southofthetower

southofthetower t1_iune7l2 wrote

If it is not a social flag, then what is it? again, I respect everyone, regardless of race, sexual orientation. But there is a reason for the separation between church and state.. But again, Im asking... why does the LGBTQ flag "DESERVE" to flown, when other similar flags cannot?

1

southofthetower t1_iuncx6r wrote

I agree with that completely. However, this is not the states responsibility. if you want to fly a flag, no one is stopping you. pull a permit, buy a pole and privately fly it.... but I see an issue of forcing it on others, especially when paid for by the taxpayers... what if this scenario were reversed? Imaging this thought experiment.... imagine if all the LGBTQ's were nazis (IM NOT SAYING THEY ARE... Trying to make you think) WOUld it then be acceptable, if they wanted to fly their flag on state property...?

5

southofthetower t1_iunb4rp wrote

what does forcing a social flag on a state owned property have anything to do with what you said... you've been watching CNN and rachel maddow to much. do you even have a thought of your own? You stand by what you said? what did you Actually say in a response WHY the flag should be flown...? I may have missed that between the insults.

5

southofthetower t1_iun6z8i wrote

Do you not see the reason why the flag was not flown? It is to set a precedent; not discrimination. pretty simple issue.. so what if you wanted to fly a "dont Tread on Me" flag...? would you feel that is acceptable? A black the blue flag? could their language been a bit more empathetic, absolutely yes. however what does flying a LGBTQ flag on state property have to do with anything but virtue signalling?

−16