Posted on 05/12/2005 7:13:02 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
That would be true if only "sexual orientation" were a protected non-discrimination category under the law as race and religion are. As far as I know there is not such federal law saying so. Is there such a state law in Florida?
I was thinking something along those lines earleir today. Why do they define themselves just by their sexuality? Is that all they are?
I am a woman, a mother, a wife, a Christian, a writer, a musician and much more. I have many facets that make me who I am. Gays seem to just focus on their sexuality.
Every day in this country it's straight pride day. Give them their stupid day, who the heck cares but people like you. DON'T GO if you don't want to see it.
They focus on their sexuality because it's an obsession. They define themselves by their obsessions. They think that if they can talk about it, it'll make it ok. They think that if we keep saying the word Gay, we'll accept them, and love them. But it never does, and the sad thing is that they know it.
LOL I think we can accurately guess.
Wasn't there a minister who took some pictures of what went on at Disney a few years ago? i think his pictures showed that it was all "out" for everyone to see.
Back in the 60's my grandmother had a funny retort to the phrase "let it all hang out". Her reply "Why would one want to let it all hang out? It''s taken us centuries to tuck it all in." I always think of her when reading these threads.
With regard to many of the parks listed, you have a point. Not so with Walt Disney World. You really should look into the vast array of governmental powers ceded to that entity by the State of Florida. While you are at it, take a look at the Reedy Creek Improvement District. Sounds rather benign, no? The fact is that at Walt Disney World, Disney IS the government.
Your mistake is that you're equating race and ethnicity to a deviant sexual behavior. They are not the same.
Banning Asians and Blacks from a park would be wrong. Banning queers, pedophiles, or beastiality-freaks would be a-ok in my book.
Given the promiscuity and insanely higher risks for disease in the sodomite community, they'd be doing a public health service by banning them from the park. It's high time ordinary, normal folk started standing up and refusing to kowtow to sexual deviants.
It would be ok in my book too. Unfortunately, our books don't count for much. I suspected that Gay Civil Rights would be violated, if anyone providing a public service (Resturant, Tours, Theme Park, Taxi, ect) were to deny the service based upon the person being homosexual, and I was correct. It took a while to find, but this is the Orlando City Concil's vote on adding sexual orientation to the list of prohibited areas in which a person may discriminate. Link
They could crack the whip on lewd behavior, but I bet they don't.
I understood 'public' as in 'open to the public,' but regardless, these places don't want to face a lawsuit, with the jury being filled with folks from the extended Los Angeles area. They know the jury will stick it to them.
This link shows that sexual orientation is protected by the Orlando City council. Disney can see the writing on the wall; they can either make waves and get sued, or they can remain silent and be punished.
On top of that, we also have the perceived Constitutional belief that 'all men are created equal'; and 'all men' includes men, women, gay men, gay women et. al.
Simply stated, Disney can not win; they can only moderate how much they lose. If they chose to fight this and ban gay organizations, they will face boycotts from Liberals and as Liberals are approximately 50% of their target audience, the boycott will hurt. Then, they can fight the ALCU in court; and get their company drug through the mud. This would likely bankrupt them.
If Disney were to chose to welcome Gays, they face a boycott from conservatives, which is the other 50%. If they say nothing, and ride it out; they get their nose rubbed in the dirt and have to put up with a Gay Outting day or two a year; then it's over for until the next year. It's a no-win situation; and EVERY theme park in the USA is a target. Sea World, 6 Flags, Magic Mountain, Islands of Adventure, Busch Gardens, Disney, Knotts Berry Farm .... everyone is a target; and there is nothing either (or all of them) can do about it.
That's in the Constitution? I can't find it in my copy.
It's a sad day for our Republic when a sexual perversion is considered a "Civil Right".
I miss the days when 'shame' actually meant something.
No, not in the constitution, but in the Declaration of Independence, which was the forerunner and basis for our Constitution. Link
I have no idea how Dollywood handles this.
This depends on how the trademark is used. For example, if I publish a poster for a bake-off; and I use the Duncan Hines logo, indicating that the cakes are made with Duncan Hines, this would probably be considered 'fair use'; as I am not denegrating the icon, nor using it for my commercial gain. These groups, to the best of my knowledge are using the moosehead logo in conjuction with advertizing for Disney, which I would believe to be in the 'fair use' clause for the trademark.
Do I like it? No. Do I wish that 'shame' and 'perversion' still meant what it did 40 year ago; yes. But can one blame Disney that groups decide to descend upon Disney for Gay Days? No.
One thing I do find interesting, is this; I suggest you do an internet search for 'Gay Day' and look at the photos taken at the parks. You will notice a lot of red shirts; but no group sex, no pornographic behavior nor oval office hyjinx. If Gay Day were even 1% as offensive as it is made out to be, certainly one would expect to see more than a few photos. At the same time, Disney has pretty straightforward rules on how heterosexual couples act within the park; this is Disney's property and they must uphold certain standards year round.
Oh, I know that. Florida pretty much gave Disney anything it ever wanted, and treats them as a power unto themselves.
There's a website around somewhere that details LOADS of behind-the-scenes stuff (and felonies) perpetrated by the disney organization; but I can't find the link to the page anymore. I can remember the front logo was of 'the mouse' in a circular green background, with lowered and sinister eyebrows and needle-sharp little teeth in his grimace.
Does the site found familiar to anyone?
If they made it new policy to not support ANY 'special' groups' days or projects at their parks, HOW could anyone take them to court for being discriminatory?
If you treat EVERYONE equally you can't be accused of discriminating against ANYBODY. :)
I'll bet working 'whip cracking' and 'lewd behavior' into a double entendre took some time, huh? :D
Seriously: as long as they can make a profit on it, they'll do whatever they can get away with because the 'cattle' are dumb enough and/or ignorant enough not to care just so long as they get their entertainment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.