Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow, this one keeps going and going. I'll reiterate, that I believe the findings of the OP are correct. As the LGBT lobby has become more militant, of course people are turned off. People are turned off by any militant, extremist position and will have negative reactions as a result.
However, as a gay man, I can say the LGBT lobby does not represent me and does not do gay people many favors. The truth is, most Americans, regardless of region, political party or race could care less if people are gay or not. What they don't want is people making a big deal of it.
In fact, the only people making a big deal of being gay are the LGBT lobby and liberals, who like to take on a gay friend to feel better about themselves. People across this nation could care less and I can say I have NEVER felt discriminated against, anywhere I have ever lived or traveled.
Another way the left destroys everything it touches.
Educate all you want. That will always only be "opinion." Until the US Congress passes Federal legislation to add LGBT as a protected class under the Federal Civil Rights Act, LGBT will continue to have no legal rights.
Not for these reasons:
Currently, there are at least 20 states that have nondiscrimination laws on the books which protect lgbt citizen's rights across the board.
A few other states only protect lgb rights, with the exclusion of trans rights.
Some states only protect state employment rights of the gay community.
While it will take an enlightened act of congress to pass ENDA, its passage will only take place, due to both an educated congress and public. Congress members will be reluctant to distance their constituents, due to fear of political polarization.
Persistent education, relentless active political engagement, and continued cultural enrichment will most assuredly guarantee the passage of ENDA after the regressive Trump years (if we all survive as a species).
And what you REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE is that it IS the FACE of TODAY'S FEMINISM.
Show me a news outlet that features a feminist that is NOT:
1. Militant/angry
2. Calling for patriarchy to be abolished/saying men are the problem
3. Pro-abortion
4. Anti-marriage
You won't find one.
And yet you keep saying that well, it's only a small portion. Well, they WHERE IS EVERYBODY ELSE??? Why aren't all those non-aggressive, middle-of-the-road pro-marriage, anti-abortion women on the NEWS?
You are delusional in your interpretation of the movement and how it is defining itself, from not understanding the #metoo issue to saying that feminism is whatever you want it to be (yes, you said that).
Seriously? Saying #metoo is not part of the feminist agenda???
Moving on.
Because the squeaky wheel gets the grease. And because they don't want attention drawn to themselves, they prefer to keep the focus on the issues.. For those of us non-aggressive types, it's about the issues, not individuals.
Wow, this one keeps going and going. I'll reiterate, that I believe the findings of the OP are correct. As the LGBT lobby has become more militant, of course people are turned off. People are turned off by any militant, extremist position and will have negative reactions as a result.
However, as a gay man, I can say the LGBT lobby does not represent me and does not do gay people many favors. The truth is, most Americans, regardless of region, political party or race could care less if people are gay or not. What they don't want is people making a big deal of it.
In fact, the only people making a big deal of being gay are the LGBT lobby and liberals, who like to take on a gay friend to feel better about themselves. People across this nation could care less and I can say I have NEVER felt discriminated against, anywhere I have ever lived or traveled.
Another way the left destroys everything it touches.
You've conspicuously mentioned "the left" on several occasions here. I'm not really certain about what all "the left" entails, but what I do know for certain, is that if not for the Stonewall riots in NYC, back in the summer of 1969, the Gay Rights movement would have lost its initiation point. Police in NYC would most likely have continued brutalizing and arresting members of the LGBT community, just for being themselves. It was fairly routine back then to beat, arrest, and bash homosexuals and transgenders whenever and wherever the police had a whim to do so. Openly gay homosexuals were almost forbidden to show their faces in public and were frequently bashed publicly and banned from public establishments such as restaurants, bars, barbershops, movie theaters, etc...Employment and housing discrimination was the norm and openly practiced throughout our nation. MtF transgenders were often brutalized during arrests and then subsequently charged with "Female Impersonation", which usually required mandatory jail time, or a hefty fine, and sometimes both, if convicted.
After the Stonewall riots, gays began to become more politically active and vocal about their rights. The LGBT community became more of a cohesive social aggregate of a force to confront their adversaries. They in turn, gained much more respect and wider social acceptance. Subsequently, state laws began to change in favor of gay rights beginning in 1975 with the state of Pennsylvania. Laws have continued to change in favor of the LGBT community ever since the Stonewall Riots of 1969.
If this is "the left" of which you've mentioned, then you should thank your gay lucky stars for "the left"!
The Bible God - the 'God' of Christians - killed thousands whenever the fancy took him. He drowned them and he rained fire down upon them and boiled them alive. This mass slaughter included even tiny, innocent babies, and ...God had no moral conflict about that. Still want to compare (for the most part decent) human behavior with the sadistic behavior of the God of Christianity?
Oh come on, Rom. If you had unchecked, unlimited power and someone cheesed you off enough, tell me you wouldn't drop the hammer. We've all been there.
(For everyone else that doesn't know me, yes I'm kidding.)
You've conspicuously mentioned "the left" on several occasions here. I'm not really certain about what all "the left" entails, but what I do know for certain, is that if not for the Stonewall riots in NYC, back in the summer of 1969, the Gay Rights movement would have lost its initiation point. Police in NYC would most likely have continued brutalizing and arresting members of the LGBT community, just for being themselves. It was fairly routine back then to beat, arrest, and bash homosexuals and transgenders whenever and wherever the police had a whim to do so. Openly gay homosexuals were almost forbidden to show their faces in public and were frequently bashed publicly and banned from public establishments such as restaurants, bars, barbershops, movie theaters, etc...Employment and housing discrimination was the norm and openly practiced throughout our nation. MtF transgenders were often brutalized during arrests and then subsequently charged with "Female Impersonation", which usually required mandatory jail time, or a hefty fine, and sometimes both, if convicted.
After the Stonewall riots, gays began to become more politically active and vocal about their rights. The LGBT community became more of a cohesive social aggregate of a force to confront their adversaries. They in turn, gained much more respect and wider social acceptance. Subsequently, state laws began to change in favor of gay rights beginning in 1975 with the state of Pennsylvania. Laws have continued to change in favor of the LGBT community ever since the Stonewall Riots of 1969.
If this is "the left" of which you've mentioned, then you should thank your gay lucky stars for "the left"!
Currently, there are at least 20 states that have nondiscrimination laws on the books which protect lgbt citizen's rights across the board.
Irrelevant. Read the US Constitution's Supremacy Clause, Article VI. Local/State laws cannot supersede Constitutional Rights, which in part include Free Exercise (Religion) and Free Speech/Expression.
Additionally, that's why Federal Court upheld Pitt's expulsion of the FTM but still anatomically female transgender student: he/she has NO legal rights whatsoever.
You would think supposedly "educated" people would understand that, but clearly... they don't. /SMH
They could have civil unions and not co-opt marriage and shouldn't receive survivor benefits because that was intended primarily for grandma or someone who at least could bear and raise children in lieu of working.
So to clarify: Gays don't have other family members, no fathers, mothers, grandmothers, grandfathers, sisters, brothers. Gays can't have kids, why is that?
Wow, this one keeps going and going. I'll reiterate, that I believe the findings of the OP are correct. As the LGBT lobby has become more militant, of course people are turned off. People are turned off by any militant, extremist position and will have negative reactions as a result.
No, no, no, you're wrong. The LGBT lobby is all sunshine and rainbows, filled with happiness and joy. Everyone hates them because they're all knuckle-dragging, Rightwing KKK, Trumpsters who secretly hates gay people. The lobby's not doing anything to alienate anyone outside of this demographic...
Oh, well, would everyone look at that. A member of the "LGBT" lobby verbally a heckling for not standing up for transgender rights. Because apparently, women no longer have the luxury of fighting for their rights anymore. They must share the struggle with of gender-confused males who think they're females, too, as well as carry the burden.
This is the kind of stuff I was talking about in an earlier post. When you have people like this attacking women and feminists, demanding to share an equal spotlight with them when they have their own lobby, when you have people like this scapegoating blacks for a motion passing that they had nothing to do with, why on earth would I or anyone else who are the biggest targets of LGBT or be comfortable around them anymore? But no, people want to argue that if people are no longer comfortable, it's because they were secretly bigoted all along or they're not understanding that the extremists are just a fraction of the lobby.
No, they're not a fraction of the lobby anymore. They are the lobby. And all burying your heads in the sand and trying to pretend that everything is fine with the lobby, that it's all rainbows and sunshine and that it's everyone else's problem if they start to distance themselves is not going to do you any favors or make the issue disappear.
Why so many letters? And what on earth does “q” mean now? I remember when it was just LGB. I am tired of all these new terms. I’m literally losing track. Does anyone know what omnisexual means? I heard that recently and didn't know. The “non-binary” thing is confusing enough.
All these terms, all these reversing of genders yet it seems an identity is not being found with some of these people. There are some of that believe they are gay and then become trans and then go back to their original gender. It sounds like some of these folks have a borderline personality disorder.
"Non Binary". Binary means two. Non Binary is something other then two. Not really that confusing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
