quote Originally posted by Flamberge: I think any historical figure that is purported to be gay is sketchy at best. Most historical information on people who lived in their time does not take special time to mention their sexual preference. Von Steuben? I researched him for my Revolutionary War novel. He left the Prussian army for unknown reasons. Some have speculated WHY, but they don't actually KNOW. But the Gay community seems to be eager to snatch up any well known person they can get their hands on, as if Von Steuben being gay or straight has anything to do with his ability to train our soldiers at Valley Forge. I have a friend who is gay and he can recite off the top of his head every historical figure that ever lived that was supposedly gay. He also knows every hollywood actor, singer, etc. but does he KNOW? No. But don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. The problem with teaching history by pointing out supposedly gay figures of note is that 1) the truth might be different than the textbook and teacher says it is, 2) their sexual preference most likely did not affect the outcome of whatever event they were a part of that made them noteworthy, and 3) sexuality should not be taught in school. But go ahead, California! Only 4% of your population claims to be gay, but don't let that stop you from forcing the other 96% to learn about tolerance instead of history in a history class. It's not like you are facing crippling debt, illegal alien invasion, etc.

All excellent points. Seems to me, CA elected leaders have several more significant things they need to address, maybe balancing their budget would be a good start. It appears to me that having the legislature in session as a full time job gives them way too much time to do something besides govern accordingly and there appears to be little accountability based on what I read. Come on CA voters, wake up before it's too late.

------------------
Ron

quote Originally posted by blackrams: Let's see, how should I respond to James inflamatory crap? I think I'll just ignore him. That always seems to make him happy.

Coming from a racist homophobic hater who's so steeped in far right extreme conservative ideology that he barely qualifies as American anymore, in my opinion, I'm truly not bothered by anything he says. Truly. And I mean that with all due respect.

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Coming from a racist homophobic hater who's so steeped in far right extreme conservative ideology that he barely qualifies as American anymore, in my opinion, I'm truly not bothered by anything he says. Truly. And I mean that with all due respect.

Yay, the name calling has started again. I was afraid for a second we had left the third grade mentality behind. Whew, close one doodie head.

Brad

quote Originally posted by partfiero: Try further! God created two males, Adam and Steve. But that part of history has suppressed until now, it can finally see the light!

I've heard this story. Its on broadway!

In the beginning, the garden of Eden was a pretty clean place, with curios full of knick knacks and CD shelves full of showtunes, the fridge full of wine coolers and in the closet? Hawaiian shirts. Then that old bull-dyke Eve came along and demanded equal rights and wanted to have a child, so Adam had to leave Steve, be a sperm donor and start a family.

Steve would stay in the Garden, but Adam and Eve had to leave because they ate the forbidden cous cous. Eve, as well, was a very poor housekeeper and let everything get hideously dusty and grimy. This angered God, who sent them out across the river Jordan to San Francisco never to return together to paradise.

Although Adam would head back alone and he and Steve would spend some time together through the years, Eve kept Adam nearby as her beard, and to help raise their first child who was neither murdered or a murderer, Niles. The real problem, Eve thought, was that Niles was turning straight. Wasn't this supposed to be a choice? And he wore brown shoes with a blue blazer! HIDEOUS!

Years later, when Adam and Steve saw each other again, Steve said "I wish I knew how to quit you".

From "Brokeback Eden", a play

[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-07-2011).]

quote Originally posted by blackrams: SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- California lawmakers on Tuesday sent the governor a bill that would make the state the first requiring public schools to include the contributions of gays and lesbians in social studies curriculum.

I'm sure the school kids in Kalifornistan are eagerly awaiting a "blow-by-blow" account of gay history.

On a more serious note, I really despise divisive politics, especially when they target a social demographic group. Whether the policy affects that group in a positive or negative way, it serves to "single out" that group, and expose them to public scrutiny. For example, this new bill in California will spark up outcries of anti-gay sentiment among the homophobes. It will do nothing to improve relations between the gays and heteros, but rather will be like salt on a wound.

Like the saying goes, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

[This message has been edited by Blacktree (edited 07-07-2011).]

quote Originally posted by twofatguys: Yay, the name calling has started again. I was afraid for a second we had left the third grade mentality behind. Whew, close one doodie head. Brad

You're a kaka-poopoo head!

quote Originally posted by tbone42: Well, the KKK does do it in VIOLENT ways. Maybe thats what gets everyone up in arms. I dont think its a bad thing for people to be who they are if its not hurting somebody... but the KKK man? Really? You had to have abetter example in your head than THAT.

If violence is your yardstick, then you would be perfectly happy with non-violent segregationists.

Racial preferences and racial discrimination are two sides of the same racist coin.


.

quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: If violence is your yardstick, then you would be perfectly happy with non-violent segregationists.

umm.. I seriously doubt it. At least not into it as much as I imagine you are, if you want to throw rocks..

Making laws through our process in the US and states is a legitimate form of rule making. It can be fought and overturned. Lynching and running people out of town who are not WASPs is not. (Even if the aren't doing it currently, thank you Brad.) It's illegal. And sometimes their actions have no solution, especially for victims that have died. One is the legal process, the other at best is vigilantism and at worse an attempt by a few at genocide. Not the same ballpark, not even the same sport.

So why do people get up in arms when the KKK does their thing? Because of everything the Klan stands for, or has stood for, and their methods. If you don't know that...yeah, your example was terrible. Or bad rhetoric, either way... *thumbs down*

quote Originally posted by tbone42: umm.. I seriously doubt it. At least not into it as much as I imagine you are, if you want to throw rocks.. Making laws through our process in the US and states is a legitimate form of rule making. It can be fought and overturned. Lynching and running people out of town who are not WASPs is not. (Even if the aren't doing it currently, thank you Brad.) It's illegal. And sometimes their actions have no solution, especially for victims that have died. One is the legal process, the other at best is vigilantism and at worse an attempt by a few at genocide. Not the same ballpark, not even the same sport. So why do people get up in arms when the KKK does their thing? Because of everything the Klan stands for, or has stood for, and their methods. If you don't know that...yeah, your example was terrible. Or bad rhetoric, either way... *thumbs down*

I don't enjoy seeing people kill eachother (not exactly like I've witnessed this personally), but I can half-way admit that I'm QUITE comfortable with at least one event in history...

It was some kind of riot (I think MadCurl posted it a while back) where a huge gang of the KKK and a huge gathering of the Communist Party members got into a big fight, and I think they nearly all killed eachother.

Again, I don't like to see people die... but how can you not feel at least in that situation, that things just kind of "worked themselves out." heh...

only beef I have ever had with the gay community are the ones that flaunt the in your face attitude. I don't go around with stickers on my car that say I like vagina, and I don't care to see people flaunting that they like to take it in the ass. That's all. Other then that, I don't care. Its the activism and forcing everyone one else to accept their world view that annoys the hell out of me.

quote Originally posted by NickD3.4: only beef I have ever had with the gay community are the ones that flaunt the in your face attitude. I don't go around with stickers on my car that say I like vagina, and I don't care to see people flaunting that they like to take it in the ass. That's all. Other then that, I don't care. Its the activism and forcing everyone one else to accept their world view that annoys the hell out of me.

I'm very much the same way. I am a gay rights supporter,but I do not want to hear about their bedroom activities any more than anyone else's. Same thing with PDAs... you want to suck face, gay or straight, get a room. Its in really poor taste, I dont really like seeing make out sessions in public one way or the other. Good for you, you're "getting some". I get some all the time, but you are not gonna see me half-poke some girl in public.

A friend of mine told me he "doesnt mind gays as long as they keep it to themself".. so I had to ask him what he meant. Because just being identified as gay is harmless to me. Saying what you do in the bedroom is offensive to me from anyone, gay or straight. I don't care what you are doing in your bedroom people, nobody needs to hear about it in crude fashion.

Straight or gay.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: I've heard this story. Its on broadway! In the beginning, the garden of Eden was a pretty clean place, with curios full of knick knacks and CD shelves full of showtunes, the fridge full of wine coolers and in the closet? Hawaiian shirts. Then that old bull-dyke Eve came along and demanded equal rights and wanted to have a child, so Adam had to leave Steve, be a sperm donor and start a family. Steve would stay in the Garden, but Adam and Eve had to leave because they ate the forbidden cous cous. Eve, as well, was a very poor housekeeper and let everything get hideously dusty and grimy. This angered God, who sent them out across the river Jordan to San Francisco never to return together to paradise. Although Adam would head back alone and he and Steve would spend some time together through the years, Eve kept Adam nearby as her beard, and to help raise their first child who was neither murdered or a murderer, Niles. The real problem, Eve thought, was that Niles was turning straight. Wasn't this supposed to be a choice? And he wore brown shoes with a blue blazer! HIDEOUS! Years later, when Adam and Steve saw each other again, Steve said "I wish I knew how to quit you". From "Brokeback Eden", a play

``Two snaps up`` (with gestures)
It is as good as history now.

I see you are perfectly fine with racism so long as it is done legally. At least you are consistent. Racism for or against a race is still racism.


.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: umm.. I seriously doubt it. At least not into it as much as I imagine you are, if you want to throw rocks.. Making laws through our process in the US and states is a legitimate form of rule making. It can be fought and overturned. Lynching and running people out of town who are not WASPs is not. (Even if the aren't doing it currently, thank you Brad.) It's illegal. And sometimes their actions have no solution, especially for victims that have died. One is the legal process, the other at best is vigilantism and at worse an attempt by a few at genocide. Not the same ballpark, not even the same sport. So why do people get up in arms when the KKK does their thing? Because of everything the Klan stands for, or has stood for, and their methods. If you don't know that...yeah, your example was terrible. Or bad rhetoric, either way... *thumbs down*

quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: I see you are perfectly fine with racism so long as it is done legally. At least you are consistent. Racism for or against a race is still racism. .

Not sure where you got that from, but you could not be further from the truth. What race am I supposedly for or against?
Homosexuality does not equal race.

You really do live in bizarro-world, dont you?

[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-07-2011).]

Alexander the Great was gay.. Its well documented, and i believe even in, at least some, school history books.

Most Spartans where gay as well.. Or at least Bi-sexual.. As gay sex was a normal thing for warriors growing up in the barraks..

And the Romans where well known for homo sexual behavior, and thats in the books as well..

So there has always been some "gayness" in the history books, lol.. I don't know what these gay groups are complaining about.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: Not sure where you got that from, but you could not be further from the truth. What race am I supposedly for or against? Homosexuality does not equal race. You really do live in bizarro-world, dont you?

Nice tactic you got there. Drag the discussion into leftist field then claim it is no longer relevant.

Answer two direct question then:

Are you for or against the government categorizing people into groups?

Are you for or against the government then giving special privileges, protections, perks or any kind of special treatment based on these groups?


.

quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: Nice tactic you got there. Drag the discussion into leftist field then claim it is no longer relevant. Answer two direct question then: Are you for or against the government categorizing people into groups? Are you for or against the government then giving special privileges, protections, perks or any kind of special treatment based on these groups? .

I didn't drag the conversation anywhere. You are the one who cant keep what we are talking about straight. Are we talking about racism, because that is DEFINITELY not what I was talking about?
Yet you baited and switched yourself, my friend. I have never seen anyone who cannot even keep on topic between three posts. Ridiculous.

You want a response? Its already above.

And, had you ACTUALLY read ANY of my posts in this thread, you would realize I never spoke in favor of this law, yet AGAINST it. Try scrolling up, read a little..

... and boy, your face must be red now, huh?

[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-07-2011).]

quote Originally posted by tbone42: I didn't drag the conversation anywhere. You are the one who cant keep what we are talking about straight. Are we talking about racism, because that is DEFINITELY not what I was talking about? Yet you baited and switched yourself, my friend. I have never seen anyone who cannot even keep on topic between three posts. Ridiculous. You want a response? Its already above. And, had you ACTUALLY read ANY of my posts in this thread, you would realize I never spoke in favor of this law, yet AGAINST it. Try scrolling up, read a little.. ... and boy, your face must be red now, huh?

You didn't answer either question. I can answer both, plainly and clearly with a "no." At least I know where I stand and I'm not ashamed to say so.

You are clearly too emotional over this subject to continue. When the government institutionalizes discrimination, whether for or against a group, then emotions flare.


.

quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: You didn't answer either question. I can answer both, plainly and clearly with a "no." At least I know where I stand and I'm not ashamed to say so. You are clearly too emotional over this subject to continue. When the government institutionalizes discrimination, whether for or against a group, then emotions flare. .

You are clearly a reactionary douschebag who cant be bothered to read my previous posts, even though they contain the answer you seek. You THOUGHT you knew my position on this, but you only assume because of my past posts on other subjects (Think ya got me pegged a liberal, so I MUST tote the whole platform, huh) how I feel about it. Still, my opinion is there, I cannot help it if you have problems comprehending the english language. Do I actually have to quote myself to give you the answer, since saying it once is not enough?

quote Tbone42 originally posted Heck with it, I'll make a criticism... it will be flawed, but I think closer to the mark and not be an illegitimate comparison. I think this law is unnecessary, we dont need to know who was gay throughout history. Thats just dumb. Its like knowing what nationality someone's grandparents were. Its not important, but if you really want to know, there will be resources for you to find that out that are not part of curriculum.

But as we will probably see, no matter how many times I repeat myself you wont understand.. Sorry a simplistic minds like yourself needs a soundbyte, not a paragraph. The answer is right there how I feel about the bill, not like I needed it to legitimize it by LEADING YOU BY THE HAND to the answer. Its on page 1 of this thread (response somewhere in the late 20s) in blue and gray, as clear as crystal, You lazy ****.

You are clearly unequipped to participate in a conversation where you cannot keep track of the subject or what anyone said in it, and yet react negatively to people who actually espoused the view you probably believe yourself. And if all else fails, accuse me of a leftist bait and switch to try and mask your incredible level of stupidity and inadequacy in debate.

Too emotional over the subject? Just too dumbfounded at how absolutely braindead you truly are. You call me a racist when we are talking about sexual orientation (WTF?) you use the KKK as your shining comparative to lawmaking, and then you are too lazy to actually look at the answers I posted before you even posed your question. You're an enigma wrapped up in a queston wrapped up in a turd. Did your parents have any children born with a brain?

Go away before your ignorance spreads.

[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-08-2011).]

My questions just like my first statement in this thread are about the larger subject of the left's obsession with categorizing people, and then discriminating for or against them based on their category. You chose to argue with me on this point which implies that you side with the left. It is your own fault for appearing to be one.

You still have not answered those two simple questions so any claim that you don't side with the leftists is moot at this point.


.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: Thats the last time I repeat myself. You dont want to look at the answer again this time, thats your own fault. So, it was "No" for the record, and simplistic minds like yourself that need a soundbyte, not a paragraph. The answer is right there how I feel about the bill, not like I needed it to legitimize it by LEADING YOU BY THE HAND to the answer. Its on page 1, in blue and gray, as clear as crystal, You lazy ****. YOU are clearly too STUPID to participate in a conversation where you cannot keep track of the subject or what anyone said in it, and yet react negatively to people who actually espoused the view you probably believe yourself. And if all else fails, accuse me of a leftist bait and switch to try and mask your incredible level of stupidity and inadequacy in debate. Too emotional over the subject? Just too dumbfounded at how ignorant you truly are. You call me a racist when we are talking about sexual orientation (WTF?) you use the KKK as your shining comparative to lawmaking, and then you are too lazy to actually look at the answers I posted before you even posed your question. Your an enigma wrapped up in a queston wraped up in a fart. Go away before your ignorance spreads.

quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: My questions just like my first statement in this thread are about the larger subject of the left's obsession with categorizing people, and then discriminating for or against them based on their category. You chose to argue with me on this point which implies that you side with the left. It is your own fault for appearing to be one. You still have not answered those two simple questions so any claim that you don't side with the leftists is moot at this point.

I only feel the need categorize one group of people. Dumbasses. Congratulations, you fit that category.

Other than that, I dont feel the need to point out unescessary differences in others based on race or sexual orientation. Of course, had you read what I posted before, you would already know that.

quote Tbone42 originally posted Heck with it, I'll make a criticism... it will be flawed, but I think closer to the mark and not be an illegitimate comparison. I think this law is unnecessary, we dont need to know who was gay throughout history. Thats just dumb. Its like knowing what nationality someone's grandparents were. Its not important, but if you really want to know, there will be resources for you to find that out that are not part of curriculum.

[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-08-2011).]

I am confused as hell. I am all for same sex rights but this is out there. California a few years back was pushing to ban the pledge of alegance because it bothered atheist. Now they are taking something that truly has been a religious based fight and shove it into the schools. I understand that the government has gotten involved to help there rights but wow there comes a point to stop it. I have a strong homesexul family base and still think this needs to stop. I mean there are so many views on it how can you teach it. Some feel its a choice others feel its a genetic basses. I am not going to voice my views on it but I am gonna say is fix our damn economy before passing more unneeded laws.

quote Originally posted by NickD3.4: only beef I have ever had with the gay community are the ones that flaunt the in your face attitude. I don't go around with stickers on my car that say I like vagina, and I don't care to see people flaunting that they like to take it in the ass. That's all. Other then that, I don't care. Its the activism and forcing everyone one else to accept their world view that annoys the hell out of me.

Your local gay community must be exceedingly vocal. I don't think I've ever seen a bumper sticker that says "I like to take it up the ass."......though I have seen countless ones related to women's T&A. "Ass, Gas or Grass.....no one rides for free" is the first one that comes to mind.

I agree with you about activism to the extent that trying to get someone to accept one's sexual preferences, whatever they may be, is an exercise in futility if the person you're trying to convert isn't ready to be converted. To my way of thinking, sexual activity doesn't so much define "who you are" as much as it does "what you do."

[This message has been edited by Doni Hagan (edited 07-08-2011).]

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: I agree with you about activism to the extent that trying to get someone to accept one's sexual preferences religion, whatever they may be, is an exercise in futility if the person you're trying to convert isn't ready to be converted.

Works for both religion and sexuality. So in a way, Gay Pride parades and gay activisim is like proselyting and missionary work.

quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: The Spartans are an example of culturally based homosexuality. That undeniable historic example puts a huge hole into the leftist theory that all homosexuals are born that way. Leftists can't live with even the idea that there is even a possibility that some or many homosexuals are that way by choice.

This logic fails the logic test. Basically, you're trying to say that the ability to learn to be homosexual eliminates the possibility that it is hardwired in. One does not lead to the other. If it were true, then nobody would learn to be homosexual in a culture where homosexuals are routinely beaten, tortured, and murdered, instead, they would all learn to be straight people who tortured and murdered homosexuals. That's not the case.

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: This logic fails the logic test. Basically, you're trying to say that the ability to learn to be homosexual eliminates the possibility that it is hardwired in. One does not lead to the other. If it were true, then nobody would learn to be homosexual in a culture where homosexuals are routinely beaten, tortured, and murdered, instead, they would all learn to be straight people who tortured and murdered homosexuals. That's not the case.

Routinely? If there are as many gay people as they want us to think there are, I wouldn't call their harrassment routine. I'm not trying to diminish the challenges they face, but routine is too strong a word IMO.

I dunno.. a friend of mine WAS routinely beaten in high school because he was out of the closet by 9th grade. Two years later, some of the people that used to attack him ended up being gay, too.

But yeah, routinely. On a weekly basis almost. He eventually had to transfer to a private school to avoid it. Never saw him again.

[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-08-2011).]

quote Originally posted by tbone42: I dunno.. a friend of mine WAS routinely beaten in high school because he was out of the closet by 9th grade. Two years later, some of the people that used to attack him ended up being gay, too. But yeah, routinely. On a weekly basis almost. He eventually had to transfer to a private school to avoid it. Never saw him again.

Do ALL gay people get routinely harrassed, or just a portion if their congregation? I know a woman who was routinely sexually abused, but I wouldn't make the blanket statement that all women are routinely sexually abused. Would you?

And if all of them are routinely harrassed, should they teach about supposedly gay historical figured to stem the tide ofhate? It doesn't work for the nerds.

quote Originally posted by Flamberge: Do ALL gay people get routinely harrassed, or just a portion if their congregation?

In my town, growing up, I would say yes, all, or certainly a large majority, of openly gay people did get routinely harrassed in one way or another. Does not mean it happens everywhere, but NW Indiana is also homophobe gaybasher central. Even those suspected of being gay but were not have been attacked. Myself included... gay by association I guess. One of my old GFs was a bit of a "fag-hag" so at one point, I hung out with almost all homosexuals. And surprise! I was treated with more respect by them then straight people almost to a person. (Theres a joke coming over this, I just know it.)

quote I know a woman who was routinely sexually abused, but I wouldn't make the blanket statement that all women are routinely sexually abused. Would you?

Routinely, no. But unfortunately, more than a minority at least once at some point in their life, yes. The figure is something like one out of two.

quote And if all of them are routinely harrassed, should they teach about supposedly gay historical figured to stem the tide ofhate? It doesn't work for the nerds.

Do we recognize nerds in history books? Is there an "N" after their name for clarity?

I never said that was the solution, did I? I only contend that gay people are perhaps harrassed more often that the example you provided. Dont get confused on my stance, I think its a stupid bill... but your statement about whether there is routine harassment of homosexuals is only limited to your experience and locale, and I challenge it. Maybe gays are more afraid to be open in Texas. I know I would be if that were the case for me. As you already know, Chicago has an entire gay neighborhood. Probably the only safe place for those people to be themselves in public without fear of violence for hundreds of miles.

I lived just close enough to Chicago to see the diversity, and just close enough to cornfields to see good ole' boys trying to bash gays. Saw it happen in the Merrillville Dennys parking lot on US30 one night back in the 90s. 7-8 country hass boys beating up one skinny queer with green hair and a rainbow bracelet. They were drunk and rowdy after an Oakridge Boys concert at The Star (no kidding, the figgin' oakridge boys..) They split after the damage was done but before the cops showed up.

Anyway, I contend it is more routine in some places then others for a host of reasons. It still happens. And compared to how many people get beat up for being heterosexual, the comparable numbers are near infinite for how many gays have been bashed.

Just shouldn't happen, but I know you believe that too.

[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-08-2011).]

Your previous post did not fully address what I asked. Your evasiveness caused me to ask direct questions.

Since you don't identify yourself as a leftist, then you should not be offended by comments directed at them. The dog that yelps is the one that got hit with the stick.

I apologize for causing your nervous breakdown. I will try to be more delicate next time when discussion things with you.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: I only feel the need categorize one group of people. Dumbasses. Congratulations, you fit that category. Other than that, I dont feel the need to point out unescessary differences in others based on race or sexual orientation. Of course, had you read what I posted before, you would already know that.

.