Who says Texans live in the dark ages?
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8410389.stm

Hmm now I lived there, and personally I'm suprised but hey should be a non-issue.

I am very proud of my city today. :yeah:

That her sexual preference was not a hindrance to democratic office is not
a victory for the equality of people, but a sign that the victory has already
been won.

Jolly good.

If they do not parade with it and do not try to score by popinting out that they are gay, it shouldn'T be an issue, yes.

We have a gay mayor in Berlin, who unfortunatly is very populistic, craving for publicity, and has openly lobbied for gay's events, so his orientation is not an issue, but the way he tried to maike profit from it (that he is very left-leaning and also incompetent in running the city'S businesses does not help, too).

Current german foreign minister also is gay. Of course he had choosen his great day of gay pride and thought he must let all the world know about this happy circumstance some years ago, but beyond that he does not make a big deal of it.

Other gay members of parliament however take every opportunity to go on crusade even in foreign countries, like that idiot from the Greens who went to Russia or Poland or Ukraine, I forgot which country it was, to attend a gay march there - and then wondering that he got himself a bloody nose from riot police there. He probably overlooked that he was member of the German parliament only, and not member of the Ukrainean or Polish parliament.

Gays are not a problem. The gay freaks giving all gays a bad name - these are a problen, and often I take offence from their behavior.

And what a total victory it is. Not many social groups have the power and status to bring city life to a halt when they want to have a parade, and not many other groups are getting so much media attention and get discussed in the media and school classes so frequently like gays, and not many groups can be so confident to acchieve a moral ban of any criticism of their behavior by calling it "discirmination", even if the criticism holds some truth.

Whenever I hear today of discrimination of gays in modern western societies, I must break out in laughter. On occasions the hetero majority gets discriminated over gay interests!

Wow. Looks like gay people are really making your life tough SB.

If all the discriminations against hetros' gets too much for you then you
should put on your most manly pair of lederhosen, find some buddies and
go on a hetro' pride march.

Simply gays: never. Freaks: yes.

And you know what? Damn many gays seem to see it that way, too! ;)

I am curious...

Was this a vote for Ms Parker or an Anti-Democrat vote? :hmmm:

Thats the point, you cant go to an hetero pride, white pride march etc. without being labelled as a gay hater or a racist.

In Finland the gay night clubs have rooms for casual intercourse, its part of their "culture".
If ordinary clubs had those they would be raided by the police very fast.

Both of them are Dems.

What the **** would you call someone on a white pride march other than a racist?

The idea of taking pride in ones sexual orientation or skin colour allways seemed weird to me. It should not be something to either be ashamed of or take pride in.

Nah, this is no big deal and anyone who makes a big deal out of it has their own issues.

Activism by underprivileged or persecuted minority groups be they gender,
religious, sexual or racially based, is historically a highly successful way of
creating a fairer society and leading to increased civil rights.

At the same time, there has always been, and continues to be, activism by
majority groups. There have been Men's, white, Christian and straight
rallies since the beginning of the 20th century. They have a somewhat
darker history to say the least.

Oops..:oops: I should have checked first!

Both of them are Democrats, an openly gay person elected in Texas...

Well, from an exterior point of view that's, indeed, very surprising!

Where I live I consider ourselves pretty open-minded and we never had a gay leader elected. :hmmm:

Assuming there is no strong correlation between sexuality and careers in politics, that's not surprising given the small percentage of gay people.

Tell me SB; on a scale of 1-10 where '1' is 'not at all' and '10 is 'it's hardly worth living anymore', how hard are these "freaks" making your life?

One. Lol. But it's a start in the right direction.

You concidering becoming one in an effort to get skybird to kill himself? :D

Tell me Letum, on a scale from 1 to 10, how offending is it to you if almost naked people next to you conduct obsceneties and sexually provocative actions - in a cultural environment where nudity and sexual practice still are banned to the private sphere and could - and do - violate other people's feelings and shame?

I am by far no sexually inhibited person, but I think the modern society is totally over-saturated with sexual overkill stimuli both from the media and social rules of conduct being pushed beyond limits. And not only does it kill my nerves, but I also see it doing damage.

Again, no problem with normal gays - and as I said in earlier threads, I know from gays themselves that they hate these "freaks on parade" themselves. Most gays do not wish to be asscoated with the freak show CSD has turned into. People making their sexuality a public business and think they must violate public consensual rules by forcing others needing to witness their naughtiness and call that a test of "tolerance" - these are a problem. Not to me in special, but to your society in general.

Identity does not get defined by unlimited tolerance for all and everything, Letum. Tolerance needs limits. My limits regarding sexuality for example are met when considering scenes from CSD, or a domina in black leather leading a man on the line lkike a dog - in public, or a camera team in a quick action shoots a porno under a public bridge - or gays and lesbians thinking they must kiss and touch half naked on parading trucks becasue they think they must act their secual orientatiton in public demonstration . That may be okay in other, natural cultures, or during an orgy, but it is not okay in our cltural public context. And that is where the normal people, gay or not, get separated from the freaks who hijack the public to make it a part of their mating habits.

Unlimited freedom you can only get by total rejection of any communal identity alltogether - and that is anarchy. You cannot violate social values and and communal rules and puszh them to the limits forever, and think that this would keep the identity feeling of the community intact.

With nudity and sexuality, it is quite much like with relgion. It is your oprivate thing, keep it in your pirvatesphere where you can do whatever you want. where you demand the public to accept special recognition for your belief or sexuality, you are no longer relgious or privbate, but become political. And then it is when religion and sexuality of the few become a nuisance, a problem, a threat for all.

what it comes down to, in plain English, is this: if people are around or could turn around the corner any moment, keep your buttocks where they belong: in your trousers, covered, and don't make such a big deal of your sexual preferences and practices. That simple it is, Letum. If you can't see that - bad for you.

Read my sig. If you haven't noticed it, it is fully valid in the context of this thread's object, too. If you don't believe that, try to criticise a gay rights march in a public media - and see how very intolerant the PC brigade and those being criticised all of a sudden can become. The acceptance of almost totalitarian rules to enforce your withdrawing from your opinion often is not far away then.

Gays and lesbians in Western nations - underpriviliged or persecuted .

Hahahahahahahaha.

There are many nations where they are indeed. Modern western nations like Germany, France, England, Sweden, America do not belong to these.