Montrose Cross-Walk To Be Repainted As Trump Admin Orders No Messages On Roadways

Scared horses are hilarious!

...until you get a hoof in the crotch. True story.

 

should leaving tread marks on a gay crosswalk be a crime?

 

We ofc know the full driving energy of why its being done and its not being done for safety.

At the beginning of the year, our county went through and painted all the crosswalks along the bike trails (not sidewalk crossings) green. This should be a requirement as the green crosswalk indicates high bike traffic. But since its not DOT approved, the state forced the county to paint over the green. Dumb

But you are incorrect - Public roadways should be consistent across the board. More and more vehicles are using video to navigate and its important these systems do not get confused because some idiots wanted to paint their political ideology on public roadways.

 

Nope

Rocket River

 

I don't want government promoting any movement/ideology/religion or other group.

Just paint a cross walk without a message associated with it.

There should be no controversy because it should never have been done in the first place.

 

Does that include the Murals/Statues/etc etc etc

Rocket River

 

You mean if there’s a neighborhood of fat people you shouldn’t paint fried chicken and ice cream sundaes on the cross walk?

@Salvy
@RB713
@cml750

 

I don't have a problem with murals/statutes/art directly correlated with military or government service.

The Vietnam Memorial, the Lincoln Memorial etc etc.

Promoting the LGBTQ+ cause/movement/ideology is entirely different.

 

so if it exists, it's promoting?

 

Yes, generally flying the flag of a movement/organization/ideology indicates support for that movement/organization/ideology.

 

This admin shows its true colors, they are so dam sensitive, bunch of snowflakes

 

Maybe I can be satisfied with this -- even with municipal or county approval, rainbow crosswalk (and all public art) must be privately funded.

And honestly, I'm open to the argument that the rainbow crosswalk might by oddly divisive and make some people feel like they don't belong in Montrose, and for that reason we shouldn't do it. If Meyerland had Stars of David in their crosswalks, it'd fit the identity of the community, but might make others feel unwelcome, for another example. But, that is a decision that should be made by the city or county officials we elect. Not by some mandate by the governor to please the president. That's why I'm yapping here. We have a process to decide these things locally, and we went through the steps and came to a decision. Then some outsider came and took away our right to make decisions for our own community because they don't like what we decided. **** that. Carpetbaggers, get out.

Might be the crux of the disagreement here. I don't really see a rainbow crosswalk in Montrose as a movement/ideology/religion. I see it as a local community expressing its own identity.

So what about a mural like this one: Growing a Brighter Tomorrow in Gulfton (Statik) - Houston Mural Map

That was paid for with a grant from Harris County. Should we not be doing that either?

 

like this one?
Confederate Statues etc?

Rocket River

 

Yes.. that is a Confederate Battle Flag... If I saw someone flying it.. I would assume they support some sort of Neo-Confederate ideology.

What's your point?

 

The LGBTQ+ movement is a real movement. The flag symbolizes that movement. It could also be classified in different ways so I tried to capture that using a numbers of terms but that's not important.

Either way, it shows government support for a particular group/movement/cause and other groups/movements/causes are not getting that support.

I don't think that's correct. I would prefer no groups/causes/movements flags are painted/created/displayed at the governments expense outside of, honoring historical service to the government via the military/political or other governmental service.

Would you be comfortable with Pro-Life flag cross walks? I doubt it.

In regards to the mural, I don't see any connection with any movement/group/cause/ideology and I don't see that on public ground. So, no, I don't have any problem with it.

 

Just making sure everyone understands that Removing the sidewalk
is like removing the statues etc.
Basically - If it is private - do whatever
but with the public funds I just want the same even hand everywhere

Rocket River

 

I think we largely agree.

I don't want the government painting cross walks in LGBTQ flag colors, Confederate flag colors or Pro-Life flag colors... or any flag colors.

Just leave it as a conventional cross walk pattern.

 

what we need is the stars and bars in rainbow colors.

 

I don't disagree with you that there is a facet of the LGBTQ+ movement that is a movement (or whatever vocabulary you want). But there is another facet of it that is just a community of people. I was saying in this context I see the crosswalk as an expression of the identity of the community and not as proselytizing for the movement. Now, obviously there is a blurred line between the two because the movement essentially is asking everyone to acknowledge and accept the community (just like all the brown people in the Gulfton mural I linked is implicitly asking everyone to acknowledge and accept the hispanics of that community), but a rainbow is just a marker that there are gay people here and doesn't make an argument about how you should feel about it.

For the county to pay for the acknowledgement of that community with public art -- seeing it through this lens -- is not really an endorsement of LGBTQ+ as a movement, but a recognition of the identity of a local community. It's local government helping local communities feel seen and valued. Much like murals of hispanics in an hispanic neighborhood does. It seems appropriate to me that local government throw a little love at local communities.