r.e.s.p.e.c.t.

[CountArach]

I respect the statement they are making, and more power to them for choosing to go in this dangerous place.

[Fragony]

I respect the statement they are making, and more power to them for choosing to go in this dangerous place.

The statement that their right to shake their tails is more important then centuries old traditions of millions and millions of people in the world? If they do da boom they have it comming, if you insist on provocing don't cry if it works, almost hoping for it to happen serves them right. There is such a thing as taking it too far, how can they possibly think this aids their cause?

[Papewaio]

Tolerance and respect are not one way streets.

[CountArach]

The statement that their right to shake their tails is more important then centuries old traditions of millions and millions of people in the world? If they do da boom they have it comming, if you insist on provocing don't cry if it works, almost hoping for it to happen serves them right. There is such a thing as taking it too far, how can they possibly think this aids their cause?

Yes, they have the right to Freedom of Speech.

[Fragony]

Tolerance and respect are not one way streets.

Well actually that is my point.

[Papewaio]

Well actually that is my point.

This is nothing more then a provocation if you ask me, shouldn't expect any pity from me if they are attacked, they pretty much deserve it.

Funny definition of tolerance and respect that if someone states their sexuality they deserve to be attacked for it.

I think sexuality lies somewhere between gene and meme, it lies somewhere between ethnic group and religious affiliation in the ability to choose what you belong to.

Would you think it okay for a Muslim, a Jew or a Christian to be beaten up for it for walking around with their respective holy books?

Would it be okay for a St Patricks parade to be car bombed?

A black civil rights march to be set upon?

[Fragony]

Funny definition of tolerance and respect that if someone states their sexuality they deserve to be attacked for it.

What respect are these guys giving religious people? Nothing, it's a deliberate slap in the face.You got me wrong, not because of their sexuality, but because their intention is provocation pure and simple. If they do this they shouldn't be surprised if someone picks up the glove. Should they be legally allowed to do this, yeah, law is law. But why there, out of all places that one? Is your definition of mutual respect 'something we must have for other people'? Millions of people are going to be deeply grieved by this, and all because they want to be the centre of attention. Should it be allowed, yes. Should they want it, hell no. Plenty other places where they can whag their tails, without insulting anyone.

[Ronin]

What respect are these guys giving religious people? Nothing, it's a deliberate slap in the face.You got me wrong, not because of their sexuality, but because their intention is provocation pure and simple. If they do this they shouldn't be surprised if someone picks up the glove. Should they be legally allowed to do this, yeah, law is law. But why there, out of all places that one? Is your definition of mutual respect 'something we must have for other people'? Millions of people are going to be deeply grieved by this, and all because they want to be the centre of attention. Should it be allowed, yes. Should they want it, hell no. Plenty other places where they can whag their tails, without insulting anyone.

there...you just answered the question yourself....
"Should it be allowed, yes. Should they want it, hell no."


it is not ANYONE´s place to say what other people should want or not want.......if it should be allowed it should be allowed...no IF´s!

and that my friend...makes this..


case ******* closed.

[Husar]

Well actually that is my point.

It depends on what you rate higher, the gays' rights to have a parade in any place or the religious peoples' right to not have any gays in their holy place.
Since almost nobody would think the latter is actually a right and religious people are usually seen as nuts today, guess who wins...

[Fragony]

It depends on what you rate higher, the gays' rights to have a parade in any place or the religious peoples' right to not have any gays in their holy place.

Of course gays should be allowed in holy places, that's not the point. It's not a matter of law it's a matter of decency and respect. This is about as decent and respectful as pissing on someone's mother's grave. When you visit a mosk you take of your shoes. When you visit a church you don't yell. When you visit a holy city you behave because it's important for a lot of people.

Behaving like this in a holy place has nothing to do with respect. In Amsterdam you can do this. In San Fransisco you can do this. So do it there.



I am not angry because the law allows it, I am angry because they want it in the first place.

[Whacker]

Behaving like this in a holy place has nothing to do with respect. In Amsterdam you can do this. In San Fransisco you can do this. So do it there.

A correction here to this logic. Jerusalem the city is NOT a holy place. There are several locations in the and around the city that are considered holy in some respects to the 3 religions in question, but the city itself is not one major shrine or temple. I saw no reference in the article of the path taking them directly past the Wailing Wall or anything along those lines. Even if it did, I doubt I'd care.

As for the view of this being "provacative", my thoughts are that I disagree. The city does indeed have multiple sites of religion significance to the 3 major monotheistic religions, so what? It sounds like they are making a point to do this in that city to demonstrate solidarity and determination. The whole "this is provacative and they are asking to be attacked" argument sounds awfully close to the "she got raped because she was dressing like that" one.