It Can Happen only in Texas.
- Thread starter SirJosephPorter
- Start date
Yukon Jack, both Tyr and Petros are transplants form canada.com forum, same as Spade and me. When the forum was shutting down, a lot of them migrated over here.
Actually I was the first one to migrate, I looked the forum over and then told others about it. Now there are quite a few of us here.
Anyway, both Tyr and Petros used to be your nemesis at canada.com. I will let them decide if they want to reveal their canada.com identities to you (they did that when they joined the forum).
No...I'm just me. I'm not from that former forum...but looking forward
to future debates. There is a Thread on here somewhere where people
out themselves with insider clues...I don't remember the Threads name,
but someone here will.
Tyr and Petros used to be your nemesis at canada.com. I will let them decide if they want to reveal their canada.com identities to you
No way. Jack's gotta guess. Do a little research. Use some deductive reasoning....
uh.... did I say he's gotta guess:lol::lol::lol:??
SirJosephPorter, I admire your courage to admit that you were - in the distant past, on a different forum - another G&S character.
Too bad Tyr has no guts to do the same.
I am still active on that other forum, as I am on many other forums. It is NOT Townhall, although I visit it once in a while as well. I also visit virulent hate sites like Huffington Post and watch hate-spewing TV channels like MSNBC.
I like to get information from all sides, which is more than you left-wingers aspire to do before bashing anyone you disagree with but never have listened to.
There is no way you or any of your ilk EVER admit having listened to Rush Limbaugh, but of course, in your infinite, liberal wisdom you don't have to; you already know everything.
Yes, I missed you liberals. I run into liberals on American websites, and I must admit - reluctantly - that Canadian liberals, by and large, with few exceptions, are somewhat more civilized than their American counterparts.
Too bad Tyr has no guts to do the same.
I am still active on that other forum, as I am on many other forums. It is NOT Townhall, although I visit it once in a while as well. I also visit virulent hate sites like Huffington Post and watch hate-spewing TV channels like MSNBC.
I like to get information from all sides, which is more than you left-wingers aspire to do before bashing anyone you disagree with but never have listened to.
There is no way you or any of your ilk EVER admit having listened to Rush Limbaugh, but of course, in your infinite, liberal wisdom you don't have to; you already know everything.
Yes, I missed you liberals. I run into liberals on American websites, and I must admit - reluctantly - that Canadian liberals, by and large, with few exceptions, are somewhat more civilized than their American counterparts.
SirJosephPorter, you queried:
"So am I, Yukon Jack, so what is your point?"
My point was that if you and/or I made the same outrageous comments/demands, you and I would be declared racists, bigots, homophobes, ageists, Anti-semites, anti-Muslims, anti-feminists etc. etc. etc.
If you you can't see that, you seriously need help.
"So am I, Yukon Jack, so what is your point?"
My point was that if you and/or I made the same outrageous comments/demands, you and I would be declared racists, bigots, homophobes, ageists, Anti-semites, anti-Muslims, anti-feminists etc. etc. etc.
If you you can't see that, you seriously need help.
It's probably like "Welcome Canada.com" or something like that....
...or this: http://forums.canadiancontent.net/introductions/81574-former-canada-com-posters.html
Tyr, if you lived 50+ years away from the country where you were born and raised to the age of 17 and you did not have tears in your eyes when you heard the anthem of tghat country, I have nothing more to say to you. Obviously, you could not care less if yo ever heard "Oh Canada!" again. In a cheap, liberal fashion you stole images from another website in order to depict an unfavourable impression of someoner you do not know, but feel free to insult in the anonimity of the internet. I would like to call you a coward, but you would probably report my post as offensive.
But then I should not be surprised. Your loyalty is not to the country of your birth, nor the country of your upbringing, but to ideaolgy: Castro's socialism or Stalin's Communism.
But then I should not be surprised. Your loyalty is not to the country of your birth, nor the country of your upbringing, but to ideaolgy: Castro's socialism or Stalin's Communism.
"
You quote me but your response has nothing to do with my quote. I asked for links on stats as to how often these laws are applied. Gay hatred in the US is his claim, not mine. He's making the accusation. Am I supposed to provide that statistics to prove he's correct? Don't quote me and then reply with something else as it only creates confusion.
This thread is not about a case of discrimination against gays occurring in Texas. It's another unfounded attack on the US, this time the vehicle is gay sex.
The first sentence of his first post:
"Texas (George Bush’s Texas) is famous for its anti-homosexual hatred, they have laws on the books trashing homosexuality and they are not afraid to use them."
The last sentence of his first post:
"Anyway this reinforces the reputation of USA (and especially the Bible Belt) as being hostile to gays, of actively persecuting gays."
Quoting RanchHand Neither do most US states as you have pointed out. Most Americans would be suprised to hear this. I guess I'm pissing in the wind here, but could you provide links (other than telling me to go look it up) where I can see how often these laws are enforced? I would think virtually every company of more than a few employees will have codes of conduct or some such similar thing in place that prohibits discimination based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation.
But that's just my opinion, of course.
Its his claim that there are no such laws in Texas. You cannot put the burden of proof on someone to provide evidence of non-existence. In any case, earlier in this very thread he provided the links which he has used to defend his position:But that's just my opinion, of course.
Quoting SirJosephPorter This is what Wikipedia says about discrimination against gays.
The states banning sexual orientation discrimination in private sector employment are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin
Plus, this whole thread is about a case of discrimination against gays occurring in Texas. "The states banning sexual orientation discrimination in private sector employment are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin
You quote me but your response has nothing to do with my quote. I asked for links on stats as to how often these laws are applied. Gay hatred in the US is his claim, not mine. He's making the accusation. Am I supposed to provide that statistics to prove he's correct? Don't quote me and then reply with something else as it only creates confusion.
This thread is not about a case of discrimination against gays occurring in Texas. It's another unfounded attack on the US, this time the vehicle is gay sex.
The first sentence of his first post:
"Texas (George Bush’s Texas) is famous for its anti-homosexual hatred, they have laws on the books trashing homosexuality and they are not afraid to use them."
The last sentence of his first post:
"Anyway this reinforces the reputation of USA (and especially the Bible Belt) as being hostile to gays, of actively persecuting gays."
I don’t know about you, but I don’t have any such problem. While I wouldn’t say anything that is homophobic, anti-feminist etc., I have been quite scathing in my criticism of Islam in these forums. You joined here recently, but if you want to read the discussion about Islam go to the thread
“The improbability of God’. The thread is still alive. Over there I have been merciless in my criticism of Islam.
Even on this thread I have called Islam ‘a religion of hate towards women and homosexuals’. If anybody wants to call me anti-Muslim because of that, that is their problem, not mine (though anti-Islam is not the same as anti-Muslim).
So I call them as I see them. If somebody gets offended by my comments, that is just too bad.
I asked for links on stats as to how often these laws are applied.
Is that what you were asking? Well, you were not clear in your previous post. Anyway, that is a red herring.
When state passes an anti-discrimination law (banning discrimination against women, gays, blacks etc.), the state is telling the population at large that discrimination against minorities will not be tolerated. And that is important in protecting the minorities.
As to statistics, I haven’t looked into it, but that is immaterial in my opinion. It is the duty of the state to loudly proclaim that it will not tolerate discrimination against any minority. While that by itself does not end discrimination, it goes long way towards changing peoples’ attitude.
We have an example of that here in Canada. When gay marriage was legalized, people were split on the issue 50:50. However, once the Courts and the government legalized gay marriage, support for gay marriage kept increasing steadily, until currently it stands around 60%.
So state proclaiming that it is opposed to discrimination does lead to more enlightened attitude in the population.
However, when the state proclaims that it is OK to discriminate against homosexuals, when the state reluctantly stops prosecuting homosexuals (not because it thinks that is the wrong thing to do, but because its hand was forced by the Supreme Court), there is no hope that the attitude of population in general will change towards homosexuals.
Is that what you were asking? Well, you were not clear in your previous post. Anyway, that is a red herring.
When state passes an anti-discrimination law (banning discrimination against women, gays, blacks etc.), the state is telling the population at large that discrimination against minorities will not be tolerated. And that is important in protecting the minorities.
As to statistics, I haven’t looked into it, but that is immaterial in my opinion. It is the duty of the state to loudly proclaim that it will not tolerate discrimination against any minority. While that by itself does not end discrimination, it goes long way towards changing peoples’ attitude.
We have an example of that here in Canada. When gay marriage was legalized, people were split on the issue 50:50. However, once the Courts and the government legalized gay marriage, support for gay marriage kept increasing steadily, until currently it stands around 60%.
So state proclaiming that it is opposed to discrimination does lead to more enlightened attitude in the population.
However, when the state proclaims that it is OK to discriminate against homosexuals, when the state reluctantly stops prosecuting homosexuals (not because it thinks that is the wrong thing to do, but because its hand was forced by the Supreme Court), there is no hope that the attitude of population in general will change towards homosexuals.
I forgot to mention one more thing, Yukon Jack. I am strongly opposed to polygamy, I think polygamy degrades women and that it violates the Charter. I had quite passionate, heated discussion with another poster (Zzarchov) here a while ago.
It was a civil discussion, While metaphorically we were at each other’s throat, there was no name calling or personal insults. However, I was quite scathing in my criticism of polygamy. For that if somebody calls me anti-Mormon or anti-Muslim, that is just too bad.
So again, I call them as I see them.
"RanchHand, I don’t know if they were released on bail or not."
Your second paragraph in your first post that started this thread says they were.
You have failed to prove any of the assertions made by yourself below. In a nutshell, they are too over the top and can't be defended. No objective person would accept any of them as being accurate. Probably if each item were rewritten to be more reasonable, you might have some valid points. But as written, it sounds like it came from a zealot and not a mature, clear thinking individual.
Texas (George Bush’s Texas) is famous for its anti-homosexual hatred, they have laws on the books trashing homosexuality and they are not afraid to use them.
this reinforces the reputation of USA (and especially the Bible Belt) as being hostile to gays, of actively persecuting gays.
Just as we find the old morality difficult to understand (where people frowned upon telling a lie, or being rude to a woman, but stringing up a black man, lynching him was perfectly acceptable)
homophobia runs rampant in USA
protection for minorities is fairly weak in USA, minority rights can easily be taken away in many states.
Maybe so Zan, but USA is full of them (bigots). We have our share here in Canada of course, but nowhere near as many as they have in USA.
(at one time in the US) A woman, lawyer, woman doctor, woman scientist, woman engineer was consider something revolting, an abomination inspired by the Devil himself
US is still in the Stone Age as far as gay rights are concerned.
when it comes to gays,(the Catholic Church) is very much a hate group.
the gay dream of equality is still a long way off in USA.
Canadian population is at least as diverse as US population. Toronto is fully as diverse as New York.
The problem here is the innate conservatism of American people. Diversity of population, size of population, number of states etc. and only of marginal importance.
I assume there is absolutely no prospect of passing anti-discrimination legislation (in Texas). The legacy of the Texas sodomy Law will remain with Texas for a long time to come.
gay rights in Texas are practically non existent.
Your second paragraph in your first post that started this thread says they were.
You have failed to prove any of the assertions made by yourself below. In a nutshell, they are too over the top and can't be defended. No objective person would accept any of them as being accurate. Probably if each item were rewritten to be more reasonable, you might have some valid points. But as written, it sounds like it came from a zealot and not a mature, clear thinking individual.
Texas (George Bush’s Texas) is famous for its anti-homosexual hatred, they have laws on the books trashing homosexuality and they are not afraid to use them.
this reinforces the reputation of USA (and especially the Bible Belt) as being hostile to gays, of actively persecuting gays.
Just as we find the old morality difficult to understand (where people frowned upon telling a lie, or being rude to a woman, but stringing up a black man, lynching him was perfectly acceptable)
homophobia runs rampant in USA
protection for minorities is fairly weak in USA, minority rights can easily be taken away in many states.
Maybe so Zan, but USA is full of them (bigots). We have our share here in Canada of course, but nowhere near as many as they have in USA.
(at one time in the US) A woman, lawyer, woman doctor, woman scientist, woman engineer was consider something revolting, an abomination inspired by the Devil himself
US is still in the Stone Age as far as gay rights are concerned.
when it comes to gays,(the Catholic Church) is very much a hate group.
the gay dream of equality is still a long way off in USA.
Canadian population is at least as diverse as US population. Toronto is fully as diverse as New York.
The problem here is the innate conservatism of American people. Diversity of population, size of population, number of states etc. and only of marginal importance.
I assume there is absolutely no prospect of passing anti-discrimination legislation (in Texas). The legacy of the Texas sodomy Law will remain with Texas for a long time to come.
gay rights in Texas are practically non existent.
You have failed to prove any of the assertions made by yourself below. In a nutshell, they are too over the top and can't be defended.
That is your opinion RanchHand, and you are entitled to it. It won’t surprise you that I disagree.
That is your opinion RanchHand, and you are entitled to it. It won’t surprise you that I disagree.
I also visit virulent hate sites like Huffington Post and watch hate-spewing TV channels like MSNBC.
Just as I thought. A masochist through and through
I must say Tyr, considering how unhappy Yukon was with liberals over at canada.com forum, it is surprising that he signed up here. He must have looked at the forum before signing up, and he must have realized that most of the crowd which was thorn in the flesh for him over at canada.com has signed up here.
Then why sign up here, unless he misses us? Anyway, welcome Yukon Jack. I trust we will be as irritating to you here as we were in the other forum.