I understand the argument, and agree with you between the lines, but we're talking two completely different representations. This isn't a pro-gay vs pro-straight. It's more like pro-gay vs. pro-lynch the non-whites there. That's probably where we disagree
Well......are ya?
You know, while in principle I see what you are saying, that isn't how it works. I am a believing Catholic and if I go work and someone wearing his rainbow lapel pin asks me to support gay rights and I say that I believe homosexual acts are objectively disordered, though the homosexual person is entitled to all rights that any other person has, I will be "counseled and re-trained" essentially for thinking wrong with no act of any kind alleged or proven. He, for wearing an open advocacy statement of what I find deeply offensive will have nothing, zero, zilch happen (BTW - I wouldn't want him "re-trained" for thinking wrong). The event described was a composite of two different events - neither of which happened to me - but essentially accurate.
Do you really believe that the result would have been different if these kids wore shirts with rainbow flags inside a red circle-slash? They are essentially being silenced for thinking wrong in the estimation of highly influential and noisy very small minority groups. This result is becoming very common in our society. No action need be taken - simply think or talk incorrectly and you will be silenced.
All to true. People in the military are facing charges and reprimand if they dare to say anything that does not toe the party line.
Are you afraid you're the only one?
How can a persons sexual orientation be offensive?
Pedophilia and beastiality might qualify. Are those considered a form of "orientation"?
Enter your email address to join: