I have a hard time believing Mayor Annise Parker really tweeted such an ignorant statement... (speech, KKK)

[mmmjv]

Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow

She's the mayor of one of the largest cities in the country, calling someone she doesn't actually know a "redneck wingnut" via twitter is far from professional for someone of her public position.

Kind of like then presidential candidate George Bush saying in 1998 that the people of Cambridge and Brookline Massachusetts hate America? That would have been about 100,000 people he doesn't know for Cambridge alone, plus however many people lived in Brookline

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by Kiovo

Hate is hate is hate. So if liberals/left side really want the hate to stop, they need to stop spewing it too. But instead they just fight hate with being super loud, vocal, and just as hateful.

Its not the same thing! There is no moral equivalence. That is just absurd.

Saying that some one is an irrelevant ignorant fool for saying hateful racist and homophobic comments is not in the same field as the person who said the hateful stuff. Good lord, some of you are so transparent.

Look just stick to your guns instead of tossing in the "civility" card and thinking cons are getting prejudice for their backwards views. Being racist and homophobic is not some ticket to be a rebellious fool. It's not cool and ppl will call you out on it, but it's not the same "hate".

[Vejadu]

Between her hateful comments and the nasty tweet from the Democrat Rep from Washington, this must be the result of Obama's call for civility and a new tone. Keep it classy Dems!

[texdav]

Originally Posted by txdemo

Um. I think he is a redneck wingnut. His views of the LGBT community are about as relevant as the GOP's on poor folks.

You might say many have the same view on LGBT views they as expressed on others views .In this case that seems to be true because its A&E actions people backlash against. .They just saw LGBT as the same as always but A&E actions to surpress is what they wanted to protest not LGBT's views; which are not anything new. That GOP slant attempt is just immature at best.

[kidkaos2]

Originally Posted by Weatherguy

I wonder if the OP saw the actual tweets, or is this something someone spread around that may or may not be true? Could it be that the OP started the thread as just another attempt to drum up support for Robertson and the right wing of the GOP? I don't know, but if it's true, any criticism Robertson gets is well deserved. He is not representing true Christianity and I tremendously resent that. I'm tired of so many "Christians" claiming to be Christians but have no idea how to follow Christ's teachings. Thank God there are many who are true Christians who are coming out of the woodwork lately.

Your condemning of Robertson indicates you're not a true Christian yourself, by your own definition of what a true Christian is. Hypocrisy isn't pretty.

Anyone who would say such things as Robertson did about people born with a sexual orientation different from his should be ashamed.

All he did was quote the Bible. The Bible says homosexuality is a sin. Robertson said homosexuality is a sin. The person who should be ashamed is you. You twist his words out of context in order to insinuate prejudice on his part that he never expressed. Your own hypocrisy, bigotry, and intellectual dishonesty is on full display in this post and as someone who claims to be against such things, you should be ashamed of yourself.

I'll say this, too. I find it ironic that religious beliefs are completely protected from discrimination by law at the federal, state, county, and city level, while LBGT people are protected only piecemeal at various levels of government. Yet...LGBT are the way they are through no choice (it's innate and immutable), while religious beliefs are a choice. It seems backwards, though in reality, I think ALL should be protected by law.

It's not ironic. The nation was founded by people fleeing religious persecution. Of course they made certain to code complete religious freedom in their founding documents. If a group of homosexual people went off and founded their own nation on some island somewhere, you can be sure they'd be more concerned with freedom of sexuality than they would with other sorts of issues as well.

Free speech is another matter. Many are screaming free speech regarding Robertson, yet speech itself is not protected in the work place. A&E is or was Robertson's employer, and thus had every legal right to fire him.

And that's the only reasonable thing you said in your entire post.

So regarding the mayor, if she said anything critical of Robertson, I say good for her. I'm tired of some of my family members, friends, and associates being condemned by right wing conservatives. Enough is enough, and increasingly a lot of us aren't going to allow that to continue.

Oh, come off it.

Like conservatives haven't been suffering liberal slings and arrows for years.

I'm tired of my family members, friends, and associates being condemned by your ilk as well.

You're no martyr.

By the way, a lot of us are equally hacked at Robertson's racist remarks. They were horrid. Another good reason for A&E to fire him.

He didn't make any racist remarks. He said the black people he knew before civil rights were happy. That's not racism. It is ignorant, but not racist. He said absolutely nothing against black people. He didn't say they were lesser than white people, he didn't say they deserved less freedoms, or anything of the sort. He simply said the blacks he knew in his youth were happy. You need to learn that anything said you don't agree with isn't automatically discrimination. Get off your moral high horse. You look foolish up there.

[Kiovo]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

Its not the same thing! There is no moral equivalence. That is just absurd.

Saying that some one is an irrelevant ignorant fool for saying hateful racist and homophobic comments is not in the same field as the person who said the hateful stuff. Good lord, some of you are so transparent.

Wow, who died and made you in charge of what is the moral equivalence of what he said she said?? She could just state that his comments were irrelevant, but instead she name called like a little kid that got their feelings hurt.

The whole point of this thread was, she's a professional, she should act like one. He is a reality show person, he acted like one. I for one am not defending him or his comments but that's not the point of this thread.

[radiolibre99]

It's so hilarious watching cons squirm to defend a pretty ignorant guy who's proud if it.

Robertson is typical though. He makes racist and homophobic comments, then hides behind the Bible and acts like the back lash against his comments is just martyrdom.

Then other cons defend him but don't want to be pegged as homophobes and racists. It's just typical.

As to Ms. Parker, she was asked about the incident in an online publication and gave a candid answer. It wasn't at an official press conference. The idea that she has to be 100% professional 24/7 and cannot speak her mind is absurd. Also I think that complaining about her not being professional is just a ridiculous cop out by cons to deflect away from the comments made by Robertson.

And stop with this ridiculous sense that liberals jab cons all the time. How can you ppl not get it that's it your views against the poor, minorities, women, gays and calling liberals anti American that earn the jabs. Stop acting like its because you guys just think differently.

When a guy like Robertson says homosexuality is like beastiality or that blacks were happier back during segregation, or when Neal Boortz calls poor people human debris, or when Rush Limbaugh says crap about women, it will get called out for being ignorant views.

It's that simple. Cut the stuff about feeling persecuted out. If you don't want to be equated with being ignorant racists, elitists, or homophobes then don't say it or at least don't get mad and call for "civility" when your called out.

[TrapperJohn]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

This is just absurd. How can you even compare the two? They're not the same. Homophobic comments are not something that should be considered a legit opinion but prejudice drivel. It is irrelevant what some redneck said. The world doesn't revolve around their feelings.

I completely agree with her comments and am glad she spoke up.

This ridiculous feeling that conservative types are being discriminated against for their backwards views has just reached the point of banality. Its time that people just learn that racism, homophobia and xenophobia just won't cut it anymore.

So please stop painting it as though ppl are just hating others they disagree with. It's not that at all.

Redneck in this context is used in a purely derogatory manner.

Hate is hate. Defending her actions simply detracts from your credibility. I think his comments are ignorant, but I signed up in Uncle Sam's Navy to defend the rights of everyone - even ignorant rednecks. It isn't my place to judge. The mayor of Houston should have kept her mouth shut.

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by TrapperJohn

Redneck in this context is used in a purely derogatory manner.

Hate is hate. Defending her actions simply detracts from your credibility. I think his comments are ignorant, but I signed up in Uncle Sam's Navy to defend the rights of everyone - even ignorant rednecks. It isn't my place to judge. The mayor of Houston should have kept her mouth shut.

Enough with the high morality that plays no role in reality there. Another cop out to deflect from the real defamatory comments. It's not the same and you hiding behind the whole Navy thing is just fodder. His comments were ignorant and he's redneck even by his own admission. It being a derogatory comment doesn't equate it as hate.

If some KKK clown said interracial marriage could lead to beastiality, and someone called him a backwoods ignoramus, would you really get mad at the latter more so than the former for being as "civil" or for not defending his right to say it?

Seriously, this is getting extremely absurd and this high moralizing by cons is just a cop out due getting called out. Nothing more. Its transparent and rather desperate. They want to say hateful things because its being rebellious in their eyes but don't want to be called ignorant or racist afterward.

Hate is hate?? LOL.

[Ace_TX]

quick question

lets take religion bible etc out of this

if a non religious man/woman said they dont believe in homosexuality etc after being asked their opinion... would that person be "homophobic"?

is it not possible for a man to think that men were made to have sex with women? is his thinking flawed?