Quote:
Originally posted by j8ear
No I don't think so as I saw this a little differently. It seemed to me that the organizers of the event went out of their way to single out and exclude a certain segment (however minority it might be) of the gay community, with peaceful and similar goals, apparently even violently. Essentially they were intolerant of people who wanted to attend an event designed to promote tolerance.
You may be homosexual but your not the right kind of homosexual to be included in our homosexual event...so we will violently and intolerantly try and prevent you from attending ~our~ peaceful tolerance event. That ~is~ a text book example of irony.
I find the blatant bigotry and intolerance of the organizers... directed at members of their own constituency to be rather bizarre. Yet interestingly not all that unexpected.
This is a debate about a group of hypocritical intolerant bigots over stepping their bounds in order to exclude members of their own community from participating in an event designed to forward the common aims of that community. THIS IS NOT a debate about guns, imo...
-bear
|
Barring your statement at the end, you do not mention the word gun at all in your explanation. In my opinion, that's misleading. Perhaps for you guns are bountiful tools that enrich the lives of those who use them, but it isn't that way for all of us. Guns have a stigma attached to them which cannot be ignored. They generate legitimate feelings of unneasiness among many who are exposed to them.
Criticize the way they went about dealing with the gun toters, but don't make this into something it's not. You're equating their disdain for guns at a parade with discrimination based on some sort of inherent part of the person.
They didn't want guns at their parade. This isn't racism or bigotry and should not be placed on the same level.
Of course this is all IMO.
SLM3