Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

LGBT Issues--


Princess of Tap

Recommended Posts

Former Beatle Ringo Starr has joined fellow rock and roll legend Bruce Springsteen in cancelling an upcoming concert in North Carolina to protest the new anti-LGBT law, which prevents transgender people using public restrooms that correspond to their gender.

 

He stated that he stood in solidarity with Springsteen to fight against the bigotry of the law. The Boss cancelled a concert in Greensboro last Sunday.

 

Ringo said, "I'm sorry to disappoint my fans in the area, but we need to take a stand against this hatred. Spread peace and love."

 

The concert had been scheduled for June 18th in Cary, North Carolina.

 

The former Beatle drummer concluded his statement by quoting a Beatle song--"All You Need Is Love".

 

"Girls Just Want to Have Fun" singer Cyndi Lauper plans to go ahead with an upcoming concert in Raleigh, North Carolina in order to turn the profits over to Equality in North Carolina's effort to repeal the so-called bathroom law.

 

Canadian rocker Bryan Adams cancelled a Thursday concert in Biloxi, Mississippi to protest a law in that state, which allows some businesses not to serve gay people on religious grounds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if trying to force the issue is an answer.

 

I certainly don't like the idea of legislating the telling of businesses how to RUN those businesses, but I also don't like the idea of state sanctioned bigotry.

 

But yeah, the prohibition to prevent certain people from using facilities aimed at relief of normal bodily urges(or needs) goes too far. 

 

However, if they REALLY wanted to be fair-------

 

The legislators who drafted and/or support this bill should........

 

Calculate the percentage of the state's population that is either gay, lesbian and transgender.

 

Then they sould estimate how much state income tax these individuals pay, and then REDUCE their salaries by that percentage in the fairness of the notion that...

 

Since I refuse to accept their "lifestyle",  and work at denying them BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS,  it's ONLY FAIR( and FAR less hypocritical) that I refuse their money!

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The legislators who drafted and/or support this bill should........

 

Calculate the percentage of the state's population that is either gay, lesbian and transgender.

 

Then they sould estimate how much state income tax these individuals pay, and then REDUCE their salaries by that percentage in the fairness of the notion that...

 

Since I refuse to accept their "lifestyle",  and work at denying them BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS,  it's ONLY FAIR( and FAR less hypocritical) that I refuse their money!

 

Sepiatone

Wouldn't matter that much.  Most state legislatures in South pay very little.  In S.C. it is about $10,000 per year.  They do it for the power, "prestige" and ability to run other people's lives.

Not sure where this is going, but protests are beginning in S.C. over our "bathroom" bill.

The people who introduce and vote for these bills are usually Tea Party affiliated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if trying to force the issue is an answer.

 

I certainly don't like the idea of legislating the telling of businesses how to RUN those businesses, but I also don't like the idea of state sanctioned bigotry.

 

But yeah, the prohibition to prevent certain people from using facilities aimed at relief of normal bodily urges(or needs) goes too far. 

 

However, if they REALLY wanted to be fair-------

 

The legislators who drafted and/or support this bill should........

 

Calculate the percentage of the state's population that is either gay, lesbian and transgender.

 

Then they sould estimate how much state income tax these individuals pay, and then REDUCE their salaries by that percentage in the fairness of the notion that...

 

Since I refuse to accept their "lifestyle",  and work at denying them BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS,  it's ONLY FAIR( and FAR less hypocritical) that I refuse their money!

 

Sepiatone

People who promote  legislation  like this are almost always hypocrites, they  deny a group of people their rights only to the extent that it doesn't also impact their (the bigoted ones) own interests. It's just like the old 3/5th's rule that the slave states insisted upon for taking a census that determined how many representatives they would send to Congress. Slaves had no  human rights, they were property just like livestock, but they merited counting for a census. And the resulting 3/5ths person rule was a compromise, southerners wanted slaves counted as a full person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It galls me more, even though I'm not that deeply religious a person, that these bigoted boneheads try to hide it under a cloak of "religious freedom"

 

Nobody otherwise has ever told them they CAN'T worship in their own way, nor not deeply cling to their "faith".  But to misuse that faith to excuse their unwarrented bigotry will surprise them on judgement day when they find themselves on the "down" elevator.  After all, since claiming to be "Christians", one would think it means abiing by the WORDS of Christ, like---"Give unto Caesar......"

 

Which in the case of that Kentucky idiot county clerk...."Do thy job thee is paid for....."

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

A letter in the "op-Ed" page today brought up a good point.....

 

For people like Sprigsteen and Ringo Starr to refuse to perorm in a state in which the LEGISLATORS passed a bill in opposition to THEIR particular political views is hypocritical.  It's no different than a bakery refusing to sell a wedding cake for a gay wedding due to religious beliefs( despite there actually being NO basis in scripture for it).

 

It doesn't mean the fans who shelled out hard earned cash for tickets supports the legislator's efforts.

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

A letter in the "op-Ed" page today brought up a good point.....

 

For people like Sprigsteen and Ringo Starr to refuse to perorm in a state in which the LEGISLATORS passed a bill in opposition to THEIR particular political views is hypocritical. It's no different than a bakery refusing to sell a wedding cake for a gay wedding due to religious beliefs( despite there actually being NO basis in scripture for it).

 

It doesn't mean the fans who shelled out hard earned cash for tickets supports the legislator's efforts.

 

Sepiatone

Sepia--

 

I don't know if you remember South African apartheid or not.

 

There was a movement called I'm not going to play Sun City.

 

That was a popular resort area in South Africa during apartheid.

 

Ringo Starr, Bruce Springsteen and other rock artist refused to play this venue as long as there was Apartheid in South Africa.

 

Various rock-and-roll artists made a video protesting apartheid. The video was called (I'm not going to play) Sun City. Ringo Starr, along with Keith Richards and Clarence Clemons of the Bruce Springsteen E Street Band were among the artists in this video.

 

They along with many others helped to bring apartheid down.

 

This kind of protest against bigotry is in the DNA of these rock stars.

 

They're only artists, but they do the best they can to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sepia--

 

I don't know if you remember South African apartheid or not.

 

There was a movement called I'm not going to play Sun City.

 

That was a popular resort area in South Africa during apartheid.

 

Ringo Starr, Bruce Springsteen and other rock artist refused to play this venue as long as there was Apartheid in South Africa.

 

Various rock-and-roll artists made a video protesting apartheid. The video was called (I'm not going to play) Sun City. Ringo Starr, along with Keith Richards and Clarence Clemons of the Bruce Springsteen E Street Band were among the artists in this video.

 

They along with many others helped to bring apartheid down.

 

This kind of protest against bigotry is in the DNA of these rock stars.

 

They're only artists, but they do the best they can to help others.

 

I say hold the concerts in these Southern states and donate the proceeds to the LGBT state groups that are fighting this type of hateful legislation.      

Link to post
Share on other sites

I say hold the concerts in these Southern states and donate the proceeds to the LGBT state groups that are fighting this type of hateful legislation.      

Some performers are doing this. Louis CK was here last week

and he is donating to an equality group. Cyndi Lauper has a

concert in a while and is going to do the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some performers are doing this. Louis CK was here last week

and he is donating to an equality group. Cyndi Lauper has a

concert in a while and is going to do the same.

 

That is great and I believe it is more useful then a boycott.    The only other advise I could give is to NOT announce that the proceeds will be donated until AFTER the event.     Spilling the beans might prevent some bigots from attending.   Much better to get their money and use it against them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're only artists, but they do the best they can to help others.

and enriched themselves too. what selflessness.

 

apartheid would not have ended if not for the willingness of F.W. DeKlerk to end it.

 

he's the real hero.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is great and I believe it is more useful then a boycott.    The only other advise I could give is to NOT announce that the proceeds will be donated until AFTER the event.     Spilling the beans might prevent some bigots from attending.   Much better to get their money and use it against them!

I suppose one tactic is as good as the other and each

performer can make their own decision. McCrory now

says he want a "dialogue" on the issue. I think there

was much more of a backlash than he thought there

would be when he signed the bill on the same day

it was passed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some establishments solved the problem by having gender neutral restrooms.  They are small, only have one toilet, sink and the door can be locked when restroom is occupied.  My local Big Lots have one.  A big relief to Pat if it ever pays my  area a visit.

 

Itispat.jpg

 

gender-neutral-restroom-sign.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

PRINCESS OF TAP-----

 

Of course I remember South African aparthied.  This is hardly the same thing(at least in level, but yeah, philosophically the same).

 

I agree with the idea of still having the concerts and donating the proceedings to those groups fighting the injustice.  After all, these performers are more or less punishing the fans,  most of whom might also disapprove of the bill, or even many of those fans ARE of the LBGT community.  I mean, Ringo Starr not showing up for or cancelling a concert i don't think has anyone in those state's governments shaking in their boots.  But, it IS good PR., although I do believe those artists(Starr and Springsteen) are sincere in their intent.

 

But as it stands, NObody seems to be taking the high road.  For example------

 

My ex mother-in-law and I never used to get along.  Ever since her daughter and I were mere "steadies".  Neither her nor my ex's father attended our wedding.  But when our first daughter was born, she humbly asked  her daughter if I could relent enough to allow her an occasional visit with her grand daughter.  I thought about it for only a few minutes before telling her, "Sure. Come over anytime to see her."  I reasoned it this way----

 

My daughter did nothing to warrent me using HER as a pawn in my and my mother in law's comedy.  Nor anything to deserve the punishment of being deprived of  contact with who turned out to be a very decent, loving and well loved grandmother and grandfather.  And over the ensuing years, WE both became closer and on friendlier terms.

 

But as I also say......

 

I don't see HOW not allowing any gay, lesbian, bisexual or TRANsexual people from using a facility aimed at serving the PUBLIC makes ANYone a better Christian, nor how allowing those individuals to USE them violates anybody's right to religious freedom.

 

However, forcing by law, ANY business to DO business with anyone they'd rather NOT do business with is also wrong.  I mean, if ANY thick headed businessman wishes to shoot himself in the foot and not make any money because the money came out of the pocket of someone his CHURCH disapproves of, well, it's HIS bottom line!  Personally, I don't actually think God WOULD look down on anyone who DID do business with them.  Dealing with the right or wrong of that individual's "lifestyle" is GOD's problem.

 

@Nip----Anti-aparthied groups eventually forced DeKlerk's hand.  He didn't end it out of the kindness of his heart.  The REAL heroes are those who SPOKE OUT and TOOK ACTION.

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

PRINCESS OF TAP-----

 

Of course I remember South African aparthied.  This is hardly the same thing(at least in level, but yeah, philosophically the same).

 

I agree with the idea of still having the concerts and donating the proceedings to those groups fighting the injustice.  After all, these performers are more or less punishing the fans,  most of whom might also disapprove of the bill, or even many of those fans ARE of the LBGT community.  I mean, Ringo Starr not showing up for or cancelling a concert i don't think has anyone in those state's governments shaking in their boots.  But, it IS good PR., although I do believe those artists(Starr and Springsteen) are sincere in their intent.

 

But as it stands, NObody seems to be taking the high road.  For example------

 

My ex mother-in-law and I never used to get along.  Ever since her daughter and I were mere "steadies".  Neither her nor my ex's father attended our wedding.  But when our first daughter was born, she humbly asked  her daughter if I could relent enough to allow her an occasional visit with her grand daughter.  I thought about it for only a few minutes before telling her, "Sure. Come over anytime to see her."  I reasoned it this way----

 

My daughter did nothing to warrent me using HER as a pawn in my and my mother in law's comedy.  Nor anything to deserve the punishment of being deprived of  contact with who turned out to be a very decent, loving and well loved grandmother and grandfather.  And over the ensuing years, WE both became closer and on friendlier terms.

 

But as I also say......

 

I don't see HOW not allowing any gay, lesbian, bisexual or TRANsexual people from using a facility aimed at serving the PUBLIC makes ANYone a better Christian, nor how allowing those individuals to USE them violates anybody's right to religious freedom.

 

However, forcing by law, ANY business to DO business with anyone they'd rather NOT do business with is also wrong.  I mean, if ANY thick headed businessman wishes to shoot himself in the foot and not make any money because the money came out of the pocket of someone his CHURCH disapproves of, well, it's HIS bottom line!  Personally, I don't actually think God WOULD look down on anyone who DID do business with them.  Dealing with the right or wrong of that individual's "lifestyle" is GOD's problem.

 

@Nip----Anti-aparthied groups eventually forced DeKlerk's hand.  He didn't end it out of the kindness of his heart.  The REAL heroes are those who SPOKE OUT and TOOK ACTION.

 

Sepiatone

RE: South Africa;

 

I remember when South Africa recently had the World Cup, all the local people who had things to sell were far away from the arena.    The big businesses like Coca Cola were nearby.  So again, not sure how anyone but big business profits in any of these instances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scare 'em to the max. He might have been going into

locker room territory, where transgender folks might

go, however unlikely that is. Cruz is also going with

the there will be a sudden influx of pretend transgender

men following little girls into the restroom idea.

 

Boston is the latest group to cancel in Carolina, North

that is. More than a feeling? Might be hard to get your

classic rock fix this summer in the state.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scare 'em to the max. He might have been going into

locker room territory, where transgender folks might

go, however unlikely that is. Cruz is also going with

the there will be a sudden influx of pretend transgender

men following little girls into the restroom idea.

 

Boston is the latest group to cancel in Carolina, North

that is. More than a feeling? Might be hard to get your

classic rock fix this summer in the state.

 

 

LOL. I did not know Boston was still around...........

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL. I did not know Boston was still around...........

I wasn't sure they were either, but they are.

These classic rock acts have it pretty easy.

No new records to make, just go out there

and play the SOS they've been playing for

years and likely make a pretty good chunk

of change. Nice work it you can get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't sure they were either, but they are.

These classic rock acts have it pretty easy.

No new records to make, just go out there

and play the SOS they've been playing for

years and likely make a pretty good chunk

of change. Nice work it you can get it.

Vautrin-- don't know about Boston - - I'll tell you all about Classic Rock/Pop right now--

 

If you had written all the songs, produced all the hit records, and created the innovative musical styles and cultural achievements in popular culture, like Brian Wilson, Paul McCartney, Smokey Robinson, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, Barry Gibb, Stevie Wonder ect then you would deserve to still be singing those songs and making money from singing those songs, if people wanted to hear them.

 

And from what I'm seeing today, people still want to hear them and still want to pay the big bucks.

 

If it was that easy to be Brian Wilson and write Pet Sounds and all those other hundreds of records that he wrote for the Beach Boys and others, then I guess everybody would be doing it. And everybody would be going out doing concert tours, earning millions of dollars.

 

It's nice work if you can get it-- if you had created the music and accomplished the cultural achievements of Paul McCartney, then you would deserve to receive the millions of dollars that Paul McCartney receives for singing all those old songs that he wrote with John Lennon.

 

Indeed, it is nice work if you can do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's bear in mind POT, that Lennon and McCartney really didn't "co-write" very many of the Beatles songs.  Sure, they did co-write a few, and I suppose several of their biggest earlier "hits", but....

 

And also, I don't think it WAS easy for Brian Wilson to write "Pet Sounds".  In fact, you may recall the whole BEACH BOY thing wasn't easy for him AT ALL!

 

But I know what you mean....

 

But also, many of the "classic rock" acts still working also put out new work.  mixing the old with the new is a way to keep old-timers coming back and teaching a bit of their musical history to the younger and newer fans.   I recall a gag that Billy Crystal once did...

 

He said, "My daughter came up to me the other day and said, 'HEY DAD!  Did you know PAUL McCARTNEY was in ANOTHER BAND before WINGS?'  "  He then went into his "old Jewish uncle" bit, coughed and hacked a bit and replied, "Sure....sit down dollink, and I'll tell you ALL about that old  good time band, The BEATLES!  *cough--HACK!*  :D

 

Ricky Nelson did that "Garden Party" song as a complaint that he wished NOT to be known only for his old time "hits", but also recognized for what he was doing musically at that point in time as well.

 

Others don't mind at all, due to a gig being a gig, even if it IS on the "Indian casino circuit".

 

Even when ROD STEWART was touring in promotion of his "standards" recordings, he STILL sang "Maggie May" along with the mix of the "songbook".

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your Daughter Must Pee Next to a Man, and You Will Be Compelled to Agree

 

The rules of bigotry according to the left represent a constantly shifting kaleidoscope of nonsense. This week, we learned that if you don’t want your small daughter peeing next to a giant man who thinks he is a woman, you are a bigot; if you are a woman who is uncomfortable with a man who thinks he is a woman whipping out his male genitalia to **** in front of you, you are a bigot; if you are a religious person who doesn’t want to participate in an activity you consider sinful, you are a bigot.

 

Conversely, if you are a man who thinks he is a woman and you want to force a small girl to pee next to you, you are a freedom fighter; if you are a large man who thinks he is a woman and you want to be one of the girls, right down to hulking into a Macy’s ladies room, you are a hero; if you are a gay man and you want to force a religious person to serve you, you are a hero.

 

If all of this seems odd, that’s because it is.

 

Read more GOPUSA:

 

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=8827?omhide=true

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...