Originals WTF? La Culture Geekery WWJD? The South Blog

NC GOP Platform insists on discrimination against gays

What The Funk?

Postby A Person » Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:27 pm

One of the more convincing arguments for not having legislation protecting specific minorities from discrimination is that general anti discrimination laws should be sufficient. It ought not to be necessary to specify the grounds for arbitrary and uncivilised discrimination whether it be as a result of race, religion, gender, politics or sexual preferences.

The North Carolina GOP just killed that argument dead. Their Platform Committee has just released their platform report -and it insists that Republicans be allowed to specifically discriminate against those sexy deviants, thereby demostrating just why specific protections are needed.

North Carolina GOP Clowns wrote:4. We recognize that single-parent families succeed and that two-parent families sometimes fail. We praise the efforts of single parents who work to provide stable homes. We also salute and support the efforts of foster and adoptive families. We oppose adoption by same sex couples.
...
6. We support federal and State constitutional amendments to limit marriage to the union of one man and one woman.
...
3. Government should treat all citizens impartially, without regard to wealth, race, ethnicity, disability, religion, sex, political affiliation or national origin. We oppose all forms of invidious discrimination. Sexual orientation is not an appropriate category.


"We oppose all forms of invidious discrimination" Except when we don't

On a different topic it also includes this gem

7. We recognize the need for treaties. We should withdraw from any treaty that compromises our sovereignty or undermines national defense.


Duh, ALL TREATIES COMPROMISE SOVEREIGNTY! Treaties restrict a country's abilitity to act unilaterally. If you recognise the need for them then you have to abide by them yourself. It's like saying "We recognize the need for speed limits, but they should only apply to other people. Restricting my choice at what speed I can drive at limits my freedoms"
User avatar
A Person
 
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:41 pm

The fact that they called on the likes of Donald Trump and Rick Perry to give keynote speeches at their convention shows that they aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. Their brain trust really has a difficult time with logic...
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.

Postby Liv » Tue Jun 05, 2012 12:18 am

I think NC just took Mississippi's reputation.

God, I really hate living here some times.
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2753
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby A Person » Tue Jun 05, 2012 1:28 am

Just think, in 30 years time, thesumofyourfears will be earnestly explaining how the Republican party was the party that supported gay rights and how the evil liebrul demoncraKKKs opposed it - after all he lived through it so only he knows!
User avatar
A Person
 
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North

Postby The Vicar » Tue Jun 05, 2012 1:48 am

@Liv:

What do you mean "just"? ...okay, I suppose it depends on what you thought Mississippi's reputation was. But if you mean "slimy, smiling, stupid right-wing hickishness", then I regret to inform you that that ship has not only sailed, but has reached its destination, returned, made several more trips, and is now in dry dock having barnacles scraped off its underside.
The Vicar
 

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Tue Jun 05, 2012 2:01 am

The Vicar wrote:@Liv:

What do you mean "just"? ...okay, I suppose it depends on what you thought Mississippi's reputation was. But if you mean "slimy, smiling, stupid right-wing hickishness", then I regret to inform you that that ship has not only sailed, but has reached its destination, returned, made several more trips, and is now in dry dock having barnacles scraped off its underside.

LOL. I lived in Mississippi for a couple of years, back at the turn of the century. Having moved there from North Carolina, I have to say that it really didn't seem that different from NC. A little less "metropolitan" than the Triad, to be sure... But most definitely easy to get around, for a White guy with a sort of Southern accent.
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.

Postby Liv » Tue Jun 05, 2012 3:11 pm

The Vicar wrote:@Liv:

What do you mean "just"?


Okay, when I think of Mississippi I think of this:

missiburning032609.jpg
missiburning032609.jpg (37.35 KiB) Viewed 2658 times


and this: (okay technically this is Alabama)






I suppose I had always hoped, the state had outgrown its past. I've often been criticized, that I publicize the "stereotype" rather than the newly evolved North Carolina. However, as I get older and tend to have less self-doubt in my opinions, I wonder if such beliefs aren't more propaganda and less fact.
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2753
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby A Person » Tue Jun 05, 2012 4:06 pm

I was not impressed by that episode of Top Gear. They deliberately tried to provoke a confrontation and then acted surprised when they got one. The entire episode was a xenophobic anti-American polemic, disguised as 'just having a bit of fun'. I pretty much stopped watching TG after that

To provide balance, they should have painted some cars with Nottingham Forest slogans and driven through Manchester when United were playing at home. Or neoNazi skinhead slogans and drive through Bradford. Either way they would be lucky to make it out

People who poke pitbulls with a stick, shouldn't act surprised if they get bitten.
User avatar
A Person
 
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North

Postby Liv » Tue Jun 05, 2012 4:17 pm

I understand what you're saying, but they were still attacked (unless it was scripted). It does not make it right. Are you saying I shouldn't roll up in Mississippi with a "I'm a lesbo and proud" license plate frame? Should I not be able to walk in that gas station and kiss my spouse?

Would it not illicit the same response?

What you're saying sounds a bit too much like "Don't ask, don't tell."
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2753
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby A Person » Tue Jun 05, 2012 7:26 pm

You mean elicit not illicit

I wouldn't park my car downtown with my laptop on the back seat either - it doesn't mean that the thieves would be justified n breaking in.

There are all sorts of provocative acts that would elicit an illegal response. Going into a biker bar and saying "the only difference between a Harley and a Hoover is the location of the dirtbag", cheering for Nottingham Forest in the Manchester United section of the stands, wearing a KKK costume round a black housing project, painting "I love my IRA" and driving round Northern Ireland (even if your IRA is funding your retirement) and yes being a snotty Brit and driving a car with 'MAN LOVE' slogans through Alabama. You have the right to free speech, the response would be illegal, but you should not be surprised to have provoked an unpleasant response.

It is a question of degree. You should indeed be able to kiss your partner in public - but making out on the hood is taking it too far.
User avatar
A Person
 
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North

Postby Liv » Tue Jun 05, 2012 9:30 pm

A Person wrote:It is a question of degree. You should indeed be able to kiss your partner in public - but making out on the hood is taking it too far.


Isn't that the basis for drama? For TV? A magnification of reality? Drama's main purpose is to elicit an emotional response in the viewer?

Is it not a modern-day theater in the round? Perhaps closer to street performance (unsuspecting passer-by)? Reality TV consists on the unknowing audience member (the rednecks in the episode) as much as it does the patrons behind their TV.

I just think the degree by which they caused the action was within reasonable acceptance. It's not as if they had sex on the hoods of their car. All they did was "be out and proud".

The only way to legitimize their efforts more would have been to send Priscilla (queen of the desert) and her bus streaking through the gas station. I doubt the outcome would have been much better.

08233-5.jpg
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2753
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby A Person » Tue Jun 05, 2012 9:59 pm

Liv wrote:All they did was "be out and proud".


No, they were 'not out and proud', they're not gay and Clarkson is quite antagonistic to gays - he delights in being politically incorrect i.e. boorish and rude to foreigners.

They used the gay movement to provoke a response to make Americans look bad. Not to make a point about anti-gay sentiment, but for theater. It's in line with their overgrown schoolboy personas.

My point is simply that it's easy to act provocatively and I have no more sympathy for them than I do for the Westboro Baptists
User avatar
A Person
 
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North

Postby Liv » Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:58 pm

They're not gay?

What?
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2753
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC


Return to WTF?