Monday, January 02, 2006

They're gay but not happy

My good buddy Bryan over at GayRightsWatch.com (They hate Christians and black people, I just have to keep saying that and it will be accepted as true) are sure that 2006 is the year that the homosexual movement takes off in Oregon.

My gut feeling is that if the Oregon legislature will not act - the movement will go from city-to-city, county-by-county until every single GLBTQ person in this state is protected by an anti-discrimination ordinance. And shit - if it were me, I'd be filing lawsuit after lawsuit until we see progress.

I know that if there was the law on the books that made assaulting people named Daniel more of a crime than assaulting someone named Bob then I sure would feel like an equal citizen... and I'll sue anyone who says otherwise!!!

Ladies and gentlemen we are no longer on the defensive. While we should never forget that we are and will continue to be under attack in some way or another - we will spend 2006 and beyond working for equality on our terms. Our community is now more visible than ever before.

More visible? Oh yeah!


I think that it's important to remember the ultimate goal of groups like Basic Rights Oregon: absolute gender neutrality, no limits on displays of sexual behavior, normalization of people who get sex changes, and if a man feels like a woman then he should be able to use the women's locker room!

In public BRO will speak of that eldely lesbian couple who has been together for 20 years as their example of what they are "protecting." They are a PR firm whose job it is to put a pretty face on degenerate behavior. They won't put the above picture on the front of their brochure.

When it comes to "gender identity" they try their best to put a pretty face on it but it's hard to take you seriously when you start talking about people expressing their gender identity in ways that "may not be considered appropriate for their assigned gender."

Do we really want an "anti-discrimination" law that says a children's toy store can't fire an employee if they show up to work looking like this:



It's time to demand that Bush fulfill his promise of a federal marriage amendment!

14 comments:

Kaelri said...

Ick.

"Illegal to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation in both private and public (non-federal) employment."

*shudder*

"Public (non-federal) employers must offer equal benefits for same-sex domestic partners"

Very dangerous language.

"Oregon ADA prohibits discrimination against people with a gender-related diagnosis, requires no reasonable accommodation"

This must be stopped.

Daniel said...

Again, your quoting the PR firm. But I do contest some of those items:

Why should public (read:taxpayers) have to supply equal benfits for same sex domestic partners? Why not opposite sex domestic partners? Isnt' that discriminatory?

But I dont' think that the people (you know, the government) want to have their tax dollars used for same-sex benefits. I know that I don't.

And "gender related diagnosis" is pretty broad. Are we talking "gender dysphoria" where something thinks they are a woman when they are really a man?

Someone like that is very disturbed.

Kaelri said...

"Why should public (read:taxpayers) have to supply equal benfits for same sex domestic partners? Why not opposite sex domestic partners? Isnt' that discriminatory?"

"Equal," I think, meaning equal to opposite-sex partners. Mutually inclusive.

"But I dont' think that the people (you know, the government) want to have their tax dollars used for same-sex benefits. I know that I don't."

"I don't know
where you get the idea that taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for anything of which they
disapprove. Lots of 'em don't like tanks. Even more don't like Congress."

"And "gender related diagnosis" is pretty broad. Are we talking "gender dysphoria" where something thinks they are a woman when they are really a man?"

Either way, I expect BRO has a realistic idea of what kind of "diagnosis" they could get away with defending.

Anonymous said...

I think the gay rights movement has "shot it's wad" so to speak. Personally I think the average citizen is sick of hearing how oppressed gays are, when the reality is otherwise.

Fine, people should not be beaten up or fired because they are gay, nor should gays be refused to be allowed to love whoever they wish to love. Besides that, I think most people could care less about the whole thing.

MAX Redline said...

I think anonymous is on point, here. I don't run around hollering "Hey look at me!" - which seems to be a mainstay of homosexual conduct in general.

I know I'm way tired of hearing how oppressed they are.

Kaelri said...

So give 'em the anti-discrimination laws. The lack thereof is the only grounds they have for complaint.

Anonymous said...

Let's take the language back from the homo Libs.

#1 Gay means Happy!

#2 Queers aren't happy.

Anonymous said...

"Oregon ADA prohibits discrimination against people with a gender-related diagnosis, requires no reasonable accommodation"

Hell, the FEDERAL ADA mandates criminally insane people be guranteed reasonable accommodation.

"Is there a message here?"

Daniel said...

Yeah, our constitution is now considered a suicide pact.

Sailor Republica said...

I'm sorry to say, Kaelri, but BRO has about as much sense about diagnosis as Ronnie Earle does about preserving justice.

Sexual Orientation is not a special race, class, or creed. They do not deserve special class status. Sexual orientation is a private matter that should not even be a factor in anything outside the hallways and doorways of a home. Laurence v. Texas taught us that.

Of course, there is the pink polka-dotted elephant with blue and green glitter that's still in the room. It needs to be addressed. I can easily sum it up in one word:

Greed.

Disagree with me on this? Follow the money trail. It's very simple, if you're willing to do your investigation.

Kaelri said...

No, pretty much fully agreed, actually (though I think you'll find that this sort of "gay supremacy" philosophy hardly represents homosexuals as a whole). I say again: just give them what they need for equality. All you'd really need is a court ruling to affirm that discrimination based on sexuality is prohibited by the fourteenth Amendment; expand the Uniform Code to let them serve in the military; and just give them the bloody marriage rights (call it a "civil union" if it'll make you feel better). Affirm those rights, and 90% of them will shut up, because equality, believe it or not, is the only thing they want. The other 10% that Daniel's decided to showcase here will end up on the path of the KKK and the Bolshevists; I'm sure you'll see to that.

Anonymous said...

What is the goal of the movement?
- Tolerance - I don't think so
- Acceptance - Currently
- Normalization - Ultimately

Tolerance, which BTW is intolerant, is the live and let live goal. Kinda like a neighbor you don't like - you ignore them, they ignore you and everyone is happy.

Acceptance means your kids play with their kids, you will talk with them at social times.

Unwed mothers went thru this. Before WWII, it was normal to ignore those women/families - getting pregnant while not married was 'horrible'.
(truly the men who knocked them up were equally bad, just harder to detect - and those who were widows still were known as Mrs.)Then after WWII and Korea - the number of single women with children increased due to the wars - asking was impolite and with the social changes - unmarried mothers became accepted.
(Now they are the norm - given how many in the population are raised by single moms)

Being normal does not mean it is best -- just so common you no longer think that they are different.

GLBTQ - want to be accepted - different but like us - and then they will want normalization - where you stop thinking they are different.

To achieve this last goal, they will have to get Christians, Jews and Muslims to stop having their views on the subject being: normal/accepted/tolerated.

Take a look at Europe - how influential is religious belief?
I heard a stat which I don't know if it is true - but that there are more Muslims in England ( 3% of the population) than there are Christians in church on a [regular] Sunday.

If we'd just get rid of those pesky religous beliefs, then we can all just get along. < /sarcasim >

Anonymous said...

Us BLACK people VOMIT, when we here the GAY RIGHTS crap being pushed. GAYS are NOT a minority per se. YES there are less of them, that is because of nature, because you don't make babies having ANAL SEX, instead, you transmit disease. Therefore they will always be a physical minority (good). BUT they are not BLACK/EX-SLAVES etc.
PERVERTS do not deserve any special "US ONLY" rights!
And the constant push for such is making many of us resentful and some nasty backlash can be expected if they don't SHUT UP & just live and have all the SEX you sickos want, PRIVATELY! BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN is nothing but propaganda and it aint gonna work either!

Anonymous said...

I am going to keep this basic. I just want these BRO people to STFU. I am farking tired of their bullsheise. It's just too much. These people are in your face all the time. When they aren't in my face with their agenda, it's cool. I don't care if they are gay or what they do. I just don't want gay "sensivity" taught to 5th graders, as CDC suggests be done in their human sexuality manuals. Just STFU already!