The homophobic thread :>

[neoplacebo]

My first serious love was a nice Jersey girl named Dixie.

My 3rd grade girlfriend (Ellen) ended up going to Harvard Law School and now lives in Hawaii. We used to ride bicycles together. I wonder if she thinks about me.......

You might enjoy Moody Blues "Wildest Dreams"... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmmPFrkuPq0
Great song - saw them do it live at Biltmore a couple of years ago. Anybody with a "past" of any sort can relate...

Or maybe to "Our Last Summer" ...well, maybe not for the third-grader, but still... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6YqC3D0GMo

Thanks; I do know that song. However, Ellen wasn't a serious love back then....more like a serious bicycle envy (she had a better Schwinn than I did) and probably still does.

[O Really]

Are Anti-Gay Activists Bigots? A Brilliant, Disturbing New Book Says Yes.

I was going to quote parts but the entire article is fascinating, and very relevant to this and many other forums.

That question reminds me of a couple others... about where bears poop, what religion is the Pope, yada.

[Boatrocker]

It's an ongoing discussion here regardless of what you and I think. Did you read the article? It explains the distinction being made and suggests how we should respond to the bigots.

Many liberals are still convinced that bigots just need a bit more time to let go of their animus . . . .

Time has never been enough, in any increment or quantity. I say we use sticks make them let go.

[O Really]

It's an ongoing discussion here regardless of what you and I think. Did you read the article? It explains the distinction being made and suggests how we should respond to the bigots.

I did read the article, and tend to agree with the 'rocker.

[Mr.B]

"Christian love and compassion"?

Nothing to do with "Christian love and compassion". Obviously they weren't church members, and to perform the funeral (or a marriage) would go against the church's Biblical teachings and the pastor's personal convictions. There are still churches that hold to Biblical teachings, you know.

It appears that they were merely looking for someone to say a few special words like "He was a great guy, yada, yada" and when the church refused, now they're outraged! Kudos to the pastor for not bending to the things of the world.

"Pastor T.W. Jenkins informed Evans' family members that the church doesn't support gay marriage.
"Based on our preaching of the Scripture, we would have been in error to allow the service in our church," Jenkins said in an interview with WFLA-TV.
"I'm not trying to condemn anyone's lifestyle, but at the same time I am a man of God, and I have to stand up for my principles," he said."

"...because his 'constituents' complained"....

[O Really]

At that point, I think it would have been "his widower." And since he was dead, he wasn't either married or gay. Do you suppose the minister would have refused to bury, for example, a murderer? And btw, I'm not saying the minister didn't have the right to refuse the guy - that's one of the differences in being a church and being a business.

[Mr.B]

"Do you suppose the minister would have refused to bury, for example, a murderer?"

Good question. That would have been his personal decision, since his church is not a business. If he did , I'm sure his words wouldn't have referred to the deceased as "a great guy, and a pillar of the community".....

[Mr.B]

"...because his 'constituents' complained"....
Opps! Got that part wrong...he <actually> said "con-tish-u-ents"

"That phrase is not in the article or my post. Are you hallucinating voices again?

Did you <actually> watch the video you posted? Kendall Capers said.......

[k9nanny]

"....cops should be able to reject assignments based on their bigotry"....

Cops should be able to reject assignments based on their personal beliefs and convictions......as long as danger to the public's life and limb is not involved.

Being forced to watch a flaunt and taunt fest is hardly a danger to the public's life and limb. "Bigotry" is your pet phrase, a form of hate speech. Own it.

Again, my point is proven.

I'm late to this discussion.....

MrB, a few years back, the KKK held a rally on Main Street, and there were more cop uniforms than hoods. Do cops have the right to reject that assignment? I'd consider a KKK rally the ultimate "flaunt and taunt fest."

What say you?

[Mr.B]

"MrB, a few years back, the KKK held a rally on Main Street, and there were more cop uniforms than hoods.
Do cops have the right to reject that assignment? I'd consider a KKK rally the ultimate "flaunt and taunt fest." What say you?"

Welcome back stranger...good to hear from you again.

I don't really compare the KKK to homosexuals, as the KKK is a hate group. I'm certain the multitude of cops were there to protect the KKK from the public....
i.e., to keep their sorry hineys from getting shot.

In the case of the "gay" parade, I've given that some thought. I believe that the cops were there to protect the public from the homosexuals. The public came to view a circus of clowns....however, ridicule of them could have sent a homosexual into a rage.

So to answer your question, since you were civil about it, I suppose the cop didn't have the right to reject that assignment; however his religious beliefs should have been taken into account rather than his being ostracized by his superiors.

[Mr.B]

"Got any examples of homosexual "rage", especially compared to homophobic rage?"

I have no specific examples; rage is spontaneous.

The media has no interest in reporting homosexuals fighting back; only in those who persecute homosexuals.

[O Really]

Got any examples of the media not reporting about homosexuals fighting back? I think it would be a juicy story to them whatever they thought about homosexuality.

Here's one for Mr.B showing some angry homosexuals. Of course, since KOMO4 is a Seattle ABC affiliate, it doesn't count for "not reporting..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SI9ckQ6494k

[neoplacebo]

Fascinating......I never realized "vehicle prowl" was illegal. But I suppose it's just a default charge that accompanies and complements the driving on a suspended license charge.

[neoplacebo]

The best part is that you can get away with this in a motor home or if you rig your car up with a functional propeller and rudder. There must be a few wingnuts in WA. I shudder to think of what the definition of vehicle prowling in the first degree entails....it must be so bad they don't even put it in the statutes.

[Mr.B]

"The best part is that you can get away with this in a motor home or if you rig your car up with a functional propeller and rudder. There must be a few wingnuts in WA."

Since this is Washington, I wonder if the law applies to water homes if they were rigged up with a functional propeller and rudder?

[O Really]

The floating homes on Lake Union have, unfortunately, become a source of controversy, with some in the city wanting to get rid of them.

There is a difference in a houseboat and a floating home.

A houseboat is considered a water-oriented vehicle. It has a motor. At any given moment, it could steer out of its dock and head onto open waters. It is by any definition a boat that someone calls home.

A floating home, however, is not a water vessel. It is a home, usually a large one, that just so happens to be built on a floating apparatus. It has no motor, no steering, no safety equipment and for all intents and purposes is no different than a home on land.

Now, there is a lot of gray area in what constitutes each but one thing seems to be clear. Houseboats are totally acceptable, assuming they meet new regulations. Floating homes are going to be illegal, it seems, according to those same new regulations.

Too bad. It's really a spectacle to see, and as much of an attraction as the Space Needle or the fictional Seattle Grace.

[Mr.B]

"Got any examples of the media not reporting about homosexuals fighting back?"
I didn't until O Really's post....I'm really not into looking up such, but since I viewed O Really's link.......
"Gay" Terrorism

(My favorite: Westboro Gets Their A-s Kicked!)

"I think it would be a juicy story to them whatever they thought about homosexuality."
Yuck.....what a play on words.

[Mr.B]

"juicy story", a common phrase, gets you obsessing about gay-sex again?"

Me? It was your metaphor you used in relation to the subject matter; are you fantasizing?

[Mr.B]

"You never answered my questions from the previous page:"

I never know when you're <actually> asking a bon-a-fide question or just being you. Those questions don't really warrant an answer;
just sum'more of your lame rhetoric. (did I say that correctly, Miss Persnickety?)

...Soon, Dixie may be able to wed Dixie in Dixie."

Soon, Dixie may be able to wed Dixie and Dixie.

[k9nanny]

"MrB, a few years back, the KKK held a rally on Main Street, and there were more cop uniforms than hoods.
Do cops have the right to reject that assignment? I'd consider a KKK rally the ultimate "flaunt and taunt fest." What say you?"

Welcome back stranger...good to hear from you again.

neoplacebo didn't wonder about my absence, so I didn't answer his "Where are they" question.

I don't really compare the KKK to homosexuals, as the KKK is a hate group. I'm certain the multitude of cops were there to protect the KKK from the public....
i.e., to keep their sorry hineys from getting shot.

I see it this way. The cops are there to protect the demonstrators from the public.

In the case of the "gay" parade, I've given that some thought. I believe that the cops were there to protect the public from the homosexuals. The public came to view a circus of clowns....however, ridicule of them could have sent a homosexual into a rage.

Again, it's more likely the onlookers who might could misbehave.

So to answer your question, since you were civil about it, I suppose the cop didn't have the right to reject that assignment; however his religious beliefs should have been taken into account rather than his being ostracized by his superiors.