JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 139
  1. #51
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    and i don't see it as anti-gay so much as anti extra regulation
    I'm sorry, I keep trying to read that sentence, and all I keep seeing is "cop out".
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  2. #52
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    i was specifically speaking to rolyo who as i've pointed out numerous times as poster boy for litmus tests

    as for this "act" i just don't get it

    and i don't see it as anti-gay so much as anti extra regulation

    i love that gay marriage is spreading organicially

    i don't hate all people who oppose gay marriage

    i don't condemn other gays who don't agree with my POV

    many here do

    and it blows on so many levels
    The 'is this really necessary?' argument is a perfectly valid one but as I just said, reality doesn't always live up to our expectations so I can understand why it is necessary sometimes. Is it necessary THIS time? I can't say without taking some time to study the legislation.

    I'm hoping we are getting closer to the tipping point where Social Conservatives will realize the fight isn't winnable and start embracing the alternative argument that in a society where gays are accepted, opposing gay marriage is opening the door to actually supporting 'alternative' marriages which will do far more harm to the institution of marriage than allow gays to marry will. You can phrase support for gay marriage in conservative terms if they really wanted to. It is either that or go for the removing government from marriage position.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  3. #53
    Banned chance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    21,386

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    ^ yep ...... it's a loser on so many levels

    reasonability being one
    the shift in people's beliefs - many pro many just don't care
    i can totally understand religious people thing gay is not right, etc. - they just don't have the right to infringe their beliefs on others
    it's really very simple
    and drawing a line in the sand on these issues where the public is becoming more and more liberal or laissez faire is uber dumb politically as well as morally

  4. #54
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,778

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    ^ yep ...... it's a loser on so many levels

    reasonability being one
    the shift in people's beliefs - many pro many just don't care
    i can totally understand religious people thing gay is not right, etc. - they just don't have the right to infringe their beliefs on others
    it's really very simple
    and drawing a line in the sand on these issues where the public is becoming more and more liberal or laissez faire is uber dumb politically as well as morally
    Is this a concession that your party's platform is wrong on this issue? Because what you are saying does not reflect the GOP platform.

  5. #55
    Banned chance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    21,386

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    ^ it's not my party

    And I have made myself clear on what I think

  6. #56
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    ^ yep ...... it's a loser on so many levels

    reasonability being one
    the shift in people's beliefs - many pro many just don't care
    i can totally understand religious people thing gay is not right, etc. - they just don't have the right to infringe their beliefs on others
    it's really very simple
    and drawing a line in the sand on these issues where the public is becoming more and more liberal or laissez faire is uber dumb politically as well as morally
    What the 'Defenders of Marriage' need to understand is that Gays are here to stay, that horse has left the barn and isn't returning thanks to the Supreme Court. The 'changing the definition of marriage' argument that if we allow gays to marry it will lead alternative forms of marriage like polygamy and bestiality is also flawed because having been recognized by society, something has to be done to address the legal inequality concerning gay relationships. If you say civil unions is the answer then you are opening the door to other types of 'alternative' marriage. Thus refusing to recognize monogamous gay couples relationships as a marriage is the thing that will open the door to group marriages, etc. IF you REALLY want to defend marriage as it is, you either have to allow gay marriage or remove government from the recognition and approval of marriages all together. The later is not going to happen as much as I might like the libertarian feel of it.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  7. #57

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    In other words, it's okay to beat up on women if they're lesbians, transgendered, or bisexual. Obviously, if you fall into one of those categories, you're not really a human being.
    Where is this stated exactly?

    The deleted provisions apparently deal with the inclusion of gay as a group that has barriers to aid. It does not appear to allow for violence against anyone. The sexist title aside, the act does little in terms of discriminating against anyone (the bigger issues are with other agencies; the FBI definition of rape, for instance, does not allow for males to victims of the act.)

    The assumption that sexuality will bar an individual from assistance or protection is a false one that is not supported by anything within the act.

    Based on real world data, this really does not appear to be true. Rates of domestic abuse for those in same sex relationships appear to be the same as seen in normal persons (though slightly higher). The issues regarding seeking assistance appear to be more related to social issues for the victims of abuse (dealing with sexuality becoming known mostly) than some systematic denial of service.

    Generally, specific inclusions of the gay in legislation is an indication that society still views non-heterosexuals as being weak and requiring special help from the stronger and better heterosexuals.
    Last edited by itsmejeff; February 23rd, 2013 at 07:31 PM.

  8. #58

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    I have just linked a story on the previous page about a lesbian who was denied assistance.

    It is one thing to be openly hostile to the idea of protecting LGBT people from discrimination; it is quite another to deny it happens even when presented with evidence.

    Are we to repeal the Civil Right Act of 1964 because it makes whites appear stronger and better?
    One case does not prove a system wide problem. Again, based on published rates of domestic transgression, homosex are not being denied protection. And, based on the writings I have seen be academics, social issues are more to blame for underreporting (just like with violence against males) than claims of institutional homophobia in government agencies.

    The CRAs (all of them) have major issues. There are clear problems with defining which groups are protected while not offering similar protection to others. Paternalism is not good. It is not even respectful. It shows a clear disregard for groups labeled as "minorities." It fosters difference instead of breaking down social constructs.

  9. #59

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    I appreciate that you belittle discrimination against the LGBT community though. Well done
    I do not belittle anything. I approach problems with logic. Not emotion.

    Your desire to suck dick should have no influence on how the determinations you make regarding issues. Subjectivity is for the intellectually differently advantaged.

    Stop thinking of yourself as a victim. It is not good for you psychologically.

  10. #60
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,778

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    homosex are not being denied protection.
    Is that a new word for us?

    Are you a gay male?

  11. #61
    Banned chance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    21,386

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    ^ trying WAY too hard

  12. #62
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    ^ trying WAY too hard
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  13. #63

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by xbuzzerx View Post
    Is that a new word for us?

    Are you a gay male?
    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    Every post is a brick in the house of doubt.
    Does it even matter? Should my opinion change because of a label?

    When did this gay hive mind nonsense start?

  14. #64
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    5,177

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    Where is this stated exactly?
    It's implied.


    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    The assumption that sexuality will bar an individual from assistance or protection is a false one that is not supported by anything within the act.
    If sexuality discourages a person from seeking help, or causes an aid worker to treat a potential victim differently, then of course it is a bar to assistance.

    Indeed, it is hard to imagine how sexuality could not be a factor here.


    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    Based on real world data, this really does not appear to be true. Rates of domestic abuse for those in same sex relationships appear to be the same as seen in normal persons (though slightly higher).
    The incidence of violence among gays vs. straights is not the issue.


    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    The issues regarding seeking assistance appear to be more related to social issues for the victims of abuse (dealing with sexuality becoming known mostly) than some systematic denial of service.
    Does that matter?


    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    Generally, specific inclusions of the gay in legislation is an indication that society still views non-heterosexuals as being weak and requiring special help from the stronger and better heterosexuals.

  15. #65
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,778

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    Does it even matter? Should my opinion change because of a label?

    When did this gay hive mind nonsense start?
    Because when you use some odd as hell phrase for gay people like when someone calls us "practicing homosexuals" I question very much if they are, themselves, a gay person. And it matters because if you are here, on a gay forum, discussing gay rights with a faintly negative slant on the topic, and aren't a gay male, you appear to be here with some kind of agenda.

  16. #66
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    65,011

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Bottom line..there might be some moderate members of the GOP party but as it stands,it is still the anti gay party,period.

  17. #67
    of the 99%
    Just_Believe18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    9,237

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    I support the concept of stopping/preventing/reducing violence against anyone - in this case women

    why do gay/lesbian women need special notation here ?

    what am i missing ?

    women need protection - i get it

    why do diff. types of women need diff. types of protection ?

    please do not respond as if this is anything but a reasonable question or POV
    Hmm, I don't know, everything?

    You've been a member of this community since 2005. You have witnessed countless threads of homosexuals sharing their experiences of being bullied, assaulted, beaten, hated, and discriminated against from strangers, friends, family, and spouses on the basis of their sexual orientation.

    It would be nice, as a fellow homosexual, to have your support sometime. Regardless of politics, when it comes to gay people, we should all be uniting for equal rights and protections under the law. It's not a partisan issue, and the Republican House is repulsive for stripping these provisions from the Violence Against Women Act.
    #439th oldest member on JUB.

  18. #68

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    It's implied.
    that is not how law works.
    If sexuality discourages a person from seeking help, or causes an aid worker to treat a potential victim differently, then of course it is a bar to assistance.
    The first is a personal problem. The latter would be an issue regarding structure of assistance/protection. The latter is not shown to be a major factor.
    The incidence of violence among gays vs. straights is not the issue.
    It shows that reported incidence (and thus protection and services) are more often utilized.
    Quote Originally Posted by xbuzzerx View Post
    Because when you use some odd as hell phrase for gay people like when someone calls us "practicing homosexuals" I question very much if they are, themselves, a gay person. And it matters because if you are here, on a gay forum, discussing gay rights with a faintly negative slant on the topic, and aren't a gay male, you appear to be here with some kind of agenda.
    Summarized as "if you do not agree with the herd, you need to get out."
    Quote Originally Posted by Just_Believe18 View Post
    It would be nice, as a fellow homosexual, to have your support sometime. Regardless of politics, when it comes to gay people, we should all be uniting for equal rights and protections under the law. It's not a partisan issue, and the Republican House is repulsive for stripping these provisions from the Violence Against Women Act.
    Your entire view is wrong. You are basing everything on sexuality. All other factors are ignored.

    Grow up, sir. Homosex is not a club. There is no "we."

  19. #69
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,778

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    that is not how law works.

    The first is a personal problem. The latter would be an issue regarding structure of assistance/protection. The latter is not shown to be a major factor.

    It shows that reported incidence (and thus protection and services) are more often utilized.

    Summarized as "if you do not agree with the herd, you need to get out."

    Your entire view is wrong. You are basing everything on sexuality. All other factors are ignored.

    Grow up, sir. Homosex is not a club. There is no "we."
    Annnnnnd here's the part where you go completely off your rocker, and begin wildly saying that any gay person who shares a belief in gay people's equal rights is all a koolaid drinking herd member.

    You're quite correct. When he said "we" he meant gay men, not non-gay Republican plants who refer to things like our "homosex agenda."
    Last edited by xbuzzerx; February 24th, 2013 at 09:17 AM.

  20. #70
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    I don't think anyone is denying that persecution exists against LGBT individuals, the question is whether this specific law requires special focus on the issue and it is not sure that it is. If you can show institutionalized discrimination against that group then most certainly such a focus would be appropriate but in this day and age such institutionalized discrimination is becoming rarer because it draws negative public opinion and controversy when spotlighted by the media. The one example provided is unclear but is just as or more likely to be a personal discrimination on the part of the individual. In my view this matter might be better addressed by wording in the law forbidding discrimination against anyone on factors outside the qualifying criteria for the providing of the service. This serves to protect a larger community than just LGBT individuals while still giving LGBT rights groups some teeth for taking legal action against specific offenders.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  21. #71
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,778

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    At this point it is not even thought by the corpus of this forum that you are gay, and at the very least, it is definite that you are not supportive of causes that benefit this community.

    Furthermore, I concur that the phraseology you use is indicative of someone who not only frequents anti-gay news and opinion sites, but prefers the arguments they present.

    Therefore, the most plausible explanation is that you are a conservative plant here to screw with us for your own amusement.

    I may have been born at night, but I was not born last night.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	gauntlet.jpg 
Views:	107 
Size:	49.5 KB 
ID:	932724


    Agreed and well said.

  22. #72
    JUB Addict vulgar_newcomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    St. Petersburg
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    2,893

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post

    Your desire to suck dick should have no influence on how the determinations you make regarding issues. Subjectivity is for the intellectually differently advantaged.
    Their is more to discrimination , violence or marriage then sucking dick. You ask many married woman who like sucking dick too, but you only applied the terminology to gays. You post a excellent example of the sort of thing a bigot would use as a defense to smear a minority.

  23. #73
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    It is, and often why judges have such a hard time searching for a record to infer meaning from the law.




    At this point it is not even thought by the corpus of this forum that you are gay, and at the very least, it is definite that you are not supportive of causes that benefit this community.

    Furthermore, I concur that the phraseology you use is indicative of someone who not only frequents anti-gay news and opinion sites, but prefers the arguments they present.

    Therefore, the most plausible explanation is that you are a conservative plant here to screw with us for your own amusement.

    I may have been born at night, but I was not born last night.
    I think the idea that Conservatives are so desperate to undermine liberal causes that they are seeding 'plants' into a gay porn website's political forum is rather silly. Aside from that, is there some condition of participation here that you have be gay and supportive of gay rights to participate in this forum? I find forums limited to one sided opinion to be quite boring, part of the reason why I'm usually willing to step in an play devil's advocate when I can at least understand the other side's viewpoint.

    Whether or not he is gay is irrelevant to the discussion, and his points are relevant to the discussion. Whether they are right or wrong is the point of the discussion but if you are unwilling to hold the discussion just because he might be a straight conservative then you have already spoiled any rational debate by making it clear you will attack the messengers you disagree with.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  24. #74
    JUB 10k Club
    CTF's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    El corazón de Tejas
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    20,054
    Blog Entries
    23

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    ^ WORD!

    Nobody wants to be slammed with being on "the bandwagon" but that's just a stupid sports analogy that really doesn't apply unless one is only talking about supporting "one team."

    On a Gay Porn discussion forum it's only reasonable that, when it comes to topics like this, that we'd all be on the same page...or "bandwagon."

    But, instead it DEVOLVES (sorry to those who don't accept evolution) into a partisan witch hunt, and everyone ends up talking past each other.

    So as a volunteer Moderator of this forum, where it's clear that I am bias, I prefer that we skip past the Fox/MSNBC News talking points and discuss how these issues effect us personally.

    Otherwise, (and this is me taking off my volunteer moderator / JUB T-shirt) right wing, or left, when it comes to Gay Equality there are quite a few TROLLS who post regularly in this forum.

    In some instances the only reason CE&P exists is so not to interrupt the more pressing topics in Hot Topics.

    Which, btw....

    IT'S BRITNEY BITCH!

    Never regret anything, because in that moment it's exactly what you wanted.

  25. #75
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    We gays are used to hate, but what we do not like are lies.



    Your problem is you don't know the difference between neutrality and objectivity.
    Perhaps I could learn if there were an example of either in the last few posts but I must admit to failing to find any.

    I thought the one comment suggesting the board filled with right wing rantings amusing, compared to some message boards I've visited this one is clearly a liberal domain. This is really the only political message board I frequent anymore because I feel there is really honest informed discussion here. I would hate to see this become like all the others I've left because they had become so one sided in opinion that any real discussion dissolved in to bashing the offender who had the temerity to disagree right or wrong.

    That being said some of Itsmejeff's responses to being challenged were clearly out of line in reasonable debate, post 69 particularly. But he may just have a temper, something he is not alone with, my advice to him is focus on the subject and ignore the personal. And it is amazing to watch how quickly the wagons circle around the dreaded conservative plant, LOL. However unlike one or two others here who can only spout talking points and cliche's he is actually addressing the subject before things started devolving. Which makes this even more amusing since there have been a few posts lately asking for a Republican defender's response to the subject and now when you think you have one, it all turns into personal bashing and lamenting on the evil conservative plants. One would almost suspect that such posts were not really plea for an opposing viewpoint but bait for a trap.

    Everyone should take a step back and calm it down. You wanted a conservative to debate, be glad you got one that is actually debating and not another drone. Drop the personal unless you really are saying this is a Gay Progressive only board. It which case all of us who aren't gay progressives can just leave and let you'll have a nice quite echo chamber to talk in.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  26. #76
    JUB 10k Club
    CTF's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    El corazón de Tejas
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    20,054
    Blog Entries
    23

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    ^ Thank you.

    Yes that are some opinions expressed here that I personally don't agree with.

    There are some members who post here that I don't think are "conservative plants" but just random internet trolls.

    And there are "regular" posters who post here that do nothing more than to wrap themselves in the opposition (calling them devil's advocates gives them too much credit) that they themselves want to be the "lightening rods" for opposition, while branding everyone else as "percenters" and leaders of "bandwagons."

    Yeah, there are some TROLLS who regularly post in this sub-forum.

    When CE&P works best, it works when all of us can just "put it out there" and then we discuss it.

    Where and when this forum sucks (for all of us), is when avatars try to make it personal between each other.

    Then, as a moderator, it becomes difficult for us to untangle that discussion.
    Never regret anything, because in that moment it's exactly what you wanted.

  27. #77
    JUB 10k Club
    CTF's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    El corazón de Tejas
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    20,054
    Blog Entries
    23

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by GiancarloC View Post
    No, he's actually right. Certain posters here try to play the neutral ground and they fail miserably at I must add. It's not about making this neutral or objective, but rather looking at intentions. The poster in question seems to be incredibly bitter and defensive... resorting to insults when their argument fails. So I think telling some people here to step back and calm down is misdirected.
    Said the kettle to the pot.
    Never regret anything, because in that moment it's exactly what you wanted.

  28. #78
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    I am bothered by heterosexuals coming here to bash gay people. I think it should not be allowed. Have all the homophobic notions in the world if you're some self-loathing closet case. I will gladly wipe the floor with you in an argument. But this forum does not need straight 'phobes who come here to bash us with their heteronormative view of what hole we need to crawl back in.

    So, as much as witch hunts have started pissing even me off, I have to ask - itsmejeff, are you gay? I don't give a fuck if you "don't like labels". You know exactly what I mean with that question and so you can answer it, with one word or ten sentences - I don't care, as long as the answer is clear.

    Because if you are not, then what you're doing here is a deliberate attack.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  29. #79
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    5,177

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    I think the idea that Conservatives are so desperate to undermine liberal causes that they are seeding 'plants' into a gay porn website's political forum is rather silly.
    As silly as claiming God steers hurricanes at gay people?

    As silly as claiming that gay marriage will destroy straight marriage?

    As silly as claiming the military cannot function if it includes out gays?

    As silly as claiming homosexuality can be "cured" with a few re-education seminars?


    If the modern Republican Party has taught us anything, it is that conservatives are bat-sh*t crazy fanatics who will believe anything and do anything to feed their own delusions. They don't accept reason, they don't accept science, they don't accept evidence, they don't accept history, and they don't accept reality.

    All that matters to them are the (usually remarkably bigoted, intolerant, and hateful) pronouncements of a handful of their anointed prophets.

    Modern American conservatism is a remarkably dysfunctional movement. And we are witnesses to that dysfunction in this forum every day.

    That is the reason Republicans in the House have eliminated the LGBT protections from their version of the VAWA. It's not about crafting more reasonable legislation. It's about promoting their particular brand of hatred and intolerance. Conservatives believe that America will be a better place for straight, white, rich, male, Christians if certain minorities are beaten to a pulp.

    I don't happen to share that view.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; February 24th, 2013 at 12:21 PM.

  30. #80
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,778

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    I think the idea that Conservatives are so desperate to undermine liberal causes that they are seeding 'plants' into a gay porn website's political forum is rather silly.
    You're apparently unaware that this did start happening, for real, and not in some kind of hyper-paranoid conspiracy theory world.

    This isn't about labelling someone a plant to discredit them. As far as I'm concerned Itsmejeff is already discredited because he's unable to defend his positions without beginning to shriek that we're all on a bandwagon or engaging in herdthink. I can't remember if it was bankside or tigersfan who said it -- but they said it incredibly well -- that if you could get 95% of people to agree the sky is blue, that is not proof of people jumping on a bandwagon.

    Coming to a gay forum and expecting there to be a Fox vs. MSN-esque appearance of 50/50 split on the topic of gay rights is ridiculous, someone who thinks or expects that needs a reality readjustment, and someone who is just here to yell at us that we're brainwashed sheep for generally being in unison that we support equal rights for ourselves is here with some agenda other than reasonable discussion.

    I have to agree with Jock on this one, Stardreamer. You engage in the sort of worldview that is totally poisoning public discourse and the information we receive in the mass media-- that worldview being that if we're not giving equal credence and respect to every possible side of every issue, regardless of how facts or reason may vary in their support of each position, we're engaging in "bias" or "closedmindedness." We shouldn't take a position for which there is no reasonable or credible argument as seriously as a position that does.

  31. #81
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    ^^^ This. Being closedminded to alternative viewpoints is incredibly dangerous, but to overcompensate by bending backwards to give every viewpoint equal consideration is pretty much intellectual suicide.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  32. #82
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    I'm not sure there is such a thing as neutral in political debate, I do try to be objective but I make no claim to being good at it. I think that there is too much emphasis on us vs them, like the world of politics is a bipolar black and white place. I also enjoy civilized debate and discussion which is why I find the rising discord into the personal here disconcerting.

    Sometimes you have to 'wrap yourself into the opposition' if you really want to discuss the issue at hand. You cannot effectively explore and validate your own positions if you only test them against a two dimensional straw man of the 'opposition'. The opposition is not always of malicious intent after all, sometimes they are just wrong or sometimes they may actually have a point. One can be pro-gay civil rights and still legitimately ask if a proposed wording related to that subject is appropriate to a specific set of legislation.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  33. #83
    PerScientiam AdJustitiam bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Beware the deepity.
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    17,487
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. - Napoléon.

    I don't subscribe to the heterosexual infiltration theory when the problem of self-hatred is so well known.

  34. #84
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct
    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    I'm not sure there is such a thing as neutral in political debate, I do try to be objective but I make no claim to being good at it. I think that there is too much emphasis on us vs them, like the world of politics is a bipolar black and white place. I also enjoy civilized debate and discussion which is why I find the rising discord into the personal here disconcerting.

    Sometimes you have to 'wrap yourself into the opposition' if you really want to discuss the issue at hand. You cannot effectively explore and validate your own positions if you only test them against a two dimensional straw man of the 'opposition'. The opposition is not always of malicious intent after all, sometimes they are just wrong or sometimes they may actually have a point. One can be pro-gay civil rights and still legitimately ask if a proposed wording related to that subject is appropriate to a specific set of legislation.
    Um, when it comes to gay issues, it IS us vs. them. They want us to not have any, to deny who we are and get "cured", or at least stuck back in the closet and pretend we don't exist. What is this, if not us vs. them?

    I am only happy some of "them" are beginning to split from the party line. Too bad they risk their careers doing so (I read today that the Illinois GOP guy could be fired in the next two weeks), thus clearly showing how much "they" hate us as a group.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  35. #85
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    As silly as claiming God steers hurricanes at gay people?

    As silly as claiming that gay marriage will destroy straight marriage?

    As silly as claiming the military cannot function if it includes out gays?

    As silly as claiming homosexuality can be "cured" with a few re-education seminars?


    If the modern Republican Party has taught us anything, it is that conservatives are bat-sh*t crazy fanatics who will believe anything and do anything to feed their own delusions. They don't accept reason, they don't accept science, they don't accept evidence, they don't accept history, and they don't accept reality.

    All that matters to them are the (usually remarkably bigoted, intolerant, and hateful) pronouncements of a handful of their anointed prophets.

    Modern American conservatism is a remarkably dysfunctional movement. And we are witnesses to that dysfunction in this forum every day.

    That is the reason Republicans in the House have eliminated the LGBT protections from their version of the VAWA. It's not about crafting more reasonable legislation. It's about promoting their particular brand of hatred and intolerance. Conservatives believe that America will be a better place for straight, white, rich, male, Christians if certain minorities are beaten to a pulp.

    I don't happen to share that view.
    Actually its rather silly because there no real reason for them to do it even for "bat-sh*t crazy" it would be a pointless exercise and waste of energy. Aside from that I pretty much agree with your assessment of the Republican party as it stands.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  36. #86
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    I am bothered by heterosexuals coming here to bash gay people. I think it should not be allowed. Have all the homophobic notions in the world if you're some self-loathing closet case. I will gladly wipe the floor with you in an argument. But this forum does not need straight 'phobes who come here to bash us with their heteronormative view of what hole we need to crawl back in.

    So, as much as witch hunts have started pissing even me off, I have to ask - itsmejeff, are you gay? I don't give a fuck if you "don't like labels". You know exactly what I mean with that question and so you can answer it, with one word or ten sentences - I don't care, as long as the answer is clear.

    Because if you are not, then what you're doing here is a deliberate attack.
    I agree if all he is here for is to rattle cages. I'm not sure what asking him if he is gay accomplishes though, not all straight people are out to bash gays and not all gays are supportive of gay rights, I've seen some who are quite nasty about it. Why not just ask him straight out if he is bigoted?
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  37. #87
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,778

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    I agree if all he is here for is to rattle cages. I'm not sure what asking him if he is gay accomplishes though, not all straight people are out to bash gays and not all gays are supportive of gay rights, I've seen some who are quite nasty about it. Why not just ask him straight out if he is bigoted?
    You wouldn't have a pretty good idea what someone was up to if they specially came to a gay forum to argue against gay rights as a non gay person?

    Seriously, you can't see why that question actually has a point?

  38. #88
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    5,177

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    Why not just ask him straight out if he is bigoted?
    Interesting thing about bigots. They never believe they are bigoted. Never.

  39. #89
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by xbuzzerx View Post
    You're apparently unaware that this did start happening, for real, and not in some kind of hyper-paranoid conspiracy theory world.

    This isn't about labelling someone a plant to discredit them. As far as I'm concerned Itsmejeff is already discredited because he's unable to defend his positions without beginning to shriek that we're all on a bandwagon or engaging in herdthink. I can't remember if it was bankside or tigersfan who said it -- but they said it incredibly well -- that if you could get 95% of people to agree the sky is blue, that is not proof of people jumping on a bandwagon.

    Coming to a gay forum and expecting there to be a Fox vs. MSN-esque appearance of 50/50 split on the topic of gay rights is ridiculous, someone who thinks or expects that needs a reality readjustment, and someone who is just here to yell at us that we're brainwashed sheep for generally being in unison that we support equal rights for ourselves is here with some agenda other than reasonable discussion.

    I have to agree with Jock on this one, Stardreamer. You engage in the sort of worldview that is totally poisoning public discourse and the information we receive in the mass media-- that worldview being that if we're not giving equal credence and respect to every possible side of every issue, regardless of how facts or reason may vary in their support of each position, we're engaging in "bias" or "closedmindedness." We shouldn't take a position for which there is no reasonable or credible argument as seriously as a position that does.
    Nice well reasoned, completely misses the mark on what my world view is but that fine. It would be utterly silly to think that every possible side of an issue is equal but it is just as silly to not explore and test the various sides against your own viewpoint. Even worse to reduce all other views to straw men and pat yourself on the back. Even if the 'opposition' is really motivated by hate and bias, they put forward public positions to justify their actions to others. Those positions should not be rejected out of hand but explored and discredited and where there is some logic to them (regardless of the motivation behind them) adjusted for so there is no longer a foothold for the opposition to use.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  40. #90
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,778

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    Nice well reasoned, completely misses the mark on what my world view is but that fine. It would be utterly silly to think that every possible side of an issue is equal but it is just as silly to not explore and test the various sides against your own viewpoint. Even worse to reduce all other views to straw men and pat yourself on the back. Even if the 'opposition' is really motivated by hate and bias, they put forward public positions to justify their actions to others. Those positions should not be rejected out of hand but explored and discredited and where there is some logic to them (regardless of the motivation behind them) adjusted for so there is no longer a foothold for the opposition to use.
    Stardreamer have you been even reading?

    His "position" is we all just engage in herdthink and bandwagoning because of some gay litmus. How exactly are we supposed to "explore and test that side"?

  41. #91
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    I am glad you said that.

    Civil rights for gay people is one of those rare issues that happens to be black and white.

    There is no legitimate discussion that debates whether or not gay people should be protected from harm, and there is no legitimate discussion that debates factual information about whether or not gay people are being harmed.



    Except that is not what has been debated here.

    The criticism in this thread is that we have been mentioned at all, and that discrimination against gays does not happen, which is evidently not true.
    Can you quote one single poster in this thread that has said that discrimination against gays does not happen or that they should not be protected from harm? I don't think anyone has put forward that idea.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  42. #92
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    2,054

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    I support the concept of stopping/preventing/reducing violence against anyone - in this case women
    How about responsibility?

    why do gay/lesbian women need special notation here ?
    Terrible question.

    what am i missing ?
    History.

    women need protection - i get it

    why do diff. types of women need diff. types of protection ?
    So, are you saying that women who are not heterosexual are "different types" and do/may not need protection, unlike heterosexual women who, as you "get it," would be in need?

    please do not respond as if this is anything but a reasonable question or POV
    '

    It's kind of you to start that sentence with the word please. But I won't respond to what you had written as if it has been "reasonable." It does not make sense.
    Last edited by CoolBlue71; February 24th, 2013 at 01:35 PM.

  43. #93
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by xbuzzerx View Post
    Stardreamer have you been even reading?

    His "position" is we all just engage in herdthink and bandwagoning because of some gay litmus. How exactly are we supposed to "explore and test that side"?
    You should explore and test it for no other reasoning than to disarm the other side by showing the flaw in their logic and in those cases where the have a point to stand on, adjust your own view accordingly to address that point and thus de-fang that argument.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  44. #94
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    2,054

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by CoolBlue71 View Post
    In other news Log Cabin Republican or GOProud -- whichever -- aren't going to CPAC.



    Did I say "however tangentially related" above? Let me correct that. The GOP uses every opportunity - however unrelated - to bash us. CPAC has become a showplace for Republicans to proudly and publicly enforce bigotry against gays. There really is something disturbingly pathological about that.
    Yes. But the "pathological" doesn't excuse any of those two groups, Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud, from accountability. They want to be representing people of the LGBT community and, yet, endorse the political party whose platform and politicians work against them.

    It's not "disturbing" so much as it's dangerous. Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud have no conscience in trying to lead the LGBT community to slaughter. And their motivation is chiefly attributed to their own delusions that it is worth selling out the LGBT because they figure it would be good for [their] financial gains.
    Last edited by CoolBlue71; February 24th, 2013 at 01:47 PM.

  45. #95
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,395

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    Hard to miss.
    Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post

    The assumption that sexuality will bar an individual from assistance or protection is a false one...
    Not well stated and rather flawed as presented but also presented here completely out of context. He was addressing if removing the language from the law says it is OK for institutions to discriminate as far as I know it does not. So the assumption may be flawed but it is not entirely accurate to say it is false since we have at least one example of discrimination in the system. We just don't know if it is institutionalized. The statement is not however in that context a statement that discrimination does not exist.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  46. #96
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    2,054

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by chance1 View Post
    what's REALLY insulting is that the premise u just suggested actually doesn't take place here

    the reverse does

    bizarro world of CE+P
    According to the below-linked New York Times post-Election 2012 article, there was 22-percent support from self-identified "gay, lesbian or bisexual" people who voted for the Republican presidential nominee. So, you shouldn't be finding Just Us Boys' political forum a "bizarro world" … especially given that you have chosen to post here for years.


    Gay Vote Proved a Boon for Obama

    By Micah Cohen
    Nov. 15, 2012 | http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/us...tory.html?_r=0

    Research by Patrick J. Egan, a professor of politics and public policy at New York University, suggests that gay voters may prove difficult to bring into the Republican tent. Many of them “aren’t swingable because they have liberal positions on a whole bunch of issues besides gay rights,” Dr. Egan said.

    Exit polls showed that 76 percent of voters who identified as gay supported Mr. Obama last week, and that 22 percent supported Mr. Romney.
    Last edited by CoolBlue71; February 24th, 2013 at 01:59 PM.

  47. #97

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    If you read the Huffington article the difference is that the House bill protects everyone. The Senate wants to protect members of listed groups, excluding others. It is the same problem with hate crime laws. Democrats always want to prefer those who tend to vote Democrat. The Democrats want to use the law to discriminate.

  48. #98
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,778

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    That would not be a correct analysis of the proposed law.

    Discrimination against straight people is included in "sexual orientation," and there are already examples of straight people rightfully bringing claims against gay establishments under state laws.

    Gay rights are not special rights.
    If only this hypersensitivity against even the perception of possible discrimination against either white people or heterosexual people were applied towards people who actually face discrimination, ey?

  49. #99
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    22,498
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    In other words, it's okay to beat up on women if they're lesbians, transgendered, or bisexual. Obviously, if you fall into one of those categories, you're not really a human being.
    Where is this stated exactly?
    I suspect it is the member’s personal dramatization, but it reminds me of some recent segments on The Rachel Maddow Show.

    … there's room [for] a worthwhile debate, but it's important for the public to understand that a constructive discussion is impossible when there's no shared basis for reality.

    When false claims drive the debate

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    … the FBI definition of rape, for instance, does not allow for males to [be] victims of the act.
    The definition was changed last January.

    The new definition of rape is: “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” The definition is used by the FBI to collect information from local law enforcement agencies about reported rapes.

    Attorney General Eric Holder Announces Revisions to the Uniform Crime Report’s Definition of Rape (FBI)
    For the first time ever, the new definition includes any gender of victim and perpetrator, not just women being raped by men.

    An Updated Definition of Rape (DOJ Blog)

  50. #100
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: House GOP Strips LGBT Protections from Its Version of Violence Against Women Act

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    I am glad you said that.

    Civil rights for gay people is one of those rare issues that happens to be black and white.

    There is no legitimate discussion that debates whether or not gay people should be protected from harm, and there is no legitimate discussion that debates factual information about whether or not gay people are being harmed.



    Except that is not what has been debated here.

    The criticism in this thread is that we have been mentioned at all, and that discrimination against gays does not happen, which is evidently not true.
    Quoted for "thanks, that's exactly what I meant too".
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.