OK, I laughed my ass off at:
"This is where you are now, Arizona: You've made yourselves too homophobic and dickish for professional football."

Gold, I tell you... Gold!

You're right - it's a British institution if we're to take the books as they come. But let's look at it from a J K Rowling point of view - from a brief scan of wikipedia, she went to an average british school with presumably average british children probably around 30 years ago - vastly different from the stats quoted above in 2011. There weren't many africans, pakistanis, etc. nor were there many gay, bi, transgendered people when i went to school about 20 years ago (1 black girl and everyone was "straight"). What she wrote came from imagination based on her own experiences and why on earth would people chastise her for the sheer happen-stance of her life experiences? She didn't write a book to exclude people, she wrote a book that just happened to not include every type of person in a fantasy world where there existed entirely different sorts of people. Are we to expect another video from professional-offence-takers about how JRR Tolkein - another FANTASY writer - didn't represent the diversity of humanity in any of his books?

And that's selling her short; there are elements of the books that make allusions to homophobia, racism, etc. - "Mudblood," is a xenophobic term used by characters in the book and it's not accepted by any of the extended main characters, and people really should think long and hard before placing their own expectations and values on other people and judging them for it.

Whether you like the books or not, they are popular and i think their popularity stems from the belief she has in her characters and story. Sure, she could have replaced Ron with an albino lesbian transgendered midget who would have lived happily ever after with Hermione, but would the books have been as good with a character that didn't come from Rowling's heart, someone that Rowling felt like she understood? What if she wrote a gay part for someone and got it wrong, is she then liable to take an ear bashing from the gay community for misrepresenting gay people? Where do you draw the line? Do we - at the expense of the story - put one gay person in and then suddenly we're taking abuse for including a "token" gay person?

It should not be the responsibility of anyone to compromise their art to appease someone else's sense of right or wrong, especially when it seems that their right or wrong is balanced on "is there someone like me in there?" In my opinion, if you come away from a story like Harry Potter with the burning question "Where were all the gay/whatever people?" then it's probably you that has the problem with diversity.

I say this - homophobia and racism are dead when no one even considers the issue any more. Now you can't do that in the workplace and stuff, because there are genuinely racist people out there who we try and keep in check. But this is the absolute worst place to direct your anger - no one was hired or fired based on their creed, no one did anything wrong here, all this woman has done is draw attention to what i consider to be her own contradiction. We want to encourage the idea that "Everyone is equal; there is no black or white, straight or gay, everyone is simply the same - we're just people!" And quickly follow that up with "Hey, where are all the GAY people in this fictional story?"

And finally, how the fuck does she know that every character in the book was straight? Isn't it a bit strange (i want to say homophobic) for her to expect gay people to act differently to the degree that she can spot them in a crowd? 95% of the people in Huffelpuff could be single and gay for all anyone knows. The main 3 characters are straight, all of their parents had to be straight for them to be their parents, but all the rest of them we never need to know about their sexuality, so why should they stand out, why should we even discuss it in a kids book anyway? There's only about 4 relationships in 7 books and some of them happen to the same characters.

These are just some of the problems i have with this nonsense and i've written an entire page.

Oh FFS. Look, I'll explain it to you one more time, and I'll use small words.

No, you don't have the right not to be offended.
Yes, you have the right to be offended by something, and even to call someone out for their "offensive" behaviour.

The difference between us is that while I find your views distasteful, I'm not calling for you to "keep it in your bedroom and to yourself".


Once again, you are entitled to your opinion, and once you voice that opinion, I'm entitled to call you a homophobic asshole because of it. Yay, freedom of speech!

Exactly, you didn't get the point. It isn't about punishing people for being hypocritical idiots, it's about calling them out for it and making clear that behaviour isn't ok.
Let's stick with the wedding cake example for a moment. It's not about forcing somebody to make a shitty cake a dozen other people can do as well or having them pay damages for percieved (by lawyers or pissed off grooms) emotional trauma. I would be perfectly fine with it if a judge ordered those kind of businessowners to just hang some Westboro Baptist style posters on their storefront and call it a day. At least then everybody knew with what kind of people they're dealing with.
The problem isn't that people with shitty opinions exist, they'll be always there, the problem is if we let them act as if it's normal and fine and not adress it.
You would crucify them if they'd say that sex with children is ok, you'd call them out if they were telling you black people should be glad their slave ancestors were treated so well. Shit, just try to open a mosque one block away from ground zero and someone will talk to you about that too.
Why is it wrong then if you confront them when they put gay relationships on the same level as people fucking their dogs or tell us that two fathers can't raise a son?
I was serious when I said I admire the Phelps familiy for their honesty. They're horrible, disgusting people but at least they made up their minds and stick to their beliefs. They won't come to us calling homosexuality a "controversial lifestyle" where you can have "differing opinions" than all the "gay friends they have". You fuck a bloke in the ass you go to hell, that's it. No cures, no dicussions. It's antisocial, cruel and stupid but at least, they very least, it's honest.
Those anti discrimination laws are just crude tool to protrect yourself from their stupid hatred. Not everybody lives in San Francisco where you call your transgender girlfriends for a protest sit in at the local homophobic bakery. Some people have only big brother on their side in their hometown.
It's not about getting your way, it's about stopping others from continuing taking a shit on you.

What? Nazis? Really?
Are the homos spraypainting yellow crosses on doors in your town again?

Stop acting like you're a victim here. If the gay community could ruin anybodys livelyhood they'd start with the republican party or foxnews (both are doing fine) and not some shitty baker. What might ruin these businesses is not knowing their countries laws (you can't refuse service to select individuals and you can't sell whiskey to 10 year olds no matter what your gods have to say about it) and alienating customers with their douchebaggery. People don't want cake from a homophobe the same way they don't want drinks served by white supremacists or drycleaning from somebody who thinks rape is a crime made up by ungrateful sluts who should've dressed less like whores.

If your community thinks you're an antisocial idiot, it will shun you. They only thing that has changed is why people consider you unworthy of their business.

As I said, the wedding cake business isn't something everybody is cut out to stomach.

What is it with homophobes and this ridiculous argument?

And why is it always a horse? I'm starting to think that you secretly hope your ludicrous scenario will come true and then you can finally satisfy your craving for horse cock.

And hey, if two women want to marry three men, if they're all consenting adults, good luck to them. Maybe it turns out that's a great way to have a relationship. I doubt it, but I don't see that they're harming anyone other than themselves.

In an ideal world, 10 years from now we won't be talking about them at all because they've all been recognized as fellow human beings who deserve equal treatment (legally and otherwise).

But since this isn't an ideal world and more to the point since there are people like you as well as the people in this video who seem to actively want to treat them as less than human, I suspect we'll still be talking about these same issues... although hopefully on a smaller and smaller scale until one day far in the future we do reach the ideal.

P.S. Two consenting non-married, non-related adults wanting to get married is not the same thing as incest, bestiality, polygamy, or pedophilia (surprised you left that one out). Homophobes constant equating of homosexuality with these things gets pretty old "after a while."

This is my last response. Listen; "shaming" doesn't work. In fact you contradict yourself by saying; "Matter of fact, psychologically, it's one of the surest ways to endure behavior." Shaming endures behaviour? What are you talking about? Education works. It really is that simple. Stop the brainwashing of kids by zealots. Stop the education of kids by bronze age mythology. And stop using infantile ads, like these, to try and "inform," when all they do is confirm, to homophobes, their prejudices. Mature debate and education, education, education will ultimately win any homophobic arguement. I'm done..

OK, I'll be the devils advocate and say; Are ads like these necessary? Don't ads like these make the homophobes react with; "See, they are now promoting being gay." My question is; Who are these ads directed at? Being "gay" is totally accepted by right minded, 21st century individuals so, it would seem, ads like these are directed at the homophobes which, surely, is self defeating. If I don't like something, seeing an ad will certainly not change my mind.

weird, didn't know he was gay from hearing him on other shows, then as soon as this video basically says he's gay at the beginning, I just think "wow, he does sound 'gay'!" - don't mean that in a homophobic way ...

support for same sex marriage is already over 50 percent. As it gets higher and higher and more states legalize it, we're just going to see more people flip. Though granted, I don't really recall any particular moment where Beck ever spoke out against homosexuality, but I guess the assumption is that he is fairly religious, thus against it.

But anyway, this is just going to happen more and more as the tide changes. Jon Stewart is going to have a field day showing clips of people saying irrefutably homophobic things in the past who are now suddenly pro-same sex marriage.

The thing is, they probably are still against homosexuality, but it's going to inevitably be a necessity to support same sex marriage if one hopes to stay in elected office or keep their job

so we're going to trade closeted homosexuals for closeted homophobes except this time, we'll want them to stay in the closet because when it comes right down to it, I don't give a shit if you hate homosexuals as long as you can keep it to yourself and treat everyone with equality

Why is it that this guy gets hung by his toes. But when Alec Baldwin calls someone a "fucking cocksucking faggot" and a long list of other unrelated homophobic slurs, no one bats an eye.

All reality TV shows have been doctored to make for more interesting TV since its inception with The Real World, the so-called point of this whole video is mute. Anyone with half a brain cell knows this video isn't about Duck Dynasty being fake, or about the discrimination of opressed people.

Alec Baldwin is making millions doing far worse on a monthly basis. Remember when he called his 12 year old daughter and verbal and mentally abused her? Or when he called a reporter a fat queen. Or another incident where he threathens to shove his foot up someone's faggot ass. No one tries to ruin his career over any of the horrible disgusting things Alec has said or done, but this bearded redneck happens to quote bible scriptures. That's what all this fabricated hate is really all about.

Most of the 'outraged' people don't give a shit about gay people, they just want to see the religious wingnuts get taken down a peg so they can wave their fedora emblazoned atheism flag. They won't come right out and say it because it would make them selfish assholes riding the coat-tails of people who are actually being abused and discriminated against. No I'm not religious, but I can smell bullshit a mile away, and this whole thing reeks. Were's this assholes outrage when it comes to Alec? Ohh He dosen't really give a shit about gay rights, not a peep when he can't pin a christian to the wall; he just cares about religious people doing stupid things.

Don't subjegate the real issue with your atheism agenda, it makes you look disgusting and reprehensible. That attitude is exactly why no one takes our ideology seriously; You think your doing some greater good, but your means are selfish to the very core.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/gay-waitress-who-publicized-homophobic-note-is-habitual-liar-according-to-friends/

My best friend in 9th grade was a compulsive liar -- my mom tried to warn me but it wasn't until she told a lie that was easily proven false that I confronted her. Why would you lie to me, I asked. "I just wanted to say something interesting."

This woman seems to have that same pathological problem, and found a way to profit from it, too. When I first saw this story, I thought it was false -- something about it didn't ring true. Too copycat, with the whole Wounded Warrior veneer to boot.

I suspect she is perfectly okay with being exposed -- because if she wants to be "interesting", even at the expense of interpersonal relationships, man, has she ever reached her goal.

What? It looks nothing like that. If you were stealing a colleague's tip, you might doctor the bill to make it look like the customer hadn't left a tip, why then also leave a fake homophobic comment which will only draw attention to the whole affair?

To me, this looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck.

That's stretching things to an extremely specific point of view. All humans possess prejudices that we may perpetrate completely innocently through ignorance, but I've never acted negatively against someone because of their race. I grew up in a violently homophobic culture, but I'm honest enough with myself that when experience taught me my behavior was morally wrong, I changed.

My comment was purely riffing off the first poster, and was a quote from a film.