Political Crossfire Forums

rainidame · Joined: 22 Apr 2005 Posts: 685 Location: in the dark

Skeptical Mystic wrote: rainidame wrote: So let me get this straight, you don't want me to be honest about the question, because you might take it personally, and then you might get your panties in a wad. Hmmm, like I said I think I shall have problems with giving you respect.
Obviously, you are having a problem giving me any respect. But I'm frankly not convinced that earning your respect is worth the effort.

Quote: You suggest I have attacked you for attacking me? I haven't attacked you I have analyzed your responses as being attacks. Remember YOU asked if I agreed with Wallie_x, you did want an honest answer didn't you? Nope, you didn't you wanted smoke blown up your arse.
Being honest without being unnecessarily offensive takes some skill.

I was simply pointing out that for all your talk about being supportive of gay people, you didn't seem to take any offense at Wallie's characterization of them as a group. You found it more important to turn my response to him (which wasn't directed at you) into an opportunity to attack me further. I was ready to let our discussion simply end until you did that.

Quote: Gee, I so wish the world was perfectly fair to you. No matter whats going on in my life that the extreme right is interfering with, I will put homosexuals desires (which I don't actually consider "rights") way ahead of anything that might be more pertinent to my life. Furthermore, I will make a concerted effort to watch and enjoy every possible homo oriented media, entertainment, or discussion and promise to vigorously condemn anyone who doesn't think homos walk on water.

Do you feel better now? Pfft!!
No. What I would hope is that you could find some common ground with gay people in their struggle against the extreme right. But you apparently can't be bothered.

As for portrayals of gay people in entertainment media, no one is asking you enjoy shows aimed at a gay audience. I simply responded to your ridiculous assertion that gay people were taking over every TV show.

I don't expect you to worship gay people or defend them at every turn. I'd simply like you to treat them with some common decency and basic respect as human beings, and I don't find that you are despite how progressive you think your own attitude is.

Are we done now?

Skeptic, I have said OVER AND OVER I intend on supporting your position in my complete lackluster way. I always treat homos with respect if they deserve it, just as I do xtians, or blacks, or hispanic, or jews, or any of the groups I have general dislike or concern about. How I treat the individual is not the same as my "feelings and opinions" of the groups he/she belongs to. You keep suggesting the folks deserve my "basic respect" but I maintain the MY respect of any degree is earned not given. Common decency must not be a prob or I wouldn't have homo friends.

The other thing that you ask for is some concern that I not present my opinions and feelings with full blown attitude, right? Well, I feel that would be dishonest, really. It wouldn't have truly explained why, it would diminish the strength and conviction of my opinion and would make it seem haphazard that I am lack luster. It is not haphazard, it is because I think your lifestyle is disgusting.

NONETHE LESS I will support your desire for rights, as I could not feel good about myself if I only supported my freedoms and not others' freedoms.

rainidame · Joined: 22 Apr 2005 Posts: 685 Location: in the dark

Skeptic, earlier I asked if you could explain why you aren't happy just getting your rights, why you think I have to embrace you AND give you rights, which is something I don't even get. Would you please address this? I have asked using myself as a comparison and using blacks who have had similar needs to have their rights completely available. Why do gay men want acceptance? If you want that then I have to say you will never get it from me. . . let me rephrase, YOU may attain my acceptance as a whole unique person. BUT homosexuality will never get my approval, acceptance, or support. YOUR right to have rights will get my support, but not your lifestyle. I will never consider it "normal," or healthy, or okay for my family. I will never consider it okay. BUT I won't get in YOUR way while you chase your dreams.

BTW, I am sure you are going to attact me for being racist and yada yada, true, in my honest self I totally am. But since I have friends from many walks of life, ethnicity, etc. I would say that my behaviour, though I am always honest when asked, must not be too anti-social. The ONLY group that WILL NOT have anything to do with me are parents. The way americans parent drives me crazy and because I have the crazy idea that children are the things we are to be most and best for . . . I speak without being asked, and I know I'm right and they are wrong so I am way patronizing and condescending. So I can be the way you are suggesting that I have been here. BUT here I was asked, and I won't pull any punches when asked a perfectly reasonable well considered question.

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

On page 2 wallie_x said:

“I don't care if they profess civil unions or whatever; and have basically equal civil rights as those of a heterosexual union”

Quote: ToonArmyisComing Sez: Quote: Why is that? Why should I live according to your moral values? Why do you want to punish me and the people who don't live according to your moral values using the government?

Punish you?!?! Er..um..ah I’m not. And I don’t see where you draw this conclusion from? There are common values that society dictates. If you said to me, “there’s nothing wrong with being a child molester.’” I’d say your loony. There are moral values we all must live by whether one likes those values or not. And in a democracy it is the majority’s prerogative to ascribe those values; though some (through a perversion of the idea of individual liberty) think the few should be able to force their ideas onto the many.

Quote: ToonArmyisComing Sez: Quote: I am amazed by your attempt to force people like me to live by your traditions and moral values. I am an individual. I shouldn't be penalized if my life doesn't fit your traditions!

Moral values are strongly associated with past traditions whether one likes it or not; even so, your statement has little to do with the argument. I am not trying to force anyone to do anything. The converse of this is that I refuse to be force fed your ideas of reality i.e. that a gay union is the moral and spiritual equivalent of a heterosexual union and thus befitting the term ‘marriage’.

The gay community has no right dictate to society what we must think and believe.

ToonArmyIsComing · Joined: 15 Feb 2005 Posts: 5888 Location: Ontario

Wallie_x wrote: Punish you?!?! Er..um..ah I’m not. And I don’t see where you draw this conclusion from? There are common values that society dictates. If you said to me, “there’s nothing wrong with being a child molester.’” I’d say your loony. There are moral values we all must live by whether one likes those values or not.

You are throwing in someting as extreme as Child molestation to argue against homosexuality!!! I'm simply amazed. Child molestation is wrong because children cannot legally give consent and scientific studies suggest that child molestation actually hurts the child's sexual development. It also traumatizes the children who go through that ordeal. To take that extreme example and argue that your moral value should be the standard of the society is absurd to say the least!

Wallie_x wrote: And in a democracy it is the majority’s prerogative to ascribe those values; though some (through a perversion of the idea of individual liberty) think the few should be able to force their ideas onto the many.

That's true, but we have a constitutional democracy and I have rights that should not be trampled on. That would be the tyranny of the majority and the founding fathers tried to prevent that ...

Wallie_x wrote: Moral values are strongly associated with past traditions whether one likes it or not; even so, your statement has little to do with the argument. I am not trying to force anyone to do anything. The converse of this is that I refuse to be force fed your ideas of reality i.e. that a gay union is the moral and spiritual equivalent of a heterosexual union and thus befitting the term ‘marriage’.

Again, let me reiterate that I simply don't care what term they are going to use when they enact the law about gay unions as long as gay unions have the same legal rights as "heterosexual married couples".

Wallie_x wrote: The gay community has no right dictate to society what we must think and believe.

The gay community is not trying to dictate anything!!! We just want our rights as human beings. We are not asking for preferential treatment.

And the world has woken up, 4 countries have already passed legislation that recognizes gay marriage and plenty more have passed legislation that recognize gay unions with full legal rights!

F'losrix · Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 5:50 am Post subject:

rainidame wrote: Skeptic, earlier I asked if you could explain why you aren't happy just getting your rights, why you think I have to embrace you AND give you rights, which is something I don't even get. Would you please address this?
I don't expect everyone to embrace me. That doesn't mean I'm going to just roll over and play dead if someone makes statements that I find offensive.

Certainly, you are welcome to maintain whatever attitudes you have about homosexuality. You likewise are within your rights to make whatever disrespectful statements you please about me and/or my sexual orientation. That doesn't mean that I have to like it or jump up and down with glee everytime someone says they'll support my rights even though they think I'm disgusting.

Just because I view my rights as the more important component, that doesn't mean I'm not going to speak up when I see prejudice and misunderstanding applied to gay people. I can't force anyone to have a change of attitude, and that is not my intention but I do hope to persuade some people to at least rethink those attitudes. You've made it quite clear that you aren't going to do that, so I'll consider the subject closed.

Thank you for your support - and I really do mean that.

F'losrix · Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 6:07 am Post subject:

Wallie_x wrote: ToonArmyisComing Sez: Quote: Here is my opinion, I don't care what you think of gay people. You don't like them, that's your choice, but I wouldn't be happy if you take that dislike and try to use the government to punish gay people by taking their rights away!

I don't believe anyone is trying to take rights away from anyone. In my mind what I am doing is trying to prevent the gay community from sanctifying their civil unions by the outright theft of a term that should never define their unions: i.e. "marriage".
Asked and answered - you don't own the word marriage, so we can't steal it from you.

If we propose to get rid of the government's recognition of marriage entirely, would you view that as an infringement of your rights?

Quote: Only in the current era where the country's moral compass has demagnetized could such a preposterous idea be given any validity to begin with.
It is only your opinion that it is a preposterous idea. There are many people who hold a different opinion. You've given no argument to support your opinion.

Quote: The secular left has succeeded in getting many to agree with the idea of moral relativism. This idea in itself, though plausible on it's surface, has an Achilles' heel, though few in the secular world seem to realize it.
And those on the right are blind to the fact that they're employing their own form of moral relativism in arguing many of the positions they hold as representing moral absolutes - they're only considered absolutes from your morally relativistic viewpoint. Seriously, we've argued this issue to death, resurrected it and killed it several times over.

Quote: Moreover, it amazes me of how few of the so-called participants in todays debates, give any validity to tradition, history, real spirituality and especially the thoughts of their predecessors.
I would say that applies as much if not more to those on the right who overemphasize the benefits of tradition, distort historical realities and use religion as a political tool. Not to mention ascribing quotes to historical figures that can't be traced or proved, taking those quotes that do exist out of context, and claiming that such figures held particular religious convictions and/or ideals that can't be proved or are in fact disproved by a thorough examination of the body of their writings and historical facts of how they lived their lives.

Quote: Most so-called modern thinkers trash all ideologies to supplant their own.
Actually, that's what 'traditionalists' are doing.

Quote: To me that only verifies how truly shallow they are as persons, but especially as so-called 'thinkers'.
Funny, I would say that shoe fits on the other foot.