Parade Chairman Makes Anti-Gay Remarks

[TradeTheBeal!]

Well, did you ever think that maybe i just like to argue?

I understand what you mean, but i still think you're wrong.

If you think I'm wrong, I don't want to be right.

[rincewind]

If you think I'm wrong, I don't want to be right.

Okay, but i think we have agreed once or twice, so.....

(this is where i would have returned your cheers if i could get the smilies to work)

[Teller]

You aren't serious are you? The Catholic Church does not consider the fact of being homosexual a sin. The Church does consider homosexual acts to be a sin but then again the Church considers sexual acts outside of Church sanctioned marriage a sin as well (and none of that divorce and remarriage sex nonsense, thank you very much!).

The Church's and most religions' whole take on sex is a throwback to neanderthal times. But that's probably a whole other thread.

There are Irish gays and to exclude them from a community event is hateful and contrary to anything I remember of the teachings of the Church. To justify their exclusion with those incredible ignorant and venal statements is a sin in and of itself. That idiot parade chairman needs to go to confession before he takes one more beer.

Edited to add that after reading all these posts I am very bothered by the amount of homophobia displayed here. I think some posters here need to examine the source of their obvious fear and hatred of another man's (or woman's) sexual preference.

Just a tad oversensitive are we? Geez.

First of all, I didn't mention the Catholic Church, you did. I didn't mention sin, you did. I didn't mention whatever that drivel about marriage was, you did. I showed no fear nor hatred of anyone else's sexuality. I simply asked that we stick to fact -- a point that was clearly lost on you.

I mentioned St. Patrick's beliefs as I understand them. I made no reference to the Catholic Church. If you believe that everyone who happens to be Catholic is a mindless drone who believes every single thing the Pope says, you are criminally uninformed. Catholics vary on all sorts of beliefs. You'll find Catholics who are pro-contraception (THE SHOCK!) and even Catholics who are pro-choice (THE HORROR!).

I also did not refer to anyone's sexuality or actions related thereto as being sinful. Again, this was an overly-sensitive fabrication on your part. I am not Catholic, so if you choose to refer to their positions on homosexuality (or anything else) as a "throwback to neanderthal times," I will not be offended by your misinformation.

Gays were not excluded from the parade. There was no questionaire that participants had to fill out. There was no lie-detector test. There was no one staring in people's windows in the weeks before the parade making sure all of there "activity" was hetero. ONE group was excluded because they wanted to use a celebration to make a political statement. It was the wrong place at the wrong time.

Using your logic, I guess it would be fine for heterosexuals to take over the multitude of gay pride parades nationwide. Or not. The majority isn't allowed to voice it's opinion, right?

To accuse me of being a sinner and homophobe constitutes an unfounded personal attack. I'm not going to throw around the "I have gay friends" line because #1 it's petty, and #2 I don't need to. I'm very secure in my own sexuality, and in that of my friends, regardless of orientation. As for the other part, I may well be a sinner, but that's not for you to judge.

Maybe gay groups as well as others with minority-held views or ways of life would get more attention and sympathy for their cause if SOME people would refrain from jumping down the majorities' throats for no apparent reason.

:2cents:

[twa]

MPIL - Multiple Partner Irish Lasses

Think you could hook a brother up with a # or website

Love redheads :laugh:

[Johnny Punani2]

Edited to add that after reading all these posts I am very bothered by the amount of homophobia displayed here. I think some posters here need to examine the source of their obvious fear and hatred of another man's (or woman's) sexual preference.

Save the BS PC comments ok. No one is "scared" or do they "hate" anyone. People like yourself coined the term "homophobia" to ridicule people who think homosexuality is wrong.

I am not scared of homosexuals and I don't hate homosexuals. However, I hate what they practice and think it is abnormal and perverted. If that makes me and others "homophobic" oh well...

[DCRunner]

Just a tad oversensitive are we? Geez.

First of all, I didn't mention the Catholic Church, you did. I didn't mention sin, you did. I didn't mention whatever that drivel about marriage was, you did. I showed no fear nor hatred of anyone else's sexuality. I simply asked that we stick to fact -- a point that was clearly lost on you.

I mentioned St. Patrick's beliefs as I understand them. I made no reference to the Catholic Church. If you believe that everyone who happens to be Catholic is a mindless drone who believes every single thing the Pope says, you are criminally uninformed. Catholics vary on all sorts of beliefs. You'll find Catholics who are pro-contraception (THE SHOCK!) and even Catholics who are pro-choice (THE HORROR!).

I also did not refer to anyone's sexuality or actions related thereto as being sinful. Again, this was an overly-sensitive fabrication on your part. I am not Catholic, so if you choose to refer to their positions on homosexuality (or anything else) as a "throwback to neanderthal times," I will not be offended by your misinformation.

Gays were not excluded from the parade. There was no questionaire that participants had to fill out. There was no lie-detector test. There was no one staring in people's windows in the weeks before the parade making sure all of there "activity" was hetero. ONE group was excluded because they wanted to use a celebration to make a political statement. It was the wrong place at the wrong time.

Using your logic, I guess it would be fine for heterosexuals to take over the multitude of gay pride parades nationwide. Or not. The majority isn't allowed to voice it's opinion, right?

To accuse me of being a sinner and homophobe constitutes an unfounded personal attack. I'm not going to throw around the "I have gay friends" line because #1 it's petty, and #2 I don't need to. I'm very secure in my own sexuality, and in that of my friends, regardless of orientation. As for the other part, I may well be a sinner, but that's not for you to judge.

Maybe gay groups as well as others with minority-held views or ways of life would get more attention and sympathy for their cause if SOME people would refrain from jumping down the majorities' throats for no apparent reason.

:2cents:

Talk about being sensitive. I wasn't even talking about you. I was talking about the parade chairman who did make hateful and ignorant remarks. He's the one who needs to go to confession. And unless you posted something earlier in the thread that I missed, I wasn't referring to you about the homophobia. I was referring to the number of posters here who do post homophobic statements - and can't even recognize it in themselves. Saying it comes from your religion doesn't make it any less homophobic.

My comments about you were directed to what I perceived as your misunderstanding of Catholic teaching about homosexuality or sexuality in general. And about your attempt to separate St Patrick from the Catholic Church. I am a Catholic. After 14 years of Catholic schools I think I'm pretty well informed on the Church and how varied Catholic thinking is. The Catholic Church, however, is pretty much in the Dark Ages when it comes to sexuality as well as its views on women. And it's getting darker all the time. The remarks about marriage are more an inside Catholic joke, so apologies to those non Catholics who didn't get it.

I also have nothing to be sensitive about regarding this topic since I am a straight female. Unless I am just being sensitive to the homophobia I see here and in society. That sensitivity I am happy to own. You don't have to be gay to feel insulted when gays are insulted.

Gays most certainly were excluded from the parade if they dared to identify themselves as gay. That's the topic of this thread. You can dance around this all you want but the intent of the parade organizers was to exclude them BECAUSE they are gay and because they were willing to admit it. I don't think they were engaging in sexual acts during the parade. So what are we saying the parade has - a "don't ask don't tell" policy for participants? And where are you getting the idea that a group of gays would be tantamount to "taking over" the St Patrick's Day Parade.

Gay Pride parades don't exclude straights. Unless it is someone condemning them - which I haven't heard was what the excluded gay group was doing. And no fair claiming that they are now - after exclusion - protesting the parade.

And your last point - when people are murdered and attacked just because they are gay then they get to jump up and down all they want. We should all be jumping up and down in protest.

[DCRunner]

Save the BS PC comments ok. No one is "scared" or do they "hate" anyone. People like yourself coined the term "homophobia" to ridicule people who think homosexuality is wrong....

Thanks for giving me credit for coining a whole word. The true BS is calling something "PC" because people are trying to be respectful of others and just fed up with hateful and discriminatory talk and actions against people who some other people don't "approve" of.

I am not scared of homosexuals and I don't hate homosexuals. However, I hate what they practice and think it is abnormal and perverted. If that makes me and others "homophobic" oh well...

It's the same thing. Don't kid yourself. It isn't abnormal and perverted to gays. It's as natural to them as whatever it is you sexually prefer is to you. The notion that someone would "hate" what another person does sexually is abnormal and perverted. WHY would you even care?

[TradeTheBeal!]

Thanks for giving me credit for coining a whole word. The true BS is calling something "PC" because people are trying to be respectful of others and just fed up with hateful and discriminatory talk and actions against people who some other people don't "approve" of.

I don't see where the IGLO is being "respectful of others". The organizers of this parade reserve the right to disallow the participation of any group they feel would be inappropriate. I don't blame them for banning a group well-known for its "heterophobia".

It's the same thing. Don't kid yourself. It isn't abnormal and perverted to gays

Unhealthy and perverted sexuality is hardly limited to homosexuality. Those engaged in beastialty may consider their own behavior perfectly acceptable, but the majority does not. Therefore, perversity is what society has defined to be. Homosexuality may enjoy an elevated place in our society in comparison to say, necrophilia, but that doesn't change what it is.

The notion that someone would "hate" what another person does sexually is abnormal and perverted. WHY would you even care?

Nonsense, sexuality and the drive to procreate are as powerful as any forces in our lives. All of us, from early in our sexual development, are driven to define ourselves and others by sexual activity. We "hate" some people for being sluts and sleeping around or cheating, others for their lack of sexual activity or refusal to be intimate with us. Others, incredibly, even "hate" the fact that their sexual activity is taken into account by others while simultaneously defining their lifestyle and labeling themselves based primarily on their sexual activity. Happily, though, here in America we can pick our teams and engage in nearly whatever sexual activity we like with a minimum of difficulties - but when we do, we must live with our choices and the knowledge that the choices we make are not without their sacrifices. This applies to everyone and nobody gets to have it exactly the way they want it.

Perhaps you should turn your atttention and sympathetic nature to those in our society who truly are victims.

[Winslowalrob]

Perhaps you should turn your atttention and sympathetic nature to those in our society who truly are victims.

There are only two points one could infer from that statement:

If a victim is one who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance, agency, or condition

And we should concern ourselves with people who are truly victims in our society

Therefore homosexuals face no harm or are not made to suffer in the United States and we should concern ourselves with real victims

OR

If a victim is one who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance, agency, or condition

And we should concern ourselves with people who are truly victims in our society

And if one is deemed unfit to recieve the rights of United States citizenship they are not victims

Therefore homosexuals are not victims because they are unfit to recieve the rights of said citizenship and should be treated as less than full citizens

Which is it? Are homosexuals complaining about nothing because they face no discrimination or are they second-class citizens getting what they deserve?

[TradeTheBeal!]

There are only two points one could infer from that statement:

If a victim is one who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance, agency, or condition

And we should concern ourselves with people who are truly victims in our society

Therefore homosexuals face no harm or are not made to suffer in the United States and we should concern ourselves with real victims

OR

If a victim is one who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance, agency, or condition

And we should concern ourselves with people who are truly victims in our society

And if one is deemed unfit to recieve the rights of United States citizenship they are not victims

Therefore homosexuals are not victims because they are unfit to recieve the rights of said citizenship and should be treated as less than full citizens

Which is it? Are homosexuals complaining about nothing because they face no discrimination or are they second-class citizens getting what they deserve?

We all face discrimination in life from certain people for whatever reason. Explain to me how homosexuals do not receive the same rights as all Americans. Which of the amendments of in the Bill of Rights do nnot apply to them or any citizen. Of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which one has been denied them

When I say victim I am referring to those who have experienced misfortune beyond their control. Example include - abused children, mentally handicapped, terminally ill, widowed war brides, diisabled veterans, etc.

[Teller]

Interesting the word "victim" is used here. Afterall, if I am the victim of a mugging and am killed in the process, the offender might do 10 years. If someone is killed because they are gay, the offender is looking at 25 to life.

Needless to say, the victim mentally of some in the gay community doesn't carry much weight with me. Afterall, state and federal governments have confirmed that their lives are more valuable than mine.

[Predicto]

I am not scared of homosexuals and I don't hate homosexuals. However, I hate what they practice and think it is abnormal and perverted. If that makes me and others "homophobic" oh well...

And if some of us think that people who believe this are close-minded bigots, oh well....

After all, I'm not scared of homophobes and I don't hate homophobes. I just think their beliefs are neanderthal and hateful

[Winslowalrob]

We all face discrimination in life from certain people for whatever reason. Explain to me how homosexuals do not receive the same rights as all Americans. Which of the amendments of in the Bill of Rights do nnot apply to them or any citizen. Of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which one has been denied them

When I say victim I am referring to those who have experienced misfortune beyond their control. Example include - abused children, mentally handicapped, terminally ill, widowed war brides, diisabled veterans, etc.

I am using your statement and asking which interpretation am I supposed to have. How exactly are they not victims?

If we have two mutually exclusive definitions of the word "victim," then perhaps you have an argument. Misfortune beyond their control hardly seems contradictory to the definition I supplied. Unless you are trying to catch me in a "catch-22" by claiming that homosexuality is a life choice, at which point any misfortune that befalls them they deserve. Yet that would contradict your first point, that they do not suffer any misfortune, that they have life, liberty, and can pursue happiness.

[TradeTheBeal!]

And if some of us think that people who believe this are close-minded bigots, oh well....

And by the grace of this beautiful country - free to disagree - we live together in relative peace and prosperity. Straight and Gay, Black and White, Rich and Poor, Majority and Minority.

Are all people you disagree with bigots?

[Predicto]

And by the grace of this beautiful country - free to disagree - we live together in relative peace and prosperity. Straight and Gay, Black and White, Rich and Poor, Majority and Minority.

Are all people you disagree with bigots?

Of course not. Only the bigoted ones.

[Winslowalrob]

Interesting the word "victim" is used here. Afterall, if I am the victim of a mugging and am killed in the process, the offender might do 10 years. If someone is killed because they are gay, the offender is looking at 25 to life.

Needless to say, the victim mentally of some in the gay community doesn't carry much weight with me. Afterall, state and federal governments have confirmed that their lives are more valuable than mine.

Man, the federal government is TERRIBLE. Anyone knows that crime is crime is crime, no exceptions. Therefore, if I steal a CD from Sam Goody, I should get 25 to life. If you download music illegally, you too should recieve 25 to life. If Sarge jaywalks, he should recieve 25 to life. If Om commits manslaughter, 25 to life for him. If Chom commits premeditated murder, he too should recieve 25 to life. Our criminal justice system is not built on punishments fitting the crime. Premeditated murder is not punished harder from a mugging gone awry.

While I would always consider a gay person's life more valuable than yours , the federal and state government's probably do not. Presuming you are a white, heterosexual male aged 18-65, I think a lot of authorities would place higher value on your life. Needless to say, the victim mentality of the straight community doesn't carry much weight with me.

[twa]

Of course not. Only the bigoted ones.

But wouldn't that be making a moral judgement?

Isn't that what you are condeming in others?

[Teller]

Man, the federal government is TERRIBLE. Anyone knows that crime is crime is crime, no exceptions. Therefore, if I steal a CD from Sam Goody, I should get 25 to life. If you download music illegally, you too should recieve 25 to life. If Sarge jaywalks, he should recieve 25 to life. If Om commits manslaughter, 25 to life for him. If Chom commits premeditated murder, he too should recieve 25 to life. Our criminal justice system is not built on punishments fitting the crime. Premeditated murder is not punished harder from a mugging gone awry.

While I would always consider a gay person's life more valuable than yours , the federal and state government's probably do not. Presuming you are a white, heterosexual male aged 18-65, I think a lot of authorities would place higher value on your life. Needless to say, the victim mentality of the straight community doesn't carry much weight with me.

Yep. White hetero male here. No college scholarships out there specifially for me. Quotas for jobs for everybody but me. Parades for them, but not for me. Higher sentences when they're killed than me. But they're the victims....not me.

[TradeTheBeal!]

I am using your statement and asking which interpretation am I supposed to have. How exactly are they not victims?

If we have two mutually exclusive definitions of the word "victim," then perhaps you have an argument. Misfortune beyond their control hardly seems contradictory to the definition I supplied. Unless you are trying to catch me in a "catch-22" by claiming that homosexuality is a life choice, at which point any misfortune that befalls them they deserve. Yet that would contradict your first point, that they do not suffer any misfortune, that they have life, liberty, and can pursue happiness.

OK, I'm still a little confused here. I have clearly defined my use of the word "victim"....BTW, that was, I think a strong even-handed post on my part and all you want to talk about is the last line, which I almost did'nt add....Anyway, we all live with the risk of, and experience, discrimination and persecution for our beliefs and actions on occasion. That doesn't make anyone a "victim" in my context, it makes you a human being. If your point is that homosexuals are, by nature, "victims" of society and therefore deserving of special compensation, then I disagree. Gays do quite well in America and travel from all over the world to enjoy our tolerant society.

[dreamingwolf]

heterophobe: A person suffering from homophobia phobia. This condition is when a straight person aggressively promotes and supports homosexuality out of an irrational fear that if they dont they will be called a homophobe. This condition seems to have an elation characteristic to it when the afflicted accusses other heterosexuals of being homophobes for not aggressively promoting and supporting homosexuality.

source:

definitions.med/witchdoctors/psycology/terms.htm

[Winslowalrob]

Yep. White hetero male here. No college scholarships out there specifially for me. Quotas for jobs for everybody but me. Parades for them, but not for me. Higher sentences when they're killed than me. But they're the victims....not me.

Haha, rather than argue my points, you basically confirm that you have a victim mentality. Unless you want to admit that you are on par with some of the gay community in such an unfair system. If there is so much wrong with it, why don't you leave . Sorry, couldn't resist.

[TradeTheBeal!]

Haha, rather than argue my points, you basically confirm that you have a victim mentality. Unless you want to admit that you are on par with some of the gay community in such an unfair system. If there is so much wrong with it, why don't you leave . Sorry, couldn't resist.

Oh, Snap!

[Winslowalrob]

OK, I'm still a little confused here. I have clearly defined my use of the word "victim"....BTW, that was, I think a strong even-handed post on my part and all you want to talk about is the last line, which I almost did'nt add....Anyway, we all live with the risk of, and experience, discrimination and persecution for our beliefs and actions on occasion. That doesn't make anyone a "victim" in my context, it makes you a human being. If your point is that homosexuals are, by nature, "victims" of society and therefore deserving of special compensation, then I disagree. Gays do quite well in America and travel from all over the world to enjoy our tolerant society.

I addressed your last line with my last line. My entire post was not focused on it. Out of 5 sentances, I devoted my last 2 to it, and this is all in arguing over definition. Where do I state or imply that gays are natural victims? I was simply hoping that you could clarify your position. You have by stating that gays do quite well here, and you believe they are treated as full citizens, and have every right as we do.

I take issue with all human beings facing discrimination and persecution not being victims. Not even under your definition would they qualify as such?

[Winslowalrob]

Oh, Snap!

Buuuuuurn

[TradeTheBeal!]

I addressed your last line with my last line. My entire post was not focused on it. Out of 5 sentances, I devoted my last 2 to it, and this is all in arguing over definition. Where do I state or imply that gays are natural victims? I was simply hoping that you could clarify your position. You have by stating that gays do quite well here, and you believe they are treated as full citizens, and have every right as we do.

I take issue with all human beings facing discrimination and persecution not being victims. Not even under your definition would they qualify as such?

Granted, all of us can claim victimhood at some time or another. The IGLO, IMO, cannot simply because they were denied a place in a St Patricks day parade. Further, casting themselves as victims of oppresion in as trivial a case as this hinders the progression of tolerance and acceptance in our society. A society which has much to be proud of in this context but also one that clearly must continue to show improvement from both sides.