WBC to Picket IAHS

[MarieDelta]

“WBC will picket the graduation of Itawamba Agricultural High School to remind the parents, teachers and students of this nation that God said 'Thou shall not lie with mankind, as with womankind, it is abomination,'” the church said in announcing the protest.

“This generation has been raised to believe that they can live for the devil and still go to heaven, that God has no standards and the biggest lie of all – that God loves everyone.”

“The parents of Fulton, MS feign outrage that a filthy dyke wants to parade her 'girlfriend' around at their night of fornication called a prom,” the church added. “They had a duty to teach their children what the Lord requires of them. They shirked this duty.”

http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=5639&MediaType=1&Category=26

I just gotta say these folks crack me up. You'd have thought they(The School) got the message across that they dont like GLBT.

But then Rev Phelps has never been too sane about his choice of pickets.

Downside: Constance will probably be blamed for this , too.

[Annika L]

Dern it, Marie, you missed the best quote of all:


Originally Posted by On Top Magazine
“But it's not you [gay men and lesbians] and your filth that is causing God's condign wrath to pour out unmixed and unmitigated on this rebellious nation,” Margie Phelps told On Top Magazine in 2008. “It's all of the pride and sin of doomed America; it's all the fag enablers, without which you would be back in the closet with your mouth shut, where you belong.”

If I was to write a hateful and paranoid character into a short story, I couldn't make up stuff better than this!

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

Sigh. I feel like the little kid on Sixth Sense, only with these people the phrase would be "I hear stupid peoples" lol Ignorance reigns guys....*Shaking Head* :disgust:
Cat

[darkeyes]

http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=5639&MediaType=1&Category=26

I just gotta say these folks crack me up. You'd have thought they(The School) got the message across that they dont like GLBT.

But then Rev Phelps has never been too sane about his choice of pickets.

Downside: Constance will probably be blamed for this , too.

Soz..but is not womankind parta mankind (even if it is a helluva presumption on mans part..they keep tellin us we r MANkind)? Mus b sum illusion me livs unda... funny ole race mankind..

[MarieDelta]

Tick: And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.
-The Tick

[12voltman59]

It doesn't make any sense--the damn school board prevented the "fag girl" from going to the prom----the Phelps whackos should be doing a prayer vigil or something to honor the school board.

The Phelps gang obviously doesn't read the news stories too closely---or---and oh this is so cynical of me I know---- but they are just publicity hogs that like to hitch their wagon to any event that has anything to do with gay type stories.

Either way----What a bunch of sleazeballs!!

[MarieDelta]

Who said hatred EVER makes sense, voltie?

[Jackal]

It doesn't make any sense--the damn school board prevented the "fag girl" from going to the prom----the Phelps whackos should be doing a prayer vigil or something to honor the school board.

The Phelps gang obviously doesn't read the news stories too closely---or---and oh this is so cynical of me I know---- but they are just publicity hogs that like to hitch their wagon to any event that has anything to do with gay type stories.

Either way----What a bunch of sleazeballs!!


They want attention and they know this school will get them attention. What about all of that humanitarian work that Jesus talked about? Like feeding the hungry and healing the sick; think about the progress they could make if they channeled their mindless enthusiasm into something constructive.

I hope they don't blame Constance. It's their own fault, if they had just let her and her girl go to prom NONE of this shit would be happening. Okay, some if it would be. I'll bet the parents would have raised a stink and pulled the same bullshit and had a 'private prom'.

[FalconAngel]

If a right wing Christian nutbag says something stupid and no one is there to listen, does he/she start to make sense?

Just as important; if a right wing Christian nutjob does something stupid and there is no media there to record it, are they suddenly sane or smart?

Just a couple of those deep philosophical questions.

The WBC is almost the worst of the right wing Christian cults. The only good thing that anyone can say about them is that at least they are not exporting their hate and ignorance like some of these other right wing Christian nutjob cults that are worse even worse.

http://www.care2.com/causes/human-rights/blog/ugandas-kill-the-gays-bill-gets-reviving-call-from-american-extremist-lou-engel/

[Long Duck Dong]

I can not help but feel sorry for the other students at the school.... cos it now looks like their graduation now, is gonna be disrupted....

I really wonder how many of them, were neutral.... and now are turning anti LGBT not cos of constance, but cos of the complete mess that their school year is becoming...... over the issue of lgbt rights....

now before anybody gets their thong twisted around their pubes... I am not saying that constance is wrong for her actions.... what I am saying is we have many innocent *victims * of the whole affair,.... and what could have been a turning point in that town with more pro lgbt support and a * changing of the guard * is fast turning into the opposite......

having looked over the net about similar cases, the first fight in courts over prom rights was back in the 80's... so it would appear that this is merely another one in the battle... but it would appear that this one has turned very nasty indeed with the flame wars in places like facebook and myspace....

sad, isn't it...... that what used to be a simple request for rights.... so easily becomes a hate war...... and shockingly enuf.... a lot of it is done by the lgbt themselves in places like myspace etc..... and revealed that we can be just as judgmental and narrow minded as the people whose mindsets, we are trying to change......

apparently and this is hearsay... its even cost constance, her partner and relationship.........
I can not help but wonder, what we do count as a victory..... one minor battle that has been won in other states....
and what we count as a loss..... constances relationship, juin ran out of town, the loss of the prom, the possible ruination of the students graduation, constance seeking to transfer schools cos of the students backlash .....

what a shame that we are too blinded to the true cost of a battle, that we just cry * fight, fight, fight *.... without any foresight and planning...and no regard to the collateral damage.....

[darkeyes]

I can not help but feel sorry for the other students at the school.... cos it now looks like their graduation now, is gonna be disrupted....

I really wonder how many of them, were neutral.... and now are turning anti LGBT not cos of constance, but cos of the complete mess that their school year is becoming...... over the issue of lgbt rights....

now before anybody gets their thong twisted around their pubes... I am not saying that constance is wrong for her actions.... what I am saying is we have many innocent *victims * of the whole affair,.... and what could have been a turning point in that town with more pro lgbt support and a * changing of the guard * is fast turning into the opposite......

having looked over the net about similar cases, the first fight in courts over prom rights was back in the 80's... so it would appear that this is merely another one in the battle... but it would appear that this one has turned very nasty indeed with the flame wars in places like facebook and myspace....

sad, isn't it...... that what used to be a simple request for rights.... so easily becomes a hate war...... and shockingly enuf.... a lot of it is done by the lgbt themselves in places like myspace etc..... and revealed that we can be just as judgmental and narrow minded as the people whose mindsets, we are trying to change......

apparently and this is hearsay... its even cost constance, her partner and relationship.........
I can not help but wonder, what we do count as a victory..... one minor battle that has been won in other states....
and what we count as a loss..... constances relationship, juin ran out of town, the loss of the prom, the possible ruination of the students graduation, constance seeking to transfer schools cos of the students backlash .....

what a shame that we are too blinded to the true cost of a battle, that we just cry * fight, fight, fight *.... without any foresight and planning...and no regard to the collateral damage.....

Innocent Duckie? I doubt very many are that... there were'nt very many who rushed to Constance's side when the battle was fiercest.. they sat and at best, stayed silent.. what they said in private we can only guess at.. but whether they sympathised, condemned or formed no view, they were hardly innocent. Collateral damage in any fight for rights is inevitable duckie.. and I have no doubt was expected.. maybe not its exact form, for rarely can we anticipate that to perfection.. best guess is about as far as we can get on that score.. it is all reminiscent of the way people kept quiet of the persecution in Nazi Germany or the old Soviet Union and many other authoritarian countries.. keeping quiet and allowing persecution when you see it takes away any pretence of innocence..

Could things have been done differently and better? I would think so.. but thats with aftersight.. time and the assault on the rights of a.. no..two young girls in particular and lgbt people in general flared up and time didn't allow a massive amount of forward planning.. it is rare for a rushed job to be entirely satisfactory..

So don't stress yourself out worrying about the innocent.... there wasn't much innocence involved..

..and WBC? If they tried what they are planning in this country I have no doubt their would be a counter picket.. at least one.. by lgbt and their supporters.. and maybe even the school and parents and their supporters.. fun huh? Three way (peaceful I hope) dust up at a graduation.. 4 way if you count the inevitable presence of the forces of law and order to "keep" the peace!!

[MarieDelta]

Thanks Fran, totally agree with ya on that post :)

[Long Duck Dong]

I was using the term * innocent * to refer to the people not involved .....

yes, they are innocent.... they took no side..... its like a dear mother that is not pro war or anti war.... but watches as her son goes off to war.....

in the case of the town, there are many people there now, that have the label of narrow minded, inbred anti lgbt etc etc.... and their only crime is to live in that town....

but I am serious, it seems more and more like its a * crime* not to take sides... and well lets be honest here... I am not exactly the flavour of the year, for caring not just about the lgbt, but everybody.... and their rights equally.... and that got me, my partner and a number of forum members flamed, cos i stood solid on the grounds of giving a shit about everybody, not just one group.....

but where my stance is at this time... is there is a number of students coming up to graduation, that may be seeking to leave that town.... and apply to other schools / collages or jobs etc..... and just the fact that they attended the school, and the absolute shit storm over the prom issue, could affect their chances at a better future.....
yet.... they could be totally innocent of any wrong doing....yet labelled as a trouble maker.....

at the end of the day, it was the school board and constance.... but its been turned to the town and everybody in it v's constance.....

what ever happened to innocent til proven guilty..????

I am with you on the fact that it could have been handled differently....as its appearing more and more that constances partner didn't want to go, but that constances lesbian mother and gay male friends suggested that the action taken, was the right move..... and based around what I read of the aclu.... while their court action was honourable.... they have a habit of setting up cases for max impact and attention and coverage.... and I have the strangest feeling a lot of what happened, was no accident.....

[TwylaTwobits]

Fran, I don't agree there was no innocents left in that town. No one in that town asked to be in the center of a national spotlight. I said it before I'll say it again, actions by certain people on both sides have caused neutral people to have to make a stand. You say there were no innocent people then I say we damned well better be mourning innocence lost.

[MarieDelta]

Dont we have a responsibility to step in when someone is doing wrong? Isnt that part of being in a society that allows for freedom of expression?

We arent likely to be killed for standing up to people like these(on the school board) and saying "What you are doing is wrong."

Just like voting is a responsiblity in a democratic republic, so is raising your voice.

[TwylaTwobits]

Dont we have a responsibility to step in when someone is doing wrong? Isnt that part of being in a society that allows for freedom of expression?

We arent likely to be killed for standing up to people like these(on the school board) and saying "What you are doing is wrong."

Just like voting is a responsiblity in a democratic republic, so is raising your voice.

In a nutshell, NO. That's what freedom means. No pressure or responsibility to do anything that is against your own personal beliefs.

What I am concerned about is the fact a legitimate issue was turned into such a debacle and the entire town suffered. What the school board did and what Constance did are to be decided by a court of law, not the media and not all of us out here in the peanut gallery. And in the end, the fact that everyone is protected under the first amendment is what is at the center of this. Everyone in that town is protected, even the WBC is protected, just as much as Constance is protected. And it's just dead wrong to paint an entire town as a backwoods bunch of homophobes when in reality they are probably just as bewildered by and just as tired of some of the flaming as a lot of people across the country. Believing you are right does not make you right, and no one can force anyone to stand up for you against their own beliefs.

[MarieDelta]

In a nutshell, NO. That's what freedom means. No pressure or responsibility to do anything that is against your own personal beliefs.

What I am concerned about is the fact a legitimate issue was turned into such a debacle and the entire town suffered. What the school board did and what Constance did are to be decided by a court of law, not the media and not all of us out here in the peanut gallery. And in the end, the fact that everyone is protected under the first amendment is what is at the center of this. Everyone in that town is protected, even the WBC is protected, just as much as Constance is protected. And it's just dead wrong to paint an entire town as a backwoods bunch of homophobes when in reality they are probably just as bewildered by and just as tired of some of the flaming as a lot of people across the country. Believing you are right does not make you right, and no one can force anyone to stand up for you against their own beliefs.

I am so not painting these(the bystanders) folks as anything other than apathetic. They took no stance, stood by and let bad things happen, that does not make them innocent.

To not make a decision is making a decision to do nothing. To stand by while bad things happen to others, is not being a good citizen.

In this case, these people knew what was happening, and did nothing. That makes them apathetic, at best.

[darkeyes]

There is innocence in law and innocence morally.. where people see wrong doing and do nothing or say nothing, they are not innocent.. it may well be a sweeping judgement, but I think not an unfair one.. and if neutrals now act then they are guilty of letting things go as they did.. whatever they decide to do.. both for and against Constance..

I didn't say there were no innocents.. I did say there were not many and that there is little innocence involved.. and I stand by that.. when people fight for what they believe is right people will get hurt.. but don't talk to me about innocence of those who stand by and do nothing.. the Nazi Germany analogy stands.. no one put Nazi Germany on trial.. yet as a nation from 1933-45 few doubt their complicity as and guilt as a people in the atrocities inflicted upon humanity by the regime..

[darkeyes]

I am so not painting these(the bystanders) folks as anything other than apathetic. They took no stance, stood by and let bad things happen, that does not make them innocent.

To not make a decision is making a decision to do nothing. To stand by while bad things happen to others, is not being a good citizen.

In this case, these people knew what was happening, and did nothing. That makes them apathetic, at best.

Drop the first letter in apathetic Marie, and you would be nearer the truth of it...

[TwylaTwobits]

Marie and Fran, god knows I love ya both. But my point is you can not tarnish people for standing by when bad things happen if they didn't believe it was a bad thing. Seeing someone mugged and not helping, that's bad. Seeing someone being beaten and not helping, that's bad. Seeing someone not have the prom she wishes is not a bad thing, it can happen every prom season to any kid across the US. The reason it didn't happen for this girl is IMO a bad thing, but not to some of the people of that town. They are no more wrong for not being LGBT supporters than anyone else. But because they don't support does not make them antiLGBT, it doesn't make them homophobic. It just makes them human. ( and please do not twist that to say I mean supporters of LGBT are not human)

The Nazi analogy doesn't work here, Fran. There is no death here and in trying to force everyone to accept something is no more right than anyone who turned in a Jew to a sure death in concentration camps.

That's the trouble with living in a free society, everyone is free to follow their own hearts as long as they don't break the law. So we condemn an entire town for the actions of an elected school board. We paint them as rednecks with bib overalls and spitting chewing tobacco, backwoods and dumb, when they are just trying to make a living like all of us and boast a school that is one of the highest rated in Mississippi and has been turning out smart kids that became the adults of that town. Now ask yourself this...next election, exactly how many of the school board do you think the town will re-elect? That's where you will see the true heart of the townfolk, not out waving signs and logging onto facebook to flame.

[FalconAngel]

Innocent Duckie? I doubt very many are that... there were'nt very many who rushed to Constance's side when the battle was fiercest.. they sat and at best, stayed silent.. what they said in private we can only guess at..

That is the point being missed by those that believe that there were any real "innocent" people on that issue. Everyone there had to take some stance and those that didn't probably thought that they would be left out of all of the collateral damages. Fools to think that. None took her side to defend here and many even helped, passively or not, to conspire against her.



but whether they sympathised, condemned or formed no view, they were hardly innocent. Collateral damage in any fight for rights is inevitable duckie.. and I have no doubt was expected.. maybe not its exact form, for rarely can we anticipate that to perfection.. best guess is about as far as we can get on that score.. it is all reminiscent of the way people kept quiet of the persecution in Nazi Germany or the old Soviet Union and many other authoritarian countries.. keeping quiet and allowing persecution when you see it takes away any pretence of innocence..

History has shown that to be completely true, going back to the very first invasions in wars. Some fight, some become turncoats and some refuse to take a stand, one way or another, and die anyway.



Could things have been done differently and better? I would think so.. but thats with aftersight.. time and the assault on the rights of a.. no..two young girls in particular and lgbt people in general flared up and time didn't allow a massive amount of forward planning.. it is rare for a rushed job to be entirely satisfactory..

True again. Hindsight is always 20-20 and those that create the machinations of intolerance rarely, if ever consider the final outcomes or long term damages of their actions.
Now they get their own allies picketing the school that supports the same misguided stupidity that caused the initial problem in the first place.



..and WBC? If they tried what they are planning in this country I have no doubt their would be a counter picket.. at least one.. by lgbt and their supporters.. and maybe even the school and parents and their supporters.. fun huh? Three way (peaceful I hope) dust up at a graduation.. 4 way if you count the inevitable presence of the forces of law and order to "keep" the peace!!

I can't say that they will or won't have any counter-pickets, but the only way to satisfy the WBC on this one will be to do to Constance's graduation what they did to her for prom.

I would love to see them defend their actions in court if they did something like that again.

[MarieDelta]

You know I love ya dearly too, Twyla.

But


But my point is you can not tarnish people for standing by when bad things happen if they didn't believe it was a bad thing...

That doesnt make sense to me

Just because people believed in segregation 40 years ago, doesn't make it right , either. Standing by while someone is mistreated, is wrong isnt it?

[darkeyes]

Marie and Fran, god knows I love ya both. But my point is you can not tarnish people for standing by when bad things happen if they didn't believe it was a bad thing.

The Nazi analogy doesn't work here, Fran. There is no death here and in trying to force everyone to accept something is no more right than anyone who turned in a Jew to a sure death in concentration camps.



If they didn believe it wos a bad thing then they give assent 2 wot happened 2 Constance an 'er girl.. therefore they can hardly b innocent..

..an the Nazi analogy is entirely appropriate.. extreme certainly but very appropriate an very accurate.. dusn matta that no deaath is involved..its the discrimination an persecutionan say nowt do nowt wich make is so appropriate.. in its own way is worse.. Germans stood by in fear a the state.. dusn excuse them.. this is a small town in theory in a democratic peace luffin an tolerant state.. it is easy 2 argue that ther inaction condemns them.. cos it dus...

... an luff u an all Twyla.. but yas not gonna move me on this.. hav seen enuff persecution an discrimination in me own country an abroad.. France is blighted wiv it jus as bad if not worse than 'ere.. as is Spain, Morocco, Italy, Austria, Switzerland, Portugal, Holland, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Denmark an Tunisia an its got me inta me own share a trubble for beratin peeps for standin by an doin nowt wile that persecution an discrimination is physically starin em in face in mosta those countries.. not wontin 2 get involved is no excuse...

[TwylaTwobits]

You know I love ya dearly too, Twyla.

But



That doesnt make sense to me

Just because people believed in segregation 40 years ago, doesn't make it right , either. Standing by while someone is mistreated, is wrong isnt it?

Doesn't make it right in our eyes, Marie, but back then some people believed it was the way it should be done. You don't hear everyone complaining about the ones who didn't march in protests, you only hear them complain about the ones that actually did their best to stop the desegragation. I'm just saying that you can't say everyone who didn't stand up for Constance was completely against her. The townfolk don't all deserve to be punished for the actions of an elected few. Not all of Constance's classmates were against her, just a few, and they became outspoken because of the pressure of the media and the rabid stories online. We can see someone as being mistreated, but it doesn't mean everyone does. Their being blind to a situation doesn't make them evil, it just makes them blind.

[MarieDelta]

Havent said they were evil, just apathetic.

Very few folks are truly evil , in my opinion. Most are misguided, prejudiced and wrong headed, but evil is something else entirely.

But very few folks are innocent either. Most of us exist in a state that is somewhere inbetween. That is the reality of human existence.

As far as their being labled whatever, all they need to do is stand up and say that they believe the way Constance has been treated is wrong. They dont even have to say that they approve of homosexuality or anything else.

Is that too much to ask?

[Canticle]

I agree with everyone who has posted.

[FalconAngel]

Havent said they were evil, just apathetic.

Very few folks are truly evil , in my opinion. Most are misguided, prejudiced and wrong headed, but evil is something else entirely.

Sometimes apathy is the most insidious evil, because when one doesn't care, that alone can be personal justification for not taking appropriate action when one knows that something needs doing.


But very few folks are innocent either. Most of us exist in a state that is somewhere inbetween. That is the reality of human existence.

Very true. We are a social species. As much as some hate to admit it, we need each other, even the ones that we disagree with.


As far as their being labled whatever, all they need to do is stand up and say that they believe the way Constance has been treated is wrong. They dont even have to say that they approve of homosexuality or anything else.

Is that too much to ask?

Also true. One need not agree, or disagree, with something to admit that it (or something about it) is wrong.

What makes all of these people so bad is that they all know that what has been done to her is wrong, yet they continue to allow it to happen or are party to it. That is the real evil of it all.

[Pasadenacpl2]

You know I love ya dearly too, Twyla.

But



That doesnt make sense to me

Just because people believed in segregation 40 years ago, doesn't make it right , either. Standing by while someone is mistreated, is wrong isnt it?

The historic lens means everything.

100 years ago it was perfectly ok for a 45 year old to marry a 14 year old. (well, probably 150 years). If we read the literature of the time, we can either be repulsed, or we can view it through the lens of history and understand the social mores of the time.

In our society, being gay is sorta accepted, but not really. Sad but true. To expect a 16 year old to break away from accepted social mores even if it is to defend someone else. When your entire 16 years of existance is inured in a society that says homosexuality is to be marginalized, to expect one to break from that is a larger expectation than I think is fair.

I think it is fair to be upset with those who actively worked against this girl. It is not fair to be upset at those who stood by the sidelines and just didn't want to get involved. That requires an amount of courage that most teenagers do not posses. For some, the courage to simply not join in with those against this girl was a huge step. The consequences for standing up and saying 'that's wrong' for those people as individuals would be long lasting and severe in such a small town. It is a heavier price than they were willing to pay, and I don't think I can blame them for that.

Pasa

[Pasadenacpl2]

Fran, you cannot be nice with the WBC folks. I've ridden against them, and it gives some comfort to the families, but honestly, these folks need a good asskicking. I say, if these folks want to be martyrs...we should assist them in that desire.

Pasa

[Jackal]

Fran, you cannot be nice with the WBC folks. I've ridden against them, and it gives some comfort to the families, but honestly, these folks need a good asskicking. I say, if these folks want to be martyrs...we should assist them in that desire.

Pasa

Drive over them with rider mowers? I'm in!!!
You're right they aren't out there to make a point and they aren't out to listen to reason. Or anyone who doesn't think god hates fags.

[Long Duck Dong]

one question...... constances partner never issued a statement either supporting or opposing constance, they were not even addressed by name in the court case, and nor did they go to the prom

is she wrong ?????

she can not be innocent, as has been stated..... but she is one of the lead *characters * in this prom * drama *
cos we do not hear her voice ANYWHERE, how do we sit in judgement of her.... or is she indeed a *victim * of constances stance.....

I am willing to bet that the first thing we will see, is people justifying constances partners choice...... and defending her rights......

and my first reaction will be to wonder at the change in stance in people

[darkeyes]

one question...... constances partner never issued a statement either supporting or opposing constance, they were not even addressed by name in the court case, and nor did they go to the prom

is she wrong ?????

she can not be innocent, as has been stated..... but she is one of the lead *characters * in this prom * drama *
cos we do not hear her voice ANYWHERE, how do we sit in judgement of her.... or is she indeed a *victim * of constances stance.....

I am willing to bet that the first thing we will see, is people justifying constances partners choice...... and defending her rights......

and my first reaction will be to wonder at the change in stance in peopleNeither Constance or her partner can escape their share of responsibility for what happened.. they may be the least guilty.. but innocent they are not..

..people do have the right to do nothing.. and say nothing.. morally that does not excuse them or cleanse them of guilt..

[Long Duck Dong]

back up a sec.... what did constance partner actually do..... or not do.....

how can she be responsible for what happened, when there is no proof she did anything at all...... constance was the one that raised the issue.... there is no proof at all that constance partner had any intention of going to the prom...as proven by the fact she never went to the prom constance went to

this is my issue..... innocent til proved quilty doesn't exist..... as proven by the opinions expressed.... yet we are so quick to proclaim that people are innocent til proven guilty.....

why can we not practise what we preach... or is it simply a case of we can't .......

[darkeyes]

Constance partner..or should I say more accurately ex partner, almost certainly sacrificed her claim to innocence by staying quiet.. it is immaterial whether or not she supported Constance.. that silence lost her her innocence..unless of course that Constance felt it best that she should not do so whether for her protection or any other reason.. even then it is arguable whether or not she bears any guilt.. but silence in any moral dilemma or argument is a blight on a human beings character.. it does lose them their claim to be innocent.. there is no court of law involved here Duckie where everyone is individually is being put on trial.. the weight of evidence required is much less.. I stand by my original point..silence.. whether personally supporting or opposing Constance in this matter is a loss of innocence.. it has been claimed we are talking of teenage children and I can accept that there are mitigating circumstances involved there.. but that does not entirely excuse them for silence.. you may believe so.. but in my opinion you are wrong...

A little poem on silence and guilt you may know...

They came for the Communists, and I

didn't object - For I wasn't

a Communist;

They came for the Socialists, and I

didn't object - For I wasn't a Socialist;

They came for the labor leaders, and I

didn't object - For I wasn't a labor leader;

They came for the Jews, and I didn't

object - For I wasn't a Jew;

Then they came for me -

And there was no one left to object.


Martin Niemoller, German Protestant Pastor,

1892-1984

[TwylaTwobits]

So Fran you are saying those that had no kids and no interest in this situation should be tarred and feathered with the whole town. Those that didn't oppose Constance should be tarred and feathered with the whole town. Those that supported Constance but silently should be tarred and feathered with the whole town. Fine, you tarred and feathered the entire town except the vocal supporters of Constance... who's left to be convinced that what was wrong was wrong? There are innocents in that town, Fran. No matter how much you wish it otherwise or how many times the radical people on the net term them as homophobes. All the continued blasting of them is going to do is actually create people who will openly oppose LGBT.

[Long Duck Dong]

Constance partner..or should I say more accurately ex partner, almost certainly sacrificed her claim to innocence by staying quiet.. it is immaterial whether or not she supported Constance.. that silence lost her her innocence..unless of course that Constance felt it best that she should not do so whether for her protection or any other reason.. even then it is arguable whether or not she bears any guilt.. but silence in any moral dilemma or argument is a blight on a human beings character.. it does lose them their claim to be innocent.. there is no court of law involved here Duckie where everyone is individually is being put on trial.. the weight of evidence required is much less.. I stand by my original point..silence.. whether personally supporting or opposing Constance in this matter is a loss of innocence.. it has been claimed we are talking of teenage children and I can accept that there are mitigating circumstances involved there.. but that does not entirely excuse them for silence.. you may believe so.. but in my opinion you are wrong...


I am happy to be wrong fran, I have stated that many times..... but I am not the sort of person that is wrong very often...I am just thought of as being wrong by other people

what I am, is a person that looks at all sides of the issue..... and questions the things that many people miss...... things that can make a lot of difference.....

IE.... have you noticed, that nobody at all has mentioned constances partner..... surely you would think that somebody would, even in a myspace page or a face book pages..... but even the students refer to constances partner...... not a actual name, but the term constances partner.....

makes you wonder, fran.... was there a partner at all.... or was this whole thing a set up ....

and being a person in a situation of being around kids, fran, you would know as well as I do.... that when there is shit going down in a school that the students will normally use a name....not a label..... and in a small town... anything is gossip...including who your partners are....

just a random thought I had....

[MarieDelta]

The historic lens means everything.

100 years ago it was perfectly ok for a 45 year old to marry a 14 year old. (well, probably 150 years). If we read the literature of the time, we can either be repulsed, or we can view it through the lens of history and understand the social mores of the time.

In our society, being gay is sorta accepted, but not really. Sad but true. To expect a 16 year old to break away from accepted social mores even if it is to defend someone else. When your entire 16 years of existance is inured in a society that says homosexuality is to be marginalized, to expect one to break from that is a larger expectation than I think is fair.

I think it is fair to be upset with those who actively worked against this girl. It is not fair to be upset at those who stood by the sidelines and just didn't want to get involved. That requires an amount of courage that most teenagers do not posses. For some, the courage to simply not join in with those against this girl was a huge step. The consequences for standing up and saying 'that's wrong' for those people as individuals would be long lasting and severe in such a small town. It is a heavier price than they were willing to pay, and I don't think I can blame them for that.

Pasa

It is up to the parents of those children to teach them right from wrong.

Havent been upset, just dont feel that they are worth defending from phelps and his ilk. Apathy begets apathy...

If you cant be bothered to stand up for me, why should I turn around and defend you?

This town and its citzens have already run one transgendered youth and his family out. They fail the most important test of all, human kindness.

I'm certainly not calling for them to be tarred and feathered , but dont feel bad for them when their town turns into a media circus , either. It will be gone in a few days. Next year no one will even remember who Constance is and IAHS will fade into historical insignificance.

[Long Duck Dong]

thats the thing, marie.... maybe some of that town were supporting constance.... maybe they were anti the school board etc etc
we will never know.....

but in nz, we had churchs support the civil union bill.... lgbt marriage..... thats why I have been saying for so long, that we have allies in the most unusual places

but yeah i also bear in mind that its a american town, in a bible belt area..... so my attitude that not all apples in the barrel is wrong ( so I am told ).... and that the whole town should be labelled with a degrading term ( strange how we get our knickers in the twist over the same treatment )
but that aside...and I am not saying this to provoke a argument, just showing the invalid state of the statement...... using the same way of labelling,.... when a person insults americans as in the whole country when in fact they are actually referring to one or two out of millions, in a degrading manner.... they are not wrong for doing so... as its been demonstrated that americans use the same formula.....

[MarieDelta]

thats the thing, marie.... maybe some of that town were supporting constance.... maybe they were anti the school board etc etc
we will never know.....

but in nz, we had churchs support the civil union bill.... lgbt marriage..... thats why I have been saying for so long, that we have allies in the most unusual places

but yeah i also bear in mind that its a american town, in a bible belt area..... so my attitude that not all apples in the barrel is wrong ( so I am told ).... and that the whole town should be labelled with a degrading term ( strange how we get our knickers in the twist over the same treatment )
but that aside...and I am not saying this to provoke a argument, just showing the invalid state of the statement...... using the same way of labelling,.... when a person insults americans as in the whole country when in fact they are actually referring to one or two out of millions, in a degrading manner.... they are not wrong for doing so... as its been demonstrated that americans use the same formula.....

THere were? Where? Why didnt they speak up?

Have I labled them with a degrading term?

Havent insulted them or labled them anything other than what they are. They refused to stand up, they had their chance didnt they? Its not like they would be run out of town , is it? Or is it? Doesnt that make the situation (if true) that much worse?

[darkeyes]

So Fran you are saying those that had no kids and no interest in this situation should be tarred and feathered with the whole town. Those that didn't oppose Constance should be tarred and feathered with the whole town. Those that supported Constance but silently should be tarred and feathered with the whole town. Fine, you tarred and feathered the entire town except the vocal supporters of Constance... who's left to be convinced that what was wrong was wrong? There are innocents in that town, Fran. No matter how much you wish it otherwise or how many times the radical people on the net term them as homophobes. All the continued blasting of them is going to do is actually create people who will openly oppose LGBT.

A metaphorical tarring and feathering sure Twyla.. there are different degrees of guilt.. from those who verbally and actively condemn to those who silently support but stay out of harms way.. I have made my position plain.. like it or lump it.. and that position is silence means a loss of innocence.. and your position is quite the opposite.. what you are suggesting is that we allow people a salve for their conscience.. I have never believed in that as an option.. not on what I believe to be a major issue.. or even a small matter of principle.. if I do not allow myself that luxury I am buggered if I will go soft on anyone else.. and if that makes me a pain in the arse.. so be it darlin'.. cos it wouldnt be the first time its been said by people I do know and care about.. hard 2 believe huh? :eek:

[darkeyes]

I am happy to be wrong fran, I have stated that many times..... but I am not the sort of person that is wrong very often...


Very pleased for you Duckie.. but not from where I am sitting.. you may not believe yourself to be wrong.. whether you are or not is often two very different things..trust me on this. Just as I believe in my own rightness.. others have an entirely different opinion.. you and Twyla on this issue for starters.. and thats life isn't it?

[TwylaTwobits]

A metaphorical tarring and feathering sure Twyla.. there are different degrees of guilt.. from those who verbally and actively condemn to those who silently support but stay out of harms way.. I have made my position plain.. like it or lump it.. and that position is silence means a loss of innocence.. and your position is quite the opposite.. what you are suggesting is that we allow people a salve for their conscience.. I have never believed in that as an option.. not on what I believe to be a major issue.. or even a small matter of principle.. if I do not allow myself that luxury I am buggered if I will go soft on anyone else.. and if that makes me a pain in the arse.. so be it darlin'.. cos it wouldnt be the first time its been said by people I do know and care about.. hard 2 believe huh? :eek:

ROFLMAO Fran, I do love ya darling and when I ever get the chance to visit Auld Reekie we can have a shot of Scotland's finest whiskey and laugh over times we disagree in spririt and principle, but in the end know that both of us are looking out for the rights of all humans to live, marry and be happy with whoemever they choose.

In this case, yes I know your opinion, you know mine. They are diametrically opposite and that's fine. You are entitled to yours, I'm entitled to mine and all those people in that town are entitled to theirs.

[darkeyes]

ROFLMAO Fran, I do love ya darling and when I ever get the chance to visit Auld Reekie we can have a shot of Scotland's finest whiskey and laugh over times we disagree in spririt and principle, but in the end know that both of us are looking out for the rights of all humans to live, marry and be happy with whoemever they choose.

In this case, yes I know your opinion, you know mine. They are diametrically opposite and that's fine. You are entitled to yours, I'm entitled to mine and all those people in that town are entitled to theirs.

The word whiskey.. when it is used in relation to Scotch has no 'e'... it is whisky.. just a little thing.. but me dad would have my guts for garters if I allowed it to pass without comment..:tong: I refuse to be silent on this.. tee hee:bigrin:

...am wile we at it... we wud indeed disagree in spirit..cos u can hav ya whisky...me will stick 2 me Cognac..

[Long Duck Dong]

THere were? Where? Why didnt they speak up?

Have I labled them with a degrading term?

Havent insulted them or labled them anything other than what they are. They refused to stand up, they had their chance didnt they? Its not like they would be run out of town , is it? Or is it? Doesnt that make the situation (if true) that much worse?

tell me marie.... over all the years you have been around, did you stand up every time that something happened that was wrong around the world, to a trans.....

or did you in all honesty, not really start doing it until you had reached a point in your life that you realised who you really were and then changed your stance or way of doing things ????

now I am not trying to be a smart ass..... I am looking at it like I do with smokers that become non smokers and then start being vocal about smoking.....

in simple terms.... why the hell has nz won the rights for lgbt..... while america is still fighting..... ??? and we did it in less than 200 years.... america took that long just to give people of color, rights....

I would rather not be right and have rights.... than be right and have none....... and to be honest..... the fact that nz have lgbt equal rights and I am *wrong *.... just proves what I say... that I am happy to be wrong in other peoples eyes..... but I enjoy what they do not have....and they are the ones that proclaim that they are right

[darkeyes]

tell me marie.... over all the years you have been around, did you stand up every time that something happened that was wrong around the world, to a trans.....

or did you in all honesty, not really start doing it until you had reached a point in your life that you realised who you really were and then changed your stance or way of doing things ????

now I am not trying to be a smart ass..... I am looking at it like I do with smokers that become non smokers and then start being vocal about smoking.....

in simple terms.... why the hell has nz won the rights for lgbt..... while america is still fighting..... ??? and we did it in less than 200 years.... america took that long just to give people of color, rights....

I would rather not be right and have rights.... than be right and have none....... and to be honest..... the fact that nz have lgbt equal rights and I am *wrong *.... just proves what I say... that I am happy to be wrong in other peoples eyes..... but I enjoy what they do not have....and they are the ones that proclaim that they are right

I have been waiting for this to arise.. we all let things slide.. we are physically and mentally unable to involve ourselves in every single thing which we believe to be wrong.. does that excuse us? No not really.. the sheer volume of issues may mitigate our guilt, but how often have we let things slide which we should have acted upon? Consciously or subconsciously? I feel guilt about Constance case, for I didnt do anything other than raise the issue among friends and colleagues and within my union, and of course argue the point here.. I did not write to the school in protest, or to the US governement and have not written to Constance in support or to the ACLU.. little things I could have done to show solidarity.. so I bear my own guilt.. when we fail to do all we can.. we lose innocence Duckie..

[TwylaTwobits]

The word whiskey.. when it is used in relation to Scotch has no 'e'... it is whisky.. just a little thing.. but me dad would have my guts for garters if I allowed it to pass without comment..:tong: I refuse to be silent on this.. tee hee:bigrin:

...am wile we at it... we wud indeed disagree in spirit..cos u can hav ya whisky...me will stick 2 me Cognac..

fine as long as it tastes like whiskey we can call it whisky :tongue: and your cognac sounds good as well. Who says we have to stop at one glass.... can see it now the evil American gets the innocent Scottish lass drunk... Kate, I'll make sure she behaves :)

[MarieDelta]

tell me marie.... over all the years you have been around, did you stand up every time that something happened that was wrong around the world, to a trans.....

or did you in all honesty, not really start doing it until you had reached a point in your life that you realised who you really were and then changed your stance or way of doing things ????

now I am not trying to be a smart ass..... I am looking at it like I do with smokers that become non smokers and then start being vocal about smoking.....

in simple terms.... why the hell has nz won the rights for lgbt..... while america is still fighting..... ??? and we did it in less than 200 years.... america took that long just to give people of color, rights....

I would rather not be right and have rights.... than be right and have none....... and to be honest..... the fact that nz have lgbt equal rights and I am *wrong *.... just proves what I say... that I am happy to be wrong in other peoples eyes..... but I enjoy what they do not have....and they are the ones that proclaim that they are right

Yes, I have done what I could. Maybe not around the world, but locally.Did write to the school board and the principal, in support of Constance and Juin.

But I've never claimed innocence, either.

I'm not sure what your point is here?

I know you have won rights in NZ, good for you! I am happy that you have rights. Will you grant that the US isn't NZ and that we have a completely different culture here? That perhaps we only share a common language (barely.)

The US is a much larger place than NZ, and we have more than our share of bigots here, therefore it takes a much longer time to get these issues resolved.

What was your point again? This seems off topic to me...

[Long Duck Dong]

I have been waiting for this to arise.. we all let things slide.. we are physically and mentally unable to involve ourselves in every single thing which we believe to be wrong.. does that excuse us? No not really.. the sheer volume of issues may mitigate our guilt, but how often have we let things slide which we should have acted upon? Consciously or subconsciously? I feel guilt about Constance case, for I didnt do anything other than raise the issue among friends and colleagues and within my union, and of course argue the point here.. I did not write to the school in protest, or to the US governement and have not written to Constance in support or to the ACLU.. little things I could have done to show solidarity.. so I bear my own guilt.. when we fail to do all we can.. we lose innocence Duckie..

the thing is fran.... is its a percieved evil..... there are aspects of what is right and what is wrong..... and then there is the truth

with constance, we do know that constance was not allowed to wear a tux..... but we do not know if there was actually a partner at all..... yet we judge according to what we understand....

to err is human, to really fuck things up is to be blind and driven ....

in nz, last year we had a greenie group that was protesting the importation of palm oil.... valid cause..... but due to their blindness to anything by their cause, they chained themselves to the wrong ship in protest, when the actual palm oil was on another ship and the company has already stated they were stopping the importation of palm oil....... but the greenies called it a victory..... when in fact they had cost a innocent company $160k....

I will be honest.... the more I research the case with constance, the more its starting to appear like it was all a set up.... a publicity stunt ..... and that in fact the only issue was the rule the school board had, and the rule on the tux........

I point to the fact, there is no partner named.... only mentioned as constance partner

no students have identified any person as constances partner, including constances friends.... they too refer to the partner.... unfortunately what one.... there are 3 different partners.... her * relationship * partner, the partner she actually took to the prom..... and the partner that constance talked about, but nobody saw.....

in the court papers and indeed in the court transcript, it was stated to the court that the partner was not to be identified at all.....

originally constances mother ( a lesbian ) and her gay male friends, suggested the aclu be involved, that was the first and only time that they were mentioned.... before the aclu were involved....

constance talked to the school board in december..and in jan and in feb..... BEFORE the school prom rule was put in the memo...not after..... so she knew about the rule already..... before it was made official for that year ( it had been in effect for other years too )

constance was told the rules concerning her and her partner going to the prom.... yet.... how could anybody know if she turned up with her partner... as nobody knows who her partner was.....

the *fake * prom was on the same night as the school prom.... yet.... the school officials were at the school prom... the fake prom was a private party... the media called it a fake prom....

the aclu filed amended court papers about info and assumptions..... or in simple terms, yes there was meetings, but what was discussed, is assumed...

I find your stance to be honourable, and respectable..... however.... I am becoming less and less convinced that what happened at that school is actually what we understand it to be....

thats why I am refering constantly to seeking out the truth..... cos if I am correct, a whole town has been slammed for the crime of doing nothing about a issue that may not have existed at all

if that is true.... boy oh boy.... is there gonna be a lot of red faces... but I doubt we will hear many people apologise...

[Long Duck Dong]

Yes, I have done what I could. Maybe not around the world, but locally.Did write to the school board and the principal, in support of Constance and Juin.

But I've never claimed innocence, either.

I'm not sure what your point is here?

I know you have won rights in NZ, good for you! I am happy that you have rights. Will you grant that the US isn't NZ and that we have a completely different culture here? That perhaps we only share a common language (barely.)

The US is a much larger place than NZ, and we have more than our share of bigots here, therefore it takes a much longer time to get these issues resolved.

What was your point again? This seems off topic to me...

my point is simple..... in nz, we fought together as a united front for our rights and a law change....

recently in the site, there was a story about bis on a gay softball team.... and accusations of unfair treatment, racism etc etc etc..... and remarks about how rules were applied and handled etc......
all that tells me is that the LGBT are even fighting amongst themselves over things.........
they are not interested in their rights.... they are interested in who's right....

you are correct marie.... there is a difference between the us and nz..... a huge difference......

in nz, we understand where the victories really need to be won.... and thats in law changes... cos they are the ones that give you your rights

either way..... I am gonna back out of this all together....and let everybody else be right..... cos as I said before, I would rather not be right and have rights, than be right and have none......

[MarieDelta]

NZ population - 4.33 million
Population of CO state - 5.00 million

It could be argued that approximately the same amount of people have rights in the US that do in NZ.

In addition when you have more people, there are more people doing different things , different issues etc...

NZ is about the same size as Colorado- we have rights here except, of course, same sex marriage, and we are working on that.

As far as whether Constance had a partner or not, that is irrelevant. If the school board hadnt acted like they did, there would have been no issue would there?

[FalconAngel]

The historic lens means everything.

That may be more true than most even realize. Without knowing where we have been and what we have done, we cannot know where we are going or even how to get there with the least bumps in the road.



100 years ago it was perfectly ok for a 45 year old to marry a 14 year old. (well, probably 150 years). If we read the literature of the time, we can either be repulsed, or we can view it through the lens of history and understand the social mores of the time.

About 130 years ago for many states. More as a social more than a legal option. But some states refused to change the age of consent to 16 or higher until some time around the Great Depression.


In our society, being gay is sorta accepted, but not really. Sad but true. To expect a 16 year old to break away from accepted social mores even if it is to defend someone else.


Well, with more and more teens coming out, starting (or joining) GLBT student organizations, it is becoming easier to stand for a cause that one believes in or is affected by. There are teenagers out there, doing some amazing things for causes and we shouldn't discount our youth.

Granted that there are a lot out there that make me wonder if our nation's future is in question, there are times when I see the future as hopeful when I see what some of these kids are doing.


When your entire 16 years of existance is inured in a society that says homosexuality is to be marginalized, to expect one to break from that is a larger expectation than I think is fair.

Sadly, because of the hateful programing of right wing religion (thank their leadership for almost all of that), this will continue to be a problem, until enough young people learn better and take enough of a stand for their fellows to take notice and learn.


I think it is fair to be upset with those who actively worked against this girl. It is not fair to be upset at those who stood by the sidelines and just didn't want to get involved. That requires an amount of courage that most teenagers do not posses.

It is completely fair to be upset with them. They know right from wrong and they stood by and silently allowed the wrong to be committed. They don't have to agree with either side, but they could have stood up and say "what you are doing is wrong"; they did not.

And forget about the teenagers; too many are more concerned with what is fashionable for their peers than doing what is right.
It is the adults that should have set the example of right and wrong. The adults either silently allowed the wrong or took action that they knew to be morally wrong.



For some, the courage to simply not join in with those against this girl was a huge step.

There is no courage involved with not joining in on a hateful action. There is no courage involved with not fighting against the evil either.

It takes less courage to say "this is wrong and I will neither help nor hinder" than it does to take the path of the hateful actions in the first place. It takes less courage to take the path of the mob than it does to stand against them.


The consequences for standing up and saying 'that's wrong' for those people as individuals would be long lasting and severe in such a small town. It is a heavier price than they were willing to pay, and I don't think I can blame them for that.

Pasa

The people that stood by and did nothing are cowards. Standing up and saying "that's wrong and I will not be party to it", takes no courage at all. The people doing the wrong will blow them off and carry on. Any negative response will be short lived as people calm down and move on after the fight is over.

Courage requires one to take action, for or against something, whether the risk is social or physical does not matter. Taking no action is not an act of courage, it is an act of apathy and, more often than not, cowardice.

Those who did the harm have more courage than the ones that did nothing. Those who took a stand against the religious bullying have more courage than the ones that did nothing.

It takes no courage to do nothing, but it takes a lot of courage to do something: No matter what side you take.

[darkeyes]

the thing is fran.... is its a percieved evil..... there are aspects of what is right and what is wrong..... and then there is the truth

with constance, we do know that constance was not allowed to wear a tux..... but we do not know if there was actually a partner at all..... yet we judge according to what we understand....

to err is human, to really fuck things up is to be blind and driven ....

in nz, last year we had a greenie group that was protesting the importation of palm oil.... valid cause..... but due to their blindness to anything by their cause, they chained themselves to the wrong ship in protest, when the actual palm oil was on another ship and the company has already stated they were stopping the importation of palm oil....... but the greenies called it a victory..... when in fact they had cost a innocent company $160k....

I will be honest.... the more I research the case with constance, the more its starting to appear like it was all a set up.... a publicity stunt ..... and that in fact the only issue was the rule the school board had, and the rule on the tux........

I point to the fact, there is no partner named.... only mentioned as constance partner

no students have identified any person as constances partner, including constances friends.... they too refer to the partner.... unfortunately what one.... there are 3 different partners.... her * relationship * partner, the partner she actually took to the prom..... and the partner that constance talked about, but nobody saw.....

in the court papers and indeed in the court transcript, it was stated to the court that the partner was not to be identified at all.....

originally constances mother ( a lesbian ) and her gay male friends, suggested the aclu be involved, that was the first and only time that they were mentioned.... before the aclu were involved....

constance talked to the school board in december..and in jan and in feb..... BEFORE the school prom rule was put in the memo...not after..... so she knew about the rule already..... before it was made official for that year ( it had been in effect for other years too )

constance was told the rules concerning her and her partner going to the prom.... yet.... how could anybody know if she turned up with her partner... as nobody knows who her partner was.....

the *fake * prom was on the same night as the school prom.... yet.... the school officials were at the school prom... the fake prom was a private party... the media called it a fake prom....

the aclu filed amended court papers about info and assumptions..... or in simple terms, yes there was meetings, but what was discussed, is assumed...

I find your stance to be honourable, and respectable..... however.... I am becoming less and less convinced that what happened at that school is actually what we understand it to be....

thats why I am refering constantly to seeking out the truth..... cos if I am correct, a whole town has been slammed for the crime of doing nothing about a issue that may not have existed at all

if that is true.... boy oh boy.... is there gonna be a lot of red faces... but I doubt we will hear many people apologise...

There's that word again.. truth. We all want that Duckie.. well most of us... some wouldnt know truth if it got out of bed and slapped them in the face (and no I am not including you in that.. just dont dare prove me wrong..;)) but so muddied are the waters I am not sure we will ever get it.. and even if we do.. we will still be arguing the rights and wrongs, innocence and guilt, and what the case is about will become obscured..

[12voltman59]

LDD---I don't know if you do realize just how big a political force that religious fundamentalism is here in the US--they are pretty powerful here since for one thing--they do have big money to spread around--and they do spread it around---plus---in America---we do have a very strong tradition of having these sorts of religious strains ever since before we became an independent country--it has been a sort of eternal fight between "secularism/rationalism" and religious fundamentalism.

Where else could you have had "religions" such as Mormonism and Scientology form in the same country, let alone hundreds, maybe thousands more of the less visible "faiths" there are out there in this country.

It really is the case here---pretty much anyone can say he or she is some sort of preacher or has been told by God that certain things should be done--and if the person is not clearly, totally, certifiably whacked (at least apparent at first)--- then he or she can have a bunch of followers and before long--is raking in the cash and getting some power since now it is clear--money is equal to speech and the more money you have--the more speech you have!!!!

It is the fact that we have these sorts of groups out there who make it so hard for people to get rights--first it was blacks and women, then it was other ethnic and racial groups--now the big fight is for "Gay Rights"--and this is one--with those people's views that homosexuality (we are all homosexuals to those folks since they don't make distinctions about what is gay, bi, trans or whatever) is nothing less than total depravity run amok!!

Homosexuality is not only something that cannot be tolerated--it is something that MUST!! be wiped out from among us!! (as many of their leaders say!)

There is no disputing that with those folks-----they cannot brook the existence of homosexuality since they feel it is such a threat to them, their children and the way of life that they think should be imposed upon everyone!!

To some of them---a person engaging in any sort of homosexual act is a greater SIN and affront to God than is killing another person--I actually have heard at least two fundamentalist, evangelical preachers say as much in sermons that get shown on a multitude of religious cable channels. I often do watch their shows form time to time--I try to keep up as to what issues these folks are focused on----it does vary--but it seems that the "anti-gay" agenda is a constant one.)

How do we--in a society that does honor human rights (mostly) and good things like free speech, free association and free thought as cornerstones of its very existence reconcile with a group of people who hold that if they cannot live their life as they chose--which includes imposing on the rest of us their vision of things-- then THEY are the ones having their rights quashed--but that if they got their "full rights" to making society as they would like to have it--that would quash the rights of everyone else????!!!!!!

Forget any other form of religion with them----for they hold that the only way to salvation is to accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior--no other religion is right--that all other faiths and religions but their version of "christianity" are all false and lead one away from "the Glory of God" and such.

Forget Paganism/Wiccan faiths, forget Buddhasim and Hinduism, forget other forms of Christianity that are not of their liking like Catholicism or Eastern Orthodox, forget even Judaism--save maybe Judasim is OK in Israel where Israel figures into their wordview that Israel plays a role in endtimes scenarios, certainly Islam is not acceptable!!! Atheism and even Agnosticism---no way, Pal!!!!

In America though---I doubt that Jews would be free to worship their faith since as a faith Judaism has not accepted Jesus as being God's son and the Messiah and individual Jews would not accept Jesus as Lord and Savior--the fundies would really amp up attempts to either persuade or compell Jews to become "Jews for Christ!" It would have be thus if they held to their views regarding other religions when it came to the Jews---at best--like I said--if American Judaism were modified to somehow recognize Christ and individuals came to some sort of acceptance of Christ or they let Jews emmigrate to Israel that would all be fine most likely---but then they just might have to resort to some "tough love" measures with any recalcitrant Jews who refused to be good boys and girls by holding to the tenants of their faith but wanted to remain in the US.

There is just no common ground with this type of christian--which as I have said before too---I don't really consider them to be true Christians since to me----just about everything they do--forget their words--but the way they do things--is so counter to what was the spirt of Christ--that ironically enough---they are actually probably following "the anti-christ" and taking their own words--since the Devil is such a trickster---wouldn't the best way for Satan to gain control would be to claim what he is doing is what Christ commands----I kinda feel sorry for most of those sort of "christians" ---they think they are doing so right--when they just might actually be doing "Satan's work" ----but they are so brainwashed---they cannot even conceive such a thing is possible!!!!

(This does of course assume--that Jesus, God and the devil do in fact exist and its not just superstitious, unproven and unprovable belief in something that really makes no sense at all--- that if we just came up with it in the world now---it would all seem so totally ridiculous---we would lock anyone up who believed it all!!)

[FalconAngel]

Well said, Volty.

Not quite as verbose as I would have been (keep working on that, ok?):bigrin: but still very well said.

[Darkside2009]

LDD---I don't know if you do realize just how big a political force that religious fundamentalism is here in the US--they are pretty powerful here since for one thing--they do have big money to spread around--and they do spread it around---plus---in America---we do have a very strong tradition of having these sorts of religious strains ever since before we became an independent country--it has been a sort of eternal fight between "secularism/rationalism" and religious fundamentalism.

Where else could you have had "religions" such as Mormonism and Scientology form in the same country, let alone hundreds, maybe thousands more of the less visible "faiths" there are out there in this country.

It really is the case here---pretty much anyone can say he or she is some sort of preacher or has been told by God that certain things should be done--and if the person is not clearly, totally, certifiably whacked (at least apparent at first)--- then he or she can have a bunch of followers and before long--is raking in the cash and getting some power since now it is clear--money is equal to speech and the more money you have--the more speech you have!!!!

It is the fact that we have these sorts of groups out there who make it so hard for people to get rights--first it was blacks and women, then it was other ethnic and racial groups--now the big fight is for "Gay Rights"--and this is one--with those people's views that homosexuality (we are all homosexuals to those folks since they don't make distinctions about what is gay, bi, trans or whatever) is nothing less than total depravity run amok!!

Homosexuality is not only something that cannot be tolerated--it is something that MUST!! be wiped out from among us!! (as many of their leaders say!)

There is no disputing that with those folks-----they cannot brook the existence of homosexuality since they feel it is such a threat to them, their children and the way of life that they think should be imposed upon everyone!!

To some of them---a person engaging in any sort of homosexual act is a greater SIN and affront to God than is killing another person--I actually have heard at least two fundamentalist, evangelical preachers say as much in sermons that get shown on a multitude of religious cable channels. I often do watch their shows form time to time--I try to keep up as to what issues these folks are focused on----it does vary--but it seems that the "anti-gay" agenda is a constant one.)

How do we--in a society that does honor human rights (mostly) and good things like free speech, free association and free thought as cornerstones of its very existence reconcile with a group of people who hold that if they cannot live their life as they chose--which includes imposing on the rest of us their vision of things-- then THEY are the ones having their rights quashed--but that if they got their "full rights" to making society as they would like to have it--that would quash the rights of everyone else????!!!!!!

Forget any other form of religion with them----for they hold that the only way to salvation is to accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior--no other religion is right--that all other faiths and religions but their version of "christianity" are all false and lead one away from "the Glory of God" and such.

Forget Paganism/Wiccan faiths, forget Buddhasim and Hinduism, forget other forms of Christianity that are not of their liking like Catholicism or Eastern Orthodox, forget even Judaism--save maybe Judasim is OK in Israel where Israel figures into their wordview that Israel plays a role in endtimes scenarios, certainly Islam is not acceptable!!! Atheism and even Agnosticism---no way, Pal!!!!

In America though---I doubt that Jews would be free to worship their faith since as a faith Judaism has not accepted Jesus as being God's son and the Messiah and individual Jews would not accept Jesus as Lord and Savior--the fundies would really amp up attempts to either persuade or compell Jews to become "Jews for Christ!" It would have be thus if they held to their views regarding other religions when it came to the Jews---at best--like I said--if American Judaism were modified to somehow recognize Christ and individuals came to some sort of acceptance of Christ or they let Jews emmigrate to Israel that would all be fine most likely---but then they just might have to resort to some "tough love" measures with any recalcitrant Jews who refused to be good boys and girls by holding to the tenants of their faith but wanted to remain in the US.

There is just no common ground with this type of christian--which as I have said before too---I don't really consider them to be true Christians since to me----just about everything they do--forget their words--but the way they do things--is so counter to what was the spirt of Christ--that ironically enough---they are actually probably following "the anti-christ" and taking their own words--since the Devil is such a trickster---wouldn't the best way for Satan to gain control would be to claim what he is doing is what Christ commands----I kinda feel sorry for most of those sort of "christians" ---they think they are doing so right--when they just might actually be doing "Satan's work" ----but they are so brainwashed---they cannot even conceive such a thing is possible!!!!

(This does of course assume--that Jesus, God and the devil do in fact exist and its not just superstitious, unproven and unprovable belief in something that really makes no sense at all--- that if we just came up with it in the world now---it would all seem so totally ridiculous---we would lock anyone up who believed it all!!)


I don't know which conveyed the sadder image, Volti sitting through some tele-evangelist cable programme, just to garner 'stones' to throw at the Christians. Or the little wet dream his febrile imagination allowed him to stray into afterwards, where he dreamnt up some scenarios in his own head, then applied to his cast of characters as though he was directing a play.

As I've said before in previous threads there are many vested interest groups in America. As long as your Constitution affords them the right of free speech, then they have every right to exercise it.

You on the other hand don't have to listen to or agree with them, but to actively search them out among your cable channels in order to be offended sounds more than a little silly.

Why waste your life listening to something you don't agree with? I'm sure there are better ways of devoting your time. Why not spend it doing something you enjoy, such as working on your photography?

Or, if you are politically minded why not join a political party or interest group of your choice and campaign for issues that matter to you.

It is open for any American Citizen after all to lobby his/her Congressman or Senator to have the Law of the State or Country changed to be more in tune with their thinking and views.

That's all these Fundamentalists are doing, lobbying and voting accordingly. It is open for you and others who share your views to do likewise.

No point in whinging about the outcome if you are not prepared to put in the work to see your ideas and views come to fruition.

And I'm sure if you ask him nicely, Falcon will lend you his soap-box.

[Gay2Bi]

Sigh. I feel like the little kid on Sixth Sense, only with these people the phrase would be "I hear stupid peoples" lol Ignorance reigns guys....*Shaking Head* :disgust:
Cat

No, no. It's still "I see dead people." As in:

Me: I see dead people.
Them: Where?
Me: That was a premonition. :devil:

[Gay2Bi]

Sometimes apathy is the most insidious evil, because when one doesn't care, that alone can be personal justification for not taking appropriate action when one knows that something needs doing.

What makes all of these people so bad is that they all know that what has been done to her is wrong, yet they continue to allow it to happen or are party to it. That is the real evil of it all.

The big irony for me is that Christianity - what WBC claims to practice as do most of the parents who orchestrated the whole debacle - has both sins of commission (where you know something is wrong but you do it anyway) and sins of omission (where you know something is wrong but do not act to stop it). By those definitions, the entire town is on the bullet train to Hell. It's just a shame I don't believe in hell, otherwise I'd be planning a big welcoming party. I hear the Lake of Fire in Gehenna Heights is lovely this time of year. ;)

[Gay2Bi]

The big irony for me is that Christianity - what WBC claims to practice as do most of the parents who orchestrated the whole debacle - has both sins of commission (where you know something is wrong but you do it anyway) and sins of omission (where you know something is wrong but do not act to stop it). By those definitions, the entire town is on the bullet train to Hell. It's just a shame I don't believe in hell, otherwise I'd be planning a big welcoming party. I hear the Lake of Fire in Gehenna Heights is lovely this time of year. ;)

Oops. Left out a critical clause there. This is what I get when I run on 36 hours without sleep... :oh:

The post should have read: "By those definitions, the entire town - except those who spoke out - is on the bullet train to Hell."

And, since the caffeine is kicking in, I think I should add some clarification:

The point I was making - and I did have one! - was this: If IAHS accepts any federal, state, or local funds, they are forbidden from discriminating against any students on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. Creating policies that forbid girls from wearing tuxes, or guys from wearing dresses, or anyone from bringing a same-sex partner to the prom are all covered by this. So the school board knew their policy was wrong, which makes them legally culpable. It also makes them and those who supported their decision morally culpable if you judge them by their own standards of sin. That's what I found ironic: The people using their religious beliefs to justify discrimination become sinners for doing so.

In retrospect, it probably wasn't worth mentioning since the point has already been made. Again, I was tired. And it was too late to delete it. :oh:

Note to self: Do not operate brain or mouth while sleepy. :sleep:

[MarieDelta]

Oops. Left out a critical clause there. This is what I get when I run on 36 hours without sleep... :oh:

The post should have read: "By those definitions, the entire town - except those who spoke out - is on the bullet train to Hell."

And, since the caffeine is kicking in, I think I should add some clarification:

The point I was making - and I did have one! - was this: If IAHS accepts any federal, state, or local funds, they are forbidden from discriminating against any students on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. Creating policies that forbid girls from wearing tuxes, or guys from wearing dresses, or anyone from bringing a same-sex partner to the prom are all covered by this. So the school board knew their policy was wrong, which makes them legally culpable. It also makes them and those who supported their decision morally culpable if you judge them by their own standards of sin. That's what I found ironic: The people using their religious beliefs to justify discrimination become sinners for doing so.

In retrospect, it probably wasn't worth mentioning since the point has already been made. Again, I was tired. And it was too late to delete it. :oh:

Note to self: Do not operate brain or mouth while sleepy. :sleep:

Sorry but you are wrong about gender idetity and gender expresion...

I wish it werent so, but it is.

They can deny you whatever based on gender identity / expression. There is no law stating that they can't...

[TwylaTwobits]

Yes, unfortunately that is true, Marie. I wish that it was otherwise but at this point some things are just not protected :(

[12voltman59]

I don't know which conveyed the sadder image, Volti sitting through some tele-evangelist cable programme, just to garner 'stones' to throw at the Christians. Or the little wet dream his febrile imagination allowed him to stray into afterwards, where he dreamnt up some scenarios in his own head, then applied to his cast of characters as though he was directing a play.

As I've said before in previous threads there are many vested interest groups in America. As long as your Constitution affords them the right of free speech, then they have every right to exercise it.

You on the other hand don't have to listen to or agree with them, but to actively search them out among your cable channels in order to be offended sounds more than a little silly.

Why waste your life listening to something you don't agree with? I'm sure there are better ways of devoting your time. Why not spend it doing something you enjoy, such as working on your photography?

Or, if you are politically minded why not join a political party or interest group of your choice and campaign for issues that matter to you.

It is open for any American Citizen after all to lobby his/her Congressman or Senator to have the Law of the State or Country changed to be more in tune with their thinking and views.

That's all these Fundamentalists are doing, lobbying and voting accordingly. It is open for you and others who share your views to do likewise.

No point in whinging about the outcome if you are not prepared to put in the work to see your ideas and views come to fruition.

And I'm sure if you ask him nicely, Falcon will lend you his soap-box.

I do go and watch some of those fundy preachers sometimes because I want to know that they "are up to"--same thing that I do sometimes watch Fox News---centering on Glenn Beck, Hannity and Bill O'Relily and I do tune into Rush Limbaugh from time to time---just to know what he is saying----as hard as it to watch them all--and yes--when I know that there is some issue that the fundies are sending letters to politicians on--I am sending out my own to my local Congresman, and two US Senators to at least serve as some sort of counter view--same with the state House and Senate reps. I also am on the email or snail mail lists of various orgs and when they ask for letters to be written on some subject---I send out letters or emails on those things too---I have also done my share of marching as well--for whatever good that does--hell--I went to Washington DC to march on a cold as crap winter's day as the US was ramping up to invade Iraq to protest that---some good it did--for there being at least several hundred thousand people marching--we hardly had any news coverage at alll!!!!

Of course---Bushwhacker went ahead and got us into the war anyhow!!

[Gay2Bi]

Sorry but you are wrong about gender idetity and gender expresion...

I wish it werent so, but it is.

They can deny you whatever based on gender identity / expression. There is no law stating that they can't...

I apologize for the mistake. I'd thought that those phrases had been added to the federal anti-discrimination laws (or maybe they were added to federal hiring policies). I guess the reason I assumed they had been added is because I've seen them in many anti-discrimination policies for local school districts (public not private) and businesses. Perhaps it's there because of local policies or legislation?

[MarieDelta]

Its only local. Federal hiring policies were just recently changed.

The Employment Non Discrimination act is still in congress. That supposedly will make discrimination agains gender identity/ expression illegal. If the senate and congress keep the wording the same.

But... Dont get me started- The trans comunity has a long history with ENDA/ HRC / Barney Frank...

[Gay2Bi]

Its only local. Federal hiring policies were just recently changed.

The Employment Non Discrimination act is still in congress. That supposedly will make discrimination agains gender identity/ expression illegal. If the senate and congress keep the wording the same.

That was probably the source of confusion. I don't normally consider PA to be a particularly progressive state in terms of its policies, so I assumed that they'd been forced to make changes at a higher level.