The Secret Gay Agenda

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/17/opinion/granderson-gay-agenda/index.html

An amusing TED talk on the "gay lifestyle" and "gay agenda".

Who knew how evil it all was?

 

Apparently you didn't know. now you know. congrats.

 

why does the gay movement continuously try to link being gay to being a different race or gender? I know of no gay person who was denied a seat at the front of the bus or denied the right to vote. Heck, I've never seen a water fountain labeled "straights only"

You are not a different gender or race from the rest of us.

 

Orientation is not comparable to race or gender. As for the misconception that raising the questions addressed in the linked article amounts to comparing orientation to race and gender or an attempt to establish it as the like, I think it fair to judge this as missing the point. The point is that undue discrimination is a tall barrier that holds people back.

Still missing the point.

Still missing the point.

When other people identify us in terms of our orientation as an excuse to abuse and discriminate against us, we are negatively affected. <- This is what you steadfastly, stubbornly refuse to acknowledge.

 

Because it's the same thing. They're being discrimanted against for being differnt. And why? Because they like differnt stuff that's all.

 

really

so you have evidence of being denied the vote?

how about being denied a firearm?

how many were refused a front seat on the bus?

I can go on with the list. Surely you are simply misguided and possibly misinformed. Being gay and race/gender are galaxies apart. it is however what the gay movement wants you to believe that they are not

sometimes you need to strip things to their simplest in order to understand

allow me

2 women walking down the street, which one is gay?

2 women walking down the street, which one is black?

 

Do you want to tell me how they're doing on job protection for being Gay, or how about marriages?

 

are you implying that if i claim to be gay that i should become a protected employee aka sacred cow?

 

Of course you can't view someone's sexual orientation in the same way as you can one's race or gender, so naturally you see discrimination manifest in different ways.

Told to ride in the back of the bus? No.

Put in jail? Yes.
Denied employment? Yes
Denied the right to vote? Well if we were convicted of the crime of sodomy, yes.
Harassed by the police and other members of the population? yes.
Discriminated against in court cases based on our orientation? yes.
Accused of being mentally ill, a danger to children, pedophiles, and legislated against on such bases? yes.
All but tortured in conversion therapies forced on us by parents? yes.

You can argue if you wish that sexuality SHOULDN'T be treated as anything different or significant, much like race or gender should not. But this does not change the fact that it has been treated, differently and negatively, in all three of the above cases.

 

Typical misrepresentation of anti-discrimination law. Your bias is noted.

 

Typical misrepresentation of anti-discrimination law. Your bias is noted.

 

not at all

it's a pendulum and statists such as most in here fully support preferential treatment for those they deem to be the chosen ones. You can continue your discriminatory ways and behaviors but segregation will not help your cause.

the hypocricy of the regular posters in this subsection never ceases to amaze me

 

No. Where would you get an idea like that from?

 

More of the same. Anti-discrimination laws don't provide "preferential treatment" for any group. They are worded very generally so that all races are covered (not just blacks), both sexes (not just women), and all orientations (not just homosexuals). There is no hypocrisy in pointing out the truth to counter your lies.

 

you claim to want equality but continue to push for legislation which divides. As long as you are comfortable in your skin that's fine. You are in good company in this sub-section. I do not and never will understand why you on the left want to continue segregation and do not see that you really are anti-equality. Oh well, you've been pandered to for so long by liberals that maybe you just like the attention.

go ahead and insult me or worse, put me on ignore . It's all you have when your hypocricy is called out.

 

For starters, I am an independent thinker. So when people start up with the "left" and "liberal" crap, I pretty much tune them out.

You continue to misrepresent what anti-discrimination law does. It is not "segregation". It's the exact opposite - an effort to ensure that irrelevant differences are ignored so that people remain integrated, rather than people using their prejudice to maintain separation and marginalization.

If you will not understand (as in making a willful effort to avoid understanding), then there does indeed seem little point in engaging you. As usual, you've completely avoided addressing my points in favor of spewing tired talking points that have no connection to reality.

If you want to characterize my honest attempts to engage you as "hypocrisy", then I shall not make a further attempt to bring you out of your delusion.

 

So very true!

 

Isnt that the guy that wanted Ted Nugent thrown in jail for what he said? Anyway, think its absurd to compare gay marriage to slavery or the womans right to vote.

 

That is because you think that YOUR perspective is the only one which MUST be accepted as valid; but that is not the reality of things.

Many people can understand that justice and 'equality' under the law, goes far beyond what YOU "think".

 

Absurd because blacks were denied freedom and made into slaves and women were denied the right to vote. Here we are talking about tax breaks and governmental entitlements, not made available to the majority of citizens. Denying gays the tax breaks and governmental entitlements of marriage is no more a denial of rights than denying the owners of medium and large businesses the tax breaks and governmental entitlements reserved for owners of small businesses is a denial of rights. You have a right to be free and vote. You dont have a right to tax breaks and governmental entitlements that you dont qualify for.

 

What I said about your perceptions stands, IMO. You have in no way justified the denial of rights which may homosexual people are addressing even now.

 

My justifications are what have been successful in courts of law all across the country. I have no doubt these justifications are deemed insufficient among frustrated homosexual men.

 

And they will be under review for as long as they remain UNJUST. Also, your interpretation of such as you present it, is hardly definitive. I'm not lawyer, but I intuitively know your positions/opinions can be challenged readily. You aren't the only "expert" I've heard on the matters at hand.

Why homosexual only men (in your view)?

And why would heterosexual men be satisfied with such unjust laws?

 

So the ban on interracial marriage was also successful in courts as well.

Was it just? Yes or no.

Why have you abandoned your silly procreation argument these days?

 

using race in comparison is like comparing a dog to a jet airplane. They aren't even close