Spent part of yesterday watching the Gay Pride parade in Los Angeles and was struck by how apolitical it seemed. In 2004, it seemed a good quarter of the participants sported HRC’s sticker, “George W. Bush, You’re Fired.” This year the “LGBT Obama” stickers were few and far between.
I only saw a handful of signs praising Obama for his “evolution” on gay marriage. And there weren’t all that many people marching with the Stonewall Democrats:
Now, to be sure, this wasn’t the entirety of the Democratic contingent. As I recall, there were 15-20 others marching ahead of these folks. But, 20-25 gay Democrats in LA’s Pride parade doesn’t seem like a very substantial number. And those marching didn’t seem particularly fired up.
Perhaps, it’s just California, but if Christopher Street West is any indication, gay Democrats aren’t all that enthusiastic about their party’s presidential candidate this year.
Other left-leaning and/or liberal organizations/people included in the parade: Kamala Harris, Mayor Villaraigosa, Paul Koretz, APAIT, and a favorite of us all (tongue-firmly-in-cheek) Gloria Allred. The Grand Marshall vocally campaigned against Prop 8. That’s all from the top of my head, as there were over 130 floats/presentations.
I wished I could have seen the LOG Cabin Republicans or GOProud’s submission go by. I had a little heat stroke, though. Should have worn my visor.
If the diminished enthusiasm is real and lasts through November, that’s pretty interesting, given that Obama has obviously chosen the strategy of appealing to specific groups commonly associated with Democrats and liberals in general rather than reaching out to the middle and the sort of people who might be called Reagan Democrats. In polls, Obama seems to be hanging on pretty well—not well enough to be sure of victory, but not so poorly as to be assured of defeat, but the anecdotal evidence has to worry the Obama campaign. Of course, it’s unlikely that Obama would lose California and even less likely that California would make the critical difference in a Romney electoral college victory, but it’s still pretty interesting to see the lack of enthusiasm for him among such a wide spectrum of nominally supportive groups.
Diminished enthusiasm replaced by skepticism.
One thing that particularly annoys me are patronizing liberals, the kind that make a point of telling you how tolerant they are then expect you to validate their self image by thanking them.
Instead of validation, BHO just wanted the money. Maybe some of our left leaning friends are seeing that now too.
This isn’t that complicated. They are finally getting what they want. The line toward what they perceive as justice is moving in their direction. And there is no one to hate on no one central figure. So the emotional fuel that drives so many to march just isn’t as strong as it had been in past years. When we do get same sex marriage here in California, you will definitely see HUGE Pride parades for the couple of years after. Then it will taper off. Pretty much nothing left, no “Grand Goal”, to fight for.
How I would love to see that happen (i.e. enthusiasm for gay activism to die), but I doubt it ever will. Even if most gay people stop caring, there will always be a class of perpetually aggrieved professional gay activists who invent “rights” to demand.
Rattle… Don’t get me wrong. The Parades are not going away anytime soon. But as the culture in the US becomes less and less allergic to gays in general, there will be less reason to participate in “Pride” parades. They aren’t “parades” after all, they are clever ways to stage protests against inequality, whether real or imagined.
“there will always be a class of perpetually aggrieved professional gay activists who invent “rights” to demand.”
Just look at the NAACP.
Is it possible that they could be evolving into Republicans? In the past Log Cabin, even if they didn´t march, had a booth at the festival. I wonder how many voter registrations they received from Democrat to Republican.
Here on the East Coast, they’re just boozy street carnivals promoting the gay bars and a few boring, leftie political-clubs that no-one participates-in. Usually headlined by this-week’s hot twink
escort…errrgo-go-boy strippers. And even the parading leather-guys are just boring now….I guess after Reichen, the Kardashians, and The A-List, ass-less chaps and nipple-rings are fairly ho-hum.Uuuugh!
Why must a gay person making a political statement at Pride be seen as Stonewall (or other Dem org) or Log Cabin.
It would be nice to just see some folks with a Romney sign.
What is the reason to participate in them now? It’s just an excuse to act like an idiot and proclaim as loudly as possible “Hey! Look at me!! I’m gay!!!” And no-one is going to dare speak ill of the pride parades, or they will look like a bigot. If you ask me, gay pride parades, if anything, are counterproductive in achieving “gay rights.” Pride parades make gay people look bad.
Exactly. All the people at HRC and NGLTF would be out of a job if they didn’t have anything to be aggrieved over.
Rattlesnake. You are so right.
No, there’s too many activists making cushy livings off activism who would have to get real jobs. The Civil Rights community didn’t taper off after the Civil Rights Act was passed, they just kept pushing for more and more programs, more and more spending, more and more grievances.
There is no reason the professional gay activism community would be any different.
Gay ‘pride’ parades are a total sham.
Nothing to do with ‘pride’ and everything to do with funneling large amounts of sweet, sweet queer dollars into the local economy.
Echoing Cinesnatch & Geena’s questions, how many Republicans or pro-Romney supporters marched during the Gay Pride parade in Los Angeles? Does anyone have a photograph of that?
If the argument is “sexual orientation isn’t the most important or defining issue for gay Republicans,” then why did the author of the article even attend & take photos of the Gay Pride parade to begin with? (Unless he was one of the anti-gay churchgoers holding up signs saying “Homo sex is a sin” and passing out anti-gay handbills, which I’m fairly certain he was not).
@Rattlesnake.
Mardi Gras parades and Spring Break parties in Cancun, Florida, etc. make straight people look bad, but I don’t see any horrified condemnation on this website (or any conservative websites) of heterosexuals’ wanton behavior when Mardi Gras or Spring Break season comes around.
The professional victim activists can’t even acknowledge the victories they’ve already won.
I would lose respect for any politician who marched in any gay pride parade.
Neither Mardi Gras nor Spring Break parties are called “straight pride.” Gay pride is the defining event of the “gay community.”
I attended the parade this year with one of my best friends. He gets a little teary-eyed every year when PFLAG marches by. He’s as unpolitical as you can get too.
In 1996, I marched in the Portland Pride with Phoenix Rising. I was just a dumb kid having fun and “being a part of something.” I skipped out on PRIDE for several years.
In 2002, I marched in the San Diego Pride with the Diversionary Theatre, one of the biggest, most successful American theatres that specialize in stories with gay characters (everything from old standards like Love! Valour! to unflattering portraits like Never the Sinner). I participated with the theatre in many capacities: box-office, backstage, onstage, etc. I was proud of my involvement with such a classy and professional small-scale theatre (when I was involved, the theatre gave just about anything in LA–including the Mark Taper and Geffen–a run for its money). My memory is hazy, but, for whatever reason, I skipped out on PRIDE parades again and/or was a casual observer for years.
I’ve watched more PRIDE parades probably in the last few years more so than in my entire life. This year was great, because it was my first PRIDE with one my best friends, which makes it all that more special.
I don’t disagree with many on here who believe PRIDE is full of its share of “activists for activists’ sake,” who will never be satisfied until every single person on this planet walks around with a rainbow flag strung from their car attenne. God help us if that ever happens.
And, yes, the parade was full of commercialism like local bars (Sandra Bernhard had a great line in her recent one-woman show were she said, “a vodka company endorsing a gay event is like Gerber giving a shout out to babies.”) and crappy TV shows. The messages that are sent are less than great, but there is still a human element to their participation. After all, as a people, all people, connect through such venues at bars and find commonalities in television preferences. And, every year, there’s a small group of people who learn LA’s own Chica Angles performs locally. Parade watchers learning about such upcoming events as Outfest and the NON-gay-specific Fringe Festival, of which I am critiquing theatre for. And, while I try not to be a celebrity gawker, it was cool to see Molly Ringwald. No, she didn’t do anything but show up, wear a toga, smile and wave. But, it was neat to see her and take a picture. *shrug*
But, there were also organizations that dealt with gay parents and older gays, concepts of which have not been part of our culture for very long in the grand scheme of things.
I clapped. I waved. I took pictures. I shouted. I danced. I rolled my eyes when Gloria Allred drove by in her car and I gagged when Erotic City marched by with their leather and whips. Each to his/her own. But, if you can believe it, I would have clapped and cheered for the contingent of Mitt Romney supporters (or young Republicans, GOProud, Log Cabin, etc), who had better things to do then organize and show their faces. I don’t judge them because they didn’t. I only bring them up to say I would have welcomed their presence and providing the procession with a little more diversity than thonged, buffed 20-somethings that one comes to expect from these events (by the way, the Magic Mike float flat-out-danced any of the bar-sponsored groups).
While I can be jaded as the next person, I was glad I could be there and watch the festivities. It’s only once/year. And, I kind of miss the parade already. Thanks again for this post dance and helping me appreciate the festivities.
Sandra Bernhard link from Comment #19
And, yes, I fully recognize that I first brought light to the fact they were missing and then when on to saw I don’t judge them. I just wasn’t honestly sure if there had been a group and I missed them (I was suffering a little bit from heat stroke). Truth be told, I really wish there had been a Republican submission to the parade (maybe there was and I missed them). As I have already stated, the diversity would have been welcome.
Why in the world would anyone want to? I certainly don’t want to be associated with that sordid moonbattery.
Other than arguing with a so-called “progressive,” I can’t imagine a bigger waste of time than a Gay “Pride” parade.
#19: “But, if you can believe it, I would have clapped and cheered for the contingent of Mitt Romney supporters (or young Republicans, GOProud, Log Cabin, etc), who had better things to do then organize and show their faces. I don’t judge them because they didn’t. I only bring them up to say I would have welcomed their presence and providing the procession with a little more diversity than thonged, buffed 20-somethings that one comes to expect from these events…”
BULLSH*T. BULL. SH*T. You really are detached from reality if you think you have the credibility to make such representations and expect anyone on this blog to believe them. Snatchy, I just got through reminding everyone that when the story came out that Romney had allegedly been involved in a hazing incident a half-century ago, you unequivocally argued that the story was relevant, comparing the teenage Mitt’s psychological make-up to that of a child molester.
So, PLEASE, stop insulting us and embarrassing yourself with all your blathering and obvious lies. Had you seen a Republican group marching in the parade, you would not have clapped or cheered in support of them because you DON’T support them or the ‘diversity’ they bring to the ‘gay community’. And even if you did, you still would have remained silent because you don’t have the character or fortitude to take the guff you would have gotten from the gay leftist fools surrounding you for clapping/cheering for Republicans. Snatch, we know how ignorant and hateful you are because you’ve shown us. Thus, it’s easy to conclude that the most likely scenario would have been: you shrieking epithets and obscenities like a cracked-out banshee along with the roided-out, GHB-dazed drones standing nearby. In the darkest recesses of your shriveled black heart, you know it’s true and so do we.
Ah, yes. Pride parades. Otherwise known as “Halloween in June.”
I should ask you stop embarrassing yourself Sean A with your animosity, but I’m beginning to enjoy it (much like I’ve taken to Miss Rita Beads, whom I hope WILL NEVER be banned from GP, FTR. You can quote me on that from here on out to all those who care).
And, yes, I would have clapped and cheered, in support, but, at the very least, in spite of those around me. But, if it’s more important for you to believe I wouldn’t, please, by all means, choose your fantasy. It seems to soothe you with comfort, or else why bother?
Never said I support Romney, but support people’s choice to vote for him. And, as I said, I welcome the diversity.
I’m not perfect, Sean. But, I’m perfectly willing to entertain ideas such as mindsets of presidential candidates from their youth, as well as the pros and cons of the current president’s health-plan.
Me thinks you doth express ire too much. Just an observation.
And, yes, I support gay Republicans’ choices in political persuasion. Otherwise, why would I have offered BDB a warm hug upon seeing him by mere chance (in a crowd of thousands) instead of turning the other direction yesterday at the parade?
And, you don’t know me, Sean A. Regardless of how poorly I represent myself here on GP and on the internet at large, as I tend not to care what others think about what I say out on the streets. So, don’t pretend to know me. But, your animosity towards me is getting rather poetic, so please keep going. It fills my tiny “shriveled black heart.” But, really, you would be best to move on.
Happy PRIDE.
So you’re OK with sexual debauchery as long as it’s not labeled “_________ Pride”?
Sonicfrog, no. I have no idea how you got that from what I said. For the record, I don’t hold New Orleans in very high regard (not exclusively for Mardi Gras, but that contributes to it). There are things Mardi Gras and Spring Break are more associated with than heterosexuality, but not Gay Pride with homosexuality.
Hmmn. Throughout history, heterosexuals in the mainstream have never had to assert themselves by identifying their sexual orientation, because they were the ruling “sexual orientation.” I don’t want to sound all activisty, but it’s been pretty recent from a historical perspective that gays have been allowed to live “in the open,” without unlawful and sometimes fatal repercussions. To single out PRIDE without this perspective seems a little shortsighted.
As ILC will attest, the gays have pretty much gained mainstream acceptance in Western Civilization. There is very little else to be fought for (though our views on marriage equality and how far we have to go are similar). Indeed, the victimhood card often gets overplayed in the gay community in a kind of emotional myopia. I surmise it’s a symtom in the step forward to marriage equality that will dissipate once it has been achieved (though I imagine a large contingent will never be able to “let go” of being a “victim”). But, I also understand it partially from the view that, yes, there are gay teens killing themselves still, because they can’t foresee a future for themselves (and we can argue on who is responsible for them and their well-being as a group [i.e. Divider Dan Savage’s It Gets Better]).
So, comparing Mardia Gras/heterosexuality to Gay Pride/homosexuality? Yes, that’s a fair comparison.
Sorry Rattle… I was just taking the comment to the extreme… Having my NDT moment…
Say… Where the heck is my favorite nemesis??? 😉
I’ve never seen a heterosexual person be called “self-loathing”, a “quisling”, a “Nazi”, or an “Uncle Tom” if they criticize peoples’ behavior at Mardi Gras or spring break — in contrast with the behavior of gay and lesbian community leaders like GLAAD award winner Joe Jervis and noted blogger Pam Spaulding, who regularly refer to gay conservatives and others who criticize peoples’ behavior at Pride as such.
And there are plenty of people who criticize the behavior of those at Mardi Gras or spring break.
So what is clear is that one must endorse and support the behaviors at Pride to be a “real gay” and not a “traitor” or “quisling”: therefore, Pride represents the normal and typical behavior of the gay and lesbian community, and any criticism of it is “homophobic”.
In contrast, one is not called a traitor or self-loathing if one criticizes Mardi Gras or spring break; therefore, these are not representations of the typical behavior of the heterosexual community.
It’s pretty straightforward. Gay pride is nothing more than an excuse to exercise your basest instincts and then claim that one is a homophobe for criticizing you. It is the classic example of how the gay and lesbian community intends to force society to grant it special privileges and dispensations based on its minority status, and to scream down and browbeat anyone who would dare criticize it.
And that brings us to this:
Not really. You were asking a question; I answered it with links and evidence.
The reason I do what I do, Sonic, is simple; when you are playing a hypocrite like the bigot James, one need only show that the bigot does not equally apply his rules. The best way to do that is to answer their attack as if they are serious, then press for them to do the reverse. The weakness of gays and lesbians like rusty, James, and Pat is that they have been so indoctrinated with the fear of being called “Uncle Toms” and “quislings” that they will not criticize even the most repulsive behaviors of their fellow gays and lesbians. You can very easily reverse and destroy their arguments by pointing out that they are based, not on logic, actual evidence, and principles, but on pure identity politics.
More on that identity politics thingy SF
from Carrie and Underwood and Jimmy
“As a married person myself, I don’t know what it’s like to be told I can’t marry somebody I love and want to marry,” Underwood told the Independent. “I can’t imagine how that must feel. I definitely think we should all have the right to love, and love publicly, the people that we want to love.”
Raised a Baptist and known for hits including “Jesus Take the Wheel,” the singer told the paper she and husband Mike Fisher, who plays for the NHL’s Nashville Predators, now attend a nondenominational, “gay-friendly” Christian church. Underwood’s outlook is similar to that of singer and Broadway star Kristin Chenoweth, another devout heterosexual Christian from the South who is sympathetic to gay issues.
“Good for her,” said Jimmy LaSalvia, co-founder and executive director of GOProud, an organization that bills itself as “the voice of gay conservatives and their straight allies.”
“You know, Carrie Underwood isn’t any different from anyone else in America,” LaSalvia said Monday in an e-mail to The Times. “The more Americans think about how issues affect their gay friends and family the more they come to realize that supporting same-sex civil marriage is the right thing to do. More and more people are coming to that conclusion — and that includes conservative Christians.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/gossip/la-et-mg-carrie-underwood-gay-marriage,0,7333550.story
I, for one, would be happy to see the day that our culture has cured its allergy to gays. The sooner the better. But the Pride Parades are important, if not locally, but in other parts of the world. The U.S. is the leader. This year. on Saturday June 30th, will be the third year that there will be a Gay Pride Parade in San Salvador. Viewing newspapers from other countries I haven´t seen any announcements. Honduras usually has one. It´s been several years since I read any activity from the gay community in the Dominican Republic. Machismo is alive and well and the evangelical churchs nutures it. On the 23rd there will be a candlelight vigil for a gay man who was murdered in a hotel room where he had been with two ¨tricks.¨ July 1, will be the first anniversary that my ex- was murdered by gangbangers who knew him as not only gay but a student in the police academy. Police and military are high on the list for victimaztion by the bangers.
The weakness of gays and lesbians like rusty, James, and Pat is that they have been so indoctrinated with the fear of being called “Uncle Toms” and “quislings”
NDT, actually, it’s more that you are projecting your own fears and your own apparent rejections onto me and others. Deal with those people instead. Thanks.
Well, that’s the thing, Pat; I have.
I just was naive enough to believe that, since you didn’t like Nazi comparisons, namecalling teenagers, and the like, that you applied that equally to both heterosexual AND homosexual people.
Of course you haven’t… Because very few do. And when they do, it doesn’t get much in the way of coverage. When it does get coverage, those people who do criticize MG and spring break are labeled “prudes” and “fundies”. It’s funny that you say plenty of people criticize those events, yet you only feature one link. I guarantee that for every one link you can find denouncing Marti Gras and spring break there are at least 60 railing against gay pride parades, and most of those wouldn’t dare rail against divorce and adultery on the same scale as they do homosexuals, because homos are a much easier target..
as is Marti Gras and spring break for hetero’s.
Which “special privileges” do homosexuals want that hetero people don’t and won’t have? Gay toilet facilities that only gays can use? I haven’t seen anything gays ask for that straights don’t already have. Adopting children, the ability to marry the person of their choice (adult and consent), etc. They aren’t even asking for a special tax break for being gay, or at least I haven’t seen that.
This will predictably set you off on your “benefit society” rant. There are a lot of things that would benefit society. Killing all poor and stupid people would certainly improve and benefit society. But what-ev’s. Have at it if you must.
Sorry, but I’ve seen each of them criticize something that they deem “repulsive” in regard to gays. What they tend not to do is to fall in step with you when you’re upset about something, which is pretty much everything and anything related to the “gay community”. Perhaps if you were more selective and less repetitive in your outrages, you would get better responses from them.
since you didn’t like Nazi comparisons, namecalling teenagers, and the like, that you applied that equally to both heterosexual AND homosexual people.
Yep, I do. Now maybe you can move on with your assumptions about me not based on reality. Thanks.
You think, Sonic?
Imagine that. These groups are just as willing to call out divorce and stand up for laws against adultery as they are against the homos.
Now let’s turn that around. Show me the gay-sex marriage groups that speak out against adultery and divorce. After all, if you supposedly value marriage, wouldn’t you be opposed to both?
Easy. Gay and lesbian people want to be able to compel people to serve them and punish them if they don’t while demanding that they can refuse service to whomever they want without punishment.
Yes, Sonic, because you’re demanding public funds.
That’s really the crux of the issue. You can go get married right now if you like; no one’s stopping you. You just don’t get to claim the welfare or tax benefits that are granted to opposite-sex couples.
It is all about money. And since you’re demanding public funds, you better be showing how you’re going to benefit the public.
HIV/AIDS has already shown that gays will engage in behavior that costs all of society money, demand that we pay more to facilitate it, and then scream that we’re “homophobic” unless it’s given to them. Why should anyone believe that gay marriage would be any different?
Sorry, but I’ve seen each of them criticize something that they deem “repulsive” in regard to gays. What they tend not to do is to fall in step with you when you’re upset about something, which is pretty much everything and anything related to the “gay community”. Perhaps if you were more selective and less repetitive in your outrages, you would get better responses from them.
Thanks, Sonicfrog. I have criticized FSF, the retched remarks of Mary Cheney’s child, promiscuity in general, and other things plenty of times on this blog. But I won’t be anyone’s trained seal anymore. And I won’t put up with anyone’s lies about me anymore either.
Wow. That’s it? Classic association fallacy. You have two, very specific, unrelated cases, brought by unrelated people. There are no rallies that I’ve seen that are demanding that, by law, gays have the special right to deny services based on gay stuff but cannot be denied services based on gay stuff.
On the Willock v Elaine photography case, when the initial case came down the pike, I thought the court got that one wrong. I remember when that case broke, and after hearing a lengthy analysis of it, I thought that case was mishandled by the defendants attorney. Don’t remember the specifics, but i remember reaching that conclusion. If the wedding was a pagan wedding, I doubt there would not have been much of a question in that case. This is a service that can be easily found through other photographers.
On the hair cut, or lack-there-of…. The hair dresser should have the right to deny service, and the photographer should have the right to deny service. They have no obligation to perform a service. When gay marriage is the law of the land in NM, that problem with the hairdresser goes away.
When gay marriage become available, many of these problems go away. As I said in a previous post, as being gay become less of an issue in society, there will be less and less of the protest and parades we have seen in the past. There will be nothing left to rail against.
No, it doesn’t.
The problem is the damage of a law that is inherently anti-liberty in the first place being compounded by patently-unequal enforcement.
Your argument, Sonicfrog, is that until gays and lesbians have gay-sex marriage, you support and endorse gays and lesbians being able to force people to do their bidding while systematically discriminating themselves.
In short, you are hostage taking: give you gay-sex marriage or you will discriminate against and use the law to punish those who disagree with you.
Since you won’t repeal the law or equally enforce it now, why should we be stupidly naive enough to believe that you will once you get your ransom? You clearly can rationalize unequal enforcement and anti-liberty laws now; what should make us think that you won’t do the same later to get something else that you want?
Which makes absolutely no sense, since I said this:
The court should not have rule that the photographer in question must provide the service to the gay couple if said photographer doesn’t want to. And I say it right there in my quote you highlighted:
Reading comprehension was never a strong suit of yours. I figured after all these years it would have improved some… Oh well.
Actually, Sonic, I would invite you to reread what I stated:
In other words, you might say that people should have freedom of choice, but as is clear, you’re quite willing to let them continue without until you get gay-sex marriage.
That is confirmed by this statement:
Hence my point. You pay lip service to the concept, but refuse to practice it. If you can hold liberties hostage to get your gay-sex marriage, that’s quite all right with you.
And again, I repeat myself. You have already shown that you will allow peoples’ rights to be taken away and for them to be punished if you think it will get you your gay-sex marriage. You refuse to consider ANY other remedy for the situation other than gay-sex marriage.
And this is why people keep voting you down, Sonic. You have demonstrated that your view of the law, freedom, and liberty is informed solely by your personal convenience. If you can’t do something as basic now as equally enforce a law or repeal it when it’s clear that it is creating problems, there is no earthly reason to expect you to do otherwise later on when your personal conveniences are met.
Last time I checked, I haven’t tried to sue anybody for anything because of my gay.
You just don’t know when to quit. I was going to say you just don’t know when to quit while you’re ahead, but you were never ahead in this case. Did the NM Gov have the right to force THAT hairdresser to do her hair? Should the lesbians have the right to force that photographer to work their wedding? Your comment only has any merit if I say yes to both. Since I’ve said “No” to each, that each person providing a service has the right to refuse service in each case, you make even less sense than usual.
That’s not my argument. It’s what you want my argument to be, so you can knock it down… Hello Mr Strawman.You really should start a new blog to demonstrate how to write using fallacies and false arguments… Because… Man… You’re so damned good at it… No, not good… Great! You’ve almost perfected the use of fallacies to an art form!
And yet the simple fact is this, Sonic: the photographer WAS forced and the hairdresser wasn’t.
And your only answer is that it’s their own fault because they don’t support gay-sex marriage.
Thus, I repeat myself: you really DON’T care about liberty or freedom in these cases, only in getting gay-sex marriage. You continue to make it clear that you support and endorse discrimination against people unless you get gay-sex marriage. You are saying to this photographer and to the governor that people can punish them and discriminate against them because they oppose gay-sex marriage.
Do you read before you respond? Or do you just like to create strawmen arguments? Not only was that not your only answer, as you put it, but it wasn’t my answer at all. Quote:
AND, to make sure I was clear, I said, specifically:
For some reason, you feel the need to be a confrontational person on line here and on your own blog. OK. Whatever. Sometimes, despite the ad-homs, stawmen, and extremely adolescent behaviors, you do have a valid point to make. But here, you’re thrashing and failing miserably. Why not just let this one go?
Absolutely I do. And here’s your answer.
Your only response to rectify the situation, aka answer, was to impose gay-sex marriage.
Mine was that if you want freedom of choice to serve who you wish, then don’t pass laws restricting that — and get rid of the laws that do, such as in this case.
That again is the problem, Sonic. You can’t get to the basic and most obvious answer of repealing the law because that doesn’t involve forcing gay-sex marriage on people. Your only response to any situation is to demand the one that will most benefit gays and lesbians, and to hell with everyone else.
And in this case, your logic is clear: give us gay-sex marriage, or you will keep having lawsuits filed against you until we bankrupt you.
I am not naive enough to believe that blackmailers and extortionists will stop blackmailing and extorting once they get what they want. If you won’t stand up for principle now, you sure as hell aren’t going to later.
Good Lord man… how much clearer can this be?
and
How can you possibly construct a disagreement when we absolutely agree.
Repealing which law? In this thread, neither you or I have mentioned anything about repealing any law. Once again you construct a strawman to inject an argument I didn’t make, and you didn’t make, in order to try and win. It fails on all levels.
Now, on this comment:
I shouldn’t be surprised that you read it as “I support these lawsuits and we won’t stop until gay-sex marriage is force upon everyone”. Of course that would make no sense since I already said both people who were providing the services do and should have the right to deny those services. Plus, nowhere, either here on GP or on my blog for that matter, did I give any support to the lesbians efforts to take the photographer to court. Yet another figment of your twisted imagination. Yet another strawman.