Political Geography by Neighborhood (required, homosexual, children)

[JuicyFredda]

Originally Posted by bfmx1

Birmingham is one of the only cities in the country to start offering an LGBQ+ safe space high school. I'm really not sure there is another one in the country. I think 99% of people think this is ridiculous they'd be shamed for saying it. So the city itself is very pro LGBQ+ but the people really are not.

Bham proper is pretty progressive but the metro as a whole does not want it in their community and at parks where their kids play. Often, they'll site statistics on homosexual's high rate of child crime (you know what I mean). If the stats are true, it's a reasonable assertion.

But yes, the pockets mentioned are very gay friendly and you'd be fine there. But if you go to the Summit or most places over the mountain, expect stares and eye rolls. But it's like that most everywhere. Get out of the pocket and you're not warmly welcomed.

One point to make, is that NOBODY has to be 'warmly' welcomed ! citizens and residents should be CIVIL at the bare minimum. One person need not be obligated to even 'warmly' welcome your in-laws or your obnoxious, nosey neighbor.


No one must warmly endorse, accept ,or agree with any other resident. It's called freedom, and that should never be put upon. I wouldn't "welcome" a jail bird dope head in my neighborhood, a child former molester, a klansman, or some attorneys I know, in my neighborhood, but I would remain civil. I would not be 'friendly' to them or endorse their behaviors. I would avoid them at all costs. I would not have my children around them either!


There is nothing written that any human must be 'pro' homosexual, meaning 'in favor of' or providing and "argument" in favor of homosexuality. It's pretty wrong-headed for a person having to be in favor of homosexuality. It doesn't mean you're automatically a good person if you supposed to be of the enlightened ilk if you do so, and a bad person if you're not 'in favor of' homosexuality. That's a bridge too far.

[bfmx1]

Originally Posted by JuicyFredda

One point to make, is that NOBODY has to be 'warmly' welcomed ! citizens and residents should be CIVIL at the bare minimum. One person need not be obligated to even 'warmly' welcome your in-laws or your obnoxious, nosey neighbor.


No one must warmly endorse, accept ,or agree with any other resident. It's called freedom, and that should never be put upon. I wouldn't "welcome" a jail bird dope head in my neighborhood, a child former molester, a klansman, or some attorneys I know, in my neighborhood, but I would remain civil. I would not be 'friendly' to them or endorse their behaviors. I would avoid them at all costs. I would not have my children around them either!

You wouldn't celebrate diversity in your neighborhood? You're cancelled. You probably have an American flag on your front porch.

Agree, nobody should be expected to celebrate anyone's lifestyle, yet we should love and be civil to all.

If the OP is looking for a neighborhood to celebrate and validate their lifestyle choice then stick with the aforementioned pockets in town. But, go over the mountain and expect diverging points of view.

[JuicyFredda]

It seems then that if you want "diversity" it must mean that you must endorse and even celebrate varieties of non-heterosexual behavior.


"Diversity", the term, has become hijacked to connote sexuality? that's pretty odd. It's also become a catchword for "black", never for "diversity of thought and ideas".


Diversity now means "you have to believe, think, accept, and act as I do". Hilarious and pathetic.

[JuicyFredda]

Originally Posted by bfmx1

You wouldn't celebrate diversity in your neighborhood? You're cancelled. You probably have an American flag on your front porch.

Agree, nobody should be expected to celebrate anyone's lifestyle, yet we should love and be civil to all.

If the OP is looking for a neighborhood to celebrate and validate their lifestyle choice then stick with the aforementioned pockets in town. But, go over the mountain and expect diverging points of view.

LOL. Yes I do!......but I don't fly a flag about my sexual bent/practices. I did used to fly an early Confederate flag below the Stars and Stripes (below the AL flag)....it was NOT the Battle Flag. Some neighbors are too stupid to know the difference, or didn't want to.

[BamaDave]

I'm going to guess that by gay-friendly, the OP doesn't expect to be "celebrated." The OP probably wants to live life without being made to feel uncomfortable with sneers, eyerolls, unnecessary comments, bullying, or worse.

[preguntas]

Originally Posted by BamaDave

I'm going to guess that by gay-friendly, the OP doesn't expect to be "celebrated." The OP probably wants to live life without being made to feel uncomfortable with sneers, eyerolls, unnecessary comments, bullying, or worse.

When the rest of us can be killed just stepping out of our homes? That doesn't seem fair and equitable.

[JuicyFredda]

Originally Posted by BamaDave

I'm going to guess that by gay-friendly, the OP doesn't expect to be "celebrated." The OP probably wants to live life without being made to feel uncomfortable with sneers, eyerolls, unnecessary comments, bullying, or worse.

I've made people "FEEL uncomfortable" no doubt, but they give themselves permission to "feel" anyway they choose to.


I've sneered at heterosexuals, little brats, cats and dogs even.


Heck, I "roll my eyes" at people ALL the TIME...family, children, spouse, ex-spouse, in-laws, my attorney, and certainly my neighbors.


Heterosexuals receive "unnecessary comments" all the time in normal discourse. (Heck, Ive said to heterosexual couples during their awful, offensive PDA's, "hey, Get a Room" LOL) Was my comment "unnecessary" ? perhaps



I didn't know that homosexuals are now a "protected class" under current law, in "living life".


Maybe homosexuals think they're "special" ? What's this nation coming to?


~juicy

[Surge0001]

Man so much Entitlement in this thread, OP just wants to know where they could live and have the lowest chance of being harassed. Looking at the 2 posts ^ it appears that wanting to be left alone is a privilege rather than a right. Snowflakes feeling threatened that a LGBT might be coming to their neighborhood

[MinivanDriver]

Originally Posted by Surge0001

Man so much Entitlement in this thread, OP just wants to know where they could live and have the lowest chance of being harassed. Looking at the 2 posts ^ it appears that wanting to be left alone is a privilege rather than a right. Snowflakes feeling threatened that a LGBT might be coming to their neighborhood

Oh, the guy is a regular who keeps ginning up new accounts from the womb of his mother's pine-paneled basement.

[nancoiner]

Originally Posted by Surge0001

Man so much Entitlement in this thread, OP just wants to know where they could live and have the lowest chance of being harassed. Looking at the 2 posts ^ it appears that wanting to be left alone is a privilege rather than a right. Snowflakes feeling threatened that a LGBT might be coming to their neighborhood

Strange conversation, but there is no 'right' to be 'left alone'. Where did you get your JD? No citizen is required to like, converse with, support, endorse, advocate for, defend, or even welcome people with aberrant, anti-social, criminal, or pathological behaviors.


No reasonable person feels 'threatened' by homosexuals, save perhaps children in critical development stages who are being fed from a menu from the homosexual societal 'ideal'.


If you noticed, NOBODY is being 'left alone'....or beyond criticism or examination.


Homosexuals are not a 'protected class' viz the law, and not beyond run of the mill scrutiny. No one is forced to accept, endorse, or celebrate some one else's sexuality.That's nutty beyond rational belief.