New York passes Gay Marriage

No...I'm just trying to put the capitalist spin on it for you. If there's money to be made, it might be ok. Cash overrides everything.

More seriously, what's wrong is wrong, no matter how you want to dress it up. It's telling that you would be quite comfortable with gay men wearing dresses is perfectly acceptable when teaching youth, helping to mold their sense of right and wrong. Hey, instead of a dress, how bout a man with just a pair of tight shorts and a cowboy hat in the classroom? The one giving him the ride (let's call him Joe), can still wear the dress while they (Joe and Bob) drop their kids off and pick them up from school, in a pink van with darkened windows. You're good with that, right? Self esteem for the kids would be great too, don't you think? That should be easy to deal with while trying to associate with their peers at school. You'll still continue to insist there isn't anything wrong with that behavior, won't you?

 

What do you have against men wearing dresses? All your Muslim-terror buddies are always kissing each other and wearing dresses, plus those little pointy shoes just scream "Don't I look fab-u-lous"?

View attachment 205
Mohammad Qatanani, left , the imam of the Islamic Center of Passaic County is kissed on the forehead by a member of his mosque after it was learned the imam can stay in the United States.

Now, is this really any worse:

View attachment 206
Man kissing his friend.

 

When is your gay pride party happening this month? Gimme your address. I'll help you spread the word.

 

Last pic should probably be lower to correctly represent the idea.

 

I am not an anarchist. I have already said that we give up some freedom to live together in groups (a society). We have decided that we do not want people walking around with their genitalia hanging out. But, we didn't decide that just men can't do it. Or just black men. Or just gay men. Or just Jews. We have decided that crapping in the streets is not allowed. But not just for women. Or lesbians. Or everyone but Aryans. And we have laws against playing music too loud in your car. But it isn't just rap music. Or Country. Or rock. The law is applied equally based upon the act. Not based upon the person doing it.

That is where we differ on what freedom and equality are. You want to make one group of men and women have different rules and freedoms than another group. To make one group of adults less equal as people than another. To make some adults more human than others.

Gays are forbidden to teach is no different than Jews are forbidden to teach to my idea of what freedom and equality is. Saying gay men can't hold hands in public is no different than saying a black man and a white woman can't hold hands in public. We outlaw the act not the men and women doing it.

 

You skirted the question.

Pink van with darkened windows, guy driving in a dress, drops off another guy with tight little plastic shorts and a cowboy hat (who is your kids teacher). That's cool with you, right? Or the same men pull up with their adopted kids, and the cowboy takes his son to class with him to teach. All cool? Right?

All people are obviously human and deserve human consideration. Why should that mean though, that accepting, what is considered offensive behavior by many, be allowed in the type of environment I describe? How bout the same teacher kisses his partner goodbye (on the lips) several times a day in front of the kids? Suppose the driver brings supplies to school, cookies, or whatever several times a week? Each time they embrace and lock lips. That cool too?

It's all about behavior, and what one considers acceptable behavior and what isn't.
You say you have no problem with gays, they're completely acceptable just as they are, to kids, to whomever. You find nothing offensive in the gay lifestyle, and would be proud to have it displayed to your child every day, and would want your child to emulate that same behavior. That's what you're saying when you claim all are exactly equal to any other human AND you fully accept their lifestyle.
Far as considering one group of people more human than the other, I submit that one group is completely inconsiderate of the other group's feelings on the matter, by forcing the issue be addressed and resolved to their satisfaction.
Do what you want. Do it on your own time, in private. You insist on freedom? You got it. We insist on our freedom not to be subjected to your immoral, disgusting, lewd behavior as well.

Conforming to society comes in there somewhere too....you adapt to it...it doesn't have to adapt to you, nor should it be forced to do so.

 

Honestly I don't care about the pink van or the guy dropping him off. But a dress code forbidding tight plastic shorts for teachers seems very reasonable. All teachers, of course. Not just gay ones. Or black ones. Or Jews. I wouldn't want a woman teacher, no matter how attractive, wearing little plastic shorts to teach my kids either. You obviously have no concern about whether it would be ok for a woman to wear tight little plastic shorts to teach children. Only a gay man.

And there, once again, lies the difference between equality and inequality. Making something illegal based upon the act versus making something illegal based upon who is doing the act. You are only concerned with making laws for a specific group of people because you find what they are to be offensive. At the heart of it, that is going down the road of fascism. The only thing missing is the violence. And I would not be surprised if it came to light that your buddies with the ballz on their pickups got them off of gays that they attacked.

And as far as you thinking "All people are obviously human and deserve human consideration." I don't buy it for a minute. Unless 'human consideration' is your code word for not as much human consideration as you and people like you.

 

Where did I ever say gay lifestyle should be illegal? The description of the attire is an attempt to get you to realize what it is you condone by default. There is a gay parade every year, isn't there? Maybe we should have a "non gay" day parade too? You see the problem with that kind of logic? On hand hand, you advocate the same for all, while defending the opposite at the same time. I don't like the gay lifestyle...clearly and obviously. That's just tough for me, right? Ok. I'll just have to live with it I guess. Gays don't represent the majority or constitute the lifestyle that MOST of the population would endorse as immoral, lewd, etc,etc. They have the right to do whatever the hell they want, so long as it doesn't impose on the rest of society. Defining marriage as two gay men isn't marriage. It might be a union, legally the same to whatever degree, but it ISN'T marriage. That is defined as one man/one woman, and is celebrated as such.
The balz on the pickup trucks comes from your neck of the woods, so where they got them exactly, I'll defer to you.
Human rights should be limited when they infringe on others.

 

Not really. We have, down here, Italian Festivals, German Festivals, Hispanic festivals, etc. The Masons have their parade and circus. There is some kind of Heavy Metal or Punk or something Festival around here too. Even the 'rednecks' have their hunting and fishing days festival. If you want to organize a Straight Pride Parade...go for it. Unless you what really mean is an Anti-Gay Parade because, in that case, the KKK and Skinheads probably already have something organized that you can attend and save yourself some organizing time. Just ask your buddies with the 'ballzy' pickup trucks. You have a lot more in common with those folks than I do. They aren't Republicans because of their economic beliefs. They are Republicans because of their beliefs about social issues.

 

How about two gay guys taking their kids to school, and they are both wearing suits that cost more than your car. And they drop the kid off in in Saab? A And don't own one pair of plastic shorts and they both work hard and one or both could beat the snot out of you without really trying. They're gay so that would be their life style. I mean since you're supposing. The tradition of marriage. Give us a break. What kind of tradition is that anyway. Where fifty percent break tradition and get divorced. Yep that's some tradition.

 

Actually, they don't use the term gay anymore. It is GLBT now. I would explain what the other letters mean but based on your reaction to gay men, I think it would make your head explode. Once you find out what the letters mean, consider this question. Is it appropriate for a T to wear a skirt and teach the children?

PS. Are you a member of NARTH?

http://narth.com/get-involved/join-narth/

 

I think it was the GLBT that made me realize we need single-user bathrooms in public (and some private) places. I started thinking about places having to provide separate bathrooms for all the different possibilities... I think there were 7 different types that I came up with. Makes sense to just have a couple of unisex (etc.) bathrooms instead of having seven lol

 

Well, maybe if they forced hetero couples to engage in the gay lifestyle following divorce, probably the divorce rates would drop drastically.

 

I don't care what they call themselves. Just do it privately, and stay away from normal marriage.

 

I guess you could just reach under the stall and claim you're straight either way. I thought rest stops were single user bathrooms? In and out in 15 seconds.

 

Didn't you say.you were living with your girlfriend? And you're judging other's morals?

 

No, I didn't say.

 

You must be thinking of someone else. I would have to believe that Tom would not be living in sin with anyone. Especially if there are children involved!

 

I thought you had in a post a while back. If not, my mistake. Are you living with your girlfriend?

 

Nope.
You live with your boyfriend?