Couldn't find a "Straight" Flag at the store

No, not every commercial, book, TV show, movie or whatever showed heterosexual relationships. There are lots of media out there that has nothing to do with any kind of relationships. There are books, TV shows and movies that were about war, survival, exploration and so on.

Now every TV show, movie, or whatever MUST go out of their way to tell you that a specific character or characters are homosexual. This really bothers me because 99% of the time it has 0% to do with the story. There are never any shows were 2 people of the same gender are just best friends. Now they're gay.

I'm not blaming gays or lesbians for any of this. They're just being used as pawns. This is a bigger issue and it is being dictated to businesses through the world's biggest financiers and the World Economic Forum. It is a social credit scheme called ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance). If you're ESG score is too low you don't get financial support from lenders such as Blackrock, Vanguard and others.

They're requiring businesses to create DEI departments (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion).

This is why Bud Light alienated a huge number of customers. It's why Target alienated most of their customers. It's why Disney is now considering selling their theme parks and/or ownership of the Star Wars franchise. They've alienated a huge chunk of their customers as well. They are just the tip of the iceberg.

This is what global fascism looks like.

The left created the phrase, "people over profits" and while that sounds good to economic illiterates, in reality people ARE their profits. Unless they are satisfying the needs of their customers their are no profits. Without people there are no profits and without profits there are no people. The two are inseparable.

Historically fascism has been quite cruel to gays and lesbians. This new 21st century fascism is no different, they've just learned how to use specific groups of people to advance their cause. They still hate everyone just like they always have. So you cannot trust them. They might be on your side today but tomorrow it's off to the ovens.

You start by saying "not every" but then in the next section you say, "every show". It can't be both things.

You wanting to be able to walk through the world to watch tv, movies, or read books without having to worry about seeing a gay relationship is... demanding Gay people not exist. It's like separate but equal, but worse.

Gay people deserve representation in movies, tv, and books. Just like straight people.

They live in this world. Just like you do.

Companies are going to market directly to them. (free market n all). They're going to make entertainment involving them.

Don't want to see marketing aimed at gay people? Easy, tune it out. Just like you do any other product that isn't meant for you.

There is a near endless list of products, services, and stores that don't apply to you and you breeze by their marketing without noticing it.

Do you have infant children? No? Target has a whole clothing section devoted to them. Furniture too. And all sorts of cleaning and care products for them.

Do you demand that Target stop carrying any infant stuff and cease all marketing for people with babies because you don't have one?

No. You don't.

Do you demand that no tv, movies, or books have babies in them because you don't have a baby?

No. You don't.

How about St Patrick's Day? Do you celebrate that? Cinco De Mayo?

No?

Do you demand those marketing efforts stop too?

Or do you walk past all of it and tune it out?

You tune it out.

So, take those same skills and apply them to marketing to gay people. It is just that easy.

But demanding that it all go away is demanding that gay people stop existing. Stop being in the public spaces.

You don't have to like Gay people. No one cares. You don't have to get gay married either. Literally, no one cares.

But you do need to have respect, acknowledge that they exist and give them the space to do so.

Because they're people. Just like you.

"You start by saying "not every" but then in the next section you say, "every show". It can't be both things."

You are absolutely right. That is why my "every show" comment was prefaced with "now". There are still a lot of books, TV shows and movies that were produced before ESG infested Hollywood and all of the major corporations. AFTER ESG was forced on everyone, you cannot watch a TV show or movie without at least one gay, lesbian, trans character.

Another thing you hardly ever see in the media are couples of the same race.

Before you're knee jerks so hard you bust a knee cap, I really do not care who anyone falls in love with, yes, that means gays and lesbians also.

What I am saying is not a complaint but an observation. Nearly every couple married or non married on TV, movies and even commercials are interracial. What I am saying is it is unrealistic. The vast majority of people marry within their race. It's just the way things are.

However, I know people and have family who are interracial couples. I'm white. My brother married a Filapina woman. His son married a black woman. I have another nephew from another brother who is living in Japan and married to a Japanese woman. I have absolutely no problem with any of that. But so many interracial couples in the media? It makes me ask, what is going on here? Are they trying to promote the homogenization of all races?

It will eventually happen but I prefer it happening organically and not coerced. People should be left to fall in love with whomever they want without coercion or outside influences.

"Gay people deserve representation in movies, tv, and books. Just like straight people."

No one "deserves" anything they do not earn. Straight people do not "deserve" representation in the media. They make up the vast majority and as such most stories written that deal with love will be about straight people. It is just the way it is. If I was born in India to a white couple, should I "deserve" right to force "Bollywood" to include white guys in 50+ percent of their movies? Before you say, "that's different" think about it. I said, "if I was born in India". I didn't ask to be born in India or the United States. I was just born that way. BTW I was born in the US, I've never been to India but I sure do l love their food.

No one "deserves" to be over represented, especially when it is done for political reasons that have nothing to do with the people being over represented

Why must I acknowledge gays and lesbians exist? When did this become a law?

BTW I'm pretty sure that everyone knew that gays and lesbians existed long before pride parades and the entire month of June.

Why?

Because they do.

Just like you.

And does everyone know? Because Florida seems pretty set on making sure no one can say the word gay. or describe 2 people who are married that aren't straight.

Imagine a world where your kind of relationship- being with a man or a woman- was illegal. Not allowed to be shown in a movie. Or have your kids make a mother's day card for their mom.

Because that would be pushing an agenda.

Imagine being fired from your job because you were married to someone of the opposite gender.

Imagine your spouse is dying in the hospital, and you're not allowed to be there "because straight marriage is immoral."

Or not being able to get medication because the pharmacist doesn't approve of straight people.

So, when you live in a world that is trying to erase you from existing, you get to throw a parade to show other people like you that it's okay to exist.

"And does everyone know? Because Florida seems pretty set on making sure no one can say the word gay. or describe 2 people who are married that aren't straight."

I really want to know how the left was able to sp egregiously lie and get away with that.

Florida did not, nor could they prevent anyone from speaking about homosexuality in public schools. You can say "gay". What Florida did was protect children from sexually explicit material in the school libraries.

The left really needs a huge does of reality on this one. Liberals, under any circumstances, do not have the right to ownership of those children. They do not get to use other people's children for A) pedophile grooming and B) creating future Democrats through indoctrination.

The school ONLY purpose in life is to give children a basic education in history, math, English and science. Nothing more and nothing less. Prior to the 1940's there was one other subject that was taught in schools since the beginning of this nation. Basic Christianity. Not specific doctrines but Christian principles that all Christians agree on.

Public schools are not the social engineering and indoctrination camp the left so desperately want them to be.

If a kid graduates high school without the ability to perform simple math but knows all 5,957,824,825.3 genders then the schools have failed.

This is why home schooling had become so popular these days. Not just because of gays and lesbians but because our education system is indoctrinating children against their parents and towards the state.

Home schooled kids have been shown to be vastly better educated on all subjects.

Homeschooling is why we have that flat earther problem. And it's interesting that home schooling took off just after the civil rights movement and the forced desegregation of schools.

I'm sure that's a coincidence.

But this whole post? Bigoted nonsense.

It's all nonsense.

And if reading a book that mentions Little Suzie has 2 Dads and Little Timmy has 2 Moms will turn a kid gay... that kid was already gay. Because reading books about straight couples doesn't make gay kids straight.

And when you said "hey do not get to use other people's children for A) pedophile grooming" I assume you're taking about Catholic Priests.

Because the kids are far far more likely to be abused by a Catholic Priest than a gay person.

What someone does in his own house should be up to him, but homosexual unions are not marriage; adoption should not be an option and immorality should not be advertised as something positive.

Immoral, huh?

Being gay doesn't make the Top 10 list in the bible. Not even a mention.

Murder, however, does.

So does cheating on your spouse.

And theft. It's on their too.

Also, respecting your parents.

But not being gay. Not on the list.

Is it moral for a murderer to get married? How about a thief? Someone who cheated on their previous spouse?

Is that okay for them to get married?

Is it moral for someone who has not honored their father and mother to get married?

Sure seems like it. Don't see anyone posting memes about stopping people who dishonored their parents from getting married.

So... why can't Gay people?

And this comes up on Leviticus. He also mentions that you shouldn't eat shellfish. And not to wear fabric blends. Or get tattoos.

Is it moral for those people to get married?

Make it make sense.

The Bible does indeed mention it in multiple places (Old and New Testament).
Of course murder and adultery and theft is wrong.
Marriage is between a man and a woman. It's a construct from the beginning of time.
Why'd you have to be like everyone else and take the law out of context? The specifications stated by Moses were to keep the Israelites separate from the other nations. It's not a sin to eat bacon. Once Jesus was on the scene the law was not necessary to be right with God.
Jesus sums up the remaining crucial parts of the law with two things: Love God and love your neighbour.

So, if the arrival of Christ negates all the rules from the Old Testiment, then why are you talking about marriage being from the beginning of time?

Jesus wiped out the rules.

And if he can forgive the sins of murder, theft, eating bacon, or tattoos, he can for sure forgive the sin of being gay, AND getting gay married.

So. Yeah.

Make it make sense where Jesus can forgive murder, theft, bacon, and tattoos but not being gay.

He didn't wipe the rules. He made the law not necessary for righteousness. You can eat bacon and still love your neighbour. You're not loving your neighbour if you steal from him or kill him.

But gayness is one of the 7 deadly sins so you would go to hell for being gay.

Which one?

Are these the sins Jesus didn't die for?

If gays want to go to heaven they must confess their sins to God of they don't they are going to hell

So, as long as they confess to being gay and gay married, they're good to go.

Which seems pretty easy.

Not really worth all the fuss every conservative Christian seems to be making about it.

And, ultimately, wouldn't that be the private business of the person and God? Why are conservatives forcing their way into that conversation?

Except being gay is a act of adultery which is against the bible

Being gay is not adultery.

You have to be 1) married and then 2) have sex with someone whom you are not married to in order to commit adultery.

It is still against the bible, here is a quote from the book of Levictus "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them." I hope you liberals know how to read.

So.. Jesus died for some sins and not all sins?

Can you provide a list of the sins he did die for and a list of the ones he didn't?

lol

That works you described actually is a good idea, I will have to tell Florid a that

It's the people who run those conversion camps.

And the people who ban books that mention gay people.

Or demand that any marketing involving gay people needs to stop. Immediately. Or there will be violence.

Those people.

Oh, you mean the Stonewall Riots?

Do you know why the Stonewall riots happened?

It's a perfect example of gay people having to literally fight for their right to exist.

Well, reality does have a liberal bias so I guess if you're into denying science and reality, getting an education would seem like indoctrination.

But good news for you, you can homeschool your kids and tell them any of the made-up fantasy stuff you want.

But remember God murdered gay people in the bible so he is probably going to kill today's gay people