“Congratulations to them both...and though it's a long time in coming, thanks for your service. The state which chose to discriminate against you for these many years didn't bat an eyelash when it sent you to risk your life. Be well and continue to have a wonderful life together, now officially wed.”
gaydood on Jun 1, 2014 at 16:10:36
“FANNED FOR THAT AND YUR BIO, ON THE LAST DAY OF HP !”
“Great article Mr. Watson. As an aside, I'm a standardized test writer, and "all of the above" is poor form for a multiple choice item. It introduces more error than information into the item. Given the nature of Van Zant's m*ronic comments, perhaps it fits even more than usual.”
“You've taken what the perpetrator suggested happened as fact and even further exaggerated it. Groped? Hardly. But we really don't know what the physical contact was, and certainly cannot consider it a "scandal." I won't put words in your mouth but I'll throw it back at you. I would contend that the problem was in fact, the reality of two men (or women) that caused the problem for the owners and in my explanation I will use an example of holding hands. Men and women hold hands in restaurants ALL THE TIME, redneck and non-redneck. Would the owners have freaked out on a male/female couple? I reckon no. But two boys. Almost certainly. That is speculation, of course, but it comes from experience. It's a double standard experienced frequently. Why do I as a gay male have to be aware of my surroundings while a straight couple does not? Answer that one in a way that doesn't expose the bigotry please. Do straight couples hold hands in restaurants or on the street to create scandals or just because they like each other? As a gay person, I do it for the same reason, yet I am judged to be "making a statement". This is just holding hands....don't get me started on a kiss.... When gay people have the same meaningful ability to express themselves as straight people, you can talk to me about "scandals."”
“So who is defensive here? Stand by what you wrote. Whatever. I said nothing about race relations at all. Nothing. Zero. We can disagree on homophobia. I indicated that's another matter. You want to talk race relations? Sure we can. On that note, I'll be happy to discuss the idea that europe is no better off than the US and in some countries worse. I travel a great deal too. My point is, read, not read into what you want to see. You are correct, there is no utopia, and I never implied there was, but I did suggest that on the front of emotional development in the area about which the article was written, many Euro countries are far ahead, and I stand by my actual comments, not those implied by others.”
PleaseUnderstand on May 27, 2014 at 00:49:49
“LOL. You continue to argue because I pointed out your comments. I stand by what I wrote and put in race relations as it falls into intolerance in the US. There are some other posters who think the same as you do that Europe is far more advanced with race, sexual orientation, and many other topics.
Why you've decided to be insulting and rude over a simple discussion, is beyond me. You implied Europe was better in dealing with these sorts of things and I assured you that was not the case. So why are you getting up in arms over my comment. If you want to prove I am wrong, you can do so civilly without trying to bite my head off. You said what you said and no one is saying you should take it back. I merely pointed out what your comment implied.
“You need to read your history of the "time honored" institution of marriage back through and before the middle ages. There have been and continue to be many, many changes both in kind and intent. Please don't try to suggest your faux-50's style Donna Reed life is the reality of 100s of years. It just isn't so. Hate has kept loving same sex couples apart for years. That hate is traditionally based in religion and has no basis in the state. There is no compelling reason for the state to keep a consenting adult couple like this from marrying. It is just another change to an every changing conception of marriage. The state has compelling reasons for preventing marriages between family members (genetics), children (abuse) and other silly things - so please don't throw those tired old lame suggestions up either.”
“Gotta admit, I don't get the cake thing, but whatever, it's their party. Man, the haters on here are sure out in numbers today. Sad. Not sure why folks can't be happy for others' success. Perhaps they are just bitter failures who need to be negative in order to make their own poor excuses for lives feel a few ounces better. Truly sad.”
The Great Intellectual on May 27, 2014 at 21:41:42
“It is not one negative event. It is the attacks on the Boy Scouts labeling tens of thousands of children as "bigots" because of adult Scoutmaster decisions. It is the attacks on Chick Fil A because their owner is a devout Christian and supports his religious form of marriage. It is the attacks on Monzilla CEO for donating a lonely $1,000 to Prop 8 even though you all ignore Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton who during that time were running for President and saying they believe marriage is between a man and woman. It is your attacks on Target who is a gay friendly company but because they donated to some Christian Groups that support traditional marriage you wanted to destroy them. It is the Benham Brothers who are extremely charitable and help many poor families with the money they made you all got them fired from a show and many poor deserving families out to dry because of their religious views.
I used to be a gay rights support so call me names all you want. Go read my past post I was for equality and gay adoption but the more and more intolerance I see from the LGBT Community makes me rethink made me change my positions.
Don't feel sorry for me feel sorry for the people who lose their jobs with little sympathy because of some the LGBT Community started. I guess thank GLAAD. Equality means equal treatment if religious folks can be fired so can LGBT.”
“Unscientific but seems to me there is a great focus on visual orientation as a male issue in general. Take a look at newscasters. There are exceptions to every rule, but, men can come out looking like anything they wish whereas women must largely fit some silly stereotype of body size, shape, etc. Why? To appeal to other women? The problem may be magnified in male same-sex relationships, simply because both are men, but I can't see how that makes gay males more superficial...just men. All that said, stereotypes are a nasty thing to perpetuate.”
“There are always nuances. Whenever equality and justice is on the move, setbacks are inevitable. We had a war to save slavery. We had the governor on the steps of elementary schools to save segregation. Hate and stupidity always makes a last gasp before they ultimately crumble before the march of progress. Why must gay marriage and abortion be a give and take? Since the advent of the GLBT rights movement there have been dozens of setbacks where we have lost rights - take the whole constitutional amendment movement. The same is true of the women's reproductive rights movement that has taken place over the same period. Both suffer from the scourge of America - religion. Eventually, however, when enough GLBTs have died in hate crimes and women have died in back alleys, things will move forward. Religion is making its last gasp. It's painful and their is nothing more dangerous than a dying animal. The next generation will ultimately not tolerate such nonsense running its life, thankfully, superstar popes notwithstanding. Now the trick is to get that generation interested enough to get engaged with the process.”
redtail151 on May 10, 2014 at 14:17:34
“That you equate the desire of a man to mutilate himself to appear as a woman with human slavery is disgusting.
As for what is making its last gasp, it is western civilization. You write as if this is the first time a society has gone don this path of "progress." This is hardly the first time. It never ends well for the society in question. As for the Catholic Church, there has never been a time in its history when it had more members. It is exploding throughout the Southern Hemisphere, and growing throughout Asia, including China. History will indeed write which one became a footnote, the Church or the secular West. I know where I am putting my money...”
“Hmmm. I don't remember saying anything about race relations or homophobia in my post, but then I wrote it so I actually read it. Gosh. Want to comment? Best to actually read what the person wrote first and then respond.”
PleaseUnderstand on May 25, 2014 at 00:00:36
“Sorry but you need to be better at not implying things in your post and then getting defensive when someone calls you out. You said "Among the western industrialized nations, it is in these hypocritically puritanical United States that touching is immediately sexual." You also stated "But if two men hold hands in the States, it's a huge deal and they MUST be gay? (So what if they were...but that's another matter). Foolish, archaic macho stereotypes. In many respects in the emotional development department the Euros and a few others are far ahead of us Yanks."
You're wrong. I travel a lot for my job and this is not common among other westernized countries with heterosexual males. You implied other countries in particular Europe is far ahead of the United States. Its not true and I stand by what I wrote. Quit being so defensive.”
“You hit the nail on the head. Among the western industrialized nations, it is in these hypocritically puritanical United States that touching is immediately sexual. Heck, a teacher can't pat a kid on the back in school anymore without fearing a sexual battery charge. All over the western world men do precisely what you say and it is entirely asexual. The cuddling is emotional and physical. Women do it, why not men? Why is it that when two women hold hands in public it's cool. They may be friends or girlfriends, but it doesn't matter. But if two men hold hands in the States, it's a huge deal and they MUST be gay? (So what if they were...but that's another matter). Foolish, archaic macho stereotypes. In many respects in the emotional development department the Euros and a few others are far ahead of us Yanks.”
PleaseUnderstand on May 3, 2014 at 07:10:04
“Why do some American's believe Europe and other countries are so far ahead of the curve in regards to race relations and homophobia? Its baffling as its simply not true. Many countries are just better at hiding it than the US. There is no utopia ideal and people need to get that out of there heads.”
“I'm not projecting, you are ignoring and implying that so-called "facts" are always obvious and superficial. For example, kindly answer this question: If this policy of only holding legal weddings were in place, it seems a most simple of policies. When a person comes to book any half-intelligent clerk would know to say no to a birthday party, anniversary, or anything else that wasn't a legal wedding in TN. So why didn't he? If this policy were in place, that is. Either the person who took the couple around was a complete idi*t, completely ign*rant of the policies, or low and behold a new strict policy appeared from the owner to deal with this "situation." "Oh gosh, we have a policy." So which is it? How could an employee be this ign*rant if he or she is in charge of showing couples around? Why would the owner entrust him or her with that responsibility if he/she is that unclear? There is more to the story than simply "there is a policy." When did this policy appear, for example. Now if you look at the Mint Springs Farm website it is clear it is a wedding venue. The clerk should have known they didn't do commitment ceremonies. But he didn't. He agreed. Then the owner backed out. He must be a pretty bad employee to be in charge and know nothing about his venue that he couldn't get off the website.”
“Several problems with your reading of the article. First and foremost, the couple plans a "same sex commitment ceremony" not a marriage. HUGE difference. Thus your argument regarding TN's prohibition of marriage is irrelevant. Prior to marriage being legal anywhere and prior to bigoted constitutional amendments commitment ceremonies were common. The prohibition on marriage bears absolutely no relationship to this situation. By your logic I should not even be allowed to hold a party to celebrate my same sex marriage. Suppose, for example, I chose to live in that backward state but was married in a more progressive part of the country. Why shouldn't I be allowed to return home and hold a reception with my friends and family? The courts will soon rule TN must recognize my marriage per the US Constitution, so why shouldn't I be able to hold my reception at this venue? Clearly the venue would find this just as offensive and deny me my opportunity. Slippery slope. There's just no justification for hate and bigotry. Lipstick on a sick pig my friend.”
Spacial Jesus on Apr 29, 2014 at 18:16:19
“Okay i don't know how many replies like this i've received and how many times i have replied to it. Show me anywhere in this story which i have read twice now from two different sources, that states anything bigoted towards this couple. They simply stated, the venue holds wedding ceremonies and the state has banned gay marriage, so they can't accommodate the ceremony. Nothing about homosexuality being wrong, nothing about their views on the matter (that have no official stance on gay marriage that noted).
What I am sick of, and this happens a lot in the media, is these speculative assertions of fact. If someone says "no" to someone else you can't assume anything behind their intention, if you are, you're simply projecting your own insecurities. Could these people be hiding behind the law for bigoted reasons, yes, but the same is true that they simply can't accommodate a ceremony that equate to a wedding because it's at the time illegal. No one knows their intentions unless they state it, and if you can pull any qoute from this story as proof i'd be glad to read it. Which is the difference between this case and several of the other cases highlighted in the story to be contrasted against. The difference is those stories had actual proof that it was about sexuality.
I don't do Lynch mobs mentality, I look for facts, and nothing about this story screams the Farm is homophobic, so stop projecting.”
“Organized religion = 3000 years of bigotry, discrimination, and intolerance. This is just the latest example. What else is new? If they had there way GLBTs would be drawn and quartered. Religions are big on bumper sticker campaigns. How about this one "Keep christ in christianity." Maybe there'd be a side of love with that meal of dogmatic hatred.”
“Fill your heads with myths about how religions are filled with love and compassion if you wish, but 3000+ years of history are on my side. Organized religion and its promulgators = institutionalized hate, bigotry, and intolerance of all kinds en masse. My apologies to those attending such institutions who do love and feel compassion for their fellow human beings, but please note, your support for these organizations simply continues the ability for these detestable groups to exist and spread their corrupted messages. Want to see change happen, tear down the marble altars and build thoughtful faiths based on that love and compassion you talk about all the time.”
“The BSA can do as they please as is their right. By the same token, they should be banned from public schools and taxpayer supported institutions, be stripped of their tax status, and be seen for what they are, like churches: bigoted, filled with hate, and discrimination based on false gods.”
Asmodean1 on Apr 22, 2014 at 12:01:48
“Although I would normally completely agree with your comment, this one time I cannot. --- "United Methodist Church made headlines for standing by an openly gay Scoutmaster". Unbelievable as it is to me... A religious organization actually stood up and followed the teachings of their deity. For once the core message of Jesus was actually noticed and the bigotry of all the rest ignored. Kudos to Seattle's Rainier Beach United Methodist Church parish.”
Apr 21, 2014 at 11:16:59
“Thank you. Few of my personal favourite television shows or movies make it. Too cerebral, too boring, too whatever. The ones that make it are usually the silliest, juvenile tripe that appeals to I can't imagine who. Look at the appeal of shows like Survivor over scripted drama. Cheap to make, rakes in the viewers. Indie films and foreign cinema at least offer some hope to those of us not always interested in mainstream profit mongering.”
artist-53 on Apr 21, 2014 at 11:50:22
“Many films and TV programing are specifically made to do one thing, target the easily excitable emotions of predictable Americans.
No thought process was involved what so ever on the part of the viewer. It's a cheap formula that is used to increase profits only. It's entertaining only to those with limited cerebral abilities.
Sort of like holding an object that shimmers in front of them, and like all good Pavlovian subjects, they intrinsically respond accordingly. Then ask those just what exactly it was that made them decide it was a great film to see. To which they then tell their friends to see as well. Listen to the answers. They too are void of any substance.
And not a brain cell was used to interpret a film, and that intrinsic automatic response is used as a measure to decide wether a film is good or not. It's cheap, ridiculous and shallow. Which doesn't reflect well on this society or the entertainment industry. It's all just based on a formula with built in predictable responses.”
Apr 20, 2014 at 07:55:41
HuffPost Live 321
“Why is this in "Gay Voices?" The charge of the attorney is sexual assault. It is not a GLBT issue. If there was assault, it was assault, and criminal. Unless HP intends on creating a "Straight Voices" and intends on suggesting that male on female assault is now a sexually oriented crime rather than a crime, to place this under Gay Voices perpetuates a negative stereotype that gay men prey on boys. HP, please move this to the appropriate news section if you intend on reporting unsubstantiated charges.”
loveis22984 on Apr 20, 2014 at 19:53:51
“You are having an argument with yourself because all the opposing views are in your head. it's in gay voice because the allegations are sexual in nature and took place between the members of the same sex, not because of the age of the victims.”