Firefighters to Sue City over 'Gay Pride' Parade

[red states rule]

Four firefighters who say there were forced to participate in San Diego's "Gay Pride" parade and subjected to "vile sexual taunts" have filed a complaint and plan to sue the city.



Firefighters to Sue City over 'Gay Pride' Parade
By Nathan Burchfiel
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
August 06, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - A religious legal organization on Monday announced plans to sue the City of San Diego after firefighters there were allegedly forced to participate in the city's "Gay Pride" parade and subjected to "vile sexual taunts."

According to the Thomas More Law Center, four firefighters were forced to participate in the parade against their will and were "subjected to vile sexual taunts from homosexuals lining the parade route." The center has filed a request to sue the city - an administrative procedure - and expects to file a sexual harassment lawsuit in coming weeks.

"These firefighters dedicated their lives to save the lives of others," Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the law center, said in a statement. "They did not sign on to become unwilling props to a controversial political and social agenda."

According to the complaint filed with the city, the firemen of Engine 5 told their chief they did not want to appear in the parade but were told the morning of the parade that they were under orders to participate.

San Diego Fire Chief Tracy Jarman is an open lesbian who lives with her domestic partner. Jarman says the "gay pride" parade "is a fun event and all employees are encouraged to participate."

The firefighters, described by the law center as "devoted husbands and fathers," claim to have been subjected to sexually suggestive comments from parade observers, including "show me your hose," "you can put out my fire," and "give me mouth-to-mouth."

"The experience left me feeling humiliated, embarrassed, and offended by this event," Capt. John Ghiotto said in his statement. "These unsolicited and unwanted behaviors from a few individuals of the public toward us, reduced our morale as well as the integrity of the workplace, and destroyed our professionalism."

In addition to sexual harassment from parade watchers, the firemen say they were subjected to criticism from religious demonstrators protesting the parade. "Not only was I being subjected to these comments [from homosexuals] but I had to be told by protestors that homosexuality is sin, I'm going to hell, and I will be judged by God," Engineer Jason Hewitt said.

"Participation [in the parade] should be a voluntary act," Brian Rooney, a spokesman for the law center, said. "These four firefighters had no choice in the matter and that is wrong no matter what one's sexual orientation."

A spokesman for the San Diego Fire Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment. According to a receptionist, the department is processing numerous requests for reaction.

A spokeswoman for San Diego City attorney Michael Aguirre said she hadn't seen the letter requesting right-to-sue notices. “I haven't heard that they've filed,” Maria Velasquez told Cybercast News Service.

San Diego Pride, the group that organized the event, was not immediately available for comment Monday. On its website, the group calls the parade "a powerful display of diversity, acceptance and celebration." It says the parade's mission is "to foster pride in and respect for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities in San Diego."

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200708/CUL20070806b.html

[avatar4321]

this is outrageous!

[red states rule]

this is outrageous!

what else could you expect from the liberal meca of the world?

[82Marine89]

San Diego Fire Chief Tracy Jarman is an open lesbian who lives with her domestic partner. Jarman says the "gay pride" parade "is a fun event and all employees are encouraged to participate."

I saw this on the local news this evening. The chief is doing everything in her power to make this go away. The parade had its name changed to the San Diego Pride Parade this year due to negativity from religious groups over the past years including Roger Hedgecock's attempt to have a "Normal People" float entered in the event. Forcing their lifestyle on heterosexuals has now reached a boiling point in this city and the gays are going to lose. They weren't encouraged, they were forced to participate.

[red states rule]

I saw this on the local news this evening. The chief is doing everything in her power to make this go away. The parade had its name changed to the San Diego Pride Parade this year due to negativity from religious groups over the past years including Roger Hedgecock's attempt to have a "Normal People" float entered in the event. Forcing their lifestyle on heterosexuals has now reached a boiling point in this city and the gays are going to lose. They weren't encouraged, they were forced to participate.

This from the home town of San Fran Nan

[diuretic]

If those firefighters were ordered to participate and those orders and participation didn't relate to their duties as firefighters then someone is going to be in a world of hurt and so they should be. It is an outrage. It is an outrage not only because four firefighters were forced to participate in a situation that caused them great personal humility, but it can be seen as use of firefighters to push a political line. It is one of the greatest acts of stupidity from a public official I've seen in recent years.

But equally, this Roger Hedgecock bloke who is mentioned in 82Marine89's post, is simply a bigot of another stripe, his behaviour should also be condemned.

Anyway, if the chief firefighter ordered this then she should be sacked.

[red states rule]

If those firefighters were ordered to participate and those orders and participation didn't relate to their duties as firefighters then someone is going to be in a world of hurt and so they should be. It is an outrage. It is an outrage not only because four firefighters were forced to participate in a situation that caused them great personal humility, but it can be seen as use of firefighters to push a political line. It is one of the greatest acts of stupidity from a public official I've seen in recent years.

But equally, this Roger Hedgecock bloke who is mentioned in 82Marine89's post, is simply a bigot of another stripe, his behaviour should also be condemned.

Anyway, if the chief firefighter ordered this then she should be sacked.

What do you expect form the left? If you dare disagree or refuse to take part in these kook parades - you then become a target of the oh so tolerant left

Hedgecock is not a bigot - he is much worse to the left. He is part of, gasp, conservative talk radio

[diuretic]

What do you expect form the left? If you dare disagree or refuse to take part in these kook parades - you then become a target of the oh so tolerant left

Hedgecock is not a bigot - he is much worse to the left. He is part of, gasp, conservative talk radio

This has nothing to do with the left or the right, it's about misuse of authority by a public officer.

As for Hedgecock, conservative talk radio :lol: Says it all :laugh2:

[red states rule]

This has nothing to do with the left or the right, it's about misuse of authority by a public officer.

As for Hedgecock, conservative talk radio :lol: Says it all :laugh2:

It is libs doing what libs do best. Show their hate towards anyone who dares to disagree with them

Libs are pissed at conservatives tlak show hosts because people CHOOSE to listen to them and to to the kook left talk show hosts

[diuretic]

It is libs doing what libs do best. Show their hate towards anyone who dares to disagree with them

Libs are pissed at conservatives tlak show hosts because people CHOOSE to listen to them and to to the kook left talk show hosts

You weren't reading again.

Two issues:

1. The fire chief allegedly misused her authority. If true her actions are to be condemned and she should be disciplined. I'd sack her for it personally.

2. Roger is a wanker.

:laugh2:

[red states rule]

You weren't reading again.

Two issues:

1. The fire chief allegedly misused her authority. If true her actions are to be condemned and she should be disciplined. I'd sack her for it personally.

2. Roger is a wanker.

:laugh2:

With libs you have one choice - you do it their way or else

Rodger is a successful talk show host - which libs have very few of

[diuretic]

With libs you have one choice - you do it their way or else

Rodger is a successful talk show host - which libs have very few of

Nope, authoritarians and totalitarians are the ones that give you no choice, by definition liberals are about individual freedom.

Rodger (sorry, I spelt his name wrong) might be a successful talk show host but he's still a wanker :cheers2:

[red states rule]

Nope, authoritarians and totalitarians are the ones that give you no choice, by definition liberals are about individual freedom.

Rodger (sorry, I spelt his name wrong) might be a successful talk show host but he's still a wanker :cheers2:

To libs, it is the freedoms they want - not what you want. Libs want to shape society the way they see it - no other visions need apply

Libs are jealous of all conservative talk show hosts. They will never understand why their hate is not catching on to the listeners

[Nukeman]

Nope, authoritarians and totalitarians are the ones that give you no choice, by definition liberals are about individual freedom.

Rodger (sorry, I spelt his name wrong) might be a successful talk show host but he's still a wanker :cheers2:

As long as you agree with their politicle agenda than the Lib's are all for freedom otherwise your a bigot and a racist..

As for Rodger Hedgecock I dont have a clue about him I have never listened to his show. If all he wanted to do was enter a float to promote HIS lifestyle why was that denied. This is America where he is aforded the RIGHT of freedom of expression just like the burning of the Flag that you have stated in another thread. regardless of how much of an opinionated jerk you may think he is he still has the right to think and act as he wishes as long as it doesn't break the law..

I find it funny that they (the gay and lebian groupe) change the name of the parade to the Pride Parade and then dont let a groupe in that take pride in their Heterosexuality

I mean after all they want inclusion and acceptance yet they want to EXLUDE all hetero behavior.. That My friend is the classic example of Liberalism in the US....

[red states rule]

As long as you agree with their politicle agenda than the Lib's are all for freedom otherwise your a bigot and a racist..

As for Rodger Hedgecock I dont have a clue about him I have never listened to his show. If all he wanted to do was enter a float to promote HIS lifestyle why was that denied. This is America where he is aforded the RIGHT of freedom of expression just like the burning of the Flag that you have stated in another thread. regardless of how much of an opinionated jerk you may think he is he still has the right to think and act as he wishes as long as it doesn't break the law..

I find it funny that they (the gay and lebian groupe) change the name of the parade to the Pride Parade and then dont let a groupe in that take pride in their Heterosexuality

I mean after all they want inclusion and acceptance yet they want to EXLUDE all hetero behavior.. That My friend is the classic example of Liberalism in the US....

If you are for illegals being sent back to their home countries - you are a racist

If you want special attention paid to yoiung Muslim men at airports - you are a racist

If you opposed to AA - you are a racist

See the pattern of the left? If you disagree with them you are a racist

To the Fire Chief, if those firement did not take part, they must be racist homophobes (and would have been fired soon after the parade)

[82Marine89]

This from the home town of San Fran Nan

San Francisco is 7 hours north of San Diego.

[red states rule]

San Francisco is 7 hours north of San Diego.

OK

It is still in CA, and it is still the left coast

Did San Fran Nan march in the parade. Given how HER approval numbers are tanking is SF, she needs all the positive photo ops she can get

[diuretic]

To libs, it is the freedoms they want - not what you want. Libs want to shape society the way they see it - no other visions need apply

That's what governments do. The Republicans have spent the last eight or so years doing it. So what? You don't like it, you chuck them out, whoever they are.





Libs are jealous of all conservative talk show hosts. They will never understand why their hate is not catching on to the listeners

I find them amusing - shallow, spiteful, hysterical, insane sometimes, but amusing. It's a great way to get a feel for a society you happen to be visiting, listen to the radio shows that have the biggest audience, because you find the lowest common denominator there.

[diuretic]

As long as you agree with their politicle agenda than the Lib's are all for freedom otherwise your a bigot and a racist..

As for Rodger Hedgecock I dont have a clue about him I have never listened to his show. If all he wanted to do was enter a float to promote HIS lifestyle why was that denied. This is America where he is aforded the RIGHT of freedom of expression just like the burning of the Flag that you have stated in another thread. regardless of how much of an opinionated jerk you may think he is he still has the right to think and act as he wishes as long as it doesn't break the law..

I find it funny that they (the gay and lebian groupe) change the name of the parade to the Pride Parade and then dont let a groupe in that take pride in their Heterosexuality

I mean after all they want inclusion and acceptance yet they want to EXLUDE all hetero behavior.. That My friend is the classic example of Liberalism in the US....


Rodger was pulling a cheap stunt. He is therefore a wanker.

A bigot is someone without tolerance. Rodger is a bigot and a wanker.

Whatever happened to the great American idea of live and let live? Why does a conservative radio show host feel he just has to try to disrupt a parade by a particular group in the community? That is the sign of an attention-seeker. You see, if you carefully think about it you can work out what Rodger was all about.

Anyway, Wodger is a wanker :laugh2:

[diuretic]

If you are for illegals being sent back to their home countries - you are a racist

If you want special attention paid to yoiung Muslim men at airports - you are a racist

If you opposed to AA - you are a racist

See the pattern of the left? If you disagree with them you are a racist

To the Fire Chief, if those firement did not take part, they must be racist homophobes (and would have been fired soon after the parade)

Folks that use labels and slogans to make a point are intellectually lazy and probably bereft of ideas anyway. You're quite right to point that out RSR. But it cuts both ways. It's more interesting to argue the point that trot out a label or a slogan - note, not accusing you of that, just making the point that it's easily done at both ends of the political spectrum. I've been called a "racist" to my face by someone on the same side of politics as me. I corrected that person and pointed out to them why and where they were wrong.

As for the Fire Chief. Perhaps she would have fired them. As it is it doesn't matter, she's in more strife than the early settlers now.

[Nukeman]

Rodger was pulling a cheap stunt. He is therefore a wanker.

A bigot is someone without tolerance. Rodger is a bigot and a wanker.

Whatever happened to the great American idea of live and let live? Why does a conservative radio show host feel he just has to try to disrupt a parade by a particular group in the community? That is the sign of an attention-seeker. You see, if you carefully think about it you can work out what Rodger was all about.

Anyway, Wodger is a wanker :laugh2:

You dont need to "educate" me on the deffinition of a bigot. You also dont need to "educate" me as to what Rodger was attempting to do. I am fully capable of putting 2 and 2 together. This is where Libs in general fail... They feel they have to "explain", "educate", or in other word talk down to everyone else..

As for the great American tradition of live and let live. I personally am all for it, how about all the homosexuals that try to say I have to "accept" their life style or I have to "teach" my children in public school about their life style.

Here's the catch of all this. (the gay and lebian groupes say) You have to accept my life style without question or your a bigot. You have to understand my life style or yoru a bigot....etc...etc... However I dont have to be tolerant and allow you to participate in our parade I dont have to accept the fact that you might find my life style abnormal, I can call you names and insult you without consequence... etc...etc...

[red states rule]

Folks that use labels and slogans to make a point are intellectually lazy and probably bereft of ideas anyway. You're quite right to point that out RSR. But it cuts both ways. It's more interesting to argue the point that trot out a label or a slogan - note, not accusing you of that, just making the point that it's easily done at both ends of the political spectrum. I've been called a "racist" to my face by someone on the same side of politics as me. I corrected that person and pointed out to them why and where they were wrong.

As for the Fire Chief. Perhaps she would have fired them. As it is it doesn't matter, she's in more strife than the early settlers now.

The left are masters at the slogan and labels. They inevented the use of them and use them to an artfore

It is so funny, now the left wil propable go with a Clinton again in 08. The very people who used napalm scented air fresheners in the WH during their 8 years there

[darin]

I hope those 4 men get MILLIONS of dollars in damages.

[red states rule]

I hope those 4 men get MILLIONS of dollars in damages.

Why not give them the government money used to pay for the cost of the parade for the next 5 years?

[Abbey Marie]

Forced to walk in this parade, yet imagine what would happen to them if they wore a crucifix with their uniform.

[red states rule]

Forced to walk in this parade, yet imagine what would happen to them if they wore a crucifix with their uniform.

Shot on sight?

[diuretic]

You dont need to "educate" me on the deffinition of a bigot. You also dont need to "educate" me as to what Rodger was attempting to do. I am fully capable of putting 2 and 2 together. This is where Libs in general fail... They feel they have to "explain", "educate", or in other word talk down to everyone else..

As for the great American tradition of live and let live. I personally am all for it, how about all the homosexuals that try to say I have to "accept" their life style or I have to "teach" my children in public school about their life style.

Here's the catch of all this. (the gay and lebian groupes say) You have to accept my life style without question or your a bigot. You have to understand my life style or yoru a bigot....etc...etc... However I dont have to be tolerant and allow you to participate in our parade I dont have to accept the fact that you might find my life style abnormal, I can call you names and insult you without consequence... etc...etc...


Don't be so bloody sensitive, grow a hide, this is the internet. If I wanted to talk down to you you'd know it.

Now as for gays and lesbians. If you truly believe in live and let live you'd follow that maxim. Your mini tirade tells me you are using the words but you're missing the meaning.

Wodger is a shit-stirrer who pulled a stunt for publicity. Wodger is a wanker :laugh2:

[diuretic]

The left are masters at the slogan and labels. They inevented the use of them and use them to an artfore

It is so funny, now the left wil propable go with a Clinton again in 08. The very people who used napalm scented air fresheners in the WH during their 8 years there

It's true what people say, Americans really don't get irony :laugh2:

[diuretic]

Forced to walk in this parade, yet imagine what would happen to them if they wore a crucifix with their uniform.

Probably not a good idea for a firefighter to wear jewellery - health and safety issue :coffee:

[red states rule]

Don't be so bloody sensitive, grow a hide, this is the internet. If I wanted to talk down to you you'd know it.

Now as for gays and lesbians. If you truly believe in live and let live you'd follow that maxim. Your mini tirade tells me you are using the words but you're missing the meaning.

Wodger is a shit-stirrer who pulled a stunt for publicity. Wodger is a wanker :laugh2:

For a bunch that claims to be so tolerant - try disagreeing with them and you will see how intolerant and violent they can get

[diuretic]

For a bunch that claims to be so tolerant - try disagreeing with them and you will see how intolerant and violent they can get

ALL of them? Yes, some are intolerant bigots themselves, the ones that call us "breeders". But they can take a jump, they're just extremists and as bad as the frothy-mouthed gay haters. But do you think that the extremists represent the rest? Of course you don't. Come on RSR, you know you don't. You know that just like the looney fringe of feminists, represented by the late Dworkin sheila, are just out there. They have no major effect on public life bar being noisy. Extremists make good copy for the media but they achieve bugger-all because reasonable people - ie the rest of us - ignore them. Which is as it should be.

[red states rule]

ALL of them? Yes, some are intolerant bigots themselves, the ones that call us "breeders". But they can take a jump, they're just extremists and as bad as the frothy-mouthed gay haters. But do you think that the extremists represent the rest? Of course you don't. Come on RSR, you know you don't. You know that just like the looney fringe of feminists, represented by the late Dworkin sheila, are just out there. They have no major effect on public life bar being noisy. Extremists make good copy for the media but they achieve bugger-all because reasonable people - ie the rest of us - ignore them. Which is as it should be.

Look at the real world and you will see how the left really operates. The Dems are appeasing the gay aganda and they leaders in that movement will stop at nothing to ram their beliefs down our throats (no pun intended)

[Nukeman]

Don't be so bloody sensitive, grow a hide, this is the internet. If I wanted to talk down to you you'd know it.

Now as for gays and lesbians. If you truly believe in live and let live you'd follow that maxim. Your mini tirade tells me you are using the words but you're missing the meaning.

Wodger is a shit-stirrer who pulled a stunt for publicity. Wodger is a wanker :laugh2:
Just so you know I am not upset or "sensitive", how you can infer my feeling through thousands of miles of internet cable is beyond me.

My point that you seem to have missed is that in general most Americans including myself DO believe in Live and Let Live. However the hipocracy of the gay and lesbian agenda is sometimes just a little too much to put up with.

When you are told that if you dont agree with me and include me your a bigot yet I dont have to agree with you and I dont have to include you and I'm okay... Here is the crux of the problem as I see. DOUBLE STANDARDS. If your going to make exceptions for one group or lifestyle than you have to do it for EVERYONE....

Ohhh by the way Rodger got exactly what he wanted out of this! he brought attention to a situation that he didn't like (right or wrong is not for me to decide). The best thing the producers/sponsers of this parade could have done was let him in, than they could have turned and said how tolerant they are and he was just being a jerk, however they chose to take the other route and be just as closed minded as him....

[diuretic]

Look at the real world and you will see how the left really operates. The Dems are appeasing the gay aganda and they leaders in that movement will stop at nothing to ram their beliefs down our throats (no pun intended)

In the real world you'd realise the Democrats are right-wingers. It's Ford v GM in American politics, no real left wing party would get a look in. The Congress is only for the wealthy, the presidency even more so. Ordinary folks have no hope of getting into either august body. American politics is captive of the wealth elite, whether they be DP or GOP.

btw what is the Gay Agenda?

[red states rule]

In the real world you'd realise the Democrats are right-wingers. It's Ford v GM in American politics, no real left wing party would get a look in. The Congress is only for the wealthy, the presidency even more so. Ordinary folks have no hope of getting into either august body. American politics is captive of the wealth elite, whether they be DP or GOP.

btw what is the Gay Agenda?

and you now fall back on the liberal talking points showing your envy for the wealthy

Why do libs hate those who succeed in life and who have earned their money?

[glockmail]

In the real world you'd realise the Democrats are right-wingers. It's Ford v GM in American politics, no real left wing party would get a look in. The Congress is only for the wealthy, the presidency even more so. Ordinary folks have no hope of getting into either august body. American politics is captive of the wealth elite, whether they be DP or GOP.

btw what is the Gay Agenda?

1. Bullshit. Liberlas have boku cash, and use it for political gain.: Hollywood.
2. The Queer Agenda is to propigate themselves. Since they can't breed they must convince normal kids that queer is normal, natural and healthy.

[red states rule]

1. Bullshit. Liberlas have boku cash, and use it for political gain.: Hollywood.
2. The Queer Agenda is to propigate themselves. Since they can't breed they must convince normal kids that queer is normal, natural and healthy.

Don't forget the union money. Unions steal it from the workers, and hand it over to the Dems

[nevadamedic]

Four firefighters who say there were forced to participate in San Diego's "Gay Pride" parade and subjected to "vile sexual taunts" have filed a complaint and plan to sue the city.



Firefighters to Sue City over 'Gay Pride' Parade
By Nathan Burchfiel
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
August 06, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - A religious legal organization on Monday announced plans to sue the City of San Diego after firefighters there were allegedly forced to participate in the city's "Gay Pride" parade and subjected to "vile sexual taunts."

According to the Thomas More Law Center, four firefighters were forced to participate in the parade against their will and were "subjected to vile sexual taunts from homosexuals lining the parade route." The center has filed a request to sue the city - an administrative procedure - and expects to file a sexual harassment lawsuit in coming weeks.

"These firefighters dedicated their lives to save the lives of others," Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the law center, said in a statement. "They did not sign on to become unwilling props to a controversial political and social agenda."

According to the complaint filed with the city, the firemen of Engine 5 told their chief they did not want to appear in the parade but were told the morning of the parade that they were under orders to participate.

San Diego Fire Chief Tracy Jarman is an open lesbian who lives with her domestic partner. Jarman says the "gay pride" parade "is a fun event and all employees are encouraged to participate."

The firefighters, described by the law center as "devoted husbands and fathers," claim to have been subjected to sexually suggestive comments from parade observers, including "show me your hose," "you can put out my fire," and "give me mouth-to-mouth."

"The experience left me feeling humiliated, embarrassed, and offended by this event," Capt. John Ghiotto said in his statement. "These unsolicited and unwanted behaviors from a few individuals of the public toward us, reduced our morale as well as the integrity of the workplace, and destroyed our professionalism."

In addition to sexual harassment from parade watchers, the firemen say they were subjected to criticism from religious demonstrators protesting the parade. "Not only was I being subjected to these comments [from homosexuals] but I had to be told by protestors that homosexuality is sin, I'm going to hell, and I will be judged by God," Engineer Jason Hewitt said.

"Participation [in the parade] should be a voluntary act," Brian Rooney, a spokesman for the law center, said. "These four firefighters had no choice in the matter and that is wrong no matter what one's sexual orientation."

A spokesman for the San Diego Fire Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment. According to a receptionist, the department is processing numerous requests for reaction.

A spokeswoman for San Diego City attorney Michael Aguirre said she hadn't seen the letter requesting right-to-sue notices. “I haven't heard that they've filed,” Maria Velasquez told Cybercast News Service.

San Diego Pride, the group that organized the event, was not immediately available for comment Monday. On its website, the group calls the parade "a powerful display of diversity, acceptance and celebration." It says the parade's mission is "to foster pride in and respect for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities in San Diego."

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200708/CUL20070806b.html

Wasn't that the event you were marching in? :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Wasn't that the event you were marching in? :laugh2:

That is where you and I met :lol:

[nevadamedic]

That is where you and I met :lol:

Oh yea. :laugh2: Thats right we went to watch Martin and Waterrescuedude march in it since they needed morale support. :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Oh yea. :laugh2: Thats right we went to watch Martin and Waterrescuedude march in it since they needed morale support. :laugh2:

and Shattered was holding Rosie O' Donell close. She could do it to - she has the arms of an orangutan

[diuretic]

and you now fall back on the liberal talking points showing your envy for the wealthy

Why do libs hate those who succeed in life and who have earned their money?

How did you get there? I merely pointed out some salient and observable facts about US politics and suddenly you're a mind-reader and profess to know my feelings about the wealthy?

I don't care about the wealthy one way or the other. I do know that unless you're wealthy you have no chance of making it in politics in the US. That means your political system is controlled by the wealthy elites. Simple observation, no envy there. Perhaps you should think about the implications of what I wrote rather than try to smear me for some reason.

[diuretic]

1. Bullshit. Liberlas have boku cash, and use it for political gain.: Hollywood.
2. The Queer Agenda is to propigate themselves. Since they can't breed they must convince normal kids that queer is normal, natural and healthy.

1. How many people are in in Congress right now who were not independently wealthy before they entered Congress? How many people in Congress came from working class backgrounds?

2. Lolololololololololololol - what a load of paranoid bullshit :laugh2:

[red states rule]

How did you get there? I merely pointed out some salient and observable facts about US politics and suddenly you're a mind-reader and profess to know my feelings about the wealthy?

I don't care about the wealthy one way or the other. I do know that unless you're wealthy you have no chance of making it in politics in the US. That means your political system is controlled by the wealthy elites. Simple observation, no envy there. Perhaps you should think about the implications of what I wrote rather than try to smear me for some reason.

People can vote for who they want. The person who has the most does not always win

John Kerry is proof of that

[diuretic]

Don't forget the union money. Unions steal it from the workers, and hand it over to the Dems

:laugh2:

[red states rule]

:laugh2:

You disagree with that as well?

[diuretic]

People can vote for who they want. The person who has the most does not always win

John Kerry is proof of that

The point is that unless someone is independently wealthy they won't get into a position in US politics to even be considered by the electorate. Your political system is controlled by the wealthy elites and they come in two colours, Blue and Red, Ford and GM, Tweedlee and Tweedledum.

[red states rule]

The point is that unless someone is independently wealthy they won't get into a position in US politics to even be considered by the electorate. Your political system is controlled by the wealthy elites and they come in two colours, Blue and Red, Ford and GM, Tweedlee and Tweedledum.

and your tiny little island nation is not?

If the US is so bad, why are we the envy of the world?

[glockmail]

1. How many people are in in Congress right now who were not independently wealthy before they entered Congress? How many people in Congress came from working class backgrounds?

2. Lolololololololololololol - what a load of paranoid bullshit :laugh2:

1. For the House, I'd say most of them. For the Senate, I'm not so sure. My Seantor used to be a congressman, and before that he sold shoes. I worked a congressional campaign two years ago and the candidate came from "working class" as well as the the candidate he lost to.

2. Your reaction indicates that you can't argue my logic.

[red states rule]

1. For the House, I'd say most of them. For the Senate, I'm not so sure. My Seantor used to be a congressman, and before that he sold shoes. I worked a congressional campaign two years ago and the candidate came from "working class" as well as the the candidate he lost to.

2. Your reaction indicates that you can't argue my logic.

One of my old Congressmen (I moved to another state) taught science at the local College

[glockmail]

One of my old Congressmen (I moved to another state) taught science at the local College From diuretic's perspective, that makes him an elite.

[nevadamedic]

and Shattered was holding Rosie O' Donell close. She could do it to - she has the arms of an orangutan

Asshole, I was just about to eat lunch and you had to bring up that nasty piece of white trash along with Rosie O'Donnell and kill my appetite. Maybe Shatterd would want my lunch, like she would ever turn down food.

[diuretic]

and your tiny little island nation is not?

If the US is so bad, why are we the envy of the world?

No my underpopulated big land mass isn't :laugh2:

Really, I know a number of Members of Parliament at both State and Federal levels who were just working people. We don't need the kind of wealth that's required to get into Congress because our political system is very different from yours, that's all.

I didn't say the US was "bad", that would be patently stupid. I was making an observation on a specific issue, not condemning the country wholesale.

[red states rule]

Asshole, I was just about to eat lunch and you had to bring up that nasty piece of white trash along with Rosie O'Donnell and kill my appetite. Maybe Shatterd would want my lunch, like she would ever turn down food.

Sorry about that

:laugh2:

[diuretic]

1. For the House, I'd say most of them. For the Senate, I'm not so sure. My Seantor used to be a congressman, and before that he sold shoes. I worked a congressional campaign two years ago and the candidate came from "working class" as well as the the candidate he lost to.

2. Your reaction indicates that you can't argue my logic.

1. Okay, points taken. Some folks can get into Congress without heaps of money. Now what about the presidency.

2. :laugh2: Show me the logic :laugh2:

This -
2. The Queer Agenda is to propigate themselves. Since they can't breed they must convince normal kids that queer is normal, natural and healthy. - is not logic :laugh2: It's truly laughable. :laugh2:

[glockmail]

1. Okay, points taken. Some folks can get into Congress without heaps of money. Now what about the presidency.

2. :laugh2: Show me the logic :laugh2:

This - - is not logic :laugh2: It's truly laughable. :laugh2:

1. The presidency requires more funding. Last election about a billion bucks were spent by all the candidates combined. There's about 300 million people in the US, so it ends up at around $3.33 per person. Yup that's large dollars. :rolleyes: A McDonalds Happy meal for everyone!

2. You laugh because you can't argue against the simple indisputable logic. You can't even admit that is is logical. The queers have trained you well, but you fool no one here.

[Abbey Marie]

Probably not a good idea for a firefighter to wear jewellery - health and safety issue :coffee:

Yes, that's the real reason the ACLU fights against it. :D

[diuretic]

Yes, that's the real reason the ACLU fights against it. :D

Hah! Good comeback! :coffee:

Frankly I don't have a problem with anyone wearing anything that denotes their religion or is required by their religion provided it's not going to present a hazard to them or whoever they work with or the public generally. I don't get the need to remove any sign of an individual's religion from the workplace (or school/uni for that matter). I don't get it.

[red states rule]

Hah! Good comeback! :coffee:

Frankly I don't have a problem with anyone wearing anything that denotes their religion or is required by their religion provided it's not going to present a hazard to them or whoever they work with or the public generally. I don't get the need to remove any sign of an individual's religion from the workplace (or school/uni for that matter). I don't get it.

Because some lib will be "offended" so it has to go to appease the lib

[diuretic]

1. The presidency requires more funding. Last election about a billion bucks were spent by all the candidates combined. There's about 300 million people in the US, so it ends up at around $3.33 per person. Yup that's large dollars. :rolleyes: A McDonalds Happy meal for everyone!

2. You laugh because you can't argue against the simple indisputable logic. You can't even admit that is is logical. The queers have trained you well, but you fool no one here.

:D

1. No more presidents from a log cabin.

2. Hah! Trained well - they'd be lucky, I'm intractable :laugh2: No, I simply find the idea of a "gay agenda" to be ludicrous. I can't take it seriously, it's the sort of thing that the supermarket tabloids would run. It doesn't make sense. Really.

[diuretic]

Because some lib will be "offended" so it has to go to appease the lib

No-one has the right not to be offended - I read that here somewhere. And I agree with it. As I said, I don't get it and I'm a left wing atheist. I just don't have a problem with religious people expressing themselves - as I said before - just as long as no-one is going to possibly be put in harm's way.

[red states rule]

No-one has the right not to be offended - I read that here somewhere. And I agree with it. As I said, I don't get it and I'm a left wing atheist. I just don't have a problem with religious people expressing themselves - as I said before - just as long as no-one is going to possibly be put in harm's way.

Wait until November, the libs annual war on Christmas will begin

The offended left will be out in full force

[diuretic]

Wait until November, the libs annual war on Christmas will begin

The offended left will be out in full force

I keep reading about it. Again I don't get it. I think though that it might have something to do with religious displays on public as opposed to private property. I don't know enough about this but I have seen it referred to as the need to keep religion separated from state. Having "said" that I think it's the case that the Constitution forbids the establishment of a state religion and after that I get lost in the complexities. I think if you wanted to build a whole nativity scene in your front garden that no-one could stop you.

[red states rule]

I keep reading about it. Again I don't get it. I think though that it might have something to do with religious displays on public as opposed to private property. I don't know enough about this but I have seen it referred to as the need to keep religion separated from state. Having "said" that I think it's the case that the Constitution forbids the establishment of a state religion and after that I get lost in the complexities. I think if you wanted to build a whole nativity scene in your front garden that no-one could stop you.

The kooks went after a frie hall. A lib saw a tree and lights INSIDE the hall through a window and had a fit

The city caved and the fire hall had to remove them

A lib had a fit over Christmas trees at the MN airport - they were removed. But the folks spoke up and the trees were put back up

Some libs walk through loking for things to be offended over

[glockmail]

:D

1. No more presidents from a log cabin.

2. Hah! Trained well - they'd be lucky, I'm intractable :laugh2: No, I simply find the idea of a "gay agenda" to be ludicrous. I can't take it seriously, it's the sort of thing that the supermarket tabloids would run. It doesn't make sense. Really.

2. Lots of people don't take serious things seriously, like a heart attack, the WOT, or the gay agenda.

[Abbey Marie]

Hah! Good comeback! :coffee:

Frankly I don't have a problem with anyone wearing anything that denotes their religion or is required by their religion provided it's not going to present a hazard to them or whoever they work with or the public generally. I don't get the need to remove any sign of an individual's religion from the workplace (or school/uni for that matter). I don't get it.

I guess it's political correctness run amok. Things have a habit of being needed at first, then people go overboard with them. Like unions. I do see the point if there is a safety or security issue, like the Florida Muslim woman who wanted to wear her face-obscuring Hijab for her driver's license pic.

[82Marine89]

OK

It is still in CA, and it is still the left coast

Did San Fran Nan march in the parade. Given how HER approval numbers are tanking is SF, she needs all the positive photo ops she can get

Not to go off on a rant, but folks like you and nevadamedic piss me off. You post just to post. First, you both need to review 2nd grade spelling. Second, you need to review 3rd grade geography. San Francisco is in northern California. San Diego is the southern most city in California. You both claim to be conservatives, but you know nothing of the issues. You post so much tripe that most people either ignore you or laugh at you. Instead of posting so much, please take the time to read and understand what it is you are posting. Until you do that, you are nothing more than a post whore that jerks himself off as he reads his name on the board.

Now back to our regularly scheduled bantering.

[nevadamedic]

Not to go off on a rant, but folks like you and nevadamedic piss me off. You post just to post. First, you both need to review 2nd grade spelling. Second, you need to review 3rd grade geography. San Francisco is in northern California. San Diego is the southern most city in California. You both claim to be conservatives, but you know nothing of the issues. You post so much tripe that most people either ignore you or laugh at you. Instead of posting so much, please take the time to read and understand what it is you are posting. Until you do that, you are nothing more than a post whore that jerks himself off as he reads his name on the board.

Now back to our regularly scheduled bantering.

Awwww are you upset that we are picking apart the Parade youo marched in?

[82Marine89]

Awwww are you upset that we are picking apart the Parade youo marched in?

Is that the best you got?

I can't believe that out of millions of sperm, you were the winner. I told your mom she should have swallowed.

BTW, it's y-o-u.

[82Marine89]

Over an hour has gone by and your punk ass hasn't responded. I see you're active on other threads, so I guess you're not as tough as you claim to be. How does it feel to be my bitch?

[nevadamedic]

Over an hour has gone by and your punk ass hasn't responded. I see you're active on other threads, so I guess you're not as tough as you claim to be. How does it feel to be my bitch?

Your bitch? To funny.

[red states rule]

Awwww are you upset that we are picking apart the Parade youo marched in?

Could be

[diuretic]

2. Lots of people don't take serious things seriously, like a heart attack, the WOT, or the gay agenda.

It helps to have a fine sense of discrimination to work out what's really important, what's not and what's simply real. Some things are but figments of fevered imaginations - eg "the gay agenda" .

[diuretic]

I guess it's political correctness run amok. Things have a habit of being needed at first, then people go overboard with them. Like unions. I do see the point if there is a safety or security issue, like the Florida Muslim woman who wanted to wear her face-obscuring Hijab for her driver's license pic.

I don't know if it's pc or an interpretation of the Constitution, but it seems unreasonable. If it is pc then it's bullshit and should be sorted out. If someone of the non-religious or different religious persuasion is offended, then, tough for them.

[red states rule]

It helps to have a fine sense of discrimination to work out what's really important, what's not and what's simply real. Some things are but figments of fevered imaginations - eg "the gay agenda" .

If the gay agenda would not be news if it did not force their lifestyle, and impose their POV on the rest of us

[diuretic]

If the gay agenda would not be news if it did not force their lifestyle, and impose their POV on the rest of us

So, how's your resistance to it? Holding up?

The "gay agenda" argument is laughable. If gays truly had an agenda to turn us all they're fairly bloody useless at it, look at all those heterosexuals everywhere :laugh2:

[red states rule]

So, how's your resistance to it? Holding up?

The "gay agenda" argument is laughable. If gays truly had an agenda to turn us all they're fairly bloody useless at it, look at all those heterosexuals everywhere :laugh2:

They are imposing their views and lifestyle on the rest of us, and if you disagree with them - the knives come out

Much like how most on the left react

[diuretic]

They are imposing their views and lifestyle on the rest of us, and if you disagree with them - the knives come out

Much like how most on the left react

Now we're down to outlandish claims and generalisations.

[red states rule]

Now we're down to outlandish claims and generalisations.

No, the facts

Libs say they are for freedom of speech - as long as you agree with them

[diuretic]

No, the facts

Libs say they are for freedom of speech - as long as you agree with them

If you have facts then show them, there must be proof if they're facts and that proof should be easily available.

As for liberals and free speech - correct me if I'm wrong but it's the conservatives who are trying to outlaw flag burning as free speech, conservatives who are arguing for a change to the First Amendment's application. That is a call for a restriction on the natural right to free expression and it's coming from conservatives, well not real conservatives, reactionaries really.

[red states rule]

If you have facts then show them, there must be proof if they're facts and that proof should be easily available.

As for liberals and free speech - correct me if I'm wrong but it's the conservatives who are trying to outlaw flag burning as free speech, conservatives who are arguing for a change to the First Amendment's application. That is a call for a restriction on the natural right to free expression and it's coming from conservatives, well not real conservatives, reactionaries really.

Gay Activists Try to Stop TV Report on Lesbian Gang Attacks
from staff reports

High school students are the victims.

The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has apparently threatened to sue a Tennessee TV station for airing a report on lesbian gangs attacking students.

Jack Peck, general manager of WPTY in Memphis, said the station agreed to make some rewrites before the story aired in February, but that wasn't enough to satisfy GLAAD.

The story featured an interview with Shelby County Gang Unit specialist Beverly Cobb, who said girls are being attacked in high school bathrooms and stairwells by members of a gang called GTO or "Gays Taking Over."

“They are forcing themselves on our young girls in all our schools," Cobb said in the televised report.

The station gave GLAAD an advance viewing of the story. The group declared it “sensationalistic and homophobic.”

Peter LaBarbera, with Americans for Truth, said the station manager told him the group definitely did not want the story to air.

“A senior staffer told him several times, ‘We’re going to take you to court if you air this report,’ ” he said.

Similar gang activity is reported in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C. Linda Jernigan, a former homosexual, said that’s why GLAAD is making such an issue of the Memphis story.

“They don’t want this type of information to get out," she told Family News in Focus, "because then they know people’s eyes will be opened, they’ll begin to see this whole situation for what it really is.”

http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000005067.cfm

[red states rule]

Payback for exposé on 'dyke' gang rapes
Homosexual activists attack revelations of lesbian assaults

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 9, 2007
9:52 p.m. Eastern


By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com


Two news stories about hundreds of lesbian gangs attacking and raping young girls in schools and other public locations have prompted a backlash against the reporters by members of the homosexual community.

The broadcasts by Memphis television station WPTY and Fox News host Bill O'Reilly quoted law enforcement authorities, victims, and even some gang members to document the growing number of attacks on young girls by lesbian gang members.

"The Eyewitness News Everywhere" report in Memphis documented incidents of gangs known as GTOs, or "Gays" Taking Over, attacking schoolgirls. Two prison inmates affiliated with the gang told the station they had begun meeting to offer each other support, but a younger generation of members had taken their group over for violence and rape.

Rod Wheeler, who has experience as a police detective, told O'Reilly of a growing national concern over lesbians and some men "recruiting kids as young as 10 years old in a lot of the schools in the communities all across the country." He estimated the presence of 150 gangs, including lesbian gangs, in the Washington area alone.

Some of the children, Wheeler said, "have actually reported that they were actually forced into, you know, performing sex acts and doing sex acts with some of these people."

On the Memphis report, Deputy Beverly Cobb of the Shelby County Gang Unit said lesbian gang members "will sodomize [with sex toys] and will force [young schoolgirls] to do all sexual acts. They are forcing themselves on our young girls in all our schools."

The report included a long list of Memphis-area schools where such incidents were documented.

The gang members, Cobb said, "carry weapons … they will use them quicker than any male that I've ever come upon – to try and fight them you'll get hurt."

Reports also said in some of the locations the organizations called themselves DTOs, or Dykes Taking Over.

But the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, which had tried to suppress the Memphis report before it aired, issued a statement charging the reporting was "without … one solid statistic or credible source."

Rashad Robinson, GLAAD's senior director of media programs, called the reporting "inaccurate tabloid journalism" and said it "perpetuates dangerous stereotypes about lesbians and feeds a climate of homophobia, anti-gay discrimination and violence."

Participants in several blogs simply ridiculed the reports. A writer who was identified as "Idaho Librul" told the "From the Left" website: "Thank goodness for Bill O'Reilly! I saw a group of rampaging lesbians just the other day going up and down my street. Oh wait a minute, come to think of it, they were Girl Scouts selling cookies. But I was terrified!"

On the After Ellen blog, another wrote, "Yes, it's true, we're just one cell short of being a full-fledged terrorist network. Don't bother asking us where bin Laden is – we'll never tell."

Peter LaBarbera, of Americans for Truth, an organization publicizing information about the impact of the "gay" lifestyle, contends pro-homosexual influences have so permeated many media organizations that the "gay" promoters are accustomed to having only their side reported.

For example, the Memphis report referenced young schoolgirls being hurt, but GLAAD's statement ignored those victims.

"All they wanted to do was shut down the story," LaBarbera told WND. "This epitomizes the selfishness of the gay activists."

Having heard over the years of the fast-growing influence of lesbian gangs and their tactics of intimidation, LaBarbera said the reports, including an estimate of 150 attack squads in the Washington, D.C., region alone, were no surprise.

Neither was it a surprise that "gay" activists would try to intimidate a news team into silence about such a story, including reports the activists demanded to see the story before it aired and threatened lawsuits.

In fact, GLAAD condemned the Memphis program as full of "dangerous, inaccurate stereotypes."

"GLAAD was first alerted to the story when Initiative Fairness of the Memphis Gay and Lesbian Community Center, The Tennessee Equality Project and Memphis community members called to complain about a problematic promotional ad," the organization said. "The teaser, aired during February 'sweeps' month, foreshadowed the familiar defamatory script in which a local news reporter relies on tabloid-style journalism and anecdotal claims.

"This type of reporting creates a climate of homophobia and fear, perpetuating dangerous, inaccurate stereotypes of gay people and feeding a climate of anti-gay discrimination and violence," the group said.

GLAAD contacted the station managers and after a private preview concluded it was "shockingly defamatory."

The statement cast aspersions on interview subjects, calling the sheriff's department gang officer "a so-called 'gang expert,'" and advocated a consumer campaign to present complaints to the station managers.

"They are taking the line that there's no other side," LaBarbera said. "If you read that GLAAD release about perpetuating negative stereotypes, you can't write anything negative about any homosexuals."

"It's a stunning bit of crude bullying," he said.

LaBarbera has had his own experience with "'gays" wanting only their side of the story told. He's debated the issue of homosexuality several times, he said, and has seen homosexuals lobbying debate organizations to "interview us alone."

"You don't need to put us on with that bigot," they've told debate organizers, LaBarbera said.

Many homosexual activists have influenced news reports by providing journalists with new definitions of various words and phrases, and major news groups such as the New York Times and Associated Press have adopted some of those demands.

According to GLAAD's own documentation, the AP tells its writers to "avoid references to 'sexual preference' or to a gay or alternative 'lifestyle.'"

And it says the New York Times tells its writers to "avoid" the term "admitted homosexual" because that "suggests criminality or shame." They also are told to avoid the term "gay rights," because "advocates for gay issues are concerned that the term may invite resentment by implying 'special rights' that are denied other citizens." Instead, the phrase "equal rights" or "civil rights" should be used." Also, New York Times writers never must use "sexual preference," because it "carries the disputed implication that sexuality is a matter of choice."

LaBarbera noted a prominent homosexual journalist has likened talking to Christians about "gay" issues to talking to the Klan about race issues.

"Obviously, this is their whole thing. They want to portray religious conservatives as analogous to the Klan," he said.

He noted even Fox News has contributed to the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association.

"Journalists need to re-evaluate their ethics on this whole issue, giving money to gay and lesbian groups," he said.

"There is a serious professional ethic at stake: Are we going to be bullied by powerful special interest groups into distorting the news and covering up key information," he asked.

"Here's a lesbian gang story obviously affecting inner city schools. If there were any justice in the media this would be huge. There would be investigations kicking in," he said.

"This is really Orwellian. We've got gayspeak words," LaBarbera said.

"Here you have girls being raped by other girls, and somehow GLAAD manages to turn the homosexual lobby into the victims," he said.

The original Memphis TV report included stories of school washroom rapes of schoolgirls, assaults with sex toys, and the intimidation that comes from the threat of those attacks.

LaBarbera told WND he heard about the "lesbian bullying phenomenon" from former lesbian-turned-Christian evangelist Linda Jernigan, who was contacted by a teacher about speaking at a suburban Chicago where "this sick behavior was occurring."

"Jernigan said she was told that lesbian girl gangs would drag a targeted female into the school restroom, hold her down, and perform oral sex on her to 'turn her out' – i.e., forcible 'seduce' the poor girl through lesbian rape," he said.

But he said that should be no surprise, because the "Vagina Monologues," a feminist-lesbian play celebrated by liberal elites, in its original version contains a chapter about a 24-year-old lesbian woman "who plies a 13-year-old girl with alcohol to seduce her."

The author turned the pedophile rape "into a sort of feminist-lesbian 'moral good' by having the girl victim end up as a happy lesbian who says, 'I'll never need to rely on a man,'" LaBarbera said.

He noted such rape descriptions were edited from later versions.

There also was an WCAU report from Philadelphia several years earlier providing similar documentation to such allegations about lesbian attacks.


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56577

[diuretic]

I did ask for facts, not opinion pieces from partisan sources. If this happening then a report of the court proceedings would be a good start.

[red states rule]

I did ask for facts, not opinion pieces from partisan sources. If this happening then a report of the court proceedings would be a good start.

So now Memphis television station WPTY is a partisan source?

[diuretic]

http://www.dlisted.com/node/12433

But you have may well be right, it looks that this gay takeover might be happening, I mean how else do you explain this:

http://www.takingdownwords.com/taking_down_words/2007/08/breaking-news-g.html

Run! Run! :laugh2:

[red states rule]

http://www.dlisted.com/node/12433

But you have may well be right, it looks that this gay takeover might be happening, I mean how else do you explain this:

http://www.takingdownwords.com/taking_down_words/2007/08/breaking-news-g.html

Run! Run! :laugh2:

I wonder if the gay attacks in the school will be charged as a hate crime?

[glockmail]

Is that the best you got?

I can't believe that out of millions of sperm, you were the winner. I told your mom she should have swallowed.

BTW, it's y-o-u.
I'd say that's over the line, bringing his Mom into this. What's next, his wife and kids? :slap:

[red states rule]

I'd say that's over the line, bringing his Mom into this. What's next, his wife and kids? :slap:

Give them time

[glockmail]

It helps to have a fine sense of discrimination to work out what's really important, what's not and what's simply real. Some things are but figments of fevered imaginations - eg "the gay agenda" .
Then how else do you explain the concerted attack of traditional marriage in America? (Returned with an 80% negative body slam by voters, BTW.)

[red states rule]

Then how else do you explain the concerted attack of traditional marriage in America? (Returned with an 80% negative body slam by voters, BTW.)

Everytime the folks vote on gay marriage it has lost (with one exception I believe)

Libs thought the gay marrage issue would carry them to the WH in 04. It backfired

[glockmail]

Everytime the folks vote on gay marriage it has lost (with one exception I believe)

Libs thought the gay marrage issue would carry them to the WH in 04. It backfired
I don't think there has been even one exception.

[diuretic]

Then how else do you explain the concerted attack of traditional marriage in America? (Returned with an 80% negative body slam by voters, BTW.)

What attack?

[glockmail]

What attack? :lame2:Have you been reading the news for the last 6 years or so?
1. San Fransicko mayor holds queer marriage ceremonies.
2. Mass supreme court legalizes queer marriage.
There's two biggies.

[diuretic]

:lame2:Have you been reading the news for the last 6 years or so?
1. San Fransicko mayor holds queer marriage ceremonies.
2. Mass supreme court legalizes queer marriage.
There's two biggies.

Sure but how is that an "attack" on marriage?

[glockmail]

Sure but how is that an "attack" on marriage? How is it not? :pee:

[diuretic]

How is it not? :pee:

Don't for the playground response, give me something to work with.

How is it an attack on marriage?

Now in adult discourse you would answer this with a response, not a question.

[glockmail]

Don't for the playground response, give me something to work with.

How is it an attack on marriage?

Now in adult discourse you would answer this with a response, not a question.

1. A Mayor of a the most liberal city in America enacts a policy - against State Law- to allow queers to marry.
2. Unelected Judges in the most liberal State in the Union re-interpret the State Constitution to allow queers to marry.

Both of these have potential impacts on the entire nation, since queers from all over can go to these places, get hitched, then go back home and claim that they are now legally married. And this is caused by the actions of a mere five individuals (one mayor, and a 4 majority out of 7 judges).

Approximately 80% of American voters disagree with these policies. How is this NOT an attack, not simply on traditional marriage, but on democracy?:slap:

[Kathianne]

None too soon:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200708/CUL20070807b.html



Fire Dept to Investigate 'Gay Pride' Parade Sexual Harassment Claims
By Nathan Burchfiel
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
August 07, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - San Diego's openly lesbian fire chief said Tuesday she has apologized to four firefighters who claimed they were ordered to participate in the city's "Gay Pride" Parade and subjected to harassment along the parade route. She also announced an internal investigation into the allegations.

As Cybercast News Service previously reported, a Christian legal organization on Monday announced plans to sue the city on behalf of the four firefighters who said they were subjected to "vile sexual taunts from homosexuals lining the parade route" during the city's annual Pride Parade. The firefighters said they were ordered to participate in the parade against their wishes.

The firemen have filed "right-to-sue" requests with the city, an administrative procedure that waives their right to pursue an internal investigation of their complaints. Once they receive the right-to-sue notices, the firemen plan to file a sexual harassment lawsuit with legal aid provided by the Thomas More Law Center.

In a statement Tuesday, Fire Chief Tracy Jarman said she will "initiate a fact-finding investigation" to be conducted by the city's Equal Employment Investigative Officer.

"[W]e're working toward solutions to avoid this situation in the future," Jarman said, announcing she has met with the offended firemen and apologized to them.

Jarman did not directly address allegations that the firemen were ordered to participate in the parade after voicing their discomfort with it.

However, she pointed out that the department "has an established tradition of accepting invitations from diverse community groups and organizations to march in their parades, attend street festivals, and participate in school fire safety forums."

She did not say whether participation in other parades was mandatory. But she noted that the fire department participates in the Martin Luther King Jr. Day Parade, Cesar Chavez Day Parade, Patriots Day in Serra Mesa and four different 4th of July Parades. The department has participated in the Pride Parade for 15 years.

"This is the first time, to the best of my knowledge, that a sexual harassment complaint has been alleged, by crews, during the participating in a parade or festival," Jarman said. "I believe it's important to investigate this complaint, and if something inappropriate did happen, we will address it."

Sterling Stires, an attorney for the firemen, told Cybercast News Service that at least one complaint was filed after the 2006 parade. The complaint says a station "has been receiving sexually explicit brochures since participating in the Gay Pride Parade" in 2006.

The complaint, which came in an inter-department communication from Capt. Lynda Lynch to a supervisor identified as R. Zepeda, said crew members reported receiving "cat calls" during the parade and complained that the crew "has been required to participate."

The firemen involved in the pending lawsuit - Capt. John Giotto, Engineer Jason Hewett, Firefighter Chad Allison and Firefighter Alex Kane - could not be reached for comment on their meeting with Jarman.

Brian Rooney, a spokesman for the Thomas More Law Center, confirmed to Cybercast News Service that Jarman met with the firemen last week but said they "didn't perceive anything to be an apology."

As for the internal investigation Jarman is launching, Rooney said she "can do whatever she wants as far as the internal policing of her fire department, I'd imagine." But he said plans to sue the city are still on track. "The damage is already done, so to speak."

"These guys were made to endure three hours of the most vile types of sexual harassment that you can imagine," Rooney said. Their allegations are outlined in pages of complaints filed along with their right-to-sue requests. (Warning: Graphic Content)

Rooney said the firefighters will seek financial damages in their lawsuit against the city. But he declined to elaborate because final plans for the complaint have not been made.

Maria Velasquez, a spokeswoman for City Attorney Michael Aguirre, told Cybercast News Service the office had no comment on the case, because it hasn't received notice of a lawsuit yet. The Department of Fair Employment and Housing must process the right-to-sue requests before a lawsuit can be filed against the city.

[Pale Rider]

I saw this on the local news this evening. The chief is doing everything in her power to make this go away. The parade had its name changed to the San Diego Pride Parade this year due to negativity from religious groups over the past years including Roger Hedgecock's attempt to have a "Normal People" float entered in the event. Forcing their lifestyle on heterosexuals has now reached a boiling point in this city and the gays are going to lose. They weren't encouraged, they were forced to participate.

Oh but hey, the faggots don't have an agenda bro. They just want to be left alone... :uhoh:

[diuretic]

1. A Mayor of a the most liberal city in America enacts a policy - against State Law- to allow queers to marry.
2. Unelected Judges in the most liberal State in the Union re-interpret the State Constitution to allow queers to marry.

Both of these have potential impacts on the entire nation, since queers from all over can go to these places, get hitched, then go back home and claim that they are now legally married. And this is caused by the actions of a mere five individuals (one mayor, and a 4 majority out of 7 judges).

Approximately 80% of American voters disagree with these policies. How is this NOT an attack, not simply on traditional marriage, but on democracy?:slap:

How does it affect anyone else? Does it take anything away from them?

As for the 80% of American voters disagreeing. "For 'tis sport to see the engineer, hoist with his own petard." Why is it that I keep reading, "America is not a democracy", yet stuff like this is trotted out showing the tyranny of the majority, the exact thing that the Founding Fathers were worried about. Conservatives should appreciate the judgement of their representatives being made on their behalf. The greatest conservative, none other than Edmund Burke, made that point in his famous "Speech to the Electors of Bristol".

[Pale Rider]

How does it affect anyone else? Does it take anything away from them?

As for the 80% of American voters disagreeing. "For 'tis sport to see the engineer, hoist with his own petard." Why is it that I keep reading, "America is not a democracy", yet stuff like this is trotted out showing the tyranny of the majority, the exact thing that the Founding Fathers were worried about. Conservatives should appreciate the judgement of their representatives being made on their behalf. The greatest conservative, none other than Edmund Burke, made that point in his famous "Speech to the Electors of Bristol".

The "tyranny of the majority" is exactly what a democracy is. We are a "republic."

A quote from our pledge of alliegance... "and to the REPUBLIC, for which it stands."

[diuretic]

The "tyranny of the majority" is exactly what a democracy is. We are a "republic."

A quote from out pledge of alliegance... "and to the REPUBLIC, for which it stands."

Of course you're a republic, you have a president and not a monarch. Now who are those folks in Congress?

[Pale Rider]

Of course you're a republic, you have a president and not a monarch. Now who are those folks in Congress?

Judging by their approval numbers, they are a separate entity all to themselves. "We the people" are fucked.

[diuretic]

Judging by their approval numbers, they are a separate entity all to themselves. "We the people" are fucked.

I find myself in agreement. No comfort for you but I think it's a common malaise.

[Pale Rider]

I find myself in agreement. No comfort for you but I think it's a common malaise.

Since we freely elect them, it's a mystery to me how these shit bags get in there. I sure the hell don't vote for them, and it makes me lose faith in my fellow American, because someone does vote for them. Either the people that voted them into office were ignorant sons a bitches, or the those that got elected did a 180 degree about face once elected.

[diuretic]

I'm going to make a comparison here and I know that's dangerous but this is not meant to be anything other than food for thought. I'll try and keep it short.

In our (Aus) political system the party is in control. I've seen the political system in the US up close (actually it was the Texas Senate but since that's my only experience I have to refer to it) and apart from the obvious differences there are some other differences which are important. I just said in our system the party is in control. Damn right they are. If a Member of Parliament here dares to vote against the party instructions on a piece of legislation (unless the party leader has allowed a so-called "conscience vote") they are in big trouble. It is entirely possible they will be dis-endorsed at the next election and may have to stand as an independent. Now there's a bit wrong with that but when you vote for someone at least you know that they will stick to the party platform.

In the US your representatives (I'm using the term generically) have a lot more freedom. I understand that and I'm not criticising it and I think I know why it is (I'm reading a book about the Federalist Papers - must admit it's hard going). That works very well in many instances but it can leave voters feeling cheated when a rep turns turtle on a previous understanding with the electorate.

I don't know what's best. I am a bit pissed off with our approach of total control by the party because it does alienate the electorate and I think at times that our pollies are ignoring us. I like the fact that your reps have more freedom to move, they can co-sponsor a bill with a member from the other party (would NOT happen here) and that can mean better legislation, but it can also mean people feel sold out.

Dunno, but it is interesting.

[red states rule]

Since we freely elect them, it's a mystery to me how these shit bags get in there. I sure the hell don't vote for them, and it makes me lose faith in my fellow American, because someone does vote for them. Either the people that voted them into office were ignorant sons a bitches, or the those that got elected did a 180 degree about face once elected.

Dems are overplaying their hand. They think the 06 election was a sign the country was turning left - it was not

Now the Dems are going back to 1960's liberalism and the voters are showing their displeasure

[glockmail]

How does it affect anyone else? Does it take anything away from them?

.... .

So you agree with me that it is an attack. Is that correct?

[diuretic]

So you agree with me that it is an attack. Is that correct?

Incorrect.

[red states rule]

Since we freely elect them, it's a mystery to me how these shit bags get in there. I sure the hell don't vote for them, and it makes me lose faith in my fellow American, because someone does vote for them. Either the people that voted them into office were ignorant sons a bitches, or the those that got elected did a 180 degree about face once elected.

Perhaps things are changing. In 06 the Republicans felt the anger of the voters. With approval numbers LOWER then what the Republicans had in o6, perhaps the Dems will be next ones to feel the anger in 08

[glockmail]

Incorrect.
Well if you can't admit the obvious then its not worth discussing related issues.
:pee:

[diuretic]

Well if you can't admit the obvious then its not worth discussing related issues.
:pee:

Are you dizzy? You've got so many circular arguments going you must surely be unable to stand up :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Are you dizzy? You've got so many circular arguments going you must surely be unable to stand up :laugh2:

Your logic makes a figure eight look like a straight line

[red states rule]

Well if you can't admit the obvious then its not worth discussing related issues.
:pee:

That is part of bing a liberal. They go through life with blinders on

[glockmail]

That is part of bing a liberal. They go through life with blinders on
Closed minded liberal? Whouda thunk?

[diuretic]

Your logic makes a figure eight look like a straight line

I can do that - I can even make a Mobius Strip end :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Closed minded liberal? Whouda thunk?

Shocking

Libs are so open minded their brain fell out of their head

[diuretic]

Come on you blokes, give me something to work with! Twittering amongst yourselves. Man up for crying out loud! Break out of the sewing circle or the circle jerk or whatever it is you've got going there :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Come on you blokes, give me something to work with! Twittering amongst yourselves. Man up for crying out loud! Break out of the sewing circle or the circle jerk or whatever it is you've got going there :laugh2:

Go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge
Proverbs 14:7

Translation - we don't want to waste our time arguing with an idiot

[diuretic]

Go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge
Proverbs 14:7

Translation - we don't want to waste our time arguing with an idiot

:laugh2:


For if we be sure we are in the right, and do not hold the truth guiltily, which becomes not, if we ourselves condemn not our own weak and frivolous teaching, and the people for an untaught and irreligious gadding rout, what can be more fair than when a man judicious, learned, and of a conscience, for aught we know, as good as theirs that taught us what we know, shall not privily from house to house, which is more dangerous, but openly by writing publish to the world what his opinion is, what his reasons, and wherefore that which is now thought cannot be sound? Christ urged it as wherewith to justify himself, that he preached in public; yet writing is more public than preaching; and more easy to refutation, if need be, there being so many whose business and profession merely it is to be the champions of truth; which if they neglect, what can be imputed but their sloth, or unability?

[red states rule]

:laugh2:

Common sense and logic is not standout qualities of a liberal

[diuretic]

Common sense and logic is not standout qualities of a liberal

But good grammar are. :laugh2:

[red states rule]

But good grammar are. :laugh2:

Back to the liberal two step dance I see

[diuretic]

Back to the liberal two step dance I see

Nope, just a fifth of wry :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Nope, just a fifth of wry :laugh2:

That would explain why people vote for libs - they are drunk at the time

[diuretic]

That would explain why people vote for libs - they are drunk at the time

Drunk on the hope of expectation. Not so much as "I'm Alright Jack [Daniels]" as "Jim Me Up Beam" :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Drunk on the hope of expectation. Not so much as "I'm Alright Jack [Daniels]" as "Jim Me Up Beam" :laugh2:

If you expect Dems to actually solve problems you are also smoking something in additon to heavy drinking

[diuretic]

If you expect Dems to actually solve problems you are also smoking something in additon to heavy drinking

I gave up cigars when I was 14 :D I don't smoke. I don't even eat Alice B. Toklas brownies :laugh2: I am in touch with reality (yes, I can stand its ugliness).

[red states rule]

I gave up cigars when I was 14 :D I don't smoke. I don't even eat Alice B. Toklas brownies :laugh2: I am in touch with reality (yes, I can stand its ugliness).

If you support liberals, you are in touch with the Twilight Zone

[diuretic]

If you support liberals, you are in touch with the Twilight Zone

Which episode? :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Which episode? :laugh2:

Take your pick

[diuretic]

Take your pick

Okay I really liked the one where the plane went into the past, the passengers looked out of the windows and they could see dinosaurs out there through the mist. And of course there was the one with a very young Bruce Willis in the diner with the fatal accident victims...eerily reminiscent of the Sixth Sense.

Of the later episodes, the ones primarily written by Rockne O'Bannon probably the one I remember best was the one with the woman in the tube thing who aged a lot, that was a bit sad.

[red states rule]

Okay I really liked the one where the plane went into the past, the passengers looked out of the windows and they could see dinosaurs out there through the mist. And of course there was the one with a very young Bruce Willis in the diner with the fatal accident victims...eerily reminiscent of the Sixth Sense.

Of the later episodes, the ones primarily written by Rockne O'Bannon probably the one I remember best was the one with the woman in the tube thing who aged a lot, that was a bit sad.

You are also Lost in Space

[diuretic]

You are also Lost in Space

Danger Will Robinson! :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Danger Will Robinson! :laugh2:

only if Dems win in 08

[red states rule]

Homophobic Firefighters Refuse to Wear Rainbow Diapers of Tolerance

Fifteen years ago today, Matthew Shepherd was chained to George Bush's pick-up truck and brutally murdered by a gang of Christian Conservatives. Apparently, America hasn't learned a single lesson from Shepherd's tragic death, for just last week four blatantly homophobic firefighters filed a lawsuit against the City of San Diego for "forcing" them to march in the annual Gay Pride Parade.

Throught history, Gay Pride parades have served as an opportunity for GLBTHBP Americans to lather up and come together under a rainbow-colored flag of friendship - and to engage in activites that would get them arrested for public indecency anywhere else. The participation of city employees and government officials in these wonderful parades not only sets an example for the less flamboyantly gay public to follow, but provides the festivities with an air of legitimacy that would otherwise require marchers to leave their feathery buttplugs at home and behave like mature, rational adults. Firepersyns and other public servants shouldn't have to be "forced" to participate, they should do so willingly and without any gripes about thong-wearing bikers humping their legs like dogs in heat. But even the fireperysns who volunteered to march refused to wear the rainbow diapers and fire sprinkler nipple rings that the city generously provided for them.

Although they wrap themselves in a cloak of moral superiority, these four FireBigots, and George Bush as well, have stolen something from the Gay Community that years of buggery will never bring back - their dignity.

http://blamebush.typepad.com/blamebush/2007/08/homophobic-fire.html

[red states rule]

Wrong Answer, Governor
The Democratic Calculus On Gay Rights Issues

By Jonathan Capehart
Monday, August 13, 2007; Page A11

Bloomberg News columnist Margaret Carlson and I were stealing glances at each other when singer Melissa Etheridge asked New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson an easy question: "Do you think homosexuality is a choice, or is it biological?" His response was quick: "It's a choice!" My visible reaction to Carlson was equally quick: "Oh, no, he didn't!"

The occasion was Thursday's forum with the Democratic candidates for president, hosted by the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group, and Logo, the gay channel owned by Viacom. I served as a panelist at the two-hour event in Los Angeles. It was a historic moment for gays and lesbians nationwide, as many believed that one of the people who came to offer their views on gay issues would be the next president of the United States. (Plans for a Republican forum were scrapped after GOP candidate Mitt Romney declined an invitation and John McCain and Rudy Giuliani did not respond to invitations.)

The forum's organizers hoped to get the candidates to show their concern for the gay and lesbian community and to see whether their understanding emanated from their consultant-generated talking points or from their hearts. Clearly, Richardson's head needed some work. Even his campaign recognized this -- it issued a "clarifying" statement not one hour after the event. And on a gay radio show the next day, Richardson told host Michelangelo Signorile that he didn't understand the question because of jet lag.

That rationale and his initial answer are inexcusable. To gays and lesbians, flubbing the choice-vs.-nature question is like botching the answer to "What's one plus one?" Note to Richardson's current and former gay staffers and supporters: Do an intervention -- and get him an Ambien -- before he implodes again.

Where Richardson got it right, however, was his political assessment of gay marriage. "The country isn't there yet on gay marriage," he said moments before diving headlong into his homosexuality-is-a-choice sinkhole. "We have to bring the country along." He talked about how he would focus on getting what's "achievable" in equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. I support gay marriage, but I am pragmatic enough not to turn my nose up at legislative and legal gains that strengthen gay relationships and lay the foundation for full marriage rights -- or turn my back on those who would fight for them.

Many gays and lesbians couldn't care less about the political calculus involved in gay marriage. They are being denied basic civil rights, and they want them now. Sen. Hillary Clinton's instructive recollection about the charged environment that led to the passage of the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, to head off an even more damaging constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, left more than a few people cold. That's understandable.

But that was the reality gays faced then -- and that is what we face now, even in these more accepting times, when civil unions are the safe harbor of politicians on both sides of the aisle who aren't "there yet on gay marriage." Think about it: The two fellas in the race who unabashedly support same-sex marriage -- Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel -- are at the back of the pack.

That's why I don't fault Clinton, Sen. Barack Obama or former senator John Edwards for their opposition to gay marriage, even if their explanations leave me scratching my head. Clinton's mantra that this is a states' rights issue, while logical, makes this descendant of slaves just a bit uncomfortable. Edwards backed off using his Southern Baptist upbringing to justify his opposition. But I still find it hard to believe his opposition is real since his no-nonsense wife, Elizabeth, and daughter Cate are in favor of gay marriage. And I can't even point to a reason Obama is against it, other than his oft-stated belief that marriage is between a man and a woman.

But that's okay. Look, they've all committed to snagging for the gay community as many as possible of the more than 1,100 federal rights and responsibilities that come with civil marriage that are now denied to committed same-sex couples. Isn't that what everyone's fighting for in the first place? Like it or not, it's a good start, and if one of these Democrats succeeds in winning the White House, he or she should be pushed to fulfill that promise.

And here's something else to think about before some of y'all fill my e-mail inbox with petty putdowns: Republican pursuers of the White House rejected their invitations to talk to the gay community about the issues important to it. Chances are that if they're not interested in talking to you during the campaign, they will be even less inclined to do so if they win.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/12/AR2007081200814.html