Executive Order 10450 gay purge?

[dilbert firestorm]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in...ent/ar-BBQ9aEQ


hmm... Ike did it!


even more boggling, the guy who wrote the EO was gay. wow!

[themystic]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in...ent/ar-BBQ9aEQ


hmm... Ike did it!


even more boggling, the guy who wrote the EO was gay. wow!

There's always been a lot of gay people in politics. Right now the Senate has 53 and the House has about 199. And the President has been " unsubstantiated"

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by themystic

There's always been a lot of gay people in politics. Right now the Senate has 53 and the House has about 199. And the President has been " unsubstantiated"

That is a pretty damned big closet.

The mistake that many make concerning Gays is that most "Straight People" don't care. I think if the truth is known, the vast majority of Americans don't care about someone's sexual orientation as long as it involves consenting adults.

I would hope that those who identify as Gay would not be like some segments of minority populations and expect some type of victim status for eternity. The Black population has it's share of Poverty Pimps who must keep those who identify as Black in a constant state of victimhood, ignoring the fact that the vast majority of Americans don't think about it one way or another.

The Democrat Party falls into this category of those that propagate perpetual victimhood as well. They must keep Americans divided along the lines that make us different in order to justify their Liberal/Progressive/Socialist Dogma.

I would be willing to bet that if you could ask every American what they thought of those that are not the same skin pigmentation or sexual bent, the vast majority would say that they accept people for the way they were created and that we are all first and foremost Humans.

Of course, this would be the last thing that those who expound to the Liberal/Progressive idealology would want to hear.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

...I think if the truth is known, the vast majority of Americans don't care about someone's sexual orientation as long as it involves consenting adults.

...

... and discretion as to the environment in which it is engaged.

"environment" example: a booth at Denny's!

[themystic]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

That is a pretty damned big closet.

The mistake that many make concerning Gays is that most "Straight People" don't care. I think if the truth is known, the vast majority of Americans don't care about someone's sexual orientation as long as it involves consenting adults.

I would hope that those who identify as Gay would not be like some segments of minority populations and expect some type of victim status for eternity. The Black population has it's share of Poverty Pimps who must keep those who identify as Black in a constant state of victimhood, ignoring the fact that the vast majority of Americans don't think about it one way or another.

The Democrat Party falls into this category of those that propagate perpetual victimhood as well. They must keep Americans divided along the lines that make us different in order to justify their Liberal/Progressive/Socialist Dogma.

I would be willing to bet that if you could ask every American what they thought of those that are not the same skin pigmentation or sexual bent, the vast majority would say that they accept people for the way they were created and that we are all first and foremost Humans.

Of course, this would be the last thing that those who expound to the Liberal/Progressive idealology would want to hear.

Look carefully at the narrative of the Republican party. Total victim consciousness. The gays have got pretty much what they wanted. A few radicals left but most DGAF

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by themystic

There's always been a lot of gay people in politics. Right now the Senate has 53 and the House has about 199. And the President has been " unsubstantiated"

! would flip those numbers, put your comment was pretty funny.

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in...ent/ar-BBQ9aEQ


hmm... Ike did it!


even more boggling, the guy who wrote the EO was gay. wow!

Many liberals are self hating gays. Psychologically speaking, a person who identifies as a liberal is by definition a change agent, hence they want to change from normal sexual content to homosexuality.

As to proof I'm not homophobic, I can publicly state right here that I love lesbians, especially those that are young, pretty, skinny, long haired & with an obsequious demeanor.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by friendly fred

.... I love lesbians, especially those that are young, pretty, skinny, long haired & with an obsequious demeanor.

.... I never ask if they are ... "lesbians." I just assume that and enjoy the moment, but back then it was probably "quiet" most of the time ...

https://www.archives.gov/federal-reg...der/10450.html

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in...ent/ar-BBQ9aEQ


hmm... Ike did it!


even more boggling, the guy who wrote the EO was gay. wow!

Originally Posted by LexusLover

.... I never ask if they are ... "lesbians." I just assume that and enjoy the moment, but back then it was probably "quiet" most of the time ...

https://www.archives.gov/federal-reg...der/10450.html

looks like the EO went thru some changes before being repealed entirely by Obama in 2017.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execut...ling_the_order

[justin_iggar]

We need a purge of more than just honosexuals.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

That is a pretty damned big closet.

The mistake that many make concerning Gays is that most "Straight People" don't care. I think if the truth is known, the vast majority of Americans don't care about someone's sexual orientation as long as it involves consenting adults.

I would hope that those who identify as Gay would not be like some segments of minority populations and expect some type of victim status for eternity. The Black population has it's share of Poverty Pimps who must keep those who identify as Black in a constant state of victimhood, ignoring the fact that the vast majority of Americans don't think about it one way or another.

The Democrat Party falls into this category of those that propagate perpetual victimhood as well. They must keep Americans divided along the lines that make us different in order to justify their Liberal/Progressive/Socialist Dogma.

I would be willing to bet that if you could ask every American what they thought of those that are not the same skin pigmentation or sexual bent, the vast majority would say that they accept people for the way they were created and that we are all first and foremost Humans.

Of course, this would be the last thing that those who expound to the Liberal/Progressive idealology would want to hear.

Jackie, This is a real problem for the Republicans. If they don't change tact with respect to social issues like LGBT rights and start to appeal more to Blacks and Hispanics, the party will be history. Take the bathroom laws. Who gives a crap? Why do Republicans insist on pushing issues like this in places like North Carolina and Texas when they only serve to push social liberals, who might agree with them on economic issues, away from the party?

Over 90% of Blacks vote Democratic. Why? One reason may be that a significant minority of Republicans are indeed anti Black. (You could make the same point about Democrats and white males but that's another issue.) Another is your point about the Democratic Party's appeal to victimhood. A disproportionate percentage of Blacks are poor, which you can attribute in large part to Democratic Party policies from the 1870's through to the 1960's. And, today, as you implied it's in the Democrat politicians best interest to keep people poor, because they get more votes that way. That's a pity, Republican government, particularly at the local and state level, stands a better chance of lifting people out of poverty than Democratic government. The Republicans are more efficient administrators. Also, where the school systems are basket cases, they're more willing to try things like charter schools and subsidizing private school attendance, while the Democrats are afraid of upsetting the teacher's unions. One thing I'll fault the Republicans on - single mothers and poor children need more help, and they're not as willing to provide that.

Anyway, given that Millennials (who are socially liberal on issues like gay rights) and Blacks overwhelmingly vote for Democrats, and given that Trump seems intent on driving Hispanics away as well, the future for the Republican Party looks grim unless it changes. As time passes, white males will become a smaller percentage of the population, and Millennials will be more inclined to vote while the baby boom generation will die off.

Dilbert, apologies if I'm hijacking your thread. I'm not sure as the link in your post was broken and I couldn't find it by Googling.

[themystic]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Jackie, This is a real problem for the Republicans. If they don't change tact with respect to social issues like LGBT rights and start to appeal more to Blacks and Hispanics, the party will be history. Take the bathroom laws. Who gives a crap? Why do Republicans insist on pushing issues like this in places like North Carolina and Texas when they only serve to push social liberals, who might agree with them on economic issues, away from the party?

Over 90% of Blacks vote Democratic. Why? One reason may be that a significant minority of Republicans are indeed anti Black. (You could make the same point about Democrats and white males but that's another issue.) Another is your point about the Democratic Party's appeal to victimhood. A disproportionate percentage of Blacks are poor, which you can attribute in large part to Democratic Party policies from the 1870's through to the 1960's. And, today, as you implied it's in the Democrat politicians best interest to keep people poor, because they get more votes that way. That's a pity, Republican government, particularly at the local and state level, stands a better chance of lifting people out of poverty than Democratic government. The Republicans are more efficient administrators. Also, where the school systems are basket cases, they're more willing to try things like charter schools and subsidizing private school attendance, while the Democrats are afraid of upsetting the teacher's unions. One thing I'll fault the Republicans on - single mothers and poor children need more help, and they're not as willing to provide that.

Anyway, given that Millennials (who are socially liberal on issues like gay rights) and Blacks overwhelmingly vote for Democrats, and given that Trump seems intent on driving Hispanics away as well, the future for the Republican Party looks grim unless it changes. As time passes, white males will become a smaller percentage of the population, and Millennials will be more inclined to vote while the baby boom generation will die off.

Dilbert, apologies if I'm hijacking your thread. I'm not sure as the link in your post was broken and I couldn't find it by Googling.

Relax Tiny. The Russians are working on it

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Dilbert, apologies if I'm hijacking your thread. I'm not sure as the link in your post was broken and I couldn't find it by Googling.

no problem.


typical of microsoft to break a link...


https://www.yahoo.com/news/closet-wh...100003760.html