Technology0 min ago
First Gay President?
46 Answers
http://tinyurl.com/6crwbt3
Republican presidential candidate Fred Karger has already launched a campaign for the nomination in the key states of Iowa and New Hampshire, well that's fair enough, but why the need to mention he is gay? Or is he using the fact that he is gay to perhaps further his chances at becoming the first gay President of the United States?
Yes I can see it now, they already have the first black president, will it next be the first gay President or will either Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin pip him at the post to become the first woman President?
Much better to select the the best man/woman for the job, than what their sexual orientation is.
Republican presidential candidate Fred Karger has already launched a campaign for the nomination in the key states of Iowa and New Hampshire, well that's fair enough, but why the need to mention he is gay? Or is he using the fact that he is gay to perhaps further his chances at becoming the first gay President of the United States?
Yes I can see it now, they already have the first black president, will it next be the first gay President or will either Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin pip him at the post to become the first woman President?
Much better to select the the best man/woman for the job, than what their sexual orientation is.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
/// Gay marriages
to our grandparents an abomination ///
A pure assumption.
/// to our children
a good excuse for a party.///
Another assumption.
/// the game is up for people who think being gay is deviant, time is up for such attitudes. ///
Yet more assumptions, the way you may wish it to be vibrasphere , but thank goodness people still have the freedom to retain their own attitudes on matters.
to our grandparents an abomination ///
A pure assumption.
/// to our children
a good excuse for a party.///
Another assumption.
/// the game is up for people who think being gay is deviant, time is up for such attitudes. ///
Yet more assumptions, the way you may wish it to be vibrasphere , but thank goodness people still have the freedom to retain their own attitudes on matters.
AOG, I think vibra was more talking in trends (although that is a pure assumption!), and I'd agree with that. My generation is a lot more tolerant of homesexuality than previous generations. There'll always be individuals that, for some reason, are convinced it's just plain wrong and immoral, but as a whole, a much more progressive attitude is developing as generations go on.
my parents had lots of gay friends when i was growing up, but equally i have friends my own age who live in the dark ages when it comes to acceptance or tolerance of homosexuality.
i think this is a fear. either fear of being poached and propositioned by a homosexual, or fear of not being. perhaps both, but they are becoming more and more lonely in their views.
i think this is a fear. either fear of being poached and propositioned by a homosexual, or fear of not being. perhaps both, but they are becoming more and more lonely in their views.
paul - I think you are rightm it is very much about trends of opinion, and in that scenario, my poiint to eyethenkyou holds up.
AOG i fully support your commendable and vociferous defence of free speech. However, i do take exception to the term 'devient' which i think is far too strong an adjective for a section of society who simply live their lives in a different way to the majority.
I don't really have a lot of time for Morris dancers, but i wouldn't refer to them as 'deviant' - it's a matter of using appropriate language.
AOG i fully support your commendable and vociferous defence of free speech. However, i do take exception to the term 'devient' which i think is far too strong an adjective for a section of society who simply live their lives in a different way to the majority.
I don't really have a lot of time for Morris dancers, but i wouldn't refer to them as 'deviant' - it's a matter of using appropriate language.
-- answer removed --
The problem on this site is that all the right-on brigade thinks everyone thinks the same as them.
NEWS FLASH: They dont. Homosexuality, although tolerated is abhorrent to many. You can make all the laws you like but you wont change it, only education and time will do that.
On the subject of a Republican gay president, what a laugh. The tea party even object to masturbation so what chance does a gay person have.
In your dreams liberals.
NEWS FLASH: They dont. Homosexuality, although tolerated is abhorrent to many. You can make all the laws you like but you wont change it, only education and time will do that.
On the subject of a Republican gay president, what a laugh. The tea party even object to masturbation so what chance does a gay person have.
In your dreams liberals.
-- answer removed --
youngmafbog, if you read my last post (as an example) it kind of covers that a) 'us liberals' don't believe, nor expect, that everyone holds these same views and that b) education and time is what has lead to a more tolerant society nowadays than in the days of previous generations.
I don't give too hoots about the sexuality of a President and, hopefully, that's the general attitude which is developing.
I don't give too hoots about the sexuality of a President and, hopefully, that's the general attitude which is developing.
-- answer removed --
I wish people would stop beating around the bush (no pun?):
"Deviant" is a perfectly applicable word when used to describe the activities of the male homosexual. If you define the meaning of deviant sexual behaviour you'll find that it includes the physical indulgence in typical homosexual activity. I rest my case.
"Deviant" is a perfectly applicable word when used to describe the activities of the male homosexual. If you define the meaning of deviant sexual behaviour you'll find that it includes the physical indulgence in typical homosexual activity. I rest my case.
The use of the term 'deviant' is deliberately derogative and...well...nasty. Test it out for yourself. If you meet a gay person in a social situation, ask them this:
"Do you have more gay mates or more straight mates?
Then substitute it with:
"Do you have more deviant mates or more normal mates".
Hope you can see where I'm coming from here. It a matter of common courtesy not to talk as if you're making some kind of social judgement.
"Do you have more gay mates or more straight mates?
Then substitute it with:
"Do you have more deviant mates or more normal mates".
Hope you can see where I'm coming from here. It a matter of common courtesy not to talk as if you're making some kind of social judgement.
My point exactly sp1814 - it simply a nasty derogatory term, regardless of how dictionary definitive it may be.
I could invoke the 'B' word to describe eyethenkyew, but in view of the furore it caused last time, i obviously refrain - appropriate though it may be as an adjective.
It's about a word pinning down a point of view - and if you do not approve of homosexuality ety, and it's pretty obvious that you do not, there are less pruriant unpleasant ways of expressing your view.
I could invoke the 'B' word to describe eyethenkyew, but in view of the furore it caused last time, i obviously refrain - appropriate though it may be as an adjective.
It's about a word pinning down a point of view - and if you do not approve of homosexuality ety, and it's pretty obvious that you do not, there are less pruriant unpleasant ways of expressing your view.
Boys, boy, boys, perlease....so much fraternal unity by you boys. Sorry, no, but you obviously have your heads stuck in the male deviant's favourite place?
You see, I'm not wrong in what I say, but you boys would rather sanitise the subject rather than call a spade a spade, wouldn't you? The facts are that men and women's sexual organs are for reproduction purposes, and not for using to indulge in unnatural sexual acts - correct? Of course, "correct".
You cannot have your cake and eat it, can you? You either use those organs for what they were intended - or if used otherwise, you become a sexual deviant - Seemples.
You see, I'm not wrong in what I say, but you boys would rather sanitise the subject rather than call a spade a spade, wouldn't you? The facts are that men and women's sexual organs are for reproduction purposes, and not for using to indulge in unnatural sexual acts - correct? Of course, "correct".
You cannot have your cake and eat it, can you? You either use those organs for what they were intended - or if used otherwise, you become a sexual deviant - Seemples.
