A New Gay Hero For California?

Clearly you have never attended a Gay Pride Day.

One of my favorite moments is when the Parents of Gay children proudly march down the street.

Well maybe right after the Dykes on Bikes contingent.

For anyone who has actually attended a Gay Pride Parade it is really about love and celebrating the fact that Gay's no longer are arrested simply for being in the wrong bar, or beaten up by police because they were in the wrong bar, or being fired because someone thinks they look too queer.

Yes- there are some nude people- guess what- we have nude people running in the Bay Breakers too. Lewd? Oh I suppose there are examples of that- mostly campy or comical examples but so what? Promiscuous? Never seen anything about promiscuouty in a Gay Pride Parade- matter of fact since there are almost always groups promoting Gay Marriage, I would say I have seen more examples of promoting monogamy than promiscuity.

And 96.5% of the population? Just dont' attend the parade. Not as if anyone is forcing you to attend that any more than the Columbus Day parade.

 

Wow are the gay-advocates missing the point on purpose or what? It's not that just not going to Main Street is the answer. It's the lifestyles that promote and celebrate sexual deviant promiscuity and exhibitionism. Put your seatbelts on because this may come as a shock to you: MAINSTREAM DEMOCRATS BY AND LARGE ARE SEXUALLY CONSERVATIVE. And we are the majority in the democratic party. We don't believe in promoting your behavior to our children as something to be "proud" of.

We don't want "gay heros" who molested boys taught as our childrens' role models in school. What problem do you guys have with having poor Randy Shilts who accomplished so vastly much more than Harvey Milk did for gays as a tireless journalist, as the gay hero instead of the lackluster, predatory and promiscuous Harvey Milk?

 

Well the problem I have is that you are lying about Harvey Milk, and that Shilts himself identified why Milk became a martyr to the GLBT community, and I really object to someone who doesn't even live in California telling us what we should be thinking.

You don't like our Gay Pride Parades- stay away from them. It is even easier than changing the TV channel. I haven't been to one for several years but it was always the most joyful and spontanious parade in San Francisco- led off each year by Dykes on Bikes rumbling down Market Street, with the biggest cheers always for the proud Parents of Gay children, who march in the Parade to show that their love for their children is not contingent on their children having the correct sexual preference.

 

If you don't like sexual promiscuity, don't be sexually promiscuous.
Same goes for sexual deviancy.
If a child is molested the case will be treated the same way it is treated now.

 

If you don't like communities which prohibit open displays of perversion, stay out of those communities. Problem solved.

 

Works fine for me- I don't think anyone should be required to watch a couple make out, whether they are straight or gay. Some communities are more relaxed about that than others and people can chose where they want to be.

And San Francisco, New York and Los Angeles continue to be among the very top tourist destinations in the U.S.

 

When I first saw the thread title, I thought this was gonna be another Green Lantern thread.

I think George Takei should embody the GLBT community.

 

Now that is funny.

How dare you bring levity to this thread!

 

Levity is fine. I wonder if George Takei would fight to protect minor boys like Jack McKinley from Harvey Milk? Or would George turn a blind eye or even fight to defend Harvey Milk's "right" to break the law?

Yes, just like the freak show was the most visited tent at the circus. People have a morbid curiosity when it comes to bearded ladies or siamese twins. It doesn't mean they want either to become the mainstream. It goes without saying that mental illness is the most rampant in the largest and most crowded US cities...

 

Only George Takai could answer whether he would be able to detect that Jack McKinley was an underage minor(16) or a legal teenager(17). If he was there maybe he could have told us whether he had ever seen Milk 'sodomize a drug addicted teenage boy' - it would be a first since no one has claimed Milk ever did that- except you.

I am more and more convinced that those who are most obsessively opposed to Homosexuals are just repressed Puritans who just can't stand the idea of people having fun. And Gays seem to be having the most fun, and therefore are the biggest targets.

San Francisco had over 15 million tourists in 2010. Many of them were themselves gay who came to San Francisco to enjoy a vacation where they didn't have to worry about being beaten up or harrassed for being gay, and where they could hold hands in public like straight couples. About 5% of all tourists were GLBT- so more than our entire population.

The number one reason given for visiting San Francisco was the "overall ambience, atmosphere", second reason was 'scenic beauty".

But whatever the reasons they keep coming- and we welcome them.

All but the bigots and the homophobes- and any who want to bring their hatred and rage to our fair City- they are welcome to stay away and villify us from afar.

 

Nobody is saying to be "opposed to homosexuals". Opposing a culture that promotes a pedophile IS however something to be opposed to. Never have I said, and never will you be able to quote me saying that there will never be homosexuals in any given culture. Just like you will never catch me saying there will never be people with OCD in any culture. Neither will you be able to quote me saying that I think either homosexuals or people with OCD should be persecuted. Now to anticipate your typical SFJeff response: "people with OCD can get married still" [even though this thread isn't about gay marriage], I will say that people with OCD have a peculiar behavioral anomoly that involves compulsive repetitive behaviors. So in light of their disability, we would never seriously consider putting them say behind the controls of a commercial airliner if they had to wipe their hands 3 times with purell each time before and after they went to touch a new knob on the instrument panel. Neither would we mainstream a sexual behavior that erodes the meaning and substance of the iconic, santioned sexual pairing which is what marriage is all about. "Between one man and one woman not related". That is so that our society can uphold the behaviors that reflect our iconic mating pair that sets the ideal for the nucleus of the family; potential offspring and so on.

Promoting a behavior as a race, particularly when that behavior includes sexual promiscuity and predation on minors ist verboten. Yet in California they're doing it.

I'll ask the question again: How do California politicians square up teaching adolescents in health ed that they are to avoid promiscuity and STDs, while at the same time they're learning in "gay history" that Harvey Milk promoted gay promiscuity and "had a penchant for young waifs with substance abuse problems"? This is their "hero" while at the same time the precise example of what they are taught to never become...

Meanwhile Randy Shilts promoted AIDS awareness and the clamping down on gay promiscuity so that lives could be saved. Now that's a role model kids could square up with avoiding STDS and staying clean and healthy..

 

Gave thumbs up to some of Silhouette's posts but also gave thumbs down to some of Silhouette's posts because Silhouette overlooks fact that Randy Shilts saw nothing wrong with Harvey B. Milk committing homosexual statutory rape on a teenage boy. SFJeff ignores the fact that in California the legal consent age is 18. While many states have lowered this to 17 & even 16, California's legal consent age is 18 so SFJeff writes rubbish. Homo/lesbian sexual behaviors are useless & comparable to drug junkyism. But to repeat, other things Harvey B. Milk did was have sex in public parks & he bragged about how he avoided getting arrested by the cops. Harvey B. Milk was a homosexual statutory rapist & Harvey B. Milk committed indecent exposure. SFJeff brings up Elvis Presley allegedly having sex with underage girls but assuming the accusation is true, Elvis Presley is respected for what he did musically & Boxer Mike Tyson is respected for what he did as a boxer, not as a convicted rapist. Both Elvis Presley & Mike Tyson don't have holidays in their names. Harvey Bernard Milk however does have a holiday in his name & Harvey B. Milk was a homosexual statutory rapist & some1 who committed indecency by having sex in public parks.

 

Just because you like elvis's music, doesn't mean you believe in the drugs that killed him. If it's impossible or impractical to teach of the good things one did without muddying the water with confused messages about promiscuity, then Harvey Milk is a poor decision. The disagreement is not about whether we support promoting promiscuity or not, but rather whether or not there is any real risk of that confused message being improperly understood outside of the context of time. Frankly, I'm not an expert on the matters of education, so I can't speak for whether or not it's impossible to teach of the good of Harvey Milk without necessarily promoting the bad. But what I DON'T trust is your assessment, which comes biased with an agenda that you constantly promote through misinformation. Your intention seems not just to correct the mistake of Harvey Milk being chosen for a holiday, but to use it as some sort of proof that gays (and the legislature that made the law) support promiscuity. What they support is the movement that united gays that he inspired. It is wrong if such support comes at the cost of confusing minors, but it's also wrong to demonize and confuse the motives for that support in order to demonize.

I would have no problem if someone else took the spot of Harvey, or nobody at all, although a recognition of key players in the movement I could support.

Agreed, although admirable as this may be, Shilts isn't the "exciting" sort of character that generally promotes wide-spread recognition... his contributions were important, but subtle. Nevertheless, someone like him who promoted healthy lifestyles would be the start of a good choice... buch such a person would also have to be inspiring and motivational in order to promote recognition.

 

There are times when you almost seem to want a real discussion- then you go and lie again.

"same time they're learning in "gay history" that Harvey Milk promoted gay promiscuity and "had a penchant for young waifs with substance abuse problems"? "

That is what you want them to believe about Harvey Milk- that is what you are promoting about Harvey Milk. That is neither what the law says, nor is what is taught to children in San Francisco.

Why do you feel compelled to lie about this?

 

There is an Elvis Presley Day in Tennessee. We can speculate that Milk had sex with a minor- as we can speculate that Elvis had sex with a minor- and we can speculate that Jefferson raped a slave....

We don't honor Elvis for having sex with 14 year old Priscilla, and we don't honor Jefferson for raping his slave and we don't honor Milk for whatever he actually did sexually- we honor them for the postive things that they did accomplish.


Oh and seriously- do you think I care that you gave my posts dislikes? Stop sending me personal messages- I find your rationalizations for murdering homosexuals disgusting, I expressed my opinion on the matter and I will not participate in your attempts at rationalizing such murders.

 

That happens in San Fran and New Orleans only, that I know of. I've never seen a nude or promiscuous display at a majority of Pride parades.

 

Revealing how homosexuals, view any criticism of individual homosexuals, to be criticism of all homosexuals. Thats how you end up wih the likes o Harvey Milk and the guy who recently got busted for kiddie porn, held out as icons of society.

 

Yeah, the law prevents the schools from teaching anything that might reflect badly upon gays, so by law they wouldnt learn about his penchant for promiscuity and boys. Might reflect badly upon gays.

 

We need to offend homosexuals. You can deny Harvey B. Milk committing homosexual statutory rape but I believe you know is true but still deny it, it's like denying 2+2=4. Homosexual/lesbian sexual behaviors is comparable to crack smokin & drug junkyism. Even if orientation doesn't change, it's best to impose celibacy on them. Jerry Sandusky was a homosexual. Murdering Harvey B. Milk is disgusting to you, but as I see it, Harvey B. Milk won't commit any more homosexual statutory rapes & it's possible his victim turned out gay because of homosexual statutory rapes. You see nothing wrong with Harvey B. Milk having sex in parks & that's evil. Methew Wayne Shepard was killed before he was 21 years & 10 months old & we'll never know how much worse he would've become. In another topic you said you saw nothing wrong with Methew W. Shepard falsely accusing some1 of sex abuse to police 2 months before his death. We'll never know how much worse Methew W. Shepard would've become because he could've in the future been a Harvey B. Milk. Difference between Milk & Shepard is that Milk had more years for his anti-social conduct. Anyhow SFJeff, you see nothing wrong with Harvey B. Milk having sex with underage boys & having sex in parks & you also see nothing wrong with Methew W. Shepard falsely accusing a man of sex abuse. I see something wrong with both conducts. Silhouette is wrong on Randy Shilts because Randy Shilts was a Harvey B. Milk apologist & didn't believe Harvey B. Milk should go to jail for homosexual statutory rape. Again, I'm against murder but murder in some cases can be lesser of 2 evils if it prevents some1 from doing worse things. If Harvey B. Milk's murder prevented him from committing any more homosexual statutory rapes on underage boys, then yes his murder is the lesser of 2 evils & no more teens will be victimised by him. If Methew Wayne Shepard's murder prevented him from making any more false sex abuse accusations as he did 2 months before his death which could send innocent men to prison, then yes, his murder is the lesser of 2 bads. Yes, people who commit murders must be punished but sometimes bad people get murdered & both Harvey B. Milk & Methew W. Shepard were bad people.

 

If you want to criticize Harvey Milk- feel free to. You object to him being as promiscuous as Hugh Hefner- go for it.

I object to the blatant lies and misrepresentations that Silhouette and some of the other posters are promoting. Frankly, I don't care whether Milk is considered a Gay Martyr or not- as I am not a member of the Gay community.

 

Which law would that be? Share that with me- because as a Californian, I am not familiar with it.

But the law regarding Harvey Milk Day talks about discussing Milks contributions- which is appropriate for discussing with school children.

Just like we don't use History books to teach children that Jefferson had sex with his slaves, we teach what is appropriate to our kids- the positive accomplishments of the individuals.

And we dont' lie to our kids by claiming things that are just the speculation of bigots- such as 'his penchant for...boys".

 

except harvey didn't break the law.

 

Your rationalizations for murdering gays disgust and alarm me. I am very concerned that your justifications for assaulting and harming gays could turn into actual violence.

Please get some counseling- whether from your religious leaders, if you are religious, or from a secular source- to assist you with dealing with this issue before it is too late.

I am very, very serious and this is not intended to be an insult in any way. I am very concerned.

 

I'm not a religious person but I see something wrong with homosexual&lesbian activities & I also see something wrong wrong with sex changes. let me say that I once stood up to a psychologist. What happened was I was in a library in 2006 discussing Jon Benet Ramsey case where a transexual was accused of her killing. I said that it should be a crime to do sex changes but the stranger who I argued with told me he was a psychologist & an apologist for it. He said that he would report me to library staff if I continued arguing. Well in January 2007, that therapist who was in the library left his desk & I got his computer ID. I called library to anonymously report he committed indecent exposure & that psychologist was expelled from that library as I never saw him again in that library because of my anonymous call. So I defended my ground. As it's about Harvey B. Milk, he was a homosexual statutory rapist who victimised a 16 year old boy & he also had sex in public parks. I don't want gays having sex with teenage boys & I don't want gays having sex in parks. If Harvey B. Milk had been arrested by the cops in 1964 & convicted by jury of homosexual statutory rape, he would've been a felon & not able to be in office in 1978. Yes, I do believe Harvey B. Milk's killer did a favor by killing him because murder in that case prevented Harvey B. Milk from victimising any other teenage boys.

 

Disproving accusation by SFJeff that I excuse Harvey B. Milk's 1978 murder. I believe that if you must go to prison if you commit murder, but that whether you're convicted of 1st Degree, 2nd Degree or Manslaughter must be based on facts & circumstances of reach case. With Harvey Bernard Milk, yes Sergeant Daniel James (DJ) White the man who killed Harvey B. Milk was convicted by jury of Manslaughter & was punished for this. I value freedom. But I do believe that Sergeant Daniel James White by killing Harvey B. Milk in 1978, did what the California authorities didn't do in 1964. I don't sympathise with Harvey B. Milk because again, I see something wrong with Harvey Milk committing homosexual statutory rape on a 16 year old boy & I see something wrong with Harvey B. Milk having sex in parks-public indecency for which he wasn't prosecuted for. Not mourning the death of some1 is not the same as rationalizing & excusing his death as SFJeff says & I think SFJeff knows this. If a crack dealer is 1 day robbed & murdered, then those who commit the crime must be punished for robbery & murder. But the crack dealer being a murder victim doesn't change the fact he is a bad person. Yes, the murderer must be punished but I'm not going to lose sleep over a crack dealer's death. So don't expect me to lose sleep over Harvey Milk's death. Harvey Bernard Milk was a homosexual statutory rapist of teen boys & Harvey Bernard Milk had sex in public parks-criminal indecency. SFJeff sees nothing wrong with this & do many Harvey Milk apologists, but any1 who is moral must see something wrong with what he did.