LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends

Information

LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends

Nontheist lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex people & friends.

Location: International
Members: 616
Latest Activity: 9 hours ago

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends to add comments!

Comment by Marie Walewska on November 15, 2014 at 5:46am
Comment by Bertold Brautigan on November 11, 2014 at 8:53pm

Sorry, but I'm pasting in the Rude 1's entire blog for the day.

-----

The Gay Greatest Generation Vets and How to Honor Them

Even at 92, you can bet that Lt. Rupert "Twink" Starr could kick your ass. Sent over to Europe in 1944, he was helping the fight the Nazis in the Battle of the Bulge and was captured by the Germans. "Starr survived a series of harrowing travails as a POW, including eight days in a boxcar jammed far beyond capacity with other prisoners and forced marches in subzero weather." Yeah, Starr is a motherfuckin' part of the greatest part of the so-called "Greatest Generation." And Twink loves cock. He's a knobgobbler who was together with his interior designer partner, Allan Wingfield, in Ohio for over 50 years.

Starr's story is all over the place this Veterans' Day because, frankly, it's a suck-on-this to everyone who ever opposed having gay men and women in the military. "This old dandy took on Hitler," it says. "What the fuck did you do in your 20s? Tailgate?" And, yeah, his nickname really is "Twink." 

Gay vets from World War II will kick your prejudices right in the nutsack. It proves that everything homophobes believe is wrong because if the decorated soldiers who went toe-to-toe with the Germans and the Japanese were bonesmokers, what other false gods do you worship?

Last year, two vets, a 95 year-old WWII vet and a 67 year-old Vietnam vet, both dudes, made news when they got married at a veterans' senior living home in California. While a couple of the cranky old bastards were upset, they had their ceremony without event. Said one anti, "I just know that it’s against my faith and my religion, but as Americans they have a right to do what they want to do." Yup, old hater, yup.

So these LGBT Great Ones are still fighting. Earlier this year, Robina Asti, who, when she was Robert Astley, flew combat missions for the Navy in World War II before transitioning in the 1970s, won her deceased husband's survivor benefits from Social Security. That we're still having these movie-of-the-week battles in the 21st century is shameful to all of us.

Maybe, just maybe, while every politician is spending the day spouting encomiums to the once-warriors, young and old, talking about their bravery, talking about their service, talking especially about the ones still alive from the "Greatest Generation," maybe they could pass the Restore Honor to Service Members Act that has languished for over a year. Maybe we can do something for the 114,000 veterans who were dishonorably discharged for just being themselves. Maybe we can shut the fuck up for a few minutes and put our laws where our filthy mouths are.

 

Comment by Daniel W on November 10, 2014 at 11:25pm

Montana KKK chapter to welcome blacks and gays

"Jimmy Simmons, one of the NAACP representatives who met with Abarr last year, believes he probably is trying to reform. If Abarr holds a peace summit next summer, Simmons said he would "take a strong look" at joining."

Ummm  Uhhhh  I have no idea what to say.  This is where the word "gobsmacked" comes to mind.

Comment by James M. Martin on November 10, 2014 at 4:40pm

I am paranoid about the "American-ness" argument. When religious minorities in the U.S. start holding non-believers and/or lgbtq people up as "immoral" because Mideastern Islamic groups and/or leaders (imams, ayatolahs, and other Moses-like tribal chieftans, the epitome of ruler-priests) claim the we are immoral in our affronts to Allah...I think you can see the implications of such thinking. Truly Hitlerian.

Comment by sk8eycat on November 10, 2014 at 1:20pm

Dear Cat...there was/is NO marriage ceremony (with exchanging of vows and stuff) in the buybull at all.  (As far as I know)...just the wine-drinking party at Cana.

Comment by Grinning Cat on November 10, 2014 at 1:14pm

A Christian rebutting the "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" argument:

"The Genesis 2 marriage model says nothing about wedding gifts therefore God must be against wedding gifts. Of course, no one believes that and no thinking person would draw that conclusion from Genesis 2." (Rick Brentlinger, from gaychristian101.com)

Similarly, it's just as illogical to conclude that God must be against wedding rings... and against getting married in church... and against adopting children... and against same-sex couples.

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on November 7, 2014 at 10:35am

Charles P. Pierce comments on the upholding of marriage bans


http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/The_Court_Gets_One_Handed_To_It

-----
I can hardly wait for the Nine Wise Souls (finally) to weigh in on marriage equality. We will get to hear Antonin (Short Time) Scalia say "sodomy" a lot. John Roberts will seek to excuse himself when the testimony gets too icky. Clarence Thomas will say nothing. And Anthony Kennedy will show up in a white sarong, blindfolded, holding a scale. It ought to be a hoot, it should.
The Sixth Circuit Court Of Appeals fast-tracked the issue up the food chain late yesterday, handing down a ruling that upheld bans on gay marriage in four states, reversing lower court rulings on the subject. Because there is now a "split" between the Sixth Circuit and several other federal circuit courts of appeal, the Nine Wise Souls can't duck the issue any more -- not since Judge Jeffrey Sutton, who wrote the majority opinion for the Sixth Circuit, has positioned himself in his arguments as the last person holding back the forces of unchecked Fabulousness.

-----
He also quotes the one out of three dissenting judge's statement:

-----
The author of the majority opinion has drafted what would make an engrossing TED Talk or, possibly, an introductory lecture in Political Philosophy. But as an appellate court decision, it wholly fails to grapple with the relevant constitutional question in this appeal: whether a state's constitutional prohibition of same-sex marriage violates equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. Instead, the majority sets up a false premise-that the question before us is "who should decide?"-and leads us through a largely irrelevant discourse on democracy and federalism. In point of fact, the real issue before us concerns what is at stake in these six cases for the individual plaintiffs and their children, and what should be done about it. Because I reject the majority's resolution of these questions based on its invocation of vox populi and its reverence for "proceeding with caution" (otherwise known as the "wait and see" approach), I dissent.

Comment by sk8eycat on November 7, 2014 at 9:43am

Then what about the parable about the seven virgins who were all going to be married to the same man on the same night?  What did all those extra women do while their husband was busy elsewhere?  I have read in several different books and articles that in plural/polygamous families that the women usually formed special attachments to one or more of their "sister-wives."

And then there was Solomon and his 300 wives and 700 concubines.....the harem guards may have been gelded, but what about the women?

For that matter, how many wives does the King of Saudi Arabia have right now?  Who do they "sleep" with when he's not around?

Hypocrites, all of them.

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on November 7, 2014 at 9:23am

Linking opposition to same sex marriage to dominionism rather than just religious traditionalism.

This showed up on RD today under the title Gay Marriage Isn't About Christianity So Much As Christian Nationalism

-------

Eerie coincidence or scholar-geist?*

From last month’s RD interview with Leslie J. Harris, associate professor of communications at the UW-Milwaukee:

I’ve become convinced that today’s debate about same-sex marriage is not simply about preserving a seemingly sacred and unchanging institution, or securing particular rights and privileges. Rather, it is about negotiating the boundaries of American-ness.

From yesterday’s RNS blog post by political science prof Daniel Bennett:

[S]ame-sex marriage is about more than morality or ideology. It is about how people view the United States of America.

*It’s been brought to my attention that this post could be read as an implication of plagiarism, which was the furthest thing from my mind. I meant only to highlight how fascinating it is that two entirely different data sets yielded a similar, though slightly unusual, conclusion.

Comment by Daniel W on November 6, 2014 at 9:44pm
I think "Pink inc." could just give a lot of campaign contributions.
 

Members (616)

 
 
 

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service