A notice to those who oppose or have a problem with the Gay Rights Movement

reply to post by TurkeyBurgers


LOL Not the first time that I've cheated death... Not the last either...

reply to post by KingAtlas


I have two words for you: GROW UP! It is apparent from your post that you are VERY young. Nice try at getting us 'old dudes' riled up, but no dice, kiddo! So when do you go back to school?

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


Come on now, don't preach tolerance and then be intolerant to someone else's view just because you don't agree with it.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
To those who object to homosexual behavior due to their religious beliefs (mainly Christians as I've seen you in the religious threads), I would remind you that Jesus gave you only two commandments:

29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12; verses 29-31

I would also add:

37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven

Luke 6: 37

To those who wish to legislate us away, remember that this country was founded on the rights and freedoms of the individual, not only that of the majority. Do you remember these words?

1. Loving my neighbor does not mean I have to have sex with him, or that I have to accept his lifestyle choices. I can rebuke a person for their openly flaunting their gayness, yet still love him as myself.

You confuse hypocritical sentimentality with Love.

2. I agree we are not to judge in the judicial legal sense where our judgement leads to condemning and punishing people. This is the kind of judging Jesus condemned.

However, "judging" in the sense of going through a process of evaluation is completely acceptable and prudent. This is not the kind of judging Jesus condemned.

3. We don't condemn people. God himself does that. However, we can condemn the activity which violates our consciences, and indeed we are encouraged to do that in scripture.

4. Each individual has rights, most intelligent people would not argue against that. You have the same rights as me, no more and no less. You get no special minority status for your lifestyle choice, because you are not a race or an ethnic group. You are just a person who has a fetish like many other people who have any number of different fetishes.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts


For those who object to it because your children might see it, eventually they will be exposed to it, and probably when you are not around. You are also missing a golden opportunity to teach your child(ren) something very valuable.

I think it depends where people live, if their young children will be exposed to it or not. Where I am living now, this definately would not happen, but their are known gay inidividuals around. While they are not discriminated against by neighbors, they don't show public displays of affection.

I'm also curious as to what age you think it is ok for children to be exposed to this? You gave a nice example of a talk one might have with their children, but unless you are actually a parent, it isn't so easy.

Children ask a billion questions when they are small, and I know for myself, being a mother of 4, that I would have a hard time explaining this to them, so, while I am acceptant of your situation, you have to realize that your suggestion might not fly with a lot of parents.

reply to post by John Matrix


But the point is, they do not have the same rights as you do. When they are allowed the same rights, then you can take this stance. There would be no need for a "gay movement" or "gay agenda" if it weren't necessary in order to obtain equal rights.

And again, may I correct you on your use of the term fetish. It is an almost universal behaviour throughout the animal kingdom, and therefore cannot be considered an aberration or a fetish.

reply to post by argentus

NAMBLA

NAMBLA? Oh, you mean the "North American Marlon Brando Look Alike" group???



Sorry, couldn't resist a South Park reference....silly me.

Originally posted by John Matrix
4. Each individual has rights, most intelligent people would not argue against that. You have the same rights as me, no more and no less. You get no special minority status for your lifestyle choice, because you are not a race or an ethnic group. You are just a person who has a fetish like many other people who have any number of different fetishes.

Execpt he doesn't.

The OP is gay and hence may not marry the person he loves.

It's the state that says he can't marry the person he loves and that makes him a second class citizen.(It made me sick to my stomach, literally, to write that last sentence. That I live in a country(or in a world) that pretends to be civilized but still has second class citizens...)

Vas

Jaxon iam sorry i offended you, i totally believe in your gay rights. Alls i was saying is that alot of people are messed in the head, just that gay dudes are a little more obvious about it....seriously what kinda dude walks around shaking his butt and talking in a high voice OMG.....

in reality you see few of there but on TV it is what alot of people see, and therefor, if young gay dudes see this they might act like this because they think its normal. So if the gay dudes just got the help they needed befor alot of the youger gay dudes would be happier people too.
Its like people who act like people they think are cool, just because they think its cool.

something like:
"mimickry is the highest form of flatery" haha

Jaxon iam sorry i offended you, i totally believe in your gay rights. Alls i was saying is that alot of people are messed in the head, just that gay dudes are a little more obvious about it....seriously what kinda dude walks around shaking his butt and talking in a high voice OMG.....

in reality you see few of there but on TV it is what alot of people see, and therefor, if young gay dudes see this they might act like this because they think its normal. So if the gay dudes just got the help they needed befor alot of the youger gay dudes would be happier people too.
Its like people who act like people they think are cool, just because they think its cool.

something like:
"mimickry is the highest form of flatery" haha

reply to post by jd140


I came to my conclusion for two reasons: One, the way the post was written, and two, the date the the poster joined ATS. It's summer, and the kids are bored. I have a friend that's a Mod who told me it's quite common in the summer months. They join up and poke at the membership to get a rise out of us. If I'm wrong, then I apoligize. But odds are real good that I'm not.

reply to post by KingAtlas


Very magnaminous of you not to want to shoot them all...you sound very well balanced.

now honestly i almost think that MOST PEOPLE including the gays should have to go for psycological evaluation befor being around others, but especially the gays, and especially the other people too.

Who are the others? How many others are there? Are aliens involved?

Originally posted by DaisyAnne
reply to post by John Matrix

 

But the point is, they do not have the same rights as you do. When they are allowed the same rights, then you can take this stance. There would be no need for a "gay movement" or "gay agenda" if it weren't necessary in order to obtain equal rights.

And again, may I correct you on your use of the term fetish. It is an almost universal behaviour throughout the animal kingdom, and therefore cannot be considered an aberration or a fetish.

Yes they do have the same rights as me, they even have the right to marry a woman, just like me.

They want special rights that are associated with their sexual behavior, and that is just nonesense.

I'd like to speak up for the more obvious queens. From what I've observed they've been at the forefront of the gay rights movement for decades.

Those men are brave and deserve some recognition for standing up and being counted.

A lot of people might not like their behaviour much, but who stops to think how much they might feel that heterosexual values are always in their faces?

In my signature I include a quote from Quentin Crisp, the first homosexual I ever heard of. He was 'out' back in the 1930's when nearly every other gay man was keeping his head down and pretending to be 'normal'.

He was a wonderful man - I don't think he ever wrote or said a word that I disagreed with.

I don't want to see anyone of any persuasion giving over the top displays of affection in public either. If you look away you get accused of being intolerant. If you look you get accused of gawping.

BUT - as long some people can get away with it, then it's only fair that everyone can get away with it.

If the less flamboyant members of the gay community object to the stereotype and don't want to be represented by the queens then they will have to make themselves better known.

Next time there's a TV crew around, elbow the queens out of the way and let the public see another type of gay male representing the cause. If no-one has the inclination to do that then it's no use complaining about the men who are willing to speak up.

A word on gay marriage - as usual Whaaa's got it right If people really want to put themselves through that, why not let them?

As for Civil Partnerships - I think they're a good idea. A better idea than marriage. It's a pity they're not available to heterosexual couples. (They're not, are they?)

reply to post by KingAtlas


Now that's a much better tone. There are 'dirty old men' of every persuasion. Just don't judge an entire group by the actions of a few. I'm almost 50 now, and trust me, I don't want a young kid. When it comes to men, I want to date one, not raise one!

reply to post by berenike


Very nice sentiments, berenike!! Truly thoughtful.

As for Civil Partnerships - I think they're a good idea. A better idea than marriage. It's a pity they're not available to heterosexual couples. (They're not, are they?)

I guess there's 'common law'??

In any event, with all of this focus on "marriage", it muddies the water.

We never hear about what must be thousands of men/women who 'marry' without the need of some ridiculous 'church'!! That would count as a 'civil union', right? For legal purposes. Religion isn't practiced by everyone...and I daresay, most religions are FAR more damaging than homosexuality could ever be!!!

Originally posted by John Matrix


Yes they do have the same rights as me, they even have the right to marry a woman, just like me.

They want special rights that are associated with their sexual behavior, and that is just nonesense.

They want to be able to marry the person they love. You know that, I know that.

You are stating that the laws of marriage should be limited based on sexual behaviour. Aren't you being nonsensical too, then? Come now, John, I don't have any interest in attacking you or insulting you. But your logic is flawed.

Originally posted by Blanca Rose
I'm also curious as to what age you think it is ok for children to be exposed to this? You gave a nice example of a talk one might have with their children, but unless you are actually a parent, it isn't so easy.

I'm the father of one and the grandfather of three. Trust me, the really tough question is "Daddy, where do babies come from?" Everything else is gravy! As to exposure, unless you don't let your kids watch TV, they'll eventually be exposed. As to the example I gave, the sooner the better, but for the reasons I listed after the quote. My daughter was brought up to cherish her individuality, and she never felt pressured to do anything! She just turned 24, has never done drugs, rarely drinks and is a Christian Republican (so not like her old man!). She is her own person.

What is there to say to homosexual persons except you reap what you sow. If your love represents nothing but the homosexual lust of 2 men then you will reap nothing but your lust from the union. When a couple that is of a man and woman is together then a child may be born. If you seek a child in your union then it should be of a man and a woman. If all you seek is each other and no product of the union then you harm no one with it. If no harm is done who has a care of this union but yourselves.

No one cares if your gay, no one.

The declaration of independence lists inherent right granted all humans by virute of thier birth. If you are human, then those rights apply. You don't need equal rights, becuase you already have them. People just think it's stupid that some in the Gay community throw thier sexuality in other peoples faces. I don't see herto pride parades, ever.

If anyone is damaging the rights of a "gay person", it's the gay rights movement.