Buffalo Rising Online

The city of Buffalo should enact laws and legislation to cater to the LGBT community. Not only would it be the right thing to do but becoming known around the country as a very accepting and tolerant community for people from all backgrounds could do wonders for buffalos population drain and economy. The GLBT has shown in city after city there power to gentrify dilapidated areas of cities. Shouldnt Buffalo be courting these individuals to move into this city? By legalizing civil unions Buffalo could reap enormous benefits.

The gay community has a lot of disposable income. It would be great for the economy in Buffalo.

rb66...odd comment on your part...does the gay community really have more disposable income than the straight community? If so, where did you get this information?

SLEEPL8,

National statistics show that in percentage, the gay and lesbian market is the most affluent and loyal group of all?

taking economics aside doesn't it seem rather 1020's that two people can't be legally married. What I don't get about this whole ordeal is the logic why they shouldn't be allowed too in the first place. No one is asking the catholic church to marry them. They can think say whatever they want. No one is asking for them to change. But it is stupid that two committed adults can't share health insurance or receive other government oriented services as a couple.

This could be great for multiple reasons on several levels. If such a progressive idea could take hold here, and we could break away from old, backward ideas such as this, just think of the possibilities:

1. Intelligent Politicians 2. No more unions 3. Lowering tax rates 4. Lowering utility rates to people who live next door to them (aka water and electric rates) 5. A community that picks up after itself (civic pride) 6. Holding slumlords responsible (as well as the government) 7. Ridding the city of old WASPs that are holding us back. 8. Making Buffalo, NY the most business-friendly city in the union

One can only hope......

I wasn't aware of this last year, but I'll make damn sure I try to get out of work and get down there this year!

Study's have show that, we (the LGBT individuatls,) do tend to have more disposable income, but above that --- are very loyal consumers when there's a reason to be. I know that I purposely will avoid a business or take the time/effort to go to a certain business when I feel comfortable going there.

It's also great to hear all the positive comments from all of you that aren't gay... 'straight but not narrow'

good people =)

It could also come down to the fact that fewer LGBT couples have children.. that sure opens up a lot of money even without a salary increase!

nono... dont paint republicans with one broad stroke. not all of us are anti gay rights. some of us support the homosexual community and hope for their equal rights.

At the very least, and I say this as your right wing nut job republican, the decision of marriage in any form should be left up to the states. A good majority of republicans will not support any amendment stating the definition of marriage as a union between man and woman.

nono... i love that you refer to republicans as Nazis. really good criticism there.

You are confusing Republican with Conservative. Though they often go hand in hand they don't mean the same thing. Unfortunately many moderate republicans sacrifice their beliefs to get the religous conservative support. Moderate Democrats do it too to gain support from the far left. Its called politics.

Honestly you seem to be the one that has more prejudice than I. Any person that affiliates themselves with the GOP is now a Nazi. Thats equivalent to me saying that democrats are Stalinist pinko commies. hmm seems like a fair assessment wouldnt you agree?

Oh and please continue to think that my views are disingenuous. I REALLY care what you think.

Finally! A frank and open discussion revealing all Republicans as the Jew-baiting, hate-filled, goose-stepping totalitarians that they are. It's a good thing that the overwhelming majority of Democratic Party lawmakers voted against the Patriot Act and filibustered legislation that suspends civil rights. They saved us from the Republicans. Otherwise that would be Federal law today.

Thank God Hillary Clinton is leading the fight to keep the border to Canada open in order to capitalize on the economic benefits to her constituents in Buffalo rather than pandering to the fear mongers and risk alienating some voters by standing on principal and fighting for the people that elected her to represent them just 2 years ago. Thank God we have a thread on BRO to spew hate and paint others with a broad brush.

Wait - was this this article about attending a rally to support the rights of gay men to receive the legal benefits of marriage? Thank you Nonono for setting us "straight" about what we should be discussing

Stay on topic {edit}. Please

If you truly care, don't just rant on here about your own misguided judgements of others. Get off your butt on Thursday, wrap a moth eaten scarf around your head and go down to the rally at 5:00. It's easy to type a sentence showing your own intolerance, it takes effort to show up and show your support.

The thing that speaks most loudly in this thread is that no one said anything derisive of the gay community for the first twenty posts.... then someone introduces a slightly different idea, and nonono in two sentences has cdubmoo loading people into the gas chamber. Freedom of speech for all who choose to speak, accept you would-be homophobes too smart to join in.

Strictly capsule, but you knew that. Sorry nonon... can't muster the same level of angst as you on this one. Good luck with the whole mano-o-mano thing.... doesn't much interest me one way or another. I don't count myself as a homophobe, but I think I'll skip the rally. I'll try to sleep tonight realizing that makes me a nazi in your eyes. A little suprising you used to throw around the lavendar m* phrase.... you don't periodically question your party affiliation, do you? Come on nononon....waive the flag proud.

Nonono

Actually,{edit} you are the poster child for hiding in anonymity since you deny who you are and have reference to your name deleted by the people you otherwise villify.

The Republican Party has not made "'banning' gay marriage a unilateral presidential campaign platform". The Republican Party does not have a platform at this time. Neither do the Democrats. The platform is presented at voted upon at the party conventions which will not be held for another seven months.

Perhaps insteading of insulting BF you should walk away from the computer for a minute and take your own meds.

Read my post carefully. I support the rally. I applaud the article that started this thread. I suggested that you try for once to stay on topic and not pervert the board with your hate filled insults toward others.

You can not demand tolerance from others while steadfastly maintaining your own prejudice.

If your not for us, your against us...wow, nono quoting George W. Wonder why it's small minded when he says it. By the way, who was talking about sex? You're right, this is all clearly beyond me, I'll return to the tranquility of my East Amherst mansion (wrong locale, proper descriptiion), letting the dark side take over BR for the 11 to 7 shift.

Taking liberties quoting others is your bread and butter, isn't it simcoe?

Maybe I'll phrase this so you can understand it... here goes..... I'm soooooo hurt you didn't get it, I mean, wft.... doesn't anybody read what they post, or post what they mean... I'm sooooo confused...I mean, what's this have to do with gay people. I like gay people, I mean, not that much, but enough, I mean, I'm sure I like gay people more that Nazi's... but I like Nazi's too...don't get me wrong...did your read what you posted, or are you just making fun of me, wft? What's with these people...why are they making fun of me....wft?

Well, that actually hurt a bit.

Thanks for the advice nono, I'll have my physician stop by momentarily. Do you have any questions you'd like me to ask him? By the way, I like benafer, perhaps I'll begin parting my hair on the other side.

BenF- that was hilarious - although you forgot a few others:

Simcoe:

wtf, dubai in buffalo has higher taxes % than california , real estate here is not a good profit, like why are you even on this site. Intenational currencies and Buffalo would be a vindication of my guitar, wft, you guys have nothing positive to say becuase I like California more than NYS taxes. Gay people in London, Hong Kong are superior to gay people in Buffalo, wtf, what do you propose we do to bring business here. I mean, like so what if Albany got AMD, it is no big loss for us, let shoot for the stars and bring Cisco downtown, like wtf, the dixie chicks are coming to Buffalo and Hillary Clinton brought us Art space.....I mean you guys need to read what you write before you write it, like wtf, you are actually really upsetting me. Dubai, Hong Kong London international currencies vs Cali taxes per capita in NYS as a % of real wages earned, like wft, Schumer and Clinton brought us Art Space.

Wish I was there to join, I definitely support this 100% , it's time for a change.

1. Challenging the opinions of others isn't an attack on free speech. It's an exercize of free speech.

2. It's interesting that benfranklin doesn't seem to care about equal rights for gays, since he's expressed libertarian-sounding arguments on other topics.

Colin, from a libertarian perspective, I'd hope that government would be as inconsequential in a gay person's life as it would be for a straight person.

Colin, you're not allow to disagree with people on this web site, don't you know that?

Couldn't agree more Ben. The government should stay out of people's bedrooms. If they would focus on protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority we'd be in a better place. I always loose it when I hear people say that they should be allowed to vote on gay marriage. Since when has anyone's civil rights been subject to a popular vote? I don't necessarily care one way or the other but I think that everyone should be provided equal protection under the law. If there are gay people that want to get married I think they should be provided with that option and the associated benefits. I can't even believe that we need to have this debate. As a Republican turned Libertarian I just don't buy the argument that it is the government's role to protect "traditional marriage." The government needs to ensure that all citizens are afforded the same rights and its responsibility ends there. Instead they waste our money by investigating c*m on a blue dress and steroids in baseball.

I have a great idea.....The black Baptist ministers and angry church ladies should concentrate on teaching unwed teenagers the importance of practicing safe sex, use of birth control, to stay away from drugs and guns, and learn how to speak proper english!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Coming from you I'll take that as some kind of twisted complement. Not sure why you've pulled me into this fight. What you choose to do is up to you, not sure what's so important about the government sanctioning it. Thought you were the 'live and let live guy....", somebody hijacking nonono on us? Hmmm....seems you get angry if I don't read carefully enough, but equally upset if I parse. Perhaps you should mark your posts with, "I mean this one", or..."Don't parse, I don't feel too strongly about what I've written." Whatever works for you nono... just let me know.

Nono... I think you missed my point. I'll try again. You make in your last post reasoned arguments about why legal status matters. The argument makes sense, but few heterosexuals have made it this far through the thread, because you're so quick to call those of us who choose to sleep with the opposite sex, nazis.

I now live in the second most 'gay-friendly' US city (Mpls) which is greatly enriched by welcoming GLBT's into all aspects of community life.

I've always wished that Bflo, the "Queen City", could become the most gay-friendly city in the northeast.

It would certainly help Bflo's sagging population. Sorry I can't lend my presence to a very important symbolic event.

R. Kern (in Mpls0

From the New York Times;

State Court Recognizes Gay Marriages From Elsewhere By ROBERT D. McFADDEN Published: February 2, 2008

A New York appellate court ruled Friday that valid out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples must be legally recognized in New York, just as the law recognizes those of heterosexual couples solemnized elsewhere. Lawyers for both sides said the ruling applied to all public and private employers in the state.

Even though gay couples may not legally marry in New York, the appellate court in Rochester held that a gay couple’s 2004 marriage in Canada must be respected under the state’s longstanding “marriage recognition rule,” and that an employer’s denial of health benefits had discriminated against the couple on the basis of their sexual orientation.

“The Legislature may decide to prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriages solemnized abroad,” a five-judge panel of the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court ruled unanimously in rejecting a 2006 lower court decision. “Until it does so, however, such marriages are entitled to recognition in New York.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/02/nyregion/02samesex.html?ref=nyregion