Where are the black civil rights leaders on this one?
Here is the radical homosexual rights gang saying that they have “rights”!
Since when is a behaviour a civic right, like voting?
What are they looking for, a constitutional amendment to lead their obscene lifestyle?
Patrick Ashley
‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.’ -Edmund Burke
You’re right! There they are, flaunting there sexuality in public, kissing, hugging, and god knows WHAT else! I don’t need to know who they sleep with, and I sure as hell don’t want them oogling me in public!
Those damn heterosexuals and their “special rights”!
Yeee-hiii!
Damn right. If they want to do that disgustin’ stuff, let 'em do it in a voting booth behind the curtain.
While we’re at it, lets go have a look at them Lutherens down the street here. I’ve heard stuff about drinkin’ blood and eatin’ flesh.
Did it in a voting booth once. Accidently voted for Reagan. Talk about unsafe sex!
Patrick, I will do you the honor of assuming that your original post is not a troll, as such terms are used here.
First point: Coretta Scott King is pro gay rights, and works with the Human Rights Coalition to assure that all Americans get a fair shake.
Two, Otto has answered at length on why gay activists are radical activists. If he cares to repeat himself here, I’ll leave it to him.
Three, aside from the tendency to use the rainbow and the pink inverted triangle as colors and emblem respectively, I see no gang tendencies on those advocating radical homosexual rights.
Four, is it your contention that homosexuals do not have rights, as putting the word “rights” in quotes would indicate? Or are you opposed to “special rights”? There is a thread devoted to that quite recently opened.
Five, to the best of my reading on the issue, their “behavior” (by which I’m assuming you mean sexual activity) is the least of what they are addressing. I’m not totally clear what you mean by “civic right” here, unless you meant “civil” and mistyped. Their civic rights are the same as yours and mine are, to vote, attend public meetings (city council and all that), speak publicly on issues, run for office, etc. Their public rights would be to be able to live their lives normally without fear of reprisal or legal condemnation for their identity. I don’t see any problem with that.
I haven’t seen anything about a constitutional amendment being proposed. Do you know something I don’t on this issue?
“Obscene lifestyle”? Can you be a bit more specific? Granted, observing two gay people having sex would probably be a bit gross; there are a fair number of straight people whose sex lives I would not be interested in seeing. But you’re perfectly welcome not to watch.
Is there a gay lifestyle? How does it differ from a straight lifestyle? Am I supposed to follow your lifestyle? Are you supposed to follow mine? What if my wife and I and our foster son and daughter-in-law and honorary grandkids don’t like what you do with your life? Should we be looking to pass a law to prohibit you from doing it?
I look forward to your response.
Memo to Sqrl, Otto, Flinx, Esprix, et al.: Don’t oogle slythe. In fact, be careful whom you oogle. 
Oh, and just as a small note, I find really offensive townships that use their zoning laws to prohibit low-income housing. “Let those lowlives find somewhere else to live.”
[Crossing arms… patting foot…]
[Supressing…]
Mhmph. Hmphph phuph phmph.
[Erupting…]
And why not always apply this?
[Being dragged out by my hair…]
Hey! Hey, ouch, that hurts!
Polycarp, please re-read my post. Those are the people I WANT oogling me!
Ok, let me clear some issues up:
I don’t have any problems with homosexuals NOT being discriminated against, reagarding housing, work, health care, and so on.
But when they try to force upon us a re-definition of marriage, which, for thousands of years has been the union of a man a woman, I take issue with that. They claim marriage is their “right”. No sorry, it isn’t. If you want to shack up, and call yourselves a family, you can do that, but not under any legal protection.
Some of you will call me “phobic” or a “bigot”, because i am voicing an opinion AGAINST the gay agenda. Fine, go ahead, villify me. Liberals are so open to the rights of expression, unless it’s aimed at them.
Patrick Ashley
‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.’ -Edmund Burke
pashley,
Some have exercised their right to disagree with your position by satire and ridicule, an ancient and respectable form of debate.
Polycarp replied with a thoughtful, point-by-point disagreement with your position, and invited you to debate him.
You did not choose to reply to his invitation, nor to the other comments suggesting disagreement with your views. You instead set up the straw man accusations that you would be called a bigot or phobic for expressing your views, which has not happened.
Im afraid I find your recent post rather disingenuous.
and the stars o’erhead were dancing heel to toe
I took his point as fairly responsive, actually…his principal issue was with gay marriage, and he simply used a bit of invective (not an uncommon practice, as you’ve noted) to get there. Rather than respond to him here, I resurrected the Gay Marriages/Parenting thread, which went over the subject at length. The “…Homophobic Bigots” thread in the Pit has some valuable information on viewpoints in it as well (a truly strange thread, with reasoned debate and mutual respect sited in the normal place for invective and sarcasm!).
Last time I checked, voting was a behaviour…
{oogling slythe}
GASP You mean you’re one of them?!
MOOOOOOOOOOOOM!! slythe likes to have butt sex! Pass a law against him!
Actually, I’m omni-sexual. I make no differenciation between cute males and cute females what so ever.
You are sexually attracted to glossy 8x11 science fiction magazines? :rolleyes:
Oooooooooh, I love them slick covers!
Here we go again…
I’m a sorta ‘live and let live’ kinda guy. You do your thing, I’ll do mine and let’s leave each other alone. It is not my practice in life to discriminate against anyone solely on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity or even (believe it or not)-sexual orientation. On the other hand, I don’t go around making a point of the fact that I’m heterosexual. Who the hell cares? So, why do the homosexual activists feel the need to get into the public’s face at every opportunity? For example why do they have to be in the St. Patrick’s Day parade? The micks don’t want them there and they’ve got their own parade. And why are they all over the Boy Scouts? Don’t the Boy Scouts and the Irish have a right to assemble with their own without outside interference?
I bet that you’re one of those “hets” that hold hands in public, and maybe even kiss!
It’s not enough that you have relations with someone of the opposite sex, but do you have to talk about it in public? And what is marrage but a “special” right for “hets” only! How far do your kind want to go with this, anyway?
What’s the “Het” agenda?
Speak for yourself, you inconsequential, illiterate imbecile. I am Irish, Californian (and a boomer - like that matters) and I don’t consider anything a party without my friends - including those who are gay. My mother, Irish from Ireland, would agree. Don’t you dare put your prejudices in the mouths of groups to which I belong.
Sassy:
Does that mean that when “inconsequential illiterate imbeciles” wish to attend your parties they have every right to do so?