus tried to show aggression to people against God. And yeah, allowing gay marriages would just promote gay-ness, so I don't think it should be legal. That's all I got to say on that subject. It's also against the Bible's commands not to forgive your brother however many times he needs it. Are we going to make a law based on that? No, obviously not - it's impractical and unenforceable.

Also, what the hell is a "gay acceptance religion"? :confused:

this whole fag-fashion is just the result of mass brain-washing. if the school system would stop all this propaganda, and children would be tought that fags are just a bunch of sick perverts, we wouldn't have so many of them.

Oh of course, what propagana are we referring to again? How dare we have the temerity to actually condone tolerance and acceptance. Incidentally, aren't you missing the local lynching and discussion of local KKK policy to post, surely you should be SODDING OFF BACK TO THE MORON WHO HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO SPAWN YOU.

I myself believe gay marriages should be illegal every where, due to the fact it's against the bible, although other countries who have a gay acceptance religion should be able to allow it with no problem. Even though, the marriages in the US are no longer religious, and more of a political/government idea. Therefore, by not giving gays the right to marry isn't such a bad thing, besides, they can't really have children. Another thing is, WE as people should be more accepting and liberal to other people's choices. If they want to go to hell for being gay, fine by me, as long as it doesn't include me, it's fine. I don't think Jesus tried to show aggression to people against God. And yeah, allowing gay marriages would just promote gay-ness, so I don't think it should be legal. That's all I got to say on that subject.

I think the concentration of contradiction in this response managed to actually bend space-time and create a little black hole of meaning. Black holes of meaning are defined as something so singularly irrelevant that not even correct grammar can escape.

this whole fag thing is against my religious beliefs, so i do have the right to express what i feel about what i consider to be a bunch of sick perverts. just like the jews consider the "goims" (non jews) to be unclean (not kosher), and muslims, according to the coran, consider that killing an unbeliever is ok, i too have the right to say whatever i want about fags. this whole tolerance crap is just another way of saying that everything is worth just as much as the next thing: normal sex=zoophilia=necrophilia=homosexuality=being a monk=being a murderer=being a canibal.

and the bible doesn't say that you should forgive your brother as many times as he needs, but to forgive him when he has sinned and wants to repent and not sin again. there's a slight difference, isn't it, my little "intelectually challenged" friends?

there's a slight difference, isn't it, my little "intelectually challenged" friends?

If you want to be sarcastic, please try to spell correctly. You're making quite the fool out of yourself

according to the coran, consider that killing an unbeliever is ok....
my little "intelectually challenged" friends?

Here's a couple of pointers if you are going to try to appear remotely credible on such matters:

One-if you are going to claim knowledge of another faith, please ensure you know what their most holy text is called and how to spell it.

Two-don't ever spell "intellectually" wrong, it tends to defeat your purpose somewhat and leave you looking like something of a fool.

Oh, but I forgive you anyway, regardless of your repentance.
Note: Edited due to spelling error. Don't you just love it :p

Its simply that America has the need for a new target for domestic hatred.
See, instead of Russia, we have "the terrorist" to direct our nationalism, and xenophobia against.

Domestically however, racial tensions seem to be lessening a bit in most areas.

So, what this country has done, is adopt a new scapegoat.
In the 50's and 60's, we had segregation, and civil rights.
Angry, fat old white men could always rely on the Blacks to supply a target for thier bitterness.

These days, being a rascist asshole, will not get you elected.
But, yelling about Jesus, and how all "Fags will burn in hell", does.

So, in a sense, "fags", are the new "Niggers".

See, we've learned that its wrong to hate minorities, becuase they were born minorties, after all, they cant help that.
But, since gays "choose to be gay" its willful evil, isnt it?
As long as the same angry, fat, old men believe that being gay is a choice, its alright to condemn those who "practice a wicked lifestyle".

Thus, "fags" are the new "niggers".

Ahh, dontcha just love logic like this?

Thus, "fags" are the new "niggers".

Brown is the new black?

Brown is the new black?


Uh....kinda like that.


and for the record...

Ew.

What if people stopped labeling sex and labeling people based on the type of sex they prefer, and they just had some sex instead?

:D

I myself believe gay marriages should be illegal every where, due to the fact it's against the bible, although other countries who have a gay acceptance religion should be able to allow it with no problem.
Hang on, it should be illegal everywhere but not everywhere....

Even though, the marriages in the US are no longer religious, and more of a political/government idea.
What? You do realise that the bible is supposed to have nothing to do with US law? That the US government is prohibited from favouring any religion?

You do also realise that marraige is not a 'religious thing' anymore than eating is?

Therefore, by not giving gays the right to marry isn't such a bad thing, besides, they can't really have children.
Why is it not such a bad thing? And what has children got to do with it? Evidently you do realise that if you cant get married it's very difficult to adopt...great logic 'they cant even have children for instance by adopting because they cant get married and you cant adopt children without being married, so therefore since they cant have children, for instance by adopting them (which they'd have to be married to do) they shouldnt be able to get married'....did you take a course to become so proficient in circular reasoning or is it a natural talent?

Another thing is, WE as people should be more accepting and liberal to other people's choices. If they want to go to hell for being gay, fine by me, as long as it doesn't include me, it's fine.
If you really felt that way you either would wish them to be able to marry or wouldnt care whether they married or not.

I don't think Jesus tried to show aggression to people against God. And yeah, allowing gay marriages would just promote gay-ness, so I don't think it should be legal.
So what if it promotes it if it's fine with you so long as your not included?

That's all I got to say on that subject.
Probably a good thing, the more you say the more you contradict yourself, the less clear it is what you are trying to say...

Here's a couple of pointers if you are going to try to appear remotely credible on such matters:

One-if you are going to claim knowledge of another faith, please ensure you know what their most holy text is called and how to spell it.

Two-don't ever spell "intellectually" wrong, it tends to defeat your purpose somewhat and leave you looking like something of a fool.

Oh, but I forgive you anyway, regardless of your repentance.
Note: Edited due to spelling error. Don't you just love it :p

well, since my native language is not english, i suppose a small typo is not a tragedy. and the word "coran" is spelled differently in different languages, like "coran", "koran", "kuran", etc. but i actually don't give a shit about the spelling, as it has nothing to do with all the nonsense preached in the coran by that towel-headed freak, mohammed.