Tolerance, coexistence, and being in a minority.

[2bi2Bboring]

Ok I know I am stepping out on a limb here, and if this thread turns into a flame war I will take it down because the subject is just too volatile, but I wanted to try to have a grown up discussion about tolerance. We are all familiar with the same sex marriage debate, it has been so prominent in the news, how could anyone miss it? Gays are none too accepting of us bisexuals, even though we are seen by the public as part of the same community (LGBTQ). But the debate among the gay community has been for years about whether bisexuals truly exist or whether we are all just in gay denial.
My question is, because we belong to a minority, are we obligated to accept other minorities because our fates are tied together? If I have heard it once, I've heard it a thousand times, "gay is the new black". But blacks do not necessarily see this as so, many black people hold a very dim view of anyone who is non-heteronormative. Racial groups often don't see that their struggle for acceptance is shared by other racial groups. They don't band together and realize there is strength in numbers, they often do quite the opposite and continue to segregate themselves based on prejudices fed to them by the majority, perpetuating the status quo and the hegemony of the majority group. Is this logical? Does this advance anyone's agenda for equality or fair treatment? Does the "United we stand" line of thinking make sense? Does the phrase "a rising tide lifts all ships", ring true or are we all fending for ourselves as individual groups?

[charles-smythe]

Ok I know I am stepping out on a limb here, and if this thread turns into a flame war I will take it down because the subject is just too volatile, but I wanted to try to have a grown up discussion about tolerance. We are all familiar with the same sex marriage debate, it has been so prominent in the news, how could anyone miss it? Gays are none too accepting of us bisexuals, even though we are seen by the public as part of the same community (LGBTQ). But the debate among the gay community has been for years about whether bisexuals truly exist or whether we are all just in gay denial.
My question is, because we belong to a minority, are we obligated to accept other minorities because our fates are tied together? If I have heard it once, I've heard it a thousand times, "gay is the new black". But blacks do not necessarily see this as so, many black people hold a very dim view of anyone who is non-heteronormative. Racial groups often don't see that their struggle for acceptance is shared by other racial groups. They don't band together and realize there is strength in numbers, they often do quite the opposite and continue to segregate themselves based on prejudices fed to them by the majority, perpetuating the status quo and the hegemony of the majority group. Is this logical? Does this advance anyone's agenda for equality or fair treatment? Does the "United we stand" line of thinking make sense? Does the phrase "a rising tide lifts all ships", ring true or are we all fending for ourselves as individual groups?
…I’m not even sure I believe in man/women marriage anymore…BUT it’s a personal choice…if 2 girls or 2 guys…hell it could be 3 girls or 3 guys…or 2 girls/1 guy or 2 guys/ 1 girl…the numbers don’t really make a damn…it’s a personal choice think…the government & church SHOULD NOT be able to tell you who to love & marry…period…

[cuttin2dachase]

LGBT activists past and present have helped bring about significant change for the good. That's all well and good as long as they stick to peacefully changing laws to combat such things as hate crimes, employment discrimination and other such legitimate social injustices against LGBT people. They should not however pout and harangue and condemn others for not accepting, condoning and jumping on the bandwagon to help support their agenda and their cause. They will not ever overcome heterosexual people's opposition that is based on their moral/religious/social convictions and personal beliefs. I live in a state where gay marriage is illegal. It's no skin off my ass personally because I would never want to marry a man. It's that way in many other states too, but there are efforts being made by activists everywhere to make it legal everywhere. It was overwhelmingly rejected here in 2004. The majority spoke. LGBT activists here are still bitching and moaning 11 years later about how the majority of people in this state are politically incorrect bigots. Shut up! Work towards putting in on the ballot again and again until eventually the old generations are dead. Change laws, not people who won't go against their beliefs. Should it be put on the ballot again, I'd vote to allow same sex marriage again, but that's the extent of my activism. I prefer to stay closeted and have no desire to be a flag waving, card carrying bisexual. All the laws need do for me is help get justice if I am ever beaten up by homophobes or denied employment because someone knows or suspects I am bisexual. There are already federal laws against that, so I'm good. It's not a civil right until the laws make it a civil right.

[Visexual]

I firmly believe in marriage as the bible describes it. It should be between a man and his rib!

Actually, I have gay friends and gay male couples too. None have any problem with my bisexuality or my marriage to a woman.

[tenni]

“My question is, because we belong to a minority, are we obligated to accept other minorities because our fates are tied together?”


As individuals, we are not obligated to support other minorities.

If you believe that your fates are tied together in one situation doesn’t mean all situations. If your rights are protected under the same Constitutional passage in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as in Canadian experience then it may be wise to support the Charter and not necessarily the other group. Several minorities like Siks did support the Charter section on minorities and yet opposed same sex marriage. As a relgious group they did not protest too loudly and some leaders spoke of the above reasons for support. They realized their right to wear a kir pan fell under section 15 (religion not sex) and that same section permitted same sex marriage. Not all Siks did though but a number saw how their rights were protected due to that same passage.

As a minority, I have to wonder why you would not accept other minorities though in a free society. I would be somewhat suspect as to a person’s ability to empathize if they put a minority down or acted bigoted towards anyone based on their race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, age, physical ableness. If someone is interfering with your own rights based upon the above, I would question their humaness to empathize and stand up against bigotry that is unjust.

If we believe that a minority is being mistreated, discriminated against, or ridiculed, I don’t see why you would not want them treated fairly just as you might want your minority treated fairly.

[a2smith09]

I think a lot of people mix tolerance up with coercion. Everyone should be entitled to their own opinions and beliefs. However tolerance have room for others that may not share your identity or beliefs. Not everyone is going to accept others identities or beliefs and that is ok. What is not ok is when people use government, or other means for coercion.

[Melody Dean]

It was overwhelmingly rejected here in 2004. The majority spoke. LGBT activists here are still bitching and moaning 11 years later about how the majority of people in this state are politically incorrect bigots. Shut up! Work towards putting in on the ballot again and again until eventually the old generations are dead.

Can I reword that? The majority WHO VOTED, voted against gay marriage. The problem is that too many people don't vote, so we don't actually know the majority's opinion. And in some cases (I think maybe we're talking about the same thing), the ones who were against gay marriage were loudest, and simply got more people to vote who wouldn't have voted otherwise, just to vote on that bill. The LGBT activists didn't push their end of the same campaign until it was too late.

To answer the original question: because we belong to a minority, are we obligated to accept other minorities because our fates are tied together?

No.

We should accept other minorities because it's the right thing to do. (Well, maybe not the KKK, but that's not the type of minority we're talking about here.)

Should we join their cause? In a way, yes. I think we need to broaden our scope to be tolerant of everyone, not just people like us. Should we advocate for them, should we be their activists? Maybe within our own social group, but I don't think we need to join every cause that comes our way. I know some people like that, and because their activism doesn't seem genuine, it's harder to be interested in what they're saying.

[darkeyes]

Being fair to, tolerating or co-existing with a minority does not necessarily mean we should support them... Much depends of course what is meant by fair.. and that is very different in one person to another... what is fair to a murderer, or rapist, paedophile or habitual criminal.. addicts and alcoholics.. fascists or nazis or communists, or socialists.. radical islamic, Christians, buddists or athiest for that matter.. the lgbt... immigrants... ethnic groups..the disabled... those who commit what societies tend to call "terror" in our world?

All of the above groups and more in parts of the world are minorities... I do not support all, but I can sympathise with many, maybe even most minority groups, and often with the cause if not the method used to achieve the end. Treating them fairly does not mean supporting and neither does it mean necessarily giving respect or always being very nice... for not all minority groups are very nice...and each of us think differently about that... so being fair, and leading on to tolerating or living with is far more complex than most think...often it means that we cannot and dare not accept what a particular minority represents, and each of us has a very different view on that too..:eek2:

As for being a minority, I deal with it... and it doesnt unduly stress me.. in the country in which I was born and live, I am both a minority and majority in many different ways. That's life... I do what I can to make things easier and more fair, and to encourage compassion, tolerance, acceptance and co-existence among all people.... unfortunately that doesnt always mean being nice to all people because some... too many... wont let me.... compassion, acceptance, tolerance and co-existence is the last thing on their mind...:(

[Annika L]

Being fair to, tolerating or co-existing with a minority does not necessarily mean we should support them... Much depends of course what is meant by fair.. and that is very different in one person to another... what is fair to a murderer, or rapist, paedophile or habitual criminal.. addicts and alcoholics.. fascists or nazis or communists, or socialists.. radical islamic, Christians, buddists or athiest for that matter.. the lgbt... immigrants... ethnic groups..the disabled... those who commit what societies tend to call "terror" in our world?

All of the above groups and more in parts of the world are minorities... I do not support all, but I can sympathise with many, maybe even most minority groups, and often with the cause if not the method used to achieve the end. Treating them fairly does not mean supporting and neither does it mean necessarily giving respect or always being very nice... for not all minority groups are very nice...and each of us think differently about that... so being fair, and leading on to tolerating or living with is far more complex than most think...often it means that we cannot and dare not accept what a particular minority represents, and each of us has a very different view on that too..:eek2:

As for being a minority, I deal with it... and it doesnt unduly stress me.. in the country in which I was born and live, I am both a minority and majority in many different ways. That's life... I do what I can to make things easier and more fair, and to encourage compassion, tolerance, acceptance and co-existence among all people.... unfortunately that doesnt always mean being nice to all people because some... too many... wont let me.... compassion, acceptance, tolerance and co-existence is the last thing on their mind...:(

I love your writing on these topics, Fran. Don't forget to add "the rich" to your laundry list of minorities above...it's an important one to consider when regarding "fairness". *hugs*

[tenni]

I love your writing on these topics, Fran. Don't forget to add "the rich" to your laundry list of minorities above...it's an important one to consider when regarding "fairness". *hugs*

Good point Annika...Over here we add words like "marginalized" minorities to distinguish between the haves and have no power minorities.

A tongue in cheek to show the most of the marginalized (for grants) was the most collective minorities in one human...ie a one legged, blind, black muslim, gay transman (or lesbian transwoman) ...should get most of our support.

But fran is correct tolerance and willing to co exist is not the same as support...nor is the word "acceptance". Acceptance seems to be used by some heterosexual inappropriately imo. The say that they accept their bisexual husband...IF he does what she wants him to do...not really acceptance. Accceptance means believe or come to recognize as valid or correct. Correct for their bisexual husbands to have a male friend with benefits.

[darkeyes]

I love your writing on these topics, Fran. Don't forget to add "the rich" to your laundry list of minorities above...it's an important one to consider when regarding "fairness". *hugs*
Defo the rich, Annika... one must nev forget that bunch of parasites... and royals.. without whom my lickle country would b a much more progressive and modern one... a tadge more democratic and serpently more free.. they can b taken as a single minority or as 2, but whether 1 or 2, they care naught about the welfare, prosperity or rights of ordinary people, but use ordinary people by lying to and conning them to oppress their own kind which of course, ultimately includes themselves...

[charles-smythe]

Being fair to, tolerating or co-existing with a minority does not necessarily mean we should support them... Much depends of course what is meant by fair.. and that is very different in one person to another... what is fair to a murderer, or rapist, paedophile or habitual criminal.. addicts and alcoholics.. fascists or nazis or communists, or socialists.. radical islamic, Christians, buddists or athiest for that matter.. the lgbt... immigrants... ethnic groups..the disabled... those who commit what societies tend to call "terror" in our world?

All of the above groups and more in parts of the world are minorities... I do not support all, but I can sympathise with many, maybe even most minority groups, and often with the cause if not the method used to achieve the end. Treating them fairly does not mean supporting and neither does it mean necessarily giving respect or always being very nice... for not all minority groups are very nice...and each of us think differently about that... so being fair, and leading on to tolerating or living with is far more complex than most think...often it means that we cannot and dare not accept what a particular minority represents, and each of us has a very different view on that too..:eek2:

As for being a minority, I deal with it... and it doesnt unduly stress me.. in the country in which I was born and live, I am both a minority and majority in many different ways. That's life... I do what I can to make things easier and more fair, and to encourage compassion, tolerance, acceptance and co-existence among all people.... unfortunately that doesnt always mean being nice to all people because some... too many... wont let me.... compassion, acceptance, tolerance and co-existence is the last thing on their mind...:( …you have a way of putting into words whats in my head…but I can’t seem to get on paper…

[Riderinthestorm]

In fairness, while there are some G/L people that marginalize us B's and those who are T's, I think that the vast majority do not really do that.

Many recognize that reality which is the diversity of human sexuality and, many more even embrace it, accepting those of us not in the extreme (gay/straight only) as part of the subculture community that we are a part of.

That said, as I mentioned, there are those in the L/G part of the community that do not consider our sexuality as valid, just as there are those in the straight community that do not consider us as a valid sexuality.

Open and adult conversations like this can and will do a lot in opening the doors for understanding, and through that, tolerance.

We are in a new era, a new age and the old, bigoted ways are falling by the wayside so the only way to properly usher them in and to overcome those old ways is through this open, honest and non-judgemental dialogue. And that can also include understanding and accepting poly relationships where one or more of the partners is bi or straight or gay.

[open2joy]

I do wonder if we are looking for a tolerance of our own minority coexistence or are we looking to tolerate a coexistence of other minorities. If you give it a little thought, from our perceptive, we are the invisible hand in the pudding of the very visible minorities and movements whose members declare themselves openly X, by way of obvious triggers such as physical appearance, religious garb, political party, Job, and actions.

The reason we are invisible is because we actually do fit in, each to their own team, albeit with a little extra baggage, namely our sexuality. The triggers there are subtle, we know, they don't. And, If we were to find someone to raise the banner and lift him/herself up as a champion, well, as soon as that campaign started gaining any rhythm then the rank and file of us would run, duck and cover. The issue of bisexuality is a tide water pool issue at best, for now.

We can and should support tolerance and coexistence with diverse groups who share our desire for self-actualized freedom. But that's a weekend out on the pond with no guarantee of a real mate along for the long haul. I'd say we were a pack of squirrels. Could be cats as well but no sign of a herder yet in all this noise.

Hiss Hiss

KissKiss

[charles-smythe]

I do wonder if we are looking for a tolerance of our own minority coexistence or are we looking to tolerate a coexistence of other minorities. If you give it a little thought, from our perceptive, we are the invisible hand in the pudding of the very visible minorities and movements whose members declare themselves openly X, by way of obvious triggers such as physical appearance, religious garb, political party, Job, and actions.

The reason we are invisible is because we actually do fit in, each to their own team, albeit with a little extra baggage, namely our sexuality. The triggers there are subtle, we know, they don't. And, If we were to find someone to raise the banner and lift him/herself up as a champion, well, as soon as that campaign started gaining any rhythm then the rank and file of us would run, duck and cover. The issue of bisexuality is a tide water pool issue at best, for now.

We can and should support tolerance and coexistence with diverse groups who share our desire for self-actualized freedom. But that's a weekend out on the pond with no guarantee of a real mate along for the long haul. I'd say we were a pack of squirrels. Could be cats as well but no sign of a herder yet in all this noise.

Hiss Hiss

KissKiss …well said…

[pole_smoker]

LGBT activists past and present have helped bring about significant change for the good. That's all well and good as long as they stick to peacefully changing laws to combat such things as hate crimes, employment discrimination and other such legitimate social injustices against LGBT people. They should not however pout and harangue and condemn others for not accepting, condoning and jumping on the bandwagon to help support their agenda and their cause. They will not ever overcome heterosexual people's opposition that is based on their moral/religious/social convictions and personal beliefs. I live in a state where gay marriage is illegal. It's no skin off my ass personally because I would never want to marry a man. It's that way in many other states too, but there are efforts being made by activists everywhere to make it legal everywhere. It was overwhelmingly rejected here in 2004. The majority spoke. LGBT activists here are still bitching and moaning 11 years later about how the majority of people in this state are politically incorrect bigots. Shut up! Work towards putting in on the ballot again and again until eventually the old generations are dead. Change laws, not people who won't go against their beliefs. Should it be put on the ballot again, I'd vote to allow same sex marriage again, but that's the extent of my activism. I prefer to stay closeted and have no desire to be a flag waving, card carrying bisexual. All the laws need do for me is help get justice if I am ever beaten up by homophobes or denied employment because someone knows or suspects I am bisexual. There are already federal laws against that, so I'm good. It's not a civil right until the laws make it a civil right.
Homophobes, biphobes, and bigots like you lost today.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/supreme-court-rules-favor-marriage-equality

The nation’s highest court has found that the U.S. Constitution requires states to license and recognize marriages between two people of the same sex, making marriage equality officially — after decades of litigation and activism — the law of the land.
Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the landmark opinion, which was handed down on Friday, writing that “no union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family.” He was joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan.
Each of the court’s conservative justices — Scalia, Thomas, and Alito — as well as Chief Justice John Roberts, meanwhile, wrote his own dissent.
The decision comes as the pinnacle of the modern gay rights movement, which began in earnest with the Stonewall riots nearly 50 years ago (http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/historic-new-york-gay-bar-stonewall-inn-gains-landmark-status). It also caps off two short years of striking progress that saw the number of states with legalized marriage equality skyrocket from single digits to 37 states, plus the District of Columbia. Friday’s decision means that the remaining same-sex marriage bans in 13 states cannot stand.

[DerrekCooke2]

…I’m not even sure I believe in man/women marriage anymore…BUT it’s a personal choice…if 2 girls or 2 guys…hell it could be 3 girls or 3 guys…or 2 girls/1 guy or 2 guys/ 1 girl…the numbers don’t really make a damn…it’s a personal choice think…the government & church SHOULD NOT be able to tell you who to love & marry…period…

I agree with you charles-smythe

[darkeyes]

Homophobes, biphobes, and bigots like you lost today.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/supreme-court-rules-favor-marriage-equality

The nation’s highest court has found that the U.S. Constitution requires states to license and recognize marriages between two people of the same sex, making marriage equality officially — after decades of litigation and activism — the law of the land.
Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the landmark opinion, which was handed down on Friday, writing that “no union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family.” He was joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan.
Each of the court’s conservative justices — Scalia, Thomas, and Alito — as well as Chief Justice John Roberts, meanwhile, wrote his own dissent.
The decision comes as the pinnacle of the modern gay rights movement, which began in earnest with the Stonewall riots nearly 50 years ago (http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/historic-new-york-gay-bar-stonewall-inn-gains-landmark-status). It also caps off two short years of striking progress that saw the number of states with legalized marriage equality skyrocket from single digits to 37 states, plus the District of Columbia. Friday’s decision means that the remaining same-sex marriage bans in 13 states cannot stand.
I think it is terrific and long overdue... well done Justices.. and well done America...an injustice corrected no matter what anyone says..

The attainment of same sex marriage for all in the US who wish it is not the end of the fight for equal rights for the lgbt... in the US now the campaign must move on to equal employment rights.. I understand that there are only 22 states where a person cannot be fired for being gay or bisexual.. that the lgbt are discriminated against in many areas of employment throughout the union... time or that to be changed..

In the UK, it is heartening to hear today that a judicial review has been granted which it is hoped will end Northern Ireland's same sex marriage ban.. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-33285452. If successful the last country in the UK where same gender marriage is illegal will have to change its law.

All in all... a good day:)

[charles-smythe]

Can I reword that? The majority WHO VOTED, voted against gay marriage. The problem is that too many people don't vote, so we don't actually know the majority's opinion. And in some cases (I think maybe we're talking about the same thing), the ones who were against gay marriage were loudest, and simply got more people to vote who wouldn't have voted otherwise, just to vote on that bill. The LGBT activists didn't push their end of the same campaign until it was too late.

To answer the original question: because we belong to a minority, are we obligated to accept other minorities because our fates are tied together?

No.

We should accept other minorities because it's the right thing to do. (Well, maybe not the KKK, but that's not the type of minority we're talking about here.)

Should we join their cause? In a way, yes. I think we need to broaden our scope to be tolerant of everyone, not just people like us. Should we advocate for them, should we be their activists? Maybe within our own social group, but I don't think we need to join every cause that comes our way. I know some people like that, and because their activism doesn't seem genuine, it's harder to be interested in what they're saying. …true story about the KKK…the farm next to my grandfather’s farm was owned by a black family…the family had never been slaves & had owned the property even before the civil war…this was in Freestone Co, texas…the Limestone Co Klan came into our community to terrize the black family…the Dew (Freestone Co) Klan baricaed the road with their cars & defended the black family…daddy said it was about 30 seconds from a shooting before the Limestone Co boys back down…the Freestone Co boys told the Limestone Co boys…you don’t come into our community & mess with ‘home folk’ (Home folks is anyone that’s part of the community)…when have you ever heard of the Klan protecting a black family with their guns?...

[pepperjack]

…true story about the KKK…the farm next to my grandfather’s farm was owned by a black family…the family had never been slaves & had owned the property even before the civil war…this was in Freestone Co, texas…the Limestone Co Klan came into our community to terrize the black family…the Dew (Freestone Co) Klan baricaed the road with their cars & defended the black family…daddy said it was about 30 seconds from a shooting before the Limestone Co boys back down…the Freestone Co boys told the Limestone Co boys…you don’t come into our community & mess with ‘home folk’ (Home folks is anyone that’s part of the community)…when have you ever heard of the Klan protecting a black family with their guns?...


Interesting anecdote, Charles. Divisiveness within the klan itself; have never encountered an incident like this before but given human nature, doesn't really surprise me.A situation where hypocrisy was actually a positive thing. I read this book as a young man: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Like_Me. Had quite a profound effect on me. I had seen the previews to the film adaptation in a drive-in theater as a boy ( remember those? ) which is what prompted me to read the book because the controversy surrounding it was so intense. If I remember correctly, the film was temporarily banned. Anyway, one thing that stood out to me was the author's experiences encountering racism & hatred within the black race itself ( e.g. Mulatto, Creole, basically, mixed blacks vs. those who considered themselves 100% black) And it exists to this day. True, it's the interracial crimes that grab the headlines, but there are still more black on black homicides among young black men than any other.

[jem_is_bi]

…true story about the KKK…the farm next to my grandfather’s farm was owned by a black family…the family had never been slaves & had owned the property even before the civil war…this was in Freestone Co, texas…the Limestone Co Klan came into our community to terrize the black family…the Dew (Freestone Co) Klan baricaed the road with their cars & defended the black family…daddy said it was about 30 seconds from a shooting before the Limestone Co boys back down…the Freestone Co boys told the Limestone Co boys…you don’t come into our community & mess with ‘home folk’ (Home folks is anyone that’s part of the community)…when have you ever heard of the Klan protecting a black family with their guns?...

Charles, that story seems to be very much like the turf wars between rival gangs that are reported in recent news stories. Is that how it worked in Texas KKK?

[charles-smythe]

Interesting anecdote, Charles. Divisiveness within the klan itself; have never encountered an incident like this before but given human nature, doesn't really surprise me.A situation where hypocrisy was actually a positive thing. I read this book as a young man: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Like_Me. Had quite a profound effect on me. I had seen the previews to the film adaptation in a drive-in theater as a boy ( remember those? ) which is what prompted me to read the book because the controversy surrounding it was so intense. If I remember correctly, the film was temporarily banned. Anyway, one thing that stood out to me was the author's experiences encountering racism & hatred within the black race itself ( e.g. Mulatto, Creole, basically, mixed blacks vs. those who considered themselves 100% black) And it exists to this day. True, it's the interracial crimes that grab the headlines, but there are still more black on black homicides among young black men than any other.

…I read the book in junior high…it was though provoking…

[charles-smythe]

Charles, that story seems to be very much like the turf wars between rival gangs that are reported in recent news stories. Is that how it worked in Texas KKK?
…actually they had the Klan to handle problems the sheriff couldn’t take care of…like a white guy who stayed drunk all the time & slapped his wife & kids around all the time…the Klan showed up @ his house one night when he’d really slapped his 10 year old boy around real bad…the pulled him out of bed…tied him to a fence & whipped his naked butt with a razor strope until he cried like a baby…they told him if he didn’t stop drinking, stop hitting his wife & kid and get a job ASAP & start taking care of his family…next time they visited him it would be with a black snake whip…….we need something like the Klan to start dealing with all the drug dealer, car thieves & just general thugs that the law can’t seem to touch…

[pepperjack]

…actually they had the Klan to handle problems the sheriff couldn’t take care of…like a white guy who stayed drunk all the time & slapped his wife & kids around all the time…the Klan showed up @ his house one night when he’d really slapped his 10 year old boy around real bad…the pulled him out of bed…tied him to a fence & whipped his naked butt with a razor strope until he cried like a baby…they told him if he didn’t stop drinking, stop hitting his wife & kid and get a job ASAP & start taking care of his family…next time they visited him it would be with a black snake whip…….we need something like the Klan to start dealing with all the drug dealer, car thieves & just general thugs that the law can’t seem to touch…

Revealing & disturbing comment on your part Charles. Notice i didn't even give them the respect of capitalizing the k? Its always been the nature of the klan to rationalize & justify their hatred, terrorism and vicious murder hiding behind the masquerade of " God-fearing Christians. " This is a classic example of that " good 'ole boy" southern mindset. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0999913/

[Visexual]

Yesterday was certainly a day to remember. Not only the court's decision on same sex marriage but a wonderful speech by our President!