Conservatives call on Federal Reserve to take down gay pride flag

[polarmystery]

Maybe the problem, a flag is a piece of cloth and nothing more. So we attack a symbol, and not even anything related to the symptoms of the problem.

Why should not gay pride be as American as apple pie, its not like it comes from foreigners. We get the problem from our very own children. Most are born "straight",
but what do we do with the small percentage born Gay and Lesbian. Don't they too deserve equal rights as Americans?

According to some conservatives, no they don't. Which is disgusting, frankly.

 

[thraashman]

I want the flag of Mexico flown in support of our Hispanic brothers and sisters in this country. I want the POW/MIA flag flown. I want the LGBT flag flown. I want the Black Panther flag flown. I want that fucking flagpole filled from top to bottom. Everyone must be pleased. This is America goddammit!

I have to say it's a bit racist to equate all Hispanics as being Mexican.

 

[zsdersw]

How about a Gadsden flag? Should they be flying one of those? Or an Democratic party flag? Republican party flag? The point is the Federal Reserve System is supposed to be non-partisan and apolitical and therefore should not be flying any flags other than the US Flag, the state flag where they are located, and perhaps a city flag if there is one.

It's not partisan or political to fly a rainbow flag. There are GLBT advocacy groups across the political and partisan spectrum.

Pride celebrations are being held all across the country with rainbow flags found on city/municipality lightposts, etc. Are they all partisan or political, too? These celebrations take place in "red" areas, "blue" areas, and everywhere in between.

 

[zsdersw]

Also, being against this does not make you anti gay by any means. I would feel the same way if they were to fly any flag other than country, state, or agency.

Of course, but for these elected representatives in VA it's an expression of their attitude toward homosexuals/homosexuality, not whether it's appropriate for the Federal Reserve to fly other flags.

 

[Sinsear]

Theres a time and place for everything.

 

[sandorski]

How about a Gadsden flag? Should they be flying one of those? Or an Democratic party flag? Republican party flag? The point is the Federal Reserve System is supposed to be non-partisan and apolitical and therefore should not be flying any flags other than the US Flag, the state flag where they are located, and perhaps a city flag if there is one.

Gay Pride is neither Partisan or Political. Not anymore than Womens Rights, Minority Rights, etc.

 

[fskimospy]

North Koreans have a different view of the Korean war as well. Your "point" has no applicable validity.

It's just funny that the 'Northern' view of the civil war is apparently another word for the 'accurate' view of the civil war.

The 'states' rights' argument is absolutely ridiculous. In a sense it is correct, that the Confederacy was pursuing states' rights. That right just happened to be the right to own slaves.

Specifically, lets ask the people of South Carolina why they were leaving:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp

The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.

But yeah, the Civil war totally wasn't about slavery or anything.

 

[sandorski]

It's just funny that the 'Northern' view of the civil war is apparently another word for the 'accurate' view of the civil war.

The 'states' rights' argument is absolutely ridiculous. In a sense it is correct, that the Confederacy was pursuing states' rights. That right just happened to be the right to own slaves.

Specifically, lets ask the people of South Carolina why they were leaving:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp



But yeah, the Civil war totally wasn't about slavery or anything.

That thar looks like pwnt.

 

[Darwin333]

Did they fly a confederate flag during confederate heritage month?

Why do you care?

 

[shira]

You have a northern view of the civil war and should spend some time in the south and learn the southern view of the war.

They actually do believe that the war was about states rights and the right of them to determine their own course etc etc.

I went to school up north and then spent a couple years of the south and the way they look at the war IS very different than what you were taught. We even had to do profiles on each confederate state. Not because we were a bunch of racists who wanted to return to slavery, but because that is part of the history of the south.


BTW do they fly the Cuban flag during Latin American history month?

They may believe this, but it's a complete fabrication. And the fact that you repeat the lie just proves yet again what a misinformed nincompoop you are. The virtually unanimous view among historians is that the civil war was about slavery.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2063679,00.html#ixzz1OXBGUa9n

A few weeks before Captain George S. James sent the first mortar round arcing through the predawn darkness toward Fort Sumter, South Carolina, on April 12, 1861, Abraham Lincoln cast his Inaugural Address as a last-ditch effort to win back the South. A single thorny issue divided the nation, he declared: "One section of our country believes slavery is right and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong and ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial dispute."

It was not a controversial statement at the time. Indeed, Southern leaders were saying similar things during those fateful days. But 150 years later, Americans have lost that clarity about the cause of the Civil War, the most traumatic and transformational event in U.S. history, which left more than 625,000 dead — more Americans killed than in both world wars combined.

Shortly before the Fort Sumter anniversary, Harris Interactive polled more than 2,500 adults across the country, asking what the North and South were fighting about. A majority, including two-thirds of white respondents in the 11 states that formed the Confederacy, answered that the South was mainly motivated by "states' rights" rather than the future of slavery.

The question "What caused the Civil War?" returns 20 million Google hits and a wide array of arguments on Internet comment boards and discussion threads. The Civil War was caused by Northern aggressors invading an independent Southern nation. Or it was caused by high tariffs. Or it was caused by blundering statesmen. Or it was caused by the clash of industrial and agrarian cultures. Or it was caused by fanatics. Or it was caused by the Marxist class struggle.

On and on, seemingly endless, sometimes contradictory — although not among mainstream historians, who in the past generation have come to view the question much as Lincoln saw it. "Everything stemmed from the slavery issue," says Princeton professor James McPherson, whose book Battle Cry of Freedom is widely judged to be the authoritative one-volume history of the war. Another leading authority, David Blight of Yale, laments, "No matter what we do or the overwhelming consensus among historians, out in the public mind, there is still this need to deny that slavery was the cause of the war."

But a weasle-brain like you of course needs to repeat the lie that the Civil War was about "states' rights," and equate the flying of the Confederate flag - a symbol of bigotry and exclusion - with the flying of the rainbow flag - a symbol of liberation and equality.

 

[davmat787]

Do the individual colors of this rainbow flag each represent something, and if so, what? Just curious.

 

[Budmantom]

I disagree.


I think they should paint the gay flag on a donkey.

 

[boomerang]

I have to say it's a bit racist to equate all Hispanics as being Mexican.

I think you're taking my post a little too seriously.

 

[Zebo]

They probably like gay people file single no dependents means more money to pay them back. Always follow the money

 

[First]

I think you're taking my post a little too seriously.

True, your posts should be laughed at quite heartily, and frequently. Funnily enough, that's not usually your intent.

 

[Throckmorton]

How about a Gadsden flag? Should they be flying one of those? Or an Democratic party flag? Republican party flag? The point is the Federal Reserve System is supposed to be non-partisan and apolitical and therefore should not be flying any flags other than the US Flag, the state flag where they are located, and perhaps a city flag if there is one.

This.

The Fed flying a gay pride flag is a complete non sequitur. It's not that it's an attack on morals, but that there's no reason in the first place to advocate for some political cause.

 

[Jaepheth]

What does gay pride have to do with the Fed. reserve?

It's a bank dedicated to fucking everything that isn't a fellow bank in the ass...

Sounds pretty gay to me, or at least Bi.

 

[Darwin333]

It's a bank dedicated to fucking everything that isn't a fellow bank in the ass...

Sounds pretty gay to me, or at least Bi.

LMAO!!! Best answer yet.

 

[First]

It's a bank dedicated to fucking everything that isn't a fellow bank in the ass...

Sounds pretty gay to me, or at least Bi.

OMG nail meet hammer. lol

 

[Onceler]

The Confederate flag is actually the battle flag used at the first Bull Run, the actual flag is quite different and I have it flying on my flagpole at my house.

 

[IGBT]

raising a flag to your bedroom and bathroom behavior is immature. Grow up for gawds sakes.

 

[wuliheron]

raising a flag to your bedroom and bathroom behavior is immature. Grow up for gawds sakes.

That's what happens when you can't have kids and you can't get married.

 

[IGBT]

That's what happens when you can't have kids and you can't get married.

then get a dog or a hamster.

 

[wuliheron]

then get a dog or a hamster.

Not all gays are into the kinky stuff.

 

[Schadenfroh]

At the risk of getting flamed: If a government agency cannot display things such as a Cross, or a Star of David, or a Confederate Flag, then it also stands to reason they equally should not display emblems associated with however many other secular and non~secular groups.

Basically: US Flag/Emblem, State Flag/Emblem, Local Flag/Emblem, Agency Emblem and nothing else.


The rationale is simple: Since there is no way to satisfy all groups, then there should be no overt support/advertising for any.

I agree, cannot have your cake and eat it to, this is the only sensible way of dealing with these kinds of issues.