So, wait. They try to see how gay-bashing the state is, find out the people there aren't gay haters, and turn it into all about Texas being a gay-bashing state anyway?
Not gon' watch it this time cuz the bait might be too tasty.
Still, you know me and the legislation of morality (against that) so, we could find ourselves agreeing about something which we know risks the universe exploding if it happens.
I only got partway through because it was all a set-up with actors. Bah. Second the gekko's comment. Confused by the serene babe's comment since she and AD agree on many things; except that there is a history of some "liberals" being swayed by word and tone to misunderstand what AD has really said.
As wonderful as it is to see people supporting the gay families, I'm confused. I know that part of urban life is to ignore other people (you'd be way to busy if you didn't) and the New York restaurant looked bigger and more crowded. Did the New Yorkers assume the law would protect the gay patrons? Why did the Texans speak up? Do they usually, anyway?
Omigosh! My word verification is "mouts"! How New Yawk!
Ha! None of you got it if you didn't watch the whole thing.
It turns out that in places like Texas (conservative/libertarian/whatever you want to call it) it is generally unacceptable for you to stick your oar into someone else's business, regardless of whether the law addresses it or not, and your average Texan isn't even slightly bashful about telling people who violate that code to fuck off.
In New Yawk and such places (liberal/big Government/more laws/slacktivism,) they decide what's their business and what's not and write a law about it. Then everyone sits with their thumbs in their ass, confident that making it illegal has fulfilled their part of the social contract.
After which it's none of their affair...the State should step in and handle it.
'Cause there's a law, by God.
God forbid they should actually dirty their own hands, stand up, and do something useful.
Ask the lesbian and her soon-to-be little gay kids at the center of the story whether she'd prefer to live someplace where the built-in tendency of society is to minimize interference by either law or other people, and the actual, normal view of the people is that she be left alone to screw up her own life as she pleases;
...or does she prefer some liberal utopia where the delicate distain her self-appointed superiors have for her are highlighted by the law they've so generously passed to protect her from the masses?
Bottom line: To the surprise of virtually everyone except anyone who knows anything, most of Texas (and conservative states in general) is VASTLY more tolerant on a REAL level than virtually any liberal bastion is outside the four corners of their self-righteous legal documents and self-congratulatory back-patting.
Let's say I'm lesbian and I'm living in the deep south. (Deep South?) Let's say my friends and family accept me, even. The small town where I live tolerates me and my partner and our children. Hate the sin, not the sinner, etc.
But, everywhere I go I know that almost everyone I interact with believes I'm going to Hell and that I deserve it. They want to live as Jesus told them to, but their preachers their whole lives have mixed up Jesus' message so much they actually believe homosexuality is bad.
Or... I'm lesbian living in New York City. Nobody notices much. If they're uncomfortable with the fact that my partner and I walk around holding hands they keep it to themselves because they believe they're supposed to be accepting of differences.
In the first case, there is real condemnation and judgment. In the second, there's wimpy means-wellness.
In both cases, the direct communication isn't there so I wouldn't enjoy either situation. In the NYC version there is, at the very least, an attempt to be truly accepting.
I'm having a hard time with the idea of New Yorkers being meekly thumb-in-ass about anything.
anyway, per AD's explanation, the actress playing the waitress was not playing a Texan waitress, but rather some nosey bimbo who could be from absolutely anywhere except AD's mind-yer-own-biz Texas.
So, wait. They try to see how gay-bashing the state is, find out the people there aren't gay haters, and turn it into all about Texas being a gay-bashing state anyway?
ReplyDeleteHokay.
Not gon' watch it this time cuz the bait might be too tasty.
ReplyDeleteStill, you know me and the legislation of morality (against that) so, we could find ourselves agreeing about something which we know risks the universe exploding if it happens.
I only got partway through because it was all a set-up with actors. Bah. Second the gekko's comment. Confused by the serene babe's comment since she and AD agree on many things; except that there is a history of some "liberals" being swayed by word and tone to misunderstand what AD has really said.
ReplyDeleteAw, it was just me pretending like he and I are opposites. It's fun that way. It probably didn't make a lot of sense in this case.
ReplyDeleteAs wonderful as it is to see people supporting the gay families, I'm confused. I know that part of urban life is to ignore other people (you'd be way to busy if you didn't) and the New York restaurant looked bigger and more crowded. Did the New Yorkers assume the law would protect the gay patrons? Why did the Texans speak up? Do they usually, anyway?
ReplyDeleteOmigosh! My word verification is "mouts"! How New Yawk!
Ha! None of you got it if you didn't watch the whole thing.
ReplyDeleteIt turns out that in places like Texas (conservative/libertarian/whatever you want to call it) it is generally unacceptable for you to stick your oar into someone else's business, regardless of whether the law addresses it or not, and your average Texan isn't even slightly bashful about telling people who violate that code to fuck off.
In New Yawk and such places (liberal/big Government/more laws/slacktivism,) they decide what's their business and what's not and write a law about it. Then everyone sits with their thumbs in their ass, confident that making it illegal has fulfilled their part of the social contract.
After which it's none of their affair...the State should step in and handle it.
'Cause there's a law, by God.
God forbid they should actually dirty their own hands, stand up, and do something useful.
Ask the lesbian and her soon-to-be little gay kids at the center of the story whether she'd prefer to live someplace where the built-in tendency of society is to minimize interference by either law or other people, and the actual, normal view of the people is that she be left alone to screw up her own life as she pleases;
...or does she prefer some liberal utopia where the delicate distain her self-appointed superiors have for her are highlighted by the law they've so generously passed to protect her from the masses?
Bottom line: To the surprise of virtually everyone except anyone who knows anything, most of Texas (and conservative states in general) is VASTLY more tolerant on a REAL level than virtually any liberal bastion is outside the four corners of their self-righteous legal documents and self-congratulatory back-patting.
It's a toss up, I think.
ReplyDeleteLet's say I'm lesbian and I'm living in the deep south. (Deep South?) Let's say my friends and family accept me, even. The small town where I live tolerates me and my partner and our children. Hate the sin, not the sinner, etc.
But, everywhere I go I know that almost everyone I interact with believes I'm going to Hell and that I deserve it. They want to live as Jesus told them to, but their preachers their whole lives have mixed up Jesus' message so much they actually believe homosexuality is bad.
Or... I'm lesbian living in New York City. Nobody notices much. If they're uncomfortable with the fact that my partner and I walk around holding hands they keep it to themselves because they believe they're supposed to be accepting of differences.
In the first case, there is real condemnation and judgment. In the second, there's wimpy means-wellness.
In both cases, the direct communication isn't there so I wouldn't enjoy either situation. In the NYC version there is, at the very least, an attempt to be truly accepting.
I'm having a hard time with the idea of New Yorkers being meekly thumb-in-ass about anything.
ReplyDeleteanyway, per AD's explanation, the actress playing the waitress was not playing a Texan waitress, but rather some nosey bimbo who could be from absolutely anywhere except AD's mind-yer-own-biz Texas.
Same with the guy who confronted her.
So I still don't get the point of the video.