• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Our era's American civil rights issue: A milestone on gay discrimination

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
classy said:
No social value at all. I touch my toes for stretching, clearly you have different ideas for touching yours.....................
Click to expand...

Nice, very very classy! We can really see your true colors now.

Your existence is a comedy to many of us. I mean, really, we laugh at you.
 
So we've established that classy fits all racial stereotypes; since all gays must fit into their stereotyped box - turnabout is fair play for him. Also, since classy is probably a closet homosexual, he's terrified of his son being gay, and his daughter is going to be a prostitute in rebellion against a strict Christian household.

This thread has become gold.
 
BassBomb said:
why do gay people purposely talk differently, lisp/slur their words, act feminine... can't you be gay without that whole charade too?

to the point, they should have all the rights a straight person has, and be allowed to marry/union/whatever with respect to the STATE/COUNTRY (church can make up their own rule) so they can too get the benefits a straight married couple does.
Click to expand...

I would alter a few words; they have the rights (as citizens of a free country), but their rights are being infringed upon by the tyranny of the majority. And classy is a perfect example of why we need the courts to overturn the majority decision.
 
BassBomb said:
why do gay people purposely talk differently, lisp/slur their words, act feminine... can't you be gay without that whole charade too?

to the point, they should have all the rights a straight person has, and be allowed to marry/union/whatever with respect to the STATE/COUNTRY (church can make up their own rule) so they can too get the benefits a straight married couple does.
Click to expand...

Why do clowns wear crazy makeup, act silly, and talk differently?

^ If you actually understood the implied lesson in that, you can have a pat on the back. If you didn't, you can sit comfortably within your 100 IQ group.
 
MotF Bane said:
So we've established that classy fits all racial stereotypes; since all gays must fit into their stereotyped box - turnabout is fair play for him. Also, since classy is probably a closet homosexual, he's terrified of his son being gay, and his daughter is going to be a prostitute in rebellion against a strict Christian household.

This thread has become gold.
Click to expand...

Lol

Nah none of that. I just simply believe little boys should be raised as little boys and little girls should be raised as little girls. And little boys grow up into decent men and marry little girls who grow up into decent women. Nothing in between. Now if you find fault with that then thats your problem.
 
MJinZ said:
Why do clowns wear crazy makeup, act silly, and talk differently?

^ If you actually understood the implied lesson in that, you can have a pat on the back. If you didn't, you can sit comfortably within your 100 IQ group.
Click to expand...

Gays are clowns now? 😱😛
 
Cerpin Taxt said:
classy said:
Ok I get it now, lol. The defintion or right ot vote never changed. That should answer your question in both respects.
Click to expand...
That does not answer the question. I didn't ask about the definition of marriage. I asked you to explain how it makes sense to say that Jane and Adam have equal rights while Adam can legally do something that Jane cannot, to wit, marry Eve.

Please, do explain.
Click to expand...
*crickets chirping*

:hmm:
 
K1052 said:
Have you been awake for the last 5000 years? You straight people have done a damn fine job of making a mockery out of the institution of marriage before us gays ever dared to lay a finger on the topic.

I daresay I wouldn't see out out campaigning with the same vigor to make adultery a criminal offense or repeal all provisions for divorce.

Lets face facts here. Your particular brand of Christianity tells you that you are to oppose gay marriage on principle. All your attempts at logical arguments have been exposed for the fallacious barricades that they are. You have no recourse but to fall back on you particular (and very selective) interpretation of a book which everyone seems to have their own take on. That you are unable to admit this fact is a clear indication of the depth that your self-delusion reaches regardless of your self proclaimed level of intelligence.

The good news here is that everything will be alright. The slow but sure erosion of religious power in this country and the deaths of people like you will continue to propel us forward in the realms of social justice. It's a matter of sheer demographics, the young of this country simply don't harbor the superstitious fears of gays that your generation does.
Click to expand...

I want to chime in as someone who was raised in a nice strong christian household, and brought up in a culture where they considered "gayness" to be a sin. I would like to think I have gotten past it completely, but I am sure that if we dig deep, I still have some of that upbringing in me.

Most of the people I have met in the churches we went to viewed homosexuality as a person who has "gone astray." Many of them did not view the person as a bad person, just on a wrong path, and believe they can be brought back to a "right path." If you went to them and said you used to be gay, but were brought back by the light of jesus, they would all welcome you in, and probably stick you on metaphorical pedastal for a while as an example of how "right" they were. These people aren't really hating you, they just want to believe they are living their lives correctly, and doing the right thing. They look to their book to figure out what is right, and it comforts them, and they want other people to follow the same path because that comfort leads them to believe it is the only right path.

Then there is a second group of people that made up most of the rest. These people are not so much trying to be sure they are living correctly as they are trying to prove to themselves they are better than others. From my experience these people have two classes of "sin" the stuff they have done is normal, and can be forgiven and no one should remember it, the stuff they have not done is really bad and proves that they are better than others. Almost everyone in the churches I was at fell somewhere in between the two extremes.

Both groups have a critical difference from the classic racist bigots of history. They don't believe the person is inherently inferior. No KKK member would have believed that a black person could repent and become white. The people who fall mostly into the first group are going to be the easiest to bring to a real understanding and tolerance. But, both groups are aware of this difference, and don't believe they are bigots. More importantly, it is probably easier to show them the error of their beliefs. For myself, the biggest thing was just exposure. The stuff they taught me about gay people didn't hold true when I started getting to know more gay people around me.

At first, the only people that I knew were gay were the ones who shoved it in every persons face, and they actually made my impression of gay people worse. For example, one guy I worked with was gay and the only way to describe him is flaming. He was a nice guy most of the time, but I think he knew he made me uncomfortable and he seemed to find it funny to tease me a bit. But, while I know he wasn't serious, when he stroked my shoulder and pretended to hit on me, it made me uncomfortable and reinforced all the negative things they told me about the "gay people."

It was all the people who I didn't realize were gay at first that made the biggest difference. Finding out that people I thought were normal were actually "gay." Started to force me to see that the things I had been told were not true. These people were living normal lives, they weren't "disturbed" or forcing their lifestyle on other people. But, it took several years, and a lot of different people.


I know I have rambled on about this, but I have a point I swear. Most of these people really think they can "help" gay people, and that they need to protect other people from falling off the "good" path. Most of their bigotry is really based on ignorance and bad stereotypes that are reinforced by the most visible gay people. The young people are being brought up with the same views. If you want to break through these barriers you need to approach it slowly, patiently, and nicely. The best things for gay people are when people who are "normal" with good lives come out of the closet, that forces people to see something that they believe shouldn't happen. They think being gay ruins peoples lives, seeing that the world doesn't work the way they believe begins to ruin the foundations of their beliefs. The second best thing is just confronting their beliefs head on, without belittling them. It is not a gay persons fault they are born gay, it is not a bigots fault he was born to christian fundie parents who told him all gay people will burn in hellfire. It is just as if their parents told them that the world was really a glass snowball that god shook to make it rain. They did not come to their beliefs on their own, they were taught them. If they are belittled they will turn to their other christian friends for comfort and confirmation that they are right. They won't believe you when you call them a bigot, so anything else you say won't be believed either. They will believe people who respect them and say nice things to them, they will ignore people who insult them. Each time you talk to them, if you respect them you will only make a small dent in their beliefs, but it will work over time.

Now, some people cannot be reasoned with, but most of these people are merely looking for someone to look down on so they can feel superior to them. These people could probably be brought around on the subject of gay rights, but they will just find another group of people to look down on that they will try to oppress. I don't think Classy falls into this group, but I do think mocking him, and insulting him only drives him away from tolerance.
 
Cerpin Taxt said:
*crickets chirping*

:hmm:
Click to expand...

Okay last one. Too many of you man loving........I mean upstanding gents to battle.

Here is what you want to do. You want to strip away many things concerning marriage.

Marriage has always had an implied and practiced use to allow one man to marry one woman.
Marriage as an institution has had most if not all of its influenced rooted in religion.
To try to seprate the history of marriage from religion is impossible.
The government both state and federal have accepted these guidelines in determing legal spouses.

Up until this point, those guidelines have defined marriage. Up until now those things have also formed the legality of marriage as well when it comes to state and federal guidelines. Now we have a challenge that marriage should not be subject to being gender discrimination. Up until now Jane was not denied any rights of marriage, but Jane has been subject to guidelines that have been established one way or another. So Janes right to marry is and has been legal and not infringed on. But she has to follow the established guidelines. People can't marry cousins or siblings, even if they are consenting. You can't be married to more than one person. So the argument is whether the definition or guidleines that have been followed concerning marriage is legal?
 
classy said:
Okay last one. Too many of you man loving........I mean upstanding gents to battle.

Here is what you want to do. You want to strip away many things concerning marriage.

Marriage has always had an implied and practiced use to allow one man to marry one woman.
Marriage as an institution has had most if not all of its influenced rooted in religion.
To try to seprate the history of marriage from religion is impossible.
The government both state and federal have accepted these guidelines in determing legal spouses.

Up until this point, those guidelines have defined marriage. Up until now those things have also formed the legality of marriage as well when it comes to state and federal guidelines. Now we have a challenge that marriage should not be subject to being gender discrimination. Up until now Jane was not denied any rights of marriage, but Jane has been subject to guidelines that have been established one way or another. So Janes right to marry is and has been legal and not infringed on. But she has to follow the established guidelines. People can't marry cousins or siblings, even if they are consenting. You can't be married to more than one person. So the argument is whether the definition or guidleines that have been followed concerning marriage is legal?
Click to expand...

Oh wow. A "that's the way it's always been" argument.

I hate to bring race up again, but if we followed that your black ass would still be in chains.
 
classy said:
Lol

Nah none of that. I just simply believe little boys should be raised as little boys and little girls should be raised as little girls. And little boys grow up into decent men and marry little girls who grow up into decent women. Nothing in between. Now if you find fault with that then thats your problem.
Click to expand...

That definition of what it takes to become a decent man or woman is so outdated it's not even funny.
 
classy said:
Yea and I know you would be first line to get you a slave......
Click to expand...

Funny!!! You calling me a bigot.

Don't you see, Classy? You're idea of civil rights stops with YOU.

My idea of civil rights extends to ALL. Even gay folks.

It's funny that between the two of us, it's YOU who is the intolerant one after all these years of you pointing the finger at me. All these years you've merely been projecting your own hatred on to me.
 
Last edited:
Amused said:
Funny!!! You calling me a bigot.

Don't you see, Classy? You're idea of civil rights stops with YOU.

My idea of civil rights extends to ALL. Even gay folks.

It's funny that between the two of us, it's YOU who is the intolerant one after all these years of you pointing the finger at me. All these years you've merely been projecting your own hatred on to me.
Click to expand...

Dude just because you support gay marriage doesn't absolved you from all the racial hatred you have spouted on here the last decade. Give me a break. Being gay is not about race so you'll continue to the lowlife racist scumbag you have always been.
 
classy said:
Dude just because you support gay marriage doesn't absolved you from all the racial hatred you have spouted on here the last decade. Give me a break. Being gay is not about race so you'll continue to the lowlife racist scumbag you have always been.
Click to expand...

Race Card!!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top