Disabled vet booed in speech

[Aunt Spiker]

Gay combat vet who lost leg in Iraq booed by anti-gay protesters in San Antonio – LGBTQ Nation

SAN ANTONIO — A highly decorated openly gay Iraq war combat veteran was booed by a crowd of anti-gay protesters during his speech to the San Antonio City Council meeting Wednesday evening.


Former Marine Staff Sergeant Eric Alva — a San Antonio native who was the first American service member seriously injured in the Iraq War when he stepped on a land mine in March 2003 and lost his right leg — was speaking in favor of a proposed addition to the city’s non-discrimination law that would add protections for sexual orientation, gender identity and veteran status.

But as Alva began to deliver his remarks, many in the crowd of approximately 200 people attending the council meeting began to boo.

“To all you people that preach the word of God, shame on you because God loves me, like the day I laid bleeding on the sands of Iraq and that’s why he saved me,” Alva told the crowd as left the podium, still visibly shaken from the crowd’s reaction.

Later on Facebook, Alva wrote:

“Well I just left city council chambers and I feel like crying. I have never seen a city so divided and hateful towards each other. All of man kind should be ashamed. I already spoke and even some of the religious groups even boo’ed me as I spoke. Such disrespect as they preach the word of God.”

Prior to the council session, local anti-gay rights advocate Pastor Charles Flowers of the Faith Outreach Center led a prayer vigil and demonstration outside City Hall where he told the crowd, “Let them vote ‘no’ to this ordinance, and ‘yes’ to the reign of the kingdom of God.”



Is it a new low or just the usual religiously fueled hatred? Of course it reminds me of the RNC, but for some reason this seems worse, maybe because this is his 'community.' It wasn't just yesterday that DADT was repealed, yet to the right wing, this seems like the one scenario where it's still perfectly acceptable to disrespect a veteran.

Anti-gay protesters booed someone who is gay.

I am not surprised. . . which is a relief, I've had enough surprises to last me a week.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Nice to meet you.

I vote a split ticket too. Always have. I vote on individual candidates, and how they stand on actual issues. I don't care which party they belong to, since I despise both parties equally, and believe the underlying mantra of both is "power to the party" rather than "power to the people."

I've enjoyed reading your posts on several issues, btw.

Thank you and nice to meet you as well.

Party first and last is not my style. And that's why you will see me taking on the adverse side of any debate here with whichever ideology, left or right, that is being forwarded ahead of what's best for the country and its people.

I believe in equal opportunity when it comes to calling out BS.

I've enjoyed many of your posts as well.:wink3:

 

[Oftencold]

I think that he was booed because normal people really by and large are sick of legal maneuvering to force them to pretend that a large, assorted, and ever growing list of sexual perversions are in some strange way socially desirable. Look for more of this to come.

 

[chromium]

I don't think this group speaks for the entire right wing.

I'm well aware of that, but it's the right wing that time and again pursues anti gay laws / blocks equality laws / boos gay soldiers. This is yet another example.

 

[chromium]

Most republicans I know are incredibly supportive of the military and grateful to those who have served this country regardless of their sexual orientation. That's why I reject your comment that "to the right wing, this seems like the one scenario where it's still perfectly acceptable to disrespect a veteran." All you or anyone can legitimately say is that to the people who behaved so hatefully, it was apparently acceptable to disrespect a veteran. That much is true. Your broader generalization is not true.

Maybe not those you personally know, but the polls reveal that republicans are practically married to the military, and by a large majority anti gay. That tells me plenty about how far their hatred goes, that only a gay soldier gets treated with such disrespect.

 

[chromium]

Right, because nobody on the left has ever shown disrespect to veterans or the military. Lol.

BTW, if the guy had been booed for giving a pro-life speech, I wonder if the OP would be similarly incensed. I doubt he gives a **** about the vet. To him, he's just a political tool (while the OP is just a plain tool eace).

You don't know me at all to make such comments, but if you're going to be a rude ass, i really don't care what you have to say.

 

[chromium]

Leaving aside the validity of the cause for a minute, why shouldn't they boo?

If it was a non-disabled non-veteran up there speaking about the same thing, the same people would boo because they disagree with the message. But because the guy is a disabled veteran, they're not supposed to? Sure, it's impolite, but I don't see why the fact that he's a veteran or disabled should matter.

No they should not. This isn't a football game or pro wrestling event. I understand how difficult public speaking is, and everyone should be shown respect, so long as they aren't resorting to hate tactics and such as the audience and that religious figure proceeded to do.

 

[Ray410]

The big problem with getting on board the seemingly endless list of Liberal social outrages is that responsible people have no way of knowing which actually happened and which were staged by Liberal plants so they could appear as victims of a cold, cruel world of "haters."

Liberals have no way of knowing which are valid either. It's just that they love the emotion so much that they leap to believe them all.

 

[X Factor]

You don't know me at all to make such comments, but if you're going to be a rude ass, i really don't care what you have to say.

I've seen enough of your posts to know a shill when I see one. If that former soldier had been making some comments you disagreed with and was booed by folks on the left, I doubt you would have started a thread about it or claimed that was indicative of the entire left wing.

 

[Anagram]

Maybe not those you personally know, but the polls reveal that republicans are practically married to the military, and by a large majority anti gay. That tells me plenty about how far their hatred goes, that only a gay soldier gets treated with such disrespect.

You're right about a large majority being against same sex marriage. But being against same sex marriage does not make you anti-gay and it doesn't mean you would boo a disabled war veteran.

 

[sangha]

You're right about a large majority being against same sex marriage. But being against same sex marriage does not make you anti-gay

Yes it does

and it doesn't mean you would boo a disabled war veteran.

No, that makes one a wingnut

 

[Anagram]

Yes it does

No it doesn't. As far as I'm concerned its a wrong belief, but being against same sex marriage does not make one anti-gay. Many recent polls even show a majority of Republicans agreeing to civil unions, even if they don't support gay marriage. If you believe homosexual activity should be legal and approve civil unions, then even if for whatever reason you get hung up on the word marriage, I don't think you can be described as anti-gay.

 

[sangha]

No it doesn't. As far as I'm concerned its a wrong belief, but being against same sex marriage does not make one anti-gay. Many recent polls even show a majority of Republicans agreeing to civil unions, even if they don't support gay marriage. If you believe homosexual activity should be legal and approve civil unions, then even if for whatever reason you get hung up on the word marriage, I don't think you can be described as anti-gay.

Yes, it does make one anti-gay.

Your argument is like saying it's not anti-gay to shoot LGBT's in the head and anyone who says differently is hung up on the word "murder"

 

[Anagram]

Yes, it does make one anti-gay.

Your argument is like saying it's not anti-gay to shoot LGBT's in the head and anyone who says differently is hung up on the word "murder"

That's a ridiculous comparison. You can quite easily not demean nor have any contempt or hatred for homosexuals, which is what anti-gay means, without approving of same-sex marriage.

 

[sangha]

That's a ridiculous comparison. You can quite easily not demean nor have any contempt or hatred for homosexuals, which is what anti-gay means, without approving of same-sex marriage.

It's a perfect comparison. In both cases, the perpetrator is denying someone else their rights.

 

[ChrisL]

Gay combat vet who lost leg in Iraq booed by anti-gay protesters in San Antonio – LGBTQ Nation

SAN ANTONIO — A highly decorated openly gay Iraq war combat veteran was booed by a crowd of anti-gay protesters during his speech to the San Antonio City Council meeting Wednesday evening.


Former Marine Staff Sergeant Eric Alva — a San Antonio native who was the first American service member seriously injured in the Iraq War when he stepped on a land mine in March 2003 and lost his right leg — was speaking in favor of a proposed addition to the city’s non-discrimination law that would add protections for sexual orientation, gender identity and veteran status.

But as Alva began to deliver his remarks, many in the crowd of approximately 200 people attending the council meeting began to boo.

“To all you people that preach the word of God, shame on you because God loves me, like the day I laid bleeding on the sands of Iraq and that’s why he saved me,” Alva told the crowd as left the podium, still visibly shaken from the crowd’s reaction.

Later on Facebook, Alva wrote:

“Well I just left city council chambers and I feel like crying. I have never seen a city so divided and hateful towards each other. All of man kind should be ashamed. I already spoke and even some of the religious groups even boo’ed me as I spoke. Such disrespect as they preach the word of God.”

Prior to the council session, local anti-gay rights advocate Pastor Charles Flowers of the Faith Outreach Center led a prayer vigil and demonstration outside City Hall where he told the crowd, “Let them vote ‘no’ to this ordinance, and ‘yes’ to the reign of the kingdom of God.”



Is it a new low or just the usual religiously fueled hatred? Of course it reminds me of the RNC, but for some reason this seems worse, maybe because this is his 'community.' It wasn't just yesterday that DADT was repealed, yet to the right wing, this seems like the one scenario where it's still perfectly acceptable to disrespect a veteran.

Terrible. Some people have no respect at all. :roll:

 

[Menard_K]

Gay combat vet who lost leg in Iraq booed by anti-gay protesters in San Antonio – LGBTQ Nation

SAN ANTONIO — A highly decorated openly gay Iraq war combat veteran was booed by a crowd of anti-gay protesters during his speech to the San Antonio City Council meeting Wednesday evening.


Former Marine Staff Sergeant Eric Alva — a San Antonio native who was the first American service member seriously injured in the Iraq War when he stepped on a land mine in March 2003 and lost his right leg — was speaking in favor of a proposed addition to the city’s non-discrimination law that would add protections for sexual orientation, gender identity and veteran status.

But as Alva began to deliver his remarks, many in the crowd of approximately 200 people attending the council meeting began to boo.

“To all you people that preach the word of God, shame on you because God loves me, like the day I laid bleeding on the sands of Iraq and that’s why he saved me,” Alva told the crowd as left the podium, still visibly shaken from the crowd’s reaction.

Later on Facebook, Alva wrote:

“Well I just left city council chambers and I feel like crying. I have never seen a city so divided and hateful towards each other. All of man kind should be ashamed. I already spoke and even some of the religious groups even boo’ed me as I spoke. Such disrespect as they preach the word of God.”

Prior to the council session, local anti-gay rights advocate Pastor Charles Flowers of the Faith Outreach Center led a prayer vigil and demonstration outside City Hall where he told the crowd, “Let them vote ‘no’ to this ordinance, and ‘yes’ to the reign of the kingdom of God.”



Is it a new low or just the usual religiously fueled hatred? Of course it reminds me of the RNC, but for some reason this seems worse, maybe because this is his 'community.' It wasn't just yesterday that DADT was repealed, yet to the right wing, this seems like the one scenario where it's still perfectly acceptable to disrespect a veteran.

Tolerance is NOT religion's long suit .... WE THE PEOPLE will simply have to understand that the bigots who think they do "GOD's Work" are really sick & twisted individuals and we can NOT allow public policy to be shaped by the religious fringe.

 

[Anagram]

It's a perfect comparison. In both cases, the perpetrator is denying someone else their rights.

To be anti-gay is to demean or to hold hatred or contempt for LGBT people. You obviously can't be killing LGBT people and not be anti-gay. You can be against homosexual marriage without being any of those things.

It's a comparison that doesn't work. Yes, in my opinion both are denying people rights, but you can hold one position, being against same-sex marriage, and not be anti-gay.

 

[ChrisL]

To be anti-gay is to demean or to hold hatred or contempt for LGBT people. You obviously can't be killing LGBT people and not be anti-gay. You can be against homosexual marriage without being any of those things.

It's a comparison that doesn't work. Yes, in my opinion both are denying people rights, but you can hold one position, being against same-sex marriage, and not be anti-gay.

Why are you against homosexuals getting married?

 

[sangha]

To be anti-gay is to demean or to hold hatred or contempt for LGBT people.

Nope.

Making up daffynitions to suit your argument means your argument is a FAIL

 

[Anagram]

Why are you against homosexuals getting married?

I'm not at all. There's no good reason to be against it as far as I'm concerned. I just don't believe you necessarily have to be anti-gay to be against it.

 

[chromium]

I've seen enough of your posts to know a shill when I see one. If that former soldier had been making some comments you disagreed with and was booed by folks on the left, I doubt you would have started a thread about it or claimed that was indicative of the entire left wing.

You can stop the ad hominen and start addressing the article or question i posed, or at least get out of my thread. Whether i would make a thread under your criteria has nothing to do with *this incident*. Are you condoning this behavior or what?

1) I don't give a damn about abortion and have never posted about it to my recollection, so you're way off there.
2) Use better arguments than posting a shopped pic
3) No **** leftists occasionally mock the military. At least they don't pretend to be in bed with the military while simultaneously harboring intense hate for a minority group within it. The right wing does so on a regular basis. That is my point!

4) Anti gay is the official policy of the Republican platform. Don't get defensive with me because you might support gay rights but also identify as Republican. That's not my problem.
5) I already posted about public speaking and showing respect. It applies both ways far as I'm concerned. If someone had gotten up there after hearing this guy out and said "I'm against the proposed law because I think employers should be able to hire whoever they want," I would disagree of course but I wouldn't have heckled them or bitched about it here. I can promise you that.

6) I've said repeatedly i dislike both parties and would never vote for either
7) You're totally ignoring the religious element, which is even more indisputable than the correlation between anti gay rhetoric and party alignment.
8) Maybe I'm sick of seeing threads like "Homosexuality - mental illness," "Sodomy propaganda," "Anti gay laws are good," littering this forum and decided to point out some abhorrent incident *against gays* that no one seemed to notice. Maybe I'd like to see if those same posters care to defend this sickening behavior. It doesn't matter why I posted. Either address the issue, or get out.

 

[Anagram]

Nope.

Making up daffynitions to suit your argument means your argument is a FAIL

That's the definition that came up when I searched it. It was certainly how I was using the term. If you were using it a different way I apologize.

 

[ChrisL]

I'm not at all. There's no good reason to be against it as far as I'm concerned. I just don't believe you necessarily have to be anti-gay to be against it.

I just don't understand why anyone else would care so much. It's a mystery to me.

 

[Anagram]

I just don't understand why anyone else would care so much. It's a mystery to me.

Honestly, if I thought some omniscient, omnipotent being wanted the world some way, I'd probably care a lot too. I don't see the world that way, but I can understand where those that do are coming from.