I was driving up 85 North yesterday, and much to my dismay, I saw a billboard with the words “Questioning Homosexuality?” in bright white judgemental letters emblazoned for all to see. Needless to say, I was quite offended, because I knew that this ad references a “cause” that attempts to “save” homosexuals from themselves, by showing us that we don’t have to be gay, that it is a choice. But beyond my frustration that people actually still think that homosexuality is a choice, and beyond my fury and rage that this hatred and bigotry is plastered in huge display on such a major highway, was that it was even allowed to be put there in the first place. Shouldn’t there be some regulations on what can be advertised? The reason I feel this way, is because if ads like this are allowed without regulation, ANY ad that condemns a certain group of people, by offering “conversion tactics”, should also be allowed. If I had the money, I should be able to advertise a “de-Christianization” camp, shouldn’t I? But we all know, that my ad would be considered hateful, and would never be allowed. So why is the aforementioned ad up there for all to see? I just don’t understand how one-sided things can be so widely advertised as a true “alternative”, when it is really a message of ignorance, judgement, and worst of all, hate. Also, why does the city of Atlanta allow such a blatant display of discrimination, slander, misinformation, and bigotry against homosexuals in a such a conspicuous place? Why doesn’t the city have regulations on what can and cannot be advertised on billboards (or anywhere else), and if they do, why don’t these regulations contain language that would protect people from being targeted and subsequently hurt by slanderous messages?
I just don’t understand it. I don’t understand why there is this mission to “save” us. There is nothing wrong with homosexuality, and if you believe that there is, then don’t have gay sex, thus making yourself homosexual. Don’t have gay thoughts, then you won’t have to worry about being homosexual! BUT, DO NOT take your ignorance out on the rest of us, and preach hate and disguise it as “religious love”. I feel sorry for anyone that truly believes this filth.
Here is an image taken from the website (link below) of the company that has paid for this billboard:
if you want to see the hateful billboard yourself, it is on 85 right around Freedom Parkway. I for one hope this billboard is taken down immediately, because advertising that homosexuality is a choice, and offering programs to “de-program” us is shameful and hateful. This is why we are moving so slowly forward in our quest for equality; there are people that are still on a quest to change us, and if we don’t conform, they deny and hate us. I just don’t get how being gay can be so threatening to anyone other that oneself (being that, it is harmful to oneself, only if they remain internally closeted and hurt themselves, which is unfortunate, but does occur.)
Here is the website for the hateful company that is responsible for this billboard. Here is the hateful, slanderous event that they are advertising, which will happen on Nov. 4. I for one hope that anyone that does attend this event doesn’t believe the lies that they are spreading about homosexuality.
What are your thoughts?
I think we should pool our money together and buy a de-Christianization billboard. That would be awesome.
Alan Chambers LOOKS like a homosexual still. Does the City of Atlanta or State of Georgia have a non discrimination policy in effect for sexual orientation?
Joe, to be honest, I really don’t know. I would think that they do, but knowing that this is the deep south, they probably don’t. Oh, and as for gay old Alan, the reason why he still looks homosexual, is because he still is. Just because he denies it, doesn’t make it go away.
While the ad is sickening I don’t have a problem with it. It is a matter of free speech. The billboard is more than likely owned by a private company, probably Viacom. Boycott the company that allowed their space to be used for such a hateful message and to profit from said message. Call/email the owner of the billboard company and complain and encourage others to do the same.
Because we don’t live in a police state that controls every aspect of our being. Of course, there are those that want to change that. Personally, I don’t care if someone posts a billboard that says, “All David Browns are assholes and should have the shit beaten out of them on sight!” … may be a little hard to read all of that from the street, but you get what I’m saying. Who cares if something is hateful? People will either support or ignore… life goes on. Forget about it … regardless of your race, creed, gender, orientation, height, hair color, or anything else, there will be someone out there that hates you. Trust me, I’m living proof. I’m supposed to be the golden child, white, male, straight, not handicapped, college graduate and there are still people that hate me. Go figure.
As I’ve said for the upteenth time, it’s not our governments responsibility to govern every little thing in our lives. Repeat after me, small government… small government… small government that will stay the fuck out of my life!
Ah, the other side of free speech. The message sucks, but they have the right to post it. But you could always have your own billboard.
Exactly. Who sends money to Viacom? Anyone who subscribes to cable television or sees movies by Dreamworks or Paramount is supporting them, and if they were running that billboard, we’re telling them, with our dollars, that we approve of their behavior.
Exactly. Sorry, Duane, I have to disagree with you on this. I don’t trust the government to decide what’s “offensive”, or whatever. I’d rather they just allow anyone with $1200 and a message to put their message up on a sign. Do you really trust them to make these kinds of decisions? Do you really think they wouldn’t use that censorship power to silcence people like you more often than they’d use it for good?
when it boils down to it, they have a right to advertise what they want. my response would be to to look unfavorably upon the company/advertisers that own the billboards and not support them with my attention or moeny. write a letter and get the word out. i saw the billboard too and wasnt in the least surprised. this is exactly the by product of the hostile intolerant times we live in.
Dave and Garrett, while I don’t want the government to control what we can and can’t say (so I agree), I do think that advertising that is slanderous and bigoted should be monitored, if not controlled. I would like to live in a world were we are not discriminated against because of sexual orientation, and one the best ways to do that, is to have non-discrimination policies about things like this on the books.
It is the company’s responsibility to sensor the advertisements, as it is them that is saying they agree with this message (since they approved the ad for placement), but freedom of speech shouldn’t overlook bigotry to anyone. If you are purposefully slandering someone else, I just think we should have checks and balances for that type of behavior, that is all.
And as far as trusting the government to do anything, well, now, that is a different issue… ugh.
Actually, with the way they phrased it, the statement itself doesn’t constitute slander. They probably ran that by their legal dept.
No. It is the company’s responsibility to maximize shareholder’s wealth.
If people are offended by the business a company takes, then they will stop buying that company’s product thereby reducing shareholder’s wealth. It is up to the company to decide what course of action makes money for their shareholders.
I agree, it would be nice to live in a world where people don’t judge others based off of uncontrolable forces (race, gender, orientation, etc…) and eventually, we’ll probably get there … if we don’t all kill ourselves first. The fact is everything in the world moves towards equilibrium. Something do it faster than other. I’m confident that over time (a long fucking time) people will drop their prejudices against those who are different, but until that time arrives, I’m not willing to sign over my personal freedom and the ability to say what I want to any government.
I guess it is a matter of free speech … but with speech (and the attitude that goes with it) like this organization promotes, I wonder how long ‘free’ will be a part of it. Great posting!
I guess it could be worse. At least these Christians are trying to change us to save our souls. I can think of lots of others who would sooner damn us to hell.
It’s on days like this that I’m so glad I decided to move to the deep South…
…my thoughts are that you’ve already devoted too much thought to a bunch of idiots
Nothing will make those people more angry than if people just ignore them. Well, I guess gay sex makes them pretty angry, too. But you catch my drift. Hrm, you should have gay sex while ignoring them. That will really piss them off.
Eater… will do. Definitely… will do.
Although you’ll probably block this post, your argument is ridiculous. Censorship is evil. You’re proposing censorship. I see things that offend me every day. I look the other way … so should you. Who decides what’s tolerable? God help us all if it’s someone as sensitive as you. Of course Exodus and their lot are repugnant. So are Klan marchers, but we allow them to march down the street. For God sakes, read “1984,” and grow a backbone.
We should go
I’d LOVE to hear what they’re making up.
I agree with atlmalcontent and Joey. I would love to hear their spiel!
atlmalcontent, do you ever feel happy? Jesus, you are a very fucking negative person.
I have a backbone. I posted MY opinion. It takes a backbone to do that. Also, I am not proposing censorship, I am proposing regulations to prevent hatred being spread amongst the masses. In case you didn’t know, hate can cause people to do bad things; wouldn’t we want to prevent that if we could? Per your example, The KKK are another group that shouldn’t have billboards spreading hate; they are a violent and evil group that should not be allowed to spread their messages in this manner. These regulations that I questioned would prevent this kind of hate, but wouldn’t censor them. There is a fine line between censorship and regulation.
Also, I challenge you to keep in mind, that this actually wasn’t an argument, as you suggested, it is my opinion. I never said that the event couldn’t be, or shouldn’t be, advertised, but I do believe that the way in which they chose to advertise it is hateful and bigoted. The regulations that I suggest would prevent this bigotry, and simply require them to advertise what they are having, an event, NOT a de-gayification holy war, and a “true alternative” to homosexuality (of which the only one is denial).
And I have read 1984. But by suggesting that book, it tells me that you are equating any “censorship” to a totalitarian society, which is preposterous. You appear to be one of those all or nothing people by suggesting that any form of regulation means total and utter loss of freedom. That kind of mentality scares me a hell of a lot more than a single instance of “censorship”. There can be a happy medium between total loss of freedom, and some necessary regulation of it.
Additionally, I have no problem with you commenting on my blog, but I would sincerely appreciate if you wouldn’t be derogatory in the manner with which you speak to me. I don’t deserve that for having a differing opinion, and it doesn’t hammer your point home any harder.
Oh be nice! So those who disagree with ur conclusions must therefore be unhappy? Not sure I follow your train of thought — if there’s any thought there at all — nor your attempt to explain the “fine line” between censorship and regulation, because my guess is it would include anything that offended you (which apparently would entail quite a lot). You can’t prevent bigotry anyways — people hate us gays, get used to it. I wish they didn’t, but they do, and that’s their business. We can work to change attitudes, but you can’t force tolerance upon people.
*BTW, I said nothing about KKK billboards, but marches, which are Constitutionally protected.*
I know this will raise your dander, but you seem to have a lot in common with the Christian right, which also seeks to censor anything that upsets or offends them. Fear the nanny state, left or right!
Now excuse be while I go be miserable.
I never said you were unhappy because you don’t agree with me, I think you are unhappy because you never say anything without being completely negative and derogatory. You’ve quite substantially proven that anyone that doesn’t bow down to you and agree with your all-knowing, ever-correct assertions deserve to be chided, demeaned, and talked down to. Thanks for confirming that what I thought about you is true!!
And a big difference between me and the Christian right, probably the biggest, which would make me nothing like them, is that I actually do try to see both sides and fully investigate the information; rather than blindly believing one thing and eliminating all else that doesn’t align with my faith. Because I don’t agree with bigotry and hatred, and don’t think they has a place in society, isn’t because I just feel that way, or because the Lord told me so; it is because they are harmful. Hate and bigotry lead to violence and intolerance, and if beings against those things, and for compassion and tolerance, makes me Christian, then great, but that isn’t even what the Christian right are about.
One final note: Just because I don’t agree with your all or nothing mentality, doesn’t mean I am any less right or wrong than you. It is called an opinion. Additionally, it has been proven time and again that you don’t agree with me, so understand that I get that, alright? What I don’t understand is why you continue to come here, and set out on your mission to demean me on my blog. People can disagree without being so negative and offensive to one another. If you don’t like what I have to say, stop reading it. The reason I said you were unhappy, is because you are only negative when you comment here. That speaks more volumes than anything I would say about you. Read it or don’t, I don’t care, just don’t be a jerk if you are going to try and have a conversation with me. It makes you look like a whiny pissed off child.
Now, you may be excused to wallow in your misery.
YEAH!!! It’s the Duane and ATLMalcontent discourse again, we all loved it last time, and this one is as equally juicy!! Seriously, I think you both should date, there just to much tension there, but I know Duane is insanely happy with his boy, so I don’t think it would work out.
I know right… He is the one that is acting like a high schooler, I couldn’t care less, seriously. He even wrote a bitchy little post on his blog about it! How fun! =oP
Actually, if you were to “try to see both sides and fully investigate the information,” how could you not see that they have the right to say what’s been said (much like your right to argue against it on this very blog)?
Sorry, but malcontent has a point.
Not sure where I stand wrt the specific instance Duane originally posted about (the billboard), but I do have to agree with this sentiment:
Something that disturbs me is the fact that in recent years, it seems that political and social debate has been watered down into soundbites. Ignoring the complexities of issues, we’re left with a false dichotomy of two extremes as our only options. So, you can either have SOCIALISM!!! or NO GOVERNMENT!!! - there is no in between.
Unfortunately, real life doesn’t work that way. Obviously, it’s harder and takes more time and attention to actually explore an issue from all sides, taking into account all the nuances and acknowledging that nothing exists in a vaccuum. All that stuff can’t be boiled down into a nice, 5-word soundbite.
(Btw, Barack Obama has some good stuff to say along these lines… my friend Jmac posted an excerpt from his book The Audacity of Hope here: http://safeashouses.blogspot.com/2006/10/from-shelves.html)
I think it’s ridiculous that this exodus site talks of homosexuality like it’s an affliction. Ignorance.
As for the debate on censorship/regulation. In a way atlmalcontent made some very good points. It can come across as being a hyprocate when, on one hand you tell people if they don’t like gays then don’t have gay thoughts or gay sex, etc, just walk the other way; while on the other hand you’re saying these anti-gay billboards are offensive. Shouldn’t you then follow your own advice? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a negative person nor an unhappy person, I’m a supporter.
If I see a billboard showing a grotesque picture of an aborted late term fetus, should I be offended if I had an abortion or am pro-choice? (hypothetical) Should billboards promoting breastfeeding offend formula feeding moms or vice-versa? Should these offenses be regulated/censored?
i think they’d allow your de-christianization ad, but who are THEY? the govt’ certainly shouldn’t have any problem with it from a legal standpoint. but the people who own the billboard space might not want to rent it to you, yes, yes.
i think the billboard should be allowed, but i think that anyone who believes in it is a moron. that’s my take on it.