Morning Doug.
I think you may have missed my earlier post to JRB when I said I find it offensive when any couple is "going at it" in public. My distaste is not limited to queers.
But my distaste for it, is not a right. I suppose if enough of you got together, rose up in indignation and changed your constitution by adding a new amendment, the right not to be offended by two men holding hands, then it would be your right. Until then it's is, as you say, your right to remove YOURSELF.
JRB makes no effort here to be specific about what that couple, back in 1978, were doing that so offended him. As such, it is very difficult to know if the public decency laws in effect in the jurisdiction he was in were being violated. I have to assume they were not being violated, otherwise he would have had recourse besides just leaving. So I am guessing that, by the standards of the community he was in, the behaviour met the legal bar.
Please tell me again about JRB's right or your right not to be offended. Rights are what we earn Doug. You know this as well as anyone. They are earned with a gun, with fists, with consensus. Within America, of late it has typically been consensus that has gained rights.
Craig just suggested I am being motivated by PC. If there has been any PC put forward here, it is the completely fallacious idea any of us have a right not to be offended. Not being offended is at the heart of the whole PC movement. The irony is stunning to me.
