Gay Pride ad a new 'equality gap'?

So suppose it wasn't a Rainbow badge but something else, perhaps a "Keep Britain Tidy" badge or a "Help for Heroes" badge or a Campaign to protect Rural England badge would you still refuse to wear it? Because if you would accept any of these but not the Rainbow you are homophobic, no matter what you believe.

I wouldn't expect to see a NT guide wearing any of those badges as that is not in their remit, not their charity. The only badge I would expect to see them wearing at work would be a NT badge so that I know they are the person to ask if I want any information about the property. If they want to promote any other campaign or charity they can do it outside working hours.

Very well put, lisalou.
Exactly how I feel.

Read the posts Chewbacca they were allowed to choose. No one was 'forced' whatever Annie might say. They were given other roles, but apparently the NT have to allow volunteers to wear anything they want and do what they like.

Boy a LOT has happened on this thread since yesterday!!! I have just spent the last thirty minutes reading it! Interesting...
Anniebach, I am sorry but i do think your last comment is twisting the comment and yes, it is different. The star of david was to humiliate and make easy targets the jews in Germany. It made it easy for the soldiers to turn them into immediate victims. It also made it easy for the children to be bullied and ostracised at school, that was only the beginning of it. Hardly comparable.
I think Trisher made a good point earlier when she pointed out that if the badge was " save our forests", or something like that, nobody would have questioned it, and all happily worn it.
I think the real issue here is, that many people think that this business is about SEX - it isnt. It is about being citizens on the same level as heterosexuals.
Let me elaborate; how many times have any one of us seen a couple behaving in public in an endearing way, holding hands, being corteous of each other, helping each other, and we have smiled, thought, how sweet.
Homosexuals rarely hold hands in public, if they do, it is usually after a lot of thinking about whether the environment is "ok". When any one of us take our partner's arm or hold hands - do we have to think about how others will view it?
When we go for a job, is there a chance we wont get it because of our sexual orientation? And yes, it does happen.
It's not just about the right to have a same sex partner - not by a long shot. It is about feeling accepted by society.

I think you've just argued against your own argument there Trisher. Surely the whole point is that forcing anyone to wear any kind of identification that marks them as "other" is never acceptable; whether that's a yellow star, a pink triangle or a rainbow lariats. If one chooses to wear anything that marks their "otherness"; or support of that "otherness", that has to be a matter of personal choice, surely?

I support freedom to choose Annie The right of the person to choose not to wear the badge and the right of the NT to decide who meets the public in their properties.
Suppose someone turned up inappropriately dressed would the NT then be required to allow them to meet the public simply because they were a volunteer?

No, they were told if you don't wear the badges you cannot mix with the public ,you support this Trisher , I do not.

No one was being "forced" they were told that they would be given roles which meant they wouldn't meet the public. They were free to choose if they wore it or not. Just as the NT is free to choose what roles volunteers play in the property they run.

So being forced to wear The Star of David was wrong , being forced to wear the rainbow badge is right .

In Nazi Germany Jews were required to wear yellow stars, homosexuals to wear pink triangles. It seems strange to me that anyone would support the right of one of these groups to have complete equality and be strident in their condemnation of people they regard as speaking against them, but consider the other group to be unimportant and unworthy of the same support.

Terri, I read an interview with a N.T, volenteer at that house, he and his wife have withdrawn their services, not homophobic , suppose as he is 81 years old he is one of a certain posters ' old farts ' and his opinion must be ignored.

What next ? A march to bring in 'homophobic ' stamped on people's foreheads .

Luckylegs9 You said it was extremely vulgar, people barely dressed and if they were were in the most bizarre and sexually explicit clothes, they looked and behaved offensively.
Sounds exactly like a Saturday night in the bars in Newcastle where most of the people aren't gay.

I dont think anyones telling people what they must think ...just that ALL of us should be treated the same ...and discrimination is discrimination WHATEVER its against .Its just as bad to be anti gay as anti black...neither are things that happen by CHOICE .Respect surely should be the byword in all religions though I do know a lot of so called christians who interpret the bible to suit themselves and their own bias.One friend of ours is an evangelical christian "born again" who was happy to work with gay folk and socialise with them until he "found" Jesus ,now his outlook has narrowed in a ridiculous way ...and its not "christian" as I would understand it .Surely we should just accept people for who/what they are ..what they do behind closed doors doesn't affect us so why are we worried/upset by it

"Teling people how they must think and what they must support certainly shows freedom of speech is not valued" Annie you have encapsulated the problem in one sentence. Eroding individual freedoms can be very insidious and those that seek to do so whatever their political persuasion are giving the thumbs up to a totalitarian ideal. There are adherents to certain faiths and political regimes that have murdered gay people are they also "farts"?

So gay pride marches are compared with Apartheid marches, Suffragettes movement, Jarrow Marches.

We have the racial discrimination act but still racism

America is still a racist

Homosexuality is legal , marching and demanding people wear badges will not change how some think or believe

The aggression and insults in this thread are vile, and the most aggressive have been far left supporters.

Telling people how they must think, what they must support certaintly shows freedom of speech is not valued

As for the badge wearing, let people decide if and when they want to wear any badge, apart from the organisation they work for. As far as I know we don't live in a dictatorship, we have minds of our own.

I got caught up in one of these gay pride processions, it was extremely vulgar, people barely dressed and if they were were in the most bizarre and sexually explicit clothes, they looked and behaved offensively. I don't care one jot what two consenting adults do, no one should be ashamed of who they are, certainly not treated any differently from other members of society, but for goodness sake I cannot see the pride in these processions. It is all about sex not people.

Just to let you know I am a NT member AND volunteer. There are a lot of reactionary old farts who are members as well as a lot of open minded older people.

Yes

Do people who work for the NT wear NT badges?

So suppose it wasn't a Rainbow badge but something else, perhaps a "Keep Britain Tidy" badge or a "Help for Heroes" badge or a Campaign to protect Rural England badge would you still refuse to wear it? Because if you would accept any of these but not the Rainbow you are homophobic, no matter what you believe.

This is good.

www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/04/you-must-open-a-gay-venue-in-office-complex-planners-tell-developers

* I am saying that making people afraid to admit to having an opinion that does not agree with the agreed politically correct view is as coercive and as unpleasant as attacking someone because they are gay*

MOnica Do you really think this is the case? I'm not saying that it's acceptable that people should be afraid to admit to having an opinion that does not agree with the agreed politically correct view but I really can't agree that this is as coercive and unpleasant as attacking someone because they are gay. I just don't think you can compare these two things. Being gay is not a choice so being attacked for that is an attack on your whole being, your whole self - just not comparable.

trisher,well said ?

I take it that you do not see yourself as 'an old fart' Penstemmon just an 'intolerant of other peoples views fart' then.