Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:38 am
Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:22 pm
I promised myself that I was not going to comment on this thread again but this idea that people should be coddled in their bigotry is just too much for me. It's really about time we start calling a spade a spade here. What we're talking about is homophobia and the disapproval is based largely here and a somewhat fear that a non-condemnation of homosexual lifestyle will make them question their own sexuality. Miscegenation was disapproved by "conventional morality" for generations. Time has proved there was nothing to that either.
The idea that liberalism has been hijacked by the cause is equally offensive. The truth is that liberals like John Kerry and the Clintons have gone out of their way to kiss the a**es of the homophobe crowd but have stopped short of outright condemnation which is simply too much for these guys. Bullies like Bill O'Reilly who can't stand any concession to any viewpoint other than his own have made oddball cases like this one the center of the party. Again only condemnation is enough to satisfy the status quo bullies.
Look at the idea that gays are all over TV and movies. A handful of shows and a handful of movies is not all over. I'm not saying there should be more but let's get it straight about all over. Again "all over" to this crowd actually means represented.
I never made a direct comparison to Jim Crow but the hatred that was once widely accepted against blacks does seem to have been channeled against gays. I was at a high school banquet about two years ago and the kids must have made about half a dozen disparaging gay jokes in their speeches. I don't know if there were any gay kids in the crowd but it must not have been any fun if there were. That kind of ignorance should be coddled?
You may have forgotten but I originally turned that statement around on you, for it was you who said that the rest of America, in so many words has to live with it. I then turned it around and effectively said, how does that sound the other way around? It took a Chief Justice Marshall in Massachusetts to dictate to the public that she was going to redefine marriage via judicial fiat. There was and is a backlash to having a minority change everything in the so-called name of "equality." Redefine something enough (come one, come all) and you no longer have what it once was. You call that prejudice, I call it drawing lines. Life is like that. I respect the right to challenge this and everything, but it seems like the gay movement is sputtering as a result - and hurting their allies as a result. After all, a gay person needs to care about the economy, war, etc. The rest ultimately comes off as an indulgence, particularly when some it comes off as an elite, urban cause, which it probably is, incidentally."When one is different maybe that person (You) has to live with it." Let's tell that to Jews or Catholics or even Christians on a worldwide basis. Things look a little different now. Much of the Muslim world disapproves of Christian beliefs. Should we conform to their prejudice? After all they're getting their input straight from God or so they say.
Fair enough, and I'm glad you acknowledge that choices do affect others and don't appear in a vacuum. But I don't think the liberal notion of "never judging " will ever take full root.I do not know what the problem is with letting a person live his or her own life which is really what this is about. I can see debate about the choices we make having an effect on others and the degree of that effect but it's not up to me to approve or disapprove.
Let me give you another example the religious folks can understand. There are pockets of believers out there who basically raise their kids using the fear of an eternity in Hell as their crutch.
Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:34 am
Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:56 am
Wed Mar 15, 2006 1:11 am
Wed Mar 15, 2006 1:46 am
likethebike wrote:With the 911 bombers I've always wondered the same thing. Why didn't the evidence in front of their faces change thei opinions? They're working, they're making money, they can move about (too much so as they wish).
Wed Mar 15, 2006 1:48 am
likethebike wrote:Still shouldn't it be some kind of lesson that Masschusetts allows gay marriage and doesn't tumble to the bottom of the rankings? In some ways I am as baffled by the right wing reaction to this as I am by the attitudes of the September 11 bombers after experiencing the US.
Gay marriage is allowed and the people still have jobs, they're making money, they're healthy. Why do you still think the walls will tumble? With the 911 bombers I've always wondered the same thing. Why didn't the evidence in front of their faces change thei opinions? They're working, they're making money, they can move about (too much so as they wish). I know in my case it would have altered my thinking in both cases.
Wed Mar 15, 2006 4:13 am
Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:00 am
Wed Mar 15, 2006 6:03 am
Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:11 am
likethebike wrote:There can't be more than a few thouand transexuals in the entire world.
Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:19 am
Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:03 am
Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:12 am
Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:24 am
Spanish_Eyes wrote:Better a transvestite teaching kids than one cross-dresser in the closet using the FBI to go against supossed communists or simply non-conservatives
Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:28 am
Hosted by ElviCities