| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/15/2009 06:35:50 PM · #3001 |
I have to say I wasn't offended in the least by Jason's question. Maybe it's because I know where he's coming from, or because I genuinely like the guy despite some of the head-scratchers he comes up with, or maybe it's just because I'm forty-five and I don't really care about all this stuff any more, but his question wasn't offensive at all. Also, I always root for the underdog, and I kind of feel sorry for him at this point. For those of you that don't know, he has the best of intentions. Maybe not the best of deliveries, but the best of intentions nonetheless.
So while it's perfectly okay to argue against the point he's making in as strong a way as possible, it's probably less okay to act boorishly in answering him. I understand that's DPC's seminal problem ;-) but just thought I'd say. |
|
|
|
11/15/2009 06:39:23 PM · #3002 |
Originally posted by Louis:
I have to say I wasn't offended in the least by Jason's question. Maybe it's because I know where he's coming from, or because I genuinely like the guy despite some of the head-scratchers he comes up with, or maybe it's just because I'm forty-five and I don't really care about all this stuff any more, but his question wasn't offensive at all. Also, I always root for the underdog, and I kind of feel sorry for him at this point. For those of you that don't know, he has the best of intentions. Maybe not the best of deliveries, but the best of intentions nonetheless.
So while it's perfectly okay to argue against the point he's making in as strong a way as possible, it's probably less okay to act boorishly in answering him. I understand that's DPC's seminal problem ;-) but just thought I'd say. |
Thank you, Louis! This comes as no surprise, coming from you :-)
R. |
|
|
|
11/15/2009 11:05:51 PM · #3003 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Louis:
"Heaven forfend!" |
Wonderful word. To save our readers the trouble, debar: prevent the occurrence of; prevent from happening...
R. |
As much as I appreciate the vocabulary drill, I just came in here to see what you (all of you LOL) could possibly be talking about after 30 pages of forum space!!!!!! And it's sheep!!!! Heaven forfend!!! Hmmmmmmm my spell checker wants to put a hyphen between for and fend. Hmmmmmmm |
|
|
|
11/16/2009 08:58:33 AM · #3004 |
| I wasn't the one who forced Jason off, was I? I truly didn't intend anything against him for his question. I just really am rather appalled and fearful of the whole gene-manipulation thing, regardless of what it is aimed at. |
|
|
|
11/16/2009 09:10:49 AM · #3005 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
I wasn't the one who forced Jason off, was I? I truly didn't intend anything against him for his question. I just really am rather appalled and fearful of the whole gene-manipulation thing, regardless of what it is aimed at. |
Nope |
|
|
|
11/16/2009 09:49:02 AM · #3006 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Anyway, regardless of all that, I'm somewhere on the spectrum between "annoyed" and "appalled" at how the politically correct, outspoken, liberal participants in this thread are working to demonize Jason (and others who think like he does) instead of understanding where he's coming from. It's ridiculous. He's carrying on this debate with civility and good humor, and he's representative of a *HUGE* number of people in America, and it makes no point at all, IMO, to ridicule and demean him for being what he is.
R. |
I would genuinely like to know specifically what people in America have against gays and as i sadly, also believe there are a *huge* amount of people that feel the same way, and worse then has been expressed in this thread.
I and my partner would love to go on holiday in America, we have specifically talked about driving down route 66 but we dare not because of the fear of people being not very nice to us, in the uk a law has been passed to sort of force hotels not to discriminate who they let in (don't think it is as clear cut as 'you must allow gays to stay in your hotel' but makes us feel safer anyway).
What do people feel is the underlying issue and how widespread is it? |
|
|
|
11/16/2009 10:42:37 AM · #3007 |
| I'd love to tell you that you have nothing to worry about, but apparently mainstream America really does not like gays if I am to believe what I read. That said, they do like money, and if your money is green they will indeed take it. I would suggest that you do some research (I know there are "gay friendly" travel books, etc) to see where would be the best places to stay and such. And I'd say just go. If you're British, you're good - Americans love British accents. :-) |
|
|
|
11/16/2009 11:48:34 AM · #3008 |
Originally posted by nikonrich:
in the uk a law has been passed to sort of force hotels not to discriminate who they let in (don't think it is as clear cut as 'you must allow gays to stay in your hotel' but makes us feel safer anyway). |
As an aside, actually I think that the law is that clear cut. In practice I guess that you might find it hard to enforce (or at least suffer a frosty reception), but it sets the moral tone for the nation.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2009 12:39:11 PM · #3009 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
I do have an "aside" kinda question - why is it so different if women are homosexual as opposed to men? I don't really see a difference, so I am truly rather curious as to why almost all these conversations deal entirely with men. |
Because Girls Kissing Girls is hawt, whereas Boys Kissing Boys is just weird.
/channeling [user]fotomann_forever[/user]
|
|
|
|
11/16/2009 03:14:27 PM · #3010 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I may be wrong, but I think Jason's question is very simple, at core. Addressed to Shannon, Richard, et al, it goes:
"If you discovered your newborn child had a predisposition to homosexuality (genetic component) and lacked but the environmental trigger to complete the acquisition of the trait, would you or would you not take steps to see that the triggering event was never realized?"
I think the question is more about the depth of commitment of the resident "liberals" than it is about anything else. I don't think it's right to make the knee-jerk assumption that the question is born out of Doc's belief that homosexuality is a correctable "flaw", because that misses the point. It's not about what *he* thinks, it's about what *you* think, if you're really honest.
And that's a question NO-body is willing to answer, apparently...
R. |
I don't know what to make of your "if you're really honest" qualifier. You seem to be suggesting that some or all of the folks who have stated a progressive position on this issue are hypocrites because they wouldn't want their own children to be homosexual?
But putting that aside for a moment and for the sake of argument, even if some of the "resident liberals" were to admit that they would choose for their children to be heterosexual, first of all there could be many reasons for that choice. And let's say that someone didn't want their child to be homosexual just because they didn't feel personally comfortable with it. Isn't it possible still to choose to do the right thing and pull the lever in support of same-sex marriage in the voting booth, in spite of your personal discomfort or ambivalence? One can choose to be on the side of discrimination or not, to do good in the world or harm, and it doesn't make one a hypocrite if one's personal feelings are ambivalent so long as one is choosing to treat people with dignity and respect. So I'm not sure where Jason's argument leads in any event. |
|
|
|
11/16/2009 05:19:37 PM · #3011 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
And let's say that someone didn't want their child to be homosexual just because they didn't feel personally comfortable with it. Isn't it possible still to choose to do the right thing and pull the lever in support of same-sex marriage in the voting booth, in spite of your personal discomfort or ambivalence? |
From a resident conservative to a resident liberal...WELL SAID! |
|
|
|
11/16/2009 05:27:29 PM · #3012 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
I don't know what to make of your "if you're really honest" qualifier. You seem to be suggesting that some or all of the folks who have stated a progressive position on this issue are hypocrites because they wouldn't want their own children to be homosexual? |
No, that's not quite what I meant. That might be a component of it, but my point is that Doc was asking all of us, indvididually, to be honest with ourselves and see where that takes us.
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Isn't it possible still to choose to do the right thing and pull the lever in support of same-sex marriage in the voting booth, in spite of your personal discomfort or ambivalence? |
Yes, that's pretty much what I said earlier, basically: that voting in favor of equality for a given group isn't the same as wishing one was a part of the group.
R. |
|
|
|
11/17/2009 07:34:55 AM · #3013 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
I don't know what to make of your "if you're really honest" qualifier. You seem to be suggesting that some or all of the folks who have stated a progressive position on this issue are hypocrites because they wouldn't want their own children to be homosexual? |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
No, that's not quite what I meant. That might be a component of it, but my point is that Doc was asking all of us, indvididually, to be honest with ourselves and see where that takes us. |
Once again, we have to roll back onto intent, motivation, and conditioning.
Being gay is not on any level to me, and to a lot of others, a condition that needs to be fixed. Never in a million years would the scenario that Jason proposed even have occurred to me. Would I rather my child was not gay? Maybe......but BECAUSE of people, even Jason, who is way better than the majority of Christians that I know, and the way that they treat gay people.
BUT......I would feel the same way if my daughter brought home a black man, or woman, and told us she was dating him/her.
NOT because I have issues with blacks, but because of pinheads who think they can tell others how to live. She would be inviting hardship into her life because of others who would decide that what she's doing is unacceptable.
You cannot change being black or gay, you CAN choose NOT to be an entitled, judgemental, religious person whose actions actually contradict the teachings of their religion, judge not, love one another, we are all God's children, etc, and then tell two deeply committed people that their declaration of love in perpetuity is wrong, immoral, and will hurt the institution of marriage.......as if it was their institution in the first place.
Once again, I call out these people for choosing to be discriminatory. I don't buy into the belief part being anything but a choice.
I come from a line of people who believe that their money and social station makes them better than the next guy.......and that simply is not true, at least not according to God, and the Constitution.
I choose not to share the beliefs of my family, because it wouldn't be right.
What I'd be curious to know is why the people whose religious background and teachings tell them to be loving, compassionate, and to do their best to be the best they can be would go out of their way to interfere in others' lives.
Especially when those others' lives in no way impact theirs.
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Isn't it possible still to choose to do the right thing and pull the lever in support of same-sex marriage in the voting booth, in spite of your personal discomfort or ambivalence? |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Yes, that's pretty much what I said earlier, basically: that voting in favor of equality for a given group isn't the same as wishing one was a part of the group. |
How can a vote for the very principle of our society be anything but the right thing?
Message edited by author 2009-11-17 07:41:22.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2009 10:42:51 AM · #3014 |
As a Christian, this makes me sick (the law, not the outcry).
International Outcry Over Proposed Ugandan Anti-Gay Law |
|
|
|
12/01/2009 07:19:33 PM · #3015 |
I make no claims that we gays have it nearly as bad here as those in Uganda, but I hope that this example illustrates why I feel justified when identifying raw bigotry as the underlying motivation for fighting against equal rights. The same fears and dislike leads right to mass murder (via death penalty) in homes not quite so well adjusted as ours. Lucky for me, most of us Westerners have gradually moved along a continuum from direct threat to life, followed by mere threat to family or career (still lingering), to broad recognition of our value to society in general, and finally our inclusion in supportive laws (apart from a few key, semantic sticking points), the institutionalized confirmation of this recognition.
These are all still points along a continuum though... and I wish everyone could be as lucky as me.
I literally place this struggle in that context when I think about it. I feel like I'm trying to prevent a slide back to a time or place where I could, no questions about it, have to live under the constant fear of execution just for being who I am. Wary of the ire of any person who would use knowledge of who I was (or worse, the accusation of homosexuality against someone who isn't actually gay) to blackmail or extort me.
That's really what people are inviting by trying to bring back the closet and pretend we don't exist.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2009 07:32:56 PM · #3016 |
So, in answer to the question "Are gay rights, including gay marriage, evolving?"
the answer must be yes. The world has been down this road before. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 06:28:08 AM · #3017 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
So, in answer to the question "Are gay rights, including gay marriage, evolving?"
the answer must be yes. The world has been down this road before. |
Going around in circles is not "Evolving"
Ray |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 07:09:18 AM · #3018 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
So, in answer to the question "Are gay rights, including gay marriage, evolving?"
the answer must be yes. The world has been down this road before. |
I guess that the implied element of the question is "Are gay rights, including gay marriage, evolving for the better?"
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 07:09:30.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2009 09:16:00 AM · #3019 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by David Ey:
So, in answer to the question "Are gay rights, including gay marriage, evolving?"
the answer must be yes. The world has been down this road before. |
Going around in circles is not "Evolving" |
That would be REvolving. ;-) |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 09:22:50 AM · #3020 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by David Ey:
So, in answer to the question "Are gay rights, including gay marriage, evolving?"
the answer must be yes. The world has been down this road before. |
Going around in circles is not "Evolving" |
That would be REvolving. ;-) |
.........Hmmmm good point. Could it also mean "devolving"
Ray |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 10:31:10 AM · #3021 |
| What goes around comes around, for better or worse, and back again. Nothing new under the sun? Perhaps. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 10:49:30 AM · #3022 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
What goes around comes around, for better or worse, and back again. Nothing new under the sun? Perhaps. |
I think it's pretty clear that the attitude and level of acceptance is definitely changing for the better, though in matters of equality, not fast enough, IMNSHO.
I'd hardly call that circular.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2009 02:53:06 PM · #3023 |
Well Jeb, it's just like global warming. (and cooling). It's happened time and again..
and has little if anything to do with human input. Some just want to think we, humans, are more powerful than we are. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 03:02:17 PM · #3024 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
[It] has little if anything to do with human input. |
Huh? |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 03:02:57 PM · #3025 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Well Jeb, it's just like global warming. (and cooling). It's happened time and again..
and has little if anything to do with human input. Some just want to think we, humans, are more powerful than we are. |
Wow that was some extreme cross-threading
I like to think that yes gay rights are evolving, simply not fast enough. This is one the the reason I'm proud to live in Quebec. But there are countries where democracy is nothing more than a faint, out-of-reach concept, in those places, equality for every citizen is even further away. The only thing we can do is lead by example. |
|
