My grandmothe died in 2012, just before her 108th birthday. Back when I was in high school, in the early 70’s, she told me she didn’t believe in “the good old days” She liked indoor toilets, air conditioning, washers and dryers, refrigerators and freezers, modern medicine, oh, and air conditioning again. She lived from 1904 to 2012 and saw a lot of change. She told me she also disn’t think people were nicer “back then” and scoffed at the notion that people didn’t lock their doors. She said if folks had locks they used them. She supported women’s rights although she wasn’t an activist. She’d had to quit her teaching job when she revealed she was married(she’d kept it a secret until the school year was up)
Yeah, my grandmother was a huge fan of modern medicine, modern climate control, and modern toilets, too.
I’ve been to a lot of parties where I was the only woman. In fact, I went to one yesterday. I’ve also been to mixed-sex gay events, and yeah, I’ve had women flirt with me. I agree, it’s never been a problem. I’m sure there are gay assholes, just as there are straight ones. But it doesn’t seem to be especially common.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20343674&postcount=151
Part of that same conversation.
For context, I am the son of a lesbian. I lived with mom and her partner for several years (pre-SSM) until they separated. I have a younger sister (step?) born to my mother’s partner via IVF. And I spent a LOT of time at gay rights events of one sort or another and met national LGBT leaders.
The gay agenda seemed, as the Conservapedia cite above, to be seen in our southern community as being a step beyond gay rights.
There are rights that we have that we can exert against one another and against the government. I have a right to my property that neither the government nor any other person can take away without my consent or due process of law. No one, not government nor private person, can take my collection of junk cars without due process. But if my collection causes a nuisance by providing a habitat for vermin then through due process of law actions can be taken to take my collection from me to ameliorate the problem.
There are other rights that we can exert against the government but not necessarily against other persons. I have a freedom of association and the government cannot take action against me simply for associating with the Northwest Association of Left Handed Snooker Players. But, so long as the organization is not a protected class, private individuals can take action against me. Might be stupid but my neighborhood bar can refuse me service because I am a member of the NALHSP. My boss can fire me for such membership. But government cannot jail me or refuse me government services for such membership.
The “gay agenda”, used in a pejorative term seems to refer to an effort to permit LGBT individuals to exert rights not just against government but also against private persons in a manner inconsistent with how other groups are treated.
A bigoted diner owner might be forced by government not to discriminate against blacks, but government cannot force the diner owner to like serving black customers, to treat them with friendly service, or to cheerfully seek their patronage. A bigoted homeowner does not have to welcome a black family to the neighborhood, invited the new arrivals to dinner, or let their kids play together.
But in the Conservapedia version of the gay agenda, gays are trying to use government force and coercion to enforce social acceptance. It is not enough that gays have the right to eat in any restaurant or buy a home in a particular neighborhood, but the gay agenda wants to force me to welcome them as neighbors, to accept their relationship as equivalent to my relationship with my heteronormative spouse, to have their kids play with my kids, and in short be treated decently. :rolleyes:
Perfect summary. It’s the difference between being an identifiable class and being an EEOC protected class.
Its just shorthand to talk about what the Queers are Doing to the Soil.
Hilarious! 
Sounds good to me!
My 91 yo mother keeps telling me that things are worst now than they have ever been. I mean, worst than when the town you were was bombed and your future husband was in a concentration camp? Apparently yes. You can’t compare, it was a “different” situation. Nowadays is worse and frightening.
My mom points to the cold war, and how much safer she feels now.
Which, the “article” or the quoting of that site as any kind of meaningful? From Rational Wiki:
Those writers are conservatives, however, and the fact that they can post that and keep their brand means that at least some significant subset of conservatives agrees with them.
I mean, I don’t write for the BBC, but I generally tend to agree with what they write. Just like people who use Conservapedia seem to agree with what they write.
That article looks like parody, but it’s written by seemingly sincere conservatives for a conservative audience.
It’s written by one person on one closely held site maintained by an extremist. If you choose to ascribe that viewpoint to a whole group, that’s your doing - not the group’s.