South Carolina is so gay!

[Rhyfelwyr]

Of course I am not comparing paedophiles to gays. (Active) Paedophiles are not just undescribably disgusting but truly evil. Homosexual acts are just horrible. I think it was part of my point that they are in a completely different league. I am sorry that I was careless with that.

And the whole point of this is not that people are being told to go to South Carolina purely because the people there are tolerant to homosexuals. South Carolina was described as "so gay".

I might be getting flamed for making insensitive remarks but that advert clearly was not designed with subtelty nor consideration for the beliefs of the people of South Carolina. Considering religious folk are being branded as a power-hungry minority, I think it is strange that a lowly ranked official was able to begin this advertising campaign against the wishes of the majority of an entire state.

[CrossLOPER]

I think it is strange that a lowly ranked official was able to begin this advertising campaign against the wishes of the majority of an entire state.

You think the other kids are going to start making fun of South Carolina now?

[Tribesman]

I might be getting flamed for making insensitive remarks but that advert clearly was not designed with subtelty nor consideration for the beliefs of the people of South Carolina.

Subtelty eh ? For the locals like .
You mean something more along these lines
http://www.scpride.org/dnn/SCPride08...4/Default.aspx
Well there you go its official South Carolina is so gay

[ICantSpellDawg]

And I can't believe you can say with a straight face that homosexuality should be illegal.

Good God man.

I thought you were a small government conservative who basically thought the less governmental interferance in peoples' lives the better. Now you want the government in peoples' bedrooms?

You think right and wrong is determined by legality/illegality. Think for yourselves, don't let laws dictate your morality.

When did I say "homosexuality should be illegal"? I don't think it should be "illegal". I don't think binge drinking should be illegal, but I would be pissed as hell if my state called itself a destination for binge drinkers. Find me my own words since you have suggested that they exist. Quit using my mouth to put words in, don't you have your own?

PJ -I do agree that the number 1 focus should be overturning roe and doe, and that nearly all other issues should fall by the wayside if we had to pick one, but fortunately we can do more than one thing at a time.

[HoreTore]

Yes, you can do a lot of things. But by the gods, why do you want to spend that time trying to limit free sex?

The main point isn't what you think about homosexuality or whatever other sexual thingy you have a problem with. The main point is what the homosexual thinks. Your feelings or thoughts are irrelevant compared to that. If the homosexual wants to live his life with a person of the same sex rather than one of the opposite sex because that is what he wants, I cannot for the life of me imagine why that is any of your business at all. If it makes him/her happy, then it's all fine and dandy. Isn't that what the foundation of your nation is, that every person is entitled to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness? What right do you have to stop someone from doing what he/she thinks will give them the most happiness?

And don't give me the old "gay people can't procreate"-tirade. Whether a human wants to procreate or not is simply not the business of anyone other than the person in question.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Many places advertise themselves as great places to come and sneak through the woods, waiting to obliterate wildlife with high powered rifles. That is a much more disturbing activity than gay sex, and offends probably just as many people, if not more, than seeing a gay couple holding hands while they walk down the street.

Would those be...

large bore guns?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Lets not get into too much of a neanderthal-bigot tizzy. This is about whether it was appropriate to use Carolinian state appropriated funds to advertise South Carolina as a homosexual hotspot throughout Europe. It isn't my money, so I don't really have a say - but the article was about whether people should get pissed about it.

I simply understand why they are pissed - and I have said it is like advertising South Carolina as a Sado-masochism hotspot. Not an illegal activity unless practiced graphically in public, but would you want your advertising money to go to something like that about your own state? I doubt it - hence the resignation of a state employee and the inquiry. Get over it.

[Lemur]

I dunno, TuffStuff, I would be pretty amused if I found out that Wisconsin was being marketed in Germany as the "butt spanking capitol of the Midwest." Come on, that would be hilarious. Especially once the Germans showed up, looking lost, asking about spankings.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Gah! The person responsible for the ad campaign ought to be promoted to a federal tourist bureau, not fired.

Gays are just another demographic, like single travellers, families with kids, singles, Jews, ethnic minorities, adventure seekers or culture lovers.

And the specifics of the gay demography make them extremely desirable tourists: a lot of DINKY's (double income, no kids) with matching large disposable incomes; there are few places on this planet that gays can travel to in dignity or even safety, which is a big boon for those places that do welcome gays; and gays are very much concentrated in big cities - with all the cultural preferences and high incomes that brings.

Everybody is fighting for the gay tourist market. In the civilised world they are at least, ie, Northwest Europe and assorted spots elsewhere. And I dare say that most gays on top of their head would only ever name New York and San Fransisco as places they'd like to visit. So, an ambitious, clever, great marketeer starts a campaign to inform affluent London gays (a million or so?) that America is also Savannah, and Atlanta, and South Carolina, and that it has more culture than any European cares to admit - that America, in short, is full sights to behold. And next he finds himself fired by an unholy alliance of hicks and fundamentalists. What a disgrace. What a pantomime.

What's next? People being fired for promoting America as a great place to visit for European Jews? Like, imagine all those Jews engaging in sex in America when they come over? An ad campaign advertising America as a great place for taking your children on holiday being pulled for promoting paedophilia? Advertising America's enormous natural parks - surely an invitation for nature lovers to engage in bestiality?
And don't say these examples are silly. We all know how slippery slopes work...

[ajaxfetish]

I simply understand why they are pissed - and I have said it is like advertising South Carolina as a Sado-masochism hotspot. Not an illegal activity unless practiced graphically in public, but would you want your advertising money to go to something like that about your own state?

That would pretty much be the pinnacle of awesomeness. I'd love to see something that funny penetrate our little bubble here in Utah.

Ajax

[Tribesman]

What a pantomime.

But Pantomime is so gay .
Caledonian do you hold your breath at the pantomime just in case ?
I bet you had a real panic attack when they shout "he's behind you"

[Adrian II]

But Pantomime is so gay .
Caledonian do you hold your breath at the pantomime just in case ?
I bet you had a real panic attack when they shout "he's behind you"

Did you know Pantomime was totally accepted in Ancient Greece and Rome?

[Tribesman]

Yes but Adrian look what happened to those gay cultures , they lost out to real men who wore trousers
I mean seriously if this starts in South Carolina who knows where it will end , perhaps it could even spread to Utah
too late..http://utahpridecenter.org/utahpride...-Sponsors.html OMG they get adverts from hotels and banks and everything , is even Utah business chasing the pink dollar .
Its the end of civilisation I tell ya , I am outraged .
Though of course it is rather telling that they advertise Bud Light because that excuse for a beer is just so gay .

[CountArach]

Because of people such as yourself. Unfortunately, when making vacation plans they have to factor in things such as whether the population of their destination will question their normalness. Who wants to go somewhere to relax in a hostile environment?

The whole gay issue is an embarrassing blight on modern conservative ideology. It completely ignores libertarianism in sake of a "moral majority" and religious pandering. The best part is that its all based off of the same old testament writings that approve of slavery and forbid eating pork, among other fun codes Christians tend to ignore. If certain groups of Christians had an understanding of the bible as a whole, not just specific passages, I find it hard to believe they would be able to reconcile the teachings of Christ with the current treatment of gay people in that community. It constantly astounds me that the people who hold Jesus above all else are reliably the most openly hate filled group of people in this country. (This is, of course, not directed at all Christians.)

1.There have always been gay people.
2.There will always be gay people.
3.You cannot become gay. Social acceptance of it will not increase or decrease homosexuality.

The sooner we on the Right stop making this an issue, the sooner it will cease to be an issue. There is so many more important things to concern ourselves with. I understand that the Republican party has to pander to the rednecks and hicks among us, just like the Democrats have to go after the inner city ghetto losers with welfare promises; but I for one don’t want to be associated with the lowest common denominator.

...wow...

[Rhyfelwyr]

But Pantomime is so gay .
Caledonian do you hold your breath at the pantomime just in case ?
I bet you had a real panic attack when they shout "he's behind you"

Haha obviously I do not still do that, that was when I was a child. Children do obsessive stuff like that, after I had salmonella I would'nt eat meat unless it was burnt to a crisp. My point is children don't always react rationally, but they take gut reactions to things.

Honestly, which side of this argument is abusing completely unfounded stereotypes? I have only ever said that homosexual acts are wrong, and have always maintained that homosexuals should not be defined by their sexuality. Hence my opposition to the advert, which blatantly targets this.

And yet in what seems to be a total reversal of the traditional roles the other side of the argument is adament that gays must revolve their life about being gay. Plus I get hit with all the stereotypes myself. I seem to be seen as a right-wing, pro-family values, product of a religious upbringing, which are are all incredibly wrong.

[CrossLOPER]

...after I had salmonella I would'nt eat meat unless it was burnt to a crisp.

Ahem.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Carcinogens, I remember reading something about them in one of the Al Gore v Unabomber quotes.

[Viking]

Lets not get into too much of a neanderthal-bigot tizzy. This is about whether it was appropriate to use Carolinian state appropriated funds to advertise South Carolina as a homosexual hotspot throughout Europe. It isn't my money, so I don't really have a say - but the article was about whether people should get pissed about it.

I simply understand why they are pissed - and I have said it is like advertising South Carolina as a Sado-masochism hotspot. Not an illegal activity unless practiced graphically in public, but would you want your advertising money to go to something like that about your own state? I doubt it - hence the resignation of a state employee and the inquiry. Get over it.

If the ad had said that South Carolina is a great place for homosexual activity. But it doesn't, so your rants are nothing short of absurd.

[Goofball]

You think right and wrong is determined by legality/illegality. Think for yourselves, don't let laws dictate your morality.

I certainly do not think that. I can think of many things that are illegal that are not wrong or immoral, and vice versa.

When did I say "homosexuality should be illegal"? I don't think it should be "illegal". I don't think binge drinking should be illegal, but I would be pissed as hell if my state called itself a destination for binge drinkers. Find me my own words since you have suggested that they exist. Quit using my mouth to put words in, don't you have your own?

I can't put any words in your mouth, it's too full with both your feet in it:

To me, homosexual acts are simply actions taken that I believe can and should be condemned by moral opinion, if not by law - In line with theft, sexual promiscuity, public masturbation, etc.

Thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts for you...

[ICantSpellDawg]

I certainly do not think that. I can think of many things that are illegal that are not wrong or immoral, and vice versa.



I can't put any words in your mouth, it's too full with both your feet in it:



Thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts for you...

I meant what I said. The acts should be condemned by moral opinion if they shouldn't by law. Where did I say that they should be illegal?

[Rhyfelwyr]

Only one side of this argument has been filled with prejudices and stereotypes.

No-one ever said homosexual acts should be illegal.

[HoreTore]

I meant what I said. The acts should be condemned by moral opinion if they shouldn't by law. Where did I say that they should be illegal?

Oh, you just want to condemn people.... That'll work out great for the suicide statistics.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Oh, you just want to condemn people.... That'll work out great for the suicide statistics.

Not people - acts.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Oh, you just want to condemn people.... That'll work out great for the suicide statistics.

And does it make these people feel better integrated into society when marketing groups tell them to go on holiday to different places than anyone else just because of something that they must feel pretty uncomfortable about in the first place if it is worth killing themselves over?

Because so far all TuffStuff and myself has said is basically "we think your sexual acts are immoral, but you are not defined by those".

But everyone else seems to be saying "you are gay, you always will be gay, most of the world hates you because you are gay, and you are so defined by the fact that you are gay that you must even travel seperately from the majority of the world".

[Louis VI the Fat]

But everyone else seems to be saying "you are gay, you always will be gay, most of the world hates you because you are gay, and you are so defined by the fact that you are gay that you must even travel seperately from the majority of the world".

I think most of us on the 'prejudiced and stereotyping' side of the argument would love for gays to just be able to travel around in safety and dignity. Like, you know, the majority of the world. Or for gays to just go to school without being ostracised like a freak.

Have a heart. They're not lawyers you know.


I really don't see the problem with any of this. I am not sure at which of these three levels gay SC is promoted, but I don't mind any:
Gays being invited to see the local sights in a non-threatening atmosphere. That is, a tolerant mind being promoted.
Or gays being targeted as a separate demographic, the way a lot of advertissement is targeted at specific market segments.
Or South Carolina promoting it's varied gay activities.

I mean, really, what's the big deal. It's 2008, come on. Is Panzer the only reasonable conservative left?


And what's up with all that talk about sex, sex, sex in you and Tuff's posts? My first association with this thread was of two gays checking out the local museums. Yet the two of you fill three pages with sexual posts..?
I note that you ended your last post with a sensual whip () - anything you'd like to share with us?

[ajaxfetish]

Because so far all TuffStuff and myself has said is basically "we think your sexual acts are immoral, but you are not defined by those".

But everyone else seems to be saying "you are gay, you always will be gay, most of the world hates you because you are gay, and you are so defined by the fact that you are gay that you must even travel seperately from the majority of the world".

And South Carolina seems to be saying, "you are gay, we hate you because you are gay, and you must travel to some other part of the world. Oh, and sorry for those ads that falsely suggested we are tolerant. They were a mistake."

Ajax

[Rhyfelwyr]

And what's up with all that talk about sex, sex, sex in you and Tuff's posts? My first association with this thread was of two gays checking out the local museums. Yet the two of you fill three pages with sexual posts..?

I think the problem is that me and Tuff see the ad as targeting something else compared to what you see.

Because you believe homosexuality to be something that utterly defines people, not just in the eyes of the world but the way they must act, the way they think of themselves, and where they go on holiday. And in that sense the advert appears to target a market segment in your eyes.

When I see the advert, I see it as targeting people because of their sexual practises. Because unlike you, I believe that these acts happen to be one immoral thing that these people do. Behind these acts are people, who have more to them than what they do in the bedroom! Therefore, there is no reason to suggest that a homosexual should like South Carolina more/less than a straight person. Do you think there is?

[Geoffrey S]

That latter point was addressed more than adequately earlier on. There are plenty of places where a gay couple cannot go on holiday, where chances are they will be treated poorly if seen walking hand in hand, audible lewd comments made behind their back. Why on earth would they want to go to such a place?

The advertisement implied that South Carolina was above such demeaning and petty practices. Apparently, South Carolina disagrees. Their loss.

[Goofball]

I meant what I said. The acts should be condemned by moral opinion if they shouldn't by law. Where did I say that they should be illegal?

Sorry, perhaps I misunderstood. I read that to be the same type of statement as, for example, "That guy is dishonest, if not an outright crook." To me that is an "at best/at worst" type of statement, meaning you believe the first idea to be true, and would also support the second idea, if not as strongly.

The fact that you included homosexual behaviour in the same category as theft and public masturbation (things that most people believe should be illegal), led me to believe that you were saying homosexual acts should also be illegal.

Forgive me if I misunderstood.

[Rhyfelwyr]

And so rather than making it clear that South Carolina would be tolerant they said "South Carolina is so gay!"