You are currently browsing the Gay Talk weblog archives for August, 2008.
Ian @ February 28, 2007 # 3 Comments
Just one more reason that clearly illustrates why we need to include homosexuality in any anti bullying campaign. Should the school have turfed the kid? No I think instead it should have educated her on why she was in trouble. I think the whole ‘expulsion’ concept used in schools is wrong, as it does not solve the issues. It merely transfers them elsewhere.
Ian @ February 28, 2007 # One Comment
See, this is what is wrong. Nothing but double standards. If you oppose Gays, well your political opinions are not relevent when it comes to getting state funding. Sure is different though if your a supporter of Gay Rights. Then it is how dare you think of being granted state funds.
Ian @ February 27, 2007 # No Comment Yet
While countries like Canada move forward with other issues, such as National Health Care, war in Afghanistan and such, these focus groups don’t see war or health care as issues warranting their full attention. Despite having 45 states out of 50 already having measures against equality for Gays, they are determined to one day insist on a federal law, to deny equality to a minority. Makes you wonder, what will be next should they achieve their current goal? (see articles on Homophobia)
Ian @ February 26, 2007 # No Comment Yet
Why does the rest of the world worry so much about what happens in the United States?
Simple really, as the United States is a superpower, and it likes to meddle in the affairs of other nations, and so whoever winds up leading that nation, effects what might happen in our own country. It isn’t right [...]
Ian @ February 25, 2007 # 4 Comments
Just one more vital reason why come next election any vote for Stephen Harper is a vote against Canada. He doesn’t stand up for us, he’s helping to lead the Canadian end of moving towards this unholy union, sending his top ministers to negotiate away our Sovereignty and Independance.
Ian @ February 22, 2007 # One Comment
Children today are learning about hate, about racial superiority (see comment ‘Rising Spread of Hate’) and other nonsense not just from home, but from their weekly sunday Church attendance, from their national leaders like George Bush, Milt Romney, John McCain and others. Is this really the signal we want to foster, to promote in our children?
Ian @ February 21, 2007 # 3 Comments
Each time people like the Pope speaks out against Homosexuals, ( see commentary ‘Papal War on Equality’) each time national leaders attempt to push second class citizenship on a minority, we send our Children the message that it is okay to hate, to vilify and terrify some innocent child. That is the message that people like Vic Toews sends when he wants to eliminate homosexuality from Canada’s hate crime laws, (see commentary ‘Climate of Hate’) it is that message that President Bush sends when he talks about constitutional amendments to deny equality to a minority.
Ian @ February 20, 2007 # One Comment
Consider that not all parents are biological or even adopt kids of a spouse from a former marriage. As such under current Marriage they still have rights, and visitation is one of them. Under civil unions, at least in Utah, those rights do not seem to exist. Despite the supposed equality it is evident that certain rights contained within marriage are not as legally binding under civil unions, not because of any other legal differences.
Ian @ February 19, 2007 # No Comment Yet
Take Iraq, where supposed death squads are seeking out Gays and Lesbians and killing them. Why do we insist on calling it isolated incidents of extremism, or some other stupid catch phrase? It is the deliberate murder of a minority group, an attempt at extermination that is no different than the Nazi rampages of WWII. Yet we ignore it, even when the Iraqi government makes no bones that the death of gays is not relevent.
Ian @ February 18, 2007 # One Comment
Honourable Role Models for gays are denied us, because if we want to succeed, we are forced to live our lives in secret. If you read the novel ‘Rage’ you would perhaps understand just how polluted the world is against Gays, even today in a so called enlightened world. Jean Chretien and Paul Martin didn’t understand how people could be Gay, but it didn’t stop them from understanding that you can’t pick and choose who to grant equality to. All People are entitled to those rights, and when you deny them those rights, you send wrong signals to people. It really isn’t Just a Piece of Paper (commentary on Marriage), it is a symbol that Gays need, not to feel better, but to survive.
Ian @ February 18, 2007 # No Comment Yet
Well, over at Gay 247 I have just added another short story you can enjoy online. This one is called ‘The After Party” and is I think rather good, but you can judge for youself.
Jake could feel himself getting a boner on the drive which started the whole night’s nightmare. Charlene assumed it was because [...]
Ian @ February 16, 2007 # One Comment
See to me, human rights means just that. If you are human, you have rights and it should apply to any human, irrespective of your differences. Just as those injured by Richard’s slurs, so too does he have rights. Two wrongs DO NOT MAKE IT RIGHT!
Ian @ February 15, 2007 # No Comment Yet
I am debating whether or not to start another novel, one that I would serialize here, but I don’t know. I mean a little break would be nice, and perhaps I’ll just write a few little stories, to post here. I also will be releasing another erotic short story for the weekend, that you can enjoy online as well.
Ian @ February 9, 2007 # 2 Comments
You would think, with all the money these zealots are spending on court battles across the country, how much better it would be to see those funds paying for new children’s hospitals, equipping old ones, or better yet, funding schools with text books, art supplies, band instruments, or even Teachers. Obviously it is more important to fund lawsuits in an effort not to protect one’s rights, but to deny rights to a minority.
Ian @ February 9, 2007 # No Comment Yet
Was this a defection or simply a politician moving on to where he could speak and carry some weight? Frankly in my simple adled mind, Turner simply took a logical step to continue to serve his constituents, in a fair and honest manner. I also think his offer to run in a byelection, as long as the others do is a good test of Mr Harper’s ethics.
