Heartland of America wrote:
And to think, before yesterday I never thought we'd have any reason to be jealous of Iran. At least they got one thing right though![/quote]
I dunno, somehow I doubt the heartland of America supports the president of Iran, even if he shares some of his views (I won't deny that there aren't some places where gays would be stoned to death if it wasn't illegal). But, given their choice of media viewing, I would dare say they are as against him as anyone.
His lack of a tie is his only redeeming quality. Ties are the stuidest outdated fashion convention forced on men. They don't look good, or professional and are just a stupid throwback to days when they actually served a function.
pullups at stop signs wrote:
i bet that gay comment was really well received by all those liberal fags...ironic that it was them who wanted the speaker in the first place....
No the irony is that American conservatives hate the guy when his moral principles are pretty much in line with their Christian base.
What makes you think liberals wanted him there. I am a liberal and I wish we would start treating our home grown religious idiots with less respect, not foreign ones with more. Pat Robertson or the late Jerry Falwell says the same stuff about gays and they are considered good decent people.
The irony to me is, why is the word "secular" considered by conservatives a compliment when we are talking about the Muslim world, but an insult here in the Christian USA?
What function did ties serve?
Whipping another man's jizzum off your work clothes.
I think that they actually served to close the top of a shirt when buttons were made of more expensive materials.
They certainly serve no function now. I all all for neat, professional dress, but ties and even suits don't look good on everyone.
My pet peeve is employers that require a tie (just because it is a tie as if this erases the stain of bad fashion in the rest of the outfit and is defacto a marker of preofessionalism) but you can wear one, Dilbert-like, with a short sleeve shirt without incurring anyone's disapproval. I'd say a well pressed pair of flat-front trousers with a nice button up long sleeve shirt looks much better than some Dilbert in short-sleeve shirt and a tie. That is the uniform of a southern Pentecostal minister.
Screw Iran and its political backwardness. Ties are the real problem. We need a whole thread on this.
I wonder if Iran supports the hijacking of this thread.
Brian wrote:
Ties are the stuidest outdated fashion convention forced on men. They don't look good, or professional and are just a stupid throwback to days when they actually served a function.
Actually ties look great and very professional.
Are there any famous gay distance runners. All big name sportsmen in Britain are straight or so they have us believe. If you go to Leeds, Manchester or London the streets are crawling with homosexuals with their camp voices and anti-sport ways!
I'm Irish and we don't have any gays either....
OIRLAND wrote:
I'm Irish and we don't have any gays either....
Or abortions.
Kele wrote:
I wonder if Iran supports the hijacking of this thread.
POD! Well played, sir.
It is too big a generalization to say all conservatives think a secular government is a bad thing for the US. There are conservatives who do understand that a secular government allows for more religious freedom.
The dumb loudmouth conservatives may not understand this principle and that may who you are talking about. If people have religious beliefs that I don't agree with I don't really care as long as they don't try to force those beliefs on me through coercion of the government.
I might waste time and argue that their beliefs are without merit on an on Internet forum, but it really doesn't bother me that much that I think some people have nutty beliefs in the US.
Brian wrote:
pullups at stop signs wrote:i bet that gay comment was really well received by all those liberal fags...ironic that it was them who wanted the speaker in the first place....
No the irony is that American conservatives hate the guy when his moral principles are pretty much in line with their Christian base.
What makes you think liberals wanted him there. I am a liberal and I wish we would start treating our home grown religious idiots with less respect, not foreign ones with more. Pat Robertson or the late Jerry Falwell says the same stuff about gays and they are considered good decent people.
The irony to me is, why is the word "secular" considered by conservatives a compliment when we are talking about the Muslim world, but an insult here in the Christian USA?
Pull the cock out of your butt. You're so screwed up you can't even think straight. (pun intended)
Pat Robertson or the late Jerry Falwell says the same stuff about gays and they are considered good decent people.
I suppose those guys have a following, but I have never met anyone who takes guys like them seriously. If you look at TV or anywhere in pop culture, gays are pretty much accepted in the US. Guys like Da Ali G go out of their way to make fun of religious zealots who say that gays can be made straight. The religious zealots gay bashers are pretty much a joke to most people I know.
I don't know what Falwell has said about gays in the past. I did a search and see hosted a gay summit in 1999 with a gay reverend and Falwell said he would tone down his language. It appears one of his writers is a gay reverend. There has been talk about accepting gay rabbi's in the past couple of years. Is the Islamic Republic of Iran going to allow gay a Mullah?
I got a good laugh at Fred Phelps quote in the article.
http://www.cnn.com/US/9910/23/gay.violence.summit.02/index.html
blanket wrote:
If you look at TV or anywhere in pop culture, gays are pretty much accepted in the US.
There is a good reason to believe almost anything. Right Lemmings?
I don't doubt gay boys/men have to put up with some hard times in junior high or at other times in their life in the US. Anyone who is different is going to be picked on.
When you compare Iran to the US, I don't see a much of a similarity. I don't see a lot of support (there may be a small faction of loud publicity seeking zealots who may support it but they are laughed at) for a law that would inflict the death penalty for the crime of committing gay sexual acts that exist in Iran.
! wrote:
Either that, or they've forced them so far into the closet that they wind up in Narnia.
Funny!
blanket wrote:
Pat Robertson or the late Jerry Falwell says the same stuff about gays and they are considered good decent people.
I suppose those guys have a following, but I have never met anyone who takes guys like them seriously.
Are YOU serious? Each has/had HUGE followings. Some of their "power"/popularity may have eroded a little, but to get the Republican nomination, one pretty much HAD to get through these guys. Why do you think McCain flipflopped after badmouthing Falwell several years ago and then kissed his butt a bit during this campaign[until Falwell's death] ? He didn't want to repeat that mistake again, and anger Christian Convervatives. They had/have a mega-following.
If you look at TV or anywhere in pop culture, gays are pretty much accepted in the US. That isn't always the best place to look. Sometimes they are way ahead of the mainstream.
blanket wrote:I don't know what Falwell has said about gays in the past. I did a search and see hosted a gay summit in 1999 with a gay reverend and Falwell said he would tone down his language.
You didn't search very hard. Falwell said he would "tone down" his anti-gay language in 1999 ?? HA HA HA Two years later, he BLAMED 9/11 on gays! Oh, to be fair, "abortionists, the ACLU, and feminists" were also partly to blame, but gays were a big reason we got attacked according to Jerry, and he was AGREED with by Robertson.
http://www.actupny.org/YELL/falwell.htmlIf you are the US and weren't aware of this, you weren't paying attention.
Where did Falwell or Robertson condone executing homosexuals? How many homosexuals were executed by the state last year for homosexuality in the U.S.?