Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/31/2015 in all areas

  1. Are you freaking kidding me? Just because the depth and severity of one type of discrimination is less severe than that of another does not reduce the importance of the injustice in ANY way at all. I'm not associated with the LGBTQ community in any shape or form and I've tried to stay out of this whole topic (I think I've posted once total in here) but the ridiculousness of the implication that the discrimination of gays is less profound got me to post this.
    6 points
  2. No, sorry, there isn't. To say this you're assuming that homosexuality is a learned trait, and not something you are born into. There is no scientific basis to assert this as fact, and actually the wealth of evidence, including if you were to ask pretty much any gay person on the planet, says that it's not something we really have control of. At the end of the day LGBT discrimination and racial discrimination are both at the core issues of treating someone differently based on who they are, as opposed to what they do.
    4 points
  3. Discrimination is discrimination...in the end, if you're hung from a tree because of your skin color or beaten up and left for dead on a fence rail in the middle of nowgere because you're gay, there's no real difference, especially to those directly affected.
    3 points
  4. I'll stand beside you, Lincoln. Every second...every minute...every hour...every day. And you may trust that -- I give you my solemn word on it.
    3 points
  5. I said this with Winston Salem in 2005, and I was called a hater, but I proved prophetic: You need to a have sizable local base of fans that will fill in for the NE folks that are sure not to travel. You can view as selfish, lazy, cheap, whatever, it's a reality....you WILL lose a sizable number of fans that will not travel. Even as it is in the NE, there are fans that will NOT go to Rochester but they did go to Annapolis. If it were there I'd attend because it's easier for Sadie sitting purposes. Conversely, there are people who WILL go to Rochester that wouldn't go to Annapolis. Substitute anywhere Nj, CT, etc, there will be people that will go that haven't gone elsewhere, and vice versa. Now...add a destination a thousand miles away. Ok, take Winston Salem, 7 hours from the closest NE Region corps. you got what 3100 fans? Oh sure, I've seen the claims of the rain keeping people away....that show was advertised to the drum corps fan and priced for the drum corps fan. The diehard. the casual fan didn't know about it and wasn't going to spend $40 to see it. DCA was unknown down there, the townie looking for something to do was going to go across the street from the stadium and pay $20 to watch monster trucks. Probably had far better concessions too. Say DCA gets 6k paid ( i'm being generous I know)........you'll lose half of that if it moves out of the NE if not more. What region out there right now can fill in those gaps? Will your city open the vault the way Rochester does, and even there I've read people complaining about hotel fees going up. Would I travel if I didn't have a toddler? yeah, but i'm not normal. I actually go to prelims and watch every corps. All of the regions need to do serious work in building their bases up, even the NE. But of the areas right now that it makes the most financial sense to do so, the NE is the winner right now. And until we see serious numbers from other places that could prove me wrong, I'm sure the corps see it too.
    3 points
  6. Stop aligning things to prove your proint. You and I have had no such dealings. All I have from you is a PM stating something about another poster which I did not reply to. I also questioned your use of "sniper-terrorism" to comment on people criticising the Indiana law in the SCV 2015 thread. I have been VERY careful what I have posted here. Very careful. Frankly, I'm shocked about some of the stretching of what has gone on, but it's not about the law in Indiana - it's about what other posters are saying. I am gay. I have MANY things to say about what is going on in Indiana and am not saying them in respect to the citizens of the U.S. The greatest democracy in the world will be able to handle this and pull forward just like they have with every other challenge they have faced.
    3 points
  7. To argue that African Americans had it worse than the LGTB community therefore their struggle for civil rights takes precedence over another group’s struggle is alarming to me. First off, the Civil Rights movement wasn’t just an African American thing, although that group was in the forefront, but it was a struggle for the rights for all people. People weren’t just fighting for their group of citizens, but the struggle was for all of humanity to get along, accept one another, and be given the same rights as anyone else. Second, back then it was an acceptable practice by some to mistreat minorities in society, hence the hardships the African American community endured through the years. Since that time, things have evolved in society where any hate crime committed upon another is unacceptable. If the country had not evolved up to this point in time, do you think our LGTB community would not be facing those same hardships the African Americans and other nationalities endured? We still hear it in the news how someone was killed or assaulted because of his or her sexual orientation. It’s appalling to most of us today to hear that someone could commit such a heinous act. It’s still happening though and there are individuals who believe it is just, but can’t say anything because society now says that way of thinking is out of touch. So we come to today where there is a push back from certain groups, who do have their agendas, to protect the rights of those from being persecuted because their way of thinking does not mesh with the nation’s as a whole. I think most of us will agree that the law and Constitution should protect them. We can all take comfort that their way of thinking is ending and dying out with each generation. Their time and what power they have in society will end as well. They’re not going to let it go without a fight, but they also aren’t going to announce to the public that this is how we really believe. It’s subtler now and they use lawyers, the Constitution, and the teachings of our “Founding Fathers” to back them up in the laws that they make. We can try to up one another by pointing out facts, or providing links with expert opinion. For me, those things mean nothing to me. This is a matter of personal belief and how we feel we should treat each other on this planet. You can recite Constitution and the history of our country based on what the Founding Fathers wanted, but those people are not my Founding Fathers (I’m Native American). My culture and religion doesn’t teach to hate or discriminate. We do our ceremonies for all living and nonliving beings on this planet. For some it’s about the law and how our country loses itself should we cater into emotions and feeling (labeling liberals). Protect the country and its Constitution at all costs. The problem with that is we all have different interpretations of what that piece of paper covers. Some take the words as scripture; others say it’s up to interpretation and change. It’s no different than what we face in our drum corps community. Electronics, any key instrumentation, woodwinds, etc. Some argue we are losing our tradition and definition of who we are. Both sides argue this is or is not what the original founders of DCI would have wanted. It goes back and forth, but the wonderful thing is that we are passionate about our love of the activity the kids it serves. I’m happy we have this medium to share what our thoughts are. It’s been a great read and I respect all of your opinions on the matter. Keeping the drum corps perspective for this thread, I have faith Indy and the state of Indiana will do our drum corps community right. We all have that line in the sand that we will not cross and unfortunately DCI does not have the budget to just pick up and leave. So they wait it out and they hope that through time something will work itself out. Patience is a dying trait and I do believe we all need to show that and wait to see how things play out. I’m happy that the mayor of Indianapolis and companies/organizations are expressing their opinion on the matter. That’s their right, just as it was the right of the Indiana government to make this law. Every choice has a consequence and the governor is now feeling the effect of his choice to sign this bill into a law. DCI has chosen to stay and should any member or fan feel the brunt of this new law by being excluded, then they will have to face the consequences of how they will respond and what their next move is.
    3 points
  8. I'm sorry, no. MANY of these issues are analogous to the gay rights struggle. Gay rights ARE civil rights. - Many Gay youths are being ripped from their family against their will and shipped to Christian "therapy" camps that abuse them CONSTANTLY. This is still happening and is more widespread than you might think. http://www.kidnappedforchrist.com - Re: Whites only drinking fountains et al, that's exactly what this law is trying to do, allow for separation by people who don't want to serve the LGBT community and attempting to create businesses and places that are isolated from the menace of LGBT people. - Re: Lynchings, THAT HAPPENS. Matthew Shepard? That wasn't an isolated incident. The LGBT community has been physically attacked mercilessly in some areas of the country. - Stonewall? I mean come on. Just because you don't see these things happening on a daily basis anymore doesn't mean they didn't happen. While yes, the extent of the abuse and discrimination wasn't as widespread as the systematic subjugation of African-Americans, that's attributed more to the times we live in and the ability for the LGBT community to camouflage into the heterosexual world when they need to. Hence why the community hid in the shadows for so long because they feared PHYSICAL VIOLENCE AND SYSTEMATIC DISCRIMINATION.
    3 points
  9. It won't happen anytime soon, but I can guarantee that if Minneapolis were ever to host the DCA Championships it would be the best-attended, best advertised and best-organized DCA Championships in the history of DCA. Why? Because the the Twin Cities have a long and lengthy track record of supporting oddball music festivals. With 3.5 million residents, MSP is the North's answer to Austin and the SXSW festival. And as host, MBI would have the best connections to all local rehearsal venues. Furthermore, the stadium (The U of M's TCF Bank Stadium) was designed (with the help of acousticians) to be the best stadium in the US for musical acts. DCI recognized this and their DCI Minnesota show is among their premier venues. This stadium has amazing acoustics. It's like it was built for marching bands and drum corps. The premier suites sell out for DCI Minnesota and those go for $1600 a crack. Again, it won't happen anytime soon. But imagine the possibilities. :)
    3 points
  10. In that vein, I think Indiana might seek to restore its reputation by adding a slogan to its signs at the state line: ______________________________ | | | Welcome to Indiana! | | | We're really not that discriminating |______________________________| || || || || || || .
    2 points
  11. Well the "news" outlets are certainly "earning" their money... Eh, I'm just not for hating on anyone, and frankly, I've lived in 9 states all over the United States. I know people of all persuasion, and I also hear their stories. I believe that my rights stop where they infringe upon your rights as a human being... Your story is interesting, and the person you're talking about with the PM's story also sounds interesting. I'm sure that neither wants to hurt the other, but that's what sometimes happens... I'm thinking that this whole issue could be taken up and decided by the U.S. Supreme court. There has to be an initial suit of course and it's all going to take time, but it seems like it's time. Personally, I don't believe that businesses have "religious freedoms". The owners do, and the owners can exercise their religious freedoms when not serving the public. Why should a business entity have something that is only important to organic lifeforms? I mean, if a corporation has religious freedoms, maybe it should also be able to go to jail? Anyway, I digress. I'm really glad that this thread has been going, I've learned a lot about the people posting here. Funny thing is that many of us can get along so well until a hot button issue is tripped and then it completely flips the perception we have for one another.
    2 points
  12. Thank you HornTeacher.
    2 points
  13. Yes, those were terrible things for black Americans ( and honestly for many Africans who fell victim to wars). A bunch of those things HAVE happened to LGBT people too. Some of the discrimination has not been codified into law, but it happens. I take it you don't know of too many LGBT people who have suffered with many of the things you mentioned above. Many people have been persecuted from a very young age. They've been beaten up at school and physically abused at home. They've been called names. They've been bashed leaving establishments and put into the hospital. Many have been ganged up on in the playground, in the locker room, at the drinking fountains. Chased from school and at one time colleges. They've been afraid to be themselves... Many LGBT people have been Lynched... They've been kick out of their homes ( often by their parents) or refused to be rented to... They've been abused for assembling by the police ( Stonewall Riots). You've probably never heard of Harvey Milk either... You know the gay guy who was assassinated? I mean, totally dismiss all of that from that group... It's not a big deal to be afraid to live in one's community because you don't want to be killed or jeered. No biggie to have one's car keyed. No big deal to be physically abused by a gang of people only to have the people who are supposed to serve and protect turn a blind eye... No big deal to be raided and arrested for assembling. No big deal to deal with the witch hunts.... Totally doesn't compare... This type of law only permits that kind of stuff to continue. ...honestly there is enough historical information out there that people should know that the LGBT community suffers civil rights issue all the time, and it's pretty terrible and physical with killings and attacks.
    2 points
  14. Indiana's law is quite different, and worse...it places the burden of fighting discrimination on its victims...very sad IMO.
    2 points
  15. As I have read the past few pages of this thread, I have become very distressed regarding the "How Many?", "How Long?", "How Strongly?", "How Much Worse?" questions which have been posed as arguments for and/or against the varied instances and types of discrimination which have arisen through discussion. And it suddenly occurred to me that as good, and as necessary, as discussion is in order to address problems, attempts at quantifying and/or qualifying the relative importance of varied types and instances of any form of discrimination is not only futile, but an actual degradation of the whole matter of discrimination when it is done so through the mere application of numbers and statistics. Human beings aren't numbers...human beings aren't statistics. Human beings are human beings. Living, breathing individuals, each with his or her own life (which I might add, we only get one earthly shot at. And that is true for ALL of us). It also occurred to me that as good as we may feel in how we have, by and large, conducted ourselves throughout 55 pages of discussion (and this is no mean feat in such a contentious age and in respect to such a contentious topic), we are not the first to have raised these questions. It made me think of the following, which came to us as a society way back in 1963 (though written in 1962): How many roads must a man walk down Before you call him a man? Yes, 'n' how many seas must a white dove sail Before she sleeps in the sand? Yes, 'n' how many times must the cannon balls fly Before they're forever banned? The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind The answer is blowin' in the wind How many years can a mountain exist Before it's washed to the sea? Yes, 'n' how many years can some people exist Before they're allowed to be free? Yes, 'n' how many times can a man turn his head Pretending he just doesn't see? The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind The answer is blowin' in the wind How many times must a man look up Before he can see the sky? Yes, 'n' how many ears must one man have Before he can hear people cry? Yes, 'n' how many deaths will it take till he knows That too many people have died? The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind The answer is blowin' in the wind -- Bob Dylan (1962)
    2 points
  16. And now for a musical interlude ...
    2 points
  17. He did say this: "He told the radio hosts that he has already turned away people who seemed gay to him, but he made up a reason rather than tell them the truth. I have discriminated.I have said something was broken in the kitchen and said I couldn’t serve them,” Ryan said. “I told them that the fan was broken and they left.” So in his case he was discriminating before the law was signed. You could make a case that knowing the guy is a bigot sue to his religion (hmmmm....though I am not so sure on that) up front makes it easier for those of us who HATE that behavior to avoid his place of business. "He said that he supports the law, but continued to refuse to give the name of his business because, he said, “I’m not ready to come out with that.” Interesting chioce of words!
    2 points
  18. Your words are your own, I'm just following them to their logical conclusion (which by the way isn't a strawman fallacy, just FYI). By saying that discriminating on someone based on their 'innate behavior' (your words) is less severe than discriminating on race you're saying that it is (or at least in this example) socially acceptable or more appropriate. Discrimination based on someone's intrinsic characteristics is unacceptable, especially when medical science is reaching consensus that it isn't either a mental illness or a behavior that the person is choosing. The abuse that LGBT community experiences is real, the discrimination that they did not ask for or deserve is real, the murders, kidnappings, disrespect, beatings, arrests, and hate filled glances are real. The fact that they have to defend against lawmakers who seek to strip them of their civil rights (whether it be marriage, access to public accommodations, or freedom) is very real even today, whether or not there is a mark on their skin letting you see that clearly.
    2 points
  19. So HERE we have an Indiana business owner calling in to a radio show and admitting that he's discriminated against gays for religious reasons. He feels the number of customers coming into his Strictly HeteroTM restaurant will outweigh those he turns away, yet for some reason isn't willing to shout the name of his business from the rooftops to promote his Homosexual FreeTM dining experience. How does this law NOT protect what he's done?
    2 points
  20. There are many LGBT people who can not find the fact that they are part of this class of people. Every see a younger child or teen who is obviously gay? I have, we all have, and it's clear that these kids have no choice as to how they entered this world. Either way whether or not someone is able to camouflage their orientation/identity or not, this is who they are, and discrimination against them is attacking them for the way they were born. ...and no you didn't specifically say that it was a learned behavior, however the point to your assertion was that discriminating against behavior is somehow not as severe as discriminating against race, which implies that somehow the LGBT community should be able to control their behavior to avoid discrimination (behavior being their orientation or identity). So while no, you didn't explicitly say that, the effect of your assertion is the same.
    2 points
  21. Respectfully (and I mean that) can you, or do you wish to expand on your disagreement? I'm always interested in reasons "not to get along"... And please accept that I'm not baiting you - at 63 I've seen a lot of change, and at times feel that I don't understand a lot of the world in which I live.
    2 points
  22. Wanna explain? Just curious. Unless you are among the few misguided who still think it's a choice. Not baiting or judging you in particular, but as you said, you have said this a few times, but haven't explained why you think this. Slavery, being ripped from your family against your will, being bought and sold, living in squalor, not taught to read and write, children ripped from mothers, and then post-1865, another 100 years of two systems: sit at the back of the bus, whites-only waiting rooms, whites-only drinking fountains, banned from colleges, "separate but equal" schools, lynchings, and on and on. This is the history of African Americans. I just don't see that level of oppression in the gay rights movement. Problems? Sure, yes. But nowhere near the history, depth and breadth of the civil rights movement. That's my honest answer. Thank you! Even as I was typing what I intended to be my last post in this discussion, in response to your prior comment (no flaming, to be sure, as I don't think I have flamed at all, and have found this entire thread to be astonishingly level-headed, given the content), I learn something new. So in my final contribution to this thread (barring major developments directly relating to DCI), let me apologize for misunderstanding you earlier, although given that seven different people liked my comment (maybe they should all unlike it now), I'm going to put some of the blame on you for being unclear. Nonetheless, I'm sorry. And thanks to GUARDLING for asking the right question. So based on what you've written here, I think you agree that sexual orientation is an innate characteristic of human beings, like race or gender. I'm apologizing because, frankly, based on your earlier comment, I thought you did not believe that. Three of the law's prominent supporters, smiling behind Gov. Pence in one of the pictures released of the law's signing, do not believe that.* Those people I find to be in the same position, 50 years later, as Maurice Bessinger, the figure whose story opens this Atlantic article, previously cited in the discussion, who "wanted everybody in earshot to know that slavery had been God's will, that desegregation was Satan's work, and the federal government was the Antichrist. God wanted only whites to eat at Bessinger's six Piggie Park barbecue joints; so His servant Maurice took that fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court"--where he lost in 1968. Prior to 1964, the law would have been on his side. So I shall put a question to the forum at large: does anyone here actually believe that homosexuality is unnatural? Because it is obviously the suspicion that some people defending the law here are modern-day Maurice Bessingers, holding that belief, which is so unnerving some other posters, who now feel that they, their loved ones, or their friends are being viewed as, if not subhuman, then at least abnormal. Whoever you are, why not stand up for that belief and stop making everyone else dance uncomfortably around the subject? If no one will own up to that belief, then let us assume no one here holds it, and proceed to your point about treating gay rights differently than other kinds of civil rights. Your post is entirely about Black rights, but dare I say that while you make the nearly-indisputable point that African-Americans have been singularly mistreated in our history (although Native Americans have a strong case), that you wouldn't have told women in 1920 that they didn't deserve to vote because they at least hadn't been as badly off as Blacks, right? Nor would you have supported businesses who refused to serve Chinese or Jews, right? Given what you've written, I can't see you saying, "Oh, it's OK to kick them out of your restaurant, because African Americans have had it worse". So what, if anything, makes this case different? I mean, if people started passing laws that made it illegal for heterosexuals to marry, you wouldn't be arguing that was OK because the straights never had it as bad as the Blacks; I'm sure you wouldn't. And clearly the gays have had it worse than the straights. Sure, in the U.S. they've never been forced into concentrations camps wearing pink triangles, as happened in Germany. And I haven't heard about gays in the U.S. being forced to be chemically castrated, as happened in the U.K. But surely a "little" persecution is still worth fighting against? It's obviously not that you think the rights don't exist until they are plainly conferred by law, or you wouldn't describe the legalized wretched history of African-Americans as any sort of injustice. And if, as you apparently agree, sexual orientation is innate, why should it be treated as secondary to religious beliefs, which are learned? No one will be able to use Maurice Bessinger's argument and discriminate against, say, Latinos, or Catholics, or women, or Italian-Americans because they believe that God hates those people--because those are protected classes. But they can do so based on sexual orientation, even though that characteristic is more natural than any religious belief that finds fault with it. As previously noted, the new law didn't create that problem, but it is meant to exacerbate the problem. It's possible that as early as June, the Supreme Court will find that sexual orientation is also a protected class. (Another reason to say, "Hurry, June!") It won't be long before it's just as illegal for a florist to deny service to homosexuals as it is for a florist to deny service to Hindus. I wonder if everyone here defending the law now on what are, shall we say, the finer technical points (seriously, the Indiana legislature could have had a unanimous bill that was as helpful as possible to Amish buggies if they'd just have accepted the proposed language declaring LGBT a protected class) will change their minds at that time. If so, why not now? Are they really waiting for someone else to tell them what is right and fair? But that returns me at last to my principal claim in this discussion: this law is a last-ditch, rear-ground effort by a losing cause that deserves to lose, which means we've all gotten a bit too worked up about it. Even I, attempting ever to walk the tight rope of moderation, fell into the trap. Before very long, the law will be modified by protections for sexual orientation--if it hasn't been scrapped entirely--and I've pretty much run out of things to say about it, and have posted my own arguments against it, most of which, I think, have held up to rebuttal--when they've been answered at all. Cheers, as you say, to garfield, the law's best defender, whom I've already praised more than once in this thread--even though he seems to see his efforts and the law itself as mainly an academic exercise, and even though, like Charles Ives**, he doesn't need our praise--and to all on both sides who have taken some effort to post thoughtfully on the subject. *Edit: Obviously the prominent conservative Red State blogger Erick Erickson doesn't believe it either: “The gay rights agenda may demand the veneer of normalcy, but nature itself will deny the gay community natural reproduction.” **Awarded the Pulitzer Prize for music, Ives gave away his winnings, saying "prizes are for boys, and I'm all grown up". (Ives gives me an excuse for a final edit: how strange that CorpsReps credits "God Save the Queen" to him--or did all those corps actually play his variations on that tune?)
    2 points
  23. You're right. This law represents not the the door on hate opening, but a wedge being stuck in that door to prevent it from closing. It's wrong, on the same grounds that it was wrong not to serve African Americans at lunch counters, or to make them sit in the back of the bus, but nothing worse will follow from it. In other times or places, this little bit of hatred--which really is more fear more than hatred--could be a first step, but here it is merely out of step with history--and, as everyone posting to this thread who's still alive in 20 years will then agree, to simple decency. Edited to fix typo.
    2 points
  24. Were the lunch-counter sit-in protesters of the late 1950s-early 1960s confused as to what a business is? Race was not a protected class before 1964. Would you have been on the side of the businesses' rights to make their own decisions then? "Someday, discrimination on the basis of race will be illegal, but for now, I have to side with a business' right to discriminate against Blacks"? Because for many of this thread's contributors, the same principles apply here.
    2 points
  25. You can now RSVP for the Gene Bennett Jr. Memorial via the website and also view the information for the Scholarship Fund in Gene's name. The web address is: http://genebennettjr...splashthat.com/ The date of the event will be Arpril 4th at the Upsky Hotel in Hauppauge, Long Island N.Y. Begins @ 6pm until10pm Food and Beverages are free. Alcoholic beverages will be available. Please see all details and RSVP on the website. A donation for a Scholarship Fund in Gene's name will be available to those who wish to contribute in an amount of your choice. You can donate at the door or by mail. Checks can be made payable to: The Gene Bennett Jr. Memorial Scholarship Fund 2 Keystone Court Centereach, NY 11720
    1 point
  26. https://youtu.be/5OIr5Y-FaSM After all the dozens of pages written about the ridiculous situation created by the GOP controlled legislature and the Governor of Indiana, the above video brings the issue back into focus. Be sure to listen to the end.
    1 point
  27. I disagree with Kelly's final argument, however (the one preceding his brief note on comparisons to Jim Crow). It may not confer the dignity immediately by enlightening the individuals who wanted to discriminate presently, but it changes the status quo in which the next generation will develop its own moral compass, and will thus likely, in fact, confer that dignity over time. It was, in my opinion, an ill-chosen anecdote to use about the child sitting down defiantly, because children often take their lessons from elders defiantly, not willingly, and yet years later when they have matured into adulthood, find that such lessons in fact improved them.
    1 point
  28. Amid all the noise and rancor that seems to dominate everything online, it is possible to find quiet corners where reasoned discussion occurs. For those who hunger for a sober, respectful and meaningful discussion on the ground where civil liberties of gays bump up against the religious liberties of believers, I recommend this debate between two legal minds. No matter what side you claim on this debate, you will be both affirmed and challenged. You will come away with greater insight to your way of thinking, while you also will gain greater appreciation for the views of those on the other side of the table. The legal lens through which these two lawyers examine the issue is not exactly the same as the RFRA, but the same principles are in play. It is familiar territory to those who have engaged in this national debate for the past few days. It takes 10-15 minutes to read through. If nothing else, it is evidence that the Internet can provide something besides flame wars, trolls and cats.
    1 point
  29. This is going to be a great night!!! A salute to one of the best people to ever grace the drum corps activity.
    1 point
  30. Would it be possible/probable for DCA to go to some of the other sites that submitted offers and create a regional for the next two years. Part of the reason why Rochester has the "best" offer every year is because they have done it more times than anyone else. It makes it easy to plan when you already know how everything is going to work out. I realize that is the point, but let's face it, finals attendance in Rochester is not spectacular and I do not see this year being any different. What if you contacted the runner-up site that submitted a bid and offer them a regional option. They could help build a base of fans over the next two-three years and then submit a bid for a Championship event after that time. They would probably have a much more accurate read because there would be (or not) an established fan base by then, plus all of the kinks would be worked out. Are there any reasons why this could not happen? You make that event attractive by advertising that every judge who will be at the regional will also judge either Prelims or Finals so you know you are going to get a great read. As a corps director that knew of this in advance, I would try everything I could to get that read.
    1 point
  31. 1 point
  32. 1 point
  33. I agree with Arrowmarcher on many points and disagree totally with Troop 12. "The grey uniform didn't ... "pop" TO the box (especially against the grass), while the 2014 uniform stood out .. more.... Personally loved the red plume and I hope they continue to use them going forward." The grey uniforms were too generic reminding me of too many BOA Indiana/Michigan units rather than the drum corps which placed second at the first DCI's. The 2014 uniform paid tribute to that legacy by returning to the corps traditional color scheme. This was most obvious when the corps and alumni corps donned the field together in LaCrosse for the Midwest Regional show.
    1 point
  34. I was actually thinking the opposite on this one. The grey uniform didn't really "pop" from the box (especially on grass), while the 2014 uniform stood out a bit more, plus it added more blue back into the look. Personally loved the red plume and I hope they continue to use them going forward. My vote for the miss was the 2007 look. Good idea in concept, but going from the iconic cross buckle to the split pants was a bit radical for me.
    1 point
  35. The cool thing about Bush is that while remaining progressive they still keep their identity!! Go Bush!!
    1 point
  36. I found this really interesting...Didn't think I'd be into WGI stuff( horn player at heart)...but actually it's really cool :)
    1 point
  37. Ahhh.... but did he not want to serve gays because of religious beliefs or he just don't like 'em..... Which brings up the question of proving the denial comes from religious reasons. More I read about the new law, think it just makes it easier for people to claim religious reasons without backing proof. But if homosexual rights are not protected, just what the heck difference does it make why they are denied service? Unless people feel better if they can say they are being religious.... Choice of words: Reminds me of the South Park episode where Tom Cruise is hiding in a kids closet because he's hiding from the media. Kid "Mom! Tom Cruise won't come out of the closet!".
    1 point
  38. Bushwackers have been more interested in looking and sounding like a World Class DCA establishment these last few years. Last year they even broke 90 at my local show in Bridgeport. If they are making the same progress they made in the last 3 years, they can call the performers in the Color Guard anything they want. Looking forward to see a thought provoking, challenge taking drum corps again in 2015. Being different is what I love about this corps when they were at their competitive best. Thank you for designing shows that is forward thinking and fan friendly. GO BUSH!! Olive
    1 point
  39. Thank you for enlightening me on your ability to use google. Although besides that I'm afraid your efforts were lost on me as fallacious reasoning was covered in the first stages of my Philosophy degree, but I digress... Unfortunately the straw man fallacy doesn't apply here, as you are making statements that are implying additional scrutiny. By stating that behavioral discrimination is somehow diminished in regards to racial discrimination you are implying that the specific behavior we are discussing is either somehow controllable or able to be mitigated by the person who's behavior is being discriminated against. Similar to your newest comment regarding human and animals, you're throwing out tangential implications all over the place and covering them up by hiding behind the fact that you're not plainly coming out and saying these things (ironically similar to this law and its creators). Your vague arguments are leaving you open for interpretation by those who you're addressing (which again, ironically is similar to the law we're discussing don't you think?). That being said, as I stated earlier there are many LGBT people who can not hide in plain sight, especially those with a gender identity that doesn't fit the norm. So yes that can be analogous to racial relations. Also, and most importantly by belaboring that point you are again implying that in order to avoid discrimination LGBT Americans should hide to avoid discrimination. That alone is a form of discrimination as no one should be forced to hide their own innate characteristics in order to avoid beatings, arrests, murder, etc.
    1 point
  40. What's getting confused here are the discrimination and it's consequences. I'm sure you'll agree that the consequences of racial discrimination were far more severe than the consequences of LGBT discrimination if only due to the sheer volume and severity of crimes committed on it's behalf. OTOH what Mello Dude is ignoring is that -- as an act of discrimination in and of itself -- there *is* no difference. Acts against any class ( be it race, religion or sexual identity) are all of the same nature and should be rejected with the same vehemence. The fact that the historical scales of impact are different (and they objectively are) makes no difference.
    1 point
  41. any law ANY that says a group is less than or doesn't deserve the same rights. For me it is very simple. People hide behind such laws. I also am not suggesting anything. The violence is there , better? maybe BUT give just 1 inch to some with a law that even opens a possibility then YES you will see more. I have no problem with religions protecting what they do in way of lets say marrying against their religion, like jew to christian etc etc. although Ive seen a tolerance for that but BUSINESS is very different. POST IT, those who agree with it. Lets see what wins out the almighty dollar or their convictions
    1 point
  42. wanna explain? Just curious. Unless you are among the few of misguided who still think this a choice. Not baiting or judging you in particular but as you said you have said this a few times but haven't explained why you think this. Come to think of it maybe this might be a bad can of worms...you can PM if you rather.
    1 point
  43. Really, the letter signed by 30 law professors (linked from this thread many pages ago) arguing against the law with multiple case citations was just emotion?
    1 point
  44. Sounds like the 4th of July parades around Baltimore... "And now sponsored by Mars Supermarkets... here are the....". Won't reveal the dollar amounts but 4 or 5 parades at $$$$ it was worth some Southern corps to make the trip with a busload of people.
    1 point
  45. The idea is to promote conversation, and there are quite a few very intelligent folks on DCP, from constitutional scholars to combat veterans to parents of DCI performers. We are all invested in the well-being of the activity and free to engage in discussion. It's truly impressive how much this community cares for its future. I admire anyone who publicly and respectfully offers thoughts on this or any other subject, and celebrate the fact that we do so. We are fortunate to have this forum. There are places in the world where such conversation is banned, condemned and ruthlessly suppressed. The conclusions of my colleagues are certainly as valid as mine, perhaps more so.
    1 point
  46. Lots of Strawmen there Garfield So you pay for bad information, interesting Hopefully, you’ve read more and many of the critics of the article you were cribbing from (the Atlantic’s for example) you were throwing out so much wrong information at the start of this thread; where to begin and why bother, let the plebs chum each other My non-lifted, lifted take on it, the act will be deemed unconstitutional because it grants Religions Special Rights
    1 point
  47. Thank you 3rd&10 for your unwaivering support of our Corps and this activity. Looking forward to seeing you cheer for these amazing performers in the stands this summer!
    1 point
  48. To be honest, I missed the reference. Thing is, so much of what is going on here lately seems like a competition for poster with the funniest post. It often seems like this has become "Last DCP Comic Standing" and much of what is being posted is not funny.
    1 point
  49. That very simple idea never dawned on me.. Must be getting senile..That might be an incentive for the "Runners-up" to have a shot at showing their stuff, and possibly become a way to re-establish an opportunity for some of the outlying corps to try and raise funds to make an extra trip to somewhere "out of the ordinary" or possibly to get an expansion of the fan base. I'd still like to see who else actually "submitted a bid" for '16-'17. Just to find out who else thinks DCA can bring in an event for Labor Day weekend and make it a win-win for the circuit and the community. Pat
    1 point
  50. I'm surprised at the sparse programming of Liszt over the years. I liked Southwind's use of Totentanz and Les Preludes a few years back. Either of the piano concertos would work well, I think. Same with Hungarian Fantasy.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to Chicago/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...