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 Donger:
Was that in the other thread and with regard to wiring? If so, that was an error.
An error you did defend valiantly, mon ami.
Originally Posted by :
In that thread, I asked many times if words such as "faulty," "incorrect" or "flawed" would be preferable. IIRC, no one ever answered.
Probably because everyone (although I shouldn't speculate) knows that those were more accurate words to describe your position on homosexuality.
Additionally, if you'd merely admitted that
Originally Posted by :
bad
was indeed subjective and your opinion I'd assume there would have been similar responses (or lack thereof). [Reply]
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ:
lol, whatever. The only student who was "unsafely" treated was Dakota. The liberal left knows how to manipulate the situation. For example, you are suggesting that Dakota's comments were "hate speech" when in fact, they weren't. They were his opinion. Dakota never said he "hated" gays.
wow, you liberals really do love to bend the truth to suite your extremist position.
Stop trying to get a DC nut job to shoot Obama to impress Ellen Page. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sorter:
An error you did defend valiantly, mon ami.
Probably because when I used it, I wasn't using it to denote bad in the sense of morality. I was using it to denote "incorrect" or "faulty."
Originally Posted by Sorter:
Probably because everyone (although I shouldn't speculate) knows that those were more accurate words to describe your position on homosexuality.
Additionally, if you'd merely admitted that was indeed subjective and your opinion I'd assume there would have been similar responses (or lack thereof).
You remember the exchange better than I, I'll acknowledge. I'm pretty sure that many people still don't agree that homosexuals have "faulty" wiring. [Reply]
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
Then you are purposely acting stupid or maybe I've given you too much credit and you're not acting.
Do you agree that there are people who find homosexuality generally unpleasant? If so, do you understand that they might find a shirt which states "gay pride" with the rainbow offensive to their beliefs? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
Do you agree that there are people who find homosexuality generally unpleasant? If so, do you understand that they might find a shirt which states "gay pride" with the rainbow offensive to their beliefs?
I agree that there are people that find homosexuality unpleasant. I do not understand how someone showing "gay pride" would be offensive to someone else's beliefs. I'll repeat my opinion from earlier that if someone is offended by somebody else's pride, then the problem is theirs not the person showing pride.
If I see someone wearing a Denver Bronco's shirt, I am not offended by that person's pride in being a Denver Broncos fan. Now, if that person was wearing a shirt with a Broncos logo on the front and "Chiefs Suck" on the back, as a Chiefs fan I would be mildly offended. See the difference? [Reply]
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
I agree that there are people that find homosexuality unpleasant. I do not understand how someone showing "gay pride" would be offensive to someone else's beliefs. I'll repeat my opinion from earlier that if someone is offended by somebody else's pride, then the problem is theirs not the person showing pride.
If I see someone wearing a Denver Bronco's shirt, I am not offended by that person's pride in being a Denver Broncos fan. Now, if that person was wearing a shirt with a Broncos logo on the front and "Chiefs Suck" on the back, as a Chiefs fan I would be mildly offended. See the difference?
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
I agree that there are people that find homosexuality unpleasant. I do not understand how someone showing "gay pride" would be offensive to someone else's beliefs. I'll repeat my opinion from earlier that if someone is offended by somebody else's pride, then the problem is theirs not the person showing pride.
If I see someone wearing a Denver Bronco's shirt, I am not offended by that person's pride in being a Denver Broncos fan. Now, if that person was wearing a shirt with a Broncos logo on the front and "Chiefs Suck" on the back, as a Chiefs fan I would be mildly offended. See the difference?
Aha, I see your hang up now. The pride part. Just forget about that and just stick with the gay part.
That person would be offended (and perhaps disgusted) at the "gay" part, not the pride part. Well, maybe both, but mostly the "you are homosexual and that is icky."
As to your Broncos analogy, the above is probably true as well. You see the Broncos logo and feel slightly sick to your stomach, right? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
Aha, I see your hang up now. The pride part. Just forget about that and just stick with the gay part.
That person would be offended (and perhaps disgusted) at the "gay" part, not the pride part. Well, maybe both, but mostly the "you are homosexual and that is icky."
As to your Broncos analogy, the above is probably true as well. You see the Broncos logo and feel slightly sick to your stomach, right?
Thinking that someone is "icky" because they are gay and expressing that opinion on your T-shirt is worlds different than someone wearing a shirt saying "I'm proud I'm gay". One message conveys disapproval and judgement of another's beliefs and the other shows "pride" in their own beliefs without passing judgement on others who believe differently. [Reply]
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
Thinking that someone is "icky" because they are gay and expressing that opinion on your T-shirt is worlds different than someone wearing a shirt saying "I'm proud I'm gay". One message conveys disapproval and judgement of another's beliefs and the other shows "pride" in their own beliefs without passing judgement on others who believe differently.
Like I said, you are hung up on the "pride" part. It's not relevant. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
Like I said, you are hung up on the "pride" part. It's not relevant.
JFC having a conversation with you is like having a conversation with my son, except I'll bet my son drools less than you.
Wearing a message saying something is wrong is different/worse than wearing a message supporting something. Do you get that you ****ing moron?
Your question about why was a kid suspended for wearing a shirt that says "being gay ain't right" and someone wearing a shirt supporting the gay lifestyle/rights isn't was ****ing stupid.
You'll notice the word pride wasn't used in this post once you gap-toothed immigrant. How's that for offensive? [Reply]
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
JFC having a conversation with you is like having a conversation with my son, except I'll bet my son drools less than you.
Wearing a message saying something is wrong is different/worse than wearing a message supporting something. Do you get that you ****ing moron?
Your question about why was a kid suspended for wearing a shirt that says "being gay ain't right" and someone wearing a shirt supporting the gay lifestyle/rights isn't was ****ing stupid.
You'll notice the word pride wasn't used in this post once you gap-toothed immigrant. How's that for offensive?
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
JFC having a conversation with you is like having a conversation with my son, except I'll bet my son drools less than you.
Wearing a message saying something is wrong is different/worse than wearing a message supporting something. Do you get that you ****ing moron?
Your question about why was a kid suspended for wearing a shirt that says "being gay ain't right" and someone wearing a shirt supporting the gay lifestyle/rights isn't was ****ing stupid.
You'll notice the word pride wasn't used in this post once you gap-toothed immigrant. How's that for offensive?
I actually disagree with the "being gay ain't right" addition in the second example. But not the biblical verses.
And, now multiple times, I do understand the differences. I just don't agree with you that they are that vastly different.
One kid objected (not openly) to a math teacher promoting homosexuality and was punished for it.
In response to that, I asked if a kid has ever been punished for wearing a "gay pride" shirt, which many people find offensive. I understand that you don't agree that that is offensive, but the fact remains.
As to you offending me, I assure you that I'm pretty immune to being offended.
Now, would you have any issues with kid wearing a "straight pride" shirt? [Reply]
