Actress Ellen Page publicly came out as gay Friday evening, while giving a speech at Time to THRIVE, a national LGBTQ youth conference held in Las Vegas.
"I'm here today because I am gay," Page told the assembled crowd, which responded with a standing ovation and a long chorus of cheers.
"Whoo!" said Page, before continuing:
Originally Posted by :
"And because maybe I can make a difference. To help others have an easier and more hopeful time. Regardless, for me, I feel a personal obligation and a social responsibility.
I also do it selfishly because I'm tired of hiding and I'm tired of lying by omission. I suffered for years because I was scared to be out. My spirit suffered, my mental health suffered, and my relationships suffered. And I'm standing here today with all of you on the other side of that pain."
Page is most famous for becoming pregnant by her awkward classmate Michael Cera, and for invading the dreams of a stranger alongside Leonardo DiCaprio, neither of which happened in real life, because she is an actress.
After her speech, the Human Rights Campaign, which organized the conference, congratulated Page on the front page of its website for "her brave decision to live openly and authentically." [Reply]
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ:
My point(s) stand--Dakota's personal opinions were persecuted by a liberal teacher who is promoting the gay lifestyle (which is strange as German class is not the place to do this) while at the same time Dakota was expressing a private opinion to his friend, not meant for the teacher to hear. At no time was Dakota using hate speech, nor directing his opinion at anyone but his friend.
You may or may not be liberal but you display the classic hypocritical signs of a liberal.
Finished beating the crap out of that strawman, yet? Let me know when you're done. I'll wait. [Reply]
Originally Posted by LoneWolf: Since when does having pride in something mean you oppose something else? A kid wearing a "gay pride" shirt isn't putting down or disagreeing with the straight lifestyle. Wearing a shirt that has Bible verses opposing homosexuality and the saying "being gay ain't right" is not about showing pride for the wearers chosen lifestyle, but is meant to demean and put down the gay lifestyle.
I'm sure a man if your intelligence can see the difference.
I don't recall claiming the bolded part. And, yes, I do see the difference. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
I don't recall claiming the bolded part. And, yes, I do see the difference.
You asked the question when was the last time a kid was suspended for wearing a "gay pride" shirt to try to show the inequality between the apparent lack of students with gay pride getting suspended and the example you posted. I'm sure you see how stupid that was. [Reply]
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
You asked the question when was the last time a kid was suspended for wearing a "gay pride" shirt to try to show the inequality between the apparent lack of students with gay pride getting suspended and the example you posted. I'm sure you see how stupid that was.
Yes, I did. And it does show that one kind of offensive message (according some) is tolerated and another (according to some) is not. I'm sure you see how clear that is.
I would imagine that kids have been disciplined for wearing "straight pride" shirts, too. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
Yes, I did. And it does show that one kind of offensive message (according some) is tolerated and another (according to some) is not. I'm sure you see how clear that is.
I would imagine that kids have been disciplined for wearing "straight pride" shirts, too.
Once again, if one person showing pride in something is offensive to someone else, the fault lies in the person offended not the person displaying pride. If a kid was wearing a "gay pride" shirt that said "Hetero is a No No" on the back, then you would have an argument if that kid wasn't suspended and the kid in your example was. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
Well, since we have been discussing the plight of the homosexual as it relates to the United States...
Is it just the U.S. or is it mainstream society?
Originally Posted by :
My definition of mainstream society would be what is considered to be normal by the majority of society.
Again, you're still limiting the section in bold to your own opinion by limiting "mainstream society" to the U.S.
If you can provide evidence for how the majority of the world's population feels about homosexuality, in addition to providing that data in a format that shows those opinions in a more detailed manner, I'm sure everyone would love to see it.
You also failed to answer my question regarding those who perform homosexual acts but likely do not/would not identify as homosexuals. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
You guys are being trolled all to shit by Donger right now.
I would be remiss in my message board duties to let those responding earnestly to our dear immigrant friend from England that he did state that the word
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
Once again, if one person showing pride in something is offensive to someone else, the fault lies in the person offended not the person displaying pride. If a kid was wearing a "gay pride" shirt that said "Hetero is a No No" on the back, then you would have an argument if that kid wasn't suspended and the kid in your example was.
For the second time, yes, I do see the difference. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sorter:
Is it just the U.S. or is it mainstream society?
Mainstream society of the United States.
Originally Posted by Sorter:
Again, you're still limiting the section in bold to your own opinion by limiting "mainstream society" to the U.S.
If you can provide evidence for how the majority of the world's population feels about homosexuality, in addition to providing that data in a format that shows those opinions in a more detailed manner, I'm sure everyone would love to see it.
I don't really care about the rest of the world and how it views homosexuality.
Originally Posted by Sorter:
You also failed to answer my question regarding those who perform homosexual acts but likely do not/would not identify as homosexuals.
I did? Sorry about that. In that case, I would say that person is mildly confused. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sorter:
I would be remiss in my message board duties to let those responding earnestly to our dear immigrant friend from England that he did state that the word was not subjective.
Was that in the other thread and with regard to wiring? If so, that was an error.
In that thread, I asked many times if words such as "faulty," "incorrect" or "flawed" would be preferable. IIRC, no one ever answered. [Reply]
