Firefighters Forced To Attend Gay Pride Parade

[Duende Verde]

Celldog, see you next year at the Annual Gay Shame Parade in Grand Plains, NE.

 

[Erzengel]

Hahahaha.

 

[Darthphere]

Celldog, see you next year at the Annual Gay Shame Parade in Grand Plains, NE.

LOL!t: t: t:

 

[Superhobo]

What kind of fireman actually feels abused by lewd gestures and people yelling "**** you, fireman!" I mean, jeez. You see charred and dead bodies regularly, and you're offended by that?
You want to talk about something, let's talk about the point in history where our supposed toughest just said 'screw it,' and turned to the legal system whenever they got offended over something.

Damn, just damn.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Okay, I get that. And I think a lot of guys would probably react that way. But everyone is different and there are those who might not be able to shrug it off the way you would.

That's true but 4 guys together were upset and traumatised by some gay jokes thrown their way seems a stretch to me

I agree that a jerk is a jerk, regardless. But the nature of the verbal abuse is relevant, in my opinion. Some things go farther in crossing the line, are more 'personal' in nature or more threatening than others.

The problem is that it's all just words and once it gets to be about the content as opposed to the action the focus shifts and allows certain ppl to stand on soap boxes and point "The EVIL gays did it!" b/c they are more concerned about tarring the gay community than actual social disorder, abuse of power and civil rights which are the real issues here, the case should always remain on the action not the content b/c that's when it becomes discrimatory.

But I disagree that it is necessarily about bigotry. There are those people who simply will never approve of or understand the homosexual lifestyle. It doesn't make sense to them, it doesn't seem natural, and for some, it's downright disgusting. They have every right to their opinions, as long as they aren't out there trying to lynch gays or something, and they shouldn't have to defend those beliefs or be made to feel that they're some sort of weirdo because they don't approve of sodomy.

But once you start down that road and accept that any form of hate is fine and give it validity you open up a dangerous can of worms where the lines become blurred, to despise someone for their colour, their religion or their sexual preference is a rocky road IMO.

Like you, I'm of the "live and let live," camp. In fact, a couple of my favorite people in the world are gay men. But as much as you want tolerance for them and their lifestyle, you have to afford the same tolerance for those (such as those with religious beliefs) who disdain their lifestyle, because unlike the argument that it's the same as hating someone for their skin color, religious people do not see anything "wrong" with someone born of a different skin color. However, they do see something "wrong" with the homosexual lifestyle, based on their religious texts. If you're going to argue with that, than you're going to be arguing with their God.

See i am not religious, i went to Sunday School as a kid but haven't been interested in many years, my mom and Aunt are religious though and their belief is god loves all his children and doesn't categorize them, so i would question a religion that states that the idea of classing ppl as disgusting based solely off their sexual preference is acceptable and i also wonder if all these religions that are anti sodomy or to put it in layman's terms, anti anal sex are against it in total or just between two guys which again brings up discrimination..

 

[Hunter Rider]

BTW Memphis/Celldog is NOT Cristo.

 

[Kritish]

Celldog, see you next year at the Annual Gay Shame Parade in Grand Plains, NE.

HAHAHA!! t:

I seriously hope his kids turn out gay though, not normal gay though, biker gay.

 

[moraldeficiency]

But once you start down that road and accept that any form of hate is fine and give it validity you open up a dangerous can of worms where the lines become blurred, to despise someone for their colour, their religion or their sexual preference is a rocky road IMO.

I agree with a lot of that but there's the opposite view point that when you make everything ok and the lines become blurred from the opposite direction. Everyone is prejudiced in some form or other. I personally hate stupid people and people without a sense of humor. It's my right to hate whomever I choose to. If I disagree with a march I shouldn't have to march, regardless of the reason. That's the nature of freedom, it cuts both ways. Once you try and force tolerance, the backlash becomes much worse than allowing people to learn, grow and change their minds.

I personally have no problems with whatever anyone's sexual preference is, but I'm not gonna march in a gay pride parade either and if someone tried to force me they would definately feel a backlash. Not only that but I would go from someone that doesn't really care about gay pride parades to someone that actively hated them because they took my day off which could've been spent at the beach.

 

[Kritish]

BTW Memphis/Celldog is NOT Cristo.

Awww...

 

[Hunter Rider]

I agree with a lot of that but there's the opposite view point that when you make everything ok and the lines become blurred from the opposite direction. Everyone is prejudiced in some form or other. I personally hate stupid people and people without a sense of humor. It's my right to hate whomever I choose to. If I disagree with a march I shouldn't have to march, regardless of the reason. That's the nature of freedom, it cuts both ways. Once you try and force tolerance, the backlash becomes much worse than allowing people to learn, grow and change their minds.

I personally have no problems with whatever anyone's sexual preference is, but I'm not gonna march in a gay pride parade either and if someone tried to force me they would definately feel a backlash. Not only that but I would go from someone that doesn't really care about gay pride parades to someone that actively hated them because they took my day off which could've been spent at the beach.

I think though with stupidity or indeed someone that is obnoxious and loud it is a case of a personality trait of the individual, it's a person that annoys you and messes with your space b/c of their actions, when the talk is of hating blacks or Asians or homosexuals it turns not to finding the personality of an individual person irritating it becomes about hating an entire race or community based simply off the colour of their skin or their sexual preference, so in essence it becomes hatred of existence for the sole fact they are different, not b/c they have caused anyone any annoyance.

As for the second part, i fully agree that no one should be forced to do anything in this manner and indeed it can have the effect of a backlash, i never disagreed with the fact the fireman shouldn't have been made to go, my issue in this thread is it's more about bashing gays than the issue of freedom violation and power abuse.

 

[moraldeficiency]

I think though with stupidity or indeed someone that is obnoxious and loud it is a case of a personality trait of the individual, it's a person that annoys you and messes with your space b/c of their actions, when the talk is of hating blacks or Asians or homosexuals it turns not to finding the personality of an individual person irritating it becomes about hating an entire race or community based simply off the colour of their skin or their sexual preference, so in essence it becomes hatred of existence for the sole fact they are different, not b/c they have caused anyone any annoyance.

As for the second part, i fully agree that no one should be forced to do anything in this manner and indeed it can have the effect of a backlash, i never disagreed with the fact the fireman shouldn't have been made to go, my issue in this thread is it's more about bashing gays than the issue of freedom violation and power abuse.

Ok, I see where you're going with personal choice, but what about people born with deviant desires such as pedofiles or psychopaths? Now we're assuming hate of one thing is bad while hate of another is good. This becomes dangerous when we forget that society is based on drawing lines and creating laws. Some very stupid laws, but laws can be changed when people are ready and capable of doing it.

To be fair, it can be reasoned that they are directly infringing on others and I believe that but we all know opening the door this wide will lead to that.

I think the issue is more about freedom. In this case it makes no difference if these people were actively abused or if it's their personal bigotry that's getting in the way, they have a right to choose to support or not support anything they want as long as it doesn't endanger others.

One other thing to the people who are saying "these are tough firemen they should be able to handle a little name calling", that about the most ignorant response I've heard in a while. There's a difference between physical bravery (running into a burning building or scooping up dead bodies) and emotional bravery (fear that they're being associated with something they might find shameful, compounded by namecalling and harassment). A lot of physically brave people can be fairly emotional fragile, especially when they're forced to endure something they feel is wrong. Think of it this way: was making those prisoners strip naked while mocking them and taking pictures really torture because physically they weren't harmed or was the fact that what was done to them went so against their beliefs and personal sense of pride and self that they would have happily taken a beating to avoid it?

 

[Memphis Slim]

We both agree that En Vogue was better than SWV. Important stuff like that.

jag

And nothing could ever change that.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Ok, I see where you're going with personal choice, but what about people born with deviant desires such as pedofiles or psychopaths? Now we're assuming hate of one thing is bad while hate of another is good. This becomes dangerous when we forget that society is based on drawing lines and creating laws. Some very stupid laws, but laws can be changed when people are ready and capable of doing it.

To be fair, it can be reasoned that they are directly infringing on others and I believe that but we all know opening the door this wide will lead to that.

There is quite a canyon here where common sense would come in though, for starters no one is hurt by the fact someone is black or gay but Pedo's and phychos murder and rape ppl, one is illegal, the other isn't, then you have the fact of actions as opposed to simply being.

I think the issue is more about freedom. In this case it makes no difference if these people were actively abused or if it's their personal bigotry that's getting in the way, they have a right to choose to support or not support anything they want as long as it doesn't endanger others.

I agree that no one should be forced to do anything period, why they don't want to do it is a murkier area IMO.

One other thing to the people who are saying "these are tough firemen they should be able to handle a little name calling", that about the most ignorant response I've heard in a while. There's a difference between physical bravery (running into a burning building or scooping up dead bodies) and emotional bravery (fear that they're being associated with something they might find shameful, compounded by namecalling and harassment). A lot of physically brave people can be fairly emotional fragile, especially when they're forced to endure something they feel is wrong. Think of it this way: was making those prisoners strip naked while mocking them and taking pictures really torture because physically they weren't harmed or was the fact that what was done to them went so against their beliefs and personal sense of pride and self that they would have happily taken a beating to avoid it?

Well personally i was just speaking from my own perspective when i touched on this but the example at the bottom is quite a contrast, being taunted at in a crowd where you are free to retaliate or walk away and are not physically touched in any form is different to being forced to strip naked and have photo's taken, that isn't really comparable even when comparing it with pyhsical torture b/c both are very far removed from being comparable with having to endure a few verbal insults when you have the freedom to rebut.

 

[Superhobo]

Ok, I see where you're going with personal choice, but what about people born with deviant desires such as pedofiles or psychopaths? Now we're assuming hate of one thing is bad while hate of another is good. This becomes dangerous when we forget that society is based on drawing lines and creating laws. Some very stupid laws, but laws can be changed when people are ready and capable of doing it.

To be fair, it can be reasoned that they are directly infringing on others and I believe that but we all know opening the door this wide will lead to that.

I think the issue is more about freedom. In this case it makes no difference if these people were actively abused or if it's their personal bigotry that's getting in the way, they have a right to choose to support or not support anything they want as long as it doesn't endanger others.

One other thing to the people who are saying "these are tough firemen they should be able to handle a little name calling", that about the most ignorant response I've heard in a while. There's a difference between physical bravery (running into a burning building or scooping up dead bodies) and emotional bravery (fear that they're being associated with something they might find shameful, compounded by namecalling and harassment). A lot of physically brave people can be fairly emotional fragile, especially when they're forced to endure something they feel is wrong. Think of it this way: was making those prisoners strip naked while mocking them and taking pictures really torture because physically they weren't harmed or was the fact that what was done to them went so against their beliefs and personal sense of pride and self that they would have happily taken a beating to avoid it?

Reminds me of that Simpsons episode where you see the army guys training and all that, then something that sounds like gunshots are fired, and they get all weak in the knees, saying "We're not reeaaddyy!"

 

[moraldeficiency]

Reminds me of that Simpsons episode where you see the army guys training and all that, then something that sounds like gunshots are fired, and they get all weak in the knees, saying "We're not reeaaddyy!"

In what possible way? How does physical bravery and emotional bravery have anything to do with each other?

I'm assuming you agree that those prisoners were in fact not tortured and should just stop whinying about it.

 

[moraldeficiency]

Well personally i was just speaking from my own perspective when i touched on this but the example at the bottom is quite a contrast, being taunted at in a crowd where you are free to retaliate or walk away and are not physically touched in any form is different to being forced to strip naked and have photo's taken, that isn't really comparable even when comparing it with pyhsical torture b/c both are very far removed from being comparable with having to endure a few verbal insults when you have the freedom to rebut.

It is a contrast; however, not an incomplete one. These men were ordered to go and in uniform. Now I remember back in my service days I was pretty proud of my uniform and when I wore it, it meant something. Going somewhere in that uniform meant you supported that store/place/whatever. I would never wear it to something I had issue with because it would be, in my head, a form of endorsement.

I bet a lot of these guys have family as firemen, most firemen do. The idea that you could have some kid being forced to suit up and be present at this event, having to stand there and feel ridiculed and imagining what his family might think..... I can definately see this as a form or harassment or torture.

If they were marching or part of the parade then they didn't get to rebut. I'm clearly using an extreme example but that's how you show a wrong clearly and you don't have a bunch of people calling them wussies or whatever because this actually bothered them and they decided to do something about it. These are the same people that every day save lives and a bunch of guys on a superhero board (I wasn't referring to you in that part of the post at all) are gonna call them names because they didn't want to go to a gay pride parade? That's cowardace.

 

[Carcharodon]

This is outrageous!!











Are you telling me that firefighters aren't gay?

 

[Hunter Rider]

It is a contrast; however, not an incomplete one. These men were ordered to go and in uniform. Now I remember back in my service days I was pretty proud of my uniform and when I wore it, it meant something. Going somewhere in that uniform meant you supported that store/place/whatever. I would never wear it to something I had issue with because it would be, in my head, a form of endorsement.

I bet a lot of these guys have family as firemen, most firemen do. The idea that you could have some kid being forced to suit up and be present at this event, having to stand there and feel ridiculed and imagining what his family might think..... I can definately see this as a form or harassment or torture.

I can respect that and see your point from a certain angle, i guess my only rebuttal on that is a person in the situation the prisoners you mentioned had absolutely no options, this was a situation where the firefighters could have walked off and showed their disgust and regained their pride. I am not in any way approving of any of the things the firemen went though and i believe they have a case, my issue in here has been with the use of this to launch an attack towards an entire community when it was a few bad apples in said community and a boss who abused her power that is the issue here.

If they were marching or part of the parade then they didn't get to rebut. I'm clearly using an extreme example but that's how you show a wrong clearly and you don't have a bunch of people calling them wussies or whatever because this actually bothered them and they decided to do something about it. These are the same people that every day save lives and a bunch of guys on a superhero board (I wasn't referring to you in that part of the post at all) are gonna call them names because they didn't want to go to a gay pride parade? That's cowardace.

I do agree with this, i don't see it as cowardice and you do make a good point about the pride of their job and uniform that someone who has never served in any form may not fully grasp. my stance was from the very basic place of being a guy and how i feel i'd have handled it.

 

[lollycop]

 

[sinewave]

This is outrageous!!

Are you telling me that firefighters aren't gay?

word. what did they expect being dressed up as firemen in a gay pride parade? have they never seen the village people?

in all seriousness, it was wrong for the fire chief to force her employees to attend this if they weren't comfortable with it and it was stupid of the gays to harass them just for being there. however, the only reason celldog even brought this up was due to his overzealous hatred of the gay community. having said that, these particular gays didn't exactly do their community a favor by behaving the way they did. when you get a huge group of socially ostracized minorities together and they act like obnoxious idiots and take their lifestyle to a cartoonishly exaggerated degree just because they can, it's really just going to foster more fear and hatred of their lifestyle. compare it to the gangsta lifestyle in the black community. i know plenty of white people who think all young black people are thugs because that's who gets all the publicity these days. yes, it's wrong to think that, but those idiots who propagate a negative stereotype deserve as much blame for racism against their community as the racists who project the hate. there, i'm done playing andy rooney. feel free to pick apart my comments.

 

[Carcharodon]

Agreed, 100%.

 

[MaskedManJRK]

Okay, here's my problem with this thing:

Firefighters, like every other kind of group of employees, have national unions. If they had problems with their boss and he or she was forcing them to do things that they don't want to do, they could simply go to that union and complain. They would have went to the chief, they could have even gone on strike, if they were that adament. Or, they could have just not went, called in sick. If the chief fired them, they could have just went to other departments in the city.

So, either these guys didn't look hard enough for ways to get out of going, or they knew that if they were "forced" to go, the press would eat it up.

Was the harassment they went through right? No. But I think they either just didn't try to stop it or just wanted some free press.

 

[Memphis Slim]

Okay, here's my problem with this thing:

Firefighters, like every other kind of group of employees, have national unions. If they had problems with their boss and he or she was forcing them to do things that they don't want to do, they could simply go to that union and complain. They would have went to the chief, they could have even gone on strike, if they were that adament. Or, they could have just not went, called in sick. If the chief fired them, they could have just went to other departments in the city.

So, either these guys didn't look hard enough for ways to get out of going, or they knew that if they were "forced" to go, the press would eat it up.

Was the harassment they went through right? No. But I think they either just didn't try to stop it or just wanted some free press.

Are you a San Diego firefighter? Are you a firefighter in some other city?

 

[MaskedManJRK]

Are you a San Diego firefighter? Are you a firefighter in some other city?

No, but I checked Google and I found articles and webites for firemen unions.

 

[Memphis Slim]

No, but I checked Google and I found articles and webites for firemen unions.

You checked it for San Diego?