Gay couple asked to reverse "marriage is so gay" shirt at Dollywood

GoBucks89 said:
Nothing anyone working at a turnstile could ever say could ever invalidate anything in my life much less anything that is truly important to me.

+1

Jeff said:

Smoke329 said:
Their yard their rules. IT IS THAT SIMPLE.

Actually, no, it's not that simple, even if you type it in all caps. Today there are very real consequences for discriminating against any "protected class," though the inclusion of people by sexual orientation is not included for all circumstances... yet. Those consequences range from violating federal law to opening yourself up to civil lawsuits. We've seen it in this industry already with regard to race, religion and physical disability.

Regardless of the law or rules, people deserve basic human respect. Implying they aren't family violates that principle.

Ok maybe I was clear as mud! LOL

Jeff I could not agree more with you that people need to be treated with respect and like a human being. I don't care if you are gay, straight, white,black and every other race or creed everyone needs to follow rules and laws until they are changed. Don't twist or spin my words to use them your way.

I said nothing to the fact that they shouldn't have been allowed in to park! Everyone should be afforded the opportunity to enjoy life and be with WHOEVER they want to be with. When I say their yard their rules... I mean follow the rules or laws set forth while you are on the property. Its private property and they the owners can tell you how to behave,what you can/can't wear or they can have you removed. They can not tell you that you aren't allowed on the property due to race creed or sexual orientation that's discrimination.

Last I checked the folks in question were permitted to enter the park/stay after they changed the t-shirt around. If they wouldn't have been allowed in the park because they were gay or told they themselves weren't family friendly, then civil rights and liberties would have been violated. But they were given the option to switch it and weren't escorted out because they are gay.

It was due the writing on their shirt period that was deemed offensive.

Words offend everyone in different ways wether there is intent or not.. The lady felt "family park" was offensive to her, CoasterDemon said it doesn't bother him.

ApolloAndy said:
Perhaps it's the fact that we have it so well that causes us to ignore what impact we might have on anyone else.

Our ancestors are laughing at us and rolling over in their graves at the same time.

Regarding this story - I appreciate them making some extension of love to folks - but it is akin to baking a cake with salt instead of sugar - Won't get more people in the Churches with these sentiments...
"

He noted there is a Southern Baptist chaplain on site at Dollywood, and he said he is quite sure homosexuals would be welcome in churches in the association.

"As far as our churches are concerned, they love those folks," White said. "They don't love their sin, of course."

White added that he is not sure that demonstrating against something is the best approach because it may tend to alienate those on the other side of the issue.

"I think most all of our churches here -- as far as the gay people themselves -- I think they would be willing to tell you that they love people, anybody and everybody," he said. "They would not turn anybody away from their church because of that.

"However, that doesn't mean that we endorse it. It just means I believe that's the way God intends for us to look at it -- that or any other sin," White continued. "I think any kind of adultery, fornication -- or whatever -- is sin just as well as this is, and those are the type of people that need to hear about Jesus.""

Jerry said:

Except Coaster enthusiasts...

Hey I'm one of those (*exactly*). Who am I forum-um-ing amongst?! Is this the Dale Earnheart society? The hot topic society? The fans of Kane Hodder society?

Another exception might be ... gay folks, people who hate gay folks, people who love gay folks; people who know gay folks... people who like to talk on a forum and have opinions and like to... debate (or something like that).

Ok, I think I get it, were just making fun of each other? In a loving huggy poo manner?

edit - *Family Friendly* the term means no harm, however certain organizations and people have used the term in conjunction with anti-gay stuff. So that's why I believe the term gets a rise from some glbt folk; it makes them feel excluded. (I'm not saying this as an IF, THEN statement - it's only an observation and does not always apply to everyone. Gotta be careful what I say around here!)

I've kept my nose clean these last ten pages. Crazy good discussion going on here. That said, here's my simple minded take on this...

The term "____ is SO gay" is meant as a derogatory remark or slur. Said slurs are not family friendly. While all of us here on CB know that the t-shirt was a clever spin on an overused slur, I think the attendant's intention was simply to keep people who aren't as enlightened from being offended. In other words, just enforcing the dress code. I don't think there was any intention of devaluing this couple as a family.

Wearing a shirt like that is making a statement and just because it's a clever reversal of a slur doesn't make it family friendly.

Kudos to the turnstile schmuck.

Here's another thought I had...what if a person who is against gay marriage bought that shirt and wrote above it "Complaining about"? The park also would have made the person flip the shirt because it too was offensive.

Just sayin...

^Now that's the best, clearest explanation I've heard yet, thanks obxKevin. If the park could borrow that statement and put it out - I wonder if that would bring peace to the situation.

CoasterDemon said:

The fans of Kane Hodder society?

Now THERE's a name I haven't heard in ages!

Mike Gallagher said:
CoasterDemon said:

The fans of Kane Hodder society?

Now THERE's a name I haven't heard in ages!

Kane has more than enough fans; my pick is Steve Dash (part2!) Still scares the crap outta me.

Carrie J. said:
I don't think you need malicious intent to be offended, but I think you should make sure it existed before you turn to the media in an effort to get a phrase removed from standard usage.

If the receiver of the message is unwilling to try to understand what was really being communicated, then why would the sender be willing to try to understand how the message might have been received? Communication is a two-way street...always.

English is a terribly ambiguous language. If you take actual intent out of the equation, everyone should be afraid to speak to anyone for fear of offense because so many things can be taken completely out of context.

She is so smart!

I'd say, "Hugs to Billy," but that's so gay...

^That's "all good" to me. I'm gay and I like hugs. Of course, that doesn't mean you have to be gay to like hugs.

Or, conversely, like hugs to be gay?

Thank goodness for those last two posts or I'd be forced to switch teams... :)

GoBucks89 said:
Thats the kind of overdramatized garbage I was talking about. Verbally invalidated?? By someone at a turnstile? Nothing anyone working at a turnstile could ever say could ever invalidate anything in my life much less anything that is truly important to me. And comparing what happend to Rosa Parks?

Dude, you're going out of your way to take what I said out of context. My point was that living in a pattern of being dissed by society for who you fundamentally are wears on you. As long as you refuse even for a moment to show enough empathy to put yourself in her shoes, you won't get it. As a white, middle-class, hetero man, you're damn right I've had it relatively easy. That's why I try a little harder to see things through the eyes of other people.

ApolloAndy said:
Perhaps it's the fact that we have it so well that causes us to ignore what impact we might have on anyone else.

Well said.

ApolloAndy said:
Perhaps it's the fact that we have it so well that causes us to ignore what impact we might have on anyone else.

Yeah, like people who wear a "Marriage Is So Gay" shirt to an amusement park.

(wrestled with including the winky, but ultimately left it off :) )

Funny, from someone who has visited Dollywood on many occasions with a domestic partner I never experienced discrimination. At a meet and greet I introduced my partner, and still, no feeling of discrimination. And we conducted ourselves just as every other couple, gay or straight. It seems to me that the choice of attire was to draw attention to ones self. And that is exactly what happened, and the guest was asked to correct what the employee saw as a violation of park policies. No need for debates, no need for controversy.

I can also say that as someone who has always been open about his sexuality, never hesitated traveling to parks in otherwise "closed minded" areas, I have never once experienced anything out of the ordinary. There is also a certain amount of tact and self-respect that I have, and would never personally want to draw that kind of attention to myself or those around me. It sends a bad message (especially in a state that is struggling with equal rights issues) to everyone involved, and in the end nobody really wins.

Wow, that article linked above adjusts the picture a bit.

It is no longer O.K. to suggest homosexuality or being gay as sinful. It's theologically unsound, inciting and civilly disobedient.

Jerry said:
Won't get more people in the Churches with these sentiments...

Just because this is a huge pet peeve of mine (being a pastor): Our first and only goal as Christians is ALWAYS obedience to God at all costs. Often times that means trying to reach more people, but on occasion it can mean sticking to our guns in spite of the consequences for the membership of our churches. (Though my hope/belief is that our integrity is a much stronger testament to the goodness of our faith than following the "attractive" popular opinion of whatever issue we're dealing with and in the end will result in a stronger church.)

Though, in case it isn't obvious, I also happen to believe that obedience with respect to this issue has a lot more love and a lot less judgement than I'm seeing in my peers. Oh, and if we put as much effort into combating poverty or homelessness as we do into combating homosexuality, we'd have no problem filling our churches.