Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,917 
|
Post by Tennesseer on Dec 22, 2013 12:17:05 GMT -5
This is why some of us are sick of this bullshit......
Danny LeClair and Aubrey Loots have always done things with panache, since the first time they met on a dance floor fogged up with dry ice.
“I couldn’t see my hand in front of my face,” Leclair, 45, recalled. Loots laughed: “By the time the smoke parted, we were facing each other.”
When the opportunity came to recognize their 12-year-relationship in front of millions of people, the two naturally went for it. On New Year’s Day, Leclair and Loots will get married atop a 15-foot-high, cake-shaped float in the 125th Tournament of Roses Parade.
A live gay wedding is a departure for the Pasadena parade, which is best known for ornate floats, the blare of marching bands and the teenage Rose Queen and her Royal Court. But Larry Wilson, whose grandfather and uncle were presidents of the Tournament of Roses, said it demonstrates how mainstream gay marriage has become.
- See more at: www.aidshealth.org/archives/17586#sthash.xa6g32T7.dpufMaybe we're just getting tired of having the gay community rubbing their genitals in our faces. And maybe gays have had enough of being discriminated against and marginalized all these padt years. One does not push back without first having been pushed. By the way-move your face (or just close your eyes). |
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on Dec 22, 2013 12:17:52 GMT -5
I haven't experienced having the gay community rubbing their genitals in my face.
Just watch the Tournament of Roses parade then and enjoy.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770 
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Dec 22, 2013 12:19:02 GMT -5
This is why some of us are sick of this bullshit......
Danny LeClair and Aubrey Loots have always done things with panache, since the first time they met on a dance floor fogged up with dry ice.
“I couldn’t see my hand in front of my face,” Leclair, 45, recalled. Loots laughed: “By the time the smoke parted, we were facing each other.”
When the opportunity came to recognize their 12-year-relationship in front of millions of people, the two naturally went for it. On New Year’s Day, Leclair and Loots will get married atop a 15-foot-high, cake-shaped float in the 125th Tournament of Roses Parade.
A live gay wedding is a departure for the Pasadena parade, which is best known for ornate floats, the blare of marching bands and the teenage Rose Queen and her Royal Court. But Larry Wilson, whose grandfather and uncle were presidents of the Tournament of Roses, said it demonstrates how mainstream gay marriage has become.
- See more at: www.aidshealth.org/archives/17586#sthash.xa6g32T7.dpuf
Maybe we're just getting tired of having the gay community rubbing their genitals in our faces.
Leclair and Loots are so excited they’ve set up a Facebook page for their upcoming nuptials, for which they only have to buy suits. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation is doubling as wedding planner, and taking care of everything else. - See more at: www.aidshealth.org/archives/17586#sthash.xa6g32T7.dpuf
Wow... the AIDS foundation is taking care of it for them. Great..... Who offered the opportunity to these two gentlemen to get married on a float in the Rose Parade? Was it the Rose Parade planning organization? If so, that's not the gay community. I'd imagine many heterosexual couples would accept if offered something like this. I don't know if it's ever happened before. Do you? |
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,469
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 22, 2013 12:19:11 GMT -5
... Wow... the AIDS foundation is taking care of it for them. Great..... Being in a monogamous relationship, gay or straight, is a great defense against a disease like AIDS. Makes sense to support marriage. |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,917
|
Post by Tennesseer on Dec 22, 2013 12:19:50 GMT -5
I haven't experienced having the gay community rubbing their genitals in my face.Just watch the Tournament of Roses parade then and enjoy. Gay sex roses and marigolds? |
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on Dec 22, 2013 12:22:35 GMT -5
And maybe gays have had enough of being discriminated against and marginalized all these padt years. One does not push back without first having been pushed.
Push all you want, but the fact remains that the vast majority of the planet is not gay. Nobody is advocating discrimination, but I don't feel that I have to have sexuality of ANY kind highlighted in any public celebration or event. You have every right to be gay without fear of recrimination. On that we agree. Enjoy.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,917
|
Post by Tennesseer on Dec 22, 2013 12:22:46 GMT -5
This is why some of us are sick of this bullshit......
Danny LeClair and Aubrey Loots have always done things with panache, since the first time they met on a dance floor fogged up with dry ice.
“I couldn’t see my hand in front of my face,” Leclair, 45, recalled. Loots laughed: “By the time the smoke parted, we were facing each other.”
When the opportunity came to recognize their 12-year-relationship in front of millions of people, the two naturally went for it. On New Year’s Day, Leclair and Loots will get married atop a 15-foot-high, cake-shaped float in the 125th Tournament of Roses Parade.
A live gay wedding is a departure for the Pasadena parade, which is best known for ornate floats, the blare of marching bands and the teenage Rose Queen and her Royal Court. But Larry Wilson, whose grandfather and uncle were presidents of the Tournament of Roses, said it demonstrates how mainstream gay marriage has become.
- See more at: www.aidshealth.org/archives/17586#sthash.xa6g32T7.dpuf
Maybe we're just getting tired of having the gay community rubbing their genitals in our faces.
Leclair and Loots are so excited they’ve set up a Facebook page for their upcoming nuptials, for which they only have to buy suits. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation is doubling as wedding planner, and taking care of everything else. - See more at: www.aidshealth.org/archives/17586#sthash.xa6g32T7.dpuf
Wow... the AIDS foundation is taking care of it for them. Great..... Who offered the opportunity to these two gentlemen to get married on a float in the Rose Parade? Was it the Rose Parade planning organization? If so, that's not the gay community. I'd imagine many heterosexual couples would accept if offered something like this. I don't know if it's ever happened before. Do you? How odd. I thought same-sex marriage was legal ìn California. And apparently it is now legal in Utah of all places (at least for the time being). |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,917
|
Post by Tennesseer on Dec 22, 2013 12:24:22 GMT -5
And maybe gays have had enough of being discrimin pesce.nated against and marginalized all these padt years. One does not push back without first having been pushed.Push all you want, but the fact remains that the vast majority of the planet is not gay. Nobody is advocating discrimination, but I don't feel that I have to have sexuality of ANY kind highlighted in any public celebration or event. You have every right to be gay without fear of recrimination. On that we agree. Enjoy. The vast majority of the planet are not Jews either. Yet they still have rights to exist ìn peace too. |
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on Dec 22, 2013 12:25:51 GMT -5
Who offered the opportunity to these two gentlemen to get married on a float in the Rose Parade? Was it the Rose Parade planning organization? If so, that's not the gay community. I'd imagine many heterosexual couples would accept if offered something like this. I don't know if it's ever happened before. Do you?
Read the entire post. It's the AIDS foundation float. Just what I want in my Parade of Roses.....
|
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on Dec 22, 2013 12:28:18 GMT -5
And maybe gays have had enough of being discrimin pesce.nated against and marginalized all these padt years. One does not push back without first having been pushed.Push all you want, but the fact remains that the vast majority of the planet is not gay. Nobody is advocating discrimination, but I don't feel that I have to have sexuality of ANY kind highlighted in any public celebration or event. You have every right to be gay without fear of recrimination. On that we agree. Enjoy. The vast majority of the planet are not Jews either. Yet they still have rights to exist ìn peace too. I'm not debating anybody's right to exist in peace. You're getting a little off the path with Jews now......... |
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Dec 22, 2013 12:29:11 GMT -5
Who offered the opportunity to these two gentlemen to get married on a float in the Rose Parade? Was it the Rose Parade planning organization? If so, that's not the gay community. I'd imagine many heterosexual couples would accept if offered something like this. I don't know if it's ever happened before. Do you?Read the entire post. It's the AIDS foundation float. Just what I want in my Parade of Roses..... Why wouldn't the AIDS foundation be free to have a float in the parade? Other foundations have floats in the parade. Some of those foundations might represent things with which I don't agree. That doesn't mean they shouldn't have a float in the parade. Other people (not me) might really like those floats, just as some might really like the AIDS foundation float. My wishes are not paramount and they shouldn't be. It's not MY parade. |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,917
|
Post by Tennesseer on Dec 22, 2013 12:29:32 GMT -5
Who offered the opportunity to these two gentlemen to get married on a float in the Rose Parade? Was it the Rose Parade planning organization? If so, that's not the gay community. I'd imagine many heterosexual couples would accept if offered something like this. I don't know if it's ever happened before. Do you?Read the entire post. It's the AIDS foundation float. Just what I want in my Parade of Roses..... Excuse yourself from the room and go take a leak when the float ìs on your screen. You won't have to look at the float. Or use the porta-pottie at the parade if you are attending. Win-win. |
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Dec 22, 2013 12:31:19 GMT -5
When was that video made? I ask that because scuttlebutt on the Internet says that Phil Robertson had lots of videos out there expressing his views long before A&E hired him. If they truly had an issue with him hey wouldn't have hired him. What they had an issue with is the backlash from the gay community, which makes no sense since they aren't suck dynasty's can base I didn't do any research outside if the interview that caused the uproar. I have no problems wih anything he said in that specific interview and that was the interview that caused the backlash. The video was made in 2010 and the interview was based on that video (of a speech he made at a wild game supper in the Berean Baptist church in Pennsylvania). Since the contents of the video (which was uncovered by GQ) were the subject of the interview, the video becomes very relevant, IMO. It's quite long and I don't have time to finish it now, but I'll watch it all before I comment further. I want to know what the man actually said, not what someone else says he said. I don't disagree hat it is relevant. My point was this shows that Phil Robertson has long had these very public views yet A&E chose to hire him. They only had an issue when the gay community got up in arms. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 10:59:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2013 12:33:22 GMT -5
Which means they have protection is some states. That is more than can be said for holding Christian views and values. Bullshit. He wasn't suspended for his beliefs. He was suspended for how he represented himself as a reflection if his employer. He wasn't jailed. He wasn't persecuted. His employer decided to distance itself, at least temporarily, from his remarks... I don't get it? He can say what he wants, but the gays and those groups of gays shouldn't be able to say what they want? .... |
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on Dec 22, 2013 12:34:27 GMT -5
Excuse yourself from the room and go take a leak when the float ìs on your screen. You won't have to look at the float. Or use the porta-pottie at the parade if you are attending. Win-win.
Just let us know what you'll be wearing so we can pick you out from the others. That way we can put a face on all of these profound posting that we read from you Tenn....
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,917
|
Post by Tennesseer on Dec 22, 2013 12:34:25 GMT -5
The video was made in 2010 and the interview was based on that video (of a speech he made at a wild game supper in the Berean Baptist church in Pennsylvania). Since the contents of the video (which was uncovered by GQ) were the subject of the interview, the video becomes very relevant, IMO. It's quite long and I don't have time to finish it now, but I'll watch it all before I comment further. I want to know what the man actually said, not what someone else says he said. I don't disagree hat it is relevant. My point was this shows that Phil Robertson has long had these very public views yet A&E chose to hire him. They only had an issue when the gay community got up in arms. Because of a poor choice of words. If Robertson should be free to express his opinions, then so should the gay (and non-gay) communities. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 10:59:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2013 12:35:44 GMT -5
The video was made in 2010 and the interview was based on that video (of a speech he made at a wild game supper in the Berean Baptist church in Pennsylvania). Since the contents of the video (which was uncovered by GQ) were the subject of the interview, the video becomes very relevant, IMO. It's quite long and I don't have time to finish it now, but I'll watch it all before I comment further. I want to know what the man actually said, not what someone else says he said. I don't disagree hat it is relevant. My point was this shows that Phil Robertson has long had these very public views yet A&E chose to hire him. They only had an issue when the gay community got up in arms. Which is their right to free speech, no? I love how people cry persecution and in the same breath say people shouldn't have rights... |
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Dec 22, 2013 12:37:05 GMT -5
When was that video made? I ask that because scuttlebutt on the Internet says that Phil Robertson had lots of videos out there expressing his views long before A&E hired him. If they truly had an issue with him hey wouldn't have hired him. What they had an issue with is the backlash from the gay community, which makes no sense since they aren't suck dynasty's can base I didn't do any research outside if the interview that caused the uproar. I have no problems wih anything he said in that specific interview and that was the interview that caused the backlash. The video was made in 2010 and the interview was based on that video (of a speech he made at a wild game supper in the Berean Baptist church in Pennsylvania). Since the contents of the video (which was uncovered by GQ) were the subject of the interview, the video becomes very relevant, IMO. It's quite long and I don't have time to finish it now, but I'll watch it all before I comment further. I want to know what the man actually said, not what someone else says he said. Really? I read most of the GQ article from their website and don't remember the author referencing any specific video. From what I recall of events Phil was suspended about a day before the video started circulating. I could have missed something though. |
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Dec 22, 2013 12:37:46 GMT -5
Sounds like it was GQ that "got up in arms" after their discovery of the video in question. They published their article and it went viral. There was a lot more than the gay community raising sand over this. It's not only the gay community that objects, and objects rather vociferously from what I've read.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,917
|
Post by Tennesseer on Dec 22, 2013 12:37:57 GMT -5
Excuse yourself from the room and go take a leak when the float ìs on your screen. You won't have to look at the float. Or use the porta-pottie at the parade if you are attending. Win-win.Just let us know what you'll be wearing so we can pick you out from the others. That way we can put a face on all of these profound posting that we read from you Tenn.... I will be on top of the cake wearing just a fuschia thong (with my 'junk' hanging out the side). |
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Dec 22, 2013 12:39:22 GMT -5
The video was made in 2010 and the interview was based on that video (of a speech he made at a wild game supper in the Berean Baptist church in Pennsylvania). Since the contents of the video (which was uncovered by GQ) were the subject of the interview, the video becomes very relevant, IMO. It's quite long and I don't have time to finish it now, but I'll watch it all before I comment further. I want to know what the man actually said, not what someone else says he said. Really? I read most of the GQ article from their website and don't remember the author referencing any specific video. From what I recall of events Phil was suspended about a day before the video started circulating. I could have missed something though. From what I can find, the reason GQ did the article was because of the video that they had unearthed. I'm not anywhere close to finishing my research into this mess, though. |
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Dec 22, 2013 12:39:37 GMT -5
Which means they have protection is some states. That is more than can be said for holding Christian views and values. Bullshit. He wasn't suspended for his beliefs. He was suspended for how he represented himself as a reflection if his employer. He wasn't jailed. He wasn't persecuted. His employer decided to distance itself, at least temporarily, from his remarks... I don't get it? He can say what he wants, but the gays and those groups of gays shouldn't be able to say what they want? .... Everyone should be free to say what they want. A&E caved to pressure from the gay community and pit him on hiatus. Which I find hysterical because it isn't like the gays would be a large part of his audience. I hate that the networks are so afraid of minorities these days (being homosexual IS still a minority) that everyone has to walk on eggshells wih what they say. I say let the markets decide. If his fan base is outraged, they will stop watching and the show will go away in its own. But to pressured by GLAD because get don't like his views is ridiculous. No different than if a bunch of conservative Christians tried to have a show taken off because they didn't like that one of the characters was flamboyantly gay. I think both of those situations are wrong. |
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Dec 22, 2013 12:40:45 GMT -5
I don't disagree hat it is relevant. My point was this shows that Phil Robertson has long had these very public views yet A&E chose to hire him. They only had an issue when the gay community got up in arms. Because of a poor choice of words. If Robertson should be free to express his opinions, then so should the gay (and non-gay) communities. I agree they should express themselves. That is not the same as putting pressure on a network to fire him |
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Dec 22, 2013 12:43:14 GMT -5
I don't disagree hat it is relevant. My point was this shows that Phil Robertson has long had these very public views yet A&E chose to hire him. They only had an issue when the gay community got up in arms. Which is their right to free speech, no? I love how people cry persecution and in the same breath say people shouldn't have rights... Where did I say people shouldn't have rights? I think both sides should have rights. I don't think either side should be persecuted. I am getting sick and tired of only one side being able to express themselves, though |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,917
|
Post by Tennesseer on Dec 22, 2013 12:43:19 GMT -5
Because of a poor choice of words. If Robertson should be free to express his opinions, then so should the gay (and non-gay) communities. I agree they should express themselves. That is not the same as putting pressure on a network to fire him Yet his supporters are putting pressure toon a network take him off suspension. It works both ways, as it should. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 10:59:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2013 12:43:24 GMT -5
Is A&E = Duck Dynasty Network? .... You think that's the only show?
Does A& E not have rights?
|
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on Dec 22, 2013 12:43:32 GMT -5
I don't get it? He can say what he wants, but the gays and those groups of gays shouldn't be able to say what they want? ....
There is a difference in responding to Phil and "saying" what you want in response and those who oppose those views trying to exert political influence to silence somebody or to otherwise cause some form of adverse effect. I'm sure the press was, and is still, available to any interest group be it gay, black, or whatever that cares to make a public statement in difference to Phil Robertson. The fact is, Phil Robertsons' comment took only a few minutes and came from one man, but the response opposing those comments have come from many and have occupied most of the entire news broadcasting of the last couple of days. I think the gay community and anyone else that has felt wronged have been given more that equal time to weigh in on the issue don't you think? So we all know that they got their feelings hurt and we're all sorry. Time for football now.....
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,469
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 22, 2013 12:43:54 GMT -5
... I'd imagine many heterosexual couples would accept if offered something like this. I don't know if it's ever happened before. Do you? During the 2013 parade, a couple from Virginia -- Nicole and Gerald -- were married aboard Farmers Insurance's "The Love Float," in what Farmer's officials said was the first wedding to be performed during the Rose Parade. www.10news.com/lifestyle/rose-parade-to-include-first-same-sex-union-aboard-a-float-121713 |
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Dec 22, 2013 12:44:54 GMT -5
I agree they should express themselves. That is not the same as putting pressure on a network to fire him Yet his supporters are putting pressure toon a network take him off suspension. It works both ways, as it should. Do you see the difference? The actual people that WATCh the show are up in arms over him possibly being let go. Versus people that have no interst other than punishing someone that disagrees with their lifestyle It amazes me how one sided some of you are. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 10:59:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2013 12:44:58 GMT -5
Who wasn't allowed to express themselves?
|
|
