Istanbul: Police Use Rubber Bullets, Dogs to Break Up Banned Gay Pride March

[Moralgy]

Okay, this is basically all I need to know about your position. You're a contrarian who just doesn't like anything. I'm guessing you're in the deep end of the libertarian spectrum, and are neutral on things like gay marriage because you're actually not in favor of any government supported marriage whatsoever. Am I close?

If I am, then you're everything that's wrong about the liberterian ideal. You don't believe in individual freedom, you believe in nihilistic anarchism.

I would put money on only being against all parades because pride is allowed. Same would go with marriage, or some twisted idea of "straight marriage is okay to promote because da kedz." A lot of nihilistic mindsets seem to come about due to some demographic that was previously discriminated against gets equal treatment.

[Hammerfest]

It was nice of them to use rubber bullets, I guess. Imaginary bullets would have been better, but oh well, it's Istanbul (not Constantinople). It's nobody's business but the turks.

[ItachiZaku]

I don't see a problem here. Doing something that is banned is met with force.

This is another reason I won't travel to that region. Ever.

[Lenonis]

3) In the USA its TOO far in favor of LGBTQ.

However, the transgender crap annoys me. You are born a male you are male. Born a female you are female. THE END. If I worked for google I would probably be fired because I would refuse to call a person whos name is Kevin on his birth certificate Samantha and say "she" That's stepping on my rights. Things are going too far the other way in the West now.

You do realize that the trans community would point out that your transphobia is a sign that the USA still has a ways to go in favor of LGBTQ.

[Cruor]

Okay, this is basically all I need to know about your position. You're a contrarian who just doesn't like anything. I'm guessing you're in the deep end of the libertarian spectrum, and are neutral on things like gay marriage because you're actually not in favor of any government supported marriage whatsoever. Am I close?

If I am, then you're everything that's wrong about the liberterian ideal. You don't believe in individual freedom, you believe in nihilistic anarchism.

Wrong, I am probably as far to the right as you can get, on most issues.

I differ from Republicans in that I am pro choice, why do we want more bums my taxes pay for and I put myself in the shoes of a woman, I'd want to get rid of some monster that grows inside me for 9 months, then comes out and screams and shits itself for 2 years. I am also agnostic, and I think religion should have no place in government or effect others.

With that said, I think we should brutalize criminals, allow guns, lower taxes, get rid of welfare and let a lot of bums just die in the streets, I think PC culture and liberal ideas need to be annihilated. Cold hard facts should be the only thing considered, for example when a certain group claims "police target us" they will be told "yeah, because your group commits the most crime, fix that issue and stop crying"

Claiming I "don't like anything" is wrong. I do not like things that screw with day to day life. A parade blocks traffic. A "celebration" held in a large open field (say Central Park's Sheep Meadow) allows people to have fun WITHOUT screwing up my commute. See the difference? Everyone wins.

- - - Updated - - -

You do realize that the trans community would point out that your transphobia is a sign that the USA still has a ways to go in favor of LGBTQ.

Trying to force people to use 37 different gender pronouns and call a mangled monster like Bruce Jenner a woman is going the other way, stepping on my rights, I already explained that. You are either male or female, and you are what you are born as. If you stay in your space we have no issues but if you are going to run and cry to whoever the authority in the area is (be it management or police) because I refuse to use your insane gender pronoun, we have a problem.


[Infracted]

[Moralgy]

Trying to force people to use 37 different gender pronouns and call a mangled monster like Bruce Jenner a woman is going the other way, stepping on my rights, I already explained that. You are either male or female, and you are what you are born as. If you stay in your space we have no issues but if you are going to run and cry to whoever the authority in the area is (be it management or police) because I refuse to use your insane gender pronoun, we have a problem.

Maybe you should appeal to the "authority" that your right to be a dick exceeds a trans person's right to feel safer in that business. Stop bitching about authority and fight the culture war if you really care.

[Lenonis]

Trying to force people to use 37 different gender pronouns and call a mangled monster like Bruce Jenner a woman is going the other way, stepping on my rights, I already explained that. You are either male or female, and you are what you are born as. If you stay in your space we have no issues but if you are going to run and cry to whoever the authority in the area is (be it management or police) because I refuse to use your insane gender pronoun, we have a problem.

Responding to my statement with more transphobia is doing nothing other than proving my point.

I also really don't see how asking (because no one is forcing you) to use pronouns they prefer is "stepping on your rights".

I think you maybe, juuuuuuust maybe, have a perspective problem when it comes to trans issues.

But I guess asking someone who is clearly as transphobic as yourself to see things rationally is probably too much. Cause, at the end of the day, how do their choices about how to dress, what to call themselves, or what surgery they have matter to you? Because, as I pointed out, no one is forcing you to do anything. Except, perhaps, not to be a dick and discriminate against them. And if you want to make an argument that you should be able to legally discriminate because you don't like a class of people...well then I'd say the conversation is over.

[Elim Garak]

Responding to my statement with more transphobia is doing nothing other than proving my point.

I also really don't see how asking (because no one is forcing you) to use pronouns they prefer is "stepping on your rights".

Well, they can't stop asking. And that's harassment and harassment is bad, right?

[Lenonis]

Well, they can't stop asking. And that's harassment and harassment is bad, right?

Ah yes. The whole "go rah rah free speech" until it's speech that they don't like then suddenly people shouldn't have the right to express themselves.

[Elim Garak]

Ah yes. The whole "go rah rah free speech" until it's speech that they don't like then suddenly people shouldn't have the right to express themselves.

What are you on about? Asking some one to use some special pronouns over and over again has nothing to do with expressing. That's harassment.

[Cruor]

Responding to my statement with more transphobia is doing nothing other than proving my point.

I also really don't see how asking (because no one is forcing you) to use pronouns they prefer is "stepping on your rights".

I think you maybe, juuuuuuust maybe, have a perspective problem when it comes to trans issues.

But I guess asking someone who is clearly as transphobic as yourself to see things rationally is probably too much. Cause, at the end of the day, how do their choices about how to dress, what to call themselves, or what surgery they have matter to you? Because, as I pointed out, no one is forcing you to do anything. Except, perhaps, not to be a dick and discriminate against them. And if you want to make an argument that you should be able to legally discriminate because you don't like a class of people...well then I'd say the conversation is over.

As you see on this very forum, things are very much in YOUR favor in the West. I get an infraction for my views, so yes, the conversation is over.

[Logwyn]

Honestly, even a Constitution won't be enough. It wasn't enough in the United States. It will take a complete shift in public perception.

What rights do gays not have now?

[Krigaren]

Wrong, I am probably as far to the right as you can get, on most issues.

Except everything you list in that tirade: Pro-choice, anti-tax, anti-welfare, guns for all, separation of church and state, allowing people to die on the streets, brutalization of criminals, can all be summed up into, "independence for everyone + meritocracy-based society" means that you're a nihilist anarchist leaning libertarian.

Which, as I said, means that you're everything that's wrong with that kind of thought.

- - - Updated - - -

What rights do gays not have now?

In most places in the US, gay people don't have legal protections that prevent employers / landlords from discriminating against them for being gay.

In many places in the US, gay people don't have the right to adopt from religious institutions.

Gay people also don't have the right to a peaceful life free of discrimination or fear of having their civil rights stripped from them as most everyone else has, as evidenced by the continued passing of religious freedom laws, the stripping of civil protections, and the right's continued desire to legislate gay marriage away, again.

So, you know, gay people already have everything I don't know what they're on about either.

[Machismo]

What rights do gays not have now?

Well, it depends on the state. Some states are still trying to restrict gay rights, via RFRA amendments for government employees. In Texas, they just passed a law that allows for government-backed adoption agencies to bar adoption based on their religious beliefs.

It took a very long time to allow for gay rights in the United States, more than 200 years. So, the U.S. Constitution was clearly not enough. Otherwise, gay people would have had equal rights well over two hundred years ago.

[Elim Garak]

In most places in the US, gay people don't have legal protections that prevent employers / landlords from discriminating against them for being gay.

It might shock you but heterosexuals are not protected from being discriminated for being heterosexual either. So it's only fair.

In many places in the US, gay people don't have the right to adopt from religious institutions.

No one has that right. It's a privilege bestowed by adoption institutions. Why should gays have it as a right?

Gay people also don't have the right to a peaceful life free of discrimination

They have as much of that right as anybody else.

or fear of having their civil rights stripped from them as most everyone else has

No one has that right. You cannot make "no fear" a right.

So, you know, gay people already have everything

[Moralgy]

What rights do gays not have now?

Varies from state to state, but gay people are still fighting adoption rights here and there for one, with weird laws trying to make adoption funky via technicalities on forms and various other ways. Other states are allowing separate but equal laws here and there in the public sphere, public is the keyword there. Since pride is the topic of this thread, trans individuals face uphill battles in regards to birth certificate changes in some states as well as the obvious "bathroom bills" here and there.

The tides are in favor of LGBT people though, just a great deal of resistance from certain parts of the country. There isn't a lot left, most of it is public perception improvements to alter the decades of "LGBT people are the devil" that went on since churches started using us as scapegoats way back when, but there are some things that are still being fought for right now. Public perception is the main thing remaining for LGBT people imo, but those legal issues do need to be won.

[Jimusmc]

if it's banned.. it's banned

so all involve with the gay pride thing are now criminals.

[Flarelaine]

This thread has just solidified my conviction to join the march next Saturday.