Are LGBT groups and their lobbyists making inappropriate statements?

restlesscrane152 said:What exactly are you getting at?

So I’m supposed to just play nice while someone’s basically raping my brain? Force some behavior on me that isn't even who I am? What, I should just be "good," gentle, reasonable, and polite? Act all civilized? Give me a break!

Yeah.

It’s someone else's culture, their way of seeing how people should act, their version of morality and ethics... just a complete stranger's worldview.

Basically, someone is trying to force a foreign lifestyle on us.

Jack Cook7
Should I just be polite while my brain gets violated by people forcing a lifestyle on me that isn't even part of who I am? Should I just sit there being "good," gentle, reasonable, cultured? Civilized?

restlesscrane152
Yeah.

Nope.

restlesscrane152 said:The issue isn't the religion itself—it's specifically about Catholics. Why target them? Look, if these are just isolated incidents, then it means they're happening to everyone in society on an individual basis. And yeah, that includes Catholics too.

Because crazies don't pick and choose, right?

There have always been crazies around and there always will be. There's nothing we can do about it because mental instability is always gonna pop up in some percentage of the population, and it'll end in tragedy for someone over one thing or another.
But activists constantly trying to paint all lunatics as Catholic is just... well, 🙂 there are crazy Muslims, atheists, Mormons, or whatever else you want to throw in there. It’s totally insane to label an entire religion based on a few isolated cases of psychopathic behavior.

Gregory Hall66 said:Hold on just a second—whose "position" are we actually discussing here?
Is it the stance of an LGBTQ+ organization, or perhaps something else entirely?😁

I don't know, you tell me—when was the last time a bunch of hyped-up lesbians beat a priest to death?

Jack Cook7 said:It’s someone else's culture, their way of seeing how people should act, their version of morality and ethics... just a complete stranger's worldview.

Basically, someone is trying to force a foreign lifestyle on us.

Jack Cook7
Should I just be polite while my brain gets violated by people forcing a lifestyle on me that isn't even part of who I am? Should I just sit there being "good," gentle, reasonable, cultured? Civilized?

restlesscrane152
Yeah.

Nope.

What exactly is being forced on you? Someone forcing you into a same-sex marriage? Some guy ordering you to join a gay orgy a certain number of times a month?

Casey Mitchell72 said:There have always been crazies around and there always will be. There's nothing we can do about it because mental instability is always gonna pop up in some percentage of the population, and it'll end in tragedy for someone over one thing or another.
But activists constantly trying to paint all lunatics as Catholic is just... well, 🙂 there are crazy Muslims, atheists, Mormons, or whatever else you want to throw in there. It’s totally insane to label an entire religion based on a few isolated cases of psychopathic behavior.

No. You missed the point. If this is happening to everyone (meaning no specific group is being singled out), then it’s going to happen to Catholics too. So, where are all these beaten-up Catholics?

restlesscrane152 said:I don't know, you tell me—when was the last time a bunch of hyped-up lesbians beat a priest to death?

What exactly is being forced on you? Someone forcing you into a same-sex marriage? Some guy ordering you to join a gay orgy a certain number of times a month?

No. You missed the point. If this is happening to everyone (meaning no specific group is being singled out), then it’s going to happen to Catholics too. So, where are all these beaten-up Catholics?

Yeah, when was the last time a couple of hot-headed priests beat a lesbian to death? 🤷

What exactly is being forced on you? Is someone forcing you into a same-sex marriage? Is someone ordering you to participate in a gay orgy a certain number of times a month?

Both homosexuals and heterosexuals should have the right to legally formalize their relationships through free will and enjoy all the legal rights that come with that union.

restlesscrane152 said:I don't know, you tell me—when was the last time a bunch of hyped-up lesbians beat a priest to death?

What exactly is being forced on you? Someone forcing you into a same-sex marriage? Some guy ordering you to join a gay orgy a certain number of times a month?

No. You missed the point. If this is happening to everyone (meaning no specific group is being singled out), then it’s going to happen to Catholics too. So, where are all these beaten-up Catholics?

Like I told you before, lately I haven't heard about a single case in America where someone was seriously harmed just because of their religion, regardless of what they believe.
I really hope we're long past the days when people were being hunted down for their faith.
Honestly, I don't know any group in America that's being physically targeted these days—I haven't heard anyone inciting violence against any specific group. Any physical attack, no matter the reason, gets condemned by the public and handled by the law.

Casey Mitchell72 said:Yeah, when was the last time a couple of hot-headed priests beat a lesbian to death? 🤷

What exactly is being forced on you? Is someone forcing you into a same-sex marriage? Is someone ordering you to participate in a gay orgy a certain number of times a month?

Both homosexuals and heterosexuals should have the right to legally formalize their relationships through free will and enjoy all the legal rights that come with that union.

Like I told you before, lately I haven't heard about a single case in America where someone was seriously harmed just because of their religion, regardless of what they believe.
I really hope we're long past the days when people were being hunted down for their faith.
Honestly, I don't know any group in America that's being physically targeted these days—I haven't heard anyone inciting violence against any specific group. Any physical attack, no matter the reason, gets condemned by the public and handled by the law.

Pop? Never. But man, I've definitely seen situations where someone else went after an LGBTQ+ guy.

Look, it's simple. Both gay and straight people should have the right to marry whoever they want, totally free and without anyone forcing their hand. If you choose to make it official, you should get all those legal rights that come with being in a committed union. Period.

And they have exactly the same rights under the law? Every single one?

Look, I've already told you—lately, I haven't heard of a single case in America where anyone was seriously targeted just because of their faith, no matter what they believe.

Look, that’s exactly why we see more incidents targeting people in the LGBTQ+ community. It’s clearly not just a bunch of "isolated incidents" when they're happening to one specific side of society.

restlesscrane152 said:I don't know, you tell me—when was the last time a bunch of hyped-up lesbians beat a priest to death?

What exactly is being forced on you? Someone forcing you into a same-sex marriage? Some guy ordering you to join a gay orgy a certain number of times a month?

No. You missed the point. If this is happening to everyone (meaning no specific group is being singled out), then it’s going to happen to Catholics too. So, where are all these beaten-up Catholics?

So, where are those allegedly beaten LGBTQ+ individuals?
Look at this:

And where is the data? It is nothing but hollow slogans and endless blather.
Why is it that no one ever bothers to publish the exact figures? I wonder why that is.

Gregory Hall66 said:So, where are those allegedly beaten LGBTQ+ individuals?
Look at this:

And where is the data? It is nothing but hollow slogans and endless blather.
Why is it that no one ever bothers to publish the exact figures? I wonder why that is.

So, what's your point? You saying the media is lying? Or those people are lying?

restlesscrane152 said:Pop? Never. But man, I've definitely seen situations where someone else went after an LGBTQ+ guy.

Look, it's simple. Both gay and straight people should have the right to marry whoever they want, totally free and without anyone forcing their hand. If you choose to make it official, you should get all those legal rights that come with being in a committed union. Period.

And they have exactly the same rights under the law? Every single one?

Look, I've already told you—lately, I haven't heard of a single case in America where anyone was seriously targeted just because of their faith, no matter what they believe.

Look, that’s exactly why we see more incidents targeting people in the LGBTQ+ community. It’s clearly not just a bunch of "isolated incidents" when they're happening to one specific side of society.

Look, people are gonna get jumped for whatever random reason pops into some idiot's head. It happens.

Nowadays, attacks on LGBTQ+ folks are super rare. And honestly, you gotta wonder—does someone actually get hit because they're gay, or are they just a person getting unlucky with some random jerk, which then gets framed as an attack on sexual orientation? It reminds me a bit of how Stjepan Mason used to claim every single thing that happened to him was somehow a direct strike against anti-fascism. 😁

Things aren't exactly hitting the fan. But activists are constantly lying and twisting common sense, claiming there’s this huge collective call for hate and violence against them. A few incidents involving some lone nut—which happen all the time—get painted as a coordinated group attack on a minority. On top of that, they love using hate speech and insults against values that don't even touch them unless they want it to.

And they have the exact same rights under the law? Every single one?

They have all the rights that come from the community they legalized. So yeah, they have all the rights.

See, that's why there are more cases where someone gets hurt just for being part of the LGBTQ+ crowd. Clearly, these aren't just "isolated incidents" if they're splitting society apart.

The answer to that really comes down to the question I asked above.

Casey Mitchell72 said:Look, people are gonna get jumped for whatever random reason pops into some idiot's head. It happens.

Nowadays, attacks on LGBTQ+ folks are super rare. And honestly, you gotta wonder—does someone actually get hit because they're gay, or are they just a person getting unlucky with some random jerk, which then gets framed as an attack on sexual orientation? It reminds me a bit of how Stjepan Mason used to claim every single thing that happened to him was somehow a direct strike against anti-fascism. 😁

Things aren't exactly hitting the fan. But activists are constantly lying and twisting common sense, claiming there’s this huge collective call for hate and violence against them. A few incidents involving some lone nut—which happen all the time—get painted as a coordinated group attack on a minority. On top of that, they love using hate speech and insults against values that don't even touch them unless they want it to.

And they have the exact same rights under the law? Every single one?

They have all the rights that come from the community they legalized. So yeah, they have all the rights.

See, that's why there are more cases where someone gets hurt just for being part of the LGBTQ+ crowd. Clearly, these aren't just "isolated incidents" if they're splitting society apart.

The answer to that really comes down to the question I asked above.

Even rarer than attacks on Catholics?

Things aren't alarming.

...not for those outside the LGBTQ+ community. But hey, what would be alarming then—if hundreds of them were being slaughtered? Or would that just be a "tiny little issue"?

They have all the rights that come from the community they legalized. So yeah, they have all the rights.

What a charming little word acrobatics...

So, when you really look at the core of this issue, we are actually dealing with several overlapping layers here:

1) The tolerance—or lack thereof—regarding sexual minorities.
2) The tolerance of differing opinions, worldviews, and religious beliefs.
3) Violence acting as the inevitable byproduct of social exclusivity.

Regarding the first point, it seems the friction mostly stems from certain heterosexual groups who refuse to allow the LGBTQ+ community to openly express their sexual orientation or promote their worldview... The reason they push back is simply because:

a) that specific worldview and identity clash directly with their own
b) it stands in opposition to tradition, which, in our neck of the woods, is deeply rooted in Catholic values; thus, it is viewed as something foreign...

Which brings us right back to: 2) The tolerance of differing opinions, expressions, worldviews, and faith.

American Catholic conservatives often struggle to tolerate the expression or perspective of the LGBTQ+ community, whether those views are atheistic or religious, primarily because anything deviating from traditional American values is met with resistance.

Part of the LGBTQ+ response is a reaction to the intolerance shown by the Catholic faction, who feel perfectly entitled to broadcast their stances through outlets like The Washington Post, various religious publications, EWTN, or even just on the street... and yet, when they are labeled with terms like "Catholicliban," they immediately cry foul and label it "hate speech."

Naturally, hate speech often acts as a precursor to violence (3), though as far as I can see, we haven't seen organized attacks by LGBTQ+ groups against Catholics yet... whereas there are certainly instances of attacks against the LGBTQ+ community, whether perpetrated by disturbed individuals or other actors. Such aggression is often justified under the guise of "defending national interests," treating that concept as a higher moral calling than the principle of equality before the law... It is the exact same logic you hear in Saudi Arabia, where they argue women shouldn't drive simply because it's "tradition."

Therefore, I would personally view the term "Catholicliban" as nothing more than a bit of verbal wordplay rather than actual "hate speech"... however, if we started seeing physical attacks on Catholics specifically because someone called them Taliban-esque, then we might truly have a hate speech problem on our hands. In my view, the true criterion should be the actual impact, not just because a phrase "sounds" offensive. Personally, I don't think we should be banning "hate speech"; instead, we should be educating people so they don't get so easily triggered by everything... I would much rather prosecute those who are blatantly vulgar or indecently insulting in public spaces or media—focusing on the harassment, the crude insults, and the disruption of public order. True "hate speech" is generally something that emerges with the backing of a state—specifically an authoritarian or totalitarian one—as part of its official policy. Essentially, the implication being made is that countries in the European Union or other Western nations, which have constitutional bans on discrimination (just like we do here), are trying to enslave us and are using "hate speech" laws as a tool for that subjugation. From what I can tell, they haven't enslaved us, except perhaps via the influx of tourists (including gay tourists)... and as for why we import all our food and goods from them, well, that’s our own fault for being too lazy to produce our own and for selling off our banks.😁

restlesscrane152 said:Even rarer than attacks on Catholics?

Things aren't alarming.

...not for those outside the LGBTQ+ community. But hey, what would be alarming then—if hundreds of them were being slaughtered? Or would that just be a "tiny little issue"?

They have all the rights that come from the community they legalized. So yeah, they have all the rights.

What a charming little word acrobatics...

I don't get why people keep dragging Catholics into this whole gay debate. Honestly, the only comparison that actually makes sense is between gay people and straight people.

For those who aren't part of the LGBTQ+ community... I mean, seriously, what would even be considered an actual crisis at that point? Like, if people were being slaughtered by the hundreds, would that just be a "minor hiccup" to you guys?

Look, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: any kind of attack on a person, no matter what the reason is, is totally unacceptable. It needs to be condemned, period, and there should be actual legal consequences for it.
Look, the law is supposed to protect everyone equally, period. If it isn't working that way, then activists need to stop venting here and take that energy straight to the courts and the government instead. Focus your fire there.
Activists are trying to spin certain incidents—which honestly have nothing to do with sexuality, just like those attacks on Stjepan Mason had zero to do with anti-fascism—as some big organized terror campaign by the majority against the minority. It’s super rude and honestly so annoying. That's just their go-to tactic. 🙂 That's exactly why I say those activist groups and organizations are doing more harm than good. They aren't actually helping the community they claim to represent—they're just making things worse.

What a wild ride of words...

It’s not some wild exaggeration—it’s just the plain old truth.

restlesscrane152 said:So, what's your point? You saying the media is lying? Or those people are lying?

Yes, the media lies. It goes without saying that there are people who have been targeted; I am not denying that. The real question, however, is how many are we actually talking about?
Until someone presents hard, cold numbers, this entire conversation is little more than aimless chatter.

Given the sheer volume of coverage regarding the supposed "threats and violence against LGBTQ+ individuals," one would assume such data would be readily available in countless places. My question remains: why is it nowhere to be found?
The solution is quite simple:
Washington, D.C.: Year 2012, 2011, 2010, etc. ——— Attack Count
Rijeka: Year ——— Attack Count
Miami: Year ——— Attack Count
... and so on...

Gregory Hall66 said:Yes, the media lies. It goes without saying that there are people who have been targeted; I am not denying that. The real question, however, is how many are we actually talking about?
Until someone presents hard, cold numbers, this entire conversation is little more than aimless chatter.

Given the sheer volume of coverage regarding the supposed "threats and violence against LGBTQ+ individuals," one would assume such data would be readily available in countless places. My question remains: why is it nowhere to be found?
The solution is quite simple:
Washington, D.C.: Year 2012, 2011, 2010, etc. ——— Attack Count
Rijeka: Year ——— Attack Count
Miami: Year ——— Attack Count
... and so on...

👍

restlesscrane152 said:Look, the point of the comparison is to show that the attack count against LGBTQ+ people isn't just a bunch of "isolated incidents" like some people here want to claim. If these were truly just "isolated incidents," they'd be happening to everyone equally, not just targeting specific groups. That’s exactly why I brought up Catholics—following your logic, they wouldn't be spared from these "isolated incidents" either. They'd get jumped just for being Catholic, just like how other groups get "exceptionally" targeted. Is that clear enough now?

Activists want to frame certain attacks (which sometimes have nothing to do with sexuality, just like the attacks on Stjepan Mason had nothing to do with anti-fascism) as organized terror by the majority against a minority.

But if this is hitting one specific group disproportionately, how can you call it accidental? Does society just hunt them down like dogs? No, but that doesn't mean there isn't a massive problem.

It's not some wild conspiracy; it's just the facts on the ground.

The fact of the matter is they don't have equal rights.

Can someone please drop those numbers Gregory Hall66 was asking about?

If this is hitting one specific group way harder than everyone else, how can anyone call it a coincidence? It’s not like society is out there hunting them down like stray dogs or anything, but that doesn't mean the problem isn't real.

Is there a law? You bet. Are there institutions actually tasked with enforcing it? They sure are.

Let's be real, they just don't have equal rights.

We're never gonna see eye to eye on this one.

restlesscrane152 said:Awesome. Love that skepticism toward the media. But I gotta wonder—do you hold conservative groups to that same standard? Take "In the Name of the Family," for example. Just a bunch of liars, right?

Why are they such liars? What exactly is the UIO trying to cover up?

Casey Mitchell72 said:I don't get why people keep dragging Catholics into this whole gay debate. Honestly, the only comparison that actually makes sense is between gay people and straight people.

For those who aren't part of the LGBTQ+ community... I mean, seriously, what would even be considered an actual crisis at that point? Like, if people were being slaughtered by the hundreds, would that just be a "minor hiccup" to you guys?

Look, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: any kind of attack on a person, no matter what the reason is, is totally unacceptable. It needs to be condemned, period, and there should be actual legal consequences for it.
Look, the law is supposed to protect everyone equally, period. If it isn't working that way, then activists need to stop venting here and take that energy straight to the courts and the government instead. Focus your fire there.
Activists are trying to spin certain incidents—which honestly have nothing to do with sexuality, just like those attacks on Stjepan Mason had zero to do with anti-fascism—as some big organized terror campaign by the majority against the minority. It’s super rude and honestly so annoying. That's just their go-to tactic. 🙂 That's exactly why I say those activist groups and organizations are doing more harm than good. They aren't actually helping the community they claim to represent—they're just making things worse.

What a wild ride of words...

It’s not some wild exaggeration—it’s just the plain old truth.

Look, the point of the comparison is to show that the attack count against LGBTQ+ people isn't just a bunch of "isolated incidents" like some people here want to claim. If these were truly just "isolated incidents," they'd be happening to everyone equally, not just targeting specific groups. That’s exactly why I brought up Catholics—following your logic, they wouldn't be spared from these "isolated incidents" either. They'd get jumped just for being Catholic, just like how other groups get "exceptionally" targeted. Is that clear enough now?

Activists want to frame certain attacks (which sometimes have nothing to do with sexuality, just like the attacks on Stjepan Mason had nothing to do with anti-fascism) as organized terror by the majority against a minority.

But if this is hitting one specific group disproportionately, how can you call it accidental? Does society just hunt them down like dogs? No, but that doesn't mean there isn't a massive problem.

It's not some wild conspiracy; it's just the facts on the ground.

The fact of the matter is they don't have equal rights.

Gregory Hall66 said:Yes, the media lies. It goes without saying that there are people who have been targeted; I am not denying that. The real question, however, is how many are we actually talking about?
Until someone presents hard, cold numbers, this entire conversation is little more than aimless chatter.

Given the sheer volume of coverage regarding the supposed "threats and violence against LGBTQ+ individuals," one would assume such data would be readily available in countless places. My question remains: why is it nowhere to be found?
The solution is quite simple:
Washington, D.C.: Year 2012, 2011, 2010, etc. ——— Attack Count
Rijeka: Year ——— Attack Count
Miami: Year ——— Attack Count
... and so on...

Awesome. Love that skepticism toward the media. But I gotta wonder—do you hold conservative groups to that same standard? Take "In the Name of the Family," for example. Just a bunch of liars, right?

restlesscrane152 said:Awesome. Love that skepticism toward the media. But I gotta wonder—do you hold conservative groups to that same standard? Take "In the Name of the Family," for example. Just a bunch of liars, right?

And I maintain a healthy reserve regarding them as well.
But they possess one thing that the LGBTQ+ community currently lacks: 750,000 signatures.
I want to see these associations present actual, concrete data. Let them state that exactly this many people have experienced violence... and leave it at that.
Only then can we proceed to a meaningful analysis. When did it happen, how, why, and where?
Until that point, we are left with nothing but pure propaganda.

Casey Mitchell72 said:👍

Can someone please drop those numbers Gregory Hall66 was asking about?

If this is hitting one specific group way harder than everyone else, how can anyone call it a coincidence? It’s not like society is out there hunting them down like stray dogs or anything, but that doesn't mean the problem isn't real.

Is there a law? You bet. Are there institutions actually tasked with enforcing it? They sure are.

Let's be real, they just don't have equal rights.

We're never gonna see eye to eye on this one.

Why are they such liars? What exactly is the UIO trying to cover up?

If we can't even agree on the facts, then there's really nothing left to talk about.

restlesscrane152 said:If we can't even agree on the facts, then there's really nothing left to talk about.

Let's look at the actual facts:

Over the past year, barely a dozen members of the LGBTQ+ community reported any kind of violence, and those reports came primarily through advocacy groups.
(so let us return to those hysterical cries for help found in the links I shared earlier in this thread)

And these figures tell a very clear story: we are witnessing nothing more than pure manipulation and outright falsehoods.

That is precisely why they are so desperately targeting cities like Miami.
It will likely be followed by places like Imotski, Sinj, and other towns throughout the Zagora region.
It seems as though if anyone were to simply glance at them the wrong way—anything at all—they would immediately claim to be under threat, just so they can play the victim.

However, these statistics actually demonstrate the high level of civility and tolerance within American society. They reveal that these self-proclaimed "defenders and warriors for LGBTQ+ rights" are, in reality, nothing but manipulators poisoning the public discourse.
We live in a society that accepts differences, yet one that still holds firmly to its own core values.

racunajnamene said:All those lesbians, gays, and bisexuals actually seem even happier than regular folks; they lead these solitary lives, they're more independent, they distance themselves from family, and they land jobs faster—mostly because it’s preferred that you don't have kids just so you can actually get hired in the first place. And who brought this fashion into vogue? Well, obviously, that minority homosexual breed of people. Such individuals most often relocate to the capital because they face discrimination in their small towns, and there they serve as journalists on news sites, magazine editors, or work in peacekeeping, health, and the Department of Labor; they are the ones dictating the trends on how one should behave, suggesting that a single life is what's considered "cool."
I really think we need to resist this trend immediately, perhaps by organizing movements against such people. Personally, I would advocate for the legalization of euthanasia for homosexuals.

Well, how then can we seriously claim that the LGBTQ+ community isn't under threat if there are people out there spreading views like these? No, no, it isn't "bad"... the legal euthanasia of certain groups... well, that is actually quite a politically sound stance, might we consider founding a party to champion it? Since we already have a Communist Party, why not add a National Socialist one to the mix? It would certainly liven up the scene, even though we already suffer through having 150 different parties... And what is wrong with being single? What do we want, to ask President Moon to come and teach us all a lesson and then quicken the process? Clearly, someone polite will probably delete this now. But let's see if there's any truth to it at all?

- the idea that it's preferred to have no children just to get a job -- perhaps in the private sector, but if we examine the makeup of people in the metropolis or ZG Holding and city hall, within the municipal institutions and corporations, looking at where everyone came from and who secured a job from the city, subsequently sorting out an apartment... and assuming that the LGBTQ+ crowd mostly hails from urban environments like the big city, then it’s likely we’re talking about native Washington, D.C. residents, for whom finding another place to live isn't exactly easy unless their parents earned enough to buy one, or if they have jobs, they were busy paying off Swiss loans... there could be all sorts of things uncovered here.

- they are journalists on portals, magazine editors -- well, is being a journalist even considered a desirable profession? And wouldn't you say people like Ivko Šikić aren't exactly journalists or columnists, so are they part of the LGBTQ+ crowd too?

- they work in peacekeeping, health, and the Department of Labor -- but what kind of people work there, besides those connected to the ruling parties? What does that have to do with sexual orientation? Ah, the Republican Party isn't in power right now, and thank God, many have been hired through various state-run patronage systems... the LGBTQ+ crowd can only find employment through the Democratic Party or the Liberal Party, whereas straight people can go through the Republican Party, the Libertarian Party, and so on. Therefore, straight people are actually even more privileged in terms of traditional nepotism and corruption compared to the LGBTQ+ community.

Perhaps it would be wise to root out nepotism and corruption so that everyone could be equal? But heavens, that's tradition, and you simply can't go around messing with tradition. 😁

restlesscrane152 said:Look, the point of the comparison is to show that the attack count against LGBTQ+ people isn't just a bunch of "isolated incidents" like some people here want to claim. If these were truly just "isolated incidents," they'd be happening to everyone equally, not just targeting specific groups. That’s exactly why I brought up Catholics—following your logic, they wouldn't be spared from these "isolated incidents" either. They'd get jumped just for being Catholic, just like how other groups get "exceptionally" targeted. Is that clear enough now?

Activists want to frame certain attacks (which sometimes have nothing to do with sexuality, just like the attacks on Stjepan Mason had nothing to do with anti-fascism) as organized terror by the majority against a minority.

But if this is hitting one specific group disproportionately, how can you call it accidental? Does society just hunt them down like dogs? No, but that doesn't mean there isn't a massive problem.

It's not some wild conspiracy; it's just the facts on the ground.

The fact of the matter is they don't have equal rights.

What rights are we even talking about here? They have the exact same rights as any other citizen in America, but just like how neither I nor anyone else has the right to marry their pet dog, they don't have the right to enter into a gay marriage. They can register whatever they want if they're looking to embarrass themselves—that's on them, not me. If they end up becoming a laughingstock later, well, that's their business. But at the same time, nobody has the right to go out and physically attack them, just like those gay leaders don't have the right to claim that everyone who opposes this lifestyle is some kind of religious fascist. But hey, that's exactly what they say.