Conservative DCUM'ers: how far back do you want LGBTQ rights rolled back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Ya wanna know what I'm sick of? I'm sick of your constant "blasted in my face" "shoved down my throat" rhetoric. I grew up in the '70s and '80s and there were rainbows all over kids stuff and NOBODY HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT and it DIDN'T TURN ANYONE GAY OR TRANS. The constant nonstop barrage of right wing freakouts is too damn much and y'all need to STFU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Yeah well we can have that once there are no longer people trying to eradicate the LGBTQ community. And please say those people don't exist. There are still huge swaths of people, mostly from conservative religious communities, who think that it is sinful to be LGBTQ, that they are subhumans, that they don't deserve all the rights that heteros have, that they should be able to discriminate against that community.

And no one is "making" you talk about this. Sorry if you think it's blasting it in your face to watch a film or tv show with a gay couple. Or to see someone in drag. Or to see a trans person. It clearly makes you uncomfortable. What if your very being and appearance made others uncomfortable and you were asked to change the way you dressed/presented yourself because of that?

This country was founded on freedom of religion. That means those religions can and will continue, and that outside activists aren't going to change them. Do you really think that Rose's stunt will open doors in conservative religious communities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When our nation expanded gay rights-- and I was an early adopter to this notion-- it was because I thought it would be good for families. Gay people could have marriages, kids, and normal lives. In the past couple years, this has changed into an overtly "sexual revolution" message that places an emphasis on personal sexual fulfillment rather than emphasizing the importance of family unity. I think this is harmful to society, and while we should certainly tolerate people who choose to live promiscuous, self-indulgent lifestyles (straight or gay), this shouldn't be celebrated and promoted in the form of state sponsored parades with public nudity or otherwise salacious dress, books in public schools for children, and the White House declaring this lifestyle the "bravest and most courageous." We don't celebrate families in this way, and raising a family is both difficult and essential for society. I think using taxpayer money to promote sexual promiscuity is a step too far and too "Brave New World" ("promiscuity is a citizen's duty"-- literal quote from the book). One way to destroy a culture is to weaken personal relationships, and I am highly suspicious of the intent behind the assault on families (again, gay or straight) and the extreme emphasis on individual sexual gratification as the ultimate good. Biden's recent comments about how all kids are everyone's kids is, again, straight out of Brave New World ("everyone belongs to everyone"). Just like when you prioritize everything, nothing is a priority-- when you make everyone belong to everyone, then no one belongs to anyone. As they say, when people show you who they are- believe them. We all saw them disrobe in front of the white house, in a crowd of likeminded revolutionaries, and shake their bare chests on a video.
In front of Biden, the secret service, etc. I believe them; they intend to destroy our culture and our values by debasing what we used to find important (the American dream) and replace it with a new priority of sexuality as the supreme value. In other words, to me, this isn't about being gay or being straight. It's about an insidious attempt to destroy our society from the inside out in order to gain control. So, what limits do I want on gay people? None. What limits do I want on l the government promoting gender confusion, while also baking in parental alienation as an actual policy? Limits on the use of elected positions to promote sexual promiscuity? I want total cessation of this.

This is not persuasive. Conservatives are famously opposed to sexual shenanigans in the WH, and impeached Bill Clinton for it. Showing that yet another democrat president did it, too, isn't going to change our minds.

Oh but Matt Gaetz's sexual shenanigans are fine. Jim Jordan letting students get raped in the bathroom is fine.

Cut me a break. NOTHING the Republicans complain about is in any way persuasive.

[Anonymous]

Veterans deserve a month. Not sexual preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When our nation expanded gay rights-- and I was an early adopter to this notion-- it was because I thought it would be good for families. Gay people could have marriages, kids, and normal lives. In the past couple years, this has changed into an overtly "sexual revolution" message that places an emphasis on personal sexual fulfillment rather than emphasizing the importance of family unity. I think this is harmful to society, and while we should certainly tolerate people who choose to live promiscuous, self-indulgent lifestyles (straight or gay), this shouldn't be celebrated and promoted in the form of state sponsored parades with public nudity or otherwise salacious dress, books in public schools for children, and the White House declaring this lifestyle the "bravest and most courageous." We don't celebrate families in this way, and raising a family is both difficult and essential for society. I think using taxpayer money to promote sexual promiscuity is a step too far and too "Brave New World" ("promiscuity is a citizen's duty"-- literal quote from the book). One way to destroy a culture is to weaken personal relationships, and I am highly suspicious of the intent behind the assault on families (again, gay or straight) and the extreme emphasis on individual sexual gratification as the ultimate good. Biden's recent comments about how all kids are everyone's kids is, again, straight out of Brave New World ("everyone belongs to everyone"). Just like when you prioritize everything, nothing is a priority-- when you make everyone belong to everyone, then no one belongs to anyone. As they say, when people show you who they are- believe them. We all saw them disrobe in front of the white house, in a crowd of likeminded revolutionaries, and shake their bare chests on a video.
In front of Biden, the secret service, etc. I believe them; they intend to destroy our culture and our values by debasing what we used to find important (the American dream) and replace it with a new priority of sexuality as the supreme value. In other words, to me, this isn't about being gay or being straight. It's about an insidious attempt to destroy our society from the inside out in order to gain control. So, what limits do I want on gay people? None. What limits do I want on l the government promoting gender confusion, while also baking in parental alienation as an actual policy? Limits on the use of elected positions to promote sexual promiscuity? I want total cessation of this.

This is not persuasive. Conservatives are famously opposed to sexual shenanigans in the WH, and impeached Bill Clinton for it. Showing that yet another democrat president did it, too, isn't going to change our minds.

Oh but Matt Gaetz's sexual shenanigans are fine. Jim Jordan letting students get raped in the bathroom is fine.

Cut me a break. NOTHING the Republicans complain about is in any way persuasive.

This thread is directed to conservatives, not Republicans.

And LBJ was really really nuts with terrible behavior. Certainly not a gentleman in any way, shape, or form.

[Anonymous]

Liberal Dem here. I know that some people are truly transgender and I support them and their transitions, That said there is an obvious contagion in late elementary grades and middle schools around here. It’s doing real damage to kids and families and I’d like to figure out how to stop it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's what bothers people. Its not LGBQ. It's the T.

I agree. It is very easy for me to empathize with LGB people. They feel attraction to members of their own sex, just like I feel attraction to members of the opposite sex. Both straight and gay people can feel deep love.

But I can't empathize with transgender people. What does it mean that a man feels like a woman? How does he know what a woman feels like? Is it just because he likes stereotypically women's things? The idea that we must behave stereotypically according to our sex is setting social progress back 100 years. It is fine for men to cry, wear dresses, and like knitting.

Whenever I see the word "trans" I assume that it is short for "transsexual" -- a man who enjoys presenting as a stereotypical female (or vice versa).

Why do you have to know what it feels like, in order to tolerate others? Did men have to understand what it feels like to be a woman for them to get equal rights under the law?? No. And it should not. Someone else's human rights should not hinge on your feelings for them, like you're deciding to save the koala but not a dingo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When our nation expanded gay rights-- and I was an early adopter to this notion-- it was because I thought it would be good for families. Gay people could have marriages, kids, and normal lives. In the past couple years, this has changed into an overtly "sexual revolution" message that places an emphasis on personal sexual fulfillment rather than emphasizing the importance of family unity. I think this is harmful to society, and while we should certainly tolerate people who choose to live promiscuous, self-indulgent lifestyles (straight or gay), this shouldn't be celebrated and promoted in the form of state sponsored parades with public nudity or otherwise salacious dress, books in public schools for children, and the White House declaring this lifestyle the "bravest and most courageous." We don't celebrate families in this way, and raising a family is both difficult and essential for society. I think using taxpayer money to promote sexual promiscuity is a step too far and too "Brave New World" ("promiscuity is a citizen's duty"-- literal quote from the book). One way to destroy a culture is to weaken personal relationships, and I am highly suspicious of the intent behind the assault on families (again, gay or straight) and the extreme emphasis on individual sexual gratification as the ultimate good. Biden's recent comments about how all kids are everyone's kids is, again, straight out of Brave New World ("everyone belongs to everyone"). Just like when you prioritize everything, nothing is a priority-- when you make everyone belong to everyone, then no one belongs to anyone. As they say, when people show you who they are- believe them. We all saw them disrobe in front of the white house, in a crowd of likeminded revolutionaries, and shake their bare chests on a video.
In front of Biden, the secret service, etc. I believe them; they intend to destroy our culture and our values by debasing what we used to find important (the American dream) and replace it with a new priority of sexuality as the supreme value. In other words, to me, this isn't about being gay or being straight. It's about an insidious attempt to destroy our society from the inside out in order to gain control. So, what limits do I want on gay people? None. What limits do I want on l the government promoting gender confusion, while also baking in parental alienation as an actual policy? Limits on the use of elected positions to promote sexual promiscuity? I want total cessation of this.

This is not persuasive. Conservatives are famously opposed to sexual shenanigans in the WH, and impeached Bill Clinton for it. Showing that yet another democrat president did it, too, isn't going to change our minds.

Oh but Matt Gaetz's sexual shenanigans are fine. Jim Jordan letting students get raped in the bathroom is fine.

Cut me a break. NOTHING the Republicans complain about is in any way persuasive.

I don't know what you're talking about. But you seem to be making an argument that we should just support any kind of indecency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's what bothers people. Its not LGBQ. It's the T.

I agree. It is very easy for me to empathize with LGB people. They feel attraction to members of their own sex, just like I feel attraction to members of the opposite sex. Both straight and gay people can feel deep love.

But I can't empathize with transgender people. What does it mean that a man feels like a woman? How does he know what a woman feels like? Is it just because he likes stereotypically women's things? The idea that we must behave stereotypically according to our sex is setting social progress back 100 years. It is fine for men to cry, wear dresses, and like knitting.

Whenever I see the word "trans" I assume that it is short for "transsexual" -- a man who enjoys presenting as a stereotypical female (or vice versa).

Why do you have to know what it feels like, in order to tolerate others? Did men have to understand what it feels like to be a woman for them to get equal rights under the law?? No. And it should not. Someone else's human rights should not hinge on your feelings for them, like you're deciding to save the koala but not a dingo.

What exactly is the human right that is being denied?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Yeah well we can have that once there are no longer people trying to eradicate the LGBTQ community. And please say those people don't exist. There are still huge swaths of people, mostly from conservative religious communities, who think that it is sinful to be LGBTQ, that they are subhumans, that they don't deserve all the rights that heteros have, that they should be able to discriminate against that community.

And no one is "making" you talk about this. Sorry if you think it's blasting it in your face to watch a film or tv show with a gay couple. Or to see someone in drag. Or to see a trans person. It clearly makes you uncomfortable. What if your very being and appearance made others uncomfortable and you were asked to change the way you dressed/presented yourself because of that?

You're completely unhinged. I work in a very liberal place and get constant emails about "pride programming" including sales of materials (pins, tshirts, flags etc), webinars, pride parade, fundraisers (bake sale etc), and had to sit through an hour of brainwashing by an activist guest speaker under the guise of a team building activity. It's not just right wing blasting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Ya wanna know what I'm sick of? I'm sick of your constant "blasted in my face" "shoved down my throat" rhetoric. I grew up in the '70s and '80s and there were rainbows all over kids stuff and NOBODY HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT and it DIDN'T TURN ANYONE GAY OR TRANS. The constant nonstop barrage of right wing freakouts is too damn much and y'all need to STFU.

Did rainbow brite symbolize LGBT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Ya wanna know what I'm sick of? I'm sick of your constant "blasted in my face" "shoved down my throat" rhetoric. I grew up in the '70s and '80s and there were rainbows all over kids stuff and NOBODY HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT and it DIDN'T TURN ANYONE GAY OR TRANS. The constant nonstop barrage of right wing freakouts is too damn much and y'all need to STFU.

Did rainbow brite symbolize LGBT?

Why is that relevant? You're not a serious person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Yeah well we can have that once there are no longer people trying to eradicate the LGBTQ community. And please say those people don't exist. There are still huge swaths of people, mostly from conservative religious communities, who think that it is sinful to be LGBTQ, that they are subhumans, that they don't deserve all the rights that heteros have, that they should be able to discriminate against that community.

And no one is "making" you talk about this. Sorry if you think it's blasting it in your face to watch a film or tv show with a gay couple. Or to see someone in drag. Or to see a trans person. It clearly makes you uncomfortable. What if your very being and appearance made others uncomfortable and you were asked to change the way you dressed/presented yourself because of that?

You're completely unhinged. I work in a very liberal place and get constant emails about "pride programming" including sales of materials (pins, tshirts, flags etc), webinars, pride parade, fundraisers (bake sale etc), and had to sit through an hour of brainwashing by an activist guest speaker under the guise of a team building activity. It's not just right wing blasting.

It's a response to right wing blasting. It seems like what you want is for everyone to just shut up and sit down when trans people are attacked. Until people stop directing hate towards trans people, I will never, ever shut up.

All I want is for trans people to just be able to exist and live. The majority are not abnormally sexually promiscuous and trying to promote sexual promiscuity like some poster a few back is trying to allege. Why can't trans people to just be able to exist and lead normal lives?

[Anonymous]

Liberals become even more infertile. It’s a good thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Yeah well we can have that once there are no longer people trying to eradicate the LGBTQ community. And please say those people don't exist. There are still huge swaths of people, mostly from conservative religious communities, who think that it is sinful to be LGBTQ, that they are subhumans, that they don't deserve all the rights that heteros have, that they should be able to discriminate against that community.

And no one is "making" you talk about this. Sorry if you think it's blasting it in your face to watch a film or tv show with a gay couple. Or to see someone in drag. Or to see a trans person. It clearly makes you uncomfortable. What if your very being and appearance made others uncomfortable and you were asked to change the way you dressed/presented yourself because of that?

You're completely unhinged. I work in a very liberal place and get constant emails about "pride programming" including sales of materials (pins, tshirts, flags etc), webinars, pride parade, fundraisers (bake sale etc), and had to sit through an hour of brainwashing by an activist guest speaker under the guise of a team building activity. It's not just right wing blasting.

It's a response to right wing blasting. It seems like what you want is for everyone to just shut up and sit down when trans people are attacked. Until people stop directing hate towards trans people, I will never, ever shut up.

All I want is for trans people to just be able to exist and live. The majority are not abnormally sexually promiscuous and trying to promote sexual promiscuity like some poster a few back is trying to allege. Why can't trans people to just be able to exist and lead normal lives?

See, you are in violent agreement with us. We also want them to be normal and think that most of them are normal. But that isn't what the activists are force feeding us. The activists are linking abnormal, aggressively hypersexual content to the essence of being LGBT. I don't think it is, and I reject that, and so do you. Welcome!